Does the U.S. Torture People? Of Course Not.

The Nazis never tortured people either, because the ones they tortured were, by definition, not people. They were something else -- anything else, really. So we have to remember that questions like the one above are somewhat loaded with technical terms, subject to all manner of various and changing subtle language use. Now the precise meaning of "is" -- as we have learned from Mister Clinton -- seems downright tricky. You can only imagine how elusive the word "torture" must be for the current administration.

What exactly IS torture? I wonder why George Orwell passionately hated politicians, calling them liars of the worst kind.

While the U.S. president staunchly maintained before Congress that "The U.S. does NOT torture people," many Democrats -- and a few others who recall the WMD fiasco -- remain a bit skeptical. NBC has reported that a congressional investigation has turned up some "eyebrow raising" data in the form of memos. One caption describing just such an official note reads:

"Oct. 4: New revelations contradict the president’s promise not to authorize abusive interrogation techniques."

Uh oh. This can't be good. Why do I have the feeling that Congress is about to turn up the heat on the Whitehouse, and find out that "actually everyone seems to have differed on what was meant by "torture."' After all, this word may have many meanings. Does it really become "torture" just because the sleep-deprived, mostly starved interogatee was screaming in pain? And where does it say that in the U.S. Constitution?

That seems just a little to obstructive a definition for the war efforts now underway. We ARE at war you know -- against evil in general, and all terrorists everywhere from any time period, even future terrorists. The pre-crimes division is actively working with Homeland Security.

If we redefine torture to include anything and everything likely to shorten a man's life significantly, and which makes him scream for mercy, this will unduly -- no doubt, you can hear the memos coming -- restrict the U.S. military's ability to ensure cooperation in the investigations now underway. We only use such techniques for peaceful purposes anyway.

Besides, captives from the Middle East are notoriously wimpy. Every time you turn the thumbscrews, they whine very loudly. In truth, the entire debate turns on the meaning of the word "is;" what IS torture after all?

I'm sorry mister Speaker, my attorney has advised me to respond that "I do not recollect that ever occurring, to the best of my willfully-controlled knowledge."

Phrase of the week soon to become: "Plausible Deniability."

So does the U.S. torture people, really? I do not recall that. And if they have, it was only because the circumstances called for it, and these people had it coming anyway. They're terrorists, and you know it. Otherwise, they would not have been arrested in the first place. Do you think the U.S. military has time to run around torturing innocent people?

And even if these wannabe terrorists didn't do it, they would have if we didn't catch them first. You know how "they" are, terrorists I mean. The bottom line is this: the U.S. has never EVER under any circumstances tortured anyone who did not have it coming to them. We can't wait for the final proof, the smoking gun, before interrogating people while mushroom clouds overrun our cities.

The U.S., mister Speaker, does not torture PEOPLE (just terrorist animals pretending to be people), who hate our freedom and way of life. They seek a culture of death, and not a culture of life. And I have a question of my own for you. Are you, mister Speaker, or have you been at any time in the past, a member of the Communist party?

I am only asking because Homeland Security wants to know. And if we have -- even accidentally -- they and their people -- we want you to know -- will be awarded handsome Casinos, guaranteed to repay them a lifetime of income for any past wrongs. It's the American way.

A round of apple pie for everyone. And quit worrying. We're the good guys.