Jebbie said to Old Poor Richard

For the record, I understood your earlier argument relative to comparing a torturer who does his torture in the hope of obtaining information as opposed to a torturer who does his torture purely as an exercise in punishment or to exercize control over others who will most certainly be exposed to the facts of what happens when the ruling elite is displeased. I also understood you when you differentiated sadistic torture from torture utilized to secure a legitimate end. In that sense, I agree with you that there really is no comparison between those who torture for pleasure and those who torture in the belief that they are some how doing so for the eventual advancement of Good Over Evil.

The problem, though, is that as ondelette pointed out, the torture has been systematic and evidence is accumulating that this was an intentional practice to terrorize particular populations in Iraq and Aghanistan. I would add to that the evidence that the torture also was aimed producing false confessions of a Saddam/9-11 link. So while perhaps the occasional interrogator may have bought into the idea that they were trying to "protect America" there can be little doubt that those who orchestrated the program were only using that line as window dressing and are morally equivalent to the Sheikh.

I held out brief hope for OPR after the first response to ondelette's explanation, but then the willful stupidity and American exceptionalism put hood right back over Richard's eyes...

I saw your post; it was great, as usual. [pmorlan's blog deserves many more visitors!] I just had additional thoughts on the topic and brought in the additional data on party affiliation, too, so I thought another post was worth doing. Now I've even added a second post riffing off the first one, wondering if the evangelicals are somehow equating waterboarding with baptism, to the point that they might subconsciously cleanse the heathens of their sins...

Sullivan's find on the poll is interesting, but I think I have a clue about those "life experiences" the white Southern evangelicals rely on for their views on torture. From the current data set, Pew also broke the numbers down by political affiliation. The Republican profile of responses aligns almost exactly with the white evangelical responses. This looks to me like a simple case of politics trumping religion for these poll respondents.

See the Oxdown at my name for the raw numbers and links.

Thanks for all the kind comments.

Almost is about as far as I want to go...

And yes, I still talk to people here:

omooex: Congratulations! It's never too late to pursue your dreams, huh? I miss my days in Berkeley. I used to eat my lunches in Sproul Plaza with the anti-apartheid demonstrators (that was '83-85).

Wow.

--blush--

Thanks for the heads up.

Re: Update II: Nadler has done more than just talk. Hidden in all the other hoopla of the week with the swine flu snoutbreak (h/t Jon Stewart) and celebrating Obama's first 100 days, John Conyers and Jerrold Nadler, along with others of the House Judiciary Committee, sent a letter to Eric Holder, asking him to appoint a special counsel. The letter makes the point that it now is not debatable whether torture has occurred and then goes on to cite the four legal requirements (the Geneva Conventions, the war crimes act, the Convention Against Torture and the federal anti-torture statute) that obligate the US to investigate and prosecute. They point out that since DOJ, specifically, OLC, wrote the legal authorizations, conflict of interest prevents DOJ carrying out the investigation and prosecution. The letter is very nicely crafted. An Oxdown about it is at my name.

re: Jim Montague and ondelette: I'd take either or both of them on my side in a battle of minds or ethics. Both are very smart and committed to the rule of law, operating in the reality-based world and care deeply about their fellow humans.

We believe that these three criteria have been met and warrant the appointment of a special counsel to investigate whether federal criminal laws were violated by individuals who authorized or participated in the interrogation of detainees. First, as noted above, there is abundant, credible evidence of torture and the cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment of detainees, and criminal investigation is not only warranted, it is also required. The Geneva Conventions obligate High Contracting Parties like the United States to investigate and bring before our courts those individuals “alleged to have committed, or to have ordered to be committed” grave breaches of those Conventions.8 The war crimes act, 18 U.S.C. § 2441, creates jurisdiction in the U.S. courts whenever the victim or alleged offender is a U.S. national or member of the Armed Forces, and specifically identifies torture and cruel or inhuman treatment, as well as the conspiracy to commit those acts, as punishable war crimes. The Convention Against Torture (CAT) – signed by President Reagan in 1988 and ratified by the U.S. Senate in 1994 – also obligates the U.S. to conduct a “prompt and impartial investigation” and “submit the case to [our] competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution” whenever there are reasonable grounds to believe that torture has been committed in a territory under our jurisdiction or by U.S. nationals.9 The federal anti-torture statute, 18 USC § 2340A, criminalizes torture and the conspiracy to commit torture and creates jurisdiction in the U.S. courts whenever the “alleged offender is a national of the United States” or “is present in the United States.”

The entire letter is worth a read and is linked at my name.

Will Holder respond or send it to the circular file? How would an eleventeen dimension chessmaster play this one?