EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Waterboarding 'Worked'?: Media Push Pro-Torture Message
To hear some tell it, the intelligence clues that ultimately led to Osama bin Laden's hideout in Pakistan were generated by the use of torture. But the evidence available so far does not bear this out.
Torture advocates on the right are claiming vindication. On Fox News Channel's O'Reilly Factor (5/2/11), Rep. Peter King (R.-N.Y.) announced that
we obtained information several years ago, vital information about the courier for Obama [sic]. We obtained that information through waterboarding. And so for those who say that waterboarding doesn't work, to say that it should be stopped and never used again-- we got vital information which directly led to us bin Laden.
This led O'Reilly to proclaim: "You're not going to hear that on the other networks. I guarantee you."
Actually, talk about how water torture may have revealed the identity of bin Laden's trusted courier could be heard widely. On the CBS Evening News (5/2/11), reporter David Martin said, "Some of the leads to that courier came out of the CIA's secret prison where those Al-Qaeda captives were waterboarded."
And ABC World News reporter Jonathan Karl tapped Dick Cheney for expertise (5/2/11):
KARL: One key, Cheney suggests: the CIA's enhanced interrogation program that Obama stopped because he said it included torture. An early tip leading to bin Laden's courier came from some of those interrogations.
CHENEY: All I know is what I've seen in the newspaper at this point, but it wouldn't be surprising if, in fact, that program produced results that ultimately contributed to the success of this venture.
The Los Angeles Times (5/2/11) reported:
Crucial information about the trusted courier who owned the compound came years ago from CIA interrogations of 9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohamed, the official said. This is significant, because the Al-Qaeda mastermind was subject to waterboarding and other brutal interrogation methods.
Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank noted (5/3/11) that Obama killed bin Laden "with an apparent assist from the Bush administration's interrogation program." And on NBC's Today show (5/3/11), Jim Miklasziewski reported:
U.S. officials tell NBC News that 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, while in CIA custody, provided key information regarding a courier close to bin Laden. Intelligence sometimes obtained through aggressive interrogation techniques like waterboarding.
But the details that are known so far do not support the argument that torture produced any of the key intelligence. As New Yorker reporter Jane Mayer wrote (NewYorker.com, 5/2/11):
You would think that if the CIA's interrogation of high-value detainees was all it took, the U.S. government would have succeeded in locating bin Laden before 2006, which is when the CIA's custody of so-called "high-value detainees" ended.... This timeline doesn’t seem to provide a lot of support for the pro-torture narrative.
The blog Think Progress (5/3/11) noted that administration officials disputed the idea that critical information came from torture sessions:
This morning on MSNBC's Morning Joe [5/3/11], Obama's counter-terrorism adviser John Brennan confirmed that the information acquired over nine years did not come from waterboarding but was pieced together from multiple sources.
The New York Times (5/4/11), interviewing an array of intelligence sources, reported that "a closer look at prisoner interrogations suggests that the harsh techniques played a small role at most in identifying Bin Laden's trusted courier and exposing his hide-out."
Most importantly, the Times noted that "two prisoners who underwent some of the harshest treatment--including Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, who was waterboarded 183 times--repeatedly misled their interrogators about the courier’s identity. "
An Associated Press dispatch (5/2/11) reported that
Mohammed did not reveal the names while being subjected to the simulated drowning technique known as waterboarding, former officials said. He identified them many months later under standard interrogation, they said, leaving it once again up for debate as to whether the harsh technique was a valuable tool or an unnecessarily violent tactic.
This "up for debate" conclusion is strange, given that evidence would suggest that the pro-torture side of the "debate" has little to support their case. And such discussions serve to reaffirm a media narrative that tries to normalize torture by making it a debate that prioritizes outcomes--i.e, Does it work?--over legality and morality. (See Extra!, 1-2/02.)
Along those lines, CNN's Kiran Chetry (5/3/11) posed this question to former Bush national security adviser Condoleezza Rice:
Things like enhanced interrogation have fallen out of favor. This administration has said they were ending some of those controversial practices like waterboarding that were acceptable under the Bush administration. The other big thing is the so-called black sites, these CIA interrogation sites around the world. All of this met with huge criticism. As more trickles out about whether or not any of these strategies played a key role in eventually killing Osama bin Laden, do they have to rethink this administration?
Along with rethinking the Bush administration, there are many media voices suggesting we should be reevaluating the question of whether torture should be an accepted practice for the U.S. government. One can only hope the media treat the subject more carefully than they have in the past.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


79 Comments so far
Show Allnuts
i was going to say 'crap'............but 'nuts' will do.
I did think of asking 'who would Jesus torture' but it's long been obvious that no one in power gives a damn about what he said.
well, the name doesn't matter.............what you have to ask yourself is: which kind of human being/homo sapien would torture/abuse any other living creature????
Maybe it's a good sign. There are a lot of animal torturers in the cities around where I live, and the MSM erupts in anger whenever an animal torture is reported. Now, if we could just get people to realize that Muslims, Arabs, etc., are entitled to at least as much respect as dogs and cats. . . . Judging by the remarks of our leaders, we have a long way to go.
i get your point manning................(i hope you were joking about the torturing of animals in your nearby cities)...............
I am thinking that the pertinent question may be, "Who did the Romans torture on behalf of 'God', in order to save humanity? "
When the Mafia used to break kneecaps as incentive to pay their bookies, It was called a crime.
When the IRA used electric drills on the kneecaps of Provo informants as a message, it was decried as a crime.
BUT...
When the Catholic Church used dozens of extreme forms of torture to extract confessions of heresy and witchcraft prior to execution by strangulation or immolation, it was called religion.
And now, when the US uses assassination, torture and random missile strikes on civilians, it's called 'policy'.
Is it just me, or are humans going backward in their social evolution?
For those out there in empireland and amoralists all over the known universe - it just doesn't *work*.
"Who would expect the Spanish Inquisition!"
Let's just say for (perverse and immoral) argument's sake that torture was indeed effective as some in high office are suggesting. It makes no sense for these same people to applaud the death of Bin laden when they could have taken him alive and tortured him.....well in his case deprive him of dialysis....one more of so many inconsistancies. There was no dialysis set up in the compound by the way, so where was he going 3 times a week for the 5 hour long procedure? So many inconsistancies....I believe very very little anyone in government of MSM says any more.
Bin Laden's kidney disease is a product of the Bush's administration.
The USA has fallen in to the trap of approving TORTURE. Disgusting. Now they have to sell the concept of TORTURE being GOOD to the Democrats. The grimm REPERs and teabaggers are already on the side of TORTURERING humans.
God help the USA military whoever gets caught by the Al Kaida they will be given the same treatment as the USA has given those in Guantanamo.
I read in the paper exactly where Osama was two years ago. College students using ecological disaster species diversion mathematics and google maps figured out it was either of two compounds, and one was military so it had to be the one he was in. Osama had to use a kidney dialysis machine so the location needed electricity and passable roads.
There is every indication that he died in April, 2002 of his kidney disease. This whole thing is a sham, right down to "we dumped his body in the sea". No independent person was to see the body. Now for the photo shop .....
Really, remember the grand story about hero Pat Tillman, really killed by friendly fire? And the earlier fabrication about the female soldier who kept firing until .... (wave flag, shed tear, shout "USA, USA .....". How many lies does it take until Americans simply get it? THEY LIE.
It all sounds much like the Pat Tillman story......much too much.
You *can* fool all the people all the time.
When will FAIR stop calling it the "media" and utilize the proper descriptive--the Propaganda System?
Thank you for calling it what it is.
"One can only hope the media treat the subject more carefully than they have in the past."
No, the evidence is stark. Truth telling is not part of the fashion of fascism…even the current American Brand.
And torture? Walk out the door, and try to find anyone nearby that gives a crap about whether or not their government is engaged in torture, Outside of peace groups, or traditional humanitarian groups, the American general public is at best, indifferent on the topic.
True, our shadow government has engaged in torture, long before 9/11, but had to hide it, and deny it. But not now, In fact, your next door neighbor is likely now an advocate of torturing anyone just suspected of being a "terrorist", and now the bar has been lowered even further as we have most Americans likely approving of the torture of American whistleblower Bradley Manning.
The darkest days of this country are ahead, unfortunately. A future brimming with poverty at home, Empire abroad, constant propaganda but ever more vicious at identifying the "enemy" at home (those who will still fight for the objective truth of any matter), political prisoners who will undergo systematic torture, and a court system that will uphold it.
I recently replaced my car stereo, after just having my mp3 player for several months, and I was immediately reminded why I stopped listening to NPR years ago. It was the last blurp of the news at the top of the hour, where the subject of the above article was raised, whether or not torture, or "enhanced interrogation techniques worked, in helping find OBL". NPR's reporter said, there was no evidence "yet" that would indicate that, but then that little blip, was immediately displaced with NPR's anchor, quoting Dick Cheney, as saying that the Bush Administration's policies had been vindicated.
NPR might as well be FOX. They have incorporated that style that FOX started, of "some people say", and putting demonstrable lies on par with the truth that occasionally gurgles to the surface.
But we no longer have any news organizations in this quickly devolving country, that simply put their reputation on the record, for actually getting at the truth through investigating reporting. We no longer have media in the MSM, or even most of the "progressive" media, who have a consistent conviction to get at the truth of any matter. Sure, Democracy Now, CD, Truthout, etc, do run articles by authors and the rare investigative reporter, that tries to eek out the cesspool of lies and corruption that has become the United States government, but the that chirp chirp chirp from the sidelines, doesn't come close to the quack quack quack in the MSM that most Americans get their news from.
The main problem with that, in my opinion, is that most Americans aren't really all that interested in ferroting out truth.
That disinterest, that ignorance is indeed the current fashion of American fascism, and is held with the most pathetic esteem. This criticism is not directed at the average CD reader/poster.
And isn't the timing of all of this convenient – Let me put on my conspiracy hat for a moment (mine isn't tin foil, but a more grounded to earth hemp fabric) – that right when there was finally a spotlight, through Wikileaks, being shone on Guantanamo, this happens.
Almost 10 years later, and no credible evidence trail has been brought to the American public to prove the official conspiracy of 9/11 to be true. A lot of the documents from Wikileaks regarding Guantanamo, highlight that the interrogators, while using torture of course, thought most of KSM's tortured confessions where just rubbish, except of course when he blurted out "im the mastermind okay, stop it already". And the rest of the "most dangerous" detainees, apparently there isnt any there there either.
And of course, they dump his body at sea to respect Muslim traditions. Of course, that makes sense!
But whatever you do, don't EVER, and I mean EVER DARE QUESTION the events of 9/11, here, or anywhere else, or you'll be called some really bad names and stuff.
I think that people do care, how would you know they do not? Have you taken a survey? Do you stop people on the streets and ask them? I know I care, and I'd guess you do as well. That's two against.....
As to your critique of NPR; I find it pretty weak , sorry to have to note. I believe you started out with the premise that NPR is bad and posted really weak evidence to "prove" it. You heard a reporter stating that there was no evidence to support torture as effective interrogation and then heard someone quote Cheney. So? I listen to NPR for several hours each day, the benefit of being a trucker, and have heard guests, senior intelligence folks, state firmly that torture does not work. I heard them on my local NPR station in fact.
Back atcha re: 9/11 conspiracy theorists.
I, in turn, have heard no credible evidence supporting any of the claims of US govt agents, or Israeli operatives, or remote controlling aircraft or any other theory, not one crumb of fact. Those who harp on the manner in which the towers fell as evidence refuse to note the articles in Architectural Digest explaining, and in detail, how the construction of the towers were actually against NYC building codes and led directly to the "pancake effect". They were built on Port Authority land and thus received an exemption.
I have been in those towers several times in fact, dining at Windows, and always was struck by how open and airy the building felt. This openness was achieved by the very factors that led to the demise of the two buildings in that awful and spectacular way.
We have far too much on our plates without alienating those we need as allies by pushing such unbelievable stuff, even if it were true. That is a fact, and it may be sad but it does keep us from gaining allies.
Very good post. However, it was in May,1970.
Every life has turning points, or we encounter events that both alter our thinking or bring us to greater resolve. Kent State was such an event for me. Though I had already returned from Southeast Asia and was deeply emersed in the anti-war movement these killings made me understand that I had embarked on a life long duty to my nation and the world; working to turn my nation from its ways.
I suppose it might be said that we are as far from achieving that goal as we were on that day so long ago. But I think we have seen some successes. Just the fact that we now make it necesary for the government to work hard at its lies is a small success. That we have seen a takeover of the media and the education system means that they are responding to our work.
Small, even useless you might conjecture, successes and great distances to go yet. I agree, but I think that we shall triumph in the end, after all what choice do we really have?
When slabs of concrete fall upon each other they are not turned primarily to airborne dust. Where were all the pancaked floors? They would have made a large pile on the ground, and it was not there. At least, I never saw a photo showing a stack of concrete floors more than a hundred feet high- there were 100 stories- however, there was a huge amount of dust blown into the air- how does concrete turn to dust like that just from falling? Is it the work of the concrete dust fairy? I've never seen concrete behave that way, except at the World Trade Center. Those buildings had to be blown. In my opinion.
correction, 110 stories.
I refuse to enter into a conspiracy argument as those who do think facts unnecesary and logic some trick of phrasing. I will make this one point and then leave it to others, less concerned with facts and more with testosterone and such.
Either way the concrete fell, whether by pancaking or explosion seems irelevant to me. Further, I wonder if you have ever seen a building rigged for demolition. The charges necessary to bring down such large buildings number in the hundreds and are rather obvious. These two buildings were doing business daily, had thousands of workers going to and fro all day long. Yet you posit, with no lack of resolve, that the destruction was caused by charges set within them.
I saw the damn planes hit the damn buildings, as did many folks around the world in fact. All you do in swearing by fairy tales is convince others that you are a crackpot and thus defeat your own purpose. ( I do not mean to say you are such)
One final story if you dont mind. On that fateful day I was hard at work already, loading my truck with building materials for a major retailer, as I owned a small trucking company back then. My first stop was in Belmont,Ca. at a very nice home in the hills. Before I could even get my forklift off the trailer (piggyback rig) the couple whose house it was rushed out to me and demanded I see what was on television. I already knew of the events of course but had yet to see it. As I stood in their family room ,watching this horrendous act play out, the women , of Indian descent, turned to me and noted that she and her husband had lived with such terrorism for all their lives in India. Now, she noted, it has come to you.
So it sounds like you accept the official conspiracy theory proposed by the 9/11 Commission, even though it is full of holes and does not support the known facts. Of course the planes hit the two WTC buildings. The only ones who deny that are the straw man argument folks who want to make those who want a real investigation look like kooks.
Open your eyes and demand a real investigation so that the facts can come out.
Until the events of and leading up to 9/11 are investigated, no one except the perpetratators will know what really happened.
September 11, 2001
Never Forget.
Never Investigate.
Stay Afraid.
You are one who believes that what he thinks real everyone MUST think as well...I Pass, thanks anyway.
I think hue_sir_name's impression that most Americans are indifferent to torture is accurate.
Republicans cheered loudly for torture during the 2008 presidential debates. As for Democrats, the last poll I saw showed that 87% of them viewed Obama favorably, despite the fact that he declined to prosecute any of the Americans who were involved in our government's torture programs. In fact, not long after taking office, Obama visited the CIA and promised to personally protect the torturers there from prosecution. Of the people I've spoken to about this issue, only one gave me the impression that she was truly disturbed by the fact that our government tortures people.
"We have far too much on our plates without alienating those we need as allies by pushing such unbelievable stuff, even if it were true."
Even if it were true? Wow. Enough said.
R U Kidding?
NPR is Fox for people who like smooth, humorous propaganda.
Perhaps NPR just speaks at a level too high for your own comprehension?
The Truthers are like the Mighty Casey. The swing was beautiful, and it would have been a home run, but the ball was missed.
I think the Truther claims are very interesting and worth investigating, and I'd be the last to call any Truther a bad name. Recently one of my relatives explained that there was no evidence of an airliner crashing into the Pentagon. I researched and found photographs on the Net of parts of the plane. The response: somebody brought those parts in after the missile hit the Pentagon. I asked: Who organized this project? Who brought in the parts? Where did they get them? At that point the discussion ended.
Meanwhile, we have more important things to discuss.
One of the problems is that the disinformation artists love to put straw man therories into the Truther camp so that legitimate questions appear ridiculous. That along with skewed reporting all help to support the official line.
I imagine the confusion of your relative stems from two questions that have never been explained.
One, why weren't the photos of the plane hitting the pentagon ever released? (Only pictures of the fireball were released.)
And as an example of mis-reporting, I watched a few minutes of the Discovery Channel disinformation last night (before I turned it off in disgust). Anyway, they emotionally state the fact that a huge hole three stories high was torn in the Pentagon which leads the viewer to believe that the plane directly caused the damage. However, early pictures show that the initial damage was a sixteen foot diameter hole; the building later collasped after the fire, causing the extensive damage shown in the program. So by omission, they imply that the plane tore the hole directly. What was left unasked is the very legitimate question of why there was not any damage from where the massive engines would have had to strike. What happened? None of us will know until there is a real investigation, something that will probably never happen.
Truthers and Birthers have common ground, though neither would admit it. Fanatics both.
Torture does work. Maybe you haven't heard about the new research programs where they use enhanced torture to find things out? So far they have discovered several new cures for cancer, the location of the True Cross, what was in the Big Bang before it blew, the nearest planet to Earth with intelligent life on it, and how much wood a woodchuck can chuck. They are working on finding a cure for fascism and the insanity of the right wing, but so far no success -- it's beginning to look like there is none.
[Chuckle.]
Belly laugh! I especially liked the part about "how much wood a woodchuck can chuck."
David Ray Griffin--who has written extensively on 9/11--has argued that bin Laden died in 2001, and Griffin's not the only one who has argued that point. If this is true, if would explain Bush's diffidence regarding finding the man: Given that he knew that bin Laden was dead, such a search would be pointless.
Word is that the Obama administration is frustrated that the talk has turned so quickly to torture. But what did they expect? Obama ordered a targeted assassination, which is an illegal act. He threw red meat to the Right and opened the door for all the secret illegalities in our foreign policy to be brought into the open and justified. Unfortunately, by committing a war crime himself, Obama has no moral ground to point fingers at the fanatical right who want to exonerate torture. What's he going to say to them: Hey guys, extrajudicial executions are fine, but let's hold the torture? By taking the expedient route instead of the legal one, Obama has set a dangerous precedent and bad example. One wonders who will be next on Obama's hit list?
Hello everyone!
This is the point.
This whole charade about Bin Laden is manufactured in part to justify more militarizing, more desensitizing, more programming americans to accept and relish in brutality and imperialism. The word "ugly" doesn't even begin to cover it.
baruchzed, you're right. Bin Laden was a has-been; otherwise, the U.S. would have gotten him alive and interrogated him. He wasn't even directly involved in 9/11, which everyone seems to think was totally organized and carried out by him. This final incident is another step in the process of aggrandizing bin Laden to justify vast expenditures to fill the already overflowing coffers of the MIC.
In all the reportage on the MSM, have you ever heard or read anything about the federal and treaty law prohibiting waterboarding? How mention of this fact gets suppressed in all those media amazes me. But it's happening.
From the article:
"ABC World News reporter Jonathan Karl tapped Dick Cheney for expertise."
Too bad he didn't "double-tap" him.
it`s no wonder so much of the world hates the US...this is disgusting
You know, there are way too many tax cheats.
In fact, we could lower taxes if every person (and by that I of course mean every poor person) paid their fair share of taxes.
To meet these goals, the IRS should be empowered to inflict physical torture on all citizens (in addition to the mental torture they do now during audits).
We need to set up IRS torture chambers in every city, and as a requirement for filing, every citizen should be required to submit to water boarding in addition to their signature on the tax form. That would ensure that the forms were filled out honestly and completely.
However, rich people and corporations could still send in their accountant for the torture, because their time is just much too valuable, plus they don't pay taxes anyway.
USA number one! USA number one in torture!
This quick excerpt from "Torturing Democracy" by Henry A. Giroux, Paradigm Press says it all: "Since the turn of the twenty-first century, we have lived through a historical period in which the United States relinquished its tenuous claim to democracy. The frames through which democracy apprehends others as human beings worthy of respect, dignity, and human rights were sacrificed to a mode of politics and culture that simply became an extension of war, both at home and abroad. At home, the punishing state increasingly replaced the welfare state, however ill conceived, as more and more individuals and groups were now treated as disposable populations, undeserving of those safety nets and basic protections that provide the conditions for living with a sense of security and dignity. Under such conditions, basic social supports were replaced by an accelerated production of prisons, the expansion of the criminal justice system into everyday life, and the further erosion of crucial civil liberties. Shared responsibilities gave way to shared fears, and the only distinction that seemed to resonate in the culture was between friends and patriots, on the one hand, and dissenters and enemies, on the other. State violence not only became acceptable, it was normalized as the government spied on its citizens, suspended the right of habeas corpus, sanctioned police brutality against those who questioned state power, relied on the state secrets privilege to hide its crimes, and increasingly reduced public spheres designed to protect children to containment centers and warehouses that modeled themselves after prisons. Fear both altered the landscape of democratic rights and values and dehumanized a population that was ever more willing to look the other way as large segments of the populace were either dehumanized, incarcerated, or simply treated as disposable. The dire consequences can be seen every day as the media report about decent people losing their homes; more young people being incarcerated; and growing numbers of people living in their cars or in tent cities. Reports surface in the dominant media about unspeakable horrors being inflicted on children tortured in the "death chambers" of Iraq, Cuba, and Afghanistan. And the American people barely blink. The Bush administration further eroded a culture inspired by democratic values, replacing it with a culture of war and a culture of illegality that experimented with an extrajudicial detention system used to create torture chambers in Bagram, Kandahar, and Guantanamo Bay. After 2001, the language of war became all-embracing, not only eroding the distinction between war and peace but also putting into play a public pedagogy in which every aspect of the culture was shaped by militarized ideals. From video games and Hollywood films either supported or produced by the Department of Defense to the ongoing militarization of public and higher education, the notion of the common good was subordinated to a military metaphysics, warlike values, and the dictates of the national security state. War gained a new status under the Bush administration, moving from an option of last resort to a primary instrument of diplomacy in the war on terror. A dogmatic faith in war was supplemented by a persistent attempt to legitimate such a politics through another kind of war based on pedagogical struggle to create subjects, citizens, and institutions that would support such draconian policies. War was no longer the last resort of a state intent on defending its territory; it morphed into a new form of public pedagogy--a type of cultural war machine--designed to shape and lead the society. War became the foundation for a politics that employed military language, concepts, and policing relations to address problems far beyond the familiar terrains of battle. In some cases, war was so aestheticized by the dominant media that it resembled an advertisement for a tourist industry. The upshot is that it the meaning of war was rhetorically, visually, and materially expanded to name, legitimate, and wage battles against social problems involving drugs, poverty, and the nation's newfound enemy, the Mexican immigrant. As war became normalized as the central function of power and politics, it became a regular and normative element of American society, legitimated by a state of exception and emergency that became permanent rather than temporary. As the production of violence reached beyond traditionally defined enemies and threats, the state now took aim at terrorism, shifting its register of power by waging war on a concept, broadening its pursuits, tactics, and strategies against no specific state, army, soldiers, or location. The enemy was omnipresent, all the more difficult to root out and all the more convenient for expanding the tactics of surveillance, the culture of fear, and the resources of violence. War was now a permanent and commonplace feature of American domestic and foreign policy, a battle that had no definitive end and demanded the constant use of violence. War had become more than a military strategy: it was now a pedagogy and a form of cultural politics designed to legitimate certain modes of governance, create identities supportive of militaristic values, and provide the formative culture that supported the organization and production of violence as a central feature of domestic and foreign policy.It is difficult to imagine how any democracy can avoid being corrupted when war becomes the foundation of politics, if not culture itself. Any democracy that makes war and state violence the organizing principles of society cannot survive for long, at least as a democratic entity. The United States descended into a period in which society was increasingly organized through the production of both symbolic and material violence. A culture of cruelty emerged in the media, especially in the talk radio circuit, in which a sordid nationalism combined with a hypermilitarism and masculinity that scorned not merely reason but also all those who fit into the stereotype of other--which appeared to include everyone who was not white and Christian. Dialogue, reason, and thoughtfulness slowly disappeared from the public realm as every encounter was framed within circles of certainty, staged as a fight to the death. As the civic and moral center of the country disappeared under the Bush administration, the language of the marketplace provided the only referent for understanding the obligations of citizenship and global responsibility, undeterred by a growing war machine and culture that produced jobs and goods and furthered the war economy."
i would like to ask a question here. i'm confounded by all the hype, carnage, death and destruction. what in the end, do the perpetrators of these scenarios hope to gain? what is their ultimate goal? at the end of the day, anyone engaged in the annihilation of others will eventually succumb to their own extinction. what are the mental processes that drive these people?
"what are the mental processes that drive these people?
Insanity maybe?
Is it too much to ask for at least one damn paragraph?
Leave it to the sociopathic pundits of the lame-stream media to promote torture. It shows Dr. King was right, except in his time our collective spiritual death was only incipient: the nation now not only approaches spiritual death but is already dead, and the vulture pseudo-journalists of the corporate media feed off the decaying corpse of the body politic. At least 50% of the population, at last count, support torture as an official policy too. A more telling indicator of the moral bankruptcy and spiritual vacuity of the country could not be found.
Waterboarding is torture.....Torture is evil and besides, it's flat out wrong.
land of the free, home of the brave? Not anymore I'm afraid. The people of the world don't respect us, they fear us.
The ones you bomb might hate you, but not all of them. A good number of us don't hate at all, we pity you. Pity for what the PTB have destroyed.