Torture Works

Torture works, but not to extract intelligence.

For the Bush White House, torture has been just one more facet in a fear campaign designed to create anxious, compliant Americans who will acquiesce to anything.

First comes the false or exaggerated threat.
“We are surrounded by numerous secret (terrorists, communists, anarchists, immigrants, witches, counter-revolutionaries, atheists, elitists, foreigners, royalists, insurgents, race traitors, turncoats, spies, feminists, homosexuals, scary black men, scary brown men, secular humanists, possessed children, dual citizens, non-Christians, reactionaries, extra-terrestrials in human guise, enemy sympathizers, Marranos, apostates, etc.) who hate us and are hell bent on destroying us.”

Next, pick up rootless, powerless people and detain them secretly without a trial or due process. Threaten and vilify anyone who objects. Torture them until they “confess”.

Finally, use the coerced confessions to prove that we are all in much more danger from many more hidden evil doers than any of us could have imagined. Use that fear to justify even harsher treatment of the enemy and more authoritarian control of everybody else until the line between them blurs.

5 Comments

Dean Pajevic on November 10, 2005 at 2:30 pm

Wow.

I’m not sure I’ve read anything more clear and direct. Great writing.

susanw on November 10, 2005 at 3:53 pm

Thank you.
Authoritarian governments have been doing this for a long, long time. The witch burnings of the Middle Ages spring to mind. An added benefit derived from convincing people that they are surrounded by dangerous, hidden enemies is the spike in monetary contributions to the “protectors”.
I would not be surprised to learn that agent provocateurs had been planted in groups opposed to this administration; it’s a tactic often used in conjunction with mass arrest and forced confessions. Another great way to increase the budget for security when the scapegoated group isn’t behaving violently enough to warrant it.
I owe a debt to Jim McDermott for his wise observation that people will do anything if you frighten them enough.

ask on November 10, 2005 at 3:05 pm

And all that remains is to ensure a legal cover for the torture and mistreatment to continue.
From Der Spiegel (English version):

How did we get to this point? Because the United States is bound by the Geneva Convention governing prisoners of war, and by the 1987 Convention Against Torture with its prohibitions against torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, McCain’s legislation should not even be necessary.
But after 9/11, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales (at that time White House counsel to the president) and others gave their legal opinion that prohibitions on “cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment” didn’t apply to noncitizens being held by the United States outside the United States. Then, because torture, even outside the United States, remains a crime, they redefined “torture” so narrowly that almost all violent and coercive methods of interrogation were excluded. Then, because of the U.S. criminal statute making violations of the Geneva Conventions a crime, they insisted that the conventions did not apply to anyone they termed a suspected al-Qaida member.

These opinions were an attempt to provide legal cover so that U.S. personnel and contractors could engage in coercive interrogations without fear of criminal prosecution. They were an attempt to show that the United States did not really engage in torture and was not really violating conventions governing cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.
(snip)
But this administration is now openly and baldly saying that it claims the right to torture, at its discretion.
(my emphasis)

(The above posted in a “Quick Post” over at Political Cortex earlier today.)

susanw on November 10, 2005 at 4:05 pm

Well, we can’t have people saying they oppose U.S. policies because we invaded their country, bombed their home, and burned Grandma up with white phosphorus. That might make Americans uncomfortable. The right kind of persuasion will have them yelling, “Yes, YES, I’m a terrorist !”

deano on November 10, 2005 at 11:25 pm

Immigrants are going to be the next in fashion right-wing talking point. “Immigrant INVASION” is what we are going to be hearing.. my prediction.

Dean Pajevic on November 10, 2005 at 2:30 pm

Wow.

I’m not sure I’ve read anything more clear and direct. Great writing.
- susanw on November 10, 2005 at 3:53 pm
  
  Thank you.
  Authoritarian governments have been doing this for a long, long time. The witch burnings of the Middle Ages spring to mind. An added benefit derived from convincing people that they are surrounded by dangerous, hidden enemies is the spike in monetary contributions to the “protectors”.
  I would not be surprised to learn that agent provocateurs had been planted in groups opposed to this administration; it’s a tactic often used in conjunction with mass arrest and forced confessions. Another great way to increase the budget for security when the scapegoated group isn’t behaving violently enough to warrant it.
  I owe a debt to Jim McDermott for his wise observation that people will do anything if you frighten them enough.
ask on November 10, 2005 at 3:05 pm

And all that remains is to ensure a legal cover for the torture and mistreatment to continue.
From Der Spiegel (English version):

How did we get to this point? Because the United States is bound by the Geneva Convention governing prisoners of war, and by the 1987 Convention Against Torture with its prohibitions against torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, McCain’s legislation should not even be necessary.
But after 9/11, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales (at that time White House counsel to the president) and others gave their legal opinion that prohibitions on “cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment” didn’t apply to noncitizens being held by the United States outside the United States. Then, because torture, even outside the United States, remains a crime, they redefined “torture” so narrowly that almost all violent and coercive methods of interrogation were excluded. Then, because of the U.S. criminal statute making violations of the Geneva Conventions a crime, they insisted that the conventions did not apply to anyone they termed a suspected al-Qaida member.

These opinions were an attempt to provide legal cover so that U.S. personnel and contractors could engage in coercive interrogations without fear of criminal prosecution. They were an attempt to show that the United States did not really engage in torture and was not really violating conventions governing cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.
(snip)
But this administration is now openly and baldly saying that it claims the right to torture, at its discretion.
(my emphasis)

(The above posted in a “Quick Post” over at Political Cortex earlier today.)
- susanw on November 10, 2005 at 4:05 pm
  
  Well, we can’t have people saying they oppose U.S. policies because we invaded their country, bombed their home, and burned Grandma up with white phosphorus. That might make Americans uncomfortable. The right kind of persuasion will have them yelling, “Yes, YES, I’m a terrorist !”
deano on November 10, 2005 at 11:25 pm

Immigrants are going to be the next in fashion right-wing talking point. “Immigrant INVASION” is what we are going to be hearing.. my prediction.

About The Author

susanw

5 Comments

Recent Posts

Recent Comments