Maybe torture and threats only work on Muslims…or something?
By Thoreau
This morning’s Washington Post has an excellent editorial cartoon. Bush is watching a video of a British sailor detained in Iran, and he says “People will say anything when they’re detained and coerced.”
Now, I admit that I don’t follow the right wing yakkers as closely as some here, but I’m betting that they’re saying one of two things about the British soldiers appearing in Iranian propaganda films:
1) “Oh, people will say anything under duress.” Um, yeah, so why do you think that torture will yield anything other than what the torturer wants to hear?
2) “They should have held out and refused to talk.” Oh, so you’re saying that motivated people can resist torture? So why are you so confident that torture will work on people who think they’re on a mission from God?
I’ll check it out and report back.
Comment by Eric the .5b —
March 31, 2007 @ 10:25 pm
You’re missing two option we’ve seen before, with coerced statements released by the captors.
3) “She’s a bitter anti-American who was always against this war, anyway.”
4) “Stockholm syndrome.”
I suppose those are more consistent with a pro-torture outlook.
Comment by Thoreau —
April 1, 2007 @ 7:03 am
Eric-
But the last statement is still consistent with a stance that people will say whatever they think their captors want to hear.
Comment by michael holloway —
April 1, 2007 @ 3:42 pm
Well if the Stockholm syndrome works…
No need for a draft; we’ll just kidnap 500,000 people hold them for about a month - then it’s off to basic training!
Comment by Eric the .5b —
April 1, 2007 @ 6:07 pm
Unless they think all the prisoners in Gitmo love America now.
Comment by Eric the .5b —
April 3, 2007 @ 12:50 pm
Of course, there’s a simpler explanation that happens to be completely neutral on the torture issue: she probably didn’t write it.