Democratic Underground

The Daily War Watch
Importing Terror Through the FBI
October 24, 2001
by J B

Printer-friendly version of this article Tell a friend about this article Discuss this article

Did you know your government is considering the adoption of torture as a means of gaining information from suspects detained without charge and without trial concerning the September 11 attacks? Talk about blowback. Did you know that the anti-terrorism law that is being advocated would allow torture by foreign nations to be used as legitimate evidence in a US court of law?

Did you know that the idea of using torture ourselves and extraditing suspects to torture-using nations is being openly discussed to representatives of the The Times (of London) and the Washington Post, whether or not new laws are passed?

Did you?

I'll be blunt. I'm in no mood to play word games here. The FBI has gone too far. Bush has gone too far here by getting so many people who supported Guatemalan death squads and torturers and covered up their crimes for the sake of the Cold War that I cannot whatsoever be sure that he does not have the distinct desire to import death squads to the United States, creating real Gestapos and not pretend ones, which will have the legal ability, indeed, the duty and obligation, to use torture against American citizens... as long as they're suspicious.

Who is suspicious? Arab-Americans. Arabs in the United States who are not citizens. Moslems? Hey, a lot of Arab-Americans happen to be Christians. However, anyone who prefers to educate him or her self about what the right wing is really thinking about these people who are "different" should read the latest from the female trifecta, Ann Coulter, Peggy Noonan, and Mona Charen.

You may also wish to read Justin Raimondo's merciless mockery of Peggy's last article, which brings new meaning to the unpolitically correct term "hysterical." I'm sorry, ladies, don't think that I'm painting anyone but these particular sad cases with this brush: they're deliberately leaving their sanity behind to snuggle up to Real Men, as they believe Real Men to be.

Personally I think a Real Man does not need to spend his life trying to look like a Real Man. But that's another matter.

My problem is this: The anti-terrorism law that Ashcroft and Hatch and others smeared opposition to as being support for Osama Bin Laden, declaring it a patriotic and military imperative, are also declaring support for strict constructionist judges (a strict constructionist favors law enforcement and disfavors criminals, favors civil rights defendants and disfavors civil rights plaintiffs, paraphrasing the words of Judge Reinquist) to be a patriotic and military imperative.

These judges, presumably, would be used to stuff the federal courts so that when torture is used against you and I, despite our innocence, we will get a hearing before a law and order judge who will tell us why it is necessary and why it is consistent with the Constitution of the United States of America and the vision of the Founding Fathers.

I'm not stretching this much at all.

What the hell are these people thinking? They are talking out loud about instituting torture as an official policy of the United States of America! They're even talking about extraditing criminals on the expectation, indeed, the demand, that the nations extraditing them torture the criminals. Of course, they're criminals because we say they are; they haven't had hearings nor trials, so no one has any real idea, under any kind of objective forum, like a court, that they really are criminals.

Remember, this is not like a grand jury; this is not about secret indictments, secret testimony, anything like that. This is about the executive branch using national security as a cloak behind which to do whatever they want to human beings without judicial review. We have to simply take the executive branch at its word and trust the men and women who carry out the will of the President.

Trust the government? To administer torture fairly and judiciously without trial?

What kind of America is this?

The Terror is gripping the government; the Terror will soon grip us, because it will come, not from Osama Bin Laden, but from our own protectors. Soon the protectors will use the Terror to protect only themselves, just like the Taliban, and to be frank, just like Saudi Arabia. (It's not like they make any secret of this; they simply justify it, like those who became the first 'terrorists' during the French Revolution.)

When will Jeb Bush declare that if his brother seeks to become Emperor, then he (Jeb) will shoot his brother (George) himself?

Yes, yes, that is a stretch, but it's a stretch only because this whole damned thing is un-American to its very core. Did we get terrorized to the point where we are expected to see torture as a patrotic duty that the FBI must perform on our behalf? Remember, this is law enforcement. They'll take advantage of absolutely anything they're allowed to do because they're convinced it's for a good cause. It's their DUTY to abuse whatever power they are allowed to protect us.

So if we make torture legal, and we put Giuliani in charge of the CIA, if Bush can stand having another bigshot on his payroll, doesn't that mean that the next Abner Louima gets told, "Sorry, pal, it's for national security, you're not allowed to tell anyone, and you can't sue, and your hospital bill will be in the mail?"

Remember, this is all being advocated under the nose of the Attorney General of the United States of America, a Senate-confirmed individual who directly serves the President of the United States. His people, people who are "high ranking" according to the journalists involved, are either extremely rebellious, to the point of advocating breaching American law for the sake of American national security, or changing American law to legalize torture in America, or they are doing it with his express permission to do so.

So there you have it. Torture is now patriotic. We have a duty to torture Osama's men, to protect the children. We have a responsibility to start extracting fingernails and maiming and beating to near-unconsciousness.

Perhaps the Israelis will insist we don't have to call it torture; only simpletons do that. We call it "pressure." After all, "moderate pressure" is a good legal standard, isn't it? National security is at stake. Lives are at stake.

Well wake up. There are more important things than mere lives at stake.

The Founding Fathers would understand.

I don't think conservatives will. That is why I no longer am one.

Previous Editions of The War Watch