Use & misuse of torture

Posted: May 27, 2004

IWAS DEEPLY disturbed by your otherwise-excellent editorial titled "Rumsfeld must go" to see that you believe that "Torture has a place in the fight against terrorism."

What exactly is this place? According to one of the many Bush government explanations of its presence in Iraq, the U.S. attacked Iraq to free its people from the tyrant Saddam, who had tortured and killed thousands. Now we are saying that torture is all right as long as we are the ones doing it? And as long as the victim is a bona-fide terrorist? Who decides?

It reminds me of the old test for witches - throw them in water, and, if they drown, they weren't a witch. Oops, sorry.

So now torture them, and if you don't get information, then they probably were not a terrorist - oops, sorry. The Nazis could have argued that they were justified in torturing members of the French resistance during WWII - after all, by such means, they might prevent attacks on German soldiers.

A climate that tolerates any form of torture inevitably leads to the disgusting pictures we are seeing from Abu Ghraib. By countenancing such abuse, you objectify the victim so that he is no longer considered human.

The fact that most of the prisoners in Abu Ghraib are guilty of nothing more than being Iraqi is beside the point. Torture of any human being is utterly and completely wrong and cannot be justified by any civilized society.

The U.S. must decide where it stands in the world - with those who would hold all humans to a higher standard of behavior or with the rogue states who believe that the end justifies the means, no matter how despicable those means are.

Deirdre Mac Dermott

Philadelphia

Beneath the Law

Deny communion to John Kerry?

Deny communion to Cardinal Law and all the bishops who have systematically covered up and enabled abuse within the Catholic Church for decades.

Michael McCool

Philadelphia

|
|
|
|
|