In the July 21 08 issue, Stuart Taylor Jr proposes that we give those accused of approving and carrying out torture a pass, so that we can get a full accounting of what went on.
When a dictatorial regime starts using torture, it selects marginalized, and generally reviled, subsets of the population. So we began with so called enemy combatants (probably known as “patriots” in Iraq and Afghanistan) and those condemned (on whose say so we don’t know) to Abu Ghraib for unspecified “crimes”. Dictatorships then move on, using the threat of imprisonment and torture to dampen criticism from a broader swath of their own population. We have, as far as we know, been spared this step so far; but the lessons of history suggest we look closely at what the Bush administration is really doing when for example, it locks US citizens and legal residents away, incommunicado, for years.
Then along comes Taylor, whose polemic suggests that we as a nation give a pass to those in the Bush administration promoted or condoned torture.
He proclaims that Congress has defined torture “very narrowly”, suggesting that it has gone too far! So some forms of torture are apparently, by his definition, ok, and we shouldn’t trust Congress to protect our rights. He further suggests that we ignore the recommendation of Major General Anthony Taguba, who investigated that Abu Ghraib scandal, that there should be criminal investigations of those responsible. After all, the Justice Department “approved” many coercive methods, including waterboarding, so clearly no one did anything wrong! These methods do not contravene, the Justice Department found, US Law. (Oh, and by the way, that little thing called the Geneva Convention, really doesn’t apply here, because were really never declared war on anyone and they are really enemy soldiers we’re torturing.)
I do wonder what Mr. Taylor’s stance would be if another country were torturing people. Would he really propose that some tin dictator should let his minions off scott free if they tell all?
