Bush’s music to torture people by


This video from the USA is called Bush says he did not torture, AGAIN.

Translated from Dutch (Rightist) daily De Telegraaf:

US American rapper Eminem is one of the artists topping the “torture charts” of the US government. The April issue of Wordt Vervolgd, the magazine [of the Dutch branch of] human rights organization Amnesty International says so.

A US journalist has investigated which music soldiers use in Iraqi jails and other places to prevent prisoners from sleeping or to disorient them during interrogations.

Top of the charts is Fuck your God of death metal-band Deicide. Other favourites include … Stayin Alive by the Bee Gees, rather cynical in this context. …

Reporter Justine Sharrock interviewed [for Mother Jones] hundreds of US American soldiers, who had worked, eg, as guards in Guantanamo (Cuba) or Abu Ghraib (Iraq), after they had returned to the USA.

For example, the song Dirrty by [Christina] Aguilera with its sexual implications was used to intimidate women prisoners. … Some artists have reacted indignantly to their music being used for those [torture] practices.

See also here.

2 thoughts on “Bush’s music to torture people by

  1. Posted on: Wednesday, April 9, 2008
    We shopped, didn’t fret about moral laxity

    By Leonard Pitts Jr.

    Return with me to Abu Ghraib. You remember it. You may not want to, but you do.

    The Iraqi prison was the epicenter of an international scandal in 2004 when it was revealed that U.S. soldiers were mistreating detainees, forcing them to stand in stress positions, sexually humiliating them, menacing them with dogs, denying them clothes, dragging them on leashes, threatening them with electrocution.

    All of it was captured in photos that shocked the world. One of the most memorable showed then-21-year-old Army private Lynndie England, cigarette poking from an idiotic grin, index fingers cocked like guns as she pointed to the genitals of a naked Iraqi man.

    We stared at those images and asked how this could have happened, how American soldiers could have become so degraded and undisciplined, could have wandered so far afield from the moorings of simple, human decency. Many answers were proffered. Mob mentality. Dehumanizing conditions. Lack of oversight.

    But as the years have passed, a truer answer has coalesced. Where did these young soldiers get the idea that the rules were suspended, that free rein was given, that they could do whatever they wanted to the men in their custody?

    It came from the top.

    The latest proof: a recently declassified 2003 memo from John Yoo, then a Justice Department lawyer. The memo, eventually rescinded by Justice, authorized torture as a means of interrogation, a finding that carried the force of law.

    Much of the media coverage of the 81-page document has focused on the — and this word is unavoidably ironic — bloodless legalese in which Yoo contemplates the permissibility of putting a prisoner’s eyes out, slitting his tongue, scalding him with water, dosing him with mind-altering drugs, disfiguring him with acid. But what is also appalling is Yoo’s contention, repeatedly restated in the memo, that the president in time of war enjoys virtually unfettered authority over, is accountable to no one for, the treatment of prisoners.

    Legal scholars have accused Yoo of sloppy reasoning. Eugene Fidell, who teaches military justice at Yale and American universities, told the International Herald Tribune the document was a monument to the “imperial presidency.” Yoo disagrees. He calls the memo a “boilerplate” defense of presidential authority.

    Your humble correspondent doesn’t know from legal scholarship. He does know this: Seven years ago when the nation was attacked and Americans wanted to pitch in, wanted to help, wanted to sacrifice, our leaders told us to go shopping. Prop the economy up, they said. Don’t worry about the war. Let us handle it. Go shopping.

    And we did. Nor, scared as we were, eager for the illusion of security as we were, did we look too closely or examine too intently the things that were being done in our names. We became, many of us, expert at ignoring the screams from behind the curtain, discounting the growing mountain of evidence that things were not as we had been told, brushing off nagging questions about what we have become and how that does not square with what we are supposed to be.

    We shopped, and did not fret overmuch about the price of our moral laxity.

    Maybe that’s because the price is paid in tiny increments of our national honor yet somehow, never by those who most deserve to foot the bill. So that, seven years later, George W. Bush is still president of the United States, Donald Rumsfeld is working on his memoirs, John Yoo is a law professor at UC Berkeley.

    But Lynndie England is a single mother, on parole and looking for work, living in a trailer with her folks.

    Leonard Pitts Jr., winner of the 2004 Pulitzer Prize for commentary, is a columnist for the Miami Herald. Reach him at lpitts@miamiherald.com or toll-free at 888-251-4407.

    http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2008804090367

    Like

  2. Pingback: Trump sued for Rolling Stones music abuse | Dear Kitty. Some blog

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.