Assessing Damage, Urging Action or the legal dispositions that organise political, economical and social life of the Nation.39 The definition of terrorism was not limited to threats or acts of violence but also criminalised anyone who, in any manner whatsoever, disseminates, divulges or propagates communications, or images, emanating from, or attributed to unlawful associations, or persons or groups known to be devoted to subversive or terrorist activities.40 The presumption of innocence was removed from those accused of “subversive crimes”, and civilian “subversives” were given over to military jurisdiction for trial (or worse). Violent groups in Argentina were quickly marginalised, leaving the military to intensify its campaign against the “internal enemy”, namely innocent civilians suspected of having subversive ideas. In parallel to the repression pursued through formal legal routes, the national security doctrine also facilitated the secret practices of enforced disappearances, secret detentions and torture. The notion of fighting a “war” (albeit against one’s own citizens) justified repression. Initially, it seems that extreme measures were used against members of armed groups and political dissidents; but the practice of torture quickly became endemic, as a useful tool for intimidating and terrorising society as a whole. It is clear, particularly in retrospect, that the most serious human rights violations, such as torture and disappearances, became routine, and even to some extent, legitimised by the fact that suspects were increasingly seen and portrayed as an implacable and dehumanised enemy. In short, in the name of countering terrorism, the State itself became a terrorist. Many participants at the Hearing pointedly drew parallels between the measures taken by some States since the 11 September 2001 attacks, and those employed in the past by these Southern Cone military regimes. Contributors drew comparisons between now and then with reference to clandestine detention centres, the use of torture to extract information, the extension of military jurisdiction to try suspected terrorists, and Operation Condor and the current policy of “extraordinary renditions”. For some, the US administration’s “war on terror” essentially reprises the national security doctrine mentality. The experiences in Argentina and other countries of the Southern Cone are a forceful reminder of : • the dangers of an existential war against a “demonised” enemy in which the end justifies the means; • the dangers of an approach that gives the military unfettered powers in internal security matters; 39 Article 1 of Law No. 20.840, Penalidades para las actividades subversivas en todas sus manifestaciones (‘Penalties for subversive activities in all their forms’) – translation by the ICJ, promulgated on 30 September 1974. 40 Ibid; Article 2 of Law No. 20.840. 33