Recently, Lindsey Graham said in a hearing: <iq>[...] one of the reasons these [torture] techniques have survived for about 500 years is apparently they work.</iq> In that, Mr. Graham is 100% correct. Torture does work, but not in the way touted by its proponents. In order to examine the issue more closely, we need to first clarify---come to agreement on, as it were---the definition of the word "work", in this context. It's just tossed in there, at the end of the sentence, as if its intent were perfectly clear and obvious. And it is; it's just that the clear and obvious meaning differs from person to person. Most will understand Graham to be saying that torture succeeds in extracting the desired vital information. Proponents of torture as a tactic will sing "Amen" while opponents will decry Graham for the fool, liar and traitor that he admittedly is. However, both of those reactions accept the common understanding that the goal of torture is to produce information. That is the <i>stated</i> goal, to be sure. But very often, the stated goal, purpose or justification for an act is simply the most politically acceptable one. It doesn't even matter whether or not its true: once torture is wreathed in the mantle of respectability afforded it by being a tool in the fight against unfathomable terrorism, far fewer people will take a stance against it. For most, a sense of ethics or principle doesn't really enter into it once their lives or the lives of their children appear to be threatened, regardless of how infinitesimal the odds. Were the torturers to clearly state that they were doing so because they wanted to subjugate an already downtrodden minority in order to keep both them and the rest of the rabble in line, they would be far closer to the truth, but much farther away from a palatable justification easily sold by the mass media and easily swallowed by the typically jingoist American citizen. So, to return to Graham's statement, torture has indeed been used for the last 500 years because it works. He's dead on there. It works very well at keeping the masses terrified that they will be the next ones to be tortured because, really, once some people get tortured by the powers-that-be, it's pretty much anything goes, isn't it? Hundreds of thousands, if not millions, were tortured during the various inquisitions, crusades and the general day-to-day life during the Middle Ages<fn>. Did the torturers really care whether the Jews converted to Christianity? Hell no. Well, maybe a little bit, but they were more interested in how shit-your-pants scared all the other people got when they heard what a loose cannon the church had become. You bet your ass that collection plate was nice and full when the next Sunday rolled around. And so it continues today. Torture works at keeping the riff-raff in line while the important people go about their business. Any halfway-decent scientific study will show that it's just about useless at extracting information. Other, far more ethical methods are much more effective and have the added benefit of not breaking any U.S. or international law, not to mention ethical codes or laws of God, if you happen to care about any of those things. Despite the complete indefensibility of torture on both moral grounds and for reasons of efficacy, the prevailing wisdom from nearly all possible sides of the issue is that there should be no prosecutions. The justifications for this so-called point-of-view all boil down to a form of not crying over spilt milk. Many of these people are, at the same time, staunch supporters of the suspension of Habeas Corpus as well as indefinite detention without trial. To sum up, this view can be expressed thusly: known crimes in the past are not to be prosecuted while potential---no matter how nebulously so---crimes in the future are to be punished preëmptively. Bravo. *golf clap* Forget the founding fathers spinning in their graves. Anyone with more than a passing acquaintance with ethics, an ounce of common sense or a shred of decency, both living and dead, should be appalled, if not outright physically nauseated. <hr> <ft>Some recent visits to 12th-century Swiss castles have been quite eye-opening in this regard, with each one having a gruesome dungeon on display, complete with implements of torture.</ft>