Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal Commentary Blogs -> Balkinization

Legal Commentary

: Balkinization

No More Debate About Whether We Tortured

By Jack M. Balkin

This article by Mark Danner in the New York Review of Books ends the debate over whether we tortured.

Danner's article is based upon a report by the International Committee of the Red Cross, which interviewed prisoners. The report explicitly concludes that we "tortured" a number of prisoners. But don't take the ICRC's word for it. Read the extensive accounts by the prisoners of their treatment and decide for yourself (although they were kept in isolation, their accounts substantially coincide).

Grotesque is the word that comes to mind to describe our treatment of these fellow humans--from administering bouts of suffocation, to extreme cold, to forced standing in chains for hours on end with their hands above their heads, to terrible beatings.

As the discussion moves forward, let us at least drop further hypocrisy and doublespeak (A soon to be infamous Bush statement made directly to the American people and the world: "The United States does not torture. It's against the law, and it's against our values.")

In plain terms, this is what happened: Bush Administration officials, with crucial assistance from top Justice Department lawyers, ordered that prisoners be tortured because they collectively thought it was necessary.

Torture was and is illegal under domestic and international law (never mind morality). Now the questions revolve around what can or should be done about it.

But please, no more pretense--no more phony debates about whether our "alternative procedures" amounted to "torture."

Full post as published by Balkinization on March 16, 2009 (boomark / email).