MSNBC is showing clips of Dick “The Penguin” Chenney asking for the de-classification of additional memos that he claims show that torture “enhanced interrogation” works. This is so we can have an “honest debate”. CHenney wants and honest debate? That’s just so loaded with irony it’s hard to know where to begin.
Andrea Mitchell notes that the CIA denies that they have received any such request for the former VP. And why would it matter if he did? He should have no more influence than any other private citizen over the CIA’s decisions on de-classification of documents.
In any case, it doesn’t matter one way or the other. It’s wrong, it’s illegal and goes against everything we’ve ever stood for. Because an old man wet his diaper in fear after 9-11 doesn’t mean that torture is right. If it worked or not is irrelevant. The ends do not justify the means. Either we live by a moral code or we are as bad as any of our foes.
Most interrogation experts seem to think that it’s not a useful tactic, that it leads the torture victim to say whatever they believe the torturer wants to hear. I wonder how many false leads were followed and resources diverted because of false information? How many jihadis were recruited based on our torture program? How can we possibly claim any moral authority when we refuse to follow our own laws? Sully noted that there was a Kafkaesque and deliberate effort to create a public face of freedom on the march, while privately trying prevent the same for detainess:
Looked at from a distance, the Bush administration wanted to do two things at once: to declare to the world that freedom is on the march, and human rights are coming to the world with American help, while simultaneously declaring to captives that the US has no interest in the law, human rights, accountability, transparency or humanity. They wanted to give hope to all the oppressed of the planet, while surgically banishing all hope from the prisoners they captured and tortured. And the only way they could pull this off is by the total secrecy they constructed and defended. So we had a public government respectful of the rule of law, and a secret government whose main goal was persuading terror suspects that there was no rule of law at all. It is hard to convey just how dangerous this was and is.
If a hear an Obama spokesman say “we should be looking forward, not backwards” again, I’m going to scream. Does that imply that if a robbed a bank during Bush administration I shouldn’t be arrested, tried and jailed becuase that would be looking backwards? Hardly. Seems like the bankers already did that anyway.
[...] the rest here: Chenney Says Other Memos Show Torture Works Pirate's day in court: 'The rule of law': The SwampTHE PIRATE SONG: Eye Patches and [...]