The New York Times Calls Torture "Torture" When the Perp Is an Official Enemy

[marmar]

The New York Times Calls Torture "Torture" When the Perp Is an Official Enemy

Thursday, 30 January 2014 00:00
By Justin Doolittle, Truthout | Op-Ed


After years of agonizing over nomenclature, it seems the good folks at The New York Times are finally done equivocating and will now refer to torture as "torture." With the release of photographic evidence showing heinous torture in Syria, purportedly committed by the Assad regime in its network of secret prisons, the Times' journalists and editors called a spade a spade: In two recent news articles on the story, published on January 22 and 23, euphemisms such as "enhanced interrogation techniques" and "harsh methods" are nowhere to be found, and "torture" is peppered throughout.

By sheer coincidence, of course, The Times has found its voice on torture only when it's discovered to have been committed by an official enemy. As of July 2013, the last time the issue of US torture was covered in the news section, the paper was still holding on to the exquisitely Orwellian "enhanced interrogation techniques," i.e., the official propaganda line of the US Government since 9/11. In a July 20, 2013, news article by reporters Mark Mazzetti and Scott Shane on the politics surrounding a 6,000-page, $40 million secret Senate committee report on torture, excerpts of which a few senators wanted to release against the wishes of the CIA, "interrogation" appears 10 times (including, it goes without saying, in the title). "Torture" appears twice, both times in an equivocating, indirect context.

When referring directly to the CIA's program in news articles, the Times will invariably employ the "enhanced interrogation" terminology; said program is never straightforwardly referred to as "torture." When the word "torture" is used, it's usually in a cautious, toothless way, e.g., "critics of the program say it's torture and constitutes a betrayal of American values."

We can state with certainty that the Times would never refer to torture in Syria, or any other enemy state for that matter, as "enhanced interrogation techniques." The notion is risible. And, given that torture is such a grave affront to our humanity, the Times is right to not sugarcoat the Syrian brutality. But minimal standards of honesty and journalistic integrity demand that torture be called by its rightful name regardless of what government or group happens to have carried it out. .......................(more)

The complete piece is at: http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/21482-new-york-times-calls-torture-torture-when-the-perp-is-an-official-enemy

[Solly Mack]

1. Every time someone refers to torture by the U.S. as "enhanced interrogation techniques",

that person(s), is deliberately (and cowardly) perpetuating the lies that:

1. That if you call torture by another name then it isn't torture.
2. That the U.S. government didn't use torture.
3. That the U.S. government was confused about what torture is, (so it was up for "debate", to include claiming water-boarding, a form of torture, isn't torture....despite years of evidence to the contrary)
4. That Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and the rest aren't war criminals.
5. That the CIA was somehow confused about what is and isn't torture. The same CIA that years earlier wrote a book on how to torture.
6. That what is and isn't torture is a matter of opinion. (and it just depended on whether you hated Bush or not and/or hated America or not)