The Normalization of Horror--American Gulags Become Permanent

[Guest guest]

Z

Mon, 17 Jan 2005 07:02:39 -0800

 

 

The Normalization of Horror

--American Gulags Become Permanent

 

 

 

The Normalization of Horror

--American Gulags Become Permanent

 

Ted Rall, UExpress, January 11, 2005

 

http://www.uexpress.com/tedrall/

 

NEW YORK--A new documentary, " Hitler's Hit Parade, " runs 76 minutes

without narration. Comprised entirely of archival footage, the film

prompts its reviewers to remark upon Hannah Arendt's famous observation

about the banality of evil. German troops subjugated Europe and shoved

millions of people into ovens; German civilians went to the movies,

attended concerts, and gossiped about their neighbors. People lived

mundane, normal lives while their government carried out unspeakable

monstrosities.

 

Sound familiar?

 

As Congress prepared to rubberstamp the nomination of torture aficionado

Alberto Gonzales as the nation's chief prosecutor, the Washington Post

broke news that would have torn a saner nation apart. The Bush

Administration, the paper reported January 2, is no longer planning to

keep hundreds of Muslim prisoners currently rotting away in U.S.

concentration camps at Guantánamo, Abu Ghraib and Bagram merely

" indefinitely. " The Defense Department and CIA are now planning " a more

permanent approach for potentially lifetime detentions " for these

innocents.

 

We're locking them up forever. Without due process.

 

Before gangsters like Alberto Gonzales seduced us into abandoning our

values, a person was considered innocent before being proven guilty. Now

we're locking people away because " the government does not have enough

evidence to charge [them] in courts. " And everyone, including Democrats,

is OK with this.

 

Untold thousands of people are being held without charges, tortured and

occasionally murdered in the system of gulags hastily strung together by

the CIA, FBI, INS and Pentagon. According to the government itself, only

a few dozen are former Al Qaeda officials. Most of these postmodern

misérables were farmers, truck drivers, grunt militiamen and political

enemies sold into bondage by Afghan warlords and similarly trustworthy

souls for cash bounties on a no questions asked basis. We know they have

no ties to terrorism, but they've already spent years getting beaten up.

Releasing them would serve as a tacit admission that we were wrong to

describe them as--in Dick Cheney's words-- " the worst of the worst. " They

would sue our government, and eventually win. Worst of all, they have

unpleasant tales to tell about systemic sodomy and countless other forms

of horrific taxpayer-funded abuse. We can never let them out.

 

Bush plans to divide U.S. concentration camp victims into two groups.

One set of " lifers " will end up in U.S.-run stalags like Gitmo's new

Camp 6, built to hold 200 " detainees who are unlikely to ever go through

a military tribunal for lack of evidence, according to defense

officials. " But not to worry: Camp 6 would " allow socializing among

inmates. "

 

Others captured in the " war on terrorism " will be outsourced " to third

countries willing to hold them indefinitely and without proceedings " in

foreign-run gulags that pledge to make victims available for torture by

American interrogators. This practice, some claim, is " an effective

method of disrupting terrorist cells and persuading detainees to reveal

information. "

 

" The threat of sending someone to one of these countries [where they are

likely to be tortured] is very important, " said Rohan Gunaratna, author

of " Inside Al Qaeda: Global Network of Terror. "

 

But the so-called " ticking time bomb " rationale for torture is patently

fallacious. We've heard the scenario repeatedly: wouldn't it be worth

torturing someone who knew the location of a nuclear bomb that was about

to destroy Manhattan? The short answer, to a moral person, is obviously

no. Moreover, its logic is ludicrous.

 

Suppose we had captured Osama bin Laden on 9/10 and immediately gone to

work on him with our Alberto Gonzales-approved psychotropic drugs and

our Alberto Gonzales-approved " waterboard " dunking technique. It

wouldn't take long for Osama's pals to notice that he'd failed to show

up at the Terrorcave. They'd assume that we had him and were torturing

him. They'd assume that he'd tell us everything he knew. So they'd delay

9/11 to 10/11 or 11/12 or 9/11/02. Or go to Plan B. Or develop a Plan C.

No one in an underground organization, not even its top leader, is

indispensable. Arrests are inconvenient, not debilitating.

 

The information a person possesses at the moment of his capture ages

like a ripe cheese in hot sun. Even if what he told you at the beginning

was true, anything you'd get out of him days and weeks and months and

years later would be completely worthless.

 

Wait a minute.

 

Look at what we're talking about. Consider the breezy way we

Americans--Americans!--are debating the pros and cons of torture. Marvel

at our moral bankruptcy. The liberal argument against torture used to be

that it was wrong. Now it's that it doesn't work.

 

So.

 

Read any good books lately?