I shouldn't be surprised, really. I mean, W. came out of Texas, so I shouldn't be surprised to find that one half of Texas Republicans polled now think the state should secede from the United States.
"Do you approve or disapprove of Governor Rick Perry's suggestion that Texas may need to leave the United States?"
….among Texas Republicans, it's 51% approval to 44% disapproval.
Call me crazy…but that seems a bit extreme to me. Just because Texas GOP'ers lost the last election, now they want to take their statehood ball and go home?
Perry's crazy call for Texas to secede, however, is like the cartoon before the feature film.
________
The Republican Party has now become, from all observable data, the party of torture. It's the damnest thing. For the longest time, because Bush/Cheney and Co. kept a pretty tight totalitarian house, the Republican response to accusations of torture by the Bush administration was simply, and repeatedly, "America doesn't torture."
Simple denial. No one could prove otherwise without the threat of a one way trip to Guantanomo, so the "America doesn't torture" mantra was all we ever heard when the topic arose.
Now that it is clear that, yes, America did torture and the Bush administration ordered that torture….Republicans are throwing around some really crazy sh*t, I guess, in the hope that America will adopt the practice of torture…or something.
Here's what I mean…..
I'm hearing two basic "arguments" from rightwing conservatives in defense of Bush/Cheney savagery.
1) It's effective. Torture works. Not only does it work, these extremist Republicans say, but Bush's use of it saved American lives.
I blogged yesterday about there being no evidence that torture worked. There's no evidence that torturing Mohammed or Zubaida produced any actionable intelligence. None. In addition, experts in the field unanimously hold that torture produces unreliable information. It's not effective in producing good intel. FBI Director, Robert Mueller, to his great credit, yanked his agents out of those interrogations because he knew torture did not produce reliable intel and that it was illegal.
But consider: The information released in the last week informs us that Bush-ordered, Condi-approved torture tactics were used in sequence on detainees. What that means is that when Khalid Shaik Mohammed was being waterboarded 6 times a day….in between those waterworks sessions….other torture tactics were used on him too. Mull that over.
Sleep deprivation, stress positioning, slapping, and (my favorite) walling were all, most likely, worked in, in between KSM's every-six-hours of near-death-by-drowning experiences. All that sadistic punishment…..and still no reliable intelligence.
I have no misgivings about KSM. He should spend the rest of his life rotting in a federal prison……but I don't want him tortured in my name.
2) "We did it to our own troops, so it can't be torture."
The SERE program. Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape. A U.S military program that trains military personnel and private contractors on how to cope with "enemy" torture tactics, should they ever be captured. SERE officials were contacted by Rumsfeld in December, 2001, asking them to train military personnel and private contractors on how to conduct the torture tactics we've now learned about.
The even-more-extreme-since-the-election Republicans have been spouting off, repeatedly, that if what we did to Mohammed and Zubaida was torture, then what we did to our own trainees in the SERE program was also torture. The "argument" goes that we wouldn't torture our own guys, and since the SERE program includes training for the waterboard, sleep deprivation, etc.,….that means those tactics are not torture.
Do you think that U.S soldiers being trained by SERE were waterboarded 6 times a day for 30 days?
As breathtakingly ignorant as the SERE "argument" seems…..I heard it many times from crazy conservative types yesterday. That's why I'm saying…..Republicans are getting more extreme, not less.
Let's tackle this stupidity head on, whattya' say?
We hire SERE people to train our soldiers to cope with our enemies' potential use of torture tactics against them, should they be captured and detained. What the enemies do, according to the training, is considered to be torture, fully outside of all internationally accepted behavior. The SERE training is not meant to strengthen our soldiers to resist breaking down under torture….everyone breaks down, ask John McCain,….it's meant to prepare them for what could happen, so that panic doesn't set in when it does happen, and they can cope, they know what to expect.
So, the intent of the SERE training is to prepare our guys so they can cope with illegal torture tactics used against them, should they ever be captured by torturers.
What was the objective for using SERE torture tactics on Khalid Mohammed and Abu Zubaida? Were CIA contractors helping KSM and Zubaida by preparing them for potential torture tactics being used against them in the future? Were they preparing them for, say, Egyptian torture tactics? Was that the goal of using those SERE torture tactics down in Gitmo?
Of course not. The "interrogators" who used reverse-engineered SERE tactics down in Gitmo were not training anyone. The "interrogators" were, in real life, standing in for our enemies. Our CIA representatives, our Pentagon representatives, became the enemy, the torturers. Not training…..torturing.
Republican crazees need to back away from the cliff. Americans rejected the GOP because the GOP has been out of touch with the American people on numerous policy issues. Do Republicans, conservatives, think that these even-more-extreme notions about torture will win over more American voter hearts and minds?
Really?
Will the future Republican Party actually campaign on the proposition that torture is a valuable "tool" for our military? Will the GOP tell us, as opposed to lily-livered, appeasing Democrats, that if they are elected they will keep us safe….by keeping torture on the table?
Update: Atrios explains the extremism like only he can….
"The United States doesn't torture, but anyone who opposes torture is un-American."
{ 37 comments… read them below or add one }
Didn't a bunch of liberals say they were going to move to Canada after Bush was elected in 2000 ?
Isn't KSM "rotting in prison" for the rest of his life in isolation and maximum security in a tiny little cell, in fact, torture ? Pretty barbaric of you to condone such a thing. What are you, some kind of extremist ?
You know — right now torture is against the law. If it is do darn effective in protecting us then go change the darn law. See how many of these yapping torture loving conservatives have the guts to go and and try to change the law. You either obey the law, change the law, or you are a criminal because did not obey the law. It is just like the Constitution — some would like to follow only part of the Constitution — well you either support our Constitution or you do not. If something is wrong with it or the Bill of Rights then go through the proper channels to change it — if you can get a majority of the voting citizens to agree with you. Quit yapping about it and DO something.
Last week it was right wing radicalism — Conservatives were so incensed by warnings about the threat of right wing radicalism that they were considering overthrowing the federal government. Haven't conservatives anything else to do but YAP? I do and I am headed back out to spread another 2 yards of mulch.
I feel sooooooooooo sorry for KSM. Let's put him out of our misery. Or send him over to your house with something sharp.
No one feels sorry for KSM. What we feel bad about is how easily our nation, during Bush, descended into lawless and barbaric behavior.
CSD….my good person…..you seem to be taking the back and forth discussion about torture just a little too personally.
I love your sentiment, mary. If it's worth yapping about so much, then it should be worth doing something about, besides just yapping.
And King, my longtime blog bud, I don't remember the Massachusetts governor talking secession in 2001. Could have been, but I don't remember hearing that.
People who are serving life sentences in prison are being kept away from society. That's the point. The torture discussion isn't about those we suspect of being the bad guys. It's about who we are as Americans. I know you know that.
The right is getting more strident in vocalizing our disdain for the current administration, because the current administration is getting more extremely left. Obama is a Soros sock puppet. Revealing national security secrets to enemies is the height of stupidity, completely irresponsible, or an arrogant attempt to appear more "moral". Hey – if Obama didn't like the program, he could have just ended it and said so. There was no compelling reason to release tactics other than to demonize conservatives, intelligence services and those with the balls to defend America with violence. This current administration is providing AQ with a timeout and with information, and it will bite all Americans soon enough.
Waterboarding is not torture. If you can survive it hundreds of times, it is not torture. All this "outrage" is a political headshot, and Americans perceived targeted by that headshot will react viscerally to it. You won once, so enjoy it now. Another vote is coming, and it is easier to be the voice of change than it is to cling to power.
The whole Texas thing is the gov throwing red meat to his nitwit base to rile them up because he's likely to lose his governorship to Kay Bailey Hutchison.
Gotta love the attempts of the right to justify the indefensible. How Obama navigates this crap sandwich will show his true political skill.
Mary do terrorists that killed thousands of innocent Americans have access to the same Bill of Rights as you and I, because I never read that if you are a terrorist from another country and you kill 4000 American citizen and threaten the live of millions more that you have rights. I thought those rights were reserved for AMerican citizens and not our enemies. And what kind of hogwash have you been listening to that said conservatives were considering over throwing the govt? Was it Olberdork or Madcow or some other conspiracy website? Do you really believe that?
And rev does that mean we are to be such passive panty wastes that we reward the murder of our citizens by terrorist groups with a slap on the wrist, painful and uncomfortable as a slap may be? Now we have Pelosi lying about not knowing what was said in her meeting when they told eveyone what was happening. I think there must be something in the water in washinton that makes lib politicians lie or give them temporary memory loss. hhmmmmm some examples: Dodd-" I don't know how that got in there. / Pelosi – " I don't remember that part of the conversation." Even though everyone else at the table did.( she was probably calculating how much cash she an her husband were going to make after they invested with Pickens) Bill Clinton-" I did not have sex…." Hillary and Barrack-"90% of the guns you have come from America…." To the Mexicans. Obama-I lowered taxes on 95% of Ameircan" SHould added this But I spent your next 5 generations cash, I'm gonna raise your energy costs by 120%, "I love the unions"…even though I am gonna cut your pay and take away your safety nets..you can count on us". Countless libs with this one-" Was I supposed to pay those taxes?" there are so many more…..
averagejoe No one ever said terrorists have rights — what I said is that if you do not like a law do something to change it instead of yapping and bitching about it forever and I guess I am just better read than you because I read a couple of blogs and more than a couple of signs at tea parties saying the conservatives should overthrow the government. Do I believe it — I do not know — I do know I would not say it unless I meant it. You see all of the conservative cowards who let the government spy on them and and take away their rights to keep them SAFE should be careful what they say and do because big brother is really watching now.
Dave…
"Revealing national security secrets to enemies is the height of stupidity, completely irresponsible, or an arrogant attempt to appear more "moral"."
Obama outlawed any reliance on the Bybee/Bradbury/Yoo torture memos. Therefore, those memos are no longer national security issues and releasing them endangers no one….except for those who wrote and implemented the torture tactics.
"There was no compelling reason to release tactics other than to demonize conservatives, intelligence services and those with the balls to defend America with violence."
The White House was under a deadline to respond to an FOIA request from the ACLU for those memos. Obama was responding to a court case. Because Obama outlawed the use of the techniques, there was no national security reason to obstruct their release.
Obama also stated clearly that intelligence services workers, obeying orders based on those memos, would not be prosecuted. No threat to morale there.
If you want to label following a rule of law, "demonizing conservatives", be my guest. Of course, then conservatives would quickly earn a reputation for being lawless….I mean, don't you think? Heck, I think the Republican Party is a criminal organization right now. So, if lawlessness is the way forward, knock yourself out.
It's odd, though, how so many conservatives insisted on the vitally important place the rule of law held in our society….but that was when White House blowjobs were threatening national security. So I guess it was different, huh?
Hey Avg., you could at least get your numbers right…..4000?
Sorry TBomb I didn't realize that you were the fact check police. Jeez King compliments you once….. In my mind it doesn't matter if it was 1 or 2800. (Sort of a little distorted number, like the 3 people that were waterboarded. You would have thought it was 100's and we were Attila the Hun by the way the media plays it.)
Oh yeah you are more well read Mary. I've looked at some of the conspiracy theory websites you quote. It amazes me how people actually beleive those sites but I guess if you use just the right spin and touch the core values of the readers, people will believe anything.
You do believe that the Neo-cons are wanting to take over the country, otherwise you wouldn't be spreading the rumor. How absurd.
It's like me spreading this story:
Tuesday morning Rahm Emanuel burst into the office to tell the president that 3 brazilian women were killed in a terrorist attack. Apparently, Obama fell to his knees praising and praying to Allah for guidance. When about half way through the prayer looked up and these were his exact words. "Rahm how many is a brazillion? It's true, I saw it on Mother Earth News.
averagejoe Very prominent video just released showing Michele Bachman R Minnesota calling for revolution because of Homeland Security's report on right wing extremeism. Did not see it on a conspiracy website and I have never quoted an extremist website in this blog but I do read them to see what is going on — makes me better read
I should say ANOTHER video of MIchele Bachman
good Reverend….looks like you've been hoodwinked again.
A couple quick points:
As a former resident of Texas I can tell you that nearly a large percentage of Texans (no fewer than 35%) are always for seceeding from the union – and that number fluctuates all the time.
So seeing the number rise to 51% is not only 'not surprising' but given the socialistic ideals, back breaking federal mandates tied to the stimulus monies and continuing difficulties with illegal immigration because of a weak national stance on it (Bush is guilty here too) it is actually surprising the number isn't higher.
As for the silly notion that "there is no evidence torture worked" – just ask why THOSE documents aren't being released. Sure, we'll unclassify methods of "torture" or "non-torture" and pictures too, but why in God's name do we continue to sit on classified documents that are evidence of effectiveness of these methods? Easy, so the simple minded can be fooled into thinking it was all for naught and no good ever came out of it.
This is tantamount to having a trial, but only allowing the opening argument from the prosecution be accepted into record before a judgment is issued.
What a joke.
This article at the "conspiracy theory website" Alternet just made my day. The title says it all — The GOP is acting like a guy who just got dumped. Hahahahahahaha
http://www.alternet.org/story/138354/bill_maher%3A_the_gop_is_acting_like_a_guy_who_got_dumped/#comments
A pretty typical article there, mary. Race card, stereotypes, fingerpointing, etc., etc., in mocking 'analysis' of wingnut anger. But nary a mention of the unprecedented government spending we've seen since Jan. 20–I wonder why?
Because at this point in time it is not important.
The govt finally did something correct and they discontinue it. Face it, the tactics worked, the proof is in the results: no attacks since 9/11/01. There are bad people in the world and they only respond to force as a deterrent. These people are laughing at our schoolboy POTUS and plotting the next attack.
The argument that there are more secret documents that vindicate torture and that Obama is keeping them secret because he knows they prove that Cheney is right….is not only silly but illogical.
If there had been one shred of evidence proving that torture worked to save lives…..Bush, Fox and Rush would have run it on a 24/7 loop. That's the clinching evidence that torture didn't work.
Torture, of course, is also illegal.
The truly simple minded prove their simple mindedness by echoing the lies and disinformation, even after they've been debunked, of the Bushies on torture.
And I'll make a note of the fact that we now have one vote for Texas seceding.
"There are bad people in the world and they only respond to force as a deterrent."
We had 8 years of that philosophy. Not only did it not work to advance American interests…..it was a crushing failure. It is the philosophy of cowards. Cowards are so afraid that they are willing to jettison 230 years of law and tradition and defend torture as a deterrent.
Conservatives need to walk away from defending and excusing torture and lawlessness in general. Cowards torture. Sadists torture. Criminal dictators torture. Fiendish totalitarians torture. Unless conservatives inside America want to be tied permanently to such cowardly and savage behavior……they need to walk away…now.
I'm not being cynical. I'm not talking hyperbolically. Seriously, conservatives…..going down the torture road is going in the wrong direction.
Good one, mary! Hopefully I'll pick a horse in the derby with blinders that are as effective as yours.
larry d
The reason it is not important at this point in time is this.
This is money we owe ourselves so therefore we set the pay back schedule
In 25 years the population of the US is projected to be almost double what it is today. That in itself helps the payback.
I think I have read that approximately 50% of high school students in America do not graduate from high school – damn imaging what the work force would look like if we could change that to say 85 – 95% and what kind of jobs would they have and how much money could they make — stimulus money is going to education to do just that.
Imagine that is stimulus money is used to improve education, commercialize alternate sources of energy, fix our infrastructure , develop mass transportation and on and on and on. Someone has to pay for that so stimulus money used to do that is just money that has to be spent in the future.
Money spend killing people in foreign countries does nothing for us – has no pay back at all – unless of course it makes us safer – which the money spent in Iraq so has not done.
What conservatives and liberals SHOULD worry about is what the stimulus money is spent on so that we insure that it is money that will bring us value and they should quit obsessing on the actual spending of the money.
Reverand:
Please define "torture". Is all torture equally reprehensible in your view, or are there degrees of torture with culpability increasing as the torture becomes more severe?
Good comment mary….larry needs guidance.
Quidpro….I'm not a torture specialist by any stretch….but I'll say this: Because torture doesn't produce reliable information, and that's what the pros tell us…..then there is no reason to rough-up a detainee or prisoner, at all. What would be the purpose?
Additionally, if the pros are correct, and many have come forward saying torture produces unreliable information, then roughing-up or torturing a detainee is simply sadistic and vengeful. Neither are good reasons.
The other reason, the Korean reason for torture, was to produce FALSE confessions. That was the purpose of torturing Khalid Shaik Mohammed and Abu Zubaida…..to produce phony information connecting Iraq with al-Qaeda.
Reverand,
You claim that al-Qaeda detains were tortured, yet you have failed to define that term. Let me try again: What is your definition of "torture"?
I'll see you wistfully blind mice in the rubble when the next terrorist attack occurs on US soil. There's nothing you or I can do about it now that we've decided to reveal our non-torture tactics, befriend the enemy and trade in our balls for a bouquet of flowers….who knows, maybe they'll subscribe to your belief system and stop beheading people and stoning rape victims…
Guess there is no arguing the point of Texans always talking secession…it has been and always will be a topic up for discussion in the Lone Star state. God knows they'd be better off economically if they did.
Guess what, Mary and Reverend–it isn't money 'we owe ourselves.'
Larry It is mary — Rev noted that from day 1
Rev says, "If there had been one shred of evidence proving that torture worked to save lives…..Bush, Fox and Rush would have run it on a 24/7 loop. That's the clinching evidence that torture didn't work."
Cheney has filed a FOIA request for two memos showing that harsh interrogation tactics worked (after Obama released the "torture" memos). Five current and former CIA chiefs have said the interrogation methods worked. Obama's National Intelligence Director said they worked.
But the Rev's argument is – because the Bush admin didn't release classified intelligence secrets documenting everything our CIA learned from the interrogations, thereby comprimising what was learned by informing our enemies, then that proves it didn't work.
Please tell me you are joking. That is a quantum leap of illogic even for you.
Maybe certain Democrats think classified intelligence is nothing but a partisan weapon to be yielded for political gain. It seems so. I sure hope that sort of thing is nipped in the bud before we all come to regret it. Too many are treating this as some kind of political game. It isn't.
huh…no response by the Rev…mind boggling.
i suppose he may come back and tell us that 1+1=3
I don't get what your are saying, mary?
This thread is interesting….I must say.
Torture has been defined clearly by the Army Field Manual. There has never been a problem following those guidelines….until Bush.
King….those are lame attempts to justify the unjustifiable…..but think for a minute….
Didn't Bush blab about every freaking rag tag group he had his henchmen round up? The Miami 7 morons….the guys who were going to attack Ft. Dix…..the guys who were going to blow up an airplane by lighting a gas pipe miles away…?
Weren't those plots classified national security plots?
And this….
"…because the Bush admin didn't release classified intelligence secrets documenting everything our CIA learned from the interrogations, thereby comprimising what was learned by informing our enemies, then that proves it didn't work."
Didn't say that. Professionals at SERE and elsewhere said clearly that torture produces "unreliable infromation." It doesn't work. It's simply the icing on the cake proof that Bush never told us about any successful plots being broken up through torture…..the one that he did tell us about, al-Libi, was never true in the first place…but Bush never hesitated in telling us about it, classified national security concerns be damned.
May I point out that you fellows are actually defending barbaric torture methods?
I will let others speak for themselves, but I am not defending "barbaric torture methods". You have avoided my two previous requests to state your definition of "torture". Your addition of the word "barbaric" is helpful, however, since it does recognize that there are degrees of torture.
So please tell us: Are the actions of al-qaeda also barbaric?
For about the fifth or sixth time, the Rev has ignored my TRUE statement about five CIA heads and other top intelligence officials stating that the enhanced interrogations worked. As former CIA chief George Tenet stated, those interrogations produced more valuable intelligence than all our other efforts COMBINED.
So, go ahead and ignore it all again, Rev, and just keep telling me how much I LOVE torture. That's what demagogues do.
I thought Democrats were supposed to be the NUANCED thinkers.
Also Rev, this is most definitely NOT the first time the USA has engaged in what you would describe as torture. Again, you're not even close, and in the past it was done with far lesser justification. I'm not justifying it, I'm just stating the facts. I'll even link you to a source you'll like to prove the point.
http://www.alternet.org/rights/132743/the_long_and_sadistic_history_behind_the_cia's_torture_techniques/
Because the U.S. does not set the parameters for al-Qaeda behavior…..asking whether al-Qaeda engages in barbaric acts has no relevancy to the topic under review. The topic under review is America's secret program of "legalizing" torture and then implementing it.
When the Japanese waterboarded our soldiers, did we let them off the hook because the Japanese claimed that waterboarding "worked?" No, we executed them for torturing our soldiers.
Torture is a crime in American law. No equivalency-seeking, cul-de-sac ramblings can change that fact. Bush/Cheney institutionalized a criminal practice in violation of American law.
King….did you believe Tenet when he told Bush, "it's a slam dunk?" Tell the truth, did you?
Even if your CIA heads' comments are true, which all empirical evidence suggests is not the case, do the ends justify the means? Is American law optional?
And because the U.S. has done other criminal stuff throughout our history, how does that excuse us from executive branch criminality today?
Rev look up the Japanese torture executions. Waterboarding was one of the questioning techniques they used. They also, electrocuted them, drown them, and when all else failed executed them. Waterboarding was the least of their worries. Another Lib spin.
Also how many were executed for torture? One. The rest rotted in jail.
Rev,
Yes, I believed George Tenet when he said it was a "slam dunk." I'd been hearing the same things about Saddam's wmd from the Clinton administration for years and years. I had no reason not to believe it. What's your point ? Is it because Tenet may have been wrong about the wmd intelligence, then he is necessarily lying about the effectiveness of the Gitmo interrogations (along with everyone else) ? No sale. I can point you to twenty things Obama has lied about already. Not been mistaken about, as with Tenet's wmd intel, but LIED about. Does that mean everything Obama says is a lie ?
There is NO empirical evidence that says the harsh interrogations didn't work. Such evidence only exists in the imaginations of the left.
I'm also still waiting for you to show me the law that specifically says waterboarding is illegal. I agree the practice shouldn't be used (well, ALMOST never, except on people like Bin Laden or KSM, where it could save thousands of innocent lives), but the illegality of the practice is not definitive, at least not according to the 1994 US adoption of the UN Convention Against Torture and the OLC memos.
Reread that last paragraph of yours……
You are against torture like waterboarding…..until it needs to be used.
And yes, it's illegal. Like Professor Huhn says at the Law Cafe…..we don't spell out in every possible detail what child abuse is, or animal cruelty….but child abuse and animal cruelty are both violations of law.
Would you defend a child abuser because it wasn't spelled out in child abuse laws, specifically, that stuffing a child into an empty refrigerator, for example, was child abuse?