"Clarity on Torture"

Sean Dailey has an editorial currently up on the website of Gilbert Magazine that's titled, appropriately enough, "Clarity on Torture".

Here's an excerpt:

Do we really need to get into the nuts and bolts of what constitutes torture?

Yes, we do. Most will agree that taking a power drill to a man’s shoulder or pulling out his fingernails with pliers for punishment or to extract information is torture. But when the subject is waterboarding, clarity vanishes again. Some consider waterboarding to be mere psychological torture — which, as we’ve already established, is morally indistinguishable from physical torture.

But waterboarding is not a harmless dunk in the tub, as former Vice President Dick Cheney once likened it, and it is not psychological torture. In waterboarding, a subject is strapped to a gurney. His feet are elevated slightly above his head. A cloth is draped over his face. And water is poured on his face so that it enters his nose and mouth and flows into his lungs. CIA interrogators are instructed to pour the water immediately after a detainee exhales, to ensure he inhales water, not air. They use their hands to “dam the flow” of excess water from a detainee’s mouth. And detainees who are scheduled for waterboarding are put on a liquid diet, to minimize the risk of death should they inhale their own vomit.

This procedure became official American policy in our so-called War on Terror, but it was not always so. Waterboarding has been condemned by the United States government since at least 1898, when American soldiers were court marshaled for waterboarding prisoners during our occupation of the Philippines following the Spanish-American War. In World War II, we hanged Japanese war criminals for waterboarding American and Allied troops. In the 1980s in Texas, a sheriff and three of his deputies were convicted by the Justice Department for waterboarding prisoners to extract confessions.

And yet, there are those exceptions: American security is at stake. If waterboarding saves even one life, isn’t it worth it?

If torturing a terrorist suspect saved a city from destruction, or if it saved even one life, it would still be a barbaric, savage act, unworthy of a civilized society. If expediency were enough to justify an immoral act, then abortion would be justifiable.

Read the whole thing.

Our Tax Dollars at Work

Not far from of our office, on Cicero Avenue, about two blocks south of Peterson Avenue, is this sign:



There's another such sign about a mile west of Haus Jansen, along 26th Street, just east of Harlem Avenue.

I've seen several other such signs around Chicagoland recently. No doubt there are hundreds (thousands?) more elsewhere around the country.

For them that don't know, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act is what most of us call simply "The Stimulus". And so, as a result of these signs, we now know that some of the $787 billion of our tax dollars are being used to fund repairs on state and local roads (not to mention the signs themselves).

Could someone explain to me why the good people of Boston, Charleston, Dayton, Louisiana, Washington, Houston, Kingston, Texarkana, Monterey, Faraday, Santa Fe, Tallapoosa, Glen Rock, Black Rock, Little Rock, Oskaloosa, Tennessee, Hennessey, Chicopee, Spirit Lake, Grand Lake, Devils Lake, or Crater Lake (for Pete's sake) should have to pay for roads to be repaired in Illinois?

EEOC to Catholic College: Drop Dead

I can't say as I'm surprised:

Feds Accuse Catholic Belmont Abbey College of Sexual Discrimination for Not Covering Contraception

So much for separation of church and state.

Thankfully, the BAC powers that be aren't backing down.

From the article:

"As a Roman Catholic institution, Belmont Abbey College is not able to and will not offer nor subsidize medical services that contradict the clear teaching of the Catholic Church," said Belmont Abbey President William Thierfelder. "There was no other course of action possible if we were to operate in fidelity to our mission and to our identity as a Catholic college."

After faculty members filed complaints with the EEOC and the North Carolina Department of Insurance, Belmont Abbey says the EEOC told the school in March 2009 that it would close the file on the discrimination charge, as it had not found the school's decision in violation of its statutes. But the agency later reversed itself, and issued a determination letter to the school on August 5 affirming that the ban amounted to gender discrimination, because it pertains only to women.

"By denying prescription contraception drugs, Respondent (the college) is discriminating based on gender because only females take oral prescription contraceptives," wrote Reuben Daniels Jr., the EEOC Charlotte District Office Director in the determination. [emphasis added]

Aside from presenting us with a clear example of bureaucracy run amok, Daniels' comment also provides with what could rightly be called a "teachable moment".

He noted that only women take oral contraceptives. This, of course, begs the question prompts the question: Why is there no contraceptive pill for men?

The redoubtable Dr. Janet Smith explains why in her talk "Contraception: Why Not":

There's a wonderful book out by Dr. Ellen Grant called The Bitter Pill. She was very much in on distributing contraceptives in the 60's in London, but she saw woman after woman coming in with different pathologies that she found were pill-related high blood pressure, blood clots, cysts in the breast, all sorts of things.

So, she said, "I'm not going to prescribe these anymore." She looked into this and she discovered, that when they were first testing for the pill, they were trying to find a male contraceptive and a female contraceptive pill.

And in the first study group of males, they found that there was some slight shrinkage of the testicles of one male, so they stopped all testing of the male contraceptive pill.

You might notice that there is no such thing in the first study group of females. Three females died and they just readjusted the dosage.

Let's read that again:

And in the first study group of males, they found that there was some slight shrinkage of the testicles of one male, so they stopped all testing of the male contraceptive pill.

And this:

You might notice that there is no such thing in the first study group of females. Three females died and they just readjusted the dosage. [!]

Smith continues:

Now, I don't know what that tells you, but it tells me that there's something sinister going on here. Women are still dying from the pill.

If you look at the insert in any set of pills, you can get this from a pharmacist if you can't find it elsewhere, it says such things as the pill will cause blood clots, high blood pressure, heart disease, greater increase of some kinds of cancer, infertility.

Now, these are very small percentages where this happens, but there are some sixteen million women in the United States on the pill. Sixteen million.

And even a very small percentage is still a very large number of women. Not to mention the day by day side effects. These always fascinate me.

Most women, in fact, 50% of women who start on the pill, stop within the first year because of unpleasant side effects. So, these side effects are really largely those of the sixteen million who continue, so you can imagine how bad they must be for the 50% who stop.

It's not Belmont Abbey College that's mistreating women.

It's the Pill.

The Episcopal Church Drifts Further Into Outer Space

This reminds me of this.

And, on a not entirely unrelated matter:

Do thou make thy voice heard in support of the conscience rights of health care providers before 9 April, the deadline for submitting comments to HHS.

Throwing Good Money After Bad and Failing to Avoid "Ethical Drawbacks"

I just did a tag-team interview (along with my boss, Joe Scheidler) with a reporter from FOX 32 News for a story on Obama's decision to lift restrictions on federal funding of embryonic stem cell research throw good money after bad — which, incidentally, will result in the killings of yet more tiny human beings.

I'm told the story will air during their 9:00 pm news tonight.

Speaking of which, I couldn't help but notice this sentence in an article in Friday's Chicago Tribune about the latest advance in adult stem cell research (induced pluripotent stem cell — iPS cell — research, to be precise):

The [iPS] cells offer the benefits of embryonic stem cells without the ethical drawbacks.

So not killing human beings is seen merely as avoiding an "ethical drawback"?

Mmm-kay.

This Is Apparently No Joke

Playmobil now makes a TSA-esque security checkpoint:


The fun is in the customer reviews.

Here's a Headline I Didn't Want to See This Morning

Courtesy of the idiot-proof DoD:

U.S. fumbles 4 nuclear fuses
Missile parts sent to Taiwan in error

By Josh White | The Washington Post
12:45 AM CDT, March 26, 2008

WASHINGTON — The Defense Department mistakenly shipped secret nuclear missile fuses to Taiwan more than 18 months ago and did not learn that the items were missing until late last week, Pentagon officials acknowledged Tuesday, deepening concerns about the security of the U.S. nuclear arsenal.

Yeah, I'd say so.

Failure Is Not an Option

Remember that spy satellite that lost power and is falling toward earth?

As of a few weeks ago:

[Gordon Johndroe, a spokesman for the National Security Council] would not comment on whether it is possible for the satellite to be perhaps shot down by a missile. He said it would be inappropriate to discuss any specifics at this time.

Now, apparently, it is appropriate, and plans are being made to shoot it down with a Standard Missile 3:

U.S. will try to shoot down disabled, toxic spy satellite

By Aamer Madhani | Washington Bureau
February 15, 2008

WASHINGTON - The Navy is preparing to shoot a faltering U.S. spy satellite out of the sky in the next two weeks using a tactical missile that was manufactured as a defensive weapon to head off enemy aircraft, the Pentagon announced on Thursday.

While it's not uncommon for space junk to fall out of the sky, military officials said they are concerned in this case because much of the 1,000 pounds of frozen rocket fuel called hydrazine on the spacecraft could survive the descent and pose health risks, such as damage to skin and lung tissue, if it lands in a populated area.

Marine Gen. James Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and James Jeffrey, the deputy national security adviser, said the Navy's window of opportunity to strike the satellite before it enters the Earth's atmosphere begins in the next three or four days.

If the satellite is not intercepted, it is expected to enter the atmosphere in late February or early March.

"This has no aerodynamic properties," Cartwright said of the satellite. "Once it hits the atmosphere, it tumbles, it breaks apart. It is very unpredictable and next to impossible to engage. So what we're trying to do here is catch it just prior to the last minute ... outside the atmosphere."

Three Navy ships will deploy in the Pacific Ocean to launch the missile. Cartwright declined to specify an exact location beyond stating it would be in the Northern Hemisphere. At the time of the launch, officials said the satellite would be about 150 miles above the Earth.

Software for the Strategic Missile 3, designed as an anti-aircraft system, is being modified to adjust for the bus-size satellite. Military officials have "high confidence" that the missile will strike the satellite and puncture its fuel tank.

If the first attempt fails, officials would have to decide whether to take another shot, but it could be "next to impossible" to strike on a subsequent attempt, Cartwright said. [emphasis added]

Your Tax Dollars at Work

...courtesy of the idiot-proof CIA:

Satellite falling toward Earth

By Eileen Sullivan | Associated Press
January 27, 2008

WASHINGTON - A large U.S. spy satellite has lost power and could hit Earth in late February or March, government officials said Saturday.

The satellite, which no longer can be controlled, could contain hazardous materials, and it is unknown where on the planet it might come down, they said. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because the information is classified as secret.

"Appropriate government agencies are monitoring the situation," said Gordon Johndroe, a spokesman for the National Security Council, when asked about the situation after it was disclosed by other officials. "Numerous satellites over the years have come out of orbit and fallen harmlessly. We are looking at potential options to mitigate any possible damage this satellite may cause."

He would not comment on whether it is possible for the satellite to be perhaps shot down by a missile. He said it would be inappropriate to discuss any specifics at this time. A senior government official said lawmakers and other nations are being kept apprised of the situation.