Turning a blind eye to the obvious
Email This Post
- 
Print This Post
- 
I’m trying to figure out how some continue to insist that the United States did not break international laws and violate the Geneva Conventions when it comes to torturing detainees in the ‘war on terror.’ The revelations spill out day after day. When I posted some here, I was accused of lying by some of the bloggers on this site. If I’m lying, then so are those service men and women who served in Iraq and participated in this heinous activity because they are now coming forward. Why come forward now? They are coming forward now because George Bush and Dick Cheney are gone and so is the threat of retribution and payback. That’s why.
If I’m lying, then so is the International Committee of the Red Cross, whose complete report was recently declassified. I downloaded this with the intention of adding it to my Scribd site, but the conversion apparently failed because the document is still encrypted, and Scribd cannot upload it. You should be able to download a copy from the above link. If not, anyone who wants a copy, please send an email to political.junkie2754@gmail.com.
The latest information reveals that medical personnel (yes, we’re talking about ‘medics’ and ‘doctors’ here) participated in torture. This information is included in the Red Cross report. So much for the Hippocratic oath and the promise to “do no harm.” Oh, and I’m sure that I’ll hear that none of these things apply during a time of war. I already heard that from one torture denier already. Know what I say to that? Why bother sending them as medics at all, if that’s the case? Just give ‘em a gun, some ammo and a couple of grenades and let them run wild. Hey, sure, some Americans might die that normally wouldn’t have, but I say you can’t have it both ways.
We can spend the day splitting legal hairs, but the fact is that torture in any form is morally repugnant. As my friend advised me, there’s a new Hippocratic oath and ‘do no harm’ isn’t in it. Know what? That’s part of the hair-splitting approach. I’m pretty sure that overseeing the torture of another human being is not morally-acceptable behavior for a doctor or ‘medic.’
Finally, the most hideous reality of all is that the U.S. lowered itself to the host country’s level, and the torture neither produced one valuable piece of information, nor did it stop one terrorist event. That’s because people being tortured will say anything to make it stop (especially what the torturers want to hear).
The realities of the Bush war years are everywhere. There’s no more denying any of it, and the truth must now come out regardless of how ugly it is. If, as some suggest, no laws have been broken, then that position should be able to withstand the legal scrutiny.
Comment by Richard on 7 April 2009:
The Geneva Conventions only apply to uniformed combatants. Defacto the convention declared terrorists excluded. That does not mean torture is acceptable. It does mean citing the Geneva Conventions is a straw man without substance.
As far as the “medics” go they are regularly targeted as valuable and killed for bonus money.
Comment by ihentschel on 7 April 2009:
Nit-picking does make the enormity of the travesty or the wide-spread scope of the disgusting behavior any less serious. For the life of me, I cannot understand how so many people are having so much trouble simply admitting that we screwed up. We need to face the music, stop arguing about who shot John, and make sure we don’t play the same song, again.
Comment by Sarah on 7 April 2009:
I too am confused by those who in the name of partisanship try to ignore the facts in favor of their own ideology. Facts are such confounding things to pass opinion upon.
Comment by Deb Della Piana on 8 April 2009:
Thanks, Sarah, for saying it so simply. The idea that it isn’t torture because the victims are not in “uniform” is the kind of legal nit-picking I was talking about in an earlier post. The idea that torture is only torture when a person wears a uniform handed out by his or her government is absurd.
Comment by Sarah on 8 April 2009:
I strongly disagree with you on the issue. Your citing of the Geneva Convention is inappropriate since it does not apply to irregulars. In fact if captured out of uniform you can be executed summarily. No trial. No conversation. No if ands or buts. Dead. Torture doesn’t enter the issue. Your concenience logic is claptrap without substance.
Comment by Deb Della Piana on 8 April 2009:
Right, Sarah, PEOPLE are “irregulars.” Nice touch. Keep denying. The people being captured aren’t being “captured out of uniform.” That IS their uniform. And we invaded a sovereign nation, Sarah. Your denial is claptrap. It’s call legal hair-splitting to justify America’s disgraceful behavior.
I’m not the one indulging in concentric logic. You are.
Comment by Sarah on 8 April 2009:
PLEASE read the GENEVA ACCORDS. Irreulars not serving in the armed, uniformed service of a sovereign nation are not covered. To dsiguise onesself as a civilian it hiding among women and children. You deseve the harshest punishment.
As far as “concentric logic” I urge you to buy and read a Logic 101 text book.
Comment by Deb Della Piana on 9 April 2009:
Hey Sarah, I went you one better than that. I have a friend who is a constitutional scholar and who practiced constitutional law for many years. He is quite familiar with the Geneva Conventions and he is the one who coined the phrase “legal hair-splitting,” not me. I have read the Geneva Conventions myself and I have relatives who have served in Vietnam and World War II who concur that this must be investigated. So, really, stop imploring me to read. Before I write any article that appears on this blog, I spend quite a bit of time investigating my topic, both on the web and at my local library. So, PLEASE, Sarah, get off it.
The soldiers serving in Iraq and Afghanistan themselves have said the number one recruiting tool being used against the United States is our country’s use of torture at both Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo. The soldiers themselves, Sarah, are using the term “torture.” The soldiers themselves have come forward to say that what we have done is inhuman and against the law and they are coming forward now because they have been afraid to up until now.
You take your books and console yourself. Make yourself feel good that America is doing just fine with what it’s doing. No uniform. No problem. Sleep well. However, I will tell you that you are in the minority on a worldwide basis (including Americans WHO WANT THIS INVESTIGATED). I prefer to listen to those who had their boots on the ground where the disgraceful behavior has, and still is taking place.
Let’s agree to disagree on this one: You continue to wave the flag and shout “My country right or wrong.” In the meantime, I’ll keep pushing for an independent prosecutor to investigate the alleged crimes.
The culpable always have supporters speaking in their favor, true “patriots” like yourself. Well, Sarah, if no laws have been broken, let’s let the legal system run its course and the Bush administration will be vindicated.