“This gave rise to what you might call Mayberry Machiavellis”

A report in today’s Guardian details the ongoing struggle to preserve Finca Vigia, Ernest Hemingway’s home for over twenty years located east of Havana, Cuba. It seems the Bush Administration has a somewhat schizophrenic view of the efforts to salvage the estate and the 9000 or so books and manuscripts that used to belong to one of the world’s foremost writers.

The efforts to preserve the estate began in 2001 and it was listed as one of eleven most endangered historic places in 2005 by the US National Trust for Historic Preservation. While the Bush Treasury Department, charged with enforcing the sanctions on that devil Castro, has allowed a number of experts in over the years to help stabilize the main house “…the original manuscripts and books, which contain thousands of Hemingway's notes, are still at risk. The US government has blocked not only the money needed but specialist equipment such as dehumidifiers and scanning equipment.”

It is widely suspected within the administration that such advanced dual-use technology as a dehumidifier or photo scanning equipment would be immediately put to use on the secret Cuban weapons of mass destruction program related activities. (I think I heard that Condi recently mentioned that governments allied with the United States seized several shipments of specialized, high strength aluminum foil destined for the nefarious Cubans.) With no sense of the irony, the Bush admin continues to present the situation thusly:

“Molly Millerwise, public affairs director at the Treasury, said: "We do not issue licences that facilitate activity promoting Cuba's tourism. The sanctions against Cuba are in place to help restrict hard currency from flowing to the Castro regime, which lines its pockets with money while forcing the Cuban people to live in fear and oppression."

Evidently, the Bush braintrust has done the cost-benefit analysis and determined the hundreds of additional dollars the Castro regime will reap each year is more damaging, on balance, than the preservation of this trove of (American) cultural history. I can’t think of anything more ridiculous. I know there are plenty of hard-right Cubans who form a constituency of the GOP and they have a few reps in Congress (the repugnant, apparent Scientologist Ileana Ros-Lehtinen comes to mind) who continue to spout the same tired story about how they are punishing Castro and not the people; as if only we give the sanctions a little more time we’ll be rid of this cigar-smoking threat to Democracy. I hate to break it to you but it’s not working. As the Guardian notes:

Mr [Jim] McGovern [D-Mass] said: "The embargo is an embarrassment. It hasn't worked. We've been doing it for 50 years, and I'd like to think that if something hasn't worked after 50 years, we'd be mature enough to let it go."

Um, no. The issue of Cuban sanctions has bothered me for a long time. In typical hypocritical fashion, the U.S. has had a deepening trade relationship with China going back nearly thirty years. Maybe I missed it but when did China become a free state and release all its political prisoners? Oh, that’s right, they haven’t. How can the U.S. not equate China and Cuba economically and politically? Both are Communist contries and have a roughly similar human rights record.

There are several arguable reasons but I think it can be explained by two factors. First, as noted above, the small but strident group of Cuban exiles exercises some influence. That Castro has been able to thumb his nose at the U.S. for nearly fifty years, though, seems to be the unforgivable sin. He has managed to survive in our hemisphere despite every attempt on his life and every economic tool the Yanqui possesses being leveled at him without bowing. That really galls some people.

For the record, I'm no Castro apologist and don't care for cults of personality. However, as with China, it seems there are significant benefits to be had by relaxing trade & travel restrictions. The contact has a way of opening closed societies. As a 'middle class' develops so does the pressure for more freedom. Even incremental movement is progress. I hate to quote Reagan but 'constructive engagement' is a legitimate policy, just not in cases like South African apartheid for which it was initially formulated.

If those anti-Castro Cubans were smart they'd push to relax or eliminate the sanctions. It's a much better idea to use the advantage of their cultural background and family contacts to benefit from the growing private investment in Cuba instead of stewing in righteous indignation. Castro won't live forever but he has surely resisted being dislodged by ridiculous sanctions and deep seated resentment. Let's just hope the Hemingway estate survives either both Castro and the ineffective U.S. sanctions.

Warmest regards,

-one pissed off cracker

VP Cheney to star in ‘24’ as guest torturer. –citation needed

- timely analysis within five to ten days after the fact -

In the second of a four part Washington Post series examining the murky world of ‘the Dick’, Barton Gellman and Jo Becker turn to the force seeking to enshrine torture as a common tactic on the part of the U.S. It should really come as no surprise that since the day that he determined that he himself was the best candidate for the VP position, Cheney has been the policy maker in this administration. From his secret energy policy meetings, to the Iraq war itself the OVP and those linked to him throughout the years are responsible for the mess we find ourselves in.

The WP notes, in short, after a meeting in which the CIA discussed possible ‘difficulties getting actionable intelligence’ using accepted techniques on detainees who began arriving in Guantanamo in January 2002, to wit:

“The vice president's office played a central role in shattering limits on coercion of prisoners in U.S. custody, commissioning and defending legal opinions that the Bush administration has since portrayed as the initiatives, months later, of lower-ranking officials.”

It seems after deciding what is and isn’t torture in his own mind he set various counsel to work and “pioneered a novel distinction between forbidden ‘torture’ and permitted use of ‘cruel, inhuman or degrading’ methods”. Though suffering numerous setbacks in the courts it seems ultimately Cheney got what he wanted.

As to the numbers who’ve died violent deaths due to the Cheney policy, the latest report I could quickly find was 108. That was more than two years ago. What of others, the number of ‘disappeared’ who were last placed in U.S. custody? I’m sure Cheney knows. For a detailed discussion of some of the deaths look here.

While on the topic, Cheney’s hunting buddy Justice Antonin Scalia recently revealed his own jurisprudential support for torture, the unabashed brand practiced by one Jack Bauer, at a legal forum in Canada. According to the Globe and Mail:

“Senior judges from North America and Europe were in the midst of a panel discussion about torture and terrorism law, when a Canadian judge's passing remark - "Thankfully, security agencies in all our countries do not subscribe to the mantra 'What would Jack Bauer do?' "- got the legal bulldog in Judge Scalia barking”

The conservative jurist stuck up for Agent Bauer, arguing that fictional or not, federal agents require latitude in times of great crisis. "Jack Bauer saved Los Angeles. ... He saved hundreds of thousands of lives," Judge Scalia said. Then, recalling Season 2, where the agent's rough interrogation tactics saved California from a terrorist nuke, the Supreme Court judge etched a line in the sand.

"Are you going to convict Jack Bauer?" Judge Scalia challenged his fellow judges. "Say that criminal law is against him? 'You have the right to a jury trial?' Is any jury going to convict Jack Bauer? I don't think so.”

I can see Scalia now, a Tivo™ full of ‘24’, an Inquisition™ brand cat o’nine tails and a little self-flagellation… This story burned up the blogs last week but I could find nothing in the U.S. mainstream media. You’d think at least Fox News would have covered it, given the great tie-in promotion but no such luck.

I think there are two issues of concern here. First, does torture provide the ‘actionable intelligence’ for which it is intended? And then, regardless of whether it works, is it something the U.S., and by extension the People want to be known for? On the latter question, we’re in good company (China, Iran, Saudi Arabia) with regards to the death penalty so why not join the torture club?** It’s a matter of our survival, right? If a majority of citizens believe it is excusable then let the water-boarding continue.

And it seems there is majority support for torture. According to an October 2005 Pew Research Center Poll 46% of those polled believed torture can be often or sometimes justified, with another 17% believing it can be justified in rare circumstances. Interestingly enough, 56% of Catholics believe it can be often or sometimes justified with another 16% approving in rare cases. Um, I’m guessing the Catholic stalwart Scalia is in the top 1% believing it is always justified…

To the Cheney-Bush administration torture is in the eye of the beholder. Bush and others have repeatedly said the U.S. does not torture. Rumsfeld, in approving some of the methods, didn’t think being forced to stand for hours on end was a problem since he himself stood for 8-10 hours a day. If only all the interrogation methods the U.S. uses could be tested on him first. He could have determined whether they were acceptable or not; call them Rumsfeld Approved Robust Methods™.

Back to the questions at hand; the short answer is, yes, torture appears to ‘work’ to a limited degree. There are a number of articles that address the limited successes of coercion. However, the Economist article and to a greater extent the Salon report also show the very real limitations of the tactic.

From: “The sight of the rack”

“Guy Fawkes, the most famous conspirator—a Catholic zealot who had fought in “holy wars” abroad—was “examined” by William Wade, the lieutenant of the Tower of London, from November 6th [1605] onwards. King James I had asked Wade to use “the gentler Tortures” first. These included thumbscrews and manicles, by which a man was hung up by his wrists. On the 7th, Fawkes weakened so far as to admit his own name. He would not admit the names of his accomplices.

On the 9th, still showing “a most stubborn perverse humour”, he was sent to the rack. One royal official said that “Fawkes was never on the rack, but only by his arms upright”. (The mere sight of the machine, on which the rackmaster slowly stretched legs and arms to the point of dislocation, was often enough to elicit confessions.) Others said he was “extremely racked”. His signature, weaker and more wavering as he signed successive statements, suggests this was the case. Certainly, he started giving names.”

The trouble was:

“The most important was that of John Gerard, a Jesuit priest. With this name, Wade could prove that the Society of Jesus was the brains behind the plot, and appropriate pressure could be applied to the chief Jesuit suspect, Father Henry Garnet. Yet the plot was not, in fact, a Jesuit conspiracy. On the contrary, their role was marginal. Torture had led Fawkes to produce a name that fed the false or wilful [sic] assumptions of the English government, but did not point to the truth.”

From: “Does Torture Work?” –On the French military's use of torture in Algeria

“…no rank-and-file soldier has related a tale of how he personally, through timely interrogation, produced decisive information that stopped a ticking bomb. “As the pain of interrogation began," observed torturer Jean-Pierre Vittori, "they talked abundantly, citing the names of the dead or militants on the run, indicating locations of old hiding places in which we didn't find anything but some documents without interest." Detainees also provided names of their enemies -- true information, but without utility to the French.

The FLN military men had also been told, when forced to talk, to give up the names of their counterparts in the rival organization, the more accommodationist MNA (National Algerian Movement). Not very knowledgeable in the subtleties of Algerian nationalism, the French soldiers helped the FLN liquidate the infrastructure of the more cooperative organization and tortured MNA members, driving them into extreme opposition.”

Unfortunately:

“And "what to do with these poor devils after their 'use'?" asked a French soldier. Many torturers preferred to kill them, though, one soldier conceded, genocide was difficult. "There isn't enough place in the prisons and one can't kill everyone ..., so one releases them and they're going to tell others, and from mouth to mouth, the whole world knows." Then, he observed, their relatives and friends "join the resistance."

Moreover:

“Torture drifted headlong into sadism, continuing long after valuable information could be retrieved. For example, soldiers arrested a locksmith and tortured him for three days. In his pocket, the locksmith had bomb blueprints with the address of an FLN bomb factory in Algiers. The locksmith bought time, the bombers relocated and the raid by the French three days later fell on open air. Had the soldiers been able to read Arabic, they would have found the bomb factory days earlier. But they were too busy torturing. As one would predict, engaging in torture prevented the use of ordinary -- and more effective -- policing skills.”

It seems apparent that when subjected to torture even fanatically motivated people will name names or say what the inquisitors want to hear. The Inquisition was able to elicit many confessions (though fewer conversions). Whether the information is of any real value is questionable. No doubt that some of those in U.S. custody, even according to the disappeared report, are rightfully characterized as ‘terrorists’. But not all of those in U.S. custody can be al-Qaeda’s ‘Number 2’ (we’ve killed about six of them already). More likely, given the cell structure of the organization(s), few of these in U.S. custody have little operation knowledge beyond their immediate contacts. Certainly, the horror stories of the petty criminals in Abu Ghraib and those rounded up in Afghanistan for cold cash paid, attest to the fact that as broad policy the methods pushed by Cheney and instituted by the Pentagon & CIA are a strategic failure and create more enmity and more ‘terrorists’.

Ultimately on the question of whether torture is an acceptable arrow in our quiver, I think the answer is absolutely not.

Yours,

-one pissed off cracker

** The U.S. has long been accused of being one of the founding members of the torture club in Central & South America under the guise of the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation, originally The School of the Americas.

Inaugural Post – Kickin’ it manifesto style

I've procrastinated for quite some time with regard to starting a weblog. One reason why is my concern that I will not have enough time to devote to it since infrequent posting or simple troll-like linking to another’s work is not going to do anyone any good. There are plenty of smart, progressive bloggers out there and I usually find myself reading them, to the point where my ‘spare’ time has passed.

But lately, I’ve found it very difficult to resist the urge to put fingers to keys. I’m very disturbed with the current state of the world and can’t say that I am very optimistic. Many of the problems we face should be plainly evident for they are the same as we’ve had since before the rise of civilization. With the development of human society the scale only increased until today, as a species, we face myriad challenges to our individual and collective existence. Conflict and suffering seem to be inescapable aspects of our condition but I think otherwise. In this space I intend to examine the issues we face through the lens of my political philosophy.

Where we stand now is not a matter for debate. Where we go must be in a direction toward a sustainable future for all the Earth’s inhabitants. We cannot find that direction without a rational perspective, one that leaves traditionalism and nationalism behind.

For our part in the U.S. we have to accept our share of the blame, historically and presently. The ‘absolve America first’ crowd would have you believe that we are simply reacting to the evil-doers in the world as a means of survival. Their arguments are hollow. We’ve clearly been playing the ‘grand game’ for more than a hundred years, as other nations have played for centuries. The U.S. may have largely avoided the consequences, aside from the events of 11 September, but I don’t foresee it lasting too much longer.

It is, in my opinion, impossible to counter the fact that the current administration is the most contemptible and incompetent in our history, run by crass ideologues and staffed by apparatchiks. The damage they’ve done has deepened the darkness. Money and corporate power corrupt a system which is, in theory at least, very elegant. A huge number of people either don’t vote or are led into voting against their own interests. The NeoCons will not save us.

Worldwide, religious extremism is increasing in intensity and furthering the division of humanity. No religious tradition is guiltless but it is plainly obvious among the more fanatical and backward elements in Islam. I think it is high time we move away from supernaturalism. No sky god will save us.

The environment is under siege and few seem to care enough to do anything about it. It is the human race that will suffer with the collapse of a habitable world. Largely we’ve lost any understanding of the interconnectedness of life. We’re not thinking about seven generations. I once asked a ‘conservative’ co-worker how far he would consider the impact of his actions. Not beyond the lives of his children was his answer. These days, the powers that be are not looking beyond the next fiscal quarter. The market will not save us.

My hope in doing this is to be a part of a change in the human perspective, a rather ambitious goal I admit. The reference in my propositum to a Second Enlightenment is half-joking but I do think it will take another grand movement forward in the evolution of thought if we are to have much of a future. It may seem hyperbolic but I think the only way to see it accomplished is through human interaction and the free flow of ideas on the internet. Corporate media is a dense filter.

My future posts will elaborate a bit more on issues and solutions as I see them and will cover the broad topics of politics and religion (my favorite subjects). Of course, I will also comment on other blog entries, articles, and other online resources or books I’m reading. As ongoing projects, I will “spotlight” (thanks to Bill “you will be spotlighted” O’Reilly for techniques on demonizing) the Way of the Mendacious, Answers in Genesis crowd, the Bush-Cheney Administration, NeoCons and other evil-doers.

I remain,

one pissed off cracker


About me:

White Anglo-Saxon atheist; born in Memphis and currently residing in Houston, by way of Philadelphia. I’m happily married, mostly, to a lovely woman who was born in Baghdad and lived briefly in England. We have two wonderful boys one is four the other eleven months. I have a B.S. in Geography (Cartography) with a minor in Geology but also took a good deal of classical Greek & political science. I work in the telecom sector doing wireless site development.