Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
The people who took pictures of abuse of prisoners did not do so to expose abuse. People in the military were sending pictures like these to each other and also home--for entertainment purposes. They sent them to friends and family who gloated and laughed over the abuse and degradation of the other (prisoners). People get a kick out of Max Hardcore's work in the very same way. They get a thrill from the abuse and degradation of the other, but in this case the other is female (women).
Bush and company wouldn't get away with torture if Americans refused to accept it. But in all honestly, a hell of a lot of Americans think torture is A-OK. They pay good money to jerk off to it.
We've become a brutal and sadistic nation. Or perhaps we always have been and now it's just more evident, I don't know. But I do know a nation that approves of "movies" depicting women being orally raped to the point of vomiting and then being forced to eat their own vomit (one of Hardcore's specialties) is going to react to the abuse of suspected criminals/terrorists with a yawn.
Someone up thread mentioned the Saw movie series. I'd say that's connected too.
I do have to take issue with your assertion that Hardcore's work is fiction. It is not fiction. It's real and right there in front of you and people get off watching it. That's a big part of this problem.
I have been paid for pitch-forking up horse turds, but that was not such a bad job. I enjoyed it. Call me a kook, maybe. So... Maybe I can understand the idea that these girls get paid, and that they enjoy their work. (I wrote, "girls," on purpose.)
Take a look, though. You can look at thumnailpost.com. That is a mostly-"relatively-mild," mostly hetro-sexual, free porn web site, with lots of material. If you actually look at the pretty girls letting the creeps do all sorts of stuff to them, you probably will be sad, at the least.
My point is: Look for yourself, and make up your own mind, if you are not convinced already. Otherwse, skip it. It will make you barf, and it will give you guilty, ashamed arousal.
On the torture: The best web site evidence is here on Salon. But the pictoral evidence apparently does not even scratch the surface of what Americans actually have done. Do you have any doubt that these things are crimes and sins?
Go to the "Movies" section, and watch the free clips. That will give you some idea.
ondelette (October 6, 2008 03:43 PM):
Rejali makes a case for there being 3 motives behind torture in democracies: interrogation, confession, and maintenance of societal order.
I'm still unclear regarding why you think that Alice Miller's explanation of the psychogenesis of authoritarian behavior, up to and including torture, does not comport with the facts discovered by Rejali's research: "Alice Miller's characterization of the underlying cause motivations of torturers do not correspond well with facts, see Darius Rejali (actually maybe just trust me on him, please)."
What, if anything you've read by Rejali, conflicts with this, by Miller?
Many people have claimed to be appalled by the acts of perversion committed by American soldiers on ADULT people, Iraqi prisoners. Amazingly, I have never heard of any such reaction in response to the occasional attempts to expose similar practices committed towards CHILDREN as for instance in British and American schools. There, these practices come under the heading of "education." But the cruelty is the same. The world appears to be surprized that such brutality should rear its head among the American forces.
After all, America presents itself to the international public as the guardian of world peace. There is an explanation for all this, but hardly anyone wants to hear it.
It is definitely a good thing that light has been cast on the situation and that the media have exposed this lie for what it is. Basically it runs as follows: We are a civilized, freedom-loving nation and bring democracy and independence to the whole world. Under this motto the Americans forced their way into Iraq with devastating results and still insist that they are exporting cultural values. But now it turns out that alongside their bombs and missiles the well-drilled, smartly dressed soldiers are carrying a huge arsenal of pent-up rage around with them, invisible on the outside, invisible for themselves, lurking deep down within, but unmistakably dangerous.
Where does this suppressed rage come from, this need to torment, humiliate, mock, and abuse helpless human beings (prisoners and children as well)? What are these outwardly
tough soldiers avenging themselves for? And where have they learnt such behavior?
First as little children taught obedience by means of physical "correction," then in school, where they served as the defenseless objects of the sadism of some of their teachers, and finally in their time as recruits, treated like dirt by their superiors so that they could finally acquire the highly dubious ability to take anything meted out to them and qualify as "tough."
The thirst for vengeance does not come from nowhere. It has a clearly identifiable cause. The thirst for vengeance has its origins in childhood, when children are forced to suffer in silence and put up with the cruelty inflicted on them in the name of upbringing. They learn how to torment others from their parents, and later from their teachers and superiors. It is nothing other than systematic instruction by example on how to destroy others. Yet many people believe that it has no evil consequences. As if a child were a container that can be emptied from time to time. But the human brain is not a container. The things we learn at an early stage stay with us in later life. (My emphasis)
Gayleg (October 6, 2008 06:07 PM ):
The people who took pictures of abuse of prisoners did not do so to expose abuse. People in the military were sending pictures like these to each other and also home--for entertainment purposes. They sent them to friends and family who gloated and laughed over the abuse and degradation of the other (prisoners).
The ordeal of Joe Darby, the MP who DID blow the whistle on Abu Ghraib, is instructive in many ways:
"Abu Ghraib whistleblower's ordeal
"The US soldier who exposed the abuse of Iraqi prisoners in Abu Ghraib prison found himself a marked man after his anonymity was blown in the most astonishing way by Donald Rumsfeld."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6930197.stm
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
219 Democrats and one Republican join in favor of the legislation, which passed by a narrow margin
Salon headlines in your mailbox
