« Clinton Obama Campaign: Negative Campaign Or Political Reality?
Democrat takes Solid GOP House Seat »



Bush Supports Undifferentiated Tortures, Even as “The People” Explicitly Do Not

March 9th, 2008
By DR. CLARISSA PINKOLA ESTÉS, Assistant Editor, TMV Columnist

Print Print

By his veto, President Bush broadcasts loudly to the world that a bill forbidding water boarding torture of human beings, and other egregious harms to prisoners held without habeas corpus, shall, by his fiat, continue.

Mr. Bush argues that ‘we,’ not he, cannot be having any humane treatment of prisoners. That ‘we’ must be able to use torture ‘techniques.’ That we “can’t, can’t can’t” remove even one item, e.g., water boarding, from the torture menu.

It almost makes a soul wish for an effective “Woody Allen moment” ….in one of Allen’s films, the cultural icon Marshall McLuhan steps out from behind a movie standee to support Woody Allen’s argument against an insufferable boor who was patronizing Allen.

Would that Harry Truman would step out from behind the people of the United States and tell Mr. Bush that “The buck stops with you pal… what’s this ‘we’ business? The ‘say so,’ yes or no, is with no one else in such heavy matters, but with you.”

What else continues to be missing in the President’s monologue, is the ever insistent voice of ‘the people’ who strenuously object to treating human beings inhumanely. The No! to torture, is not because “the people” are dunces. It is because they are developed in strategic and common sense consciousness of various kinds. (I’ve written about one kind here too, at The National Catholic Reporter newspaper online.)

Couple the President’s shocking ‘written in stone’ support for ongoing torture with an item from the President in a different category altogether. This week President Bush claimed he is too tightly scheduled to accompany John McCain on any part of Senator McCain’s campaign for the presidency. The President is very busy.

In Governments, Prevarication Can Become A Chronic Pathology if There are Also Only Cardboard Checks and Balances

If there is no brave and insightful soul to lead an inquiry– not first into what governance people are doing exactly, but first into why checks and balances are not in place, what happened to each of them, who are the clogs in the spillways, who are the destroyers of the sieves and sifters that ordinarily catch what ought not be allowed to pass.

In a way, it is not surprising that government videos, audio tapes, emails have utterly disappeared from the field of evidence in agencies whose SOLE job is to gather evidence. With only cardboard people conducting flat, un-insightful cardboard inquiries, we get paper dust, instead of documents.

And more prevarications.

In legends, behind the young prevaricator, there usually stands a far older one who is instructing the younger one.

I continue to think that George Bush is not the magneto of all these egregious matters. He is only the voice that has been persuaded by others, not of his family, but extero-family, likely a cadre of several old men whose wing mates are a cadre of ambitious and aging men… several layers deep.

There are old folk tales in my family about how the scheming, foolish and greedy parents of a young woman or young man whisper a polluted advice to their young. They instruct their young to be insincere in order to deceive an individual, a village, a stranger, or a kingdom… and the motive is to gain power, or a leg up, or some other boon or advantage not won squarely.

But in the tales, this prevarication backfires in time. The leitmotifs of those stories, including Bluebeard and Beauty and The Beast, Eros and Psyche too, display that this lying, manipulating, positioning and not telling all the truth… causes their young to nearly be killed, or to be abandoned by the forces of good, or to die for the parents’ lies.

Think of how wars are made and waged when based on a lie. Whether it be Von Klauschwitz, or Patton, or Ike or other military strategists, it is said the worst thing an army can have, a people can have, a kingdom can have… is an inept leader in wartime… one who does not understand that his own reckless, grandstanding behaviors, and his ’secret behaviors that are not secret,’ will only make the enemy stronger.

The underlying points of the old tales I know from my family are the similar to the premises found about human nature– and lack of humanity– in Sun Tzu’s The Art of War…. Such as, imagining one will be attacked and to attempt to torment all persons whom one imagines to have attack on their minds, is the weakest position.

Why? Because it enrages the army of the enemy when those deceits and devastations are reckoned. It does not defeat the enemy and save human life. Instead, it creates a stronger, wilder, more heartbroken-crazed enemy, and the loss of life on both sides, will thereby be far more enormous.

There is a falsity for certain about allowing the CIA to torture while loudly proclaiming the military is constrained from doing so—as though this is an acceptable compromise. ‘Not my brother, but the cousin’s brother of my brother will do the deed,’ therefore we are exonerated. The ill machination in all that is clear.

There’s may be an additional trope in Mr. Bush not wanting to pass legislation against torture: Rewarding others for loyalty is Mr. Bush’s most significant psychological feature. It is the way he binds people to himself. Protecting those who would likely be prosecuted if the new bill hadn’t been vetoed is far more likely his companion motive.

Thus, the ‘we’ in “we need to have torture techniques’ is not we, as in “we the people.” It is ‘we,’ as in Mr. Bush’s friends whom he wants to protect.

The pattern may continue in petty ways as well. Is there a falsity in President Bush’s claim that he’s too busy to squire McCain? Bush has taken more days of vacation than any other president. He doesn’t seem to be ‘too busy.’ It appears far more so that he simply doesn’t want to dutch McCain’s chances of winning various groups that don’t care for Mr. Bush, and wont care, given this latest veto on a bill… a veto that appears to extend the will of ‘his people’ and kicks to the side of the road again, the will of “the people” of the United States.

The questions that stand out to me over and over, go something like this:
–How dumb do those who advise the president think “we, the people” really are?
–What is the thinking of those who advise and enact, that they put forth statements which seem fashioned to be crafty and cunning?
–How is it they do not fear their contrivances will be seen through by even the most astute rabbit in the kingdom?
– How much can a president look down his nose at the will of the majority of people– as brought to him by the people’s representatives– and still continuously create outrageous distortions and think we cannot put 2 and 2 together?

Two and two is still four last I looked, even though some in Mr. Bush’s administration seem to repeat over and over that the sum of 2 and 2 is Me me me. And, We we we. But, never ever, “You, our people….”



This entry was posted on Sunday, March 9th, 2008 at 3:41 am and is filed under Newsweek Blogitics, Torture. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Viewing 6 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    The people from all over the world have been gathering sticks
    and when the time is right they will make a very big fire
    Their prayers are not mumbled and they rise above the prayers for salvation
    One day the mantra will reach a point of combustion
    When that day comes the little man, the psychopath and cheerleader for torture
    will be picked up by the Gods, whipped about like a twig in a twister
    his money makin' buddies too, we'll have two second trials
    and set the whole blaze a glow.....and like a sudden plague,
    so deep do dark so destructive, he and his ilk will be gone---
    • ^
    • v
    Excellent article Dr. E and a well said comment 1 by spirasol, too.

    Thank you both.
    • ^
    • v
    A few specific forms of torture are being defended.

    ...

    "The CIA sources described a list of six 'Enhanced Interrogation Techniques' instituted in mid-March 2002 and used, they said, on a dozen top al Qaeda targets incarcerated in isolation at secret locations on military bases in regions from Asia to Eastern Europe. According to the sources, only a handful of CIA interrogators are trained and authorized to use the techniques:

    1. The Attention Grab: The interrogator forcefully grabs the shirt front of the prisoner and shakes him.

    2. Attention Slap: An open-handed slap aimed at causing pain and triggering fear.

    3. The Belly Slap: A hard open-handed slap to the stomach. The aim is to cause pain, but not internal injury. Doctors consulted advised against using a punch, which could cause lasting internal damage.

    4. Long Time Standing: This technique is described as among the most effective. Prisoners are forced to stand, handcuffed and with their feet shackled to an eye bolt in the floor for more than 40 hours. Exhaustion and sleep deprivation are effective in yielding confessions.

    5. The Cold Cell: The prisoner is left to stand naked in a cell kept near 50 degrees. Throughout the time in the cell the prisoner is doused with cold water.

    6. Water Boarding: The prisoner is bound to an inclined board, feet raised and head slightly below the feet. Cellophane is wrapped over the prisoner's face and water is poured over him. Unavoidably, the gag reflex kicks in and a terrifying fear of drowning leads to almost instant pleas to bring the treatment to a halt.

    According to the sources, CIA officers who subjected themselves to the water boarding technique lasted an average of 14 seconds before caving in. They said al Qaeda's toughest prisoner, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, won the admiration of interrogators when he was able to last between two and two-and-a-half minutes before begging to confess."

    http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Investigation/story?i...
    • ^
    • v
    All I've read says that these techniques are not effective and the 'confessions' mean nothing, other than that we'll say anything to survive. (What did McCain say?)

    If the administration asserts this is yielding valid 'intelligence' then PROVE it. Disclose who and how many were tortured and what actionable results this provided.

    I've said it many times before, are we OK with these techniques being used on American soldiers? If it's legal here we can't prosecute for this treatment of our citizens. This is 'supporting our troops?'

    "According to sources" doesn't do it for me. These people are total liars. Let them say it under oath and turn over video, audio or in-person proof of their claims.
    • ^
    • v
    I've wondered who the real influence regarding this is, too. GWB doesn't seem like the type to really stand up/for anything, to me, unless I am misreading him. His past failures in the business world, school, etc. makes me think that he doesn't really invest too much of himself (soul) into *anything*. Maybe his ego is too big to let him?

    As long as citizens let this go on, it will go on. It doesn't take many people to change anything. Heck, John Adams said that only 1/3 of folks were for the American Revolution, 1/3 didn't care one way or another, and 1/3 were British loyalists. Unfortunately, folks in America (for whatever reason) seem to have more invested in American Idol or whatever right now. And that's the only way to change anything - stand up/out.

    You can have top-down changes (if someone "grows a pair" in Washington and puts their foot down) but the only real change can only come from citizens who tell the government to knock it off. (The Civil Rights Act of '64 only came about after regular people sat at lunch counters, boycotted, etc, for example.)

    CNN had a poll online about torture and last time I looked it was about 50/50 for and against.

    Sorry this is so long but this whole issue just pisses me off.
    • ^
    • v
    I would remind readers that it's probably Cheney, not Bush, who is running things.
 
close Reblog this comment
Powered by Disqus · Learn more
blog comments powered by Disqus

« Clinton Obama Campaign: Negative Campaign Or Political Reality?
Democrat takes Solid GOP House Seat »


By posting comments on The Moderate Voice you are acknowledging and agreeing to the following general comments policy:

(1) The Moderate Voice's comments are hosted by Disqus (http://disqus.com). If your comment doesn't appear immediately, please be patient since it is an off-site system.

(2) All e-mail received from readers by The Moderate Voice is considered intended for publication unless otherwise indicated in the initial message from the writer. Please do not send us attachments unless you contact us and we agree to it.

(3)The Moderate Voice reserves the right to edit all e-mail and posted comments for content, clarity, and length.

(4) Our comment space is reserved for comments that relate to a post's topic. You should not reprint lengthy text from your own works or those of others, including news articles. You MAY link to them.

(5) Comments that are abusive, offensive, contain profane or racist material or violate the terms of service for this blog's host provider will be removed and the author(s) banned from future comments. Such comments also violate the very SPIRIT of this site -- which was created to encourage thoughtful and vigorous discussion among readers who may share differing viewpoints.

(6) All points of view are welcome on The Moderate Voice, with the following exceptions:

(a) Comments posted several times a day with the intent of dominating, re-directing or hijacking the thread by turning a discussion into the equivalent of a bitter shouting match.

(b) Comments posted several times a day that insult or call other commenters or blog writers names or repeatedly make the same point with the effect of or clear intent to annoy other commenters or blog writers.

(7) Name-calling, personal attacks, racist comments or use of profanity by any commenter, whether they are by persons who agree or disagree with the views expressed by The Moderate Voice will NOT be tolerated and will result in the deletion of the comment and the banning of the commenter's ISP address, without notice. In some cases a comment may be deleted and the writer will be given another chance. Commenters who virtually ASK The Moderate Voice to ban them by ignoring any warnings or daring TMV to ban them will quickly get their wish.

(8) Anonymous commenters should identify themselves with the same moniker, so readers know their comments are coming from a single individual. If they don't, they are subject to a banning.

(9)If we have problems with inappropriate or inflammatory comments from a commenter who it turns out gave a fake email address that person is subject to immediate banning.

(10) Quotes from material appearing on The Moderate Voice with attribution are allowed. Reprints are allowed only by permission from The Moderate Voice. You may request permission by e-mail.

(11) The Moderate Voice is a personal site. It is not the Government. It is NOT aligned with any political party. It is NOT promoting any specific candidate for office. It is not a public institution or a media organization. It is not a neutral site. It is intended to express and disseminate the authors' varying points of views. Writers on this weblog WILL take positions. It reserves the right to limit comments to those that, in its view, comport with its stated comment policy. Comments that do not comply are subject to deletion and banning of the author's ISP.

Disclaimer:

--Reading and posting comments at The Moderate Voice constitutes acknowledgment of and agreement to the terms outlined in this comment policy. This comment policy may be revised in part or in full at any time.

--All comments must comport with applicable state and federal laws. The Moderate Voice has no obigation to monitor, edit, censor, or take responsibility for comments. It may or may not act upon a violation of its comment policy once a suspected violation has been brought to its attention. Therefore, commenters are solely responsible for the content of their comments and should ensure that that their comments are lawful and fall within the stated guidelines of both The Moderate Voice and its hosting company.

--The Moderate Voice is not be responsible for injury or liability to any reader or commenter resulting from its own communications or those of commenters, that may be offensive, misleading, inaccurate, illegal, or otherwise unsuitable in the view of the reader. Readers and commenters further agree to indemnify and hold harmless The Moderate Voice from claims resulting from the use of any material appearing on The Moderate Voice which damages the reader, commenter or any other party.

--The Moderate Voice is not responsible for and might disagree with material posted in the comments section. While we strive for accuracy in our posts and DO correct errors, material posted by The Moderate Voice in its posts -- or those left by others in the comments section -- may or may not be accurate.

Read and Post at your own risk.