Tuesday, April 28, 2009


As I was watching a panel of legal experts muse over the opinions of the legal experts that gave the green light for waterboarding...I couldn't help but this of this comment that was left here last week:

Rich at RINO Repug said: "I was waterboarded in SERE school in 1995. The reason that's relevant is because it is a precedent. Not only was I was waterboarded in SERE school, but also hundreds if not thousands of other Sailors and Marines have been waterboarded and have set this legal precedent that it is a safe legal technique when administered properly.

If it's legal to be administered on me, then how can it be ILLEGAL when administered on an enemy combatant as an interrogation technique?

Yes it may be immoral. Yes it can be of questionable strategic intelligence value. Yes it has invigorated our enemies. Maybe it should never have been used. But Illegal??? Um no.

If not illegal, then what's really going on? Answer: pure stinky politics."

And this point was actually discussed in those papers... How can something that is legal to do to our own troops and agents, be illegal to do to enemies of the State? And I'd love for the ACLU to answer that... And how can you make the case that something we do to our own boys as an intense training exercise is torture (legally --as I'm quite sure enduring this is hell on earth).

But, what Obama and the ACLU may have been surprised to learn is that 63% of Americans think that extreme interrogation techniques are okay if it prevents terror attacks. ...And, a majority (52%) disapprove of Obama releasing the "torture memos." (source) These numbers actually warmed my heart to my fellow countryman a bit...

...The obvious observation is: If waterboarding is torture, I guess we have to come up with a new word for being beheaded with a dull blade and no anesthesia.

No comments: