Who Was in That Torture Chamber?

In Wednesday's Wall Street Journal, reporter Siobhan Gorman offered a striking little portrait of Jose A. Rodriguez, who, in 2005, as chief of the CIA's National Clandestine Service, ordered the destruction of those "hundreds of hours" of CIA videotapes of the…

Now, what do we want to call it? Gorman refers to "extreme techniques" of interrogation (putting the two words in quotes), then repeats the phrase a second time later in the piece without the quotes: "… [Rodriguez] took a careful approach to controversial practices such as renditions--sending detainees to countries that use more extreme interrogation methods…"). In this mini-portrait of Rodriguez, as painted by his colleagues, and of the disappeared videos, the word "torture" is never used, but don't blame Gorman. As Greg Mitchell of Editor & Publisher pointed out recently, she's hardly alone.

"One Associated Press article referred simply to 'interrogation' on the tapes, at one point putting 'enhanced interrogation' in quotes. Another AP article called it 'harsh interrogation.' Mark Mazzeti in The New York Times used 'severe interrogation methods.' Eric Lichtblau in the same paper chose the same phrase. David Johnston, in a Saturday article for [the] paper's Web site, referred to 'aggressive interrogations' and 'coercive techniques.' Reuters, in its lead, relied on 'severe interrogation techniques.' Dan Eggen and Joby Warrick in The Washington Post on Saturday opted for 'harsh interrogation tactics.'"

Whatever is on those tapes, we've come a long way, baby, since, in Medieval Times in Europe, waterboarding was crudely known as "the water torture."

In any case, Rodriguez, according to his colleagues, turns out to be for the little guy--or the little torturer, anyway. He supposedly destroyed those videos so that "lower-level officers would[n't] take the fall" for the high-level ones who dished out the orders. But there's a slight catch in the text. What if some higher-level ones might have been in danger of taking the fall as well?

Here's Gorman's money passage, just dropped into the middle of the piece without further explanation or discussion: "One former official said interrogators' faces were visible on at least one video, as were those of more senior officers who happened to be visiting." Happened? Visiting? Keep in mind that we're talking about CIA officials in a torture chamber, not tourists at a local landmark.

Then again, for background, Gorman offers this on Rodriguez: He is, she writes, "a product of what one former agency colleague called ‘the rough-and-tumble' Latin American division" of the CIA from the 1980s. "Rough and tumble"? You won't find out what that means from her column. For that, you need to read Greg Grandin's recent piece, "Unholy Trinity, Death Squads, Disappearances, and Torture--from Latin America to Iraq." In our period, men like Rodriguez, under the leadership of George W. Bush, have essentially globalized those "rough and tumble" methods of the CIA's Latin American division. As Grandin--whose superb book, Empire's Workshop: Latin America, the United States, and the Rise of the New Imperialism, nails those "rough-and-tumble" years--points out, they have turned the "unholy trinity" that the U.S. developed in Latin America into a global operation. "U.S.-funded and trained Central American security forces would disappear tens of thousands of citizens and execute hundreds of thousands more. When supporters of the ‘War on Terror' advocated the exercise of the ‘Salvador Option,' it was this slaughter they were talking about."

Comments (45)

1. Ahhh, that's what compassionate conservatism is.

   Posted by Wolfgang1 at 12/11/2007 @ 11:28am

2. America needs our Honor and Dignity, Restored!!!! Nobody knows how many tapes of torture the Government is hiding, Nobody knows how much evidence has been destroyed. Nobody knows what the Hell Techniques have been employed, against who!!!!!

   All we know about is the tip of the iceberg. George Bush, Blackwater, training private militias how to have no soul!!! These mercenaries have no soul, they will be willing to act as agent provocateurs, to fire into crowds, to take people's guns away, and to torture people, and to obey any order.

   The Democratic Leadership is putting on their boxing gloves, and Conservative Republicans are putting on their brass knuckles. One day, we will wake up and this shameful Complacent Polite Bipartisan disgrace will end. Iraq is killing out country and we have lost so much of our honor, because of Republicans. It is time for America to get tough on Conservative Republicans, before they get us all killed with their stupidity.

   Posted by conshame at 12/11/2007 @ 12:06pm

3. I hope these CIA sons-of-bitches all get caught. They are fucking up my country

   Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 12/11/2007 @ 12:18pm

4. Thanks, Tom.

   And thanks for all the good work you do at TomDispatch. If hope is to be found in the dark, it will ultimately result from the efforts of all of those who busily toil to sustain the torch light.

   Cheers to the dreams of a brightly lit future.

   Excerpt from today's Dispatch:

   Ideologues in the war on terror, like Berkeley law professor John Yoo, have worked mightily to narrow the definition of what torture is, thereby expanding possibilities for its application. They have worked no less hard to increase the number of people throughout the world who could be subjected to torture -- by defining anyone they cared to choose as a stateless "enemy combatant," and therefore not protected by national and international laws banning cruel and inhumane treatment. Even former Attorney General John Ashcroft has declared himself potentially torturable, telling a University of Colorado audience recently that he would be willing to submit to waterboarding "if it were necessary."

   There's one possible response to our tortured definitions of torture. Let's start with the broadest definitions and then each author who advocates for a narrower view can demonstrate their integrity by undergoing methods that comport with their new definition. Sounds pretty reasonable to me....... "Hello John Yoo. Please step into my office. Just relax and try to enjoy yourself. Your organs will be fully functional when were done."

   Posted by b_kool_66 at 12/11/2007 @ 12:23pm

5. RESE, shut the fucck up you imbecile, don't you dilute our anger on this important topic with your distractions, go on one of the bullshhit topics and distract people from the topic there where you are needed. Torture is a serious issue you fool!

   Blackwater is over in Iraq, firing into crowds, doing God knows what to people with total immunity. Blackwater's purpose is to one day be turned loose against American citizens. A word of caution to you Conservative Authoritarians, your militias will be utterly destroyed, IF you even get that far.

   The Bush regime is cracking up, they can't turn men into monsters fast enough to meet their staffing requirements for people with no soul who will obey orders to commit treason. It is time for the Democrats to stop negotiating with Republicans, whip Americans into a frenzy to STOP THESE IDIOTS FROM DOING FURTHER DAMAGE NOW!

   Posted by conshame at 12/11/2007 @ 12:29pm

6. Posted by CONSHAME 12/11/2007 @ 12:29pm |

   RESE promised she would shut up in less than 5 months, CS. Of course, she was probably lying.

   BLOG | Posted 01/25/2007 @ 12:52am Comments for "Edging Impeachment Back Onto the Table" by John Nichols

   When, say, March-ish, maybe April 2008 rolls around and it becomes legislatively, much less politically, IMPOSSIBLE to impeach Bush and Cheney and they are inevitably going to finish out their 2nd terms and leave on Inauguration Day January 2009.....

   what are you going to say about them and why will it matter? ----Posted by MASK 01/26/2007 @ 08:44am

   "By then then will have Nuked and invaded Iran. The Draft will be in operation, probably Martial law too and no body will be able to say anthing against them, because all openents will be classified enemy combatants and shipped to work in the New Reich concentration camps" ----Posted by RESE 01/26/2007 @ 1:18pm

   I'll shut up if it doesn't happen!----Posted by RESE 05/22/2007 @ 09:58am

   Posted by Mask at 12/11/2007 @ 12:44pm

7. On-topic, the spin from the White House, right-wing radio, and (no doubt) soon from PONTI, SLIVER, RIO, et al...is great-

   "Nobody did anything wrong. They HAD to destroy those tapes. We can't allow Al Qaeda to know that KIND of torture we're using, or they'll gird their loins and be able to resist it!"

   "Anything that seems like a cover-up is just liberal propaganda, since OBVIOUSLY we can trust the Bush Administration!"

   Posted by Mask at 12/11/2007 @ 12:47pm

8. I hope these CIA sons-of-bitches all get caught. They are fucking up my country

   ~The Chipster @ 12:18pm

   The problem certainly runs much deeper that a few "sons-of-bitches" at the CIA. The whole idea of a "secret service" is problematic from the word go. Obviously, the reality remains that governments will maintain clandestine agencies. But it's equally obvious that democracy intimately depends on openness, and a secret branch of the government represents a never-ending threat to an open society.

   For an example of where we're at today is this simple single sentence lead-in to the CIA tape destruction story in the NY Times today:

   A clandestine branch of the C.I.A. gave advance approval for the destruction of videos of interrogations.

   A clandestine branch of the C.I.A.? I think we've blown right past "medieval" and ended up somewhere closer to "Byzantine".

   Posted by b_kool_66 at 12/11/2007 @ 12:49pm

9. "Anything that seems like a cover-up is just liberal propaganda, since OBVIOUSLY we can trust the Bush Administration!"

   Posted by MASK 12/11/2007 @ 12:47pm

   I've been having this recurring nightmare as of late. Dick Cheney and Bush have dental tools and keep drilling on my teeth with no novocaine and asking me "is it safe?"!!! lol

   Posted by Wolfgang1 at 12/11/2007 @ 12:56pm

10. "hundreds of hours"

    dios mío.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 12/11/2007 @ 1:56pm

11. Did anyone read today's news accounts of ex-CIA officer John Kiriakou? I hope his frank observations and judgements will lead to a realistic discussion about torture and the consequences of either ending it or having it continue as a clandestine policy.

    Posted by RAGGEDSTEP at 12/11/2007 @ 2:20pm

12. Posted by WOLFGANG1 12/11/2007 @ 12:56pm |

    Oh, you liberals!...complaining about FREE DENTAL CARE from the Government!

    (heheh)

    Posted by Mask at 12/11/2007 @ 2:45pm

13. "When asked if there should be a new investigation of 9/11 Vidal insisted, "of course there should and a wonderful time to do it would be at the impeachment of Bush - I think you might find everything that we ought to know but do not know ..."

    Quite. Which is precisely why impeachment is "off the table." 911. Impeachment investigations would open that Pandora's box. Hence, no impeachment, no further 911 investigations. Not now. Not in '09. Not in our lifetimes. But do look for some eye-popping presidential pardons, year-end '08.

    The republic is dying, the empire is being hammered in place.

    Don't like it? Then if you're a GOPer, support Ron Paul. If you're a Dem, support Kucinich. This Sat Dec 15. Donate: Dennis4 President.com

    The better the showing, the stronger the pressure on the other Dem candidates to revive the republic & save the Constitution.

    Otherwise, pack it all in. It's over. Exeunt omnes.

    Posted by sloper at 12/11/2007 @ 3:24pm

14. officer CIA. Robert David Steele ~ "I am forced to conclude that there is sufficient evidence to indict (not necessarily convict) Dick Cheney, Karl Rove and others...This is, without question, the most important modern reference on state-sponsored terrorism, and also the reference that most pointedly suggests that select rogue elements within the US Government, most likely led by Dick Cheney with the assistance of George Tenet, Buzzy Kronguard, and others close to the Wall Street gangs, are the most guilty of state-sponsored terrorism...I'm absolutely certain that WTC 7 was brought down by controlled demolition and that as far as I'm concerned means that this case has not been properly investigated. There's no way that building could have come down without controlled demolition"

    http://blogs.salon.com/0002255/2007/09/11.html

    Posted by RESE 12/11/2007 @ 12:18pm

    I know a lot of people have RESE on ignore (myself included, but only for the purpose of saving space), but I thought this quote needed attention by those who would otherwise miss it.

    Posted by MATTMAN at 12/11/2007 @ 3:52pm

15. Just as "No Child Left Behind" is rhetoric for policy that leaves poor children behind,

    Just as "Clear Skies Initiative" was rhetoric to give polluting industries free reign in pursuit of greater profits,

    "The War On Terror" is a front for the WORST TERRORIST STATE IN THE WORLD to pursue it's agenda of globabl domination.

    That I call the US the WORST TERRORIST STATE IN THE WORLD does not mean I do not love my country. I love America. I wish it was a democracy, as in a real democracy, the kind that I saw Frosty define earlier as "rule of the people". This oligarchy posing as a democracy is disgusting, and it is shameful that our leadership says they are "spreading democracy" with their brutal actions.

    Posted by MATTMAN at 12/11/2007 @ 3:57pm

16. Posted by MATTMAN 12/11/2007 @ 3:52pm

    MATT, I've warned IBBLE before...get sucked into RESE's Paranoia Universe and you'll never dig your way out. It's a Nietzchean Abyss.

    The woman is a nut-job and come April shown to be full of crap (and probably a liar, if she doesn't evaporate as promised).

    As for "former CIA officers"...throw a stick and you'd hit a dozen of them and just because somebody is a "high-ranking Gov't official"....doesn't mean they can't be as nutty a conspiracy theorists as the rest of the Fringe. Get 500,000 people who believe in Bigfoot, and I'll guarentee you find ONE "former CIA agent/officer"!...heheh

    BTW, take a moment of lucidity and explain EXACTLY HOW the "charges" were planted in the building with NONE of the hundreds of folks working there noticing some "Israeli-looking guys placing oddly-shaped toolboxes at different spots in the emergency stairwells"?

    Posted by Mask at 12/11/2007 @ 3:59pm

17. Posted by MASK 12/11/2007 @ 3:59pm

    I rarely read what RESE has to say, first of all, and I'm sure a lot of it is bullshit. Second, I'm not sure what you mean by "Israeli looking guys placing toolboxes around the building". No one can say for sure how the bombs were placed, but explain how a building that wasn't even struck by a plane, and had fires on two floors imploded just as in a textbook demolition. Or, how many credible witnesses have reported, not just hearing, but experiencing explosions BEFORE THE PLANES EVEN EVER STRUCK! How does jet fuel that burns at 500 degrees produce molten steel that was 5000 degrees 6 weeks after the "attacks"? How about the steel foundations that were cut at 45 degree angles, just as is done in a textbook demolition? Then NORAD, the outfit that is supposed to be all over a hijacking within minutes, just so inconveniently happened to be doing an exercise OF THE EXACT SAME SCENARIO when the attacks happened? And who was in charge of NORAD, on that day only? Dick Cheney! The first time a Vice President had ever been in charge of NORAD! Just a coincidence though, I'm sure.

    I didn't want to believe this "conspiracy theory" either. And yes, usually they are bullshit. But sometimes, sometimes truth is stranger than fiction.

    911 was just too convenient an opportunity for the neocons to pursue their "anti-terror" agenda that they've wanted for years.

    Posted by MATTMAN at 12/11/2007 @ 4:13pm

18. Oh, you liberals!...complaining about FREE DENTAL CARE from the Government!

    (heheh)

    Posted by MASK 12/11/2007 @ 2:45pm

    Alright Mask, you definitely got me there.

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 12/11/2007 @ 4:24pm

19. Thanks for the post Mattman.

    I haven't paid too much attention to the WTC conspiracy theories for two primary reasons.

    1) I looked into it early on and was not convinced, and rather than spending time periodically revisiting the matter I'd generally prefer to wait for a respected voice to chime in with a strong, substantive argument.

    2) More importantly, the fact that very few would be shocked if it turned out that the Dick Dubya administration was somehow complicit, or purposely looked the other way while the plot unfolded is all that needs to be said about the state of our nation.

    In essence, the case against our sorry excuse of a government is ironclad.

    That said, if a convincing case for the 9-11 conspiracy hypothesis gained some play it serve as a useful catalyst for change. In that respect I suppose I should be hoping for a breakthrough.

    We'll see.

    P.S. Thanks for the film link you sent awhile back. I enjoyed it.

    Posted by b_kool_66 at 12/11/2007 @ 4:24pm

20. Posted by B_KOOL_66 12/11/2007 @ 4:24pm

    I think you're right about the lack of outrage if the accusations were really looked at under a microscope. I also think it's too easy to dismiss such accusations as mere "conspiracy theory" bullshit! It really sounds too crazy to really be true.

    I think at the very least, the BA knew about the attacks and, as you said, "looked the other way". Of course there will be no evidence, or indictments for that matter. They'd be careful enough to cover their tracks so that if people did suspect that the neocons were in on the execution of 911, they'd be so easily, so very easily written off as "loony lefties" "wacko conspiracy theorists" and such.

    Posted by MATTMAN at 12/11/2007 @ 4:34pm

21. Just a coincidence though, I'm sure.

    I didn't want to believe this "conspiracy theory" either. And yes, usually they are bullshit. But sometimes, sometimes truth is stranger than fiction.

    911 was just too convenient an opportunity for the neocons to pursue their "anti-terror" agenda that they've wanted for years.

    Posted by MATTMAN 12/11/2007 @ 4:13pm

    I can't remember which president said this, but the president said that there are no such things as coincidences in politics? I'll have to get back to you on which president it was. My first guess is Kennedy, but I'll check up on it. Sorry.

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 12/11/2007 @ 4:38pm

22. Even Noam Chomsky does not believe that the neocons were behind 911, and I consider his opinion when making my own because he is someone I greatly respect. He has said he thinks if the BA had been behind it, something would have leaked, and that there is no way that could have been planned without some word of it getting out. I disagree with him on that point.

    It's sort of like my take on the existence of God--there's really no solid evidence, so no one will probably ever know for certain what really happened. So I'm kind of agnostic on the subject. There is a lot of circumstantial evidence, a lot of coincidences, and I'm highly suspicious that Dick, Dubya, and the rest of the gang know a lot more than they let on.

    Posted by MATTMAN at 12/11/2007 @ 4:39pm

23. Posted by WOLFGANG1 12/11/2007 @ 4:38pm

    Like I said, there are a LOT of coincidences surrounding 911, though nothing substantial that would ever incriminate anyone in particular. I guess in the meantime I'll have to accept my role as "wacko conspiracy theorist" since I don't believe a word of the official story of what happened on September 11, 2001.

    Posted by MATTMAN at 12/11/2007 @ 4:42pm

24. and I'm highly suspicious that Dick, Dubya, and the rest of the gang know a lot more than they let on.

    Posted by MATTMAN 12/11/2007 @ 4:39pm

    Agreed. At best, as B_Kool pointed out, they knew about it and sat on their thumbs and allowed it to happen, and that's at best.

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 12/11/2007 @ 4:49pm

25. No one can say for sure how the bombs were placed....Posted by MATTMAN 12/11/2007 @ 4:13pm

    Ahhh, that's the point....RESE can say (and PLUNGER and 1000 others on the ol' www.AIPACmindcontrol.org sites).

    See that's how it starts. Simple solutions or even unknowns are rejected out of hand (See the Popular Mechanics article. Note, as soon as that came out the Conspiracy Guys "discovered" that Michael Chertoff's supposed "cousin" Ben Chertoff is on the PopMech editorial board).

    But SOME "answers" must be found...you can't just "dead end" and leave it at that. So the "mysterious collapse" of WTC7 becomes "demolition"...and SOMEBODY had to have planted them, so who? Take the fave target of conspiracists since the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" and...it was "Mossad agents!" "Master plans"..."dancing Israelis"..."Halliburton-built concentration camps"...

    Then you take a steep plunge into "Bildeburgers", "David Rockefeller", "Jesuits", "Illuminati", and "Secret Masters in Tibet". And the "coming false flag that will result in Bush declaring martial law and installing Pope Benedict and Benjamin Netanyahu as our leaders!!!!!" (5 exclamations minimum)

    Eventually you end up "to alert the sheeple" cut & pasting every 3000 word "expose'" from ever self-annointed "expert"...

    and find yourself on the local blog "Ignore List".

    But, I'm into freedom....so knock yerself out, if that's the road you want to go down.

    Posted by Mask at 12/11/2007 @ 4:55pm

26. Posted by MASK 12/11/2007 @ 4:55pm

    MASK,

    You were starting to scare me there for a while. I was thinking that maybe RESE had finally gotten to you the way you quoted RESE so well. Do you keep a copy of every post people make?

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 12/11/2007 @ 5:06pm

27. But, I'm into freedom....so knock yerself out, if that's the road you want to go down.

    Posted by MASK 12/11/2007 @ 4:55pm

    Trust me, I'm not going to become another RESE here. My point is that I don't buy the official story. Just as you promote your healthy skepticism when considering seemingly ridiculous conspiracy theories, I apply the same philosophy toward the official story of what happened that fateful day. It surprises me that you, a thoughtful person, would not at the very least entertain the notion that the story given by the administration that is so tightly interwoven, and often indistinguishable, with the corporations and the media is not the truth.

    I notice you really haven't stated what you believe about this. Should I conclude by default that you buy that rhetoric, or is it an absolutist equation to you in which you either accept the official story, or you're just another RESE/PLUNGER type going on and on about jesuit mind control or whatever else you like to ridicule them with?

    Posted by MATTMAN at 12/11/2007 @ 5:22pm

28. From the Hitchens piece at Slate that's in today's Nation newsfeed:

    Despite a string of exposures going back all the way to the Church Commission, the CIA cannot rid itself of the impression that it has the right to subvert the democratic process both abroad and at home. Its criminality and arrogance could perhaps have been partially excused if it had ever got anything right, but, from predicting the indefinite survival of the Soviet Union to denying that Saddam Hussein was going to invade Kuwait, our spymasters have a Clouseau-like record, one that they have earned yet again with their exculpation of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. It was after the grotesque estimate of continued Soviet health and prosperity that the late Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan argued that the CIA should be abolished. It is high time for his proposal to be revived. The system is worse than useless--it's a positive menace. We need to shut the whole thing down and start again.

    No question in my mind that Hitchens is correct. The fact that it won't happen is just another brick in the wall of the mausoleum that's being built around us.

    It's nearing completion.

    Posted by b_kool_66 at 12/11/2007 @ 5:28pm

29. Mattman,

    Another strike against a full-blown 9-11 conspiracy is a circumstantial --and I would argue a substantial-- one.

    A true conspiracy requires a minimal level of competence which just happens to be among the chief deficiencies of the current administration.

    If these guys were directly involved and no one botched anything, it would stand as --by far-- their most towering achievement.

    Posted by b_kool_66 at 12/11/2007 @ 5:39pm

30. Posted by B_KOOL_66 12/11/2007 @ 5:39pm

    Good point, but let's not forget who really pulls the strings of these puppets. Are they really so dumb? They got their on going "war on terror", which means ongoing defense contracts, which boils down to profits, profits, profits at the expense of who cares?, who cares?, who cares? They got their patriot act. They got a lot of things that had to do with serious thinking, planning, strategizing, etc. Assholes, but not necessarily dumbasses.

    Posted by MATTMAN at 12/11/2007 @ 5:47pm

31. True enough, Mattman.

    Here is a "conspiracy" theory I do buy into:

    The Shock Doctrine .

    And here's one that's new to me but intriguing:

    The Planned Collapse of America .

    It references a government funded study from 1974 entitled the "Changing Images of Man" which can be downloaded as a PDF.

    Here's the fascinating description of the study:

    The object of the research was the development of a plausible vision of the future in which democratic methods survive, major problems are managed successfully if not resolved, and the unfolding of the human potential continues to expand. In other words, the postulation of a "desirable future" including feasible paths to its realization . . .

    The government was looking forward to a very troubling future, trying to figure out the best path through it. The plan was to find ways to shape and mold mankind into a new cultural image, complete with new ideas and ideologies, even religious ones. The root of the problem was human nature, and solution was to reshape the competing forces of daily life, in order to forge a new image of a new human nature. The researchers were brutally honest in seeking all available knowledge pertaining to their research, and in assessing the current common image of man-on-earth.

    The research revealed that there were a multitude of crises that were about to intersect in America's near future. Not the least of these converging catastrophes was a rapidly approaching breakdown of both American capitalism and democracy. The collapse was a natural result of globalism and monopoly capitalism. The basic greed that powers the system eroded the American political and economic structures, exposing the foundation of immorality and unfairness that amplifies the social unrest. The Stanford researchers clearly predicted that the American economy was destined to collapse from its own dead weight. The data also showed that that economic collapse was to be accompanied by disastrous social repercussions, such as rioting and upheaval, which would lead us into a "garrison state."

    The thing about this research is that this work has confirmed that our economy based on parasitic capitalism, where the small elite sits atop the heap of men and gorges on their lifeblood, is destroying the social fabric of America. This system is based on a stacked deck, where the top elite always reap the profits that are made to rise to the top through the corporate profits-based system. The research confirmed that the growing inequities of such a system were ever increasing and with them, elevated social tensions. A system based on usury and putting everyone in the "poor house" is an economic order that is guaranteed to produce a democratic revolution, whenever the misery index of the armed populace exceeds the limits that they are willing to peacefully bear, without striking back at the source of their misery.

    Changing Images of Man predicts an American economic collapse and a "garrison" (police) state," if the overwhelming inequities of our economic system are not corrected by powerful multinationals making more humane decisions. Alternatives to this doomsday scenario are discussed, all of which point to the need to devote all available resources towards transforming the image of man, changing man's nature, instead of altering the corrupted economic system which has brought America to this dire state.

    Posted by b_kool_66 at 12/11/2007 @ 6:16pm

32. Posted by MASK 12/11/2007 @ 3:59pm | ignore this person

    You have an unerring tendency to associate people with the exact opposite of their expressions. As Rese is in fact the most non-Nietzchean poster here.

    Reality, if it is not of the view you would impose, then, it's not wither or no it's true, or not, its just "bad for you," I guess.

    For those who cannot accept, let alone research truth, it till it's dropped in their laps ... How about "Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth." Perhaps they are cloaked in sufficient, (waiting for such is not evidence of virtue in regards to ones maturity, the more so for a citizen of a democratic republic, with its, forewarned ... need for vigilance) authority?

    "Why are Architects and Engineers Re-examining the WTC Collapses?

    Architects and Engineers are trained to design buildings that function well and withstand potentially destructive forces. However, the 3 high-rise buildings at the World Trade Center which "collapsed" on 9/11 (the Twin Towers plus WTC Building #7) presented us with a body of evidence (i.e.controlled demolition) that was clearly outside the scope of our training and experience."

    http://www.ae911truth.org/

    If one wants to know how this republic got into such a sorry state of affairs, for most, it is sufficient to simply look into the nearest mirror. Though, I do admit, it is easier to heed the warning of the one who bids you not to look, to "pay no attention to the man behind the curtain," and further turn and disparage the messenger. Even though the truth renders all else (mere innocent by-standing, political calculations and such) said, into but so much bullshit moral and intellectual cowardice. Still its, easier, I spose ...

    Posted by V at 12/11/2007 @ 6:24pm

33. Also from ZNet --a sort of Chomsky playground of ideas-- is this fair minded critical review of The Shock Doctrine by the well respected acholar, Walden Bello:

    book review for The Shock Doctrine

    I believe it is one of the more important books of the last several years.

    Posted by b_kool_66 at 12/11/2007 @ 6:32pm

34. Posted by B_KOOL_66 12/11/2007 @ 6:32pm

    Thanks for the links. I look forward to reading them when I have the time. Unfortunately I have "work" to do here at my "job" before closing time. That excerpt you pasted sounds fascinating, though bleak.

    Posted by MATTMAN at 12/11/2007 @ 6:46pm

35. Posted by B_KOOL_66 12/11/2007 @ 6:16pm

    It's hard to know what to believe, especially when you can't trust your media to deliver truth.

    Posted by MATTMAN at 12/11/2007 @ 6:58pm

36. Do you keep a copy of every post people make?

    Posted by WOLFGANG1 12/11/2007 @ 5:

    Only the stuff that they'll deny later.

    Posted by Mask at 12/11/2007 @ 7:45pm

37. Posted by B_KOOL_66 12/11/2007 @ 6:16pm | ignore this person

    Goods links.

    Posted by MATTMAN 12/11/2007 @ 6:58pm | ignore this person

    Easy, but hard to do. Go back as far as you can stomach, (800 BC and you'll become 100% pundit proof). Then study history by reading and analyzing the writings of ambassadors to their various kings, and sundry rulers.

    Posted by V at 12/12/2007 @ 04:02am

38. Assholes, but not necessarily dumbasses.

    Posted by MATTMAN 12/11/2007 @ 5:47pm

    Summed up beautifully I might add.

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 12/12/2007 @ 07:44am

39. I believe it is one of the more important books of the last several years.

    Posted by B_KOOL_66 12/11/2007 @ 6:32pm

    B_KOOL, I just checked it out from the library.

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 12/12/2007 @ 07:49am

40. Happy to hear that, Wolf. :-)

    Posted by b_kool_66 at 12/12/2007 @ 09:16am

41. For instance WOLF....

    When I read this....Posted by V 12/11/2007 @ 6:24pm....I like to remind folks of this...

    BLOG | Posted 08/20/2007 @ 2:01pm More on Sheehan v Pelosi; Bush Dogs of War by Katha Pollitt

    "I consider Larouche to be one the most intelligent, and patriotic Americans alive at this or any other time."----Posted by V 08/25/2007 @ 01:19am

    nuff said?

    Posted by Mask at 12/12/2007 @ 09:54am

42. "I consider Larouche to be one the most intelligent, and patriotic Americans alive at this or any other time." -"V" 08/25/2007 @ 01:19am

    nuff said? ~MASK @ 09:54am

    MASKOT,

    I'm guessing that your point here is that certain people should be completely disregarded if they can be shown to have said something considered to be sufficiently "wacky".

    I'm also guessing that is why you assiduously file away tender morsels of choice quotes in your mole's den root cellar --so that you can fire them off at the critical moment of rhetorical battle, thus plunging the "enemy" ignominiously under the waves like Capt. Nemo's latest victims.

    If that is, indeed, the point of this re-posting of a previous "V" comment, then you are indeed a scoundrel, a coward, and a fool.

    Please clarify.

    Posted by b_kool_66 at 12/12/2007 @ 10:58am

43. Posted by B_KOOL_66 12/12/2007 @ 10:58am

    Time Warp WIPE?!?!?!?!....everything since 11am gone?!?!?!

    Anyway, just to show I answered your question. If LaRouche is "V"s idol...and LaRouche is a conspiracy nut...and "V" is talking 9/11....

    seems pretty natural to point that out.

    Posted by Mask at 12/12/2007 @ 3:57pm

44. Posted by B_KOOL_66 12/12/2007 @ 10:58am | ignore this person

    He is knowingly, willfully, lying, as the only idol I am aware of having is Jimi Hendrix. Plus he wont dare to put it in context. If you are of a mind, ask him to give you link of the thread, for context. As he never dares to respond me, directly, always comes sideways, hoping to slide something by when I'm, not looking. If you've read the posts of late you've never heard mask respond to me, even when his words were my subject ...

    Humour me, just for a moment, if you will, about my reference to Architects and Engineers. It is not that they had the courage to put their pictures, along with their license ID's, on a web page for all to see ... Nor is it that a significant portion of them have also served, and are-were officers in the military. They are not some fringe group of people, and there is no argument mask is capable of making against them. By his own words, there is no content, only form, and that, pathetic. That was all for show, an attempt at character assassination by association. I once had a modicum respect for mask, but once I found how low he would, and could sink ... the only thing I can consider in relation to him when he arises from beneath it, is, contempt. Calling someone, anyone, something disparaging, is one thing, proving it is another.

    "....I like to remind folks of this..."

    Posted by MASK 12/12/2007 @ 09:54am | ignore this person

    The truth is, it's more like you cannot help yourself, even though you know better. For my part there is nothing you have said worthy of repetition.

    Posted by V at 12/12/2007 @ 4:54pm

45. Skepticism.

    It's a good thing, and a sure sign that one is thinking critically; beyond what is spoon-fed.

    There is much about this century's most infamous day that doesn't add up.

    The administration has a record of secrecy and mendacity, and it's demonstrated a willingness to disregard the Constitution in its quest to unify the powers of the executive.

    I don't consider the conspiracy theorists to be any less credible.

    Posted by drhammer at 12/12/2007 @ 8:21pm