Psyche, Science, and Society

President Clinton endorses torture

This morning on NPR, former President Clinton was on, criticizing Republican moves to legalize torture. Toward the end of the interview came a shocker: Clinton brought up the possibility that there might be circumstances where one really wanted the information held by a detainee. Then Clinton proposed, the interrogators should draw up a plan to waterboard, or whatever. The plan should then be submitted for Presidential authorization and then, after the fact, submitted to the FISA court for review.

Clinton suggested that narrowly drawn legislation could be written that would legalize torture in these circumstances, as an alternative to Bush’s proposed general rewriting of the Geneva Convention’s Common Article 3.

I was, shall we say, shocked to hear Clinton openly endorsing the Dershowitz idea of legalizing torture. Additionally shocking was to discover that the anti-Bush Pensito Review website actually cited the Clinton interview positively, ignoring that he had just endorsed torture, albeit in “limited” circumstances.

I guess the Bush-is-absolute-evil school goes along with the “if only Clinton was still President.” How quickly people forget how depressing the Clinton Presidency was, what with Clinton “triangulating” by attacking liberals and friends and cozying up to the right, with healthcare reform being destroyed for a generation, gays being blessed with “don’t ask, don’t tell” codifying hatred, welfare “reform” being passed that contained little in job training or childcare resources to help people, and missiles being sent randomly into Iraq every few days to kill a few here, a few there. If historical memory is so short, heaven help us.

Add comment September 21st, 2006

GOP Rep “voted for torture”

Not having gotten the talking points yet, Georgia congressman Lynn Westmoreland “voted for torture” but now is on cue and wants to revise his staement:

On Tuesday, the Grantville Republican told a Douglas County Chamber of Commerce luncheon that he “voted for torture” and that “we need to get information out of these people the best way we can,” the Douglas County Sentinel reported.

He said Wednesday that he should have “put that another way.”

“Maybe I shouldn’t have said I voted for torture,” he said in an interview with The Associated Press. “I should have said I voted against the anti-torture bill….”

“I think they should use the methods necessary to get the information from the people who know the information,” he said. “We’re fighting people that don’t wear a uniform. They’re not from a country. They’re not a recognized military. So I don’t know that the Geneva Convention even covers them.”

Pressed on whether that means he supports torture, he said, “What’s torture? Torture is many things to many people … people have different breaking points.”

Asked whether he would support using electric shocks, he said, “Electric shocks are given to people during initiations to different clubs … Is that torture? I don’t know.”

Asked about beatings, he said, “Are you talking about tying his hands behind his back and beating him in the head? No, I’m not for that.”

If there was any doubt that Congress was deciding whether to explicitly ratify torture, his words should end the doubt.

Now word comes of a “compromise” on that issue of principle. We’re waiting to learn which torture techniques are ok with McCain-Warner-Graham and which will only be used under the table.

1 comment September 21st, 2006