Ours is a brand-new world of allatonceness - The Murray Torture Telegrams

by ghandi
Sat Dec 31st, 2005 at 10:13:19 AM EST

from the diaries. A fitting epitaph for 2005? -- Jerome

The Murray Torture Telegrams

Chris Floyd

By now, the world -- or at least the blogosphere -- has seen the documents released by former UK diplomat Craig Murray, proving that the Bush and Blair governments both knew that the "intelligence" they were receiving from Uzbekistan was the result of gruesome and agonizing tortures on thousands of innocent people. Bush and Blair knew this -- yet Bush continued to "render" his Terror War captives to Uzbekistan, and shower the nation's Stalinist dictator, Karimov, with gold, guns and public honor. And despite Blair's repeated and strenuous denials of any complicity in America's heinous practice of "rendition" (indeed, in one recent Parliamentary appearance, Blair pretended that he didn't even understand what the term meant), Murray's documents prove that Britain's leadership knew full well what was happening in Karimov's torture chambers. Yet, like their American counterparts, British officials not only condoned the Uzbek tortures, they also spent considerable energy in devising contorted -- and specious -- "justifications" for using the tainted fruits of these evil practices.


And evil is the word for it. Murray, while still serving as UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, dug up proof that the tortures condoned by Bush and Blair included boiling prisoners to death, in addition to the traditional methods of pulling out fingernails, beating, starving, and raping. Nor were these refinements limited to the prisoners themselves -- their family members were also tortured to produce "confessions." One chilling case unearthed by Murray, who witnessed the Stalinist show trials mounted by Karimov's judicial goons, featured a peasant farmer who was forced to confess to extensive family links to Osama Bin Laden -- after seeing his children tortured before his eyes. At the show trial, the old man renounced his confession and exposed the torture of children -- and was promptly hustled away.

All of this -- and much more -- Murray reported at the time to his superiors in London, and to his diplomatic colleagues from Europe and the United States. At every turn, he found either resigned complicity -- "What can we do? The US supports Karimov?" -- to outright embrace of torture from -- who else? -- Bush's own man in Tashkent, who told Murray that the "reduction of civil liberties" under Karimov was "no bad thing," since it was being done in the name of combatting Islamic extremism. Here we see the Bushist ethos in essence: Everything is permitted -- torture, murder, rape, kidnapping, aggression -- in the name of "fighting terrorism." Bush has of course brought this police state philosophy to America, as even the mainstream media is beginning to report.

Murray's release of these documents -- an end run around the Blair government's threat to censor his whistle-blowing book on his tenure in Uzbekistan -- is yet another of a whole battery of smoking guns proving the pervasive criminality of the oh-so-Christian Coalition of Bush and Blair. Empire Burlesque's intrepid webmaster, RichardK, has been on top of this story quite literally from the beginning; he was among the first to receive Murray's documents upon their release this week, and one of the first to get them out into the blogosphere. He has compiled a detailed -- and growing -- compendium of stories and documents relating to Murray's revelations, which can be found here.

One very significant item unearthed by Richard is a speech Murray gave at York University last February. Here you will find a good overview of Murray's "journey through dark heat" in Tashkent. But there is also another telling revelation buried in the speech, almost as an aside, which does much to explain how the "intelligence" community -- which now appears to have swallowed the US-UK governments whole -- really works. Murray tells of his time as a diplomatic officer in Warsaw in the 1990s. He meets a Polish informant, who retails some hot gossip about something the Polish prime minister allegedly did. But Murray was at the event where the indiscretion supposedly took place, and knew that the story was false. The next day, Murray saw the same informant talking with another UK "diplomat" who was in fact an undercover MI6 man. "Low and behold the very next day I received on my desk in its striking bright red cover a piece of MI6 intelligence material containing this [false] story about the Polish Prime Minister," Murray told the students. The next time he saw the informant, he asked why he'd given the false information to the MI6 agent. The informant smiled and said, "Well, he paid me $8,000 for it."

And that, dear friends, is the basis of much of the "intelligence" upon which the "War on Terror" is now based: grasping informants selling false information to agents looking for anything to justify the policies of their leaders. We already know of cases of innocent captives in Guantanamo Bay who were sold outright to U.S. agents by "bounty hunters" -- human traffickers, actually -- in Afghanistan and Pakistan. As Murray points out, we now know that much of the "intelligence" used by Bush and Blair to manufacture war fever was sold by proven liars and shady operators willing to tell the warmongers what they wanted to hear.

So when you hear Bush and Cheney -- and the pipsqueaking bootlickers in the blogosphere and mainstream press -- defending the use of torture, rendition, and lawlessness in the "fight against terrorism," remember that British bagman in Warsaw. For this is how the world really works. This is the true foundation of the malevolent edifices of fear and repression that Bush and Blair are building on the ruins of ancient liberties.

Ours is a brand-new world of allatonceness

By RichardK (webmaster)

Crossposted at Empire Burlesque

The UK government has been quick to deny that they practice, or tolerate the practice of torture. So it is perhaps not surprising that they are determined that you should not see the following documents that were leaked to Empire Burlesque soon after they were leaked in the UK.

Craig Murray was the UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, until his complaints and protest at the use of intelligence gained by torture got too much for Jack Straw and the Foreign Office, who set about attempting to unsuccessfully smear him, and to boot him from office. He retaliated by digitally unleashing telegrams and memorandums that he was told to 'burn' and were not to be unveiled under the draconian Secrecy Act. This has turned out to be somewhat of a circus event for the blogosphere. The realisation that whistleblowing may have a future online has arrived and there is little officials can do when sensitive data is propogated to tens of thousands of people via blogs in a matter of hours.

The Wiretap story story I've  been covering behind the scenes has suddenly taken on a whole new colour since this unveiling and subsequent data burst by Murray. It's possible that the Bush administration has been targeting dissidents and those who don't fit into the  'With Us"  slice of George's ridiculously dogmatic and stark view of the world because we are a threat to his war mongering family dynasty when it's possible that the real truth can be unveiled to many.

Over the last couple of days, bloggers and forumists have proven that they truly do represent a force in the war of ideas. Now -  underlying layers - which have been blanketed from the masses by corporate and government enslaved  media can be disseminated by hundreds of thousands of online social networks that are only a few bytes removed from one another.

Media guru and electronical anthropologist Marshall McLuhan brilliantly predicted this in his 1967 work - "The Medium is the Massage: An Inventory of Effects". It's close to 40 year ago that McLuhan coined the term "the global village."

"...Ours is a brand-new world of allatonceness. 'Time' has ceased, 'space' has vanished. We now live in a global village...a simultaneous happening."... "Electric circuitry profoundly involves men with one another. Information pours upon us, instantaneously and continuously. As soon as information is acquired, it is very rapidly replaced by still newer information. Our electrically-configured world has forced us to move from the habit of data classification to the mode of pattern recognition. We can no longer build serially, block-by-block, step-by-step, because instant communication insures that all factors of the environment and of experience co-exist in a state of active interplay."

...Societies have always been shaped more by the nature of the media by which men communicate than by the content of the communication.... The alphabet and print technology fostered and encouraged a fragmenting process, a process of specialism and of detachment. Electric technology fosters and encourages unification and involvement. It is impossible to understand social and cultural changes without a knowledge of the workings of media. Anxiety is, in great part, a result of trying to do do today's jobs with yesterday's tools, with yesterday's concepts.

from McLuhan's The Medium is the Massage: An Inventory of Effects (1967)

As a member of "I'll Publish the al Jazzera memo" group at Blair Watch, we were one of the first to get the memo outside of the UK - and have had some time to develop the idea of how to build a blogswarming monitor. With Technorati and Google it is truly possible to view how this story unfolds in close to real time due to their intense data gathering and the Open Source software we used for RSS scraping. It's pretty geeky I know. But the page has been attracting swarms of blogophiles as this story gets mapped out in virtual real time on the page. And it provided mewith a way to approach the story from a different angle.

Empire Burlesque also has the fresh Channel 4 interview stream with Murray on it's podcaster to help take some of the stress of Blair Watch. You can stream it on the page or download it.

There's also a 'must see' Channel 4 video below by Andrew Gilligan that we uploaded last week in flash.

Dispatches: Kidnap and Torture American Style (pops in new window and you may need Macromedia Flash 8 Player to view it) follows the stories of terror suspects. Some of them are British residents, who have been snatched from streets and airports throughout the world before being flown to the Middle-East and Africa. In countries such as Syria and Egypt, they undergo agonising ordeals before being incarcerated, without ever facing an open trial.

Testimonies from those suspects allege that Britain has a key role in these shady operations from supplying intelligence information on which interrogations are based, to ordering their arrest and detention.

Andrew Gilligan : Megan - we should stop calling it a war for one thing. You can't wage war on an abstraction and this isn't a problemthat's solvable through military means because terrorists have no fixed assets which you can attack. Terrorism is an idea and the only way we can defeat it is intellectually and by causing those extremists to cast out those ideas. Terrorism thrives from repression. Terrorists can argue that we are no better than they are (falsely).

A message from Craig Murray:

"Can I pass on my thanks to everyone who is posting the documents and making them public. You are striking a real blow for humanity and against the appalling decline in our civil liberties and standards.

We have also proved that, as long as we have good people out there, technology now makes it impossible for Western governments and political establishments to bury the truth, no matter how much they control the mainstream media." And he attaches another document, this time one that is already in the public domain, but seems pertinant to what so many of us are posting.

It is not secret, and not new, but gives a valuable historical context to the relationship between Uzbekistan and the West.

Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password

Display:
I would not put the Ken Lay memo in the same bag as the rest. It "stinks" because it is Enron, but every company with business in another country lobbies officials from its own country when they travel there, to drop a word in their favor. Obviously access to officials is not the same for everybody, but it's not necessarily criminal or even illegal, and I think it dilutes the sheer horror of the torture story, and I'd keep it separate.

(Also, anyone knowing the region - and its pipeline politics - would have known that Enron's project had strictly zero chance of ever coming to fruition. At the time, Uzbekistan was a backwater of little interest to anyone not intimately connected with and supported by Gazprom, so if there was any corruption by Enron then, it took place in Moscow more than in Tashkent - and it was ultimately a failure, as what Enron wanted went against the strategic interests of Gazprom, or could be done without them, and thus did not happen)

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Sat Dec 31st, 2005 at 10:25:25 AM EST
Hi Jerome.

I put the Enron letter jpg in because it's part of the email Craig sent to me so therein lies its relevance to this diary.

Atlantic Free Press

by ghandi (expatforums@gmail.com) on Sat Dec 31st, 2005 at 10:32:34 AM EST
Understood. It's an interesting piece to have, as it sheds some light on how these things are done, and after all, if it ties Bush with Enron ANG Uzbekistan, it may be politically useful to play with. But the torture story is way more outrageous in my mind (from the information available at this point).

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Sat Dec 31st, 2005 at 10:46:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]

For me - this piece Chris wrote wrapped up a lot of my feelings for the year... while I was busy on the Wire Tap and The Murray Terror Telegrams stories at our blog - he was weaving this work which has been finding it's way around the net over the past two days.

Clowntime is Over: The Last Stand of the American Republic

Chris Floyd

So now, at last, the crisis is upon us. Now the cards are finally on the table, laid out so starkly that even the Big Media sycophants and Beltway bootlickers can no longer ignore them. Now the choice for the American Establishment is clear, and inescapable: do you hold for the Republic, or for autocracy?  

There is no third way here, no other option, no wiggle room, no ambiguity. The much-belated exposure of George W. Bush's warrantless spy program has forced the Bush-Cheney Regime to openly declare what they have long implied -- and enacted -- in secret: that the president is above the law, a military autocrat with unlimited powers, beyond the restraint or supervision of any other institution or branch of government. Outed as rank deceivers, perverters of the law and rapists of the Constitution, the Bush gang has decided that their best defense -- their only defense, really -- is a belligerent offense. "Yeah, we broke the law," they now say; "so what? We'll break it again whenever we want to, because law don't stick to our Big Boss Man. What are you going to do about it, chump?"  

That is the essence, the substance and pretty much the style of the entire Bushist response to the domestic spying scandal. They are scarcely bothering to gussy it up with the usual rhetorical circumlocutions. The attack is being led by the fat, sneering coward, Dick Cheney, who has crawled out of his luxurious hidey-holes to re-animate the rotting husk of Richard Nixon and send it tottering back onto the national stage. Through the facade of Cheney's pig-squint and peevish snarl, we can see the long-dead Nixonian visage, his grave-green, worm-filled jowls muttering once more the lunatic mantra he brought to the Oval Office: "If the president does it, it can't be illegal." This is what we've come to, this is American leadership today: ugly, stupid men mouthing the witless drivel of failed, dead, discredited, would-be petty tyrants.  

But not even Nixon was as foul as this crew. When he was caught, he folded; some faint spark of republican conscience restrained him from pushing the crisis to the end. He was a vain, stupid, greedy, grasping, dirty man with blood on his hands, but in the end, he did not identify himself with the government as a whole. He did not say, "l'etat, c'est moi," he had no messianic belief that the life of the nation was somehow bound up with his personal fate, or that he and his clique and his cronies had a God-given right to rule. They just wanted power and loot -- as much of it as they could get -- and they pushed and pushed until the Establishment pushed back.  

It has long been evident, however, that Bush and Cheney do believe their clique should by all rights rule the country -- and that anyone who opposes their unrestrained dominion is automatically "anti-American," an enemy of the state. For them, there is no "loyal opposition," or even political opponents in any traditional understanding of the term; there are only enemies to be destroyed, and herd-like masses to be manipulated. They believe that their dominion is more important than democracy, which they despise as a brake and hindrance to the arbitrary leadership of an all-wise elite -- i.e., them. They are the state; a police state.

Elections are just necessary evils, a way to manufacture the illusion of consent, shake down corporations for big bucks and calibrate the loyalty of courtiers. Democracy is simply another system to be gamed, subverted, turned to factional advantage -- in precisely the same way that Enron gamed the California electric grid. This accounts for the strange, omnipresent tang of unreality that permeated the last three national elections, in 2000, 2002, and 2004. It's because they were unreal: the results were gamed, sometimes in secret, sometimes in plain sight; the "issues" and rhetoric were divorced from the reality that we all actually lived and felt -- and the outcomes were as phony as an Enron balance sheet.  

Dominion seized on such sinister and cynical terms will almost certainly be defended -- and extended -- by any means necessary. That is the great danger. The Bushists have already pushed on further than Nixon ever dared; will they "bear it out even to the edge of doom"? This is the crux of the matter; this is the crossroads where we now stand. Will the American Establishment push back at last? Will they say, This far we will go, but no further; this much we will swallow, but no more?  

Some of us have been writing for years about Bush's piecemeal assumption of dictatorial powers. We have watched in rage and amazement as the Establishment meekly accepted Bush's repeated, brutal insults to democracy. Time and again, I've quoted the words of the Emperor Tiberius, after the lackeys of the Senate grovelled to do his bidding: "Men fit to be slaves." In one sense, then, the Rubicon was crossed long ago. Yet "we live in hope and die in despair," as my father always says. In the back of the minds of many an embittered dissident, there has been a spark of hope that somewhere down the line, one of the many, many Bush outrages would somehow take hold, gain critical mass, and force the Establishment to act, to rein in the renegade, break him, box him in if not remove him from office.  

For let's be clear about this: only the Establishment -- the institutional powers-that-be -- can break an outlaw president. Millions marched in the street against Nixon and the system; whole city quadrants went up in flames in those days; but none of this was decisive in the corridors of power. (Nor to much of the American public, to be frank; after Kent State, after My Lai, after Cambodia, Nixon was still re-elected in a landslide.) It was his insult to the institutions -- the Watergate break-in of Democratic headquarters, the subsequent cover-up and subversion of the legal system, the defiance of Congress -- that led to his downfall. He pushed too far, tried to grab too much -- and the Establishment pulled him short.  

And it will have to be the Establishment that breaks Bush -- or he won't be broken. All the blogs in the world won't bring him down, no matter how much truth they tell, how much bloodsoaked Bushist dirt they expose. Yes, perhaps if we had millions of outraged citizens marching in the street day after day across America, a sustained mass movement and popular uprising for liberty and democracy, this might obviate the need for Establishment action.  But we all know that such marches are not going to happen. If there was sufficient fire for liberty and democracy in America, there would have already been a popular uprising -- and Bush would never have garnered enough public support to keep the election results close enough to be fudged. No, it will be the Establishment -- or no one.  

That's why the spy scandal is so pivotal. Because it is a direct, open and unignorable challenge to the institutional life of the American Establishment. In it, the Bush Regime is saying to the various powers-that-be, especially in Congress and the courts, but also to centers of power and influence outside government: you no longer have any power. All real power is now in our gift. Your laws, your institutions, your traditions, the whole complex infrastructure of checks and balances that have sustained society are now essentially meaningless. As in ancient Rome, we will keep the old forms, but the life of the state has now passed into the hands of the autocrat and his court. His arbitrary will can override any law -- although of course, strong law will still be applied to his enemies, and to the riff-raff in the lower orders.  

How will the Establishment deal with this direct challenge? The past few years give little grounds for hope: the Democrats spineless, conflicted, co-opted and corrupt; the Republicans slavish, bellicose, cruel and criminal; the media timorous, witless, corporate-controlled; big business absolutely rolling in gravy from the autocrat's larder; academia cowed, silenced, ignored, demonized; the military acquiescent in criminal aggression, top-heavy with time-servers currying autocratic favor. Only the courts provide some stray sparks of hope, although they too are now loaded with political sycophants, corporate bagmen and knuckle-dragging throwbacks produced by the Right's decades-long devolution of American jurisprudence. Prosecutors like Patrick Fitzgerald and Elliot Spitzer "keep hope alive," but their efforts will mean little in a system where lawlessness at the top has been countenanced by the rest of the Establishment. And in any case, the outcome of their work lies ultimately with the Supreme Court -- the same court that shredded the Constitution in awarding power to Bush in the first place, and which is now led by a Bushist apparatchik.  

Still, you don't go through a constitutional crisis with the Establishment you want; you go through a constitutional crisis with the Establishment you have. And this sad, sick crew, ladies and gentlemen, is all we have. If they swallow the spy scandal, if they don't push back now -- and I mean really push back, not just make a lot of harrumphing noise or hold a few toothless hearings or get a couple of underlings offered up as ritual sacrifices to save the Leader -- then we will have well and truly and finally lost the Republic that Franklin, Jefferson and Madison gave us so long ago.

The next few weeks will show us if there is still some hope of restoring the Republic through the old institutions, or if we will have to follow the course laid out by Bob Dylan some 40 years ago: "Strike another match, go start anew." Who knows? Maybe we can make a better republic next time: one not born of blood, greed and fury -- those all-too-common elements of human organization -- but made from a new compound of mercy, justice, communion and liberty. Still imperfect, of course, still corrupt -- because that's our intractable human nature -- but with our worst instincts restrained by enlightened, ever-evolving law, and the predatory ambitions of the rich and powerful reined by elaborate checks and balances.

It's just a dream, of course; probably a vain one. But we will need some vision to guide us if, as seems likely, we must soon set forth into the unknown territory of an openly declared American autocracy.



Atlantic Free Press
by ghandi (expatforums@gmail.com) on Sat Dec 31st, 2005 at 11:05:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It's a good piece and a good summary, indeed, of the current situation. I am not yet as pessimistic as him that only the Establishment can bring Bush/Cheney down, but we'll see.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Sat Dec 31st, 2005 at 11:13:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]
We are both expatriates - Chris in Oxford and myself in the Netherlands. Though he is American and I Canadian.

Watching from afar can give one another perspective at times. And he certainly touches the dark side in this piece... I agree.

Atlantic Free Press

by ghandi (expatforums@gmail.com) on Sat Dec 31st, 2005 at 11:49:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]


Display:
Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]