I don't understand

Read this TalkingDonkeys: (conservative) quote of the day and what  Hugh Hewitt is saying about Senator Durbin.

Can anyone explain how can it ever be more important to a Christian that a Senator used a piece of hyperbole in a speech than that your country is torturing people?

If I went to an encyclopedia to look up democracy then would I find it compatible with that definition for a country to censure elected representatives for criticising illegal activity by its government?

Where is a sense of balance or priority? Where are Christian values from Scripture and Tradition being demonstrated?

It might be that Senator Durbin has overstated the case. However, it is absolutely certain that the US chose to ignore international conventions and human rights and that there have been some (maybe not many, although there does appear to be quite a lot of documentation around) cases of torture. We need to be clear. Such behaviour is not compatible with Christian faith, it never has been and it never will be, no matter who is doing it to whom. For any Christian to make it a higher priority to attack someone for criticising their government of this than to get the situation investigated is, I believe, wrong.

For related issues see connexions � Blog Archive � When blogs get the media to pay attention.

Comments

[John]

What matters is that the torture allegations are unsupported lies, and Durbin's comments directly support them from the floor of the Senate again, without any evidence.

Senator Durbin didn't just overstate his case. He:

1. Lied
2. Suggested that our troops are the equivalent of Hitler, Stalin, and Pol Pot, thereby undermining their morale
3. Validated the nutty view of America that the psychoLeft has

Durbin is a traitor. Perhaps not in the Constitutional sense, but certainly in the moral sense. Hopefully the good people of Illinois will send him packing soon.

[DaveW]

John,

From my position outside the US I don't see that all the torture allegations are lies. I respect the Red Cross and Amnesty International and I think they both have made allegations. The original article has a link to http://www.andrewsullivan.com/main_article.php?artnum=20050130 which also supports the allegations.

If some of the allegations are true then isn't the situation regarding Senator Durbin somewhat different?

[John]

I haven't heard of the IRC investigating torture at Guantanamo Bay. Got a link to a report of theirs?

As for Amnesty International, the President of the US division has admitted that it has no evidence of torture taking place there:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050605/ts_nm/rights_guantanamo_amnesty_dc

If some of the allegations are true then isn't the situation regarding Senator Durbin somewhat different?

Yes. If the US were actually shoving prisoners into ovens or gas chambers, slaughtering them and forcing them to work to the death in coal mines, then it would be fair to place them alongside the minions of Hitler, Stalin, and Pol Pot.

[DaveW]

John,

If the allegations of torture are false then the US needs to respond helpfully to these comments by Amnesty International. If the allegations are true then the US needs to change its policy and respond helpfully to these comments by Amnesty International.

Torture is not acceptable, it is certainly not something that I believe any Christian can support - ever. As a non US citizen I believe that the US needs to demonstrate that a) it does not supoort or accept torture b) it will allow independant inspection to prove this c) it will deal with any violations.

From the link you gave:

"... But there are some similarities. The United States is maintaining an archipelago of prisons around the world, many of them secret prisons into which people are being literally disappeared ... And in some cases, at least, we know that they are being mistreated, abused, tortured and even killed."

"And whether the Americans like it or not, it does reflect how the more than 2 million Amnesty members in a hundred countries around the world and indeed the vast majority of those countries feel about the United States' detention policy," he said.

Biden added: "More Americans are in jeopardy as a consequence of the perception that exists worldwide with its existence than if there were no (Guantanamo)."

The comments about the Red Cross came from the link in my previous comment: http://www.andrewsullivan.com/main_article.php?artnum=20050130

Dave

[John]

Your quote is accurate. Amnesty International did say it. Have the offered up any evidence? No.

So the detainees say that they have been abused. Of course they have. The official training manual of Al Qaeda instructs them to allege abuse even when it has not taken place:
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/jihad18chap1.html

Are there any photos of abuse taking place, or the physical effects of it?

The IRC report (as Sullivan quotes) states that more reliable sources, such as US officers, have admitted to keeping prisoners naked or forced standing for long periods of time. This activity hardly constitutes torture. Was this a complaint from the survivors of the gulags, Hitler's death camps, or the victims of Pol Pot?

You wrote:

"If the allegations of torture are false then the US needs to respond helpfully to these comments by Amnesty International."

I am confused by this statement. What do you mean?

[DaveW]

John,

From outside all we have is the captors word against the prisoners, some of who have been released as innocent and some of whom have made allegations. We have seen photos of unacceptable behaviour by the US with prisoners in Iraq (just as there were by the UK, I am not claiming that we are innocent).

Therefore from outside the US we need to hear from independant inspectors who have been allowed free access to the prisoners, that is the only way to get credibility. Therefore the US should allow Amnesty access.

If there is anything that the US would demand for US citizens help prisoner then you should provide it for prisoners you hold.

After all as Christians we believe that Jesus died on the cross for all people, not just Americans - let our behaviour demonstrate our belief.

[John]

Independent inspectors from the IRC have been granted access. They have not announced any mistreatment discovered.

There were abuses at Abu Ghraib. The Army has investigated the miscreants and begun prosecutions. One recently recieved a 10-year prison sentence. The commanding general was reduced in rank. The US did so because the abuse took place. But there is no reason to believe that torture has taken place at Gitmo.

"If there is anything that the US would demand for US citizens help prisoner then you should provide it for prisoners you hold."

If the US produces unlawful combatants, then they should expect no sympathy from me, or any other American. Let them rot in any hole their captors place them in. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you? Well, I am.

[DaveW]

Just to refer people to Richards post on The Connexion at http://theconnexion.net/wp/?p=1288 on the same subject - I am not alone ;-)

[John]

I noticed. And I find the prevelance of this view very disturbing. It's like we're reading and viewing is completely different, as stark as night and day.

[DaveW]

John,

It seems Americans do not understand how we feel just as we do not understand how Americans feel, separated by a common language.

To me the handling of these issues by the USA appears arrogant, convinced of its own superiority and unaccountable to anyone else, it also seems to me that many Americans are not disturbed that people from other countries might think this. Does that seem accurate to you? If so, does it worry you?

[John]

Dave-

I don't think that we're separated by a common language, but by different media that report different things.

What I see is that the Islamic world is spreading jihad across the world, and Europe seems content to slide away into dhimmitude. The US is struggling for its survival and the survival of civilization. Europe, on the other hand, is more concerned about offending Islamic terrorists by being 'racist' than by the possibility of becoming Eurabia. It may seem arrogant, but I have ceased to care about Old Europe thinks -- the increasing threat of terrorist nuclear attacks is a more pressing concern.

I do, however, appreciate the conversation, and getting your point of view.

[DaveW]

John,

Lets take what you say "the Islamic world is spreading jihad across the world" as a working hypothesis. What would a Christian response be?

From this side of the pond the US is neither behaving in a Christian way, nor in a way designed to reduce the chances of terrorism.

I do not see Europe as sliding away into anything. Instead I see a responsibility to act justly and in a Christian way to all people. That is not just for manipulative gain (although I sincerely believe that people who believe they are being treated justly are less likely to try to attack me) but because I believe it is the right thing to do.

I do not believe the US is Gods chosen land or people any more than any other. Jesus came, died and rose again for all people equally, not just Americans. In face of Gods grace it is not appropriate to feel arrogance, superior, to think yourselves above the law or to be agressive. Nor is this idea that the US is automatically the good guy in all situations appropriate or correct.

If anything, at the moment US Christians appear to have lost the plot putting nationalist fervour above the Kingdom of God and its values.

[John]

"Lets take what you say "the Islamic world is spreading jihad across the world" as a working hypothesis. What would a Christian response be?"

Honestly, I'm thinking less as a Christian and more as someone who doesn't want his country destroyed and democracy rolled back. I'd like to say that my Christian faith educates my politics, but I don't think that my politics have changed much since I became a Christian.

"From this side of the pond the US is neither behaving in a Christian way, nor in a way designed to reduce the chances of terrorism."

I think that we are as we are (a) killing terrorists and (b) attacking some of the root causes of terrorism, such as tyranny and economic poverty.

"I do not see Europe as sliding away into anything. Instead I see a responsibility to act justly and in a Christian way to all people. That is not just for manipulative gain (although I sincerely believe that people who believe they are being treated justly are less likely to try to attack me) but because I believe it is the right thing to do."

I see 15% of the French population as Arab and many of them laughing about demographically taking over the country -- and much the same in the rest of Western Europe. I see radical clerics calling for jihad against the West while living in Europe, and the population is unconcerned. How many times do Muslims have to call for reducing Europe to dhimmitude before Europe takes it seriously? America is taking it seriously, because we care more about remaining free and not dead at the risk of offending our enemies.

"I do not believe the US is Gods chosen land or people any more than any other. Jesus came, died and rose again for all people equally, not just Americans. In face of Gods grace it is not appropriate to feel arrogance, superior, to think yourselves above the law or to be agressive. Nor is this idea that the US is automatically the good guy in all situations appropriate or correct."

I completely agree.

"If anything, at the moment US Christians appear to have lost the plot putting nationalist fervour above the Kingdom of God and its values."

I think that I'd rather not see my city get nuked, and I'm willing to kill (or allow my country to kill in my name) terrorists in order to do it.

And as we've discussed before, I recognize that by endorsing killing of any kind, I am acting in an unChristlike manner. I weigh that against the advantage of not getting killed.

[DaveW]

My point is that "And as we've discussed before, I recognize that by endorsing killing of any kind, I am acting in an unChristlike manner. I weigh that against the advantage of not getting killed." is not working.

From an email from Sojourners I got a few minutes ago

"Yesterday, two and a half years later, The New York Times reported on a new assessment by the CIA that "...Iraq may prove to be an even more effective training ground for Islamic extremists than Afghanistan was in al Qaeda's early days, because it is serving as a real-world laboratory for urban combat." The report went on to note that since the American invasion, Iraq has become "a magnet and a proving ground for Islamic extremists" and is "helping combatants learn how to carry out assassinations, kidnappings, car bombings, and other kinds of attacks...." Our words have rarely seemed more prophetic."

When in a hole ...

[John]

I think that the facts on the ground speak differently. You'll notice that there has not been another successful terrorist attack on the US homeland since 9/11, even though Al Qaeda and its affiliates were planning many more.

Let them come to Iraq. We'll kill them there and spare them the trouble of a transoceanic trip.

When the US and Britain (and others) crossed the Channel in 1944, our invasion force became a magnet for attacks against our countries. But it was still the sensible thing to do. Following your logic, we should not have crossed over into France.

[DaveW]

John,

We have post reports here (or was it on the connexion) demonstrating (from US govt stats) a huge increase in the number of terrorist attacks worldwide since the war on terror began.

Your plan is not working.

Your comparison to WWII is not very accurate - although one aspect of it is true. War exacts a terrible price on all. Both in lost lives and lost morality. If we can learn anything by that it should have been what the soldiers who went to fight said on their return froim WWI and WWII - don't do this again, let this be the war to end all wars. Unfortunately we did not listen.

You also forget that as a British citizen I have lived in a war on terrorism for most of my life, that is in Northern Ireland. Againt did the US stop to learn any lessons, particularly the one that you can't win by force against terrorists - we failed in a small area close to home.

[John]

For the US, the bloodiest month of WWII was April, 1945 -- just before its end. So I'm not surprised that the terrorists are fighting. They know that we are trying to kill them. Also notice where the terrorist attacks have not taken place -- inside US borders. The war is working.

Anyway, it's not like we have a choice. These are not rebels with a defined, reasonable goal like say, the expulsion of people X from country Y. Their objective is the extermination and/or subjugation of the United States. If we simply quit and go home, the attacks against our homeland will continue, now based out of safe sanctuaries in the Middle East, where the US will not tread.