Torture

I suppose it's worth me putting my two cents in here.

The first thing I'll say, as I've said here, is that saving lives - particularly lives in the short term - is not enough of a justification to commit a particular act. If we dropped down into a ghetto in Oakland with helicopters and took every individual there prisoner, that would no doubt save lives from gang violence- innocent lives. But the long term results would be catastrophic for the people's relationship to their government. Other gangs in other cities would respond with increased violence, possibly even linking forces to protect against the police, and the cost in innocent lives would increase. And most importantly, the legal/moral code which binds the society would be shattered, and there would be no common order holding the country together.

We could impose a mandatory 10mph speed limit on our highways. That would save lives. We could mandate AIDS testing for all of our citizens and then quarantine all those who test positive. That would save lives. We could outlaw cigarettes and Alcohol (again). That would save lives.

There are countless other ways we could save innocent lives. Kick down doors, forced truth serum injections, racial profiling, curfews, etc. But they would all have the same deleterious effect in the long term. And besides the practical dangers of such policies, the self-respect of the nation would be wounded, and though the effects of such a wound are not easily measured, they would no doubt be enormous.

And this is the problem with torture for the sake of "saving lives." Due process is what makes the Western system unique- and many would argue superior. When we skirt that code, we lose our purpose and our right to a destiny all our own.

In the end, descending into torture reflects cowardice, not strength. It is an open admission that we are out of control and we are too fearful of you to maintain our integrity in approaching you. In effect, you have broken us without even trying.

We therefore lose before we begin by ennobling our enemies through our own debasement. This statement could be taken to cover most of the Bush presidency foreign policy- weakness, poorly disguised with bluff and bravura. Even the ingenious unmanned drones are received in this spirit by our enemies- that Americans are too cowardly to fight face to face like men. They hide behind gadgets and toys to do their killing for them, anonymous, sanitary, remote. Such approaches do not evoke fear and respect from those they are used against - only rage. We are weakened by our seeming strength.

But.

There is no but here, truly, but I have to say this to make a point for the devil, because it needs to be made. Putting oneself in the place of Yoo, Bybee, Bush, or Cheney, you could argue the following:

Think back to 2005, before torture allegations were widespread. Then think of the word "torture" and watch what pictures come into your mind.

For me, it would start out with something like we saw in Pan's Labyrinth. A person hanging from the ceiling and being questioned. Refusing to answer, the interrogator breaks his kneecaps- wrenching pain. After a while he pulls out a fingernail, then another, then another. Maybe even a few teeth. Several humiliating slaps across the face would be a mere decoration of the procedure at this point.

Burning and branding might follow, the smell of flesh filling the dank chamber. Then, inevitably, the loss of digits, ears, tongue, nose. . . the grotesquery continues.

I picture the rack. Thumbscrews, stretching, whipping, breaking bones. Screams of pain, salt in the wounds, no hope of release, better to die here. Genital mutilation would follow, and life would lose all meaning.

In 2005, in my mind, this is torture.

Somewhere along this continuum, we have sleep deprivation. We have enclosure in a small cell with a scary insect. We have loud music and extremes of temperature. We have our bodies thrown against a wall (while wearing a neckbrace to protect our neck).

It is not hard to convince oneself, given the great many procedures all would admit to being far worse, it is not hard to convince oneself that this is not torture- that sleep deprivation is consistent with our "humane," "humanistic" values when compared with whipping and cutting off fingers. Or at the very least, that given that a terrorist threat might be imminent with innocent lives at stake (but more realistically, massive economic and political uncertainty following in its wake), it might be possible to justify to oneself these acts which, though depraved, fall far short of the irreversible devastation suffered by torture victims of yore.

I think any reasonable person could look at it this way.


But this does not matter. Because reason is not what is at stake here; it is honor. And evocations of dehumanizing treatment in the one nation founded on and dedicated to human rights is an unforgivable sin- both in our own eyes and in the eyes of the world. We must hold ourselves to a higher standard if we are to be a beacon unto the world. Freedom is always risky. Freedom is always risky. But therein lies its glory. The willingness to be harmed because one chooses Freedom over security, as all of our forefathers did in the 18th century, reflects the essential light of our nation. To forfeit that is to forfeit everything, and what is left exposed when that light is dimmed is a corrupted vision, lazy, fat, and unwilling to back up our principles with anything other than fear.

And this, for the United States, is far worse than anything a terrorist could do to us. . . But even saying that, I am unsure. . . because there are things that a terrorist could do that would undo as much of our country physically, emotionally, economically as torture has done to us philosophically. I feel fortunate that it was not my decision to make, and I imagine President Obama feels the same way.

But since we remain essentially safe, the desire for justice that is ensured by security is unabated, and it may in fact hang innocent men. But the waters are too poisoned in this country now to do without some sort of public excoriating, some sort of purging of our evil. And, to continue, that is why we have tended to focus on waterboarding as the prime example of having gone "beyond the pale."

I have never been waterboarded, but the horror seems quite intense. The purpose remains unclear, since false confessions are all but guaranteed once one is truly in fear for one's life. Some would say that was the point. I have no information on that, but it would certainly round out the "reason" for doing what we did.

What I can say is that the effects of waterboarding are largely reversible and impermanent when compared with the effects of my earlier list of sadistic deeds. Can anyone argue with this? Yes, the waiting between waterboardings must be anguish, especially if one is sleep deprived. I can only imagine. But eventually it ends, as it has, and the wounds can begin to heal. The same can not be said about the other methods. It really can not.

As horrified as I am with myself to go down the road of condoning such a treatment of prisoners (and in my heart of hearts I truly do not), it is impossible for me to see this issue entirely from one perspective. I do believe many people out there are twisted souls- and the government seems to draw more of them than most professions. But it is possible for me to believe that they are not twisted beyond all sense, and that sometimes in our condemnation, we give ourselves permission to twist our own perspective so much that it dehumanizes those whom we believe to have dehumanized others.

Who can say? That is why I write this blog, to reach the extremes of thought and give us a wider pool to muddle around in the middle. Centrist vitriol. Perhaps it works.