'We Do Not Torture' and Other Funny Stories

By FRANK RICH
NY Times Op-Ed: November 13, 2005

IF it weren't tragic it would be a New Yorker cartoon. The president of the
United States, in the final stop of his forlorn Latin America tour last
week, told the world, "We do not torture." Even as he spoke, the
administration's flagrant embrace of torture was as hard to escape as
publicity for Anderson Cooper.

The vice president, not satisfied that the C.I.A. had already been
implicated in four detainee deaths, was busy lobbying Congress to give the
agency a green light to commit torture in the future. Dana Priest of The
Washington Post, having first uncovered secret C.I.A. prisons two years ago,
was uncovering new "black sites" in Eastern Europe, where ghost detainees
are subjected to unknown interrogation methods redolent of the region's
Stalinist past. Before heading south, Mr. Bush had been doing his own bit
for torture by threatening to cast the first veto of his presidency if
Congress didn't scrap a spending bill amendment, written by John McCain and
passed 90 to 9 by the Senate, banning the "cruel, inhuman or degrading"
treatment of prisoners.

So when you watch the president stand there with a straight face and say,
"We do not torture" - a full year and a half after the first photos from Abu
Ghraib - you have to wonder how we arrived at this ludicrous moment. The
answer is not complicated. When people in power get away with telling bigger
and bigger lies, they naturally think they can keep getting away with it.
And for a long time, Mr. Bush and his cronies did. Not anymore.

The fallout from the Scooter Libby indictment reveals that the
administration's credibility, having passed the tipping point with Katrina,
is flat-lining. For two weeks, the White House's talking-point monkeys in
the press and Congress had been dismissing Patrick Fitzgerald's leak
investigation as much ado about nothing except politics and as an
exoneration of everyone except Mr. Libby. Now the American people have
rendered their verdict: they're not buying it. Last week two major polls
came up with the identical finding, that roughly 8 in 10 Americans regard
the leak case as a serious matter. One of the polls (The Wall Street
Journal/NBC News) also found that 57 percent of Americans believe that Mr.
Bush deliberately misled the country into war in Iraq and that only 33
percent now find him "honest and straightforward," down from 50 percent in
January.

The Bush loyalists' push to discredit the Libby indictment failed because
Americans don't see it as a stand-alone scandal but as the petri dish for a
wider culture of lying that becomes more visible every day. The last-ditch
argument rolled out by Mr. Bush on Veterans Day in his latest
stay-the-course speech - that Democrats, too, endorsed dead-wrong W.M.D.
intelligence - is more of the same. Sure, many Democrats (and others) did
believe that Saddam had an arsenal before the war, but only the White House
hyped selective evidence for nuclear weapons, the most ominous of all of
Iraq's supposed W.M.D.'s, to whip up public fears of an imminent doomsday.

There was also an entire other set of lies in the administration's prewar
propaganda blitzkrieg that had nothing to do with W.M.D.'s, African uranium
or the Wilsons. To get the country to redirect its finite resources to wage
war against Saddam Hussein rather than keep its focus on the war against
radical Islamic terrorists, the White House had to cook up not only the
fiction that Iraq was about to attack us, but also the fiction that Iraq had
already attacked us, on 9/11. Thanks to the Michigan Democrat Carl Levin,
who last weekend released a previously classified intelligence document, we
now have conclusive evidence that the administration's disinformation
campaign implying a link connecting Saddam to Al Qaeda and 9/11 was even
more duplicitous and manipulative than its relentless flogging of nuclear
Armageddon.

Senator Levin's smoking gun is a widely circulated Defense Intelligence
Agency document from February 2002 that was probably seen by the National
Security Council. It warned that a captured Qaeda terrorist in American
custody was in all likelihood "intentionally misleading" interrogators when
he claimed that Iraq had trained Qaeda members to use illicit weapons. The
report also made the point that an Iraq-Qaeda collaboration was absurd on
its face: "Saddam's regime is intensely secular and is wary of Islamic
revolutionary movements." But just like any other evidence that disputed the
administration's fictional story lines, this intelligence was promptly
disregarded.

So much so that eight months later - in October 2002, as the White House was
officially rolling out its new war and Congress was on the eve of
authorizing it - Mr. Bush gave a major address in Cincinnati intermingling
the usual mushroom clouds with information from that discredited,
"intentionally misleading" Qaeda informant. "We've learned that Iraq has
trained Al Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases," he
said. It was the most important, if hardly the only, example of repeated
semantic sleights of hand that the administration used to conflate 9/11 with
Iraq. Dick Cheney was fond of brandishing a nonexistent April 2001 "meeting"
between Mohamed Atta and an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague long after
Czech and American intelligence analysts had dismissed it.

The power of these lies was considerable. In a CBS News/New York Times poll
released on Sept. 25, 2001, 60 percent of Americans thought Osama bin Laden
had been the culprit in the attacks of two weeks earlier, either alone or in
league with unnamed "others" or with the Taliban; only 6 percent thought bin
Laden had collaborated with Saddam; and only 2 percent thought Saddam had
been the sole instigator. By the time we invaded Iraq in 2003, however, CBS
News found that 53 percent believed Saddam had been "personally involved" in
9/11; other polls showed that a similar percentage of Americans had even
convinced themselves that the hijackers were Iraqis.

There is still much more to learn about our government's duplicity in the
run-up to the war, just as there is much more to learn about what has gone
on since, whether with torture or billions of Iraq reconstruction dollars.
That is why the White House and its allies, having failed to discredit the
Fitzgerald investigation, are now so desperate to slow or block every other
inquiry. Exhibit A is the Senate Intelligence Committee, whose Republican
chairman, Pat Roberts, is proving a major farceur with his efforts to
sidestep any serious investigation of White House prewar subterfuge. Last
Sunday, the same day that newspapers reported Carl Levin's revelation about
the "intentionally misleading" Qaeda informant, Senator Roberts could be
found on "Face the Nation" saying he had found no evidence of "political
manipulation or pressure" in the use of prewar intelligence.

His brazenness is not anomalous. After more than two years of looking into
the forged documents used by the White House to help support its bogus
claims of Saddam's Niger uranium, the F.B.I. ended its investigation without
resolving the identity of the forgers. Last week, Jane Mayer of The New
Yorker reported that an investigation into the November 2003 death of an Abu
Ghraib detainee, labeled a homicide by the U.S. government, has been, in the
words of a lawyer familiar with the case, "lying kind of fallow." The Wall
Street Journal similarly reported that 17 months after Condoleezza Rice
promised a full investigation into Ahmad Chalabi's alleged leaking of
American intelligence to Iran, F.B.I. investigators had yet to interview Mr.
Chalabi - who was being welcomed in Washington last week as an honored guest
by none other than Ms. Rice.

The Times, meanwhile, discovered that Mr. Libby had set up a legal defense
fund to be underwritten by donors who don't have to be publicly disclosed
but who may well have a vested interest in the direction of his defense.
It's all too eerily reminiscent of the secret fund set up by Richard Nixon's
personal lawyer, Herbert Kalmbach, to pay the legal fees of Watergate
defendants.

THERE'S so much to stonewall at the White House that last week Scott
McClellan was reduced to beating up on the octogenarian Helen Thomas. "You
don't want the American people to hear what the facts are, Helen," he said,
"and I'm going to tell them the facts." Coming from the press secretary who
vowed that neither Mr. Libby nor Karl Rove had any involvement in the C.I.A.
leak, this scene was almost as funny as his boss's "We do not torture"
charade.

Not that it matters now. The facts the American people are listening to at
this point come not from an administration that they no longer find
credible, but from the far more reality-based theater of war. The Qaeda
suicide bombings of three hotels in Amman on 11/9, like the terrorist
attacks in Madrid and London before them, speak louder than anything else of
the price we are paying for the lies that diverted us from the war against
the suicide bombers of 9/11 to the war in Iraq.

***

REMINDER:

Monday,  November 14
Journalist Robert Fisk at UCLA

The War for the Middle East: History Unlearned

7:00 - 9:00 p.m.
Grand Ballroom
Ackerman Student Union
UCLA

Robert Fisk is the Veteran Middle East Correspondent for The Independent
(London)
Author of: The Great War for Civilization: The Conquest of the Middle
East(2005),
Pity The Nation: The Abduction of Lebanon (2002)

Winner of: Amnesty International Award, 2000; David Watt Memorial Award,
2001;
and seven-time winner as the British International Journalist of the Year

UCLA parking: $8.00
Take Westwood Blvd. entrance to campus from Wilshire Blvd.

This event is Free and Open to the Public

Sponsored by the Center for Social Theory and Comparative History and
Academic Advancement Program
For more information call:
Center for Social Theory and Comparative History: (310) 206-5675
Or Jeff Cooper, AAP: (310) 206 2912

************
Tuesday, November 15:
Robert Fisk at USC
12 Noon - 2 PM
USC
Room 101
Mudd Hall of Philosophy

Fisk will be signing copies ofhis latest book, The Great War for
Civilization: The Conquest of the MiddleEast, which will be available for
purchase at Mudd Hall.
Sponsored by the Center for International Studies at USC.
For more information, call(213) 740-0800 or email [EMAIL PROTECTED]

**********
Wednesday, November 16:
Robert Fisk at Cal Poly Pomona
12 Noon - 1 PM
Cal Poly Pomona
Bronco Student Center
Centaurus Room(1329)
3801 West Temple Avenue
Pomona 91768

###





------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page
http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/7gSolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Reply via email to