No
one better to do so than Yoo
The release of a Senate report on Bush-era interrogation policies could
have prompted an informed, responsible debate over intelligence and the
war on terror. But not the report that saw the light of day Tuesday.
Because of fundamental mistakes made at its very birth, Sen. Dianne
Feinstein’s accounting offers a dispiriting, partisan attack on
American intelligence agencies at a time when we need them more than
ever.
Bizarrely, Feinstein and her staffers refused even to interview the
very CIA officials who ordered and carried out the program in question.
Because Republicans saw where the train was headed, they refused to
participate in the review. The slanted approach to the investigation
sadly colored its conclusions — which are questionable, to put it
charitably.
Yoo lays out the shameless partisanship of the Democrats’
heading-out-the-door-and-into-the-electoral-wilderness poke in the eye
of the Bush administration, of which John (full disclosure: we’re
friends) was an important part. He’s one of the smartest guys I
know,
so pay attention:
As a Justice Department lawyer who worked on the legality of the
interrogation methods in 2002, I believed that the federal law
prohibiting torture allowed the CIA to use interrogation methods that
did not cause injury — including, in extraordinary cases, waterboarding
— because of the grave threat to the nation’s security in the months
after the 9/11 attacks.
I was swayed by the fact that our military used waterboarding in
training thousands of its own soldiers without harm, and that the CIA
would use the technique only on top Al Qaeda leaders thought to have
actionable information on pending plots.
Does anybody, besides the bedwetters in the media, really care about
whether a few al-Qaeda operatives were discomfited by “harsh”
interrogation techniques? Tell Saul Alinsky to take his Rule No. 4 and
shove it. As Mr. Dooley should have said, war ain’t beanbag.
[Full]
How's this for a compromise: we pick someone for a test subject; say, possibly, well, Senator Feinstein, as an example, and subject HER to the so-called tortures and mis-treatments visited on these poor, unfortunate Terrorists who just happened to fall under the influence of all those wicked people working for the C.I.A.
ReplyDeleteThen, when all is said and done, we put it up to a vote of her colleagues in the Senate: id Di-Fi deserve to be water-boarded? Sleep deprived? Threatened with power tools? Forced to sit through replays of Joe Biden speeches?
I'm willing to bet a paycheck that she goes down, 100% to 0%, friends and foes alike, and then we can do all those mean, evil and wicked things TO HER!!!
I'd pay to see a few of those lying sacks of crap in Washington waterboarded. I have the feeling, after only a few minutes, Benghazi would be completely explained.
ReplyDeleteHow's 'bout we do that AND ask her about all the crooked deals she made all her money on while "working for the people". When she tells all she can't complain about "torture" not working.
ReplyDeleteThe moslems just found out the details of our "Torture" and laughed because between female genital mutilation and stoning, they treat their wives and daughters much worse then we treat enemy combatants.
ReplyDeleteThe moslems just found out the details of our "Torture" and laughed because between female genital mutilation and stoning, they treat their wives and daughters much worse then we treat enemy combatants.
ReplyDelete