Originally Posted at Liberal Street Fighter

Clinton Equivocates on Torture

… at yesterday’s Daily News editorial board meeting, it emerged that she’s not actually against torture in all instances, and that her dispute with McCain and Bush is largely procedural.

She was asked about the “ticking time bomb” scenario, in which you’ve captured the terrorist and don’t have time for a normal interrogation, and said that there is a place for what she called “severity,” in a conversation that included mentioning waterboarding, hypothermia, and other techniques commonly described as torture.

“I have said that those are very rare but if they occur there has to be some lawful authority for pursuing that,” she responded. “Again, I think the President has to take responsibilty. There has to be some check and balance, some reporting. I don’t mind if it’s reporting in a top secret context. But that shouldn’t be the tail that wags the dog, that should be the exception to the rule.”

Asked again about these methods, she said:

“In those instances where we have sufficient basis to believe that there is something imminent, yeah, but then we’ve got to have a check and balance.”

Well, now THERE is a surprise. Hot on the heels of a strong anti-torture statement on the floor of the Senate, the would-be President talks out of the other side of her mouth. Now what other issue have we seen her play THIS game with before?
The Senator from New York is so emblematic of how pathetic and lost the Democratic Party has become. Handmaidens to the far right, to the military-industrial complex, for the parasitic investor class, the Democratic Party is interested only in gaining power. There is little or no thought about what power should be held FOR, other than maintaining some vauguely more “responsible” application of empire, death-dealing and greed. For every heinous, monstrous policy or action the Republicans pursue, the Donk leadership seems only able to say, “well, it’s all sadly necessary, but WE’D do it better!”

How paltry the debate about vital issues has become. Hell, WHY IS THERE EVEN A DEBATE ABOUT TORTURE? The Democrats, spineless courtiers eager only to maintain access to money and power, are unwilling, unable or DISBELIEVING that a civilized nation should hold itself to higher standards. Nope, better to pander, better to go all mealy-mouthed over fake dilemmas like the ticking time bomb scenario (hat tip to Schneier on Security for the link):

In a democracy, I do not think we should ask our fellow citizens to sacrifice themselves or their principles for the public good unless we are, at least in principle, prepared to do the same. We may not be capable of serving in the military, but we should understand what that means before we ask our fellow citizens to fight for us. One of the signal characteristics of the TTB is that it treats the interrogators and their agency, their principles, as a black box. Who they are is unknown. But we should not assume “democracy for us, dictatorship for the interrogators.” The interrogators are our fellow citizens, part of our democracy, and it would be wrong to ask them to do something we were not prepared to do ourselves. Thus the democratic implication of the TTB is that we must steel ourselves to do something that is very unpleasant, but necessary.

So let us imagine ourselves in the interrogation room with the suspect. Evidence collected from his apartment certainly seems to indicate that he has knowledge of a looming terrorist attack, but he is begging for mercy. Too bad, isn’t it? All we have done is deprive him of sleep and clothing. And it is a bit cold. Unfortunately, he may be scared and cold, but he hasn’t given us one scrap of useful information. And we’re under some time pressure. Your superior has an idea. For better cover, the suspect was living with his family, a wife and young daughter. We’re detaining them in another room. The evidence seems to show the suspect cares for them. Perhaps if we brought them into the room? Your superior warns you to steel yourself for what comes next. Perhaps the suspect will respond to mere threats that they might be put to death in front of him. If threats are not enough, however, we must be prepared to do the worst. Of course, in some cultures there are acts regarded as worse than death. Your superior looks at you. Do you understand what he is talking about? Of course you do. You are experienced in the ways of the TTB, of doing what is necessary to elicit information under the terrible pressure of a deadline.

I really hope I don’t have to elaborate further this fantastic scenario of moral corruption. Our popular culture is full of faux scenarios of torture and cruelty. Just check out your local video rental store. What’s amazing about the TTB is that it is taken to be “real,” a serious matter for public debate. But it’s no more real than my scenario, a Tom Clancy novel of military adventure or a superhero comic.

The TTB counts on eliciting a certain sort of response. Of course, “the president would have to authorize torture” to prevent millions from dying. But surely it puts a slightly different spin on the situation to imagine that you are the one responsible for making sure the interrogation is effective. And you will have to live with the consequences if you turn out to be wrong. What wouldn’t you do to prevent millions from dying? Well, I wouldn’t engage in torture, child abuse, murder, rape and a whole long list of morally corrupt acts. And I’m willing to bet you wouldn’t either. Scenarios like the TTB are well designed to cloud our reason and judgment. For that reason, we should avoid them and concentrate on the ways in which we can realistically prevent terrorist attacks.

We in this country seem EAGER to ask others to do things we’d never do ourselves. We cheer on soldiers as they are put into situations where they kill journalists, slaughter large numbers of civilians and even other soldiers and marines. After they provide this “service”, we often abandon them when they return from the slaughter, a crime we’ve repeated throughout this country’s history. We depend upon cheap and slave labor for our piles of stuff, we expect children to pay for the failings of their parents. Why not demand our spooks ape Joseph Mengele if it gets us what we want, the illusion of safety?

There is a scary question we must ask ourselves. What if Senator Clinton and her fellow righties at the top of the Democratic Party are RIGHT? What if America really is an out-of-control Sparta, a feudal state occupied by an ignorant, immense pool of economic and martial cannon fodder supporting a bloated and greedy landed class? Is their course, only slightly-less-pandering to fear, bigotry and hatred than the Republicans, driven by what kind of nation we’ve become? One could argue, looking at the long history of genocide, human bondage and economic exploitation the fundamental truth of us as a people, that perhaps the Bush and Clinton families DO represent what and who we are. This is a question we must face, will we continue to submit to these venal “leaders” who stir up our darkest urges, or will we find a path back to the halting course that we’ve followed at time to ameliorate our past crimes … back to expanding suffrage, economic opportunity, HOPE? For all of our atrocities, we’ve also built better things as well: our Constitution and Bill of Rights, the Civil Rights Acts, Voting Rights Acts, we lead the way on the development of the modern Rules of War, including the Geneva Conventions. Will we be a nation of bridge builders or berserkers?

Will we be content to pander to the demands of the various creeds, or will we return to shared public square where we can find common ground no matter how we explain life’s mysteries to ourselves?

The left in this country needs to stop enabling a center-right Democratic Party leadership that produces and promotes characters like Senator Clinton if we want to return this nation to a more humanist course. This nation has no chance to follow the angels of its higher nature when the debate is dominated by the rabid right and enabled by pandering creatures of ambition like Clinton and her cohorts. If you believe that we will have a better nation if we COOPERATE than if we destroy, if you want full and reasoned debate to replace shallow talking points, if you want this country to be a force for good, both within our borders and without, if you’re a leftist who despairs at the monstrous acts being committed in our names, it is VITAL that you not support shameless equivocators like Senator Clinton.