Even when you produce your own news segments, bribe columnists, hire fake reporters, and suppress information, you still can’t control everything in the media. Bush learned this the hard way this week, when his announcement that the U.S. does not condone or engage in torture coincided with reports of five American soldiers in Iraq accused of beating detainees. The President, in a rare feat, explained his policy clearly and succinctly: “We do not torture.”
Given this position, it follows that the administration would give its full support to ending the gruesome practice. Not if Dick Cheney has anything to say about it, though. According to the Washington Post, “Over the past year, Vice President Cheney has waged an intense and largely unpublicized campaign to stop Congress, the Pentagon and the State Department from imposing more restrictive rules on the handling of terrorist suspects.”
Maybe those rules could have saved some of the 108 people who have died in U.S. custody in Iraq and Afghanistan, including 27 cases that have been investigated as criminal homicide involving possible abuse, according to a new report by Human Rights Watch.
It takes a high level of moral clarity to group entire nations under the banner of “evil.” It takes a stark contrast between our morality and their brutality, our right and their wrong. This bold, comic-book confidence was sold to the people through lies and propaganda—nd we bought it. Maybe that moral clarity, though, has since been muddied as we terrorize, murder, and torture. Maybe that confidence has been shaken as we see brutal images of pain inflicted in the name of freedom.
Cigarettes are put out in prisoners’ ears; a father is made to watch what he thinks is the bloody execution of his son; detainees are shackled to the floor for up to 24 hours at a time, deprived of food and water. Then there is the psychological torment: Religious leaders are being leashed and made to crawl around like dogs, wear women’s clothing, and stand naked in front of female officers, who pretend to wipe menstrual blood on the detainees. Doctors and psychologists abet the torture by instructing interrogators how to exploit fear. The Qur’an is being desecrated (yes, just because Newsweek doesn’t know how to report a story doesn’t mean the whole thing is fabricated).
All of this information was suppressed by the government until the ACLU received access through a Freedom of Information Act request. The ACLU is currently filing suit against Donald Rumsfeld. You would think there would be outrage. You would think that every newspaper editorial would be decrying this American barbarism, especially given that most military experts agree that these tactics are ineffective and only endanger our troops and American citizens. If you do think that, maybe you haven’t been well acquainted with the media.
Let me introduce you to Rush Limbaugh, who compared the Abu Ghraib images to “frat hazing.” Then there is Diana West of the Washington Times, who wrote that by following the Geneva Conventions, it means we’ll be “serving tea and crumpets” to terrorists. Fox News’s Bill O’Reilly agrees with West, but adds that “progressives want to give terrorists condos on Miami Beach.” This is a good point – it is a small step from not mercilessly torturing someone to serving them tea and buying them real estate. Also from the “fair and balanced” network is John Gibson, who delightfully employs pop culture when he describes the plaintiffs in the ACLU case as “liberal, anti-war-type activists….They allege a lot of stuff. And you feel like Seinfeld. ‘Yada-yada-yada.’” You’re right, John Gibson, I DO feel like Seinfeld! “What’s the deal with murder and torture? I mean, really – whatever happened to asking nicely?” Finally, let me introduce you to Brit Hume, Chris Matthews, Sean Hannity, and hordes of other pundits and journalists who smile cheerfully at the camera while torture is ignored, distorted, or even applauded.
To torture or not to torture is a tough question. On the one hand, it violates human rights, international law, and invites unprecedented levels of enmity against America causing recruitment in terrorist groups like al-Qaeda to skyrocket. On the other hand, it can be great for your career. Take Alberto Gonzales, who called the Geneva Conventions “quaint” and, according to Human Rights First, “’was among the first to embrace the no-rules-apply approach to the ‘war on terror.’” For his efforts, he was made Attorney General and put on the short list of considerations for the Supreme Court. Then there is former General Counsel for the Pentagon William J. Haynes, who helped circumvent laws restricting the use of torture, promoted indefinite detention of U.S. citizens without due process, and advocated many of the most abusive tactics in Guantanamo. Bush rewarded him by nominating him for the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. Many other architects of torture, including John Yoo, Jay Bybee, and David Addington, have been promoted and given expansive power over American policy.
This is not a war; this is a crime. This is a crime that has made the world a more dangerous place, that has stirred ire and vast condemnation, that has set modern precedents for the trampling of rights. This is a crime for which the perpetrators are promoted or re-elected and to which the media is an accomplice. This is a crime that was born in the horrific American prison system and expanded to victimize people around the globe. This is not just a crime against humanity; it is a crime to redefine it, to erase it. As the quagmire thickens and the death toll rises, it is important to ask the question: can you win a crime?
Leave a Reply