III. “Abuse” of Torture

May 14, 2009


I have written before that I have little moral disdain for the use of torture, but intense legal disdain for abuse of the practice. The famous example of torturing a kidnapper to reveal the whereabouts of the victim- is justified, certainly, if it works. If it does not, the torturers accept the consequences, whether they be somehow punished or the kidnapper cannot be prosecuted- whatever the consequences. Those in the government that used torture to elicit false confessions, linking Hussein to Al Qaida or fake confessions from innocent victims of Mercenary bounty hunters, must be investigated. The designers of these plans have to accept the consequences, they were not protecting their country, they were covering up their grievous misdeeds!! The lower level “employees” need to be dismissed. They are not adequately intelligent or trainable for their jobs. It may not be their faults, but their agencies cannot afford to keep them. This goes for the CIA, the Armed Forces and any other now incompetent agencies.


The higher ups need to be summarily discharged or impeached as well- that is attorneys involved in dismantling the law. They can never again be trusted by even the questionable Bar Association. People like Cheney, Rumsfeld and the architects of the War in Iraq need to be thoroughly investigated. If they are, indeed, guilty, they need to be prosecuted. If convicted, they may have their sentences commuted or even pardoned, but they must bear the “mark of Cain” for the rest of their lives. This includes high ranking military officials as well. Let’s not blame the General Karpinkskis and Sanchezs- this is much higher than they.


Allen Finkelstein, D.O.