The Myth of “Torture Lite”

2009 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica Wolfendale
Keyword(s):  
Sleep Deprivation ◽  
Moral Psychology ◽  
Public Discourse ◽  
September 11 ◽  
Terrorist Attacks ◽  
Military Intelligence ◽  
Liberal Democracies ◽  
Liberal Ideology ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Enhanced Interrogation

Since the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the phrase “torture lite” has appeared in public discourse about torture, used by journalists, military intelligence personnel, and academics to distinguish between two kinds of torture: torture, which is violent, physically mutilating, cruel and brutal, and torture lite, which refers to interrogation methods that are, it is claimed, more restrained and less severe than real torture. Techniques in the latter category, which are also described as “enhanced interrogation techniques” or “stress and duress methods,” include extended sleep deprivation, noise bombardment, and forced standing. In this paper I argue that the distinction between torture and torture lite is attractive to liberal democracies because it bolsters what David Luban has called the “liberal ideology of torture,” the myth that torture can be compatible with the basic commitments of liberal states. However, as I shall demonstrate, torture lite techniques are torture, for they are sufficiently cruel and severe to meet any plausible definition of torture. Furthermore, the use of terms like “torture lite” and the nature of such techniques encourage a moral psychology in which the violence and cruelty of torture is denied, the victim's suffering is hidden, minimized and doubted, and the torturer's responsibility is diminished. As such, the use of torture lite techniques is likely to encourage the normalization of torture.

scholarly journals The New Dilemmas of Rule of Law Assistance

2018 ◽  
Vol 112 ◽  
pp. 259-263
Author(s):  
Veronica L. Taylor
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
September 11 ◽  
Terrorist Attacks ◽  
Berlin Wall ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Definition Of

As we meet in 2018, it is nearly thirty years since the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989; seventeen years have passed since the terrorist attacks in the United States of September 11, 2001; and it is nearly fifteen years since the United Nations promulgated its definition of rule of law in 2004.

Twenty-First-Century Torture

2021 ◽  
pp. 125-158
Author(s):  
William L. d'Ambruoso
Keyword(s):  
Bush Administration ◽  
September 11 ◽  
First Century ◽  
Terrorist Attacks ◽  
Al Qaeda ◽  
Legal Counsel ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
Twenty First Century ◽  
Enhanced Interrogation ◽  
The Military

Immediately following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, members of the George W. Bush administration signaled that current rules regarding intelligence, detention, and interrogation were too confining. With approval from the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC), the president declared that the Geneva Conventions’ detention and interrogation guidelines would not apply to Al Qaeda and Taliban detainees. The problem with Geneva, administration lawyers argued, was that it would tie interrogators’ hands. The CIA and the military wanted an explicit legal blessing for their interrogation programs. They got it in the form of a series of memos by the OLC and military lawyers, who defined torture in exceedingly narrow terms. The result was “enhanced interrogation,” which the administration claimed did not amount to torture but was still a sufficiently “tough” program to break hardened terrorists.

Homeland Security

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Cadwalader
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
Homeland Security ◽  
The United States ◽  
September 11 ◽  
Terrorist Attacks ◽  
Department Of Homeland Security ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Unity Of Effort ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Exclusive Focus

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 caused a seismic shift in how the United States organizes and executes the mission of securing the homeland. The creation and growth of the Department of Homeland Security is the most visible manifestation of this change. However, the homeland security discipline contemplates shared responsibilities and a unity of effort among all levels of government, the private sector, and the general public. The wide array of stakeholders, alongside an expanding definition of what constitutes homeland security, presents complex challenges for policymakers. With the perspective of the more than fifteen years that have elapsed since 9/11, this chapter examines the evolution of homeland security from a near-exclusive focus on terrorism to a broader “all hazards” approach, the relationship between homeland security and national security, the roles of leading actors, and contemporary issues.

E-health developments in the system of health services in Hungary and the European Union

2014 ◽  
Vol 155 (21) ◽  
pp. 822-827
Author(s):  
Ágnes Váradi
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
European Union ◽  
Public Discourse ◽  
Action Plan ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Public Health Care ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Contemporary Issue ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Basic Features

The question of electronic solutions in public health care has become a contemporary issue at the European Union level since the action plan of the Commission on the e-health developments of the period between 2012 and 2020 has been published. In Hungary this issue has been placed into the centre of attention after a draft on modifications of regulations in health-care has been released for public discourse, which – if accepted – would lay down the basics of an electronic heath-service system. The aim of this paper is to review the basic features of e-health solutions in Hungary and the European Union with the help of the most important pieces of legislation, documents of the European Union institutions and sources from secondary literature. When examining the definition of the basic goals and instruments of the development, differences between the European Union and national approaches can be detected. Examination of recent developmental programs and existing models seem to reveal difficulties in creating interoperability and financing such projects. Finally, the review is completed by the aspects of jurisdiction and fundamental rights. It is concluded that these issues are mandatory to delineate the legislative, economic and technological framework for the development of the e-health systems. Orv. Hetil., 2014, 155(21), 822–827.

You Say You Want a Reformation? Parsing the Ubiquitous Rhetoric of an “Islamic Reformation”

2010 ◽  
Vol 4 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 37-73
Author(s):  
Paul R. Powers
Keyword(s):  
Present Article ◽  
Political Change ◽  
September 11 ◽  
Terrorist Attacks ◽  
Protestant Reformation ◽  
Islamic World ◽  
History Of

The ideas of an “Islamic Reformation” and a “Muslim Luther” have been much discussed, especially since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. This “Reformation” rhetoric, however, displays little consistency, encompassing moderate, liberalizing trends as well as their putative opposite, Islamist “fundamentalism.” The rhetoric and the diverse phenomena to which it refers have provoked both enthusiastic endorsement and vigorous rejection. After briefly surveying the history of “Islamic Reformation” rhetoric, the present article argues for a four-part typology to account for most recent instances of such rhetoric. The analysis reveals that few who employ the terminology of an “Islamic Reformation” consider the specific details of its implicit analogy to the Protestant Reformation, but rather use this language to add emotional weight to various prescriptive agendas. However, some examples demonstrate the potential power of the analogy to illuminate important aspects of religious, social, and political change in the modern Islamic world.

Terrified

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher A. Bail
Keyword(s):  
Public Discourse ◽  
The United States ◽  
September 11 ◽  
Theoretical Argument ◽  
Muslim Americans ◽  
Media Messages ◽  
American Media ◽  
The Face ◽  
September 11 Attacks ◽  
The Public Sphere

In July 2010, Terry Jones, the pastor of a small fundamentalist church in Florida, announced plans to burn two hundred Qur'ans on the anniversary of the September 11 attacks. Though he ended up canceling the stunt in the face of widespread public backlash, his threat sparked violent protests across the Muslim world that left at least twenty people dead. This book demonstrates how the beliefs of fanatics like Jones are inspired by a rapidly expanding network of anti-Muslim organizations that exert profound influence on American understanding of Islam. The book traces how the anti-Muslim narrative of the political fringe has captivated large segments of the American media, government, and general public, validating the views of extremists who argue that the United States is at war with Islam and marginalizing mainstream Muslim-Americans who are uniquely positioned to discredit such claims. Drawing on cultural sociology, social network theory, and social psychology, the book shows how anti-Muslim organizations gained visibility in the public sphere, commandeered a sense of legitimacy, and redefined the contours of contemporary debate, shifting it ever outward toward the fringe. The book illustrates the author's pioneering theoretical argument through a big-data analysis of more than one hundred organizations struggling to shape public discourse about Islam, tracing their impact on hundreds of thousands of newspaper articles, television transcripts, legislative debates, and social media messages produced since the September 11 attacks. The book also features in-depth interviews with the leaders of these organizations, providing a rare look at how anti-Muslim organizations entered the American mainstream.

Rationality revisited: Politicisation through planning rationality against the rationality of power

2021 ◽  
pp. 147309522110011
Author(s):  
Esin Özdemir
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
General Position ◽  
Strong Relationship ◽  
Planning Theory ◽  
The Political ◽  
Rational Thinking ◽  
Liberal Democracies ◽  
Substantive Issue ◽  
Rational Consensus ◽  
Definition Of

In this article, I readdress the issue of rationality, which has been so far considered in western liberal democracies and in planning theory as procedural, and more recently as post-political in the post-foundational approach, aiming to show how it can gain a substantive and politicising character. I first discuss the problems and limits of the treatment of rational thinking as well as rational consensus-seeking as merely procedural and post-political. Secondly, utilising the notion of Realrationalität of Flyvbjerg, I discuss how rationality attains a politicising role due to its strong relationship with power. Using the concept of planning rationality aiming at public interest, I present the general position and actions of professional organisations in Turkey, focusing on the Chamber of City Planners, as an example illustrative of my argument. I finally argue that rationality becomes a substantive issue that politicizes planning, when it is put forward as an alternative to authoritarian market logic. In doing so, I adopt the Rancièrian definition of the political, defined as disclosure of a wrong and staging of equality. In conclusion, I first emphasize the importance of avoiding quick rejections of the concepts of rationality and consensus in the framework of planning activity and planning theory and secondly, call for a broader definition of the political; the political that is not confined to conflict but is open to rational thinking and rational consensus.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document