Khalid + Waterboarding = Chatty Terrorist
Andy McCarthy reacts to WaPo's story about how CIA tough interrogation tactics were highly effective. Just ask CIA terror tutor Khalid Sheik Mohammed.
McCarthy:
Anyone care to make that principled argument...? Anyone?
McCarthy:
As they say, you're entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own facts. The MSM has tried to have both for the last five years, arguing against experience and common sense that tactics like sleep-deprivation and waterboarding were not effective. Clearly, they worked, and to great effect. As Steve says, that case should now be closed.
Obviously, there is still a principled argument to be made that the nation should not engage in such practices. But the burden of making it in a principled way should be to say: "While this is an excruciating choice, it would be better for thousands of Americans to be killed than to allow the CIA to use non-lethal coercive tactics (that cause no lasting physical or mental damage) on a terrorist who refuses to tell us what he knows about ongoing mass-murder plots."
Anyone care to make that principled argument...? Anyone?
6 Comments:
Khalid + Waterboarding = War Crime
I guess anon-diano can't read.
The request was for a principled argument, not more of the same tired liberal Bush bash.
But then again, when has anon-diano ever given a principled argument?
Waterboarding is torture, a violation of US and International Law, and a War Crime (that the US has prosecuted in the past).
If you don't understand that waterboarding is torture, then you are unable to understand the basic moral, ethical and legal issues involved. (That's the polite way of saying you are too stupid to argue with.)
I've always been impressed with smug name-calling as a principled argument.
I've never been impressed by a "lack of understanding" as a prelude to an argument.
i have little faith that the liberal methods of interrogation (giving out soccer trophies) would have had the same effect...
Post a Comment
<< Home