On Wed, 22 Apr 2009 12:59:15 -0700, Chris Gehlker <[email protected]> wrote: > On Apr 22, 2009, at 8:59 AM, Roger Howard wrote: > >> If that's how I was taken, then I was very unclear. >> >> Torture does *not* have a place, which is why I didn't >> say torture. I said interrogation, and I meant what I said - that >> interrogation can be proper, but it may not give us the answers we >> want and >> we have to accept that without moving on to more extreme, uhh >> "enhanced", >> forms. > > Here is the context.
<snip> > ...it was confusing. You're totally right. I still object to the notion that the sole reason for torturing (errr, "enhanced-interrogating") people was vengeance - I think plenty of regular people, right or wrong, believe there is potential value in these techniques beyond less-enhanced techniques, and therefore vengeance/brutality was not the singular motive you make it to be. Surely there are some who might be motivated by that - a majority? I doubt it... but even if a majority, it's certainly not unanimous. Look, these techniques are designed *as much* (and, likely, much more) to put as much of the public at ease with them as they are designed to be effective evidence-gather tools... no pulling fingernails, no electric probes on the nuts, no breaking bones. So plenty of people fall for this notion, casually and with some sense of necessity. People trust authority, as long as it doesn't offend their standards... and, in "dangerous" times, these standards are lower. But, from my perspective, most people who approve of what's been done are simply convinced that 1) these are really, really dangerous people, ready and willing to eat their children and piss on Jesus, and 2) that smacking someone around is fair game if it mean preventing a nuclear bomb from going off in LA at noon. I'm not saying they are right, wise, or moral, but that I don't see vengeance and brutality as the primary motivator; they are, at least in the abstract, afraid and don't see what the big deal is. On the other hand, I think there is an element of over the top outrage on the left that is distracting and almost getting into Godwins territory - we need to maintain perspective and recognize what happened for what it is: the calculated formation of policies designed precisely to work around existing US and international standards on detainee treatment and interrogation, and an integrated public relations (propaganda) campaign of the most cynical type. Torture is just one facet, along with Guantanamo, Abu Graibh, the mass internment of Muslims after 9/11, etc. FWIW, I'm all for hearings and investigations modeled on Truth and Reconciliation councils. 1) documenting the truth of what has happened in the US over the past decade is far more important, and a more effective way to prevent these things from happening again in the long-term; 2) those who are really afraid of prosecution, the policy makers, will be absolutely unwilling to provide a complete accounting of their actions, so prosecutions will still be viable in many cases. _______________________________________________ OSX-Nutters mailing list | [email protected] http://lists.tit-wank.com/mailman/listinfo/osx-nutters List hosted at http://cat5.org/
