Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said Monday the United States would never send terrorism suspects to countries where they would be tortured but admitted once they have been dispatched to nations like Saudi Arabia or Egypt the U.S. government has little control,Reuters reported on Monday.
Now that is absolutely classic CYA doubletalk. "We would never allow people to be tortured! Absolutely not! And when we did, it wasn't our fault!" My mother used to describe such logic with a joke:
"My lawn mower was broken when you brought it back."
"I never borrowed your lawn mower and besides, it was broken when you loaned it to me."
I mean, is this really supposed to be accepted as a serious argument? Claiming that we are as clean as new-fallen snow and innocent as a newborn babe because we (supposedly) get "assurances" of proper treatment of prisoners while at the same time openly admitting that those assurances don't mean a flipping thing? What are we, Pontius Pilate? (Matthew 24:27)
Let's make the insane assumption that torture is not exactly what is expected and intended, make it even though it was The Slipper himself who said the "New Paradigm" puts "a high premium on ... the ability to quickly [emphasis added] obtain information." Even then, why even then, do we get to just turn away and say "not my problem?" Why do we get to just shrug our shoulders with indifference?
"Once someone is rendered we can't fully control what that country might do," Gonzales said. "If you're asking me, has a country always complied? I don't know the answer to that."Well, why the flaming hell not, Mr. Gonzales? Don't you care? Doesn't it concern you that, even taking you at your highly questionable word, we are almost literally tossing people into the arms of modern-day versions of Vlad the Impaler? Or is it that you just don't give a damn?
As an old saying supposedly has it, "Some questions need only be asked."
Footnote: The Slipper said DOJ would investigate "credible" allegations of abuses and torture. Guess who gets to define what constitutes a "credible" allegation.
Extra Added Footnote: Pontius Pilate is a somewhat more ambiguous figure than the common image of him. Some have even argued that he was a relatively - relatively - moderate ruler who tried to prevent some violence.
No comments:
Post a Comment