Right back inna jungle. On account of the breakdown of ethics
Which is why, of course, ethics are important.
First, you might want to read this account (via TBogg) of Sunday’s pro-war march on Washington. Specifically, one should make note of this quote from “B-1” Bob Dornan, re: Saddam Hussein:
“We are the good guys,” said Dornan, a former Air Force fighter pilot and longtime conservative firebrand. “Never again will we put up with this kind of person who tortures children in front of their parents.”
Got that? Noted it down? Good. Now, put yourself in mind of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. Specifically, ponder the dilemma facing his interrogators (via blueheron, in a roundabout fashion), who have to get him to talk without, you know, violating the UN Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. —Fret not; by our reading of the document, we can still lie to him, scream at him, play on his phobias, strip him, shave him, deprive him of religious items and toiletries, pretend to transfer him to a third country which hasn’t ratified the convention, or even, what the heck, go ahead and so transfer him. (Jordan has been suggested.) And, if all else fails:
US authorities have an additional inducement to make Mr. Mohammed talk, even if he shares the suicidal commitment of the Sept. 11 hijackers: The Americans have access to two of his elementary-school-age children, the top law-enforcement official says. The children were captured in a September raid that netted one of Mr. Mohammed’s top comrades, Ramzi Binalshibh.
We are the good guys. So we can do whatever we want. Because we’re the good guys. —As moral clarity goes, it’s pretty goddamn clear, isn’t it?
Commenting is closed for this article.
Appaling that the option is even being considered.
Go shake some sense into Oliver Willis, please...
well, ya know, "might is right" afterall...
...fuck.
Perfect consistency--after all, we're not going to torture his children IN FRONT OF HIM are we? Maybe a little off to one side . . .