Thursday, March 15, 2007

"The world was going down the tubes. They needed a scapegoat. They found Wayne."

Does anyone else doubt whether Khalid Sheikh Mohammed actually did all of the things that he’s confessed to? Before I go any further, I want to express that based on the evidence that I have seen (through the mainstream media), it appears that Khalid is a very, very bad man. He is probably responsible for the 9/11 attacks as well as many others. He probably deserves whatever punishment a court hands down for him.

Nevertheless, I don’t have much faith in his “confession” (and I'm not the only one). My doubt comes from the fact that this administration has made it very clear that they have no problem using torture to extract information from captured terrorists. So far, we have only seen evidence of this in cases where the terrorist was being held outside the US. However, given its support of torture, I do not doubt that this administration uses these methods within our own borders (including Guantanamo Bay). I believe that confessions extracted by torture are not reliable because the person being tortured will admit to anything to stop the pain. I am not saying that no information taken from torture is useful – some information may actually be true. But without independent verification, I will not believe it.

I also doubt the veracity of his confession because it seems too convenient. I originally believed his confession to masterminding the 9/11 attacks because we had information that led us to him. However, once he “confessed” to beheading Daniel Pearl, I stopped believing him. Then he confessed to being behind the “shoe bomber” attempt and the 1993 WTC attack. It seems too convenient that the same person was responsible for all of these highly publicized heinous acts (and 9 others). It seems to me that the government was looking for someone to blame and this guy is the worst guy we have. He makes it easy for us to want to torture captured terrorists. Because he is so bad, it’s easy for us to believe that he did these bad things which makes him good target for blame – a good scapegoat. Since the administration now has its scapegoat on whom it can blame these many attacks, it is in a much better position to declare victory in the war on terror before Bush leaves office (he is very concerned about his legacy).

“You may be right. I may be crazy. But it just may be a lunatic you’re looking for.”

1 comment:

M & M Holdaway said...

To think that our government still uses torture as a way of extracting information makes my blood turn cold. Anyone who has been sleep-deprived, beaten and starved will say or do just about anything for a Big Mac. Even confess to a crime they did not commit. If our government is so keen to condone torture methods, perhaps we ought to string up this administration and reveal what secrets they have swept under the rug.

I think that their incompetency in finding Bin Laden (and the mounting frustration of the Nation) has led them to search for any possible scapegoat who happens across our path.

There is a new documentary on HBO, "The Ghosts of Abu Ghraib" which I am very interested to see. Torture is not only de-humanizing to those who suffer at it's hands, but also to those who are administering the abuse themselves.

Mr. Mohammed is certainly guilty of terrorism, but not Watergate.