Among the endless stream of outrage brought to us by the news media, last December's news included the long overdue release of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s report on the CIA's use of torture during the George W. Bush administration.
The ethos of truth and justice and the vision of America as a shining example in the world emerged bruised and battered in this document.
Among the endless stream of outrage brought to us by the news media, last December's news included the long overdue release of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s report on the CIA's use of torture during the George W. Bush administration.
The ethos of truth and justice and the vision of America as a shining example in the world emerged bruised and battered in this document.
Critics were quick to cry foul, asserting the report was biased and the intelligence gathered from the “enhanced interrogation” methods described was valuable to the point of saving the lives of US citizens. But that is a lot like saying the referees on the field were looking for penalties, and any rule breaking was okay because our team won.
Setting aside for the moment the horrific and unproven techniques used in these interrogations, we can agree the CIA misled those they supposedly work for and answer to—Congress, the White House, and the public. Fact is, intelligence professionals grossly misrepresented the brutal procedures employed in your name and in mine.
Tragically, the techniques described in the Senate’s torture narrative were also deemed ineffectual. Flag-wrapped declarations by former VP Cheney and other Bush Administration officials notwithstanding, the report’s strong conclusion was that this torture did not prevent any terror attacks.
What were the techniques employed in these interrogations, techniques so heinous our government conducted them under strictest secrecy at sites it did not admit existed? The Senate report lists them as water-boarding (a form of simulated drowning), keeping prisoners naked in cold cells while dousing them with cold water from time to time, slapping (a euphemism) prisoners, shaking (another euphemism) prisoners, and forcing prisoners to stand shackled for hours (often combined with extreme sleep deprivation). In short, we subjected the prisoners in our care to repeated acts of cruelty.
What our government employees did was wrong, because torture for any reason is wrong. Even if the painful methodologies used had saved American lives – the only lives our current culture deems to be worth saving – the acts committed in that salvation would be inherently immoral. Any denials of this truth speak only to the lack of real courage or morality on the part of our policy makers and our society.
Our nation would strenuously condemn any such abuse of our own citizens no matter the reason. How on earth can it be claimed such inhumanity toward other human beings – for what boil down to political reasons – is somehow justifiable? How can torture defenders renounce the compassion, fairness, and defense of human dignity America once exemplified in the world?
We note that the architects of torture as the formal U.S. Government policy–Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, et.al. – have not been keen on foreign travel. Perhaps the risk of international law indictments keep them close to home.
But even if brought to trial at home, they would at least be treated better than those we tortured for political ends.
Pat Grimes, a former South Bay resident, writes from Ypsilanti, Mich. He can be reached at pgwriter@inbox.com
