- MUST READS
- PRODUCTS
- RESOURCES
- MULTIMEDIA
- ENFACTLOPEDIA
- FSM AUTHORS
- ABOUT US
- CONTACT US
- FSM BLOG
- DONATE
- PRESS COVERAGE
SEARCH FSM
- IN THIS SECTION
March 12, 2009
Interrogation by Liberals: Hugs Instead of Waterboarding
Last year there were non-stop assaults on the CIA for allegedly torturing captured al Qaeda members. Questions have arisen if a particular “enhanced interrogation technique,” known as waterboarding, is torture or not. The question surfaced again when then-Attorney General Michael Mukasey refused to rule on the legality of waterboarding for the Senate Judiciary Committee. In a moment of political grandstanding, the committee’s chairman, Patrick Leahy, insisted the AG rule on the issue despite the CIA and Pentagon having banned it in 2006.
During the primary debates, some candidates were asked a hypothetical question if they would authorize waterboarding a terrorist if it was certain he knew the secret location of a nuclear device set to go off in this country. I was hoping to hear a candidate say he or she would personally waterboard the terrorist in the Oval Office to get the information, but no such luck with this bunch. At least Mitt Romney and Hillary Clinton didn’t completely rule it out.
Waterboarding obviously works or so many liberals wouldn’t condemn it. Just ask Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, who quickly confessed to personally beheading Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl and being the architect of the events of 9/11.
Considering all the torture techniques ever devised, waterboarding is like giving a terrorist a wet kiss. This is in contrast to an al Qaeda interrogator cutting your head off and handing it to you. I’m not suggesting the U.S. stoop to such levels, but our interrogators shouldn’t be told that their only option is to give terrorists hugs, either.
Let’s assume waterboarding is definitely torture and should be universally banned, even at primary debates. What politically correct alternatives should U.S. interrogators use? I suppose interrogators could continuously play the theme songs to Gilligan’s Island or The Beverly Hillbillies until the terrorist reaches near insanity and gives up bin Laden. The point is that, of all the so-called torture techniques ever devised, waterboarding is the least likely to cause permanent physical damage. Its use has been proven effective in eliciting actionable information from otherwise uncooperative bad guys who want to kill you, your children, your culture, your religion and our country. Who is Ted Kennedy to criticize CIA interrogation methods when he knows full well that more people have drowned at Chappaquiddick then from waterboarding?
Liberals who are against waterboarding have already succeeded in giving terrorists taxpayer-funded legal representation in U.S. courts. They are seeking to shut down Guantanamo Bay and transfer prisoners to America. Yale Law School attorneys are suing former and current U.S. government officials for their role in capturing or prosecuting terrorists and enemy combatants. Congressional Democrats hesitate to renew or make permanent an updated Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, leaving America “deaf” to future planned attacks.
Those on the left seek to reverse every inroad made in the global war on terror by using legislation and the courts to prevent and discourage government officials from doing their duty.
Why isn’t it obvious to liberals that al Qaeda terrorists should not be provided with U.S. taxpayer-funded attorneys and sent to this country to stand trial as “enemy combatants?” During World War II, eight Nazi saboteurs, including two American sympathizers, were captured in New York. These men were swiftly tried by a military tribunal and convicted – and most were promptly executed.
There seem to be no limits to the aid and comfort liberals are willing to give terrorists. Don’t they realize their efforts tie the hands of our intelligence and law enforcement assets in making this country safer than it was before 9/11? Of course they do. A defeated America seems to be their ultimate goal. Correct me if I am wrong, but it seems that every opportunity the far left has to dismantle an effective institution such as the Boy Scouts, the military, Christianity or the CIA, they take.
In any event, no matter where you stand politically, when the day comes the CIA learns that a nuclear bomb is about to explode in your hometown and a terrorist who knows its location is being interrogated, let’s hope our interrogators have the tools necessary to do their jobs without fear of being sued.
FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Gregory D. Lee is a retired DEA Supervisory Special Agent. He writes a weekly syndicated column for North Star Writers Group and can be reached through his website: www.gregorydlee.com.
Reader Comments: Submit Your Comment (0)
| Print This E-mail This |
|
