About Me

Name: RME KRNL
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 
[Click to edit me]

Oh, the Irony! Or Is That Ironies?

David Axelrod, one of President Obama's chief White House advisors (who strangely looks like a door-to-door salesman of some kind to me), recently told CBS's "Face the Nation" that waterboarding and sleep deprivation were "one of the key tools al-Qaeda has used for recruitment."

Really? First, where's the proof of that? Did an al-Qaeda rep call and tell you that? Or is it just another unproven allegation, like "Bush lied, babies died"? Or, worse, is it simple speculation, like Democrat Senator Harry Reid's "The war is lost!, the war is lost!"?

Second, I wonder how al-Qaeda (and Democrats and other liberals) made us the bad guys for waterboarding (something we have done for years in training some of our own troops), while maintaining that they, al-Qaeda, were the good guys for beheading people. Oh yeah, because their cause is right and holy and we are the Great Satan. Well, whether we had waterboarded or not, wouldn't their cause, to them at least, still be right and holy and wouldn't we still be the Great Satan?

If these methods were already serving as a recruiting tool for al-Qaeda, as Axelrod claimed, why did Obama release the Top Secret details of the Bush waterboarding memos, thereby confirming whatever al-Qaeda was already saying to recruit more followers? It would seem that assists al-Qaeda in now saying, "See, we told you so. The American Satan has now admitted what it was doing. But, better than that, we now know in detail about their methods and can therefore train to resist them." Way to go, Team Obama! I feel so much safer now that our enemies, by our own admission, know our interrogation techniques in detail.

Obama banned "enhanced interrogation techniques" his first week in office, but that's obviously not enough for some Democrats and other liberals. They want a so-called Truth Commission and/or federal investigation (read: show trials), as Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) stated, "so it never happens again." Well, Senator, you don't need a show trial to keep it from ever happening again, just better Congressional oversight. Don't forget, please, that Congressional leadership was briefed about 30 times by the Bush administration on what it was doing and why, and Congress not only went along with it but in some cases asked if what Bush was doing was enough. See, there may be the Catch 22 to insisting on so-called Truth Commissions and/or federal prosecutions - they may come back to haunt some Democratic leadership, as well as members of the Bush administration and the intelligence community, notwithstanding Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's blank-stare protestations of "I don't know what I knew or when I knew it" to the contrary. (May I get you a bigger shovel, Miz Nancy, or is the hole you've been digging for yourself getting deep enough already?)

There are several ironies involved in all this.

The first irony is that the CIA stopped waterboarding in March 2003, after using it on only three high-value al-Qaeda detainees in 2002 and 2003, and the practice was removed from the CIA authorized list of techniques altogether sometime around 2005. In other words, waterboarding not only began but also ended during the Bush administration, long before Obama "banned" its use in January 2009.

The second irony is that Obama ostensibly released the classified CIA methods in another show of "transparency" and "openness" but he calculatingly and politically really did it to further the Bush-bashing which he and Team Obama have engaged in (and hidden behind) before, during and ever since he became president, as well as offering it up as another sop to his left-wing base of supporters. Well, ironically, his "lefties," instead of being "placated," became emboldened and wanted still more. For them, Obama's naive miscalculation in releasing the previously classified techniques was like fresh blood in the water.

The third irony is that Obama's own Director of National Intelligence, his own hand-picked Director of CIA and four previous CIA directors all told him not to release the classified techniques, and why, yet he yielded to the pressure from the likes of liberal godfather George Soros, MoveOn.org and other far left agents and did it anyway. However, I will give him credit, so far at least, Obama has shown that he will listen to his military experts (a smart thing, especially when you yourself don't know much about "military things," like the difference between a battalion and a brigade). But an additional irony therefore is, why didn't he also listen to his intelligence experts?

The fourth irony is that, once Obama let the cat out of the bag, he found he couldn't put it back. Oopsie! My bad. Naivete and inexperience, sometimes described by Team Obama as boldness, showed themselves once again. He vacillated back and forth about what to do, a firestorm of criticism followed (something Obama has demonstrated an overly thin-skinned ability to handle in the past), and so he passed the problem off to his Attorney General, saying Eric "Americans are cowards about race" Holder would determine whether any prosecutions needed to take place or not. We're still waiting, Eric, but if you decide to prosecute anyone, make sure you include all those fellow-traveling Democrats in the House and Senate who were briefed on, approved, supported and funded what the CIA was doing, okay?

The fifth irony was Obama going to speak to the CIA intelligence community and telling them he supported them and not to worry about being prosecuted for doing what you were told, while they sat there knowing that he had compromised their classified techniques and would probably sell them out in a heartbeat if he had to for political expediency. The mere possibility of a new round of federal investigations has sent the real message to all U.S. intelligence agents that there is no upside in aggressive interrogation. To the contrary, it's not only a career killer but also may land you in prison.

The sixth irony is that the 9/11 commission was supposed to prevent intelligence lapses so that 9/11 could never happen again. Now, Senator Leahy and other Democrats want to "investigate" what they claim were post-9/11 intelligence "abuses." So, the 9/11 commission didn't really work? So, you want something similar done again? Let's be honest, this isn't about gathering more information to prevent any further "abuses." This is another attempt at Democratic payback for the liberally despised Bush administration, pure and simple. To call it anything else is.....well, ironic.

And, Heaven forbid, but what may become the most tragically ironic thing of all: If Obama plays politics and so dismantles what Bush assembled that we don't see another attack on our homeland coming. In other words, we are back to "not connecting the dots" again. Those who ignore history are not only ignorant but also doomed to repeat it, and tragic history usually repeats itself with a vengeance. Beware the irony - or ironies, as it were.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Waterboarding = Torture? Maybe, Maybe Not

Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post recently wrote an article entitled "Torture Is Illegal." Aside from selecting as his title what would appear to be a BGO (blinding glimpse of the obvious), what Mr. Robinson and liberals in general insist on doing about the "we don't torture" issue is conflate that "we don't torture" with the statement that "waterboarding is torture" and therefore make the argument that we waterboarded, so that means we tortured.
 
Not so fast. While President Obama's Attorney General Eric "Americans are cowards about race" Holder has stated that, in his opinion, waterboarding is torture (and there are obviously others who agree with him), there are still other legal experts and scholars who disagree.
 
Evidently among them were the lawyers who drew up the very narrow and specific guidelines for waterboarding which the Bush administration followed, as well as briefing Congress on (Republicans AND Democrats alike) about 30 different times along the way. So, if lawyers who rendered their legal opinions can be prosecuted, surely so also can Congressional members who were briefed on what was going on and who not only did not object but agreed to and approved of such methods being used (Democrat House Speaker Pelosi's somewhat conflicting protestations notwithstanding).
 
I mean, illegal and morally wrong is illegal and morally wrong, right? Er, correct? And whether you made the pie or just stuck your finger in it is all merely a matter of degree, correct? Or in another context, if you and I rob a store and you shoot and kill the clerk although I didn't even know you had a gun, we both can be tried for murder. Anything less is comparable to the less-than-credible "I voted against the war before I voted for it."
 
So, if there is rational disagreement that waterboarding is torture, it's hardly ipso facto that we waterboarded, therefore we tortured. We did perform waterboarding, on three high value terrorists, it was done by professionals, it was done under extremely controlled and medically safe conditions, and we got valuable intelligence as a result. So, yes, we waterboarded and if waterboarding is torture, then we tortured. But if it's not, then we didn't torture anyone.
 
Aside from all of the legalese and ideologically and politically motivated arguments currently flying around, it is beyond me how something like waterboarding, to which many of our own troops have been subjected as part of their training to resist enemy interrogation (under much less medically controlled conditions than those provided for the three murdering terrorists responsible for killing thousands of Americans and others), can be considered torture. If so, lock up those un-American military instructors who conducted that training!
 
And this is all beside the fact that some college hazings also involve a type of waterboarding, usually without ANY safeguards. Is that torture? Then, lock up those monstrous, un-American upper classmen!
 
Oh, and for those of you astute enough to argue that, well, our troops and the college kids had a choice about undergoing waterboarding or not but the terrorists did not, here's a reality check for you. Sure, if the troops wanted to fail their training, they could have said no, and, sure, if the college kids didn't want to be accepted, they could have also. But then, so also could the terrorists -- by just giving up the intel before they were waterboarded. Everybody has choices, well, except unfortunate people like journalist Daniel Pearl who was brutally beheaded on video by cowardly, mask-wearing, sword-wielding terrorist thugs even after cooperating with his captors in making the video for their propaganda purposes.
 
Instead of disingenuous bleeding heart liberals saying they want to "restore America's image in the world" by protecting the "rights" of murderous terrorists not to be tortured (oh, and, secondarily of course, finally find a way to "get" George Bush in the process if at all possible), they should focus on people in the hands of our terrorist enemies, to often include many of their own -- now, THERE'S someone who's been tortured!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »