Is it just me, or are some people missing the point? President Barack Obama (I had to say the whole thing-it still makes me grin) said he wouldn’t prosecute the CIA agents who tortured so-called enemy combatants if the agents acted in good faith.
Let’s look at that sentence a little more in depth, shall we? CIA Agent John Smith (please, no Matrix jokes) is about to interrogate a prisoner. Before he enters the room, the lawyer Jane Doe tells him it is perfectly legal to torture the prisoner to get any information he has. So Agent Smith proceeds to torture his prisoner. A few years later, he finds out that not only is what he did illegal now, it was never legal in the first place – the lawyer lied to him.
So why are cartoonists (1-look at 957 2 3) (as I’m sure are many bloggers) equating this scenario with letting a burglar go free because “he acted in good faith”? The law, every law, says that burglary is wrong. The highest lawyers in the United States said that torture was right.
I’m not saying that there weren’t any CIA agents who took full advantage of this technicality during interrogation sessions. They might have done it anyway, knowing that they wouldn’t be punished by the Bush Administration. If one CIA agent spoke up under the Bush Administration, he would be fired and replaced by someone with the same “values” as the government. It would take many people who thought this was wrong to make any difference.
People believe that going after the foot soldiers will bring about some closure. And maybe it will. However, it won’t bring justice. Obama needs to do what any good drug enforcement agency does – flip the little guys to get to the big guys. It was immoral and illegal to subvert the Geneva Convention’s “prisoner of war” rules by saying the prisoners are enemy combatants. It was hideously wrong to say it was fine to torture a man to get information he may or may not have. The CIA agents weren’t completely angels, but to get the big prize, you need to forfeit some of the smaller prizes.
Now let’s see if Obama chooses what’s behind Door # 3…
April 29th, 2009 at 9:52 am
I suppose in a way it’s like being upset with Nazi soldiers getting off for saying they were just acting under orders. But if studies of psychology have shown us anything it’s that .. well, there’s some sad truth to such things. One can say they should have known it was inhuman and wrong, that they deserve some justice for being complicit…
But ultimately it’s the enabling power structure and leadership that is the true evil, that created the context and initiated the actions.
Hate to sound like a loony lefty but it’s really not just the lawyers, but Bush & Cheney who should be targeted for justice. In a sane world, anyway. And anyone else in government who made decisions or drafted spurious laws enabling torture.