The Banality of Bush White House Evil
Adolph Eichmann, the subject of Hannah Arendt's book, Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil
By FRANK RICH
NYT
WE don’t like our evil to be banal. Ten years after Columbine, it only now may be sinking in that the psychopathic killers were not jock-hating dorks from a “Trench Coat Mafia,” or, as ABC News maintained at the time, “part of a dark, underground national phenomenon known as the Gothic movement.” In the new best seller “Columbine,” the journalist Dave Cullen reaffirms that Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris were instead ordinary American teenagers who worked at the local pizza joint, loved their parents and were popular among their classmates.
On Tuesday, it will be five years since Americans first confronted the photographs from Abu Ghraib on “60 Minutes II.” Here, too, we want to cling to myths that quarantine the evil. If our country committed torture, surely it did so to prevent Armageddon, in a patriotic ticking-time-bomb scenario out of “24.” If anyone deserves blame, it was only those identified by President Bush as “a few American troops who dishonored our country and disregarded our values”: promiscuous, sinister-looking lowlifes like Lynddie England, Charles Graner and the other grunts who were held accountable while the top command got a pass.
We’ve learned much, much more about America and torture in the past five years. But as Mark Danner recently wrote in The New York Review of Books, for all the revelations, one essential fact remains unchanged: “By no later than the summer of 2004, the American people had before them the basic narrative of how the elected and appointed officials of their government decided to torture prisoners and how they went about it.” When the Obama administration said it declassified four new torture memos 10 days ago in part because their contents were already largely public, it was right.
Yet we still shrink from the hardest truths and the bigger picture: that torture was a premeditated policy approved at our government’s highest levels; that it was carried out in scenarios that had no resemblance to “24”; that psychologists and physicians were enlisted as collaborators in inflicting pain; and that, in the assessment of reliable sources like the F.B.I. director Robert Mueller, it did not help disrupt any terrorist attacks.
(More here.)
1 Comments:
oh, puh-lease. Give me a break. Comparing Abu Graib to anything related to the Nazi experiments is ridiculous at best and irresponsible at worst. I don't think anyone at Abu Graib was being injected with dye in to their eyes to see if eye color can be changed or other heinous experiments conducted by the Nazi's. Sure, there was mistreatment, but none of that even comes close to comparison to what the Nazis did, especially Eichmann and Mengele. This is just another hit piece which is so far fetched, it is utterly ridiculous.
Would you please screen you content better and leave the extremist left-wing kooks off you pages? You do a huge disservice to your website by publishing tripe like this. Are you a serious blog or a left-wing rag?
Post a Comment
<< Home