For want of a scapegoat

What's so wrong about torture?
Simple: it presumes guilt.

Almost universally on this planet (and increasingly since the 20th century), two ideas are central to the notion of Justice: 1) the presumption of innocence until proof of guilt, and 2) the right of the accused to a robust defense. Can you imagine a trial without those assumptions? What a joke! Can you imagine being on trial without those assumptions? What a nightmare. Kafka, anyone?

In a normal world, my country would sanction, or possibly even organize international action against a country which operated its justice system like this. In Bushcheney's post-Raygun Amerika, we join them.

By definition, the victims of torture are not yet guilty: people are tortured to get information that would allow others to prevent illegal acts from being planned or executed. There is no trial, no opportunity for defense; guilt is presumed, and the victim is immediately punished for either Presumed Guilt By Association or Presumed Thoughtcrime. Torture after a trial would be considered "cruel and unusual punishment." Doesn't that say enough, by itself? Hello?

Fear is the mind-killer. Fear of ill-defined "terror scenarios" made many of us inclined to allow "whatever's necessary" to prevent said ill-defined scenarios. For want of a scapegoat, the Constitution was lost.

I can't imagine why anyone would want anyone else to be so afraid that they would allow such mistreatment of other humans, or such distortion of Justice, but apparently some people think they have their reasons.

I can't imagine how anyone, given the order to waterboard, could do so knowing that the victim was never given the presumption of innocence, or a robust defense. This blows my mind.

But in the face of colorfully-described but poorly-defined terror scenarios, we ran like children to the neighborhood bully* for protection. And now he's come for us.

We are all innocent until proven guilty. This is as fundamental to this planet's idea of Justice as is the right to a defense (which is also, incidentally, abrogated in the case of torture). Justice demands this presumption. Justice requires it.

I can't believe we're still talking about this. Why is this concept so difficult to grasp? Why did your congressman and senators support this crap? Why did mine? I keep asking, and still keep getting unsatisfactory answers. Rep. Baird, YOU WILL BE FIRED for this. Pack up your shit; you're going home.


On this day in 1864, George Washington Carver is believed to have been born. Thanks for the peanut butter!
In 1895, Buckminster Fuller and Oscar Hammerstein II were born.

The following two are apocryphal; I cannot confirm their validity. I found them in the Fortean Times.
In 1738, a strange creature was fished from the water around Exeter. It resembled a man about four foot tall, 'with a Genital Member of considerable Size - with Fins at his thighs, and larger ones like Wings - at his shoulders - and two spout holes behind his eyes.' And in 1978, a garage in Galax, Virginia, was bombarded by nails of various sizes for the third day running. Many were observed flying from the front and back doors, sometimes from both at once. Mechanics collected almost 400. The police were completely baffled.


*They f*cking redacted their own biographies!?!?! It's significant that they didn't just edit them- no, they had to leave the blacked-out parts there so we would know that there are things we're not allowed to know.