From: David Robjant (David.Robjant@irismurdoch.plus.com)
Date: Tue Jun 01 2004 - 21:13:33 BST
This is clearly an argument where both sides are right. You can cogently
argue both that it is torture and that it isn't, according to what you mean
by 'Torture'. But who cares about words. The point is those things should
not be done to human beings, period.
Chomsky is right in that. Platt Holden is right in that, atleast from what
we know so far, the actions of American soldiers in this instance were not
quite on the level of the Nazi Holocaust, Communist Gulags, Baath party etc
- although there is the perfectly intelligable worry that the pictured
officers showed a talent for enjoying the sufferings of others that might
well lead in that kind of degenerate direction, which is what makes those
pictures so politically dangerous in Iraq, undermining the US claim to
special moral authority and mission on behalf of democracy. Anyway, for PH
to point out that sexual humiliation isn't the same thing as mutilation
isn't for him to defend the humiliation in any way, and I'm quite sure PH
didn't offer the comparison so as to defend those actions.
I should hope not, anyway, and in fact we have no reason to think Platt had
that in mind. What Platt is after is the rather different goal of resisting
the Chomsky analysis in which uncle sam is *just as bad as* the other guys.
I'd go along with him here. Refusing to acknowledge differences between
greater and lesser sins is no way to go about reducing sin.
In short, in the best traditionso of dynamic Quality, whether something is
wrong or not doesn't hang on whether it fits a legally specified SQ word
like "Torture". A fact which, to judge by congressional hearings etc, the
US of A well understands.
From: Valuemetaphysics@aol.com
Reply-To: moq_discuss@moq.org
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2004 13:35:38 EDT
To: moq_discuss@moq.org
Subject: Re: MD Noam Chomsky
In a message dated 6/1/04 4:01:16 PM GMT Daylight Time, pholden@sc.rr.com
writes:
Hi All:
Thanks to MSH we have this comment from Chomsky about American treatment of
jailed suspected terrorists:
> The clear truth of the matter is that it wasn't "abuse,"
> but torture, and it wasn't a few "bad apples," but general
> policy.
I suggest old Noam learn the difference between abuse and torture by first
having girl's underwear placed on his head and then having his fingers
chopped off one by one. You can call both torture if you wish, but believe
me, there's a difference. Nor is it U.S. "general policy" to toss dissidents
off 3-story buildings or put them alive feet first in wood chippers.
Talk about making irrational comparisons . . .
Regards,
Platt
Hello Platt,
I feel sad reading you these days. What has come over you?
All the best,
Mark
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jun 01 2004 - 22:08:21 BST