EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Cheney's 'Fodder'
Cheney's torture claims debunked; will the media say so?
The release of a 2004 CIA inspector general's report on the agency's "enhanced interrogation" techniques, along with two other previously classified memos, has thrown a harsh spotlight on former Vice President Dick Cheney's oft-repeated pro-torture arguments. But corporate media seem intent on deflecting much of that glare.
Earlier this year, Cheney spent weeks on the airwaves, explaining that these CIA memos would back up his argument that torture provided valuable intelligence that helped thwart attacks against the United States (FAIR Media Advisory, 5/29/09). But the heavily redacted documents don't appear to do that. Of the two that Cheney asserted would help his case, reporter Spencer Ackerman noted (Washington Independent, 8/24/09) they "actually suggest the opposite of Cheney's contention: that non-abusive techniques actually helped elicit some of the most important information the documents cite in defending the value of the CIA's interrogations."
Some reporters managed to reach the opposite conclusion, though how they did so was unclear. On the CBS Evening News (8/25/09), reporter Bob Orr said: "The once-secret documents do support the claims of former Vice President Dick Cheney that harsh interrogations at times did work. Interviews with prisoners helped the U.S. capture other terror suspects and thwart potential attacks, including Al-Qaeda plots to attack the U.S. consulate in Karachi and fly an airplane into California's tallest building." The problem is, whatever one makes of the CIA's argument that their interrogations yielded valuable intelligence, there's nothing in the documents newly available to the public--and to CBS--that actually argues this intelligence was produced by the torture techniques like waterboarding that Cheney so publicly defended.
As Ackerman told CounterSpin (8/28/09): Cheney and his supporters' argument "depends a lot on conflating the difference between saying the documents show that valuable [intelligence] came from detainees in the program, and then saying that it came from the enhanced interrogation techniques themselves.... That's a conflation that has served the former vice president's purposes."
Many other accounts treated the release of these documents as another chance to play "he said/she said." An August 26 Los Angeles Times headline read, "CIA Interrogation Memos Provide Fodder for Both Sides." What sort of "fodder" they gave to Cheney's side wasn't evident in the story itself, which pointed out that the CIA documents "are at best inconclusive--attesting that captured terrorism suspects provided crucial intelligence on Al-Qaeda and its plans, but offering little to support the argument that harsh or abusive methods played a key role."
ABC reporter Brian Ross (8/25/09) managed to convey the lack of evidence for Cheney in the documents, but inexplicably still left things up in the air: "Nowhere in the reports, however, does the CIA ever draw a direct connection between the valuable information and the specific use of the harsh tactics. So, Charlie, there's just enough for both sides to argue about, while CIA officers in the field are left to figure out just what is expected of them."
NBC's Andrea Mitchell (8/25/09) sounded a similar note, explaining that "administration officials say there is no way to know whether the same information could have been obtained...without waterboarding" and airing a quote from an Amnesty International spokesperson pointing out that Al-Qaeda detainee Khalid Sheik Mohammed told the Red Cross that he lied "to mislead his interrogators and make them stop"--but then concluding: "An argument experts say that may never be resolved."
As FAIR noted in May, media's willingness to give Cheney a platform in the debate over torture shifted the discussion away from the central issue that torture is illegal under both U.S. and international law, and focused attention instead on torture's efficacy. The media allowed Cheney to push the discussion in this direction, in large part because Cheney assured that these secret documents would show that he was right. Now that it's clear they do not, will the media outlets that gave Cheney a platform continue to let him off the hook?
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...
36 Comments so far
Show AllWelcome to the Fodderland.
Your not kidding vdb,
There no doubt in anybody's minds that Bush/Cheney took advantage of 9/11 to destroy our constitution and turn America in to a corporate controlled stazi police state.
The stazi brain washing and expansion of unconstitutional law enforcement with immunity was designed to give the military industrial complex and large corporations complete control of our country.
All the spying and gang stalking surveillance being done is not to find terrorists,that's a bonus, its being done to scare people into joining the nation wide spy network.
Ulitimate control, you have millions of spys that are your zombies, and they spy on all the activists and political foes that want to stop the take over.
You got to give Darth Cheney his due, he has studied how Hitler made a fortune and war/fear mongering machine , and almost destroyed America from within.
The battle is on, and true patriots are going to right this ship.
But , the Republicans have placed their buddy's in charge , and law enforcement has received billions, and doubled if not tripled in force.
They could care less about the constitution, it just gets in their way.
I think that everybody knows that Cheney lied and continues to lie.
There is a certain mentality that gets a kind of affirmation out of forcing others to accept a transparent lie. Those who embrace this mentality accept torture not out of misguided patriotism or misguided belief in its efficacy, but instead because they like the idea of torturing others. It's the petit frisson that comes from (abuse of) power.
I suppose that ascension to power through electoral fraud indicated to some of them that they could get away with other abuses of power as well. And here we are.
Dick Cheney is a blight on the soul of humanity. If he lives the remainder of his days as a free man in the United States, it will be one of the saddest, most depraved annotations in the history book of humankind. How has such a nation, with so much potential, with so many opportunities and resources at its disposal, managed to squander it all and become such a force of evil? How can Americans do this to the present and future inhabitants of this world? Is this world a better place because of the official U.S. actions of Dick Cheney? I hate having to have this feeling towards another human being. I don't believe in the death penalty. I would make an exception for Dick Cheney.
Wayout August 29th, 2009 9:12 am.......One thing we can look forward to....Cheney's cowardice will not allow him to go down alone.............he will take Bush and the rest of the cabal with him.....he's the weakest, most cowardly link in the entire plot. Given this possibility, do not expect him to exist much longer....poppa Bush and his cohorts will see to that......"leave my son alone".
Wayout your sentiments are good (except I would not execute anyone) but a clear look at the USA sees a nation that was very violent, racist,sexist and classist from the very beginning. The USA does have a good constitution but that has been destroyed by corporate personhood.
Did you know the Whiskey Rebellion was a reaction to Hamilton's purposeful taxation plan to bankrupt trans Alleghaney small farmers,for whom their homebrewed whiskey was essential for economic viability and create a pool of unemployed to be hired by large industrial east coast distilleries??
I also find the description,including that of hundreds of union and anarchist perpetrated bombings and police and contractor atrocities, of the early USA 19 hundreds to be very interesting. Such as those found in the book "The Day Wall Street Exploded".
And again the early 1900's race riots throughout the USA were primarily caused by corporate manipulation of the labor pool.
Thanks Glenn Ford,
But, I'll only agree to this one execution. And, what may I ask did you find "exciting" about "bombings.... and atrocities?"
OK, no executions, but how about a little enhanced interrogation for the fibber Cheney?
"very interesting" as in creates alot of mental fodder to rumminate on not exciting.
Just messing with you.
(1) Take away the broadcast licenses of the networks that refuse to provide the public with a truthful account of the memos.
(2) Investigate the reporters, producers and owners of the networks to determine who is culpable for lying about the content of the memos and try them in court as accessories to the war crime of torture.
Problem f**ing solved.
There's a problem...a federal court ruling has decided that news corporations are permitted to lie in their broadcasts...so no legal authority to do that.
You're alluding to the 2003 case where a couple Fox reporters were forced to present a false story about growth hormones in dairy cows.
A court of appeals overturned an earlier verdict which greenlighted Rupert Murdoch's position that news networks are permitted to lie.
However, this situation is much different.
In this case the networks are providing cover to a former government official accused of a war crime.
Perhaps they're legally allowed to lie in their presentation of the "news".
But I doubt any non-neocon, federalist society run court would determine they're permitted to protect criminals.
Thanks the for info, I didn't know there had been a successful appeal.
I did not do a good job of writing this sentence:
"...A court of appeals overturned an earlier verdict which greenlighted Rupert Murdoch's position that news networks are permitted to lie."...
Bottom line:
Rupert Murdoch won in the Florida Court of Appeals which overturned an earlier court's decision.
The Court of Appeals stated:
"...that the Federal Communications Commission position against news distortion is only a "policy," not a promulgated law, rule, or regulation."...
Blah, yeah, that's what I originally thought.
But as Sotomayor said, appeals courts do more or less make law. They decide what a law means, and all must follow those decisions unless the Supreme Court overturns it, if I'm not mistaken.
The issue isn't whether or not torture "worked" it's that it is inhumane and against the laws of the land. This is not about justifying the means because of the end, this is about whether or not we have a government which is above the law or a government which obeys the law. We all know what the reality is. The US government has been breaking its own laws for a long time. The question is do we have the courage to face that and fix it, or not. So far the answer is...not.
Baruchz
Your first sentence is excellently stated and which would lead one to conclude that because torture is certainly inhumane then the person or persons who authorize that torture must have committed crimes against humanity. This then begs the question that since the [alleged] party of the people, the Democrats, control both houses of Congress, when will these Democrats at least indict Cheney for his crimes if not binding Cheney and the rest of the Bush cabal over to an international court in The Hague where they can stand trial for their actions. But the chances of that happening are probably as likely as someone hitting the Mega Millions or Powerball lottery.
The dems are as complicit as the reps. This is not a partisan issue, or should not be. The dems were complicit at the time and are complicit now through their inaction. Only by being dragged kicking and screaming is the Obama DOJ starting an investigation. I am under no illusions that the dems are the good guys and the reps are the bad guys. That's just the story we're told. The reality is that in the US there is a huge class division. The real "bad guys" are those who are willing to profit at the expense of life, and the "good guys" are the ones who do not believe that the ends justifies the means, and who value life over money. That's too simplistic an analysis too, but I think you get my point.
Cheney's fodder, Richard D. Cheney (D for Devious) gave his son a rattlesnake for his third birthday. Late one night, the boy slipped it into his parents' bed, dispatching both of them. Cheney then appropriated all their money and the rest, as they say, is history.
The obvious question yet to be asked is why the "news" divisions of the networks would go to such lengths to protect a former vice-president?
What power does Cheney now have over them?
Do they fear him?
Are they allied with him?
They obviously wouldn't go to these lengths to protect Al Gore.
The main reason as to why corporate media continue to describe Dick Cheney's lies as still in doubt is obvious...they generate fodder for their punditry programs. There is also the added side effect of not having to discuss those persons, companies, & government agencies who aided Cheney in his depredations.
Corporate media let Cheney off the hook long ago. They're in on the whole torture-is-OK-if-it-works false justification just as he is. They have a love affair with all these fascist assholes, including Palin, who they can't get enough of. Anything Cheney says about torture they treat as if it's from a very wise man, so it must be true. Opponents of Cheney's twisted psychotic logic are still relegated to the sidelines. Nothing has changed, and Obama wants it that way.
Once again, FAIR states the obvious and asks really stupid questions at the end of their finger-pointing and whiny-child-like tantrums. This time we get this question:
"The media allowed Cheney to push the discussion in this direction, in large part because Cheney assured that these secret documents would show that he was right. Now that it's clear they do not, will the media outlets that gave Cheney a platform continue to let him off the hook?"
The entire premise of this question is wrong. The "media" didn't allow anything, they (NYT, Post, NBC et al) participated in the framing the debate.
The media are covering their ass for culpability in international aggression and torture. The owners of the Post, for example, don't give a shit about journalistic integrity, along with the rest of the Agenda Setting Press. For profit systems are simply not to be trusted to tell the truth. Period.
For 20 years, FAIR has been asking these stupid questions, analyzing the same media institutions, and continue to sound surprised by their actions! What's the definition of insanity? Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result?
Every time I hear CounterSpin on the radio, I have to turn it off because it's embarrassing to hear the hosts act surprised by the behavior of the for-profit-state-affiliated corporate press. Really, they lied AGAIN? Shocking!! It's a joke, and they sound like whiny children telling Daddy that someone just stole their toys. FAIR! FAIR! Please for god's sake, WAKE THE FUCK UP!
Honestly, what do you expect to happen here? I don't mind you calling out the corporate press on their obvious lies, but your public stance and 'ACTION' items consist of nothing more than filing a complaint with these very companies that don't give a shit what we think.
The only thing we should be doing is de-legitimizing them, their 'journalism' schools, and ignoring them. If you care about people's consciousness, stop whining about it, stop complaining to "the media" ( i guarantee you the CEOs of these companies don't take you seriously ), and start organizing direct actions to create our own media, or put pressure on these CEOs personally. Long live Indymedia!
I am going to puke if I have to read one more question of yours, 20 years later, that exposes your complete inability to learn something about the nature of propaganda in the U.S.
I'm sympathetic towards organizations like FAIR and "Media Matters", and when I started reading your comment my impression was that it is unduly harsh. But by the time I finished, I'd changed that opinion to "duly harsh".
When you're right, you're right. And you're right.
I have a similar standing criticism of persons like Glenn Greenwald, whom I admire and read regularly. For all of his virtues as a political and media analyst and critic, the "Accountability Now" group he helped to found exists to determine which reactionary Democratic incumbents need to be challenged, and assisting designated candidates by fundraising and media ads.
Many of his regular commenters have questioned the efficacy of this approach, for several good reasons. A recent critic pointed out that even with optimal results, at best only a few theoretically "better Democrats" could be elected and drive out "bad" Dems in a given election. (So far, AFAIK, this group hasn't knocked off any targeted incumbents.)
But even the newbies seen as "part of the solution" are certain to be co-opted or corrupted as soon as they become "made men/women" in the Amerikan duopoly, which has essentially become a national crime syndicate.
I don't question Glenn's sincerity, integrity, or amazing capacity for hard work. And he certainly knows that this is an uphill battle, especially since so far they've had to operate on a shoestring. But, as with FAIR, Accountability Now maintains a sort of institutional naïveté.
Over the years, I often recall a mere phrase from Bob Dylan's "Queen Jane Approximately": "Trying to prove that your conclusions should be more drastic". This applies to FAIR as well as Glenn.
Good comment.
· Yr Obd't Servant
As for the US Constitution, if anyone cares to review the history of the US they will find that the first President to openly defy the US Constitution was Andrew Jackson in 1836 and he is held as a high 'hero' and even has his 'likeness' on the 'currency', along with cities, towns, and counties names for him all accross the nation.
The Constitution is simply a document of convenience for most americans, and it has been from the beginning.
That the members of the Bush administration used torture, is simply a matter of public knowledge from their own admissions. That there have been no immediate calls by the 'population' for these people to answer for their criminal behavior is not surprising, and the fact that at the same time so many are up in arms about a 'proposed health care plan' is simply one more reflection of the lack of integrity that the american people have as a general rule.
The fact that so many other americans were willing to participate at any level is an indication of 'absolute corruption' and the criminal mind set of the average american.
The contradictions of the american people are so numerous to even mention here, but the ones that the world is watching should be of concern for the american people. It would be if they were not the most collectively arrogant people in history (with the exception of the 'children of israel'*) and presently on this 'ever shrinking' planet.
Now however, things are beginning to change for the world.
Even though they fear the USA (and if they do not they are fools) they loathe the USA as well and for good reason; the USA has made a high science of making enemies----and they are GOOD at it.
The americans have repeated the mistakes that made them poverty stricken in 1929, even some of the descendants of those who helped create the collapse in 1929 are in control of the money again. This time however, the USA has many more enemies than before, and they like the "giant that sleeps' are vulnerable to the world's actions.
It would be difficult to imagine the world, having faced many other dangers in the past, would not realize the time to be the 'right time' and eliminate the 'giant that stalks their children'---'the monster under the bridge' the 'war monger that cannot be trusted' and ;'slay the giant while it sleeps'.
Good Luck America, you brought it upon yourself.
* One of the greatest and most arrogant of ironies that the world cannot be missing is the 'illegal state of israel'.
And its illegal barbaric behavior towards the Palestinian People.
The USA while currently engaged in a 'war on terror', committs international crimes of kidnapping ,torture, murder and assassination, false imprisonment and denial of justice, and the slaughter hundreds of thousands of the innocent; they borrow billions of dollars from the Communist Chinese to do it with.
While at the same time they send 20 billion or more each year of that borrowed money to israel to commit the same crimes there under the guise of 'self defense'---after forcefully evicting the indigenous peoples of Palestine.
This will be used by history, as a 'negative example', or there is no hope for humanity in the centuries to come.
All truth, all.
"As FAIR noted in May, media's willingness to give Cheney a platform in the debate over torture shifted the discussion away from the central issue that torture is illegal under both U.S. and international law, and focused attention instead on torture's efficacy. The media allowed Cheney to push the discussion in this direction, in large part because Cheney assured that these secret documents would show that he was right."
Even if he was right, it's still illegal. Whether or not it worked is irrelevant.
Torture is now and has been illegal due to the Geneva conventions and the UN Convention Against Torture.
Cheney (and Bush, Obama, Pelosi etc...) should all be arrested (but won't be, of course).
FAIR sez: "An August 26 Los Angeles Times headline read, 'CIA Interrogation Memos Provide Fodder for Both Sides.'"
***
See, the law now has "sides".
You here are all up in arms about the side of the law that holds torture illegal. But Pimpmaster Dick and his infohos are fortified with the magical new side of the law that maintains torture is peachy.
Dick and his mini-me Addington are currently developing 'Side v.3' in their undisclosed bunker. That's the side which will make torture mandatory.
Ya know...
I don't mean to get flip about this torture thing or anything, but it has been really hard for me to spend any serious time dwelling on it, even though I know it is a really serious issue, because it is so serious and I know a lot about being tortured and how one might react to it.
When I was in junior high school my father used to punch me in the nose until I got bloody, during interrogations in the basement while my mother was off working. He would accuse me of lying but it never mattered whether I lied or told the truth: either way he would punch me in the face. He also said, "if you tell your mother about this, I will kill you."
During the summer before high school, I encountered my slightly older cousin David, and for some reason I do not know we exchanged stories of being physically abused by our fathers. His father didn't punch him in the face; he used a belt, or strap.
Virtually ALL LAW declares such practices a violation of our Humanity. I wonder.
I grew up tortured. By internationl standards as well as those signed off on by the United States. My cousin grew up tortured, by the same standards.
I am from the American Midwest, and it would not surprise me in the least if millions of men in my generation were similarly "tortured" and thus have so many unrequited issues concerning "torture" by government. For example, I can "justify" my father's acts on the grounds that he taught me to "resist" the depradations of our current guvment. Thus have I justified to my own mind my father's violation of my human dignity, and by doing so I am enabling it into the future. Better to acknowledge the pain and declare that my father was wrong.
The world is bigger than that. My grandson experiences no oppression. Except as provided by our guvment. Like a $13 Trillion deficit.
This Torture Thing goes a lot deeper into the American psyche than most of us are willing to acknowledge.
Dick Cheney is still running the government. By stint.
-30-
Thanks for this profound comment, and condolences on your own ordeal.
This pales by comparison, but it brings to mind an exchange I once had with my older brother. We had recently attended a family function. My father and his brothers were reminiscing about their parochial school experiences; they were despised Italians in a working-class Irish parish.
What bothered me at the time-- this was many years ago-- was how respectful and affectionate they were when recalling the corporal punishment inflicted by the nuns. In those days, whacks with a ruler were administered freely enough to split and bloody knuckles.
Of course, it wasn't a systematic or even regular thing. But what bugged me most of all is when their stories involved being WRONGLY beaten because Sister picked the wrong suspect, or administered collective punishment.
My brother explained, with slight annoyance, that Daddy and his siblings grew up very poor, in a rough neighborhood. They really believed that the nuns did what they did to keep them on the straight and narrow, and naturally remained grateful and appreciative in their old age.
This explanation did give me new insight, and made sense. We never discussed it further, but over the years I've wondered about these irreconcilable perspectives and had some insights of my own as to my brother's distinctly sententious response.
My brother, who is politically a moderate progressive and remains a devout Catholic, is more sympathetic to the traditional religious belief that suffering is a tonic for the soul. He thinks it's dumb and childish to view the nuns as sadists or abusers, or even "oppressors".
I may be misremembering, but I have a very faint recollection of mentioning the "Stockholm Syndrome", and getting a contemptuous eye-roll in return.
In the spiritual Long Game, it's a win-win outcome. Or at least that's the impression he gave at the time.
Again, this isn't in the same class as being beaten bloody by a parent on a regular basis. But it does touch upon the issue of how our own experiences condition our perceptions. And one still hears adults crediting violent corporal punishment as "tough love", and bragging, in effect, that abuse made them a better person.
I'm not buying it; to me, this is obviously a pathological cycle of brutalization.
· Yr Obd't Servant
"Old man river"
You sound like you may be from my own generation.
If so, you should seek some mental health therapy, and should stay in the 'program' until you either respond to therapy---or 'die of old age'.
You exemplify the typical american with a low intelligence quotient, poor reading skills, and under developed cognitive skills. But then again, taking this into consideration, your own words reveal that you ARE the 'typical american': dangerous to yourself, others, and the planet at large, and should be 'allowed'* to become extinct. Unfortunately, it seem that you have been 'allowed' to reproduce, and the possibility that you have 'passed on' your 'archetypal american traits' to the next generation is highly likley. This is actually most unfortunate for 'them' since they most likely will not be able to survive the 'coming events' that people "JUST LIKE YOU have created: all at your own hand.
* It has been my contention for over fifty years that if the american people were simply 'contained', they would 'inbreed' to the point that they would soon be 'walking on their knuckles' and far too ugly, filthy, and smelly for any other human beings to 'copulate with': and would by natural law, become extinct.
You might consider submitting your photo and biography for the 'poster child' for the 'contain the americans' program.
Good Luck America you really need it.
NativeSon,
Sir, with all due respect. I have thought a few minutes before responding here. Though I don't reside in the U.S., I am a U.S. citizen. Therefore, I fit squarely in your bullseye, as a recipient of your ire, in most every one of your posts. Rarely, do I find anything but truth in your posts. I never take offense. In fact, I would rank you in the top ten people who I agree with most on CD. Now, I don't know Old Man River, or his philosophy. However, correct me if I'm wrong here. You are criticizing him for his being desensitized to torture because he was beaten as a child. If you are denigrating him on another matter, or another post, forgive me. If you are, in fact, vilifying him for something that was beyond his control, than I think that is wrong. Wrong? No, Sick.
NativeSon, from a logic perspective alone, it is foolish to make such sweeping generalizations that would condemn all the individuals in any group. I can probably find a good many U.S. citizens who live more sustainably than you, or your ancestors, on this earth. As well, I can probably find a similar percentage of Native Americans who are as corruptible, as prone to all the vices as the white man and any other group of people on earth. I have come to believe that we are all the way we are for a reason. There are many things we don't choose in life, like our parents, like where and when we were born, what color we are. What I'm saying is that while I agree with almost all of your premises, it is a mistake to make such sweeping generalizations about the goodness of people. You didn't just choose a good heart and sound mind NativeSon, a million others helped you along. I won't say anymore on the matter, but you and I are probably more alike than you'd care to admit, yet, you keep throwing me in with all the others. You're the only one you can hurt using that strategy. I can never walk closely to someone who is always swinging their arms. And the seething hatred of anything white cannot do your own soul good for long.
One more thing. If you really do feel that Ole Man River deserves to stay in therapy until he dies, than I believe that says a lot more about you, than him. I feel sorry for anybody who is hit against their will. Especially a child. Aren't you?
NativeSon, I've admired your posts from afar for quite some time. I hold you to a higher standard than that last post.
Sioux Rose
NATIVE SON: If Ole Man River had learned aggression from his father and made use of it, your post would be more understandable. Ole Man River posts in this forum and generally has insights worth relating. I think his point is that violence is pervasive in our society. My father on occasion was rather fierce, to say the least. I remember hiding under the table when he'd come home from work when I was about 4 years old. I was afraid of his temper. As a wild teenager and the first born daughter, one who at times defied him, my path was hardly smooth. Quite a bit of violence occurs in families, and as the noted mystic Edgar Cayce related, "Family life is the hot bed of karma." I've interpreted that to indicate that we are stuck with these people. A five-year old cannot get away and is largely dependent on the parents for sustenance. Suppose the ones currently raising him or her are the same ones s/he took down in a gunfight two centuries ago? The law of karma works like cosmic math to balance all moral equations. Usually the persons we have the most difficulty with in the present are the ones we owe the greatest karmic debt towards. Let us be gentle with one another in this forum. We are a battered people, that has been taught the dark art of battery too often. The detox we currently face is one of universal necessity, and I think it requires our compassion for one another, foremost. I do reserve the right to not extend compassion, however, to ones like Cheney who go forth in their murderous frenzies, convinced in their deranged arrogance that they possess a "007-style" license TO kill. Perhaps I "got it" wrong, but it seems mercy is earned when the offending party owns his or her trespasses. Those who shun that basis for cathartic healing are not worthy of being granted forgiveness or mercy.
Unless I misread River's post, you did.
He acknowledges some desensitization from the abuse he grew up with. He does not approve of torture.
Even if he did, nothing in your tirade sounds like an argument against torture or even for it.
What in his confession so bothered you?
I'm trying to imagine news networks giving equal time to Jeffrey Daumer or Squeaky Fromme.
OleManRiver is one word, NativeSon. No "D."
I have waited several days to see how people would react to my allegations of what might be called "domestic torture" and I am actually heartened by the general response.
NativeSon writes, in part, above, of me:
"You exemplify the typical american with a low intelligence quotient, poor reading skills, and under developed cognitive skills."
Actually, I am a proofreader, a typesetter, a graphic designer, a corporate computer systems manager, and a former reporter whose work was submitted for a Pulitzer, white boy!
Your reaction to my posting to my mind marks you as a troll---and I do not use that term lightly. In fact I generally eschew it.
***
I believe that what I was trying to say late last month is that if we were to drill beneath the hard truth of Torture we, many more of us than are acknowledged, would have to admit that we are products of Torture and have been denying it, while I am slowly coming around to recognizing the beast for what it is. Millions of American fathers were tortured and thus tortured their children. I am among those children. But my daughter, with an MA in math and a BS in chemistry, never experienced the torture of which I speak.
I broke the Western World Torture Cycle, Native Son. You are too bitter. It took 4 wives for one child! You are exposed.
We need Serendipity, not arguments against it.
***
Meanwhile, SiouxRose, please accept my deepest apologies. I just wanna make love instead of you know what. I hate myself for being so NativeSon STUPID. At least I am getting the Syntax right, or left, depending.
One more thing: my father the Torture Guy never tried to drown me. Punching me in the nose until I was spraying blood on the basement floor was more his style. His announced enemies were Stalin and Hitler, but he ate their amphetamines and drank their booze and smoked their nicotine. He was of the Generation of their sons if they had any which I do not think they had and so I am left to tell the tale. When I had spontaneous nosebleeds in Junior High and early high school, and had to lean my head back to keep from bleeding red on the desk, not a single adult in two school systems ever asked what was going on. Was that because they knew, and silently accepted? Individual Torture is all around us, every day.
Has anyone investigated Dick Cheney's beatings by HIS father? Or mother, for that matter... What we need are people who know how to break out of cycles of oppression. We also need to ask ourselves how such a really sick person ever gained so much control over our national government. Put Joe Biden in charge of the investigation! Har Har.
What is needed is a transcendence from Escapism and a Confrontation with our daily selves.
As for my right to be here, in Indiana, NativeSon, my paternal Family has been here in the USA since 1702, doubtless longer than yours. Your natural lie is exposed.
I am getting to be an old man who spent a lifetime seeking Truth, and the aspirin just isn't cutting it anymore. I sure could use some opium in my waning days. Far better than BigPharma. See you in Afghanistan...
Methinks Chris Hedges would agree, or else he would object.
Love and kisses...
-30-