Tantalizing clues in the torture hunt
Interesting things are percolating related to torture. On opposite sides of the Atlantic judges made decisions in recent days, which will open up adjoining cans of worms. There are many potential consequences which these legal decisions may lead to. But first I'd like to share some thoughts on the bureaucratic banality of evil which seems to underlie torture. After that I'll share an idea for how seemingly mundane bureaucratic decisions may become the key to Pandora's Box of war crimes.
Torture doesn't just happen. In authoritarian regimes there is a huge amount of paperwork surrounding the preparation, the administration, the monitoring, and the recording in minute detail of every aspect of this process. Even the Inquisition kept minute records. Records of interrogations. Records of torture. You can still read these at the Vatican. For some reason people who torture are record-keepers. And they not only want total control over their victims, they also want total control over the whole process. They write the equivalent of cookbooks for torture routines, rendition routines, interrogation routines. You name it! They break everything down into a series of boring routines. Everything measured out - like sugar, flour, oil, eggs, spices, and so on. Ingredients of Torture. They think of everything as just one in a series of steps. One ingredient after the next. So that torture is viewed by its designers, its lawyers, its technicians, its recorders as nothing more than following the recipe book. Except that these are recipes for poison. Poison which harms the recipients just as much as it harms its purveyors.
In Spain a judge has agreed to hear evidence against 6 US lawyers in connection with torture. Spain, as you may recall, had a civil war from 1936 to 1939. They had decades of fascism, including years when dissidents were detained, tortured and imprisoned. And they have a legal system which recognizes that for certain laws there is a universal jurisdiction. And, operating under the system of Roman law, where judges make decisions about whether to investigate and prosecute, a Spanish judge has agreed to hear a case against the Torture Lawyers: Gonzales, Addington, Feith, Haynes, Yoo, and Bybee. On this basis:
My point here is not simply to draw this to your attention. For I assume you've already heard about it. What interestes me is where this is leading. And how this might relate to another judicial decision which happened almost concurrently but here in the US. I refer to an ACLU request (under the Freedom of Information Act) for "documents related to the destruction of videotapes of detainee interrogations." These documents, the judge has ruled, must be released. There are thousands of them!
Let's just take a moment to catch our breath and consider the import of these two decisions and how they might interplay. Remember, torture happens through a bureaucratic flurry of paperwork. And in essence, the Spanish case will use their very paperwork to indict the architects of torture. While the US judge is allowing the ACLU - and thus us - to have a look at the paperwork underlying the decision to erase the evidence of torture. See how neat that is?
Now, in addition to the two legal pincers described above, here is an interesting idea by mary over at emptywheel. It's not a formal proposal but was suggested on the fly (comment #136) in brief:
Once again, this idea points at the minutia of torture. The little details. How everything was laid out, carried out, monitored, recorded. With the idea that by looking at the paper trails, we will be examining the recipes in the poisonous cookbook. And even worse, we are looking at a subterfuge designed to hide the fact that torture was not yielding anything but wild goose chases and useless information.
Now, putting all this together, here are some questions or inferences which may be operative:
I don't have the answers to the above questions. But these are questions to keep in mind as further details of torture come out. As they inevitably will.
Torture doesn't just happen. In authoritarian regimes there is a huge amount of paperwork surrounding the preparation, the administration, the monitoring, and the recording in minute detail of every aspect of this process. Even the Inquisition kept minute records. Records of interrogations. Records of torture. You can still read these at the Vatican. For some reason people who torture are record-keepers. And they not only want total control over their victims, they also want total control over the whole process. They write the equivalent of cookbooks for torture routines, rendition routines, interrogation routines. You name it! They break everything down into a series of boring routines. Everything measured out - like sugar, flour, oil, eggs, spices, and so on. Ingredients of Torture. They think of everything as just one in a series of steps. One ingredient after the next. So that torture is viewed by its designers, its lawyers, its technicians, its recorders as nothing more than following the recipe book. Except that these are recipes for poison. Poison which harms the recipients just as much as it harms its purveyors.
In Spain a judge has agreed to hear evidence against 6 US lawyers in connection with torture. Spain, as you may recall, had a civil war from 1936 to 1939. They had decades of fascism, including years when dissidents were detained, tortured and imprisoned. And they have a legal system which recognizes that for certain laws there is a universal jurisdiction. And, operating under the system of Roman law, where judges make decisions about whether to investigate and prosecute, a Spanish judge has agreed to hear a case against the Torture Lawyers: Gonzales, Addington, Feith, Haynes, Yoo, and Bybee. On this basis:
Court documents say that, without their legal advice in a series of internal administration memos, "it would have been impossible to structure a legal framework that supported what happened [in Guantánamo]".
My point here is not simply to draw this to your attention. For I assume you've already heard about it. What interestes me is where this is leading. And how this might relate to another judicial decision which happened almost concurrently but here in the US. I refer to an ACLU request (under the Freedom of Information Act) for "documents related to the destruction of videotapes of detainee interrogations." These documents, the judge has ruled, must be released. There are thousands of them!
Let's just take a moment to catch our breath and consider the import of these two decisions and how they might interplay. Remember, torture happens through a bureaucratic flurry of paperwork. And in essence, the Spanish case will use their very paperwork to indict the architects of torture. While the US judge is allowing the ACLU - and thus us - to have a look at the paperwork underlying the decision to erase the evidence of torture. See how neat that is?
Now, in addition to the two legal pincers described above, here is an interesting idea by mary over at emptywheel. It's not a formal proposal but was suggested on the fly (comment #136) in brief:
Here's what strikes me as doable.
A commission investigating the actual circumstances surrounding, issuance and use of the OLC opinions...
If the focus is the opinions and their handling (and related professional responsibilities of all Exec lawyers, including CIA and FBI counsel, as torture videos are being destroyed), a lot of peripheral testimony can come in on facts, but in a way that will preserve prosecution options.
Once again, this idea points at the minutia of torture. The little details. How everything was laid out, carried out, monitored, recorded. With the idea that by looking at the paper trails, we will be examining the recipes in the poisonous cookbook. And even worse, we are looking at a subterfuge designed to hide the fact that torture was not yielding anything but wild goose chases and useless information.
Now, putting all this together, here are some questions or inferences which may be operative:
- How will the Spanish investigation look to the rest of the world?
- Will the Obama administration be forced to grapple with this every time the president deals with leaders of other countries?
- Will the public's need to know increase pressure for an Independent Prosecutor?
- To what degree will indictments of the 6 lawyers lead to disbarment and/or difficulty finding employment?
- Will Yoo (anyone else?) face loss of tenure?
- Will the lawyers and others face ostracism and public outrage?
- Will the documents released to the ACLU assist the Spanish case?
- Does all of this inexorably lead to the Principals?
I don't have the answers to the above questions. But these are questions to keep in mind as further details of torture come out. As they inevitably will.
Advertisement
Nicely pointed out, Thera.
A couple things to simply state here:
1) None of those "memos" would have been drafted had there not been direction for exactly that from the very top.
2) My own take on it is that these people, the torturers, the "inqusitors", know very well that they are not gaining useful information from what they do. Rather, they enjoy it. It excites them, it gratifies them, it is indeed food and drink to them to be meting out oh-so-carefully measured doses of misery to other human beings. And the very worst are the ones I mention in #1 above, those who give the "executive" direction, those who relish the thought of the pain and suffering of others and yet do not wish to dirty their own hands with such activities.
It is, in the most classical of senses, a "tragic flaw" of humanity. While not the only one by any means, it is a significant one, wouldn't you agree?
March 30, 2009 6:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hate to say it, Grouch, but, I fear you are right.
March 30, 2009 7:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with #1 completely. And the way to drill into the "top" is through the paper trail, I believe.
Regarding #2, this is difficult to assess. The CIA knew full well that torture would not work. They are skilled at the kind of interrogations where you form an alliance with the person and they have found this to be quite effective. Indeed, the first person (we know of) tortured gave useful information - up until he was tortured! But the information showed that he was not a high-up Quaida leader - but a nobody! He was tortured in effect to hide that - it would seem. Check out emptywheel for further info on that.
In any case the CIA protested vociferously that it was against Geneva to torture and that it would be counterproductive. To no avail.
As to the personality of a torturer. My personal view here is that we need to differentiate the person who seeks to torture from the person who is ordered to torture - as an employee or whatever. Yes, the latter person should know better, but I do not think that by and large they seek, in any way, to be a torturer. I think they become conscripted by this bureaucratic process, step by step, each step seemingly discrete, as they are led into evil deeds.
People who seek to torture, and I have seen some of their victims, are individuals who, I believe, would not take well to discipline, whether military or governmental or any type of discipline. As I said above, the thing about authoritarian regimes is that the people at the top, the "authorities" want to be in control of everything. And thus the minute details. Everything nearly "choreographed" - possibly being watched in real time. (consider that!) In any case your civilian who abducts someone and tortures them or preys upon a child is a person who needs that total control themselves. They would not be likely to fit into a military or other chain of command. (The Principals might fit here though.)
Studies show that about 7% of soldiers are sociopaths, for whom killing does not cause a breakdown in personality (as it would for the other 93% - under conditions of combat). We could assume that might be the same percentage among persons conscripted to be torturers. I honestly do not believe most military or govt employees SEEK to torture. But I do very strongly believe that having tortured may mark these individuals for life. They too are victims. They need treatment - but may fear to seek it. If anyone reading this is such a person, I urge you to seek treatment.
The reason I laid out the case above for the "banality of evil" in terms of the bureaucratic process is because, in addition to that being a way for the Principals to maintain total control over the process, it also becomes a way for them to conscript - bit by bit by bit - a soldier or civil employee into the torture process.
Perhaps you know the Arab tale of how a person approached someone, sitting by his hut, and "innocently" asked if he could nail a nail on the wall. The next day he asks if he can hang his coat on the nail. Etc. Etc. Until bit by bit, he confiscates the hut!
This is the case of the person conscripted into torture. And the use of the cookbook, the fact of the "authorities" authorizing it's legality and bit by bit authorizing each and every "move" in the process..... The fact of being part of a group going through this... well, before they know it....
Sorry for the long comment. But this is so important! Ask further questions if anything is unclear. Or tell me if you disagree.
March 30, 2009 8:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you don't know where to go for help try here:
http://www.militarymentalhealth.org/
or via telephone at:
(877) 877-3647
A solid first step.
March 30, 2009 9:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bless you, Flower!
March 30, 2009 10:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've reread this several times and come to the conclusion that I have further questions.
Do you not think that those who are inclined to give the order to do such things are also inclined to seek out those who will willingly, even eagerly carry out those orders to do their "dirty work" for them? Do you not also think that there are degrees and variations of pathology that make some order-givers and some the willing executors of those orders? And do you not also think that, along the lines of my first question immediately above, while there may be a 7% percentage of pathological personalities in the service (a truly sad thought, until we consider that there is also a percentage of such personalities in the population at large, at which point it becomes quite disturbing) that distribution may not be either uniform or random?
I do believe that those who are inclined to think this is somehow acceptable behavior will seek out positions where they can engage in such activities, and also seek out their disturbed - and disturbing - fellows, for the same reasons.
March 31, 2009 1:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wonderful questions, Old Grouch. And I will do my best to answer them. Understanding that my answers are my best guesses. And also understanding that it would be unethical to do research on this kind of thing - unless someone can do that with individuals who've already been involved in torture (and even then we might not have a baseline from pre-torture).
First of all, I can't neglect mentioning the experiments by Stanley Milgram (which indicate that people will "give in" to an authority and shock people they believe are actually being shocked). This has recently been replicated as I understand it, but the original experiments were done decades ago. Next, there is the famous "prison experiment" by Zimbardo, which had to be stopped because the students playing guards were becoming so abusive to the students playing prisoners that one of them had decompensated and needed immediate care. (You can easily google lots of info on these.) I mention them because that may help you see that people can easily fall into behavior - either under the guidance of an authority figure or as part of role-play in a group setting even when that behavior, under ordinary circumstances, might be completely contrary to their values and usual behavior.
To my mind, OG, one of the reasons for "hooding" prisoners - which happened right away in both Afghanistan and Iraq - is to deprive the prisoner of humanity in the eyes of the guards. Once you've done that - other "doors" may open and treatment can become abusive.
You wonder if the 7% of sociopaths might be attracted to the military or clandestine govt service. That may be. However, I would make this guess. The military is less discriminating about who is allowed in. Especially of late - with so many people even with criminal records allowed in, in order to meet conscription goals. But the CIA and other spy agencies (there are a total of 11 I believe!) likely have extremely stringent assessments prior to taking someone on. Such assessments would not be perfect, of course, but they likely have refined them to a very high degree (which of course would be classified info - to which I have no access).
Then again.... you have asked a very important question: Could it not be that a sociopathic leader, a sadistic leader, might literally seek to screen for sadistic lieutenants or foot soldiers? Now I'd have to weigh that two ways. On the one hand a sociopathic leader would want total fealty. On the other hand that fealty might involve nefarious behavior (and that might put fealty at risk). But if you establish a "back channel" (and we suspect cheney did so!) where you gather a bunch of willing sociopaths - and you somehow ensure their fealty and silence... well... god help us! (Then your theory works!) emptywheel had a recent thread on that.
Next, I would completely agree that there are always degrees and variations of pathology. Each person on this earth is a unique individual. Diagnostic categories are no more than very, very fuzzy sets - and their purpose is to help guide treatment. These categories may change over time. The DSM, to me, is nothing more than the current state of affairs between warring psychiatrists. Clinically, each of us develops our own unique understanding of psychopathology. So, inevitabley, you have an interaction between the perceptions and interpretations of the "diagnostician" and the uniqueness of any person being assessed.
I honestly have to agree fully with your last paragraph. But I'd stretch it further. I'd say that all of us do seek work which is in conformity with our values and personalities. Sociopaths, however, have two avenues for that. Legal and illegal. Even within the "legal" you have what we call "successful sociopaths" - individuals who are able to blend in and manipulate the rest of us - for their own ends. (We're seeing this in spades right now in the areas of finance and law and politics and religion, etc!)
Please feel free to make any further statements or ask further questions. This has been very helpful!
March 31, 2009 9:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
In fact, that was not what I was wondering. I took your 7% as a given, and from that both wondered about the relative percentage in society at large and somewhat about non-uniform distribution.
Example: Are there more or fewer sociopaths in the motor pool than in MP units, intel, and similar (those who would wind up in direct contact with the confined)?
I am familiar with the "prison" and "shocking" experiments, to the extent that I've heard about them. I have minimal psychological courses in my background - it's a very long way from what I do, and while it's an occasional curiosity, that's about it. I'm just a guy who's appalled by what we've seen and the damage it has done to my country and its people.
Thanks for filling in a lot of stuff that gives me much wider understanding. My questions are from someone who wants to know, not someone who's trying to "make a case".
March 31, 2009 10:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
Given that the 7% figure came from Viet Nam, we can assume that's pretty much a distribution in the population of people the military would take. Sorry I misunderstood the question. Given that the military does not allow people to choose their form of work, I cannot say what the distribution would be. I believe the figure comes from people on the battlefield - grunts.
For a good book, read On Killing by a military psychologist. You can find it on amazon or wherever you check. I never thought I would read such a book. Till bush&cheneyco led me to the "water" - and I chose to "drink". It's well written, well researched. And it will tell you more about the topic than you would ever want to know.
I'm not an expert on these matters. But like many of those who post and comment here, the past 8 years drove me to think deeply and read more widely about topics I wish I'd never had to tackle.
And our work seems only to have just begun....
March 31, 2009 11:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'll look for that book. Might actually try (gasp!) a library or two - I'm in a good library area.
And while I know people in the military are not able to choose their assignments, I think it's a fair question, given the amount of things like aptitude testing that they do, whether they sort out the "interesting" specimens and put them where they might be "useful" in some nefarious ways.
BTW, a friend of mine was a journo in Vietnam. And he and other people I know who were there have told me a few stories. Not a good time in American history, that.
March 31, 2009 11:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think that there is a large measure of choice as to MOS [Military occupational Speacialty] when joining the military. Obviously, some cannot qualify for the job they hoped to hold and get put somewhere else. Some get screwed, but I believe that most who end up as infantrymen, or the equivilant in the Marines, are self-selected to be in those positions.
The vast majority of those who joined the Navy or Air Force never intended to take the chance that they would walk the streets of Faluja.
March 31, 2009 12:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good Points.
March 31, 2009 1:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree Thera. In fact if you really want to get a fly on the wall vantage point of administration torture decisions, check out this book. It was written by former OLC head, Jack Goldsmith titled "The Terror Presidency". It really gives you a glimpse into how some people can seem to reconcile this horrid practice.
On page 152, Goldsmith writes about his mental struggle to have the OLC officially withdraw the Yoo torture opinions:
There is just so much in this book that it might contribute to those "little pieces of paper" used to see justice done and a bright line drawn.
March 31, 2009 2:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you for pointing us to this goldmine of info, mage! Wow - that first sentence is basically the basis of the entire Spanish Case against the 6 lawyers. Now, it's my understanding that the case was already laid out in a book. And I bet you've named the book! (Likely it is named in the Guardian article I referenced in the post, so I can check it.)
Boy, what a group we have here! Kudos to you!
March 31, 2009 5:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Different book, but that just proves there's info lying all over the place! From the Guardian article in the post:
March 31, 2009 5:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
I did not hit your links because it erases my rec. I will return:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-03-26/partisan-war-breaks-out/
If it is duplicating something, I apologize.
This is a nice piece on Johnsen. You were the one that introduced me to her.The GOP is already calling her a traitor for simply GIVING THE PUBLIC SOME IDEA ABOUT WHAT WE HAVE BEEN DOING FOR EIGHT YEARS.
I get so GD mad about this I....you do not need a rant, you need careful and considered discussion TheraP.
I have more that I want to say about this. The GOP just has me so mad about this.
YEAH ITS POLITICAL BECAUSE THEY DID IT--THE GOP.
I am excited about Europeans getting into the act. I was a little upset with Canada. The good people brought their shoes and everything to the throw down--or throw at w.
Very considered blog here TheraP. I shall return.
March 30, 2009 7:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dick, you need to separate partisanship from torture as much as possible, if we are going to able to clean this foulness out of America's soul. It is proper to question anyone of the right, who attempts to paint this as a partisan issue, if pro-torture is an inherent part of their political perspective, but do not use it to target those opposed to torture unjustly; even those who may have been slow speaking out against it.
No REAL Conservative would ever support torture as American Governmental policy. Opposition to Torture is NOT a political issue; it is a foundational stone of The Dreamtime America.
March 30, 2009 7:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hope to post related to this soon. How the "Dreamtime" (of America and indeed all this is best of humanity) not only represents the ideals of the founding fathers (and mothers) but is part and parcel of some of the highest levels of development - those who come to care about society and want to pass along the best to younger generations.
It will take me a bit to get there, but I'm working on it.
Your comments are always so helpful, PCA. (Indeed some of my need for a respite came because I had overtired myself - and - partly - your corrections of some errant comments of mine helped me to see the need for a break - to rest my mind, so as to be more careful when reading and commenting.) So I thank you for that.
March 30, 2009 8:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cheney is going around bragging about it. The GOP is attempting to block the confirmation of Johnsen.
Right now, with all due respect it is the GOP standing up and bragging about this crap.
I am not happy with some of the briefs and arguments filed by the New Administration. At least from what I have read.
But Johnsen is extremely important here. And there are at least twenty repubs who should be in prison right now. Including the number one war criminal in the country, dicky c. He personally set up these assassination squads, her personally called for these lies to be printed on legal stationery.
I see your point PCA, but the repubs are drawing a line in the sand and I say WAR, NOW.
March 30, 2009 8:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Do I hear a blog coming on? A great rant?
March 30, 2009 8:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes. Tomorrow AM. This really has me mad.
March 30, 2009 8:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Go for it!
March 30, 2009 9:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Again Dick, do not cheapen this fight by making it one of party; this is about American values. If the GOP wants to make their support of torture a partisan issue, then the party damns itself, but it is not your place to do so.
If you must make a partisan issue out of this: go to the mirror, brother, and fix the mote in your own eye first. Where was Jay Rockefeller, as minority head of the Senate Intelligence Committee? Why did he allow Roberts to play him like a fiddle? Why do Inouye and Feinstein get a free pass?
Thou Hypocrite...
March 30, 2009 10:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
It was always clear, from the start, that people were being mistreated, though we may not have realized to what extent right away. They were put in metal containers in Afghanistan. They were hooded. They picked up just about anyone. You could see how they were chained when arriving in Gitmo. There was always a lot of information - and we learned early on of the torture. And Taguba's report indicated it had migrated from Gitmo. Plus, it was clear the Red Cross was not getting to see certain detainees. It was always possible to read between the lines.
And I agree, this could not have been accomplished without either the participation or the absence of sufficient outrage by elected Dems. Cowardice is also reprehensible and carries its own complicity.
There is enough blame to go around. We will be reaping the consequences for decades at least.
Not everyone believes in collective guilt. But for those of us who do, it is a heavy burden to bear.
March 30, 2009 10:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
PCA, I think dd's rant and even his comment is related to the link he gave, to the stalling on the confirmation of Dawn Johnsen, and how that connects with the need for info to come out. I could be wrong, but it sounds like he was having trouble making use of my links and was already upset by the link he provided in his first comment.
Your words are nevertheless important ones for us all. These crimes happened on our watch.
March 30, 2009 10:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
The GOP will likely attempt to frame its opposition to Dawn Johnsen's appointment in terms of past work as an attorney for NARAL and The ACLU. Those who are using these past associations as a smokescreen to hide their real intent to block any meaningful investigation into acts of human torture need to be separated from the grass-chewing herd of ditto-heads, and properly targeted for their dishonest and reprehensible attempt to falsely portray their opposition to her appointment. We need to call the opponents of Johnsen's appointment out openly, using pro-torture as as the referent, and let the guilty hang themselves with their own rope.
March 31, 2009 4:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Absolutely! The will use that avenue to paint her as a godless creature, etc. That's been clear from the start.
I have one word to say about that. I hate to say it, but condoleza rice!
(I think that should be our strategy!)
March 31, 2009 9:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
Two-pronged attack. Yes, call out those who oppose her as "pro-torture" and via the backdoor remind the fundies of condoleza rice.
March 31, 2009 9:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
I've been thinking that the Spanish court's decision to investigate the lawyers, will put some pressure on our own government to investigate the same, (and More, hopefully). The administration will have to wear a cloak of indifference to the matter of torture, or to conduct their own investigation, even if it turns out to be a whitewash of criminal malfeasance on the part of the perpetrators. As to the rest of the world, I suspect there will be popular support for the 'Spanish inquisition'. My guess is that a special prosecutor will be needed less to satisfy the public's need to know, and more as a function of avoiding increased international criticism for condoning and conducting torture.
March 30, 2009 7:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Didn't mean to skip over this, amigo. I hope you're right about the prosecutor.
March 30, 2009 11:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
You need to read the last four posts of Richard W. Painter, S. Walter Richey Professor of Corporate Law af the University of Minnesota law school, who from February 2005 to July 2007 was White House chief ethics officer, for his guest-blogging week at The Volokh Conspiracy. Here's an excerpt from his last post there. Immediately following it, the links numbered 1,2 and 3, are also relevant to torture:
March 30, 2009 7:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
I assure you I will read the posts. And I thank you for this information. As you likely know, this is a topic I am following with great interest.
March 30, 2009 7:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Minnesotans should be proud that Richard W. Painter is a tenured professor at the University of Minnesota Law School.
March 30, 2009 7:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Off to read now....
March 30, 2009 8:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ethics reform! Right up my alley! (for anyone who goes there to read, at the bottom of the post, PCA has linked you will find a place where you can immediately link to all of his posts!) I may need to order this book.
March 30, 2009 8:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Chaney and others are nervous. They are running a public campaign to justify and defend everything they did. An example is Chaney's recent public criticism of Obama and his statement that Obama has made America less safe. I expect that it was a tactic to gain Chaney a wide audience and many repetitions of the clip where he says that the tactics were necessary, they worked, they saved lives, and they kept America safe. He only criticized Obama to give his show an “R” rating and thereby increase the audience.
I've seen too many other officials who are also implicated turn there answers to other questions in this same direction. They are justifying and want everyone to hear there justifications. I have no doubt that many Americans believe them.
March 30, 2009 8:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
There has been much speculation about cheney's recent remarks and various interpretations about what that means. Clearly he doesn't think that he's said enough to voice his propaganda. That he needs to speak at all is a tribute to the lack of republican voices - since his approval is so low that normally his words would not carry very much weight.
Thanks for pointing to the evidence that he and others may be nervous. (Yoo also has been writing and speaking again.)
March 30, 2009 8:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rachel Maddow just had an excellent segment on the whole torture issue, Spain's investigation and the meaning of Dawn Johnson's nomination as head of OLC. They kept repeating that as long as the criminals don't leave the US they woulnd't be subject to arrest or extradition which is embarassing to me. They ought to be arrested and imprisoned right here, right now! The US is a signatory to the very same treaty Spain is attempting to comply with. Why is it that Americans feel that treaty obligations are somehow optional?
March 30, 2009 9:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, but here's the problem this may pose for the Obama administration. Suppose they are indicted. And suppose Spain seeks extradition. Well, that poses a problem! I'm not saying they will be extradited, but nonetheless that would mean that something would have to done. And that would mean that each of these persons would be considered, worldwide, to be indicted war criminals. That would only increase the pressure on the US to do something.
In the meanwhile, the only way to stop the case going forward in Spain would be if the US indicted them or had an ongoing case itself. Should that happen, Spanish law defers to the host country. It is truly mandatory that a country pursue credible allegations of war crimes. We should be doing that. But this Spanish case in some ways gives us a "black eye" before the world. Showing us up for the cowards we are - cowards to face the war crimes done in our name - cowards to investigate and prosecute the Principals of the previous administration. So it presents further pressure. An investigation is already open investigating torture in Britain - not of us, of them. But that's more pressure too.
I agree, oleeb, that is reprehensible nothing has begun here yet. Nevertheless, I do agree that we need Dawn Johnsen's confirmation.
I still think we have an ongoing series of revelations. And for me I see each step as another step in the right direction. My blog, small and unimportant as it may be, is my way of of contributing to those steps. You've done your part. Others here as well.
Your last sentence asks a question. I fear the answer is "American exceptionalism" - a shameful practice of viewing ourselves as able to except ourselves from things which we would insist upon for others. I don't agree with it. But there it is....
March 30, 2009 10:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree that exceptionalism is the culprit in terms of our refusal to abide by our obligations, but I have one proviso. That is that I believe in this sort of case it is the exceptionalism only of the elite that permits this. The bulk of the public is totally ignorant about our treaty obligations and what our duty is under international law and many in the public remain in the dark in terms of what a war crime is, what torture is and how serious those things are. I do believe that the public would support enforcing our obligations if they understood the whole picture. Obviously, the permanent 28% who loved Bush to the end would support any atrocity, but I think a far larger number would be in favor of prosecuting wrongdoing no matter where it was found, if (and yes it is a very big if)the media were reporting the truth and educating them about what has gone on and what the laws are. Instead, we get the false nuetrality of the media reporting as though there is a legitimate disagreement about what constitutes torture, what is a war crime and so forth.
I also think Dawn Johnson is an important person to have in place, but I am not at all convinced that Obama's administration will allow her to do the job as she sees fit with respect to torture and war crimes. Thus far, every indication has been given by Obama and those lower on the food chain that there will be no investigations let alone any prosecutions. Remember, the new CIA chief stated flatly in an open hearing that there would no one would be prosecuted for torture or torture related crimes.
March 31, 2009 11:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
"exceptionalism of the elite"
This term will be forever credited to you! Yes, I so agree! But we've allowed that by default. And we have to swallow that bitter pill as well.
Little by little, working together here, the jigsaw puzzle comes into focus!
March 31, 2009 1:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
YES OLEEB YES
March 31, 2009 1:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
What you have placed before us here is the work of the Saints. Torture is systemic in the U.S. as an instrument of power. A saint would recognize that power, know its name and devote a lifetime to combating it. No less will be required by what you have just described. The Spanish experience is instructive. Decades after Franco they are only beginning to speak of some of the essential elements of that regime’s activities.
Torture and the principles of abuse that underlie it are a matter of internal politics for states like Spain and Chile. Individual regimes engaged in these practices against their own populations in the pursuit of internal political objectives. When these regimes were overthrown, the practices ceased. For the U.S. abuse is a principle of empire, exercised in multiple continents over multiple decades by multiple political leaders and officials. There is no Franco or Pinochet. There is only the institutional mentality of a world power.
With kind regards to Mr Dickday and Mr. PseudoCyAnts, when it comes to matters like the long. long U.S. practice of torture, Republican and Democrat is one snake eating its tail. Any “real Conservative” would have committed ritual seppuku long ago. Watching Conservatives swallow the policies of Conservative politicians is watching what Conservatives love to complain about in Liberals, a complete lack of fundamental principles. For both it is all a game of power. So call the snake a Republican and hunt it down, as Mr. Dickday suggests. The result will be to catch the Reid’s and the Pelosi’s and the Rockefeller’s and the Harman’s and a lot of others that may surprise everyone. In fishing it is called bycatch. Mr. PseudoCyAnts you will have your just satisfaction too.
This is a dark business not suitable for the gentle soul. In post war Germany, school children were compelled to watch documentary film of the atrocities of the Third Reich. The inference of course was that there was some inherent proclivity of the German people toward such behavior. The intent was to “inoculate” the future generations against such behaviors and thus was justified this painful prick of the antibody injections. It seems harsh to think of it now but do think of it when approaching this matter and resolve to avoid unnecessary pain to the innocent.
Anger is an emotion. It does not last forever. Achilles relented eventually and resumed his responsibilities as a member of society even unto his own inevitable hero’s death. If you are angry then step aside and sooth yourself until you feel humane again. The only motivation for this great task should be justice and love for those who suffered and for those who will be spared if the truth can be displayed for all to see.
Many thanks TheraP for this outstanding and conscientious post.
March 30, 2009 10:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
We have so many excellent people posting at TPM. There is such wisdom here. Kindness. Efforts to restrain and channel our emotions when we get carried away. Further links and cautionary words.
And I particularly commend Larry's comment - which indicates that above all, in this work, there is need to overcome our immediate feelings. PCA touches on that above as well. But Larry makes it so clear that we can only pursue this task if we gird ourselves for it in a spiritual manner - as a calling to reform our society through reforming ourselves. And that the pursuit of these matters can only be done from justice and love.
As Larry says:
I am working on a further blog which carries these ideas forward. But I must take my time on that. And get it right.
March 30, 2009 11:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Larry, there is a fundamental difference between what went on during the GW Bush Administration and past acts of US governmental torture. The difference is that it became Official Publicly Stated Policy of our government, instead of being hidden from the public, and discovered subsequently. The primary difference being, that the moment it became Official Policy, We, The People became directly responsible for it. It was no longer the criminal acts of some members in our government, it is now our burden to shoulder, personally.
This battle runs deeper than human torture also. By asserting a right to torture, our government has also asserted that our rights are derived from its own magnanimity towards it citizenry; that human rights are a function of nationality. A leviathan thusly unmuzzled and unchained is an unspeakable monster whose thirst for power will forever be insatiable. It will assuredly someday, turn upon its masters and devour them. I am not attempting to downplay past governmental actions of cruelty and perfidy totally unworthy of a free nation. These acts should be properly investigated, and blame rightfully assessed. Yet the acts of the Bush Administration directly threaten the Dreamtime America, threatens to destroy the fecund ground from which both the Dreamtime and The Nation were birthed: that all humans are created equal, endowed by that which they perceive to be the force of creation with inalienable rights. This is a defense at the very ramparts of America's soul. If it devolves into tawdry partisan warfare, then all is lost. This battle must be won, or future Americans will urinate upon the memorials of our deaths, and curse us for their chains.
March 31, 2009 4:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
What can I say? A masterpiece of a comment!
Yes, you have described what must become a means for good people of all political persuasions to set aside petty partisan differences in the service of the Rule of Law, ethics, a universal view of human rights. And it may have to come from the grassroots. It will require the spiritual qualities Larry talks about. And the goals you have described. It is a selfless task. It is our legacy to the future. And we cannot shirk what fate has dropped in our laps.
March 31, 2009 9:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Brilliant! Very well expressed, PseudoPsyAnts.
March 31, 2009 12:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
I do not think there is anyone here willing to allow a Democrat to walk from their responsibility. Our fury is not directed at Republicans, but at those who are collaborators in torture. This is not a party issue, but since it was the Bush Administration, it certainly will start there. No one hear will care too much about where it ends, as long as justice is served.
Isn't it interesting that Republicans WILL circle the wagons to defend sadists, so long as they are Republicans. If one would indulge me a crystal ball, I suspect we will have w viewing the videos, since he was the same man who wanted to have bin Laden's head delivered to him in a box, and perhpas one of those undisclosed locations where Cheney was will be found to be one of these prisons where torture was being administered.
March 31, 2009 12:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
You may have that crystal ball award yet... sad to say!
March 31, 2009 1:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good to see you back, Luv! :-{)>
March 31, 2009 1:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bless you, my dear GregorZ!
March 31, 2009 5:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
TheraP, I think your concern about missing evidence is well founded, and the likelihood that we will never see most of that evidence mounts every day a special prosecutor isn't appointed to officially gather it up.
Which may become Obama's only option, to try to keep this out of the world courts and in our own, which I would think might be a deal that will be made in the bowels of the serpent. And considering the alternative(s)it's a deal Cheney and Bush may well embrace, if it gets the international wolfhounds off their trail. Which is where they seem to be going, starting so close to the top.
But that missing evidence is not the only avenue of disclosure, by any means.
Lets get some of the TORTUREES on the witness stand, maybe they can fill us in on what the TORTURERS were doing.
Any investigation worth it's salt will bring some of these victims into the investigation, adn there are still some of them alive.
At least for now. Has anyone as yet discerned if Cheney ever STOPPED his assassination squad chess-game? Just who was in that private club and where are they now?
March 31, 2009 12:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
I mean RIGHT NOW.
Seriously, anyone else here think Cheney's potentially demented (as in the onset of dementia)?
Not trying to trash the old geezer if he's losing it, but some of his recent pre and post-inaugural subterfuge is teasingly tantamount to treason, which should come as no surprise. The Plame affair should be easy proof he's not above treason.
The Obama FBI should find out some of this stuff ASAP or we might start reading about strange coincidental "accidents" all over the map.
Any potential witness against crazy old Scattergun might end up up like his old quail hunting pal, only moreso...
March 31, 2009 12:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
I guess we need more FIA suits. More sunshine!
March 31, 2009 9:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Here's what I would say. Yes, I agree with your concerns. But who knows what whistle-blowers have gathered up and sent to appropriate institutions? I never discount that that may have occurred. Perhaps by numerous individuals - who may remain forever unsung.
Meanwhile, we must keep these issues alive and keep up the pressure!
Amen!
March 31, 2009 9:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Releasing information that is not a national security threat seems to be a problem, and I don't understand why (our enemies know what we’ve done and probably think we’ve done even worse than we have). Regardless, I don't think state secrets privileges can be used to cover up war crimes.
Obama has released the memos and is releasing more after courts have decided in favor of the ACLU's FOIA requests. But why are they hiding evidence (much of it already at least general public knowledge) and stalling courts behind state secrets laws.
It is not only embarrassing as Oleeb points out above, but it is fatal to our standing in the world as its supposed leading "rule of law" democracy. The last eight years have been one of the most detrimental eras to US prestige and moral eminence in our history.
On top of our human rights abuses, we have now contributed to a worldwide economic recession that may threaten the US dollar as reserve currency, which will have a devastating effect on our economy. And if we do not try to reconcile and adjudicate our own high crimes and misdemeanors, our reputation and our word (whether by treaty or diplomacy) will mean little. Who will trust us?
Britain and soon others will begin investigations of their own complicity thereby taking responsibility. It is this administration and this congress that can either hold those responsible to account or cover it up, becoming complicit in the crimes.
March 31, 2009 11:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Don, you are becoming a necessity to our discussions. I hope you realize that! Your voice is needed here. :)
March 31, 2009 2:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I appreciate the way you massage your threads, TheraP. But I think I replied in the wrong place. When you start sounding like a broken record, even to yourself, it seems like time to move on to something else. But I really do think a lot more is at stake here than letting some Neocon weasels "get away with it."
It's a funny thing about America: we're a country of immigrants, founded on the very idea of equality and civil rights. Yet, we're as xenophobic as any, and we openly criticize everyone but ourselves. Hopefully, with the new media, more Americans will be informed by alternative and foreign media that doesn't shy away from the truth.
PS I wonder if Bush's decision to torture people is going to be one of the big twelve life decisions in his new book? Besides the CYA aspect, I doubt he rates it as even a minor consideration.
March 31, 2009 3:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
You go right ahead and repeat your concerns if they need repeating. And never fear about responding in the correct place. We're all pretty forgiving of such things here.
Can't you just imagine w smirking and lying his way through one book and a bunch of book interviews? God help us all!
March 31, 2009 4:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
I forgot, I wanted to add that TheraP beat out Keith and Rachel on this tonite. Their lead story really. Rachel spent a lot of time on this and the Johnsen story.
March 31, 2009 1:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Be careful, dd! Rachel will come after me next....
LOL!
March 31, 2009 9:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
TheraP, this is a magnificent post. What I like so much about it and the subsequent comments is how you incorporate heart and soul, and great writing. Thanks so mush for this important work. We appreciate it more than you know.
I did some writing on this subject last year. I'm providing the links and a quote regarding the "reverse engineering" element of the progression towards the use of torture by the U.S. government:
1) Middle East Report Card (8/23/08)
2) Be Careful What You Ask For (7/27/08) To quote from "Torture After Dark" (7/22/08) at Counter Punch by Soldz*, Olson, Reisner, Aarigo and Welch. The quote:
. . . What we do now know, from a report issued by the Defense Department’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG) and from documents released during recent hearings by the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC), is that [these] SERE techniques, designed to ameliorate the effects of torture, were "reverse engineered," transformed from ensuring the safety of our own soldiers, to orchestrating the abuse of detainees in Guantánamo, Afghanistan and Iraq.
March 31, 2009 8:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for adding those links, Carol. And do so any time! It's very helpful for anyone who seeks further information - and you've already amassed a treasure trove (unfortunate, that you needed to).
Folks, click Carol's name. And go back through her blogs. She's the go-to person for heaps of info on many, many topics. She chooses one weekly and digs and digs. Then provides all the links. Her posts are marvels of organization!!!!
March 31, 2009 9:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Aw shucks! Thanks for those nudges for readers for my posts, TheraP. As you may have deduced :-), I am a bit of an Obsessive/Compulsive.
March 31, 2009 10:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
OC is good - when not done to excess. All successful people have some of that. Else we would never have achieved (honestly). :)
March 31, 2009 11:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think one of the most important elements to investigate, regarding the Bush Administration's torture revival, is the motivation behind this dark initiative. Did they really expect to retrieve usable information quickly? Or, like the Soviet security apparatus, did they recognize its futility in that regard - and employ torture merely to enhance an overall ecology of terror? Did they institute torture as part of a larger corrosion of American Constitutional justice? Was this return to the dungeon and the rack a message to Americans that the ground had shifted under their traditional framework of justice?
Consider Abu Ghraib. No war crime, no atrocity was more meticulously documented. The atrocities are preserved in almost every form of record. Were photos and videos of the dehumanizing crimes intended to "break" hardened terrorists prepared to commit operative suicide (if, indeed, there were any among the unfortunate inmates), or were they intended for public consumption in the Middle East, to whet anger and outrage, to guarantee the "Arab on the street" became a true foe of America and Americans, with emotion-based enmity, righteous rage? You can't build a case for spreading war unless you're targeting an expanding base of enemies, after all.
We can't write this off as "banality of evil". Torture is employed around the world; it's simply part of the human condition, and there's every indication it'll continue to be. But the impact of its re-employment - the footprint it's left on how Americans determine justice - is profound. We have left many scars on many people, and we haven't yet recovered what waterboarding and Abu Ghraib took from us, as well.
March 31, 2009 10:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
I did not in any way intend to diminish the evils of torture - and the banality part is the paperwork trail part as I hope was pretty clear.
But your questions and concerns are good ones, Kurt. This is a terrible blot upon our conscience, our honor, and our nation. It seeps into our society in very negative ways.
The worst part of it is what's beginning to emerge now as to why the torture became state-endorsed. And it appears that the torture may have been done to cover up the fact that bush&cheneyco had picked up hapless people with little intelligence value - but they needed "information" and irregardless of the fact that the "information" retrieved was of no value, except to feed the war machine and feed a re-election campaign and feed false reputations for "keeping us safe" - this may be worst - that it was simply a cover-up! It destroyed minds. But it fed the war machine.
You can read about that here:
http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/03/29/cheney-lies-obstruction-of-justice-torture-tape-destruction/
Read the post and the numerous comments. And follow the links. To the heart of darkness.
We must attempt to eradicate torture. I understand we cannot guarantee success. But having gone down this terrible path - we must do whatever we can - as Larry said above: out of love and justice.
March 31, 2009 11:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
I didn't mean to imply that you did. It is in fact "banality of evil" - outrage and obscenity accepted as routine, as systemic. What I intended to convey is that we can't merely recognize that fact - and let it go. It's a mistake to think of these crimes as products of some arcane mutation of human character, fundamentally different from our own. The potential for atrocity lurks in us always; it surfaces when we become seduced that ends justify means.
March 31, 2009 12:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
So well put! Thanks.
March 31, 2009 1:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
See, I misspelled your name again! And you never said a word, Curt! ;)
March 31, 2009 1:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
That is an excellent point, Curt. It seems that the intent was to send the message to those outside the prison that the occupation forces were brutal.
On the home front, many Americans, terrorized by the news of the war may have been placated to see that we were metting out vengeance, pure and simple. It may also have frightened people to join the Republicans or at least not leave the Republicans, because of that same message above-noted, the Bush Administration is brutal and it is best to be on their side or else ....
March 31, 2009 12:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Excellent post, Thera.
March 31, 2009 12:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Merci. :)
March 31, 2009 2:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
"And another query: why are almost all "recommended posts" at TPM almost 100% dumbshit inanity?"
jealous much?
March 31, 2009 2:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Terrific TheraP. You've generated a rich and fluid discussion about torture with remarkable clarity and patience and forethought.
Your posts always flourish.
March 31, 2009 5:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
What a lovely Coda at the end (or near end) of the post! :)
March 31, 2009 5:41 PM | Reply | Permalink