The results of this poll surely cannot make the “human rights” lobby pleased:

Most Americans and a majority of people in Britain, France and South Korea say torturing terrorism suspects is justified at least in rare instances, according to AP-Ipsos polling.

The polling, in the United States and eight of its closest allies, found that in Canada, Mexico and Germany people are divided on whether torture is ever justified. Most people opposed torture under any circumstances in Spain and Italy.

In America, 61 percent of those surveyed agreed torture is justified at least on rare occasions. Almost nine in 10 in South Korea and just over half in France and Britain felt that way.

No time to comment to any great length on this poll or the topic in general (final exam time), but former U.S. Department of Justice Attorney John Yoo’s quote in the article more or less is my position: “The debate is whether you can use interrogation methods that are short of torture…Some who have been critical of the Bush administration have confused torture with cruel, inhumane treatment.”

Most of those shouting torture tend to include things such as draping detainees in Israeli flags, sleep deprivation, or the use of dogs; tactics that until the topic recently became politicized, never, ever would have been classified as “torture.” Most disturbing is the fact that lumping in clearly non-tortious tactics under the general term “torture” diminishes the plight of those political prisoners suffering in outposts of tyranny such as Zimbabwe, Iran, Syria, North Korea, Cuba, etc. The misuse of the word “torture” has essentially watered down the term to the point at which it has no true meaning anymore.

UPDATE: Opinion Journal has an excellent piece on Europe’s mock outrage over “secret” terror prisions, which contains this notable passage:

[T]he claim that aggressive interrogations of these hard cases are unnecessary and unproductive is simply naive. On Monday, ABC News reported that “Of the 12 high-value targets housed by the CIA, only one did not require waterboarding before he talked.” The exception was Ramzi bin al-Shibh, who “broke down in tears after he walked past the cell of” KSM. “Visibly shaken, he started to cry and became as cooperative as if he had been tied down to a water board,” ABC’s sources said.

Posted by Jeff at December 6, 2005 08:26 PM | eMail this entry