Was It Torture?

Was It Torture that the Bush administration lawyers allowed, within ‘limits’? My first question is how could they have known if it was or was not torture? Had they tried the various techniques on themselves or on each other in a specially equipped legal dungeon with a dispassionate group, twelve of their peers, observing, taking snapshots, and helping to form a decision? It is common to expect experts in any professional discipline to have some direct experience living, or at least working within the niche where they advise or decide.

Now that so many people worldwide are out of jobs, as a nation we may be grateful for the visibility of strong, hands-on famous role-models teaching us how to get and keep a job.

I suggest that any tribunal that seeks to pass judgment on the people who allowed torture, and those who did the torturous acts, make it their goal to give these folks their old jobs back—with slightly altered job descriptions. Put them back to work as evaluators who are in a proper position to decide just where the line is that demarcates torture from uncomfortable piffle. Their daily work, on a contract of uncertain duration—(to assure their ‘security’) would oblige them to subject themselves, and each other, to the same experiences they once had decreed for others. At the end of that work they will be able to render opinions and judgments of their own, on precisely where that line aught to be drawn.

These serious legal issues are at the core of national and worldwide debates that only seasoned field experts can hope to sort out for us. We trusted them and depended upon them when they made their initial determinations, and we should continue show our trust and loyalty and support now. In a sentence, our hats are off to the lot of you as your head(s) are off to the dungeons, and keep up the great work!

Comments

[mariana]

There is this phenomenom that happens usually when you ask a group of people to decide over others, the ones that take decisions often forget that the others are human beings as well, specially when dealing with activities related to harming this dehumanized people.

I like the exhange idea, specially cause you are proposing a learning scheme instead of a punishing or revenge one.

It also brings up the fact that we do not usually treat or judge other in the same way we
do with ourself, which in my opinion is not correct, equality would be the right thing.

But do not worry cause it's legal, according to the EEUU laws, so torture can't be bad or wrong. Besides it's within limits, that's also good, they do break only one of your arms, never both of them. Torturing people is a civilized activity when done properly.

Mariana, from our correspondence on your blog I doubt that you missed the irony in my posting on torture. Do I detect the same irony in your comments? I would never seriously suggest torture for anyone, for anything, and am sure that you would not either. To make a pun, the post was a suggestion that the irony would be to put them in irons. — Mayer