Slate's Jacob Weisberg claims we're all complicit in torture. BS!

[ProSense]

Our Tacit Approval of Torture

We need to come to terms with not just who did what, but our collective complicity with their decisions.

<...>

Unlike the Japanese internment, waterboarding was ordered and served up in secret. But it, too, was America's policy—not just Dick Cheney's. Congress was informed about what was happening and raised no objection. The public knew, too. By 2003, if you didn't understand that the United States was inflicting torture upon those deemed enemy combatants, you weren't paying much attention. This is part of what makes applying a criminal-justice model to those most directly responsible such a bad idea. The issue we need to come to terms with is not just who in the Bush administration did what, but our collective complicity in their decision.

<...>

Well before the nation reelected George W. Bush in 2004, the country's best investigative reporters had unearthed the salient aspects of his torture policy: in December 2002, Dana Priest and Barton Gellman revealed on the front page of The Washington Post that American interrogators were employing "stress and duress" techniques as well as shipping prisoners to places like Egypt, where even fewer rules applied. "Each of the current national security officials interviewed for this article defended the use of violence against captives as just and necessary," the reporters wrote. "They expressed confidence that the American public would back their view."

<...>

As with Japanese internment, Bush's torture policy wasn't seriously challenged by the other branches of government while it was still in effect. Though House Speaker Nancy Pelosi claims she wasn't told about it, evidence suggests she and other senior members of the intelligence committees were briefed extensively on the use of waterboarding in fall 2002. One official quoted in The Washington Post said, "The attitude was, 'We don't care what you do to those guys as long as you get the information you need to protect the American people'." In September 2006, Congress passed the Military Commissions Act, which shielded U.S. interrogators from potential prosecution for torture. The Senate rejected an amendment introduced by Ted Kennedy that would have defined waterboarding as a war crime. In 2008 Democrats finally had the guts to pass legislation limiting interrogation techniques to those covered in the Army Field Manual. Bush vetoed the bill and there was no override.

<...>

President Obama has done the most important thing: reversing Bush's policy and declaring, as he did last week, that torture was unequivocally wrong. What we need now is a public airing through congressional hearings and perhaps an independent commission, an idea that the White House is resisting. Pursuing criminal charges would be too hard politically and too easy morally. Prosecuting Bush and his men won't absolve the rest of us for what we let them do.

Utter bullshit.

[Solly Mack]

1. Good thing I'm not looking for absolution then.

Prosecute the fuckers!

[ProSense]

3. Seriously, how

the fuck does he sit and write this bullshit:

Pursuing criminal charges would be too hard politically and too easy morally. Prosecuting Bush and his men won't absolve the rest of us for what we let them do.

Maybe if Weisberg and the rest of the media did something other than make lames excuses year after year, those who weren't paying attention would have a clue.

What next, claiming the neighbor is complicit in abuse because they didn't notice the guy next door was beating his wife?

Asshole.

[Solly Mack]

22. Well now, I do think the American people bear some responsibility

for what happened under Bush for several reasons. Not the least of which was that far too Americans fully agreed with torture. I've heard people rationalize and justify very bad votes made by members of Congress - votes about the MCA 2006 for one example. If members of Congress weren't doing their job of checks and balances, then people should have worked to vote them out. Instead, far too many made excuses for not voting them out. Choosing the politically expedient over what was right. But it goes deeper than that.

And I know many won't agree with me; such is life.

The American people need to be honest with themselves about what they allow their government to get away with....if we're a government by,for,of the people...then we better start using that power we do have (the vote, protesting) to let government know we will not tolerate the crimes of government.

If we don't have a voice or the power to change our government, then we better be honest about that too. (and do something about it)

Do I see myself the same as the Bush administration? No

Do I see myself the same as those in Congress who pretended it wasn't happening? No

Or the members that didn't care it was happening? No

Do I see myself the same as those who cheered torture? No

Do I see myself the same as those who engaged in torture? No

But did I do as much as I could? No.

But I'm not looking for absolution - there is none. My country is a war crime nation - not even prosecutions can change that. But we don't have to be a nation that protects war criminals.

Prosecuting the Bush administration (& others) will not absolve anyone in America for what our government did...but it might just give us a chance to change the government for the better - if we are brave enough.


The thinking that prosecuting the Bush administration (and others) is politically hard just goes to prove my point - the politically expedient over what's right. And if we, as voters, continue to vote for those in government who choose what best serves them instead of what best serves the people, then we're enabling the corruption in government.

And I disagree with Weisberg on that thinking.

In fact, I think many in the press are attempting to mitigate their role in what happened by pushing their share of the blame off on others. And there's more than a whiff of the (bullshit) thinking that if everyone is guilty and you can't prosecute the entire country, then no one should be prosecuted. That's the cowards way out. The world already knows just how guilty America is...and we'd only be lying to ourselves.


I see the danger in prosecution giving people a false sense of morality. Some will feel good about themselves because the guilty went to prison. They'll absolve themselves and the country - and government - without ever really changing the underlying problems that helped create the atmosphere that allowed for the criminality of the Bush administration. (the all too easy acceptance of corruption in government, of politicians that lie, of choosing the lesser of two evils, etc.)

That said, I disagree that such is a reason not to prosecute.

[ProSense]

23. None of it matters except this:

In fact, I think many in the press are attempting to mitigate their role in what happened by pushing their share of the blame off on others. And there's more than a whiff of the (bullshit) thinking that if everyone is guilty and you can't prosecuted the entire country to prison, then no one should be prosecuted. That's the cowards way out. The world already knows just how guilty America is...and we'd only be lying to ourselves.

This is exactly what's happening, a series of bullshit excuses.

[Mark Twain Girl]

25. Solly, FWIW, I agree strongly and I think this needs to be its own post. Well said. nt

[Solly Mack]

26. Thank you, Mark Twain Girl

I appreciate you saying that

[BuyingThyme]

2. What's the bullshit part?

[ProSense]

5. Sorry, accept your complicity and move on. n/t

[kentuck]

4. I know a lot of people here that spoke out against torture since day one...

What are they guilty of?

[BuyingThyme]

7. Supporting Nancy Pelosi, for one thing.

[ProSense]

10. Yeah, that's

the stupid-ass spin from some on the left that continues to blur reality and excuse the actions of Bush and the rest of the war criminals.

It's bullshit. Investigate and prosecute anyone found guilty.

[BuyingThyme]

12. Nancy Pelosi knowingly covered up torture by taking the Constitution off the table.

Get used to it. The facts don't change. Complicity is an understatement.

[ProSense]

13. I don't give a shit. That still doesn't mean there should be no prosecution. n/t

[BuyingThyme]

15. Well, at least you've fessed up to your complicity.

[ProSense]

16. Oh please, don't try to drag me down to your level. You want to accept resposibility, do it! n/t

[BuyingThyme]

17. But I DO give a shit.

See the difference? Yet?

[ProSense]

18. You're responsible so you're contradicting yourself.

Step away from the blind Pelosi hatred and realize that you can't have it both way.

[BuyingThyme]

19. I'm taking responsibility for my party. You're still being complicit.

[annabanana]

6. It's a Democratic Republic. We didn't stop them.

The Citizenry is culpable, and the only way to right the ship is to show the world that we will not tolerate this abuse that was done in our name.

[ProSense]

8. I don't buy that BS.

Oh, they're guilty of war crimes and illegally invading Iraq so we're all guilty. I say bullshit.

[annabanana]

9. "the American story is one of perfectibility

and striving for ever-greater fidelity to our ideals . ."

They did it for us. They did it in our name.

[ProSense]

11. "They did it for us."

They did it for oil. They weren't elected to break the law.

Americans weren't complicit in Watergate. This is a bullshit lame argument.

[eShirl]

31. they weren't elected, period.

[Richard Steele]

14. I'll plead guilty to everything I'm responsible for, when the torturers do the same.

This article is fucking pathetic.

As you said: utter bullshit.

[mmonk]

20. Can't hang that shit or the support of doing nothing about it on me.

My soul is not that damned to tolerate barbarism. I just have nowhere to put my vote or anything to fight it with.

[ProSense]

21. A Prompt and Impartial Investigation (torture)

here.

[Marr]

24. Mr. Weisberg should speak for himself.

A lot of people were against torture as soon as it came to light, and had no period of denial or cowardly rationalization. It might be interesting to look at how Mr. Weisberg talked about protesters back then.

I think this guy is projecting his own moral cowardice onto everyone else-- and oddly, using it to sell yet more moral cowardice.

Here's a tip, Jake. If you were too confused or too chickenshit to be against torture back then, maybe you should just shut the fuck up about moral responsibility today.

[Spazito]

27. Ignorant shit...

"Pursuing criminal charges would be too hard politically and too easy morally. Prosecuting Bush and his men won't absolve the rest of us for what we let them do."

It isn't a question of "absolution" for anyone, it is a matter of LAW, US and INTERNATIONAL LAW. The US signed on the dotted line:

UN Convention AGainst Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment



Article 4

1. Each State Party shall ensure that all acts of torture are offences under its criminal law. The same shall apply to an attempt to commit torture and to an act by any person which constitutes complicity or participation in torture.

2. Each State Party shall make these offences punishable by appropriate penalties which take into account their grave nature.

http://www.hrweb.org/legal/cat.html

[ProSense]

28. Exactly. n/t

[KT2000]

29. Bullcrap Weisberg!

This guy needs to find a better circle friends if that is who he is basing this editorial on.
For starters - Bush was not even re-elected - he stole the elections.
If Weisberg is feeling guilty - that is his problem. He should have been writing to his congress people with his objections like many of us did.
He would do better to investigate the reasons that objections were silenced, from the media, to the politicians, to the government agencies, to the top levels of the administration.

And to head off his next bullshit editorial - I am also NOT responsible for the economic mess. Many of us regard our houses as our homes and have not done much more than pay higher property taxes as a way of participating in the housing bubble.

[Senator]

30. Michael Kinsley Is Shoveling From The Same Pile Of DC Dung

He gets downright contemptuous at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/30/AR2009043003301.html?hpid=opinionsbox1">the evil American People:

Indignation comes cheap in our political culture. Polls give the impression that the proper role of voters is to sit like a king passing judgment on the issues as they pass by like dishes prepared for a feast. "No, I'm not in the mood for waterboarding today, thanks. But I think I'll have another dab of those delicious-looking executive-pay caps." Prosecuting a few former government officials for their role in putting our country into the torture business would not serve justice or historical memory. It would just let the real culprits off the hook.

This is sort of the converse of "patriotism as the refuge of scoundrels." When in doubt (about whether you and/or your friends were/are complicit with torture and war crimes), just foist the blame on the public -- then skip off to the next bipartisan, taxpayer-funded gala luncheon to talk about "serious" issues.

Maybe they're afraid Spain will eventually get to the propagandists and apologists.

--

[immoderate]

32. Our leaders betrayed us. The media were complicit. And it's our fault?

Yeah, some of us screamed bloody murder from the beginning of the Bush atrocities. But our voices were drowned out, and never penetrated the curtain of fear that the Bush administration pulled over the country. Weisberg is serving up a big mess o' blame the victim.

Every attempt at moderation was met with derision and jingoism -- charges of not supporting our troops, or hating America. They said that if we don't torture, they'll take away our freedom. They ruined our reputation and stole our money, and it's our fault?

You are so right to call that bullshit.

--imm