What a difference 21 years makes

Back in 1988, our commander in chief Ronald Reagan championed and signed the Convention Against Torture, which states that torture is never acceptable even with war as an excuse, and which requires participating countries to prosecute their torturers (thanks Glenn Greenwald on Salon for this, and for the pointer to the Krauthammer column).

Today in the Washington Post, Charles Krauthammer describes the circumstances under which he thinks torture is permissible and says anyone who never sees any justification in torture should not be entrusted with military decisions.

The other day in the New York Times, Thomas Friedman said Obama was right not to prosecute, because it would "tear America apart" and we have a "unique" enemy.

A Pew poll published the other day revealed that "the more often Americans go to church, the more likely they are to support the torture of suspected terrorists" (CNN).

What on earth is going on, when the people who mourn Christ's crucifixion, with a faith built upon mercy, suddenly condone torture?  When a one conservative icon's recommendations nobody took issue with 20 years ago are suddenly considered nigh treasonous by their own party?  When the human-rights-loving, law-expert President we just elected refuses to hold anyone accountable for breaking international and US law?  When a writer and columnist we respect and admire says it's okay to trade human rights for political harmony, like some kind of warlord dictator (fascist or communist, take your pick)?

What on earth is going on?  This is America.  Can people not simply open their eyes and say, "looks like someone's being accused of criminal acts, let's give him a trial"?  Is that so darn hard?

Comments

[Scott Draves]

Thank you Isabel. I too feel bewildered and lost. While Bush and his team are personally responsible and should be investigated and prosecuted forthwith, alas our condition isn't so simple. As the Pew poll indicates, this moral rot is widespread in our country. Is Bush the cause or the effect of this condition? Some of both I think... To combat it, I think Reagan's actions are a great starting point. Another is the Israelis who are far more threatened by terrorists, and yet do not employ torture:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/01/opinion/01fri4.html

[Russ Nelson]

Torture is pointless. It gives you the first plausible answer whi ch stops the torture. I remember when the left hated Reagan, but he's on their side now.