Lies, More Lies, Still More Lies… and the Simpletons Who Repeat Them

by Scott Creighton

I don’t know how else I can put this: “waterboarding” is illegal and has been for some time, but we have ALREADY addressed this a year ago when John Yoo first became a household name. So, why are we talking about it NOW?

It’s a DISTRACTION people.

All the dissent groups are talking about torture. Keith Olbermann is talking about torture. The republican sites are deliberately mouthing off in ludicrous ways about torture NOT being torture so as to fuel the fire and keep this crap going as LONG AS POSSIBLE.


Well, let’s try to take our feeble little minds back a few weeks and see what was the BIG ISSUE (read as “current ongoing criminal activity”) facing the nation and drawing much unwanted attention from the liberals and the conservatives alike.  Hmm… what could that have been? I can’t seem to remember back past the last episode of Dancing With the Stars….

Oh yeah! It was the criminal fucking bankers stealing all our money with the help of the Obama administration while 5 million jobs were lost last year and the housing market folded even more! Ah yeah. Now I remember.

Good thing we are talking about torture; an issue that will AT BEST produce another PHONY “commission” like the one run by Philip Zelikow. Speaking of which, as it just so happens, guess who is a BIG STAR on the liberal “dissent” sites these days?

That’s right! Philip Zelikow, the liar from the 9/11 Commission Report days.

Big Star! Big Star!

Over at After Downing Street, the guy who runs that “prosecute Bush” site (formerly of “Impeach Bush” fame, it was a good attempt I have to give him props for that) David Swanson, has written up his own little review of the Zelikow article that I diced up on my site a day or so ago.

One difference though: Swanson just can’t praise Zelikow enough for his little propaganda piece.

Now, I’m glad that Zelikow is speaking out now, and I want to encourage other late-blooming whistleblowers to do the same. If such people seem to receive too much gratitude, so be it. We need the truth told, and it’s better told late than never.”  Swanson

What do you say to gullibility like that?  I am at a loss for words.

First of all, Zelikow is acting like his memo is registered in the White House documents when in fact he himself states that all official records of it were “destroyed” by the White House. Which means he just produced this “white paper” and is CLAIMING that he wrote it in the first place.  We know he is a liar.  Why don’t you people question whether or not he is lying about this memo of his? There are no “official” accounts of it dating back to when he said he sent it.

Do you understand? He is LYING to cover his butt and Condi’s butt.  We also KNOW HE IS LYING because part of his story in the article is that he and Condi were never FOR the torture treatment of detainees, yet ANOTHER memo released since his article started making its rounds clearly shows that CONDI RICE helped devise the torture program in 2002, and signed off on it OFFICIALLY.  Now THAT paper IS still on White House records and is dated and is easily verifiable.

Oddly enough, after heaping the same “big wet kisses” on Zelikow for his “whistleblowing” that he will later condemn UVa for doing in public, Swanson calls for Zelikow to be removed from his position teaching modern history at the university.  Apparently Mr. Swanson holds the integrity of his alma mater up to a different standard than say his website, ADS.  Since he has already published one set of horrible lies from Mr. Zelikow on it and then written this article where he can’t praise him enough for “telling the truth”.

Well, which is it Mr. Swanson? Is Zelikow a liar or is he not? Can’t have it both ways just because you happen to like one thing he says; just because it happens to fit in your “prosecute Bush” agenda.

Now typically I wouldn’t get too upset by all this, except for the fact, that as I was looking at his site I ran across the other BushCo propaganda piece designed to be picked up by the “liberal” blogs and media.

This one is actually from a CIA agent, so of course that automatically means that every dissent group in the country will jump on it, that is of course, if they don’t look TOO HARD at the facts mentioned. And par for the course,  ADS jumped all over it.

Here is a guy, Ali Soufan, who always seems to pop up when there is some question making the mainstream news, saying that he knows that torture wasn’t even needed in some cases and that it deterred from the “investigations” that were ongoing.

Of course the important thing for you to take away from that is that they were ONLY doing this torture stuff to protect the country and defend us from all those mean “terrorists”.

It is inaccurate, however, to say that Abu Zubaydah had been uncooperative. Along with another F.B.I. agent, and with several C.I.A. officers present, I questioned him from March to June 2002, before the harsh techniques were introduced later in August. Under traditional interrogation methods, he provided us with important actionable intelligence. ”   Soufan

Now remember, this is the CIA; an organization that has been torturing people for generations, at will, usually in small nations where big business wants to install a dictator, or has recently installed a dictator, so that they can privatize the collective wealth of the nation and subject it’s people to a stark version of the Friedman “free-market” savage capitalism plan and destroy their national economy by erasing trade restrictions. Just Google “The Miracle of Chile”, “The Miracle of Argentina”, “The Miracle of China”… you get the picture. Or just read “The Shock Doctrine” when you get a moment.

Aside from the fact that Soufan works for an agency that can’t order lunch without torturing someone, somewhere, he goes on to say that Abu Zubaydah was the big “high value” terrorist that the Bush administration kept trying to project him as when they were first addressing this issue back in 2008.

The problem again here is credibility.

Contrary to claims made by the administration and the CIA — which, as described in Time magazine shortly after his capture, indicated that he was “al-Qaeda’s chief of operations and top recruiter,” who would be able to “provide the names of terrorists around the world and which targets they planned to hit” — the story that emerged in Ron Suskind’s 2006 book, The One Percent Doctrine, was that Zubaydah was nothing like the pivotal figure that the CIA had supposed him to be, and had actually turned out to be mentally ill.

Investigating his diary, analysts found entries in the voices of three people — a boy, a young man and a middle-aged alter ego — which recorded in numbing detail, over the course of ten years, “what people ate, or wore, or trifling things they said.” Dan Coleman, the FBI’s senior expert on al-Qaeda, explained to one of his superiors, “This guy is insane, certifiable, split personality.” According to Suskind, the officials also confirmed that Zubaydah appeared to know nothing about terrorist operations, and was, instead, a minor logistician.

And yet, as Suskind also reports, so misplaced was the CIA’s belief in Zubaydah’s importance that when they subjected him to waterboarding and other forms of torture, and he “confessed” to all manner of supposed plots — against shopping malls, banks, supermarkets, water systems, nuclear plants, apartment buildings, the Brooklyn Bridge, and the Statue of Liberty — “thousands of uniformed men and women raced in a panic to each target … The United States would torture a mentally disturbed man and then leap, screaming, at every word he uttered.”   Andy Worthington

Zubaydah was a mentally disturbed individual who provided exactly what the CIA wanted; justification for their “endless war on terror”.  And even now, after all this is known and out there for all to see, these CIA moles are creeping into the historical debate, leaving out key details, so as to poison our perception of what we already know happened.

It’s like that Scott McClellan article he wrote claiming Bush lied, but only because he loves his country soooo much.  But at least Swanson didn’t fall for that one, right?   oh, wait a minute

This is how propaganda works people; they give you a little tidbit from an “insider” that everyone already knows, so that everyone publishes the article as if it were some new gospel and carefully woven into its fabric of the story… is small pox.  Like blankets to keep the Indians warm. The “small pox” (ie. propaganda) works it’s way into the dissent community to become the “new history”.. the undisputed facts.

When people say that torture doesn’t work, they are wrong. It does work. It just isn’t used for what people THINK it is used for.  Again, I would STRONGLY recommend “The Shock Doctrine” by Naomi Klein if you want a little insight into the long-term socio-political effects of torture programs.  Especially ones that are well known to the target population.

But, all that said, perhaps ADS and our other “dissent” sites could use a researcher who takes a little time trying to figure out the actually merit of an article BEFORE they slap it up on their site for their many hundreds of activists to see and regurgitate as fact.

Unless of course ADS doesn’t really mind helping to spread the BushCo propaganda to their readers.

4 Responses

  1. Distraction? Educating the public as to what our criminal government has been up to isn’t a distraction.

    Not everyone reads blogs and a lot who don’t, depend on the same MSM outlets that are running this story.

    As for the American public forgetting about the Wall Street gangsters, that ain’t gonna happen.

    Millions of American families will get booted out of their homes this year by some of the same Wall Street banks we’re bailing out.

    Add those to the 5 million or so that have already lost their homes and you’ve got a story that ain’t gonna die.

    ”Why would Iraq attack America or use nuclear weapons against us? I’ll tell you what I think the real threat (is) and actually has been since 1990 — it’s the threat against Israel,” Phillip Zelikow told a crowd at the University of Virginia on Sep. 10, 2002, speaking on a panel of foreign policy experts assessing the impact of 9/11 and the future of the war on the al-Qaeda terrorist organisation.

    ”And this is the threat that dare not speak its name, because the Europeans don’t care deeply about that threat, I will tell you frankly. And the American government doesn’t want to lean too hard on it rhetorically, because it is not a popular sell,” said Zelikow.

  2. will,

    I’m fine.

    thanks for wondering.

    I thought you’d like to hear others on this Zelikow story.

    I was in the midst of writing something incorporating what this guy said on the Rachel Maddow show. I think where he said that he had written a piece, as a staffer for C. Rice, that argued that the torture memos were badly argued.

    Then I heard that Rice was supposed to have supported the torturing. Then I read some of your pieces talking up skepticism of Zelikow and what exactly he was doing with this story of his memo gathered up and destroyed by Bush operatives…

    I wonder if you will do any follow up on this?

  3. will,

    I liked the commentary here about Rice.

    I have not seen any mention made of Zelikow and his comment that his memo, opposing the torture-justifying memos were written on Rice’s behalf.

    Are they protecting Zelikow?

    Or, are people now wanting to figure out more about who did what given the attempt by Zelikow to construct some kind of cover for Rice?

    Why all of this cover/Brushing when there does not seem to be any real effort to investigate and prosecute?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: