Torturers suffer, too, in these displays of weakness

Thank you, Stuart Herrington, for your thoughtful and intelligent article in last Sunday's Forum section ("Two Problems With Torture: It's Wrong and It Doesn't Work," Oct. 21).

I am a military mom whose son is a lieutenant colonel in the Army.

I am also a school psychologist and grandmother who has been appalled and deeply saddened by this administration's statements and actions pertaining to torture.

My son is a West Point graduate whose idea of duty, honor and country does not include torture, for all of the reasons retired Army Col. Herrington so eloquently cites. I am against torture not only for what it does to the tortured, but also for what it does to the torturer. What happens to the soul of a person who must somehow persuade himself or herself that it is the right thing to do? I wonder what happens to the torturer, psychologically and spiritually in the long run.

We have to help our young people understand that life is not an hour-long drama -- that study, analysis and painstaking work help us understand our enemies, and thereby develop more effective strategies to defeat them and, if we're lucky, win them over. Somehow there are those who think that understanding the enemy means coddling them, and the right wing in our country has exploited fear to make us look weak when we insist on sticking to long-held principles regarding torture. Stubborn adherence to policies and procedures that are morally wrong and ineffective is not strength -- it is a defense against inherent weakness. Thank you, Col. Herrington, for having the courage to speak out.

GAIL HOLMSTROM
Mercer

---

Smart intelligence

It was refreshing to read "Two Problems With Torture" (Oct. 21 Forum). Retired Army Col. Stuart Herrington is a true professional, so unlike the amateurs who have cast a dark shadow over the intelligence community with attempts at intelligence gathering by torture.

Col. Herrington cites his lessons in ethics as the first reason to deny the use of torture, but even more important from a practical standpoint is that cruel methods do not work, and a more enlightened approach does produce results. Col. Herrington adds examples, such as get to know your adversary and show him respect.

As a student at the Army Intelligence Center in 1955, I recall the first lecture on interrogation. The instructor cited the example of the then-popular TV drama "Dragnet," in which Jack Webb insulted and intimidated the bad guys. The instructor followed up, "Gentlemen, that's not the way you do it. It doesn't work." In succeeding lectures he taught the use of methods like those outlined in Col. Herrington's article.

Then, fast forward to Iraq, Guantanamo, etc. Imagine my feelings of horror and shame when we heard of the crude and criminal behavior practiced by this generation of intelligence agents. We can only hope that ethics and professionalism will be restored and make intelligence gathering more effective in ensuring our defense.

PHILIP S. SLAUGH
West Mifflin

---

BODIES beautiful

Regarding Rabbi Danny Schiff's Forum article " 'BODIES': Don't Go," I say " 'BODIES': You owe it to yourself -- and those you love -- to go." I have always been romanced and intrigued with the human body, entranced with the nascent beauty, the intricacies of the design -- that is why I chose a health profession. Whether or not this body of ours is the result of divine creation or a product of evolution is a subject for theologians and scholars.

In dental school, I met my cadaver in the anatomy lab, lying on a stainless steel dissection table. Our anatomy professor, Dr. Stuart, came by, looked at the identification label attached to his big toe, told us the cause of death (black lung disease). He then said to our group of four freshman dental students, "Remember that the only difference between you and him is that you have the spark of life -- he does not." I continue to be fascinated by the human body -- its incredible design, its miraculous function, its amazing self-repair -- an engineering and design project that has no peer.

This wondrous exhibit at the Carnegie Science Center permits the nonhealth professional to peer inside a human body and to understand and visualize the location of all the organs, all the veins, arteries, nerves -- how these all fit together and how they function together. Perhaps, when we all learn and understand how fortunate we are to have such a complex, we will be less eager to send these beautifully designed and executed creations off to fight fruitless wars and be destroyed, rather than venerated.

CHARLES JAY MILLER, DDS
Assistant Professor
University of Pittsburgh School of Dental Medicine
Oakland

---

It matters to us all

I was quite astonished reading the letter from Matthew R. Knupp in last Sunday's paper telling noncity residents to "butt out" of Pittsburgh's mayoral race ("Butt Out, Noncity Folk," Oct. 21). I lived the first 30 years of my life in the city, and while the last 20 years have been spent residing in the suburbs, I remain a "Pittsburgher." I believe that this election -- and the future of the city of Pittsburgh -- is very much my business and should be the business of every resident in the Greater Pittsburgh area.

I was very optimistic when Mayor Luke Ravenstahl took office, hoping that "business as usual" was gone. Unfortunately, despite his young and fresh face, the ideas remain the same. I beg to differ with Mr. Knupp when he tells me that it is none of my business. The exact opposite is true. It is Mr. Knupp's isolationist view that this election matters only to the city. It is that type of view that will never resolve the issues we face.

Until the city and county learn to act -- and govern -- as one, we will continue on the same road, regardless of who is mayor.

MARCIA R. CALIENDO
McCandless

---

Police on the move

I was shocked to see that the Pittsburgh police union is backing a Republican for mayor ("City Police Endorse DeSantis for Mayor," Oct. 20). Fraternal Order of Police President James Malloy's stance on allowing Pittsburgh police officers to reside outside the city limits as a reason for this jumped out at me like a punch in the face.

Police officers are public servants (it's dictionary time, Mr. Malloy -- "public": the general body of the state or community; "servant": a person employed to perform a service). Mr. Malloy apparently believes police officers are entitled to self-interest first and community interests second.

What does it say for our city that our police force doesn't want to reside within its limits? Having our police live within city limits is an investment in our communities that we cannot afford to lose. If the cops want to live in the suburbs, I suggest that they go to work in the suburbs. But wait ... the majority of suburban police officers don't make nearly as much money as our city police officers do (don't get me wrong, this is not an indictment of our police officers; I believe the majority of cops earn every penny they make).

Some years back my father complained to Mr. Malloy (we were neighbors) about how rowdy the South Side was becoming. He said to my father, "If you don't like it -- move." Didn't our police cars say "at your service" on them at one time? The next time we get police cars, perhaps the slogan should be: "Pittsburgh Police -- If you don't like it, move." Why not? They want to.

ROB FRANK
South Side

---

We must get serious now about cutting energy use in a big way

PG Executive Editor David M. Shribman's column "The Admiral's Warning" (Oct. 21) should be required reading for everyone. I've been waiting for someone to bring up the matter of conservation of energy, and Mr. Shribman really brought it home by letting us know that Rear Adm. Hyman G. Rickover, father of our nuclear Navy, talked about this 50 years ago! Too bad his advice wasn't heeded then.

Conservation is the only way to save what we have of fossil fuels to meet our energy needs. In other words, let's reduce the rate of depletion of fossil fuels, which also will mean we are cutting back on pollution and global warming. Also, note that alternative energy sources are long-term solutions requiring months or, more likely, years to put into place, whereas conservation can be instituted right now. Every little bit done to conserve helps, but it has to be undertaken on a "grand scale" to be really successful.

The real problem with this "grand scale" conservation approach is getting people to understand and then implement it. It generally means doing with less, and that's a hard sell. Major undertakings would be having a lot fewer -- perhaps one-half -- of the night ballgames, having much less floodlighting of buildings of all kinds, reducing unnecessary and overdone indoor lighting, reducing the national speed limit and evaluating use of electricity in places like the "strip" in Las Vegas, Times Square in New York and all shopping malls.

This type of action would take a really big bite out of our energy consumption, yet is only the beginning of major cutbacks of energy use that must be taken, and better sooner than later, even though we are off to a late start.

L. ARTHUR LASSMAN
O'Hara

---

We welcome your letters. Please include your name, address and phone number, and send to Letters to the Editor, 34 Blvd. of the Allies, Pittsburgh 15222. E-mail letters to letters@post-gazette.com or fax to 412-263-2014. Letters should be 250 words or less, original and exclusive to the Post-Gazette. All letters are subject to editing for length, clarity and accuracy and will be verified before being published.