I am really having a hard time wrapping my head around this whole debate. I have read the memo that was released by the White House that gave details to the types of "harsh interrogation" that were used on high value prisoners like Khalid Sheikh Mohamed. My first reaction was, "Is that it?" This is the "torture" that the left was screaming about? But what I really don't get is why would the Obama Administration do this other than to appease the left wing of his party? But what is worse is that now Obama has opened the door for the justice department to prosecute Officials in the Bush Administration who wrote opinions and recommendations as to what interrogation techniques were acceptable.
Above all however, I feel that these actions and new policies enacted by the Obama Adminstration do absolutely nothing to strengthen our defense against potential terrorist attacks, and in actuallity rolls back our handling terror threats to a pre-9/11 mentality.
Forget the fact that using interrogation techniques such as waterboarding, helped to thwart terroist attacks on US cities. Does Obama really think that by telling our enemies that we will no longer use these techniques, which inflicted no bodily harm on these terror suspects, will somehow endear us to the terrorists all over the world. Does he think by doing this that the next time an American journalist (not even a solider or operative) is taken captive by these evil people, that they will show mercy and not decapitate their prisoners head.
But a bigger question must be asked? Hypothetically speaking lets postulate that in the future the CIA or NSA picks up chatter, backed up by intel that another terrorist attack err "man caused disaster" is imminent. Around this time they capture a terrorist who they know was involved in the planning and possible participation of this or a similar imminent attack, or they are fairly certain that he has information about an upcoming attack. Does the current administration really think that just by asking nicely or even harshly, that this person will give up the information. Is this despicable man's dignity or civil rights more important than the lives of thousands of Americans that might be killed if an attack is not stopped?
If you think I am exaggerating about something like this, look into what happened to Khalid Sheikh Mohamed. He had been captured. The US knew he was the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, and when interrogators were questioning him, he told them of another attack coming by saying "you will find out" but was otherwise defiant and uncooperative. The interrogators used waterboarding and he gave up information which helped to break up a terror cell in Asia that was planning an attack, like 9/11 on a bulding in Los Angeles. "Enhanced interrogation" on this dispicable exuse for a human being saved thousands of lives.
The Obama adminstration, with its policy changes and actions is signaling to the terrorists of the world that it is more important to spare the diginity of a terrorist or detainee than to save the lives of thousands of Americans. I suspect Bin Laden and the other leaders of Al Qaeda are laughing. We won't be laughing if we are hit again by these animals.
From the Point of View of a Red State American
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Harsh Interrogation vs Tortue
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
No, there is no anti-Israel Bias at the NY Times.
Recently the New York Times published an Op-Ed of a Palestinian who describes the deplorable conditions that he says exist in Israeli prison...
It is interesting to watch as the press seemingly does not want anything to do with the current oil price spike. As oil and gasoline prices...
As I watch what has unfolded in the Valley of the Sun with regards to the Arizona Cardinals, the feeling of the fans and the play of the tea...
I get so tired of the overused word "bipartisan" when people talk about what is happening in the government. True bipartisanship ...
Post a Comment