Torture may not seem a HealthBeat topic. But I’m willing to declare torture a medical problem. (Whether the victim or the torturer suffers from the greater problem is open to debate).
As regular readers know, I could go on at length. But let me just say this. Why has the media focused on Nancy Pelosi? Was she the Secretary of Defense at the time? Was she the director of the CIA? Was she the president? Could she possibly have been responsible for authorizing the torture?
No.
Did she receive information from those responsible that should have told her that the U.S was engaging in inhumane behavior? I don’t know. But Pelosi is just one of many members of Congress who may well have known what was going on, and given the Bush administration’s stubborn refusal to share power with Congress I doubt any of them could have stopped it.
More importantly, as Washington Post's Greg Sargent pointed out yesterday, “Nancy Pelosi's claims about what she was told and when about torture are getting far more intense media scrutiny than the CIA's claims are. Simple fairness demands that both side’s claims get treated with a similar level of skepticism,” Sargent continues. “And they’re not. Sargent also notes that most news reports omit the fact that two other senior Democrats–Bob Graham and Jay Rockefeller–have publicly claimed that the CIA didn’t brief them about the use of torture in the manner the agency has claimed.
Why, then, the focus on Pelosi? The answer: “Cherchez la Femme”
“Find the woman” is based on the Medieval belief that women are the root of all evil. In Eden, Eve committed the first sin by succumbing to Satan and eating the apple. (Or at least that is what Genesis tells us.) In the Middle Ages, religious scholars took this as a justification for primal misogyny. More recently, the 1854 book The Mohicans of Paris by Alexandre Dumas warned: Il y a une femme dans toutes les affaires; aussitôt qu'on me fait un rapport, je dis: Cherchez la femme (There is a woman in every case; as soon as they bring me a report, I say, 'Look for the woman')
The phrase then became a truism for both the detective novel and film noir: no matter what the problem, a dame is probably at the bottom of it.
Little wonder then, that when a great crime has been committed, many still believe that here is only one solution: Cherchez la Femme.
Thus, the media’s “expose” of torture zeroes in on Nancy Pelosi—distracting everyone from who in the Bush administration knew about the torture, when they knew about it, and who authorized it.
Since I’m not a woman I can’t really comment on the degree that sexism plays a role, but I think the reason the conservatives are going after Polosi is because she is a pretty effective house speaker. If she were a backbencher they wouldn’t be paying any attention.
If they can throw her off her track they might be able to forestall the inevitable congressional investigations that are going to come.
Today the conservatives reached a new depth of ridiculousness, asking her to “prove” that she wasn’t briefed about the torture by the CIA. How do you prove that something didn’t happen?
They know their arguments are weak and are failing as new evidence keeps emerging, but what alternative do they have at this point? The brand is already damaged, imagine what would happen if some of the top former whitehouse operatives started getting indicted.
Maggie,
I think that Pelosi is rightly being scrutinized is because she is prevaricating. Her versions of what she knew has ‘evolved’ over the past week. Her press conference performance by this seasoned politician only fueled the belief that she was running from the truth. In addition, since she had been so vocal about grilling the Bushies over harsh interrogations and torture, her newfound view became more relevant. It’s not ‘find the woman’ but ‘find the truth.
http://www.MDWhistleblower.blogspot.com
In the end, the question of what Pelosi knew when is not relevent to the issue. The question is not who knew what when, but rather did the US abandon its values, foresake the principles it was founded on, and give aid and comfort to torturers everywhere?
This is just a distraction from the real issues, thrown up by people trying to get cover for their actions that betrayed our country and aided by the usual combination of ignorance, malice, and A.D.D. in the media.
To me the bottom line is that, unlike others, Pelosi did not authorize (or order) that people be tortured. Others did do that, and they broke the law when they did so. Investigate them, indict them if indicated, and then prosecute them for breaking the law.
Robert, Michael, Pat S, Chris-
Thanks for your comments.
First, everyone, on the Cherchez la Femme theme–
I agree that any House Speaker who spoke out against torture as foricibly as Pelosi has would be attacked by the conservatives– even if the Speaker were a man.
But there is a special hatred of outspoken women in some circles in Washington. We saw it with Hillary,and we’ve seen it with other liberal woman politicians in the past. The attack goes beyond criticsm; it becomes a witch-hunt.
And the fact that a woman is being attacked makes it a better story from the media’s point of view.
Robert–I agree that the fact she is House Speaker makes her a target. The fact thst is a sometimes outspoken woman House Speaker makes her even more of a target for some.
And yes, they hope to forestall investigations by turning the spotlight on her–hoping to throw her off balance.
Michael– Pelosi has angered some conservatives by her stance on torture: it is morally wrong, a violation of international law.
I think we all agree with her on that.
How much she knew really is beside the point: she didn’t have the power to stop it.
Pat S. & Chris–
I agree.
The fear of the succubus, the Lady Macbeth who pulls the Thane’s strings, lies at the heart of the religious Right. If Nancy Pelosi didn’t exist, the Republicans would drop down to some assistant undersecretary and cite her as the evil manipulator of the Obama administration. Republican jihadists see independent-minded women as subversive to their entire eschatology. Instead of the frontier virtues, they see women as reflecting the decadence of civilization. Instead of deriving virtue from blood, women seek to coddle the weak and the unfit, the lazy and the dishonest. Republicans perceive visceral threat from women who disdain the blonde, Christian bimbo ideal of enhanced boobs and homophobia. This ugly, irrational, medieval side of America has always been with us and its revivification is part of the Reagan-Bush-Clinton-Bush legacy, our Thousand Year Reich, that will require another 20 years before it is shoved back into the cesspool where it belongs.
While Maggie is right in general about the sexist bashing of women politicians, the reason progressives are angry at Pelosi now is because she, like 99% of Democrats, supported, and still supports, Washington’s “war on terror,” including torture (at least by their silence, often by positive affirmation, and now by going along with Obama’s retreading of Bush policies and refusal to prosecute war criminals).
The wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, etc., are heartily approved by Pelosi et al. I certainly don’t recall her being a voice against torture even after it was exposed.
For an earlier expose of Pelosi’s hypocrisy, see http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat/258258
Andrew &
Andrew–
I agree that Pelosi caved on the war on terror– and continues to support wars that I believe are a huge mistake.
But, as you point out, in this she is like 99% of the rest of the Democrats.
So why is she singled out for such special criticisim. Sure, she’s the speaker, but what about male leaders in the Senate?
Very, very few people spoke out against torture under the Bush administration. Yet, I have to believe that most in Congress knew that terrible things were happening to prisoners. (You only had to look at Rumsfeld’s face–or Bush’s-filled with hate.)
I read the Nation piece. Usually the reporting in the Nation is quite good, but the only evidence that Pelosi might have had a positive response to a private briefing on torture comes from “Florida Congressman Porter Goss, a Republican who would go on to head the Central Intelligence Agency.”
“Was Pelosi one of the .. . cheerleaders for waterboarding? That is not clear,” the Nation’s reporter acknowledges.
At that point, the story seems to hangingon a very think thread. The reporter continues: “Another member of the House who is closely allied wit Pelosi did tell the Post, however, that the California Democrat attended the session, recalled that waterboarding was discussed, and “did not object” at the time to that particular torture technique.
“If this is the case, Pelosi has provided aid and comfort to the Bush administration’s efforts to deviate not just from the standards set by international agreements . . ”
The reporter’s “IF this is the case” is very honest–but it also points to the fact that he doesn’t quite have a story. . .
More importantly, unless we think Pelosi could have stopped the torture, what she thought or didn’t think about it isn’t that important. (The notion that her “encouragement” would have given succor and comfort to the Bush administration seems a stretch. I don’t think they cared one whit what Nancy Pelosi liked or didn’t like.)
Under the Bush administration’s “executive presidency” , her position as speaker didn’t give her the power to do anything about the torture.
I’m more interested in whether she joins in the call for investigation and prosecution of those responsible.
Finally, let me add, she is not one of my favorite politicians–far from it. Although she is a woman, she belongs to an earlier (1950s generation) of women that I don’t really identify with.
Nevertheless, I always hate to see the Cherchez the Femme theme in American politics. The press loves it, and some of our misogynistic TV pundits revel in it.
I think misogyny is like racisim or atni-semitism; whenever you smell a whiff of it, you have to call people on it. That’s the only way to make it clear that it is just not acceptable.
Karl J.–
I agree that misogyny has been a theme on the right.
Certainly, Hillary was cast as Lady MacBeth beginning in the early 1990s.
Though I would add that, in the past, not all conservatives and not all Re publicans were misogynists. Certainly not Gerald Ford. Or Bob Dole.
It’s the current crop that sprang up over the past 18 years or so that seem terrified of women. (Misogyny is firmly grounded in fear)
I think you do a disservice to Health Beat by getting involved in what is essentially a partisan battle between the Republican and Democratic parties.
What Nancy Pelosi knew about torture and when is not relevant to health care in the US. It can only divide the readers of Health Beat into different camps instead uniting them to find solutions on health care issues.
I suggest you leave this topic and others like it to other blogs that deal with type of issue – of which there are many.
P.S. I am a Democrat
Leagcy Flyer–
I appreciate your concern that I might divide people who are truly conerned about meaninful healthcare reform by getting into
Republican/Democratic politics.
I hesitated putting up this post for that reason.
I sent it to my adult son– who knows me and my tendency to be impetuous
better than virtually anyone.
His advice– go for it. “You’re making it clear that this is your political opinion–
And, I have to add people who would object to the post are not, by and large in favor of progressive health care reform.
At this point, the REpublican party has become the conservative party. Moderate Republicans were driven out of the party by Karl Rove, et. al.
There are just a handful of moderates left. The rest really are ideologically opposed to healthcare reform.
So I don’t think I’m going to divide support for reform by going up against those conservatives, like Cheney, who support torture.
Ultimately, health care reform is all about doing the right thing. And torture is clearly wrong.
My step-son is in the amry– a career soldier.
He and his frinds strongly believe that by aruging that torture keeps the coutnry safer, Cheney and other conservatives are putting our soldiers in harm’s way.
Finally, healthcare reform is a very political issue.
Conservatives and progressives have very different values when it comes to whether everyone deeserves equal, high quality, affordable care.
But again,thank you for your concern for HealthBeat. I really do appreciate that.