Torture Seeps Into Discussion by News Media: ‘…(A) growing number of voices in the mainstream news media (are) raising, if not necessarily agreeing with, the idea of torturing terrorism suspects or detainees who refuse to talk.’

Some human rights advocates say they do not mind theoretical discussions about torture, as long as disapproval is expressed at the end. But they say that weighing the issue as a real possible course of action could begin the process of legitimizing a barbaric form of interrogation.

Journalists are approaching the subject cautiously. But some said last week they were duty-bound to address it when suspects and detainees who have refused to talk could have information that could save thousands of lives. Plus, they added, torture is already a topic of discussion in bars, on commuter trains, and at dinner tables. And lastly, they said, well, this is war.

NY Times [via Abby]

It seems the discussion contemplating torture is couched entirely in moral relativistic terms, of considering the acceptability of acts no matter how heinous if one can frame them as preventing even greater evils. Are there no courses of potential action that cross some absolute line of incompatibility with whatever remains of our humanity?

And then there’s this, from Geov Parrish:

Does anybody in this country get it?

Does anybody understand what the United States is on the verge of doing?

Experienced, respected food aid organizations warn that even before the bombing of Afghanistan began on October 7, some 7,500,000 Afghans were — through a gut-wrenching combination of poverty, drought, war, dislocation, and repression — at risk of starving to death this winter. When the bombing began, almost all delivery of food from the outside world stopped. Now, roads and bridges are destroyed, millions more people are dislocated, and the snow is steadily approaching from higher elevations and from the north.

For weeks, aid organizations, along with voices from throughout the region, have been begging the United States to call off its bombing campaign, at least for long enough so that aid agencies can conduct the massive transfer of food into and throughout Afghanistan that is necessary to prevent death on a scale the world has not seen in a long, long time. On our newscasts, it’s politely referred to as a “humanitarian crisis.” That’s a euphemism that makes “collateral damage” seem humane.

Seven and a half million people at risk of dying in a matter of months. That’s three times the number of people Pol Pot took years to kill. Thirty-five times the number that died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, combined. If 5,000 died on September 11 (a number that reports are now suggesting is vastly inflated), we’re talking the equivalent number of deaths to ten World Trade Centers, every day, for 150 days. Slow, painful deaths. Entirely avoidable deaths. Deaths whose sole cause is not the United States, but most of which can still be prevented — except that the United States is refusing to allow them to be prevented.

It repulses me to say this, but I suspect a lot of Americans don’t care. They’d rather see the United States “get” Osama bin Laden (though there’s no actual evidence that we’re any closer to that today than we were two months ago, and probably the task is harder as he becomes more popular and protected). A lot of people in this country do not care that a staggering number of innocent people are on the verge of being condemned to death, or that most of the world will blame the United States. Correctly. workingforchange [via AlterNet via wood s lot]

The calls for renewal of a military draft have begun. Washington Post Here’s a Google search that will inform about conscientious objector status, as I said in September. Perhaps now is the time to begin passing the information on to your draft-age friends and family?

CIA recruited cat to bug Russians. Is the 4/11/01 dateline of the article close enough to 4/1 that we should have trouble believing it? From the celebrated ex-CIA informant Victor Marchetti.

…Marchetti, a former CIA officer, told The Telegraph that Project Acoustic Kitty was a gruesome creation. He said: “They slit the cat open, put batteries in him, wired him up. The tail was used as an antenna. They made a monstrosity. They tested him and tested him. They found he would walk off the job when he got hungry, so they put another wire in to override that.”

Mr Marchetti said that the first live trial was an expensive disaster. The technology is thought to have cost more than £10 million. He said: “They took it out to a park and put him out of the van, and a taxi comes and runs him over. There they were, sitting in the van with all those dials, and the cat was dead.” [thanks, David]

Declan McCullagh fleshes out the Green Party story about which I wrote yesterday on his mailing list. He points to a different version of the Nancy Oden story. “[Oden] was grounded at Bangor International Airport on Thursday after reportedly becoming uncooperative when she was targeted for additional screening…” Bangor Daily News He notes that a Green Party press release contains no evidence to buttress Oden’s claim that she was singled out before even arriving at the airport for her political views. ethere are suggestions that she does in fact have a background of association with ecoterrorism. InstaPundit

A former National Guardsman wrote to McCullagh:

“I would be very surprised if there is not another side to this story as well. Most National Guard enlisted soldiers have barely heard of the Green Party let alone would know who a Maine party leader was, what she wrote in a local paper, or would care.

The National Guard units of Maine, like National Guard units in every other state, are on a very steep learning curve regarding how to manage airport security. It is not a duty that National Guard units routinely trained for before Sept. 11 except for those Guard and reserve units involved in Civil Administration. The National Guard soldiers will make plenty of mistakes, including big ones, along the way. Members of Guard units come from all civilian occupations and it is not impossible that a few might have voted for Green Party candidates in 2000. But to start a myth that every local activist is being targeted by the National Guard for his or her political views is just plain silly.

As long as they are not carrying box cutters or pose a threat to other passengers, no one cares if Green Party officers fly to their heart’s content from Bangor to Bute (sic).”

Another reader pointed out that the Green Party USA is a splinter group in opposition to the Green Party of the United States, and may be trying, through publicizing the Oden incident, to draw attention to itself. [A disclaimer: not claiming to know anything independently about the Green Party’s (or Parties’) internal politics…]