Mark Shea is listing the items engaged in by the CIA as revealed in the Torture Report released this week and is excoriating the majority of Catholics who defended it:
Now that the Torture Report is out and we are discovering that the lies we listened to for so long (We only waterboarded three high value targets! We had to do it to save lives! Valuable intel! Are you telling me that some filthy terrorist is more important than an unborn baby in your sick twisted liberal
mind?) are all exposed as appalling lies, it’s important to do an examination of conscience. Why? Because we Catholics consistently supported torture in larger percentages then the average American population. And the more we self-described as “faithful conservative” and “prolife” the more likely we were to do so. God’s name is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of us. (Romans 2:24)
The ugly fact is that in our fear and rage, we became the thing we hate.
- We defended the torture of innocents (indeed people who were on our side).
- We defended standing on the broken legs of prisoners (something out of a Gestapo or SS scene in a movie).
- We defended drowning.
- We defended dungeons and putting prisoners at the mercy of interrogators known to be psychologically unstable and having a history of violence.
- We defended forcing prisoners with broken feet to stand in stress positions.
- We defended non-stop torture for days and weeks.
- We defended 180 hours of sleep deprivation.
- We defended “forced rectal feeding” (aka “anal rape and humiliation”) that consisted of ramming hummus up the anuses of helpless prisoners.
- We defended refusal to treat bullet wounds and neglect leading to the loss of eyes.
- We defended dragging shackled, naked prisoners around around blindfold and beating them.
- We defended keeping prisoners in total darkness with only a bucket for their waste.
- We defended a system that had no clear idea who it was imprisoning and torturing.
- We defended a system that derived no intelligence to stop terrorist attacks, and that used gruesome torture to get information we could have obtained by conventional means, while generating lots of false intel from prisoners who said anything to make the pain stop. That false intel meant millions spent on wild goose chases.
- We defended a system that got its torture techniques from the Commies we used to fight, not imitate.
- We defended a system that mainly served to enrich contractors and shrinks who told it what it wanted to hear.
- We defended a system that lied to its own superiors.
- We–WE PROLIFERS–cheered for a system that “threatened to harm detainees’ children, sexually abuse their mothers, and “cut [a detainee’s] mother’s throat.’ In addition, several detainees were led to believe they would die in custody, with one told he would leave in a coffin-shaped box.
Detainees wouldn’t see their day in court because “we can never let the world know what I have done to you,” one interrogator said.
- We defended sexual assaults on prisoners by interrogators.
And all the while we did it, we offered an immense menu of Ticking Time bomb scenarios, garbage sophistries, and “what if?” fantasies about bombs under orphanages, all carefully designed to distract us from the reality of what we were defending by reinforcing our fear and rage. We told ourselves we were fighting an inhuman enemy that justified using any means necessary. And we became the monsters we feared.
He's not finished. Not even close. Read the rest.
I am one who once supported doing anything to take the fight to the terrorists. If you were to search this blog for the word "torture", you'd find the evidence.
I'm now however one who is attempting, and admittedly failing still too often, to live up to the tenets of my faith and Catholic teaching on this is crystal clear.
Phil Lawler has more on that point:
The Catechism of the Catholic Church (#2298) teaches: “Torture which uses physical or moral violence to extract confessions, punish the guilty, frighten opponents, or satisfy hatred is contrary to respect for the person and for human dignity.” When an interrogator treats his captor in a degrading manner, the human dignity of both men is violated; by treating his subject as something less than human, the captor becomes something less than human himself.
Defenders of the “enhanced interrogation” techniques say that it was necessary to put extra pressure on terrorist suspects, to extract important information that would save the lives of innocent people. That is a powerful, practical argument. But is it true? Expert interrogators question that premise.
A tortured prisoner might blurt out… anything. He may tell the truth, or he may say whatever he thinks his questioner wants to hear, whether it is true or not. Under extreme duress, he might not even know whether he is telling the truth or not; when pushed beyond their endurance, most people become lesscapable of speaking intelligently.
Even if it were true that torture could induce prisoners to give more accurate information, that would not be enough to justify an intrinsically evil act. Some defense experts claim that “enhanced interrogation” helped to ward off terrorist attacks. That is, to be sure, a powerful practical argument. But practical arguments are not enough to justify an intrinsically immoral act. How many women, finding themselves in difficult pregnancies, can make powerful practical arguments in favor of abortion?
A moral end does not justify an immoral means.
He too has more. You should click the link and read it all.
The part of us that believes the ends justify the means is the part of us that needs exposure to the gruesome details that are now coming to light because let there be little doubt.
We are losing our humanity.
By the way, because I know some might wonder, Mark has an older post up that helps define the word torture, for those who might be prone to ask. I used to go there myself, thinking that torture could be defined in such a way as to minimize what torture might actually be. Again, the Church is clear on what it is. Read Mark's post.
Don't lose your humanity.
For Christ's sake.
