Josh Marshall: Sources Say- CHENEY's ROLE In TORTURE Will Turn Out To Be "Pretty BIG DEAL"

Just What You'd Think

I've been talking to a few people today who have some professional insight into the whole torture saga, just what happened, what this or that secret memo might say. And I'm getting the sense that waterboarding to force people to tell us the 'truth' about Saddam's alliance with al Qaida might turn out to be a pretty big part of this. Especially when we look closely at Cheney's role.

--Josh Marshall
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2009/05/just_what_youd_think.php

he's got this.

less than fucking zero.

I mean, why bum out the poor defeated Reich? Haven't they suffered enough?

He's a real sick Dick.

Remember, he grew up blowing up frogs for fun.

a kick..Josh Marshall gets the scoops.

Cheney is pivotal to all of this.

sorry... don't buy any of this anymore. Not until I see Chenney and company arrested.

Until that happens... forget it, smoke and mirrors...

EMPIRE this is what this is about.

viewed this relationship of Cheney to torture:

The idea that torture was recommended by his office (him--although Jane Mayer's The Dark Side reveals Addington as some piece of work) and that it was mostly used early on to try and find a link between al-Qaeda & Saddam Hussein never surprised me, and makes a lot of sense--in the exact proportion to which the War on Terror extending to Iraq never did make sense to me.

He and Rumsfeld pushed the Iraq War, hard. Take most scandals from the Bush Administration, and it's like you can draw a line back to Cheney & Iraq. Valerie Plame--Cheney's office. To smear Wilson because he was debunking the bs yellow cake story. US attorney selective firing? The Justice Dept needed to be loyalists to ensure no one would investigate anything the administration did. Abu Ghraib--a symptom of a systemic institution of this kind of interrogation--

But why?

The stomach-turning part I can't shake is the nonsense that used to be spouted about how the war would "pay for itself" in oil revenues, and the widespread use of privae contractors. We weren't gonna nationalize that revenue. The leases went to private companies. And as far as services contractors who acted as support for the war effort in Mr. Rumsfeld's smaller, more effective military? Who were those people?

I don't like where that kind of thinking leads me. (I'll stop short of libel, right about here.) If my gut instinct is right, Cheney would be a very bad sort of man, indeed.

The ability to control world oil prices by the fear factor and
real destabilization, I think is one important reason.

The other was to make Halliburton safe from democracy, and its asbestos claims disappear.
This would be done while making Iraq a model for radical capitalism.
This goes hand and glove with the rejections of Kyoto, the rejection of climate change,
the use of extra legal intel techniques -- wiretapping, torture-- at home and abroad.

The French call it 'savage capitalism' Conrad called it the heart of darkness.

People associated with KBR & Halliburton and the oil indutries would be making money hand over fist. (I like Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine for pointing out this very thing as being a reason for the war.) But it even make sense in terms of how f****d up the carrying out of the war--especially Bremer's provisional coalition gov't and all the amateur-night bullcrap there--

It could either be grotesque incompetence or--the administration planned to drag everything out to milk a maximum of revenue from the American taxpayer. Or---something else, but those are the two possibilities that come to mind.

What I like least is who "people associated with Halliburton" primarily amounts to.

I want to recommend this thread.

:kick: