I now feel terror

When a group of low tech thugs flew airplanes into buildings, I was horrified, saddened at the loss of friends and business acquaintances and angry at my inability to change the situation but I didn't feel fear or terror. I lived in the United States and I knew that given an opportunity our government would put down "My pet goat" get off their collective rears and find those responsible.

5 years later I am starting to feel terror not as a result of a gathering storm of despicable acts carried out by our proclaimed enemies. No I feel terror at scenes like
this:

The American president looking confused and unsure, yet championing his need to abuse prisoners-- calling the Geneva convention vague.

I checked the definition of vague on dictionary.com :
1. Not clearly or explicitly stated or expressed: vague promises.
2. Indefinite or indistinct in nature or character, as ideas or feelings: a vague premonition of disaster.
3. Not clear or distinct to the sight or any other sense; perceptible or recognizable only in an indefinite way: vague shapes in the dark; vague murmurs behind a door.
4. Not definitely established, determined, confirmed, or known; uncertain: a vague rumor; The date of his birth is vague.
5. (of persons) not clear or definite in thought, understanding, or expression: vague about his motives; a vague person.
6. (of the eyes, expression, etc.) showing lack of clear perception or understanding: a vague stare.

I then looked up Article 3 of the Geneva Convention:

Article 3

In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:

1. Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.

To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:

(a) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;

(b) Taking of hostages;

(c) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;

(d) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.

2. The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for.

An impartial humanitarian body, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, may offer its services to the Parties to the conflict.

The Parties to the conflict should further endeavour to bring into force, by means of special agreements, all or part of the other provisions of the present Convention.

The application of the preceding provisions shall not affect the legal status of the Parties to the conflict.

For those interested in reading the entire Geneva Convention click here.

It doesn't seem that any of the definitions of vague apply to this document.

The concept of my President arguing that we need to clarify rules designed and agreed to by multiple nations after the last world war was what frightened me. He was talking about a set of rules that codified civilized behavior; these are the same rules that we have held aloft as an ideal for the treatment of prisoners for over 50 years and prior under the rules in a previous agreement. The notion that these rules were vague and required redefinition or reinterpretation scared me. What was it that was unclear?

The president seemed especially baffled by the definition of what torture was and how it should be defined. It was during these discussions and the phase that passed for opposition from the McCain camp that led me to feel terror.

Can we, the United States of America, really believe that torture can serve a noble purpose? That information gleaned from someone through coercive means can be valuable or accurate? Will we begin the deep and inevitable descent that can and must follow legalization of brutal and anti social policies against our supposed enemies? The Nazis tortured prisoners; so did the Japanese and the Khmer Rouge.
Are these the governments we wish to learn from? Or perhaps our affection with the water board stems from our desire to be like the Apartheid government of South Africa who used this device on Stephen Biko, Nelson Mandela and others?

Our soldiers who suffered in Vietnamese prison camps understood what torture was. I remember the news footage when the "last" prisoners finally came home in 1973, the pictures of broken men barely able or unable to walk as result of their imprisonment in tiger cages for extended periods of time.

Then I saw this
clip and began to shake in terror. After all, it's apparent that he is the "Decider" and with that title will decide all things of importance and all interpretations of events.

Like many of my fellow Americans, I look forward to this November when we may finally rise up as a nation and shake off the shackles of fear that have bound us for 5 years. We can as a people say: No More. No more will we allow you to subvert the values and reputation of this great country for the sake of power and profit. No more will we let you use our own fear to bind us into passivity rather than protest. No more Mr. President will we sit calmly by while you reinvent this country in your own (neocon)image and destroy the freedoms that true Americans hold so dear.

Such as the right to free speech, because with that right comes the necessary right to free thought, something that you are evidently uncomfortable with Mr. Bush.

Please Mr. Bush don't torture anyone on my behalf.