Various & Sundry, too random to categorize

Sorry I'm so late! Today, I was working on the revisions for Confirm not Conform Adult and came across this great TED talk of Karen Armstrong explaining the Charter for Compassion. There are worse ways to spend 20 minutes.

Anyway...let's see what else I've got here. It's fairly minimal this week. I guess I've been doing other things.

I have found a new blogger that I like a lot: one Lance Mannion by name. This week he had an interesting post proposing that "the object of liberalism is to create more conservatives." It's a fascinating argument, which you'll just have to read for yourself. I'm still pondering how this actually works in real life.

In election news, I was very glad to see Greg Sargent ask Can we please talk about torture?

The executive order banning torture was the very first one signed by Obama, to improve America’s image abroad, explicitly repudiating a major policy of his GOP predecessor. The Romney camp is internally debating whether to rescind that order, which would represent a return to those policies. There are only five weeks until the election, and we still don’t know what Romney will do on an issue with far reaching moral and international implications.

I'll be watching to see if this comes up at any of the presidential debates.

One of the people who played a role in the Supreme Court's ruling on the Affordable Care Act died this week. Jennifer Jaff, who had Crohn's Disease and was an advocate for the chronically ill, wrote an amicus brief in one of the cases brought to the court, arguing against insurance policies denying coverage to those with pre-existing conditions.

After the Supreme Court ruling, Ms. Jaff told The Hartford Courant: “I live and breathe chronic-illness law, and in my estimation this is the most important civil rights advance for people with chronic illnesses ever. There can never be equality if we can’t get health insurance.”

I can't imagine what it must have felt like to her to see that law upheld before she died. She was 55.

On a completely different note, Peacebang offers some helpful suggestions for cultivating a personal sense of style, something I'm working on. Here's the essence:

Style can be beautiful, pretty, dramatic, shocking, erotic, and many other things. Whatever it is, it is mindful. It is intentional. It is knowing. The stylish person knows a few things: 

1. What they love.
2. What kind of impact they want to create with their apparel, accessories and personal grooming.
3. How to use fashion to communicate their inner vision of who they are.

She then goes on to give some exercises to help you do just that.

Here's someone with a definite personal sense of style. Well, point of view, at any rate.

And with that, I hope you have a lovely weekend.

International Day in Support of Victims of Torture

Today is the UN's observance of the International Day in Support of Victims of Torture. I have to say it is embarrassing to me how few of the major U.S. news outlets are recognizing this at all.

The big headline on CNN is that the UN urges Iraq to ratify the convention against torture. The article doesn't even mention what to me is the headline: that UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon said, "Torture cannot be justified under any circumstances whatsoever, whether during a state of war or in response to terrorism, political instability or any other public emergency.”

I am embarrassed that my country has participated in torture. I am embarrassed that we don't even seem willing to admit it. I am embarrassed that we seem to be willing to continue to participate in torture in the name of emergency circumstances, national security, or the war against terror. Embarrassed, ashamed, and deeply, deeply sorry that we have played any part in torture in this world.

And so I plan to mark the day by writing a letter to President Obama reiterating this point: that torture cannot be justified for any reason. I hope you will consider joining me, and praying for those who have been victims of torture.

Martyrs everywhere, on the feast of the Martyrs of Uganda

The first few days of June are packed full of martyrs.

June 1: Justin, commonly known as Justin Martyr
June 2: Blandina and her Companions, aka the Martyrs of Lyon - 48 of them.
June 3: the Martyrs of Uganda - 32 of them
June 4: we get a day off
June 5: Boniface, Archbishop and Martyr

Martyrs through the ages, from Justin in 167 to Uganda in 1886. Men and women, church leaders and new converts, very young and very old. And a good chunk of them servants or slaves.

What does it mean? I have been asking myself. What does martyrdom mean? How do we interpret their roles and their lives? Should they be interpreted at all? On Margaret's blog she highlights how

These young men and boys [the martyrs of Uganda] are now celebrated as the heroes of those who hate homosexuals... these youngsters refused to submit to rape.

Too bad these martyrs are not remembered and celebrated as ones who sang and prayed for their persecutors.... instead, the power of what they suffered still holds sway....

It's that last sentence that put it in place for me, or at least raises a different question: How do we shake off the power suffering holds over us? What do the martyrs have to tell us about that?

More to think about.

***
In a side note, I did want to point out that both Blandina and Charles Lwanga are patron saints of torture victims. June is Torture Awareness Month with the United Nations International Day in Support of Torture Victims on June 26. The National Religious Campaign Against Torture has suggestions for marking this month in your congregation, if you are so inclined.

IG memos and prosecutions: analysis

It took about 30 minutes after I wrote that last post for me to rethink my position on the proposed prosecutions by the Attorney General. Or at least to have mixed feelings about it. The complaint many people have about these prosecutions is that going after low-level people will help the government wipe its hands of the issue without ever getting to the root of the matter and what started it in the first place. I can appreciate that.

On the other hand, it makes sense for the AG to prosecute people who went beyond the scope of what the Bush administration countenanced as legal interrogation techniques because that was plainly illegal even by those very relaxed standards. And that seems like an important step to me. Even that is getting complaints from people. At some point the law has to kick in, even for low-level people, surely. [addendum: Finally clearer in thoughts about this thanks to Andrew Sullivan who wrote, "If it is the end and not the beginning of accountability, it will be worse than nothing. But it need not be the end of the story." That's what I was trying to get at.]

Meanwhile, apparently I spoke too soon when I said I was happy the U.S. would be following the Army Field Manual. According to bmaz at EmptyWheel, "The Army Field Manual is not a panacea to solve the torture problems that were indoctrinated into the military and intelligence conduct of the United States by the Bush/Cheney Administration, it is a tool for continuing and codifying much of the worst conduct, especially via the egregious "Appendix M"."

What is Appendix M? The Center for Constitutional Rights reports that

Appendix M of the Army Field Manual - a new section introduced in 2006, applicable only to "unlawful combatants," the category applied to detainees in Guantanamo, at secret CIA prisons, and elsewhere - allows the use of techniques such as prolonged isolation, sleep deprivation, sensory deprivation, and inducing fear and humiliation of prisoners.

It goes on and on and on, doesn't it? What an awful tangled mess. The more I learn, the more I realize how little I know. God bless all those who are trying to clean it up.

(The link to the CCR, above, includes a spot for you to send an email asking President Obama to close the loopholes in the AFM, if you wish to send it.)

Torture in the news

Today is the feast of St. Bartholomew who, according to legend, was flayed alive. Of course we don't really know what happened to St. Bartholomew, one of Jesus' apostles. But it seems appropriate that on his feast day we do learn a bit more about what our country has done in the name of self-defense. Whether you call the methods Enhanced Interrogation Techniques or torture, two items have emerged today related to our treatment of prisoners over the past number of years:

The first is that a 2004 report from the Inspector General of the CIA has been released.

And the second is that the Attorney General "has named a veteran federal prosecutor to examine nearly a dozen prisoner abuse cases in which detainees were held by the Central Intelligence Agency."

Marcy Wheeler at EmptyWheel is examining the documents in a first run-through and thinks the prosecution is a whitewash, saying the prosecutor selected, John Durham, "doesn't necessarily have the stature to go after--say--Jim Haynes and John Rizzo for setting up the torture regime."

Regarding the prosecutions/prosecutor, I don't know enough to say, but I do think this is a step or two in the right direction. That and the Obama Administration announcing that "all U.S. interrogators will follow the rules for detainees laid out by the Army Field Manual." Imagine! Following our own laws! I am, however, unhappy to see we will continue to use Extraordinary Rendition as long as those other countries promise--really, truly promise--not to torture people.

The National Religious Campaign Against Torture has an online letter-writing campaign asking the AG to "undertake a comprehensive investigation that will prove that no one in this nation is above the law." I suspect that horse has left the barn, but there you are.

Regarding the documents, I'll be interested to see what the fallout and analysis is over the next couple of days. I'll keep you posted if I find anything I think is particularly interesting or insightful.

Guantanamo update

from an email sent by the National Religious Campaign Against Torture.

Dear Friends:

Senator Inhofe has offered an amendment, S.A. 1559, to the FY 2010 National Defense Authorization bill (S. 1390) that would PERMANENTLY prevent the President from transferring any detainee in the Guantanamo Bay detention facility to a prison in the United States - whether for the purpose of trying that detainee in a court of law, or for the purpose of closing Guantanamo.

As you all know, Guantanamo is widely recognized as a symbol of our government's use of torture. Senator Inhofe's amendment would make it much more difficult for our country to close Guantanamo - preserving the symbol of torture and needlessly tarnishing our country's reputation.

Please call your Senators and tell them to vote against S.A. 1559. Remind them that the abuses that occurred in the prison in Guantanamo shamed our nation and you hope that they will not stand in the way of closing that prison. Voting against this amendment will make it possible to close Guantanamo.

You can reach your Senators by calling the Capitol switchboard at 202-224-3121 and asking to speak with one of your Senators. Then call back and ask to speak to your other Senator.

Thank you for all you have done to end U.S.-sponsored torture.

Sincerely,

Linda Gustitus, President
Richard Killmer, Executive Director

Torture Update

I learned this morning that a group of religious leaders went to the White House yesterday to meet with members of the Obama Administration and ask for a Commission of Inquiry. They brought a letter signed by (among others) the Most Reverend Dr. Katharine Jefferts Schori! I was pleased and surprised to see it. The full text of the letter is here.

Meanwhile, June is Torture Awareness Month. You'll notice I changed the widget in the top left of the blog to reflect this. Just so's you know, the United Nations International Day in Support of Victims of Torture is on Friday, June 26, two weeks from today. I'll keep you posted.

Quote of the day

Name the speaker:

...[T]here is no place for abuse in what must be considered the family of man. There is no place for torture and arbitrary detention. There is no place for forced confessions. There is no place for intolerance of dissent...the roots of American rule of law go back more than 700 years, to the signing of the Magna Carta. The foundation of American values, therefore, is not a passing priority or a temporary trend.

Why, that would be Newt Gingrich, back in 1997 when he was, in fact, Speaker.

This, along with other illuminating quotes from unexpected sources, can be found here.

Torture update

No response from my other emails to the Bishop and Presiding Bishop, and I think that's all the response I'm going to get, alas.

There's all sorts of stuff finally filtering out through the news, but one thing I wanted to highlight especially is the debate over whether or not torture is effective.

Actually, I want to point you to someone who says it better than I. Over at Obsidian Wings, there's a very good entry by Eric Martin about why this debate is a red herring.

Although many respected experts in the realm of interrogation best practices contend that building a relationship/rapport is a more effective of extracting reliable information (rather than false confession), the reason that we, as a nation, should abstain from torture is because torture is a morally reprehensible practice.

Full stop.

Finally, a reminder that June is Torture Awareness Month. Spread the word.

Churchgoers and torture survey

Various news outlets were a-twitter yesterday with a new Pew Forum survey on The Religious Dimensions of Torture that suggested that the more often you went the church, the more likely you were to approve of torture.

This both was and was not accurate. The headlines could have also said that if you go to church at least once a week, you are as likely to think that torture can never be justified as the general population.

The thing that bothered me about this--well, a few things. First of all, it was that "churchgoer" does not mean one particular thing. And that "more often you go to church" magically and automatically equates with "religiously conservative." And "religious conservative" does not automatically equate with "approves of torture."

There was also the "tut tut, we secular types are more enlightened" nature of it when the NY Times is STILL not calling waterboarding torture.

There was the lack of critique of the survey itself which seemed, to my unpracticed eye, to use a very small sample size and to have a rather strange question; they asked, "Do you think the use of torture against suspected terrorists in order to gain important information can often be justified, sometimes be justified, rarely be justified, or never be justified?" But isn't "rarely" also "sometimes"? I don't know that I completely trust these results.

It's still mighty depressing, though, that what seems to me a fairly basic Christian tenet (i.e. Would you like others to waterboard you? Then you shouldn't waterboard others) is completely missed.

It reminds me of a great story my college roommate told on herself. She went on a retreat and was having a lovely time learning about God's love and forgiveness and kindness, praying and fellowshipping and generally getting all warm and fuzzy, when along came a spider and sat down beside her, and she jumped up and said, "Forget this mercy crap! Just kill it!"

At least she had the sense to recognize the difference between what she was learning and what she was saying. Unlike this guy. This one depressed the hell out of me.

Response to torture update--my noodging continues

A little over a week ago, I wrote that I was going to contact the Presiding Bishop and our Diocesan Bishop to ask them to support a Commission of Inquiry into the use of torture by the United States. I've heard back from both.

I received this message from the Presiding Bishop's office today:

Bishop Katharine asked that I be in touch with you regarding your email about the NRCAT. You can find Bishop Katharine’s endorsement of a January 9 statement against torture at the following two addresses:

http://www.nrcat.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=257&Itemid=189

http://www.episcopalchurch.org/79901_104197_ENG_HTM.htm

Thank you for your work and witness.
Miguel Angel Escobar
Office of the Presiding Bishop

If you click on those links you will find they are for statements written right around the inauguration calling for an end to torture, not for a Commission of Inquiry. Obviously, I'm pleased about what's been done, but I'll write back again asking if she would support a Commission of Inquiry as well. It may be that she doesn't think that's a good idea, but I'm going to at least ask.

Bishop Marc Andrus responded also, with this message:

Dear Laura,

I appreciate your principled stand, which is one I share and have publicly embraced. The disciplined and on-going effort of the Episcopal Diocese of California to oppose the war in Iraq includes opposition not only to the war in total, but to the many elements, including torture that lead to a judgment that this war is not a just war.

I've read the several opinions related to your letter, and I think the one that I find most compelling is that it would be best if a resolution regarding the diocese's opposition to the United States government employing torture came forward at the next diocesan convention. In this way, we can say with confidence that the diocese, including its bishops takes the stand your suggest.

Peace,
Marc Andrus

I wrote him back to say that the diocese actually passed a resolution against torture back in 2005, before he arrived, but I have not heard any more since then.

Just a reminder that the National Religious Campaign Against Torture has a ton of ways you can make your feelings known, including encouraging your congregation to endorse a call for a Commission of Inquiry, or participate in Torture Awareness Month in June. And if you think this is a good idea, please pass the word along!

On partisanship

I think one of the things that most saddens me in the ongoing discussions in the news about torture is that there are any ongoing discussions at all.

Do we think for one blind minute that any conservative commentators would be justifying torture, or memos authorizing the use of torture, or calling them "enhanced interrogation techniques" if they had been employed by a Democratic administration? And I would hate to think that Democratic commentators would be doing the same kind of mental gymnastics that Republican commentators are currently doing had the situation been reversed, but I fear it might be so. Because the rule of the day seems to be Party Uber Alles. And it is amazing to me how few people seem willing to say "This is wrong" simply because it's wrong rather than because it's a chance to win.



This morning I read a commencement speech by David Foster Wallace (given at Kenyon College, actually), recommended by someone I follow on Twitter, that really hits its stride toward the end.

Worship power, you will end up feeling weak and afraid, and you will need ever more power over others to numb you to your own fear. Worship your intellect, being seen as smart, you will end up feeling stupid, a fraud, always on the verge of being found out. But the insidious thing about these forms of worship is not that they're evil or sinful, it's that they're unconscious. They are default settings.

They're the kind of worship you just gradually slip into, day after day, getting more and more selective about what you see and how you measure value without ever being fully aware that that's what you're doing.

I suspect that's what we're seeing: partisanship as unconscious worship, as default settings. How far do that road do we have to go before we snap ourselves out of it?

After the torture memos: next steps

I went to the National Religious Campaign Against Torture's website today to get their reaction to the release of the torture memos last week.

In response to these events, NRCAT has reiterated and strengthened its call for a Commission of Inquiry....“We must, as a nation, address the fact that high-ranking officials in our government authorized torture and that agents representing our country carried out acts of torture in our name,” [NRCAT president Linda] Gustitus said. "A Commission of Inquiry is critical to develop the complete picture of what the United States did, how many people were involved and affected, and how such a heinous policy was approved. Without that record, we have no guarantee we can prevent it from happening in the future."

Lots of information on what the Commission of Inquiry is and what it will do and how to endorse it is here.

I was disappointed to see that the Episcopal Church is not listed anywhere among the faith groups that have endorse the Commission of Inquiry. I plan to write a letter to my bishop and to Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori asking them to do so. If you want to join me, here's the contact information:

The Most Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori
Presiding Bishop and Primate
815 Second Avenue
New York City, NY 10017
(212) 716-6273 • (800) 334-7626
pboffice@episcopalchurch.org

Taking a step at a time, I hope justice will be done.

Waterboarding someone 183 times in a month! It is beyond appalling.

P.S. I also just saw this article that claims "U.S. Provided Torture Training To Uganda." Goody. What an export.

That's the democracy I'm talking about!

President Obama released the memos on torture I wrote about yesterday. You can read his statement on why he is releasing them here, ending with, "The United States is a nation of laws. My Administration will always act in accordance with those laws, and with an unshakeable commitment to our ideals. That is why we have released these memos, and that is why we have taken steps to ensure that the actions described within them never take place again."

Amen to that.

On the torture front

The National Religious Campaign Against Torture is making it very easy to send a message to President Obama and to Congress regarding creating a Commission of Inquiry. This comes up today because President Obama has yet to release the Bush administration's memos regarding torture. I hope he will. It occurred to me that perhaps I should say so. You can do so too, here.

Also I'd like to point out that NRCAT is encouraging congregations to take the opportunity in June to observe Torture Awareness Month. Please do pass that information on to your congregation, if you wish.

Boy, that was fervent, wasn't it?

Update: Just got this email from NRCAT

Dear Friends:

The Wall Street Journal is reporting today that the Obama White House might continue the Bush Administration policy of concealing key details about the CIA's use of torture. Please call President Obama immediately to tell him that he should not act to conceal our country's use of torture!

On Thursday, the Obama White House is expected to release a series of three 2005 legal memos that authorized the use of torture as an interrogation technique. These memos are crucial in order to understand exactly what torture techniques were used and how they were approved. The Wall Street Journal is reporting that these memos may be released in a redacted form - that parts of the memos may not be made public.

This is unacceptable! Our nation's use of torture cannot remain hidden. The American people need to know exactly what was done, how it was approved, and how it can be prevented in the future.

Please call President Obama TODAY at 202-456-1111, and tell his staff that you think that the legal memos authorizing the use of torture should be released in their full, unredacted form. Tell President Obama that you expect him to put an end to Bush Administration secrecy.

Thank you for your help,

Sincerely,

Rev. Richard Killmer
Executive Director

Good Friday thoughts, #2

I appreciated the Passion Narrative, which surprised me. Again, I keep thinking I'm not going to hear anything new and then I do. This time it was the line, "They themselves did not enter the headquarters, so as to avoid ritual defilement and to be able to eat the Passover." And a smidge later when they say, "We are not permitted to put anyone to death."

And I thought, this is all about loopholes, isn't it? This is all about technically obeying the law so you can say you're innocent when someone subpoenas you. So that you can look at others and sneer at how they are impure while washing your hands of the affair.

I admit it made me think of our previous administration, not torturing people, oh no. We're just interrogating them. It made me think especially of Extraordinary Rendition, when we would ship prisoners off to other countries where torture is legal.

How nice to have the authority to get other people to take Jesus in to Pilate so you can celebrate the Passover with a clear conscience, knowing you have broken no commandments.