This month, Sen. Olympia Snowe and members of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence will deliberate a matter of great importance to our country’s integrity: the release of its comprehensive report on the Central Intelligence Agency’s interrogation practices.
For more than three years, the SSCI has been carrying out its investigation into CIA interrogation practices, in particular the use of torture by the armed services. By far, this is the most inclusive probe into U.S.-sponsored practices of torture. The report indeed is comprehensive, spanning what is rumored to be 5,000 pages. As Snowe prepares to retire, this is her chance to leave a lasting mark for the good of transparency and public knowledge into the truths of our past.
What is most revealing and significant about this report is the fact that it will demonstrate conclusively that torture was, regardless of the moral and ethical dimensions which of themselves are overriding considerations, a useless interrogational technique. Should the report findings be made public, we, the constituents, will have the opportunity to gain knowledge and insight into precisely what took place, uncover evidence that what did take place was illegal, unethical and morally wrong, and also be confronted with the reality that the practice was harmful to our national security interests.
This committee ultimately must choose one of three options: Release the executive summary of the report, release the entire report or not release either version. It is our recommendation, and that of the National Religious Campaign Against Torture, that the committee release the entire report. If its members elect to do so, the entire report will then be eligible for CIA declassification. That process takes months as the CIA will need to make redactions in order to protect legitimate interests, but, in the end, the public will have a complete picture.
This isn’t just another report that should sit on the shelf in Washington collecting dust. Rather, it is a report that begs for the light of day. My father, echoing Jesus, always said to me that the truth would set free me — a lesson that only served to enlighten me later as I grew up.
Indeed, truth and transparency serve to free us from our mistakes of the past and open the door to the potential of a brighter future. For Catholics and for many other people of faith, torture attacks the human dignity of its victims, but it also victimizes the perpetrators as well as any society that tolerates its practice. Torture contaminates society and debases it. This is true because the human person is not only sacred but also social. What we do to one another we ultimately do to ourselves because, as social beings, our fates are intimately and intricately bound together.
A society that tolerates torture threatens the common good of all people because it undermines respect for human dignity and basic human rights.
More than a decade after 9/11 and a year after the death of Osama bin Laden, one would have thought that the debate over torture would be settled. After all, the law says that it is illegal; the military admits that it doesn’t work; and our religious traditions tell us that it is plain wrong. Yet for some reason, the debate continues in many circles. In a world where situational ethics prevail, we are tempted to justify the means for the perceived ends. Curiously, in the case of torture, those perceived ends never materialize, and it does not yield the desired results.
In the end, sunshine is the best disinfectant. Releasing the results of the committee investigation will help ensure that our government never again engages in torture, principally by describing how our country came to use torture and proving that torture was not an effective way to gather intelligence.
As a person of faith, I oppose torture in all circumstances. As an American, I believe that the U.S. government should be accountable to me and all Americans. I join with the National Religious Campaign Against Torture in calling upon Snowe and the rest of the committee to release the facts about the U.S. government’s use of torture.
Marc R. Mutty is the director of the Office of Public Policy for the Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland and a former president of the Maine Council of Churches.
There will be a lot folks who hide their quiet fears with tough guy talk via the keyboard who will disagree with this, I suspect.
I agree.
There will also be a lot of liberals running their mouth who have absolutely no clue what goes on in a war. Never set foot in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, and a few places that shouldn’t be mentioned. Have no idea what information has been gathered through CIA tactics, or how many lives it has saved.
We liberals apparently have a far greater understanding than cowardly chickenhawk wingnuts like you – and we certainly know a hell of a lot more about the difference between right and wrong.
Liberals have no idea between right and wrong. If they did, they’d be appalled at all the wrong things their liberal leaders are engaged in.
That is one of the most ridiculous generalizations I’ve read in the BDN in quite a long time!
Just an observation based on the words and beliefs of liberals, especially the liberals in Congress.
But you know this country (and state) is filled with people who have beliefs that aren’t always pigeon-holed like you have just done?
Really Stevie? That’s big talk from a whiny little homosexual who’s main goal in life is begging for acceptance. I’m sure you know all about what goes on off American soil. At least whatever the media tells you.
“a whiny little homosexual”?
Uh, sorry to disappoint you, buddy, but I’m straight. Your homophobic personal attack is cute, though.
But, that’s the right wing way, isn’t it? Don’t waste your time debating the issues honestly, just start flinging muck at those you disagree with and see what sticks.
The right wing way?
Scroll back, who started “flinging muck”?
Apparently you don’t read many of the comments on here. The liberals will start the muck flinging every time. Of course, I like to fling a little just for sport to watch them squeal.
Hugs!!! Such a nice sunny day today! I think I’ll go for a walk today the summer sun’s calling my name! I hope you get out into this glorious sunshine, too!
Are you calling Mr. Mutty a liberal?
I see the author is quick to state that the U.S. and Military members used torture. What practices of interrogation do you consider torture? Is sensory deprivation torture? Before you condemn the practices stating they are torture and we used it how about telling us specifically what you consider to be torture?
And therein lies the problem. The anti-torture group hasn’t been able to define torture. To them, it all depends on who’s in the White House.
One could say that same for those who advocate torture.
“Is sensory deprivation torture?”
What an absurd question. Of course it’s torture.
I guess we could make them listen to Obama speeches 24/7. That would break them in no time. Talk about torture.
I believe in Jack Bauer tactics. They work 99.9% of the time.
If it came down to getting information from a terrorist to save the life of one of my family or friends, I’d be the first to put a round through the bad guy’s kneecap. Of course, if you want to bring him an ice tea and sandwich and try and reason the information out of him, then go ahead. But say goodbye to your loved one.
Completely false.
Torture makes people talk, but the intelligence gathered from torture is horribly unreliable. That’s a fact that any remotely competent interrogator will readily affirm.
Just how many “remotely competent interrogators” do you know? By the way, if they’re remotely competent, they won’t disclose their tactics in the first place, unless they have a political ax to grind.
And, just in case you have a difficult time comprehending, my comment was my opinion. Therefore, it can’t be false.
You’re just about right. There is a small window where some such methods work on some people, they will tell you, but that’s it. If you’re still at it three days later–let alone three months–you’re not going to get anything useful.
So your morals are indeed situational.
How hypocritical of you to so completely stand against granting equal treatment under the law to deserving same-sex couples, when you will tolerate torture.
I forget where Jesus preached that the ends justified the means…
In dealing with high level operatives like Khalid Sheik Mohammed, they should be subjected to torture if they do not provide intel. High level operatives like KSM commanded others to their death, but in many cases high level terrorists are nothing, but cowards. Terrorists are not subject to the Geneva Convention protocols and shouldn’t be.
Geneva Convention? We don’t need no stinkin’ Geneva Convention.
I don’t agree with Mr. Mutty on some issues and I really didn’t know anything about him aside from what I saw in the 2009 campaign. But the man I saw in the documentary on question one is a man that I think I would like, so this opinion piece from him showing the compassion of his faith is no surprise.
It is a shame that he compromised his values so thoroughly, simply to oppose treating Mainers equally under the law.
On its own, this is a good opinion piece. But I can’t help but remember the man who took an ends-justify-the-means approach to strip rights away from Mainers who simply wanted to protect their households with civil marriage.
Yes, I know what you mean. Have you seen the movie? The others in the movie I don’t like so much, like Emrich, but Mutty seemed conflicted in his role. I don’t like what he did, but I don’t hate him.
I have not yet, I do hope to see it sooner than later though.
In general I feel more disappointment than anger toward the folks who stand against marriage equality. The folks we hear from here like “sonofbangor” and cs232 (or whatever their name is) are the radical outliers, deserving of derision. But I try to be noncombative in my approach to most here on that issue— the statistics are clear that the more you really know about the issue of same-sex marriage, the more likely you are to support it.
Yes, I agree with that.