Friday, November 11, 2005

Secret prisons and torture

Go read the Molly Ivins column entitled, Some Kind of Manly. It makes you sick. Well, if it doesn't, you ARE sick.

Austin, Texas -- I can't get over this feeling of unreality, that I am actually sitting here writing about our country having a gulag of secret prisons in which it tortures people. I have loved America all my life, even though I have often disagreed with the government. But this seems to me so preposterous, so monstrous. My mind is a little bent and my heart is a little broken this morning.

Maybe I should try to get a grip -- after all, it's just this one administration that I had more cause than most to realize was full of inadequate people going in. And even at that, it seems to be mostly Vice President Cheney. And after all, we were badly frightened by 9-11, which was a horrible event. "Only" nine senators voted against the prohibition of "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment of persons under custody or control the United States." Nine out of 100. Should we be proud? Should we cry?

"We do not torture," said our pitifully inarticulate president, straining through emphasis and repetition to erase the obvious.

A string of prisons in Eastern Europe in which suspects are held and tortured indefinitely, without trial, without lawyers, without the right to confront their accusers, without knowing the evidence or the charges against them, if any. Forever. It's "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich." Another secret prison in the midst of a military camp on an island run by an infamous dictator. Prisoner without a name, cell without a number.

Who are we? What have we become? The shining city on a hill, the beacon and bastion of refuge and freedom, a country born amidst the most magnificent ideals of freedom and justice, the greatest political heritage ever given to any people anywhere.


I'll tell you what we have become. We have become what we once despised. That is what we have become.

Go ahead. Read the rest of the article. No sense hiding.

1 comment:

  1. Anonymous9:10 PM

    After Senator Colburn was one of only ten to oppose the McCain prohibition on torture, I emailed his office. This is the response.

    November 10, 2005

    Mr. Marilyn Bedford
    5369 Sowasso Avenue
    Tulsa, Oklahoma 74105

    Dear Mr. Bedford:

    Thank you for your e-mail regarding Sen. McCain's torture amendment
    offered to the Defense Authorization Act.

    I would like to make it clear I abhor the practice of torture in any
    form. The use of torture is not, nor ever should be, the stated policy of
    the United States.

    With that said, I chose not to support Sen. McCain's amendment. I agree
    in principle with the effort to strictly define what constitutes torture
    as this amendment sought to do. However, my reason for not supporting the
    amendment was the unintended effect it would have upon intelligence
    officers bravely serving our nation in the field.

    The men and women who serve within the CIA's Directorate of Operations
    are subject to strict guidelines regarding the use of torture. The McCain
    Amendment would make these officers subject to a new set of laws that
    would compromise their ability to defend themselves and also make them
    susceptible to the rulings of foreign courts who may not hold their best
    interests at heart. The danger this poses to those trying to gather vital
    human intelligence abroad and ultimately prevent another major terrorist
    attack on our country led me to oppose this amendment.

    Once again, thank you very much for contacting me.


    Sincerely, A
    Tom Coburn
    United States Senator

    TC: ds


    I don't know who he represents in Oklahoma; he doesn't represent me.

    ReplyDelete

New policy: Anonymous posts must be signed or they will be deleted. Pick a name, any name (it could be Paperclip or Doorknob), but identify yourself in some way. Thank you.