One month ago today, Cambridge University Press published
The Torture Papers: The Road to Abu Ghraib, by Karen J. Greenberg and Joshua L. Dratel.
Not since Nuremburg has such a large amount of documentation been made publicly available that so starkly reveals a methodical, systematic plan to torture a group of human beings by a government. The documentation shows that the officially sanctioned policy of abuse and degradation of these human beings -- most of whom were innocent and had no part in terrorism or even understanding of why they were being tortured -- was conceived in and directed from the White House, was executed across many locations and by personnel at many levels of authority, and was in violation of both longstanding military doctrine and United States law.
Follow me to the flipside for a discussion and a call to action.
Thankfully, authors like Greenberg and Dratel, human rights activists, whistleblowers, the ACLU and even the military itself have uncovered and produced materials that demonstrate, for the world and generations to come, the astonishing breach of morality and American ethos at the highest levels of our government.
[By way of disclaimer, I do not know Greenberg or Dratel and I have no connection to their publisher. However, I am a strong believer in the use of culture and media, in this case a book, to get messages out and educate people. So, I will plug their book even though I have only read excerpts and encourage everyone to check it out for themselves at their local bookstore. I also do not know how the authors plan to market the book, but based on the WaPo discussion described below, I would absolutely attend a book tour appearance by them.]
With that disclaimer and those recommendations, let's return to the issue at hand.
In support of their book, today Greenberg and Dratel participated in a Live Online at WaPo that produced some excellent insight and commentary.
In the discussion, Greenberg and Dratel directly engage the question of accountability:
Indianapollis, Ind.: I believe the punishment of those lower enlisted was just scape-goating because I have't seen anything done to the NCO's and officers over them. Or have I missed something?
Joshua L. Dratel: Thanks for your question. I agree with you. There is a huge and important gap in this story that needs to be filled in. We have the soldiers who implemented the policy on actual persons, and the very highly placed government officials who designed the policy. What's missing thus far is the chain of command by which these instructions and this policy were communicated to the rank and file. It is reasonable to conclude that those who commit torture are acting outside authority if the policy clearly prohibits it. But when, as in this context, there is a policy developed at the highest level of government, and that policy is manifested at the "field" level, it is extraordinarily hypocritical for only those in the field to be prosecuted and punished, and for them to be treated as if there is no connection between the design of the policy and its implementation in the field.
Karen J. Greenberg: Perhaps as an aside, we might mention that those who wrote many of these memos have been promoted. Bybee to the 9th Circuit, Gonzales to Attorney General, and now Haynes has been nominated again for the US court of appeals, fourth circuit.
So, let's be clear: the architects of your government's torture policy are now United States Attorney General (Gonzales), a law professor at the University of California at Berkeley (Yoo), sitting Federal Judges (Bybee and Haynes) and more. Far from being prosecuted, fired, or otherwise held to account, they have been rewarded for instituting torture and blackening the reputation of our country for all time.
As an American, and a human being, I feel something should be done about this. But, I'm not certain what more we can do. I am greatly heartened by the fact that many here at dKos and many Americans across our country feel the same way, and the evidence I have for this is the outcry over the nomination of Gonzales and the strong campaign we mounted in opposition to him.
One idea recently proposed is to hold a mock trial at one or more universities or law schools. Modeled on Nuremberg, prosecutors, defense counsel and judges would be assembled to consider the evidence as to each of these defendants. While this would have no legal effect, it could provide a foundation for useful media and grassroots efforts.
Comments on this idea, and submission of other ideas for the purposes of keeping this issue alive and in the public eye would be most appreciated.
P.S. I encourage you to check out the rest of the Greenberg/Dratel discussion. Also, just in case you have been influenced by Alan Dershowitz or your redstate neighbor who thinks that torture is acceptable, today the NY Times published an editorial that discussed how the abomination that is our country's policy on torture has to date produced no actionable intelligence whatsoever:
Self-Inflicted Wounds
I myself say, "Fuck you, Alan Dershowitz!" He should be ashamed of himself, and should read the last line of the NY Times editorial:
An Israeli judge, Aharon Barak, summed it up six years ago when he ruled that abuses of Palestinian prisoners were illegal. "This is the destiny of a democracy," he said, "as not all means are acceptable to it, and not all practices employed by its enemies are open before it."
Not exactly a clarion call for human rights, but certainly a fine point.
P.P.S. Greenberg/Dratel also discuss this issue in the context of longstanding military doctrine that torture does not produce reliable information, and that most experienced military and other interrogators believe extended interrogation, let alone torture, is fruitless.