April 20, 2013 at 12:56 P.M. Among the shocks that flesh is heir to is recognition of the nearly infinite human capacity for malice and pleasure in cruelty, often pointless cruelty. Events in Boston this week bear me out on this point.
Witnessing the suffering imposed on our loved-ones -- how many lives have been shattered in Boston for no rational reason that I can figure out? -- is far worse that suffering ourselves. It is among the tactics of terrorists to extract obedience through sadistic evils imposed on our helpless loved-ones. We must never negotiate with or accept evil. We must struggle against evil (or terrorism) until that evil is destroyed.
The usual harassments at computer #12, NYPL, Morningside Heights. Home page changed to what purports to be MSN.
The identification of two men -- "foot soldiers" -- in the Boston bombings, has left the public pondering the forces behind these individuals and their motivations: 1) Was the goal to make it "appear" that the attackers were Middle Eastern, Muslims, Pakistanis? 2) Are there Right-wing affiliations for these individuals, ethnic and religious loyalties to another country; and 3) Was there logistical and other kinds of support provided to these persons in this conspiracy? And if so, by whom was that assistance provided? No "dark-skinned," Middle Eastern-looking men?
April 18, 2013 at 1:09 P.M. Developments in the Boston investigation seem to be following expected patterns. It is wiser to refrain from predictions or assumptions, at this time, especially racist assumptions about "dark-skinned" culprits.
I notice that, the day after the Boston bombings, U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan took the lives of dozens of persons.
Efforts to prevent disclosures of crucial information pertaining to the drone, assassination, and surveillance policies will have the effect of perpetuating many evils, whose consequences for the life of the nation are only beginning to be seen. Hiding the truth will only worsen the effects of America's currently failed policies.
A new film examines this dilemma between democracy and freedom, on the one hand, and national security measures on the other hand. "War On Whistleblowers," http://www.waronwhistleblowers.com
"Indisputable Torture: A new non-partisan study confronts the legacy of brutality from the Bush years," (Editorial) in The New York Times, April 17, 2013, at p. A22.
During a week when my life as well as the much-loved city of Boston seem to be under vicious attack, it is important to come to terms with the events in our recent history that appear to be the source of this intense reaction.
Hatred comes mostly from the experience of evil. "Torture" is among the evils that need to be understood if we are to overcome and transcend such policies. Torture is among the defining evils of our time which we have not yet come to terms with and from which we are not yet free:
"A dozen years after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, an independent, non-partisan panel's examination of the interrogation and detention programs carried out in their aftermath by the Bush Administration may seem to be ultimate old business. But the sweeping report issued by the Constitution Project, a legal research and advocacy group, provides a valuable, even necessary reckoning."
There is a danger that the crisis in Boston will drown out this important and possibly related news:
" ... the report's authoritative conclusion that 'the United States engaged in the practice of torture' is impossible to dismiss by a public that needs to know what [evil] was committed in the nation's name."
The U.S. made use of torture policies that violated international and American human rights laws without gaining useful or valuable information that would not have been otherwise obtained. ("American Doctors and Torture" and "Is America's Legal Ethics a Lie?" then "Legal Ethics Today.")
This is not the kind of news that can be hidden from the public or from history. Truth requires full disclosure and discussion in the media and academia. ("Law and Ethics in the Soprano State.")
Much the same is true in New Jersey, where efforts are underway to cover-up and deny what, I believe, is obvious to readers of these blogs: An American jurisdiction has targeted individuals for torture, censorship, created and perpetuated a conspiracy to violate their civil rights by using the power and technology of government to censor, suppress, or destroy political speech, also much worse. ("Psychological Torture in the American Legal System" and "What is it like to be tortured?")
The use of torture -- psychological or so-called "touchless torture techniques" are included in the relevant legal definition -- " ... had no justification and damaged the standing of our nation, reduced our capacity to convey moral censure when necessary and potentially increased the danger to U.S. military personnel taken captive."
Much the same applies to New Jersey's fiasco of abuse of government authority and corruption. Innocent persons are and will continue to be hurt. ("An Open Letter to My Torturers in New Jersey, Terry Tuchin and Diana Lisa Riccioli.")
The U.S. has regarded conduct by other countries that is identical to what America has done in Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib -- or N.J. -- as "criminal" and prosecuted responsible individuals in U.S. courts for those crimes.
Torture is admitted to qualify as a "crime against humanity," assassination of persons -- including U.S. citizens -- without due process of law, while not discussed in this report, is also clearly illegal. This tactic will result in the assassination of Americans and others by victimized nations and groups in response to what we have done.
The "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" quality of American practices and policies during the Bush years as opposed to our rhetoric, then and now, suggests that (despite this report) the U.S. will continue to engage in torture, creating a great probability of retaliation and, frighteningly, more incidents like this week's bombings in Boston.
"The panel further details the ethical lapses of government lawyers in the Bush years who served up 'acrobatic' advice" -- Stuart Rabner? -- "to justify BRUTAL interrogations, and of medical professionals who helped oversee them. It is also rightly critical of the Obama Administration's use of expansive claims of secrecy to keep the details of rendition and torture from becoming public and to block victims' lawsuits." ("Have you no shame, Mr. Rabner?" and "No More Cover-Ups and Lies, Chief Justice Rabner!")
It is time to tell the victims the truth concerning torture, Mr. Rabner, rather than seeking to protect Ms. Poritz, Mr. Tuchin, or any other persons involved in the OAE's illegal efforts or Mr. Menendez's "shenanigans." ("New Jersey's 'Ethical' Legal System" and "New Jersey's Office of Attorney Ethics" then "Is Senator Menendez 'For' Human Rights?")
... To read about torture. To this day I remember the exact time and place when, as a child, I first became aware of [torture.] ...
the detail that most sickened me. How little of this there would have to be before the living comfortably with it by others to be itself an outrage? And how much of it there is? ...
... the moral reality I attempt to encapsulate in the contract of mutual indifference is ... unbearable. These mechanisms of denial themselves say it. It is unbearable that people should be made to suffer in terrible ways. So it gets shut out. But if it is unbearable that they should be made to, it is unbearable also that they are left to. And the more it is shut out, the more they are. But the less well-placed people then are to perceive the coexistence of the evil with its adjacency to their own lives. The less well-placed they are to estimate the extent of the 'leaving to,' the wide tolerance there is towards the misery of others. ...
Theodor Adorno has put forward the view that a thinking which does not measure itself against extremity is 'in the nature of the musical accompaniment with which the SS liked to drown out the screams of its victims.' ...
Norman Geras, The Contract of Mutual Indifference: Political Philosophy After the Holocaust (London: Verso, 1998), pp. 46-47.
Are you "comfortable" with the torture of innocents, Mr. Rabner? Is this torture "ethical"?
