Tag Archives: Torture

Deceit, lies and waterboarding

water_cure

During the Spanish-American War, a U.S. soldier, Major Edwin Glenn, was suspended from command for one month and fined $50 for using “the water cure.” In his review, the Army judge advocate said the charges constituted “resort to torture with a view to extort a confession.” He recommended disapproval because “the United States cannot afford to sanction the addition of torture.”

Stephen Rickard, Washington director of the Open Society Institute, says that throughout the centuries, the justifications for using waterboarding have been remarkably consistent. “Almost every time this comes along, people say, ‘This is a new enemy, a new kind of war, and it requires new techniques,'” he says. “And there are always assurances that it is carefully regulated.”

(excerpts from Waterboarding: A Tortured History)

 

It’s been said that waterboarding created quick, effective results after 9/11. That turned out to be a lie, an oft-repeated lie, but a lie nonetheless. The specific case mentioned was that of Abu Zubaydah. Problem is, interrogators had already gotten excellent, actionable information from Mr. Zubaydah, including the identification of José Padilla, the dirty bomber. That information was not obtained by torture, it was obtained through traditional methods. (Zubaydah provided this information between March and June of 2002; waterboarding was authorized in August of that year) In addition, recently declassified memos show that Zubaydah was waterboarded “at least 83 times,” [Ed.—or 83 pours, as noted in the comments below] not the 30-35 seconds that Rush Limbaugh and others like to talk about.

I could go on and on, but plenty has been written about the foolishness of using torture techniques that have been proven historically to provide false confessions, much has been reported following the declassification of the memos about torture. What is important for us to remember, though, is that we were deceived. Again. We put our trust in politicians and professional soldiers to give us reliable information about what they were doing and why. As the people of God, we cannot place ourselves blindly in the hands of ungodly people, letting them make decisions about whom we should hate, whom we should kill, whom we should torture and what is right and what is not. The kingdoms of this world, all of them, promote their own interests. They do not put God’s kingdom first. They will lie to us to get us to do what they want. They will hide information from us, distort the facts, and present partial truths. A quick look at history confirms this fact. Monarchs and revolutionaries, Democrats and Republicans, capitalists and communists, … we dare not let them make our moral decisions. They will promote their own interests by any means necessary.

Our government will never do that, for our king cannot lie.

Shifting sands

sandOne reason I brought up the subject of torture yesterday is that I wanted to remind us how culture shifts in its definition of morality, especially regarding warfare. The torture techniques, the “enhanced interrogation” if you speak NewSpeak, these were the very things that we found outrageous when they were practiced on American soldiers during the Korean War, Vietnam War, etc. Waterboarding, for example, was one of the main accusations against a Japanese officer tried for war crimes after World War II. American soldiers were court-martialed for performing “the water cure” during the Spanish-American war. It’s been considered something morally repugnant. Until it became “necessary.”

To be honest, there is no reason for a nation of this world to not embrace these things. Nations aren’t Christian; people are Christian. However, dare we Christians go along for the ride as our country’s morality changes? I wrote before about the bombing of cities becoming acceptable. Now we’re talking about torturing prisoners. Each of these things become acceptable out of pragmatism: they work, they save lives, etc.

Terrorism works as well. When the governments to whom we blindly pledge our allegiance accept the use of suicide bombers, will Christians do the same? History says yes. And that’s really sad.

How do you feel about torture?

1902waterboarding

Commenter on CNN blog, talking about waterboarding: If even one American life is saved, it’s worth it.

As Steve Ridgell said to me the other day, if you’re not a Christian, you shouldn’t have any problem with torture. (Unless it’s done by others to your people, of course) That fits with this Pew research report that shows that 23% of Americans view American lives as being more valuable than others.

Rush Limbaugh: It works, is the bottom line.

As Christians, however, how should we react to the use of torture? Does the end justify the means?

Jonah Goldberg, National Review: Debating whether it was worth it still seems open to debate, depending on the facts.

It should be no surprise that worldly people support “whatever it takes.” What I’m curious about is, how do Christians see it? If you have a problem with torture, well, why? If it works and saves lives, why not use torture? Is it morally different than other military acts? I’d really like to hear your thoughts.