Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Rights and Liberties

A Tortured Logic

By Amy Goodman, King Features Syndicate. Posted January 25, 2007.


It is up to the new Democratic majority to investigate the use of torture and demand prosecution for those who engaged in it.
Advertisement

The new head of the Senate Judiciary Committee was angry. Sen. Patrick Leahy was questioning U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales about a man named Maher Arar.

Arar is a Canadian citizen who the U.S. detained without charge then sent to Syria in 2002. Leahy fumed: "We knew damn well, if he went to Canada, he wouldn't be tortured. He'd be held. He'd be investigated. We also knew damn well, if he went to Syria, he'd be tortured."

Leahy was responding to Alberto Gonzales' comments that "there were assurances sought that he would not be tortured from Syria." Assurances? From the country that President Bush recently described as the "crossroads for terrorism"? From the country that Bush has vilified and threatened to attack? But before we point the finger at other countries, we have to look here at home.

Gonzales knows about torture. Arar was detained less than two months after Gonzales' office produced the notorious "Torture Memo," which has served as the legal basis for the Bush administration's brutal torture methods like "waterboarding" (holding a victim's head underwater until unconscious) that are increasingly well-known and globally despised.

The U.S. government also engages in "extraordinary rendition." This Orwellian phrase describes how foreigners are grabbed off the street or from their home and secretly delivered to some other place, outside the U.S. (in Arar's case, Syria), where illegal and brutal interrogations can take place beyond the reach of Congress and the courts.

Arar's Kafaesque nightmare began on Sept. 26, 2002. He was returning to Canada from a family vacation, with a plane change at New York's JFK Airport. There he was pulled aside, searched, questioned and imprisoned. Two weeks later, U.S. authorities sent Arar to Syria.

Arar spent the next 10 months enduring brutal beatings and psychological torture, kept in a cell the size of a grave. Arar was accused of being connected to al-Qaida, and of having been to a training camp in Afghanistan. Neither was true, but after weeks of beatings, he admitted to everything. Worse than the beatings, Arar said on "Democracy Now!," was how he suffered while isolated in the dank, windowless cell:

"... the psychological torture that I endured during this 10-month period in the underground cell is really beyond human imagination. I was ready to confess to anything. I would just write anything so that they could only take me from that place and put me in a place where it is fit for a human being."

As inexplicably as Arar was kidnapped to Syria, he was released home to Canada, a broken man. Canada just finished a thorough inquiry that completely exonerated him and supported his request for financial damages. Conservative Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, a Bush ally, has asked Bush to "come clean" on the Arar case.

Leahy is demanding action: "The Bush administration has yet to renounce the practice of sending detainees to countries that torture prisoners, and it has yet to offer even the hint of an apology to Mr. Arar for what he endured with our government's complicity."

The Bush policies of war, occupation, torture and rendition are having a cumulative effect on global opinion. A recent BBC poll of more than 26,000 people found that 75 percent oppose the U.S. role in Iraq, two-thirds oppose the handling of prisoners at Guantanamo, and 52 percent feel that the U.S. has an overall negative effect on the planet. Citizens just protested the fifth anniversary of the prison at Guantanamo. Legislators in North Carolina are demanding an investigation into Aero Contractors, a firm based there that supplies Gulfstream jets to the CIA to execute these "extraordinary renditions." And tens of thousands are expected in Washington, D.C., and around the country on Jan. 27 to protest the war.

Democrats criticized the Republican-controlled "rubber stamp Congress," which failed to provide adequate oversight of the Bush administration. Now that the Democratic Party has control of Congress, the onus is upon them to restore law and order, to investigate the use of torture and to demand prosecution of those who engaged in it.

(c) 2007 Amy Goodman, Distributed by King Features Syndicate

Your $20 would help AlterNet run Amy Goodman's column throughout 2007! Click here to help!

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: torture, amy goodman, arar

Amy Goodman is the host of "Democracy Now!," a daily international TV/radio news hour airing on 500 stations in North America.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Rights and Liberties! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Who said what
Posted by: mizipi on Jan 25, 2007 5:14 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When I was a kid, growing up in the deep south, we had a neighbor down the road, who was also my hi-school biology and chemistry teacher, that was somewhat of a character. She had a lot of sayings, one of them being "a hit dog hollers first" which basically meant this in our local language: when someone goes around saying a bunch of accusatory stuff, that person is usually guilty of whatever accusations are being made." Bush & Co. have been calling a lot of people thugs and accusing them of hating freedom, liberty and justice. Gee, ah, duh, .............Anyway, maybe we should use the same tactics of torture on Scooter Libby to learn the truth. Torture Dick Cheney to find out his motives. Bring in Gen Powell to see if he really meant all the things he said before the invasion of Iraq began. Our leaders are cowards, afraid of anyone who is not in their aristocratic country club. Afraid of non-lies, as Rummy might have put it. Freedom, liberty and justice are ideals we can only dream of, yet very easy to work toward. Our leaders are working toward taking as much money from "us" to enrich themselves, "us" being the decent folks of this world.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Who said what Posted by: Scott Griffith
» Decent folk Posted by: mizipi
» RE: Who said what Posted by: willymack
» But, they all say.... Posted by: mizipi
» RE: Let's get to the point Posted by: Edward George
An even better idea...
Posted by: arag on Jan 25, 2007 6:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Besides bringing Amy's column to this site, let us also start a real push to bring Democracy Now to every PBS station of the land.

So start calling and writing your local PBS stations.

Welcome Amy!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: An even better idea... Posted by: MartianBachelor
Gonzales' comments on habeas corpus were outrageous
Posted by: brunowe on Jan 25, 2007 6:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I mention that because it's linked to the Arar issue. Gonzales took the phrasing in the Constitution in Article I, Section 9, Clause 2 of the Contitution: “The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.” to support his statement that “There is no express grant of habeas in the Constitution.”

Here's the whole exchange.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Punish the right people
Posted by: packofwolves on Jan 25, 2007 6:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The people who are behind American-backed torture need to be arrested and prosecuted and punished for their crimes, including Bush and his cronies who cleared the path and condoned the use of it. IMPEACH BUSH. This administration is guilty of war crimes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Punish the right people Posted by: mizipi
» RE: Punish the right people Posted by: JSquercia
Dear Amy
Posted by: wawa on Jan 25, 2007 6:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I hope to meet you on Saturday in DC and ask your opinion on democracies that torture their own citizens:


“Since 1967, 650,000 to 700,000 Palestinians have been arrested and detained. That totals 20% of the total population and 80% of all adult Palestinian males have been arrested.

"The methods and photos from Abu Grahib and Guantanamo were no shock to any Palestinian who had been in prison between 1967 and the ‘80’s. All the methods used in Abu Grahib were normal procedures against Palestinians. In 1999 Internationals, Palestinians and Israelis for human rights threatened a boycott against Israel and that is what forced the Supreme Court to address the torture issue. They did not ban torture and the General Prosecutor can choose not to prosecute those who still use it."-Ala Jaradat, of ADAMEER [Arabic for conscience] WWW.ADDAMEER.ORG
to me January 5, 2006 in Ramallah.

And dear Amy, your 2004 interview with Mordechai Vanunu has been used as testimony against him in his historic FREEDOM of SPEECH trial-to conclude at any moment the Israeli government chooses, but no date set at this moment-
won't you please do a follow up???

"30 Minutes with Vanunu" FREELY Streaming on
http://www.wearewideawake.org/

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Definition of Torture
Posted by: kbest on Jan 25, 2007 7:41 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't think sleep depervation is torture. Neither is loud music (unless it is Barry Manilow or rap) or water boarding.
I ask you: Waterboarding or picking up body pieces from the ocean?
Waterboarding or dirty bomb detonation in a major city?
Waterboarding or destruction of a full stadium with thousands in attendance?
It's a no-brainer.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» False dichotomy Posted by: brunowe
» RE: Definition of Torture Posted by: lonpine
» Barry Marshmallow?! Posted by: MartianBachelor
» RE: Definition of Torture Posted by: NoPCZone
» RE: Definition of Torture Posted by: mizipi
» Same logic Hitler used... Posted by: Carl Street
» RE: Definition of Torture Posted by: Mr. Heathen
» RE: Definition of Torture Posted by: JSquercia
» RE: Definition of Torture Posted by: hennep
» RE: Definition of Torture Posted by: hennep
» Are you kidding ? Posted by: Khaidea
» RE: Definition of Torture Posted by: bansidh@citlink.net
We Have To Be Better
Posted by: NoPCZone on Jan 25, 2007 8:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If a nation does not have some level of moral authority it really has nothing but brute force, which puts us in the same camp as our enemies. The difference between evil visited upon one person and a large group of people is nothing but a difference of scale- the evil intent is the same.

Democracy and liberty cannot exist in a moral vacuum- they are birthed in the open and based upon respect for the rights of all people. When a person or institution steps across the line and starts to compromise individual human rights for whatever reason they have started down the slippery slope to despotism and repression.

Basic human rights, fair hearings before a court and decent treatment while detained or incarcerated are not negotiable and never should be. If one person is treated as beneath the law, without rights or with diminished rights, all of us subject to the same. If all people's rights are respected as sacrosanct, we can all be assured of justice and a fair process before the law.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The new commander in Iraq is a 'counterinsurgency expert' - Vietnam all over.
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Jan 25, 2007 9:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First, one of the main reasons this issue is before the American public is due to the tireless reporting efforts of Democracy Now!, Amy Goodman, and the rest of their group. It's important to understand that they've also provided a channel to independent reporters to get their information out to a far larger audience than would otherwise be possible. Without this, we would probably be in a far worse position than we are.

Regarding the torture issue, I recently attended a lecture on Iraq and the Middle East by Dahr Jamail, and one underreported issue from Iraq is how the Israeli occupation methods used in Palestine have been imported to Iraq, using Mossad agents as 'instructors' - entire villages are routinely surrounded by razorwire fences, all inhabitants are retina-scanned and fingerprinted and issued ID cards; a single checkpoint is set up to scan anyone entering and leaving the village, and bulldozers are used to demolish the homes of families of suspected insurgents - i.e. collective punishments; food, water, electricity and medical supplies can be cut off at the whim of the local commander, etc.

Furthermore, the Central American / School of the Americas torture methods have been imported to Iraq wholesale; thus you have the electric drills used for torture, the body parts cut off - Then you have the CIA/Mossad interrogators, whose methods are described on this Democracy Now interview: Professor McCoy Exposes the History of CIA Interrogation, From the Cold War to the War on Terror.

All of this probably isn't aimed at getting information - it's designed to terrorize the local population into abject obedience, and while it may have 'worked' against helpless Guatemalan villagers, it only inspired the Iraqi insurgents to respond in kind; thus it is no surprise when Iraqi insurgents dress up in US uniforms and attack US counterinsurgency planners, SF Chronicle, Jan 22 2007

" The armored sport utility vehicles whisked into a government compound in the city of Karbala with speed and urgency, the way most Americans and foreign dignitaries travel along Iraq's treacherous roads these days....Once inside, however, the men unleashed one of the deadliest and most brazen ambushes of U.S. forces in a secure, official area. Five U.S. service members were killed in a hail of grenades and gunfire in a breach of security that Iraqi officials called unprecedented.

This is just a replay of Vietnam (obviously the attackers knew where to go!); none of the foreign contractors in Iraq will hire local Iraqis because they fear similar 'security breaches' but instead import 'third country nationals' as a source of cheap labor.

It's also important to note that the new commander in Iraq, Petraeus, is the author of the US army counterinsurgency manual - so these torture tactics will continue to be used more then ever; the goal will be to terrorize the population to the point where they will welcome anyone who can offer them 'security'.

This really is an escalation of the war, and the main aim is probably to create a pretext for bombing Iran and driving the price of oil through the roof, so that Bush&Co. can cash in even more. Congress has attempted to resolve itself of responsibility for these actions, but that's BS - I suppose now we'll see where they really stand.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's not new with Bush/ Cheney
Posted by: fanny666 on Jan 25, 2007 1:28 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Some declassified documents on the history of torture, and the reason behind some of the methods.

link

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Torture = More Terrorists and Terrorism
Posted by: sofla100 on Jan 25, 2007 4:09 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Using torture actually has increased the risk of terrorism against America and the West. Here are the reasons:

1. Tremendous and unrelenting negative publicity, across the world and across the Arab world. From Al Jazeera to the BBC, and much more then in the American Press, the stories of torture from Guantanamo to Abu Ghraib to extraordinary rendition ring across the Arab lands. The net result, a fantastic recruting tool for Osama and company. How much so? Some specultate without these stories and this news of torture, the insurgency in Iraq would have collapsed. America's use of torture fueled the insurgency as thousands of recruits came forward.

2. Just how stupid can you assume would-be terrorists to be? From the fact that the information gleaned from torture might not be accurate to the probability that would be terrorists have trained for this possibility, that is, of being tortured, just how do you know the information gathered is of any value? Not only that, terrorists to be MIGHT COVERTLY send operatives, perhaps without them knowing it, to be captured and deliver loads of false information.

3. Torture is a sign of desperation. You only resort to it when you are losing. So, what signal is being sent? Not only that, it usually equates with a loss of civil rights and liberties, as in America now, for those using it. Once again, the terrorists win, America becomes just like them. What kind of victory is this???

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The USA has signed the Geneva Convention and it defines torture
Posted by: Carl Street on Jan 26, 2007 10:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Article 17

Every prisoner of war, when questioned on the subject, is bound to give only his surname, first names and rank, date of birth, and army, regimental, personal or serial number, or failing this, equivalent information. If he wilfully infringes this rule, he may render himself liable to a restriction of the privileges accorded to his rank or status.

Each Party to a conflict is required to furnish the persons under its jurisdiction who are liable to become prisoners of war, with an identity card showing the owner's surname, first names, rank, army, regimental, personal or serial number or equivalent information, and date of birth. The identity card may, furthermore, bear the signature or the fingerprints, or both, of the owner, and may bear, as well, any other information the Party to the conflict may wish to add concerning persons belonging to its armed forces. As far as possible the card shall measure 6.5 x 10 cm. and shall be issued in duplicate. The identity card shall be shown by the prisoner of war upon demand, but may in no case be taken away from him.

No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion, may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them information of any kind whatever. Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may not be threatened, insulted, or exposed to any unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind.




Nazi Germany WAS a signatory of the Geneva Convention and one of he principle reason German officers and German officials were jailed and executed following WWII was their failure to comply with its tenets. I leave it to you, dear reader, to decide whether or not the USA should emulate Nazi Germany.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A Tortured Logic
Posted by: Nacho on Jan 26, 2007 1:45 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My comment:

Not only SHOULD the Democratic majority in Congress do this, it is their legal obligation, their constitutional duty, and their sworn responsibility to the American people and our form of government. Anyone who has broken the law should be prosecuted. Failure to do so is tantamount to aiding and abetting the obstruction of justice, ongoing criminal conspiracy and cover-ups. Torture is against the law. Extraordinary renditions are against the law. These practices should be stopped, and those guilty of engaging in these criminal activities should be prosecuted. But, as pointed out in Don't Think of an Elephant, Democrats need to frame the debate in words other Democrats can understand, or to be more specific, in ways that already have established neural synaptic pathways. As stated on www.physorg.com, "Nerve cells store and transmit information via special contact sites called synapses. Synapses also play a role in determining what we remember and what we forget. When we learn, both the structure and the functional characteristics of these contact sites change. Scientists are only now beginning to understand the molecular processes which cause that change. " To that I would add something from Leon Fe stinger. The cognitive dissonance which arises from the suggestion that the Attorney General of the United States should be investigated for participating in criminal acts is more than most Americans (let alone Democrats in Congress) can cognitively come to terms with. To suggest that the highest law enforcement officer in the United States has been engaging in criminal activity is a concept that Americans will naturally reject because it is so offensive, and this fact must be confronted squarely before the issue can be raised. In simple terms, for most Americans, it is too disturbing a thought to be possible; it is therefore "unthinkable." This is no less true for Democrats in Congress than it is for any other Americans. A more appropriate question then is, can the new Democratic majority in Congress, as human beings, accomplish this task? The fate of our world hangs in the balance. Nevertheless, my hat is off to Amy Goodman for her courage, her intellect, and her wisdom, and for her compassion for the rest of humanity.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Those who justify torture should think about this...
Posted by: Carl Street on Jan 26, 2007 4:50 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1. Hitler and the Nazis did not START with Auschwitz, Buchenwald, etc. -- they ramped up to it. History shows there is FAR MORE danger in trend line of currently favorable or semi-favorable circumstances going bad; than there is in a trend line of bad circumstances going good. Just because we are NOT currently at the gates of the train stations and ovens does NOT mean that we should take any refuge or comfort in the present circumstances.

2. One of the reasons the Nazis succeeded for as long as they did in operating their death camps is that they were able to conceal their existence largely because many who could have; SHOULD have known did NOT wish to know. While the Geheim Stats Polezei (GeStaPo) did curtail their revealation in some cases; the sad fact is MOST of the time such direct action was unnecessary -- anyone speaking of them was immediately shouted down by their neighbors as unpatriotic (conspiracy theorist?). To quote one person, "there could NOT be any such camps; for if there were it would be reported in the news". My point is that You and I do NOT and CANNOT know WHAT is REALLY being done. That, in fact, their could be pogroms, death camps, and Guantanamo COULD be an Auschwitz.

3. I wish to avoid any misunderstanding of my position -- I am NOT in favor of Muslims, Jews, Catholics, Baptists, Buddhists, etc. etc. I AM in favor or rational and just treatment of ALL members of the human race regardless of their race, particular beliefs (or lack of same); philosophies, etc. Consequently, I abhor any and all injustice and do NOT believe in the popular misguided theory that injustice can be justified by circumstances. To accept this latter false precept would mean that I am NOT opposed to injustice; rather, that only I perhaps place a higher price than average on its implementation. In short , it is hypocrisy and a LIE.

4. ONLY FOOLS believe that laws are passed to persecute others. MANY Germans who cheered the persecution of the Jews early on ultimately wound up on the wrong end of Nazi tyranny themselves -- discovering too late that they, in fact, had cut their own throats. In order to ensure a safe world for myself, my family, my children, etc. I must therefore recognize at all times that ANY tyranny against ANY human being be they black, white, green, Muslim, Catholic, Jewish, Baptist, Buddhist, Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, Communist, etc., etc., etc. ultimately THREATENS ME. The mere fact that my particular skin color, religious beliefs, philosophy, etc. happens to be in vogue is an accident of history; and NOT some measure of its intrinsic value. AND, it is ONLY a matter of time before one or more of those factors will become politically "unfashionable" and all that implies in terms of personal security. Thus ethical justice for all is ultimately the MOST PRACTICAL means of survival; not just some kind of pontificating moral stance.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]