The Real Reason that the U.S. Tortures People

[G_j]

http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/2008/07/torture-doesnt-work-so-what-is-real.html

, July 24, 2008

The Real Reason that the U.S. Tortures People


The top experts agree that torture doesn't produce any useful information.

And the experts on national security agree that torture turns people against us, creates actual terrorists who want to kill us, and makes us less safe. Torture also makes it almost certain that our troops will be tortured by others.

But the U.S. has embarked on a coordinated policy of torture since 9/11. The U.S. has rounded up scores of innocent farmers and other civilians -- including children -- in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere and tortured them until they died, went crazy, or were disabled.

Why?

If torture doesn't do anything useful, and instead does alot of harmful things like dramatically weakening our national security and putting our troops in harms way, why are we doing it?

Well, listen to the testimony to Congress by a representative of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services:

"Governments that use torture intend to intimidate their citizens in order to maintain control; those who are tortured become examples of the consequences of dissent."
Indeed, this is a well-known tactic for brutal regimes.

<snip>

Torture is a form of terrorism, plain and simple. As the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services director told Congress:
"... torture is the deliberate mental and physical damage caused by governments to individuals to ... terrorize society."

..more..

[seemslikeadream]

1. Meet the terrorists

[awoke_in_2003]

44. Interesting picture

makes the guy on the left look like a giant resting his arm on the guy on the right.

[rhett o rick]

65. Please identify for us uneducated. nm

[seemslikeadream]

68. David Addington and John Yoo (the Torture memo guys)

ADDINGTON'S ROLE IN CHENEY'S OFFICE DRAWS FRESH ATTENTION

That's David (Geneva Convention is "Quaint") Addington


http://nationaljournal.com/about/njweekly/stories/2005/1030nj1.htm

By Murray Waas and Paul Singer

10-30-05

David Addington, counsel to Vice President Cheney, has been named to succeed Scooter Libby as Cheney's chief of staff. Addington's own role in the Plame matter is emerging just as the vice president selects him for the top job.

...

Further, Addington played a leading role in 2004 on behalf of the Bush administration when it refused to give the Senate Intelligence Committee documents from Libby's office on the alleged misuse of intelligence information regarding Iraq. Because Addington may be in line to succeed Libby, the Intelligence Committee-White House battle over the documents has sparked new interest on Capitol Hill.

....

Rockefeller's call for an inquiry by the Intelligence Committee captured the attention of many senators Friday, but did not attract wider press attention. It also surprised senators because Rockefeller, who is a political moderate, was often praised by the Republican chairman of the committee, Pat Roberts of Kansas, and other Republicans for serving as vice chairman in a bipartisan matter. Indeed, some other Democratic senators on the committee have privately complained that Rockefeller had not pressed Republicans hard enough on some oversight issues.

....

During confirmation hearings of Alberto Gonzales to be attorney general, it was revealed that Addington helped draft the White House memo that concluded that the Geneva Convention against torture did not apply to prisoners captured in the war on terror. The memo declared that terrorism "renders obsolete Geneva's strict limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners and renders quaint some of its provisions."

....

helped out that torture guy Gonzales too (who maybe under indictment also)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1262353&mesg_id=1262353



http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article323785.ece

By Andrew Buncombe in Washington
Published: 01 November 2005
The Independent


Lewis "Scooter" Libby, the senior White House official charged over the CIA leak affair, is to appear in court this week, as investigators continue their inquiries into the activities of President George Bush's senior political adviser, Karl Rove.

An official said yesterday that Mr Libby would appear in a federal court in Washington on Thursday morning, where he would be formally charged, or arraigned. He faces five charges ­ two of lying to investigators, two of lying to a grand jury and one of obstructing justice ­ in relation to the leaking of the identity of a covert CIA operative, Valerie Plame.

Mr Libby, 55, has made it clear he will plead not guilty. He was replaced yesterday by David Addington, a longtime aide to Vice-President Dick Cheney and his top legal adviser. Mr Addington was among the authors of a White House memo justifying torture of terrorism suspects.

Over the weekend Mr Libby's lawyers said they would argue that, as a busy White House official, he could not be expected to recollect the full details of every conversation he had with reporters. They will deny that he deliberately intended to lie to either investigators or members of the grand jury about what he had told reporters about Ms Plame.


http://thinkprogress.org/2005/10/31/cheney-promotes

Cheney Promotes Individuals Named In Indictment

"Both Addington and Hannah are named in the indictment. Hannah was intimately involved in the strategy of leaking Plame’s identity. From the indictment:

13. Shortly after publication of the article in The New Republic, LIBBY spoke by telephone with his then Principal Deputy and discussed the article. That official asked LIBBY whether information about Wilson’s trip could be shared with the press to rebut the allegations that the Vice President had sent Wilson. LIBBY responded that there would be complications at the CIA in disclosing that information publicly, and that he could not discuss the matter on a non-secure telephone line.

Addington provided legal counsel to Libby in helping to divulge Plame’s identity.

18. Also on or about July 8, 2003, LIBBY met with the Counsel to the Vice President in an anteroom outside the Vice President’s Office. During their brief conversation, LIBBY asked the Counsel to the Vice President, in sum and substance, what paperwork there would be at the CIA if an employee’s spouse undertook an overseas trip.

http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2004/3128addington_memo.html
Addington, a "swell " guy...
Cheney's Lawyer Addington
Penned Key Torture Memo
by Jeffrey Steinberg

David Addington, the General Counsel to Vice President Dick Cheney, was the actual author of one of the now-infamous White House "torture memos" that claimed for President Bush the authority to violate the Geneva Conventions on the Treatment of Prisoners of War, in the so-called "war on terrorism." The immediate result of this Hitlerian document was the scenes of inhuman torture at the Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad, and the as-yet untold tales of similar torture at other secret prison locations in Afghanistan, at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and in other countries around the world.



http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?id=1521846767-3158

David S. Addington actively participated in the following events:
January 21, 2002 Torture in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere

White House lawyers visit Guantanamo Bay. On the flight back, Alberto Gonzales agrees with David Addington that all Guantanamo detainees should be designated eligible for trial by military commission under the president's November 13 Military Order (see January 20, 2002).
People and organizations involved: Alberto R. Gonzales, David S. Addington

'Passive' participant in the following events:
Torture, rendition, and other abuses against captives in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere - November 13, 2001 - President Bush issues a 3- ...


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=5223042
Page 4 - ("Under Secretary of State")International Security Affairs John Bolton or Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Marc Grossman?

Page 4 - ("A senior officer of the CIA") ?

Page 5 ("An aide to the VP") John Hannah - Senior Nation Security Aide or David Wurmser - Middle East Advisor?

Page 5 (CIA briefer") ?

Page 6 ("Libby's then Pincipal Deputy") John Hannah

Page 7 ("WH Press Secretary") Ari Fleicher?

Page 7 ("Counsel to the VP') David Addington?

Page 7 ("Ass't to the VP for Public Affairs") Catherine Martin (she was his press secretary)?

Page 7 ("MSNBC Reporter") Chris Matthews

Page 8 ("Official A") Karl Rove?

Page 8 (Other Officials) Plane trip from Norfolk

http://thinkprogress.org/2005/10/28/addington-involved-in-leak-scandal/

Scooter Libby’s replacement as chief of staff to the Vice President is reportedly a man named David Addington. He was formerly Cheney’s counsel, a position he held since 2001. According to the indictment, it appears that Addington was involved in the leak:

18. Also on or about July 8, 2003, LIBBY met with the Counsel to the Vice President in an anteroom outside the Vice President’s Office. During their brief conversation, LIBBY asked the Counsel to the Vice President, in sum and substance, what paperwork there would be at the CIA if an employee’s spouse undertook an overseas trip.

Was Addington aware that he was facilitating alleged criminal conduct?

Unitary Executive theory

http://alternet.org/blogs/themix/#27514

Scooter Libby's insta-replacement, David Addington, believes in the Unitary Executive theory. If you guessed that this meant the power of one CEO who decides liberty and justice for all, you wouldn't be far off. It's not too far from King of Everything, really.

Here's a description of how it works by a legal theorist from Michigan Law School:

Several scholars have recently rearticulated the "unitary executive theory" of Article II , arguing that Article II vests the power to execute federal law solely in the President of the United States. Unitarians do not maintain that the President must personally execute all laws; Congress may establish an administrative bureaucracy and identify particular officials to assist the President in carrying out legislatively prescribed tasks. But, unitarians argue, such officials must always remain subject to the President's direction.

According to Raw Story, Bush has made at least 95 decisions since 2001 using this unitary logic, including many of his ill-fated choices relating to torture and the Geneva Conventions. And who was the author of the infamous "torture memo?"

David Addington.

http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=David_S._Addington

Primary Role in Bush Admin's POW Policies

....

Former attorney general William P. Barr suggested to Gonzales's staff early on that those captured on the battlefield go before military tribunals instead of civil courts. But Ashcroft and Michael Chertoff, his deputy for the criminal division, both adamantly opposed the plan, along with military lawyers at the Pentagon. The result was that the process moved slowly."

"Addington was the first to suggest that the issue be taken away from the Prosper group and that a presidential order be drafted authorizing the tribunals that he, Gonzales and Timothy E. Flanigan, then a principal deputy to Gonzales, supported. It was intended for circulation among a much smaller group of like-minded officials. Berenson, Flanigan and Addington helped write the draft, and on Nov. 6, 2001, Gonzales's office secured an opinion from the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel that the contemplated military tribunals would be legal."


"The task of summarizing the competing points of view in a draft letter to the president was seized initially by Addington. A memo he wrote and signed with Gonzales's name -- and knowledge -- was circulated to various departments, several sources said. A version of this draft, dated Jan. 25, 2002, was subsequently leaked. It included the eye-catching assertion that a 'new paradigm' of a war on terrorism 'renders obsolete Geneva's strict limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners." More...

http://whateveralready.blogspot.com/2005/10/i-have-brand-new-national-journal.html

by Murray Wass
Thursday, October 27, 2005

....

Cheney has tried to increase executive power with a series of bold actions -- some so audacious that even conservatives on the Supreme Court sympathetic to Cheney's view have rejected them as overreaching. The vice president's point man in this is longtime aide David Addington, who serves as Cheney's top lawyer.

Where there has been controversy over the past four years, there has often been Addington. He was a principal author of the White House memo justifying torture of terrorism suspects. He was a prime advocate of arguments supporting the holding of terrorism suspects without access to courts.

Addington also led the fight with Congress and environmentalists over access to information about corporations that advised the White House on energy policy. He was instrumental in the series of fights with the Sept. 11 commission and its requests for information...

....

Even in a White House known for its dedication to conservative philosophy, Addington is known as an ideologue, an adherent of an obscure philosophy called the unitary executive theory that favors an extraordinarily powerful president.

....

http://www.democrats.org/a/2005/10/libby_resigns_b.php

Libby Resigns, But Was His Replacement Involved in the Leak?

Posted by Joe Rospars on October 28, 2005 at 04:34 PM


The crack team over at Think Progress has the scoop on Libby's replacement in the White House:

Scooter Libby’s replacement as chief of staff to the Vice President is reportedly a man named David Addington. He was formerly Cheney’s counsel, a position he held since 2001. According to the indictment, it appears that Addington was involved in the leak:

18. Also on or about July 8, 2003, LIBBY met with the Counsel to the Vice President in an anteroom outside the Vice President’s Office. During their brief conversation, LIBBY asked the Counsel to the Vice President, in sum and substance, what paperwork there would be at the CIA if an employee’s spouse undertook an overseas trip.

Was Addington aware that he was facilitating alleged criminal conduct?

You'll remember that Republican leader Tom DeLay handed his leadership post to another ethically-challenged Republican, Roy Blunt.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A22665-2004Oct10.html

In Cheney's Shadow, Counsel Pushes the Conservative Cause
By Dana Milbank
Washington Post Staff Writer Monday, October 11, 2004; Page A21

The vice president's point man in this is longtime aide David Addington, who serves as Cheney's top lawyer....

Where there has been controversy over the past four years, there has often been Addington. He was a principal author of the White House memo justifying torture of terrorism suspects. He was a prime advocate of arguments supporting the holding of terrorism suspects without access to courts.

Addington also led the fight with Congress and environmentalists over access to information about corporations that advised the White House on energy policy. He was instrumental in the series of fights with the Sept. 11 commission and its requests for information. And he was a main backer of the nomination of Pentagon lawyer William J. Haynes II for a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit. Haynes's confirmation has been a source of huge friction on Capitol Hill.

Colleagues say Addington stands out for his devotion to secrecy in an administration noted for its confidentiality. He declined to be interviewed or photographed for this article, and he did not respond to a list of specific points made in the article.

[Muttocracy]

2. also seems to reflect a hateful toxic view of the world and other humans. :(

[Ichingcarpenter]

3. I knew families from Chile, Argentina and South Africa

Who told me stories that fled those places in the 70s



No matter what anyone says, it is the worst rape of the body and mind you
can imagine.

I was told the story 25 years ago, what a Nicaragua citizen told me about
on the roof we were working on in Texas about his brother who didn't get to flee,
Having the right wing putting a hungry rat in an iron box and heating it up,
He fled the country because he was marked by the country, and was sent back


I saw that story in a movie 10 years later, but his experience was true

This was done by CIA contras to break the left.

[awoke_in_2003]

45. The guy at the chevron station

down the street escaped haiti. His arms and face (and probably the rest of his body) bear the scars from the burn he received under torture. It is inhuman.

[EFerrari]

4. Exactly. Torture is a form of crowd control by terror.

I mentioned that in passing a few months ago in a piece about Chavez, that knowing your government torture must alter the way you interact with that government or how active you might be in dissenting from its policies.

[napoleon_in_rags]

5. Amen. REcommeneded. nt

[azul]

6. Well, duh. Funny, though, some one would come right out and say so.

Naomi Klein's Shock Doctrine lays it out pretty well that 100's of thousands of people were tortured in the name of free market capitalism under the guise of denying commies territory by a bunch of business buffoons backed by the US military and cia.

But that's not the narrative we continue to get by business persons still on the path to beautification of Milton Friedman. So call US real state terrorists at the risk of smashing the mirror of US self-reflection into divisive smithereens.

We as a nation need an educator and justice server to help bind US together and heal the dupeification into war crimes. The US is in a state of denial and shame, and can't get up what with the MSM still spinning US into the dumb-dumb trance.

[elehhhhna]

16. I read it and still don't understand something...

it never explains what Freidman's POINT was. Just an experiment in free market capitalism? Seems he never bothered to "sell" anybody on a good reason to implement such harsh, confiscatory policies. What was the POINTof inflicting all this misery on so many people? I know it's really about theft & control of resources. But what was the stated, publicly acceptable reason the Freidmanonians gave for doing things their way?

[yardwork]

27. I can only speak for what I was taught in college in the early 1980s.

Almost everybody was in love with Friedman. Most of the adoration came not from what Friedman offered but what he tore down. The capitalists were mad at the left for the laws passed to protect the environment, which cut into company profits. They were mad at "the liberals" for workplace protection laws, OSHA, etc. They were looking for a way out - and Milton Friedman and the Chicago School offered it by creating a fairy tale. The fairy tale was that the workers of the world were perfectly happy just the way they were!

It was like the excuses for slavery that you still see sometimes among right-wing extremists. Milton Friedman presented a fairy tale that made the corporations back into the good guys and gave them an excuse to go after the "head in the clouds" liberals.

The press never reported that torture and murder was used to keep the populations in line. The presented the fairy tale just the way their corporate owners wanted it presented.

[azul]

54. Friedman was just the capitailistic dreamer, whose notions were seized upon

and used as justification by business opportunists to run roughshod over labor and the enviornment by way of defeating communism. Is was percieved as a necessary part of the effort in a war.

And the real, behind the scenes battle was capital fighting labor. And guess who got trounced and tortured and terrorized.

[FKA MNChimpH8R]

57. Friedman's version of capitalism is the quickest and most efficient road to enslaving

the entire population save for Chimpoleon's base of feudal lords. Count on it.

The haves have resisted every advancement brought to human civilization beginning with the Magna Carta. The imbeciles born to money (i.e., Smirko the Wonder Chimp) and greedheads have always wanted to return to a world where the masses have certain kinds of rights: The right to sit down, the right to shut the fuck up and the right to do as their betters command. The story of the last 600 years has been the struggle against that mindset. People in this country were too damned stupid to realize that all that progress could be rolled back. Reagan and the Bush crime family said that they would do exactly that and they got elected (except for Chimpo) anyway.

Molly Ivins said it best - the chickens are now willingly voting for Colonel Sanders.

[Marr]

7. I think they torture(d) primarily to get false information.

These are the guys who sold a war based on lies-- people who doctored the intelligence to promote their idiotic foreign policy. They pulled their torture techniques straight from a Chinese manual on *how to obtain false confessions*. That says it all.

They never wanted factual intelligence. They don't care about facts. They wanted items to scare the public with, and to help sell their continued occupation of Iraq.

[Th1onein]

25. BINGO!

You hit it right on the nail.

[defendandprotect]

38. That too -- they need confessions. . . but main reason is to control the population . . .

[Marr]

43. I don't see the control angle, personally.

Torture for control would look like Chile in the 70's. You know-- bodies being found out the open, that were clearly tortured. If you wanted to use torture to terrify a population, you'd make it visible and imply a personal threat.

The thugs in our government did everything they could to deny these programs even existed-- even after they were caught red handed. Remember the "bad apples" line? Ever since they were proven to be torturing people, they've been attempting to assuage the US public by insisting that we're only torturing 'those other people'. There's no implied threat to US citizens.

[defendandprotect]

53. They have been using FEAR ceaselessly in our own country . . ..

DO YOU NOT RECALL THAT IMMEDIATELY YOU SAW PEOPLE BEING ABUSED AT GUANTANAMO . . . ?
PEOPLE DEPRIVED OF ALL SENSORY SENSATION WITH ORANGE JUMP SUITS, GOGGLES ON EYES,
SOUND BLOCKING FOR EARS -- MITTENS ON HANDS. YOU KNEW IMMEDIATELY WHAT WAS HAPPENING...
DID YOU NOT?

Think of our prisons with more than 2.5 million --- ?
And our own prisoners are trying to get the message out saying they are being tortured in
these same ways.
That's a threat to you whether you understand it or not --

Drug War -- traffic stops where you can be intimidated into letting them search your car --
any police officer could "throw down" a drug parcel or a weapon.
That's a threat to you whether you feel it or not ---

Methods used against political protesters - anti-war groups --- spying on them --
roughing them up -- holding them in prison longer than usual -- not feeding them --
or providing rancid foods ---
NETTING THEM IN . . . . including people in wheelchairs, children in strollers ---
Forcing protesters into PENS . . . !
That's a threat to you and your freedom whether you get it or not ---


So . . . when it comes to torture we're all aware of the history of torture ---
so are they. The people in Nixon's White House were studying NAZI propaganda films.
Tens of thousands of NAZIs were brought into America at the end of WWII and became
founding members of our CIA - and took up positions in our FBI and NASA.
With families I think the number was almost 70,000.


As far as I'm aware, it was said of NAZI torture that it was done to keep the population
in line --- not those tortured. I have no personal experience with this. I simply
agree with those who study these issues.

If you notice, the thugs in the White House have almost brazenly and heroically revealed
now that they did put these torture programs into being --- that they sat around in the
White House discussing waterboarding.


Films did get out --- Congress seems to be the first to have seen them --- did they feel
intimidated? Naturally, stories got out; the Iraqis were the first to know what was
happening to their loved ones in these prisons.

And soldiers siccing on dogs against prisoners -
can you recall that picture in your own mind?

And, overall American citizens are being spied on --- internet, telephones, peace groups,
whatever . . .

That's why I have always felt that the remedy has to be impeachment as quickly as possible.

These are really sick people and murderous people ---

[Kitty Herder]

59. Bravo!!

Thanks for saying it.

[azul]

56. perhaps many reasons to promote torture, like rewarding the sadists

in the cabal. And maybe to get more scientific data to like help protect American serviceman in the newer technologies. Right.

It is the atrocity that the world will not bear. Period.

[merh]

67. To get data to protect servicemen?

What data can one hope to obtain from torture? Each individuals breaking point is different, you can't teach someone how to bear unending pain whether it be physical or emotional. The emotional scars of this war will haunt us for generations, our grandchildren will be trying to deal with them and the sad truth is, we inflicted the scars, we caused it all and we didn't have to.

"Studying" torture is sick and criminal. Each of those doctors that took hand in it should be stripped of their licenses and jailed as war criminals.

[flashl]

8. America is the largest exporter of 'war' and its economy relies on it. nt

[defendandprotect]

41. A nod to ole Brig. Gen. Smedley Darlington Butler --- "War Is A Racket--!!" . ..

long time ago --- a man to be remembered --- !!!

[malaise]

9. Shock Doctrine

plain and simple.

[Solly Mack]

10. That's a classic definition of terrorism. Hurt/kill/torture one to terrorize the rest

[LWolf]

11. And those among us who support a congress or an administration

that allows torture are complicit.

What a nightmare this nation has become.

[underpants]

12. I also think that they did it to make sure there was punishment for 9/11

this doesn't excuse it mind you but I would be surprised if that didn't have something to do with it-I saw Seymour Hersch allude to just this in an interview.

I also wouldn't be surprised of Dick or Bush themselves witness a few.

[NashVegas]

13. Oh, It's Totally a Control Factor

Don't tell me they don't love it every-time these atrocities come up on the news, along with their green-lighting, and no one is held to account for it.

[Joanne98]

14. It also creates a "diaster capitalism" boom...

If you're going to run a protection racket, you need enemies to threaten your people. Torture is good for bidness.

[Papa Boule]

15. To underscore--Not just foreigners. It intimidates the home folks too.

If you were a child and you found out your daddy was torturing other children, in spite of all assurances from him that you would never be tortured because you are family, you would still be deeply affected. Your sense of safety and security would be undermined.

You would conform to anything that parent desired. You'd adopt any belief system, take sides with him on any issue, or against any enemy, in order to make sure your approval and acceptance by him is secure. You'd have the need to do that to reassure yourself you will never be tortured.

[indepat]

17. That our use of torture is a form of terrorism and deliberate mental and physical damage

inflicted to terrorize society should be obvious to all. Beside, it should also be obvious to all that they like it if the story about blowing up frogs has even an iota of validity. :P

[G_j]

20. it has always been obvious that Bush has a sadistic, cruel streak

He sure seemed to enjoy putting people to death in Texas.

[indepat]

22. If your assessment has merit, one would think that those tens of millions

who have continued to support and shill for the man, his reckless environmental and fiscal policies, and his pre-emptive wars of aggression, the torture, et al, would have began to question what has and is being done to destroy this Republic, its Constitution, and too much of the rest of the world. Or are we only being nattering nabobs of negativism, i.e., bleeding heart librals? :shrug: :D :P

[defendandprotect]

42. Do you think Bush/Cheney ever worry about a revolt by those they're bullying . . .???

and I mean their own Repugs . . /staff ---

[ullad]

28. it has always been obvious that Bush has a sadistic, cruel streak

I read somewhere that he used to torure his cat.

[G_j]

40. ... cats, turtles? who knows?

but it would stand to make sense, given his actions as an adult.

[glitch]

18. K & R everybody needs to get this. nt

[barbtries]

19. that just makes sense

and i hadn't thought of it in that light. thanks for sharing

[slipslidingaway]

21. K&R thank you n/t

[Th1onein]

23. WRONG. That's not the main reason we torture.

The main reason is this: WE WANT COOKED INTELLIGENCE. Plain and simple.

[EFerrari]

24. Cooking intelligence doesn't require the ritual of torture.

All you need is Doug Feith in an office in the Pentagon and a good press person.

[Marr]

34. If you want a collection of false "leads", it's perfect.

If you want to be able to say things like, "we have signed statements from Iraqi officials admitting that Hussein is stockpiling WMD" or, "we've foiled a plot to blow up bridges", it's perfect.

[EFerrari]

52. That's true. Good point. n/t

[G_j]

26. why bother?

they can just concoct whatever they want anyway

[ThoughtCriminal]

29. They use it to get propaganda - not info

Torture does not provide useful intelligence, it gets you the answer that the victim thinks the torturer want to hear. The resulting "Testimony" is then used as propaganda to support what the state wants to do.

[calimary]

30. Sometimes even the bad guys tell the truth.

Reminds me of that old cartoon - I think it was Pogo - where the line was something like "we have seen the enemy and he is us."

[bbgrunt]

31. Let's not forget that it also has the side benefit of

creating more radical terrorists to justify their war without end.

[Frisbee]

32. And I thought...

it was just because it gives Cheney a boner quicker than massive doses of Viagra. Silly me.

[Causarius]

33. Not to control.

I don't think it was publicized enough to make it a control issue, but I definitely think there is a degree of that there, obviously...when does the government NOT want to control? Saying that "The government does ________ because they want control" is redundant.
That is why government raises taxes.
That is why government doles out welfare checks.
That is why there is a Department of Education.

I think the biggest factor in why US agents torture people is because they hate, despise and judge inferior and thereby get pleasure from from to torturing people that they torture.

[Jim Sagle]

35. Aren't you lost? The libertarian sites are over there, on the right.

[gatorboy]

36. Yeah, sure thing.

Government can't help it if it's citizens (Usually of the conservative nature) are too dumb with their finances. Sure Repugs love to talk about lousy government programs...let's see how fast they separate themselves from their social security. :eyes:

[Papa Boule]

37. Occam's razor, then. They do it because they like to do it. n/t

[2Design]

39. look at how congress and others continue to roll over for evil n/t

[bertman]

46. Torture is all of the things mentioned here and more. It's a big part of a "systems approach" to

domination of populations.

Psyops (psychological operations) have been part of military jargon and tactics since I was in the Army in the 60's and probably well before. The Nazis were masterful manipulators of the general population. At the end of WWII many of Germany's top behavioral scientists (along with weapons experts, biological, chemical and nuclear experts among other specialists) were captured by the Americans and were absorbed into our military-industrial-corporate complex. The expertise of the Nazis in controlling their national population was not lost on the elites in our government.

Torture, shock and awe, intimidation through occupation, destruction of infrastructure, control of the media, control of the police, monitoring of personal communications, all are parts of the methodology of making people fear their masters to the point that they become compliant. When some dare to rebel they are put down mercilessly and made examples of.

Causarius is right on in naming a number of government's functions that serve the needs of those who would control us. I'm not a libertarian, but I do recognize behavior modification and methods of control when I see them--or at least, I think I do.

I personally know individuals and families who are totally reliant upon government subsidies and who have absolutely no clue how to do anything for themselves except turn on the TV, drive to the mall, eat, and sleep. Of course this is an exaggeration but not by much. To ignore the deleterious effects of subsidizing segments of the population who have come to rely on government largesse is asking for an underclass of dependent and subservient semi-slaves. Before some of you wet your pants, I do support helping those who are in need, whether it's due to a lost job, medical problems, mental problems, economic dislocation and certainly the elderly who deserve Social Security. But, I am not naive enough to think that there is no dark side to the welfare state.

My kids are out of college now so I don't have much opportunity to see elementary schoolers, but I have been to an elementary school for plays and graduations of friends' kids a couple of times. I was astonished to see the regimentation that the teachers were using to control those kids. Everybody in line. No talking. Walk when we say walk. Sit when we say sit. This is not the school environment I experienced. To me, that methodology is scary. When I see this in a school system where there are many highly educated parents I wonder why they stand for the regimentation of their children. Maybe that's another reason private schools are so popular.

Back to torture. If you were a tyrant who knew that his people might rise against him if he started torturing his own citizens and it became common knowledge, wouldn't you ease into torture by first torturing your people's enemies in the name of saving your people? Then, when your people became desensitized to the idea of their government torturing people you could expand your torture program by torturing ONLY YOUR OWN PEOPLE WHO YOU NAME AS ENEMIES OF THE PEOPLE.

Seems to me we are right there NOW.

[happygoluckytoyou]

47. why does a dog lick his balls? BECAUSE HE CAN! welcome to america

[bonito]

48. A one sided game of psychopath's

SICK.

[disndat]

49. Banana Republic

Exactly like Pinochet's Chile or any other repressive regime. Bush is impoverishing th middle class to create a repressive oligarchy. Enron and the latest mortgage sub prime rate/Freddy Mae taxpayers bailouts were designed by Milton Friedman/Alan Greenspan/Ayn RAnd economic plans for this purpose. Less education, more youth going into the military are part of this scheme producing Military dictatorship. I still have hope that with the Obama presidency, in a few months, will turn this around.

[redqueen]

50. I think it's to guarantee that there are new insurgents. Disaster capitalism in action.

[live love laugh]

51. "Torture is a form of terrorism..." Once again, BushCo is guilty of projecting

their own dehumanizing scare and control tactics onto others in the guise of terrorism being a threat to the US. The biggest threat to the US is BushCo.

[lilyannerose]

55. The Real Reason . . . .

Hadn't quite thought about this before an admittedly I'm a bit out of the box on this and wondering if some of the die hard Bushies are remaining die hard due to an unconscous fear?

[Bobbie Jo]

58. To demoralize our millitary...

to function on the same non-human level as the criminals in charge.

[bdf]

60. Close, but no cigar

Yeah, repressive regimes do use torture in that way. Saddam did. The Argentinian gov't of a couple of decades ago did. But it only works if you have a good intelligence network.

If you have a good intelligence network then you get few false positives (people who are innocent being wrongly implicated) and few false negatives (you fail to receive reports on those who truly are part of a rebellion). If you have a poor intelligence network then you miss a lot of the rebels and you get a lot of false positives. Saddam had a good intelligence network, Dubya 'n' Dick do not.

Iraqis under Saddam knew that if they kept their noses clean it was almost certain that they would be unmolested and that if they joined a rebel cell it was almost certain they'd be ratted out and tortured. That kept the number of rebels small.

Iraqis under Bush know that it's almost completely random as to whether or not they get tortured as rebels. If they don't join the rebels they have the same chance of getting tortured as if they did, so they might as well rebel - nothing to lose, everything to gain. Which means that torture is fuelling the insurgency, not dampening it.

At this point the naïve will be thinking "another example of Bush incompetence." It's not. It's deliberate. Look how hard these guys worked to be allowed to use torture. They bribed and/or blackmailed various countries not to take them to the ICC for war crimes. Yoo and others wrote memos declaring that torture was legal because it wasn't really torture. Cheney tried to get Leahy to drop his anti-torture bill (which should not have been necessary in the first place since there were several existing statutes banning torture). When Leahy wouldn't change his mind Cheney pushed for an exemption for the CIA. When the bill passed, without a CIA exemption, Bush issued a signing statement saying that he had his fingers crossed behind his back when he signed it so it doesn't count. And the US military manual cited by the Leahy bill as defining permissible behaviour was promptly reissued with 5 new classified pages (you don't have to see them to know what those pages say, and it isn't pretty).

The truth is that Cheney and Wolfowitz planned this back in 1992, and the plan called for staying in Iraq until the oil wells were sucked dry. Also to use Iraq as a base to invade surrounding countries and steal their oil - hence the 14 permanent military bases under construction, and the largest US embassy in the world (which will become a regional headquarters of the US oil empire).

Under the Geneva Conventions (ones which Alberto "torture boy" Gonzalez would not deem quaint) the US, as an occupying power, has certain obligations. Once there is a stable government the US must leave Iraq. As long as the local government cannot provide certain essential services (food, water, health care, etc.) then the US must stay to provide them. Thus the US will never face the embarrassment of having to veto a UN resolution for it to leave Iraq, because such a resolution would be illegal as long as the insurrection continues. And the insurrection will continue as long as the torture continues. That is why they torture.

There is a bonus. Islam requires that Moslems join the fray if a fellow Moslem is attacked by an infidel. This torture is inflaming the entire Islamic world. And many Islamic countries happen to sit on top of most of the world's oil. Nobody would be surprised if Iranian, Kuwaiti, Saudi, or Nigerian terraists attacked the US, justifying a retaliatory invasion to steal their oil. The opportunity for more false-flag operations continues as long as the torture does.

[Usrename]

62. That's only half the story.

Welcome to DU!

Fueling the war is only half of the story. The other half is just as sinister. We tortured these folks in order to help create the entire false narrative about 9/11. We know now that the official report produced by the 9/11 Commission is the product of waterboarding confessions from people. It is a complete and total sham, a bogus report that is full of lies.

The report does not contain anything about the $100,000.00 Mohamad Atta received from the Pakistani intelligence agency days before the attacks. The publicly released version of the report has 20 pages redacted, supposedly incriminating the Saudi government. We KNOW that the official story of how the attacks were planned and carried out is complete bullshit. A fabrication. Torture was instrumental in creating this myth.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=3367258#3369074



http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=3041310

[DemoTex]

61. The torturers' new weapon-of-choice? The TASER.

Torture-in-public made easy.

[G_j]

63. good observation

let us not overlook the obvious!

[bettyellen]

64. It's a Neo-Con thing- they hate International law, think we are too "soft on crime"

9/11 was the perfect opportunity for them to bring out the big bully in all Americans.

[rhett o rick]

66. Right on! Good post. I'm too late to R but here's a K.

Population control via terrorism is the number one use of torture.

Others are:

Show the population that you (gov) are actively aggressive for their protection.

Gain false confessions to prove you are torturing the right people.

Gain false info to use for propaganda.

And last but not least, satisfy a psychopathic or even a sociopathic lust.

[derby378]

69. The Bottom Line (thanks to Negativland for this)

(Sobbing of an adult male)
(Electronic apparatus, possibly a drill or a set of electrodes)
(Female voice, agonized, possibly pleading)
"I was sitting there on Sunday morning, in the Chief of Police’s office, at a large table..."
Torture.
"He was listening to a football game..."
Let's be up front about it.
"...a football game..."
Torture. T-O-R-T-U-R-E.
"...on the small transistor radio."
That's the bottom line these days.
"And I began to hear..."
It's replaced death. Even teenagers kill themselves these days...
"And I..."
...along with the depressed...
"And I..."
...and terminally ill.
"And I began to hear..."
Death's a release from pain and anxiety and humiliation...
"...this very low..."
...a valued reward.
"...this very low wailing sound..."
But the threat of death just isn't enough to control people, so the ante's been raised.
"...coming through the walls."
Now...
(Cry of anguish)
...it's torture...
"Then it got louder..."
...and high-tech torture at that.
"Then it got louder, and it was a moaning sound."
As the technocrats say, it's "functional."
"The Chief of Police told the Colonel to turn up the radio."
That's why everyone who's intelligent and unanesthetized enough to care...
"Then..."
...has sort of put their life on hold.
"Then the sound got louder..."
Underneath all the defensive layers of denial...
"...and turned to..."
...we're all afraid of being tortured...
"...anguish..."
(Male gasping for air)
...or homosexually gang-raped, or having it happen to someone we care about.
"...screaming..."
We're all self-consciously living a lie.
"And I knew what it was."
We're all happy Joes.
"And I knew that this man was being tortured with..."
How did it happen here in the land of the free and the home of the brave?
"...tortured with electricity."
(Male sobbing)
I mean, in some banana republic...
"Well, it kept getting louder..."
...some distant past like the Spanish Inquisition...
"...and more horrible..."
(Agonized female voice)
...World War II, the Nazis and the fanatical Japs.
"And each time..."
But not us Americans.
(Male screaming)
"And each time..."
GI Joe.
"And each time..."
Frank Sinatra.
"And each time..."
Jerry Lewis. Autumn in New York.
"The Chief would tell the Colonel..."
Baseball.
"...to turn up the radio."
(Pleading female voice)
College football. Glenn Miller.
"Pretty soon..."
Somehow, it doesn't fit with torture.
"Pretty soon, the radio was very, very loud..."
But it does, of course, does.
"...but I could still hear those sounds."
Because it was always a façade, the image of America. And now, the façade has finally failed...
"...anguish..."
...like a burned-out clutch...
"...screaming..."
...or a decayed tooth that bursts open.
"...horrible..."
They both smell bad.
(Agonized female voice)
Strange.
(Agonized female voice)
Ominous.
(Male sobbing and gasping for breath)
"Going back to the office in the Embassy, naturally I was speculating who that possibly could have been."
(Male screaming)