It's in the public domain that the folks who proposed using torture on detainees were military psychologists who had administered and overseen SERE training. (SERE, Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape, is a program that aims to somewhat inoculate US serviceman against torture by applying the techniques to them in a controlled environment.)
Also out there is the almost universal horror expressed by the community of psychologists that some of there own would participate in torture, much less propose it as a legitimate tool against suspected terrorists.
Well, NPR's Alix Spiegel scooped the world by finding a colleague of these torture advocates willing to go fully on the record not only in support of, but in praise of these people and their actions. The man's name is Bryce Lefever, and he said this:
"I think the media ought to give us a big ol' thank you for our efforts on behalf of America," Lefever says. "There should be some recognition of the effort — the really extreme effort — that we've gone through to help."
After all, he said, the 15 or so SERE psychologists knew that these techniques worked. After all they had used them for years in SERE exercises and they could always be counted on to break down big bad Marines, SEALS, Army and USAF special forces members.
"You know, the tough nut to crack, if you keep him awake for a week, you torture him, you tie his arms behind him, you have him on the ground — anyone can be brought beyond their ability to resist," says Lefever.
Now, you could quibble with this 'til the cows come home. But I'm gonna ignore the fact that there is a huge difference between a potentially innocent suspected terrorist (reality) and the Jack-Bauer-caught, dead-guilty, evil doer (fantasy). I will also ignore that the vast majority of the inmates at Camp Xray in Gitmo were eventually found to be innocent bystanders, grudge cases or bounty trophies.
Instead let's humor Lefever. Let's grant him his point.
Okay, but what about the ethics, he was asked. Psychologists are thought of as health care providers, there to ease mental anguish, not inflict it. That's the way it "seems at first blush," Lefever said. But the real ethical standard is to "do the most good for the most people." After all:
"America is my client; Americans are who I care about," says Lefever. "I have no fondness for the enemy, and I don't feel like I need to take care of their mental health needs."
That's were I lost it and almost jumped the curb, took out 2 pedestrians, a boxwood hedge and a mailbox. That is the classic "ends justify the means," amoral argument. It only works if you are an ignorant, short-sighted member of the favored cohort. I mean, the Final Solution was to be for the benefit of all the Aryan peoples and surely they dwarf the numbers of those that had to be eliminated to achieve this good. Likewise, the militarists in Argentina were eliminating the minority Marxists to achieve the greater good, weren't they?
"Dr. Mengele, how do you respond to the universal denouncement of your experiments on live concentration camp inmate as war crimes?"
"Nazi Germany is my client; Germans are who I care about," says Lefever. "I have no fondness for the Jews, and I don't feel like I need to take care of their health needs."
Try it with the Argentinian physicians who assisted in torture during the Dirty War. It works there too.
"Argentina is my client; Argentinians are who I care about," says Lefever. "I have no fondness for the Marxists, and I don't feel like I need to take care of their health needs."
I was hoping against hope that Spiegel would challenge Lefever with a comparison like this, but I was, of course, disappointed.
Lefever, while protesting that he personally had nothing to do with suggesting or implementing the torture program, said he was proud of it and saw nothing to apologize for now that it was front page news.
That's how evil gets done. My (your group/nationality/party) is not good because it's actions and principles are beyond reproach, it is good by definition and therefore all who threaten it are evil and, after all, you cannot abuse an evil person, can you?
I encourage you to listen to the NPR story. I'd be interested in your opinion of it.
I, in the meantime, will be picking boxwood out of my grill.
