President Obama's decision to stop publication of photos showing torture of prisoners by U.S. service personnel was reached by a calculus of greater complexity than the factors I perceive, so I do not oppose it now, but only raise cautionary issues, reserving judgment.
Mr. Obama's main stated reason against releasing the photos - stirring up anti-American hatred - paradoxically also contains a very good argument in favor of publishing them. Are we about torture or not? If not, there are no photos to discuss. But there are photos, so either we ARE about torture, or "a few bad apples" are ruining the whole bushel. The best way to prove it's the "apples," is to publish the photos along with a public adjudication of the perpetrators' deeds. Our moral authority in the world is restored, and the photos serve as evidence of justice for all [and not just them].
The photos will be published, and the only question is by whom. If a newspaper does not get hold of and publish them, eventually the Supreme Court will order their release. Under those circumstances, and especially if, by that time, no official responsibility for the torture is ascertained through prosecution, "truth commission," or other means, the photos will forever correlate to complicity between the torturers and the government.
We like to think of America in terms of our freedoms, and the idea of transparency in our governance is attractive. But free speech, to talk about reality television shows and which medications we want our doctor to think are right for us, is not so radical or precious. Free speech is only remarkable if it remains free in the face of danger and turmoil. During our history, America has experienced shameful instances where that freedom was curtailed, usually out of fear. In retrospect, it has seemed cowardly, and political operatives have skillfully manipulated those fears to advance their programs. Post 9/11 America has many such examples, which got us into war, cost us our privacy, and in the current context, has us defending policies of torture as necessary expedience.
Lack of courage by Democrats, as the opposition party in 2002 and 2003, haunts them today, as Republicans use it as a smoke screen to avoid reckoning for their transgressions while in power. Hope that the Republicans learned from the Democrats' error, and will provide a legitimate and reasoned opposition, seems faint, as the main message from their visionaries still plies our fears - abandoning torture will make us vulnerable.
Freedom is not absolute, and there are extraordinary cases, where we must accede to the government's greater understanding of world politics. We need to see solid evidence of those circumstances soon, or the surrender of our freedom of speech will become just ordinary.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Privacy is a very subjective matter. I don't believe it really exist as we expect it to be. Once something about you is stored electronically your Privacy is already compromised. I do wonder however, if Chris, your privacy has been violated somehow in the last 8 years?
ReplyDeleteAs far as torture and releasing the photos, I don't see any benefit to releasing pictures of what goes on in secret interrogations of enemies of our country. If anything it will weaken us.
I have no doubt that privacy, as we like to think of it, no longer exists. Our names may remain masked, but everything is known about us.
ReplyDeleteWho is an enemy of our country?
I just wrote 5 points of disagreement with this post. But when I went to Preview, I wasn't logged on, and they got lost. I'm not going to recreate that text. Suffice it to say that I highly disagree with the title and premise of this post.
ReplyDeleteKonny, Sorry your post got lost. I have trouble using this interface too, and have lost several pieces. Regular text editing keys don't seem to work. Please try again, at least to list your objections.
ReplyDeleteSome of those complex factors include the following:
ReplyDelete1) Our enemies don’t hate us because we waterboard them, or otherwise use enhanced interrogation techniques (EIT). So they won’t begin to like us, or hate us any less, if we stop. What they hate us for is something we cannot change.
2) The animals who cut off Americans’ heads on videotape really couldn’t care less if we practice EITs. If anything, the fact that they now know we will not practice EITs will only embolden them because unless they get killed in action (which most of them look forward to), they have nothing to fear if they get caught. In the end, they win. We lose. Incidentally, since you asked Chris, those are the people who are our enemies. (I read a great line once: It’s not Islamophobia if they really do want to kill you.)
3) Studies have shown that upon the US’s release of any EIT information, there is a marked increase in violence against US troops resulting in their injuries and death. At this point, and for any reason, if a person suggests we publish more of this information, that person should also make sure they replace the US soldier who is about to take that bullet, with themselves first.
4) Evidence shows that Gitmo detainees, once released, go back to terrorism. (And BamBam wants to close Gitmo and put them into our civilian jails – the same jails that cultivated the 4 home grown idiot terrorists who were caught recently. Yea. That’ what we need in our jails. Some professional training from professional terrorists. Not these amateurs. At least Congress is not that Lib-crazy, so they’ve rejected BO’s plan, and Gitmo stays.) If, after being released, these buggers know where to go and who to talk to in order to get back into the terror game, then we didn’t interrogate them enough. So again, it is treasonous if even one US soldier’s life is then taken by a former captive. To tie this point to the first, even now that we’ve announced that we will no longer undertake EITs, there is no evidence, nor will there be, to show a reduction in violence against US troops, or any improvement in US Mid-East relations. The only improvement is to BO’s and the Libs’ self-gratification level. The cost, though, is everyone's safety.
I have a solution to the EIT and Gitmo problem. Every bastard that we capture, we sedate them unconscious, implant a highly explosive device up there butt, a highly sensitive microphone in their head, wake them up and send them back to where they came from. When they get close to a high value target, or if they become an imminent threat themselves… BAM! If they stay harmless, the live.
No need for Gitmo or harsh interrogations.