It's a Matter of Semantics? Waterboarding and Torture!
The President insists that we as a nation don’t torture; but he reserves the right to define the word. I think I remember something about a semantic dodge in the previous administration, only then it had to do with sexual relations. Now, we’re dealing with something a bit more important. Does the United States engage in torture?
If John Kiriakou, a former CIA interrogator, is to be believed the CIA has used waterboarding to gain information from terror suspects, including Al Qaeda suspect Abu Zabaida. According to Kiriakou, who was involved in the questioning of the suspect, though apparently not the actual waterboarding, Zabaida cracked right away. It was successful, he says, but now he thinks it might have been torture.
The President insists we don’t torture, but here is pretty strong evidence that we use waterboarding. Although some GOP candidates and the new AG won’t give a direct answer, most people agree that waterboarding is torture. It may not leave any physical marks, but it is inhumane. That John McCain, who knows something about torture, says this technique is torture and that we hanged Japanese prisoners who waterboarded US soldiers in World War II. That should be pretty strong evidence that this is torture.
As a nation we have prided ourselves on our moral principles. And yet we consistently belie this claim by engaging in acts such as this. We entered a war in Iraq that was unprovoked and we have made use of interrogation techniques that sure look like torture to most observers. As a result, we have as a nation lost our moral standing in the world. What makes us any different than other countries that abuse human rights? This is more than semantics, it’s reality. It’s also time that we stop the semantic dodges, admit the truth, and put a stop to practices that are not just like torture, but are torture.
Cross Published at Faithfully Liberal
If John Kiriakou, a former CIA interrogator, is to be believed the CIA has used waterboarding to gain information from terror suspects, including Al Qaeda suspect Abu Zabaida. According to Kiriakou, who was involved in the questioning of the suspect, though apparently not the actual waterboarding, Zabaida cracked right away. It was successful, he says, but now he thinks it might have been torture.
The President insists we don’t torture, but here is pretty strong evidence that we use waterboarding. Although some GOP candidates and the new AG won’t give a direct answer, most people agree that waterboarding is torture. It may not leave any physical marks, but it is inhumane. That John McCain, who knows something about torture, says this technique is torture and that we hanged Japanese prisoners who waterboarded US soldiers in World War II. That should be pretty strong evidence that this is torture.
As a nation we have prided ourselves on our moral principles. And yet we consistently belie this claim by engaging in acts such as this. We entered a war in Iraq that was unprovoked and we have made use of interrogation techniques that sure look like torture to most observers. As a result, we have as a nation lost our moral standing in the world. What makes us any different than other countries that abuse human rights? This is more than semantics, it’s reality. It’s also time that we stop the semantic dodges, admit the truth, and put a stop to practices that are not just like torture, but are torture.
Cross Published at Faithfully Liberal
Comments
That's what the Soviet Gulag was, right?
This is the United States of America? Bastion of freedom and hope in the world? I'm so angry about this that I truly don't know what to do with myself.
We have enough information from other sources to know that waterboarding was being used. It is likely that Bush authorized it. Thus he has legal and moral responsibility for this crime against humanity.
My congresswoman, Pelosi, was notified of the plans to use waterboarding many years ago, and at the time raised no objections. So she bears some responsibility, or at least complicity, in the whole mess.
• I think I remember something about a semantic dodge in the previous administration, only then it had to do with sexual relations. Now, we’re dealing with something a bit more important.
I appreciate that comment, too. I find it hard to understand that President Clinton's sin, primarily against his wife, was regarded as an impeachable offence; whereas the Bush Administration's gross disregard of human rights isn't.
I should mention, for the record, that I'm a Canadian. I'm hoping that Obama gets elected, with his prescient opposition to the Iraq war and his unequivocal rejection of torture. It would be great to have a US president worthy of Canada's respect. (And not just because he's a Democrat, of course.)
Stephen (aka Q), Emerging From Babel
So in this view of what is fully human, Bush would not think it's torture. Something I think worth considering.