Cheney's Speech
An excerpt(s):
The speech is great. Think what you want of him, but he's putting himself out there and backs up what he did and has no shame in it. And he's not going to let the CIA agents who work at Gitmo get hung out to dry.
He makes some excellent points. One of which, on the idea that waterboarding is a recruitment tool for the enemy. What recruitment tool did they use in the years before 9/11? They used out entire way of life. Our freedom of religion, the roles of women here, our pop culture ... and it was enough for the 19 highjackers. They don't need waterboarding to hate us. They hate us because of who we are.
And he also notes that President Obama has retained the right to use the enhanced interrogation techniques, should he ever see a need to do so.
And another thing ... he can say what President Clinton can't say: After 9/11, we were not hit again. For 7.5 years they kept us safe. Now you can view that one of two ways ... that 9/11 was a one hit wonder and that there is no on-going threat. Or that the actions taken by the leaders of the CIA, FBI, NSA, DOD and the White House saved lives and stopped attacks.
Obama's speech is here, I haven't had a chance to read the whole thing. But I will. He makes good points in the beginning about fighting two wars and giving more support to Afghanistan. I'm sure it's an eloquent speech. I'll update with comments after I finish it.
ANd as the American Spectator says, Cheney's speech is pretty irrelevent. He's not the President, and Obama's policies are what will lead our nation. But as AS says as well ... if we are attacked again, and even the current President says that it's possible, this administration saying "we did our best" is not going to be good enough for an American people that eagerly awaited the 9/11 Commission and wanted answers on how their government failed them in it's most important task.
One person who by all accounts objected to the release of the interrogation memos was the Director of Central Intelligence, Leon Panetta. He was joined in that view by at least four of his predecessors. I assume they felt this way because they understand the importance of protecting intelligence sources, methods, and personnel. But now that this once top-secret information is out for all to see – including the enemy – let me draw your attention to some points that are routinely overlooked.
It is a fact that only detainees of the highest intelligence value were ever subjected to enhanced interrogation. You’ve heard endlessly about waterboarding. It happened to three terrorists. One of them was Khalid Sheikh Muhammed – the mastermind of 9/11, who has also boasted about beheading Daniel Pearl.
...
In public discussion of these matters, there has been a strange and sometimes willful attempt to conflate what happened at Abu Ghraib prison with the top secret program of enhanced interrogations. At Abu Ghraib, a few sadistic prison guards abused inmates in violation of American law, military regulations, and simple decency. For the harm they did, to Iraqi prisoners and to America’s cause, they deserved and received Army justice. And it takes a deeply unfair cast of mind to equate the disgraces of Abu Ghraib with the lawful, skillful, and entirely honorable work of CIA personnel trained to deal with a few malevolent men.
...
Behind the overwrought reaction to enhanced interrogations is a broader misconception about the threats that still face our country. You can sense the problem in the emergence of euphemisms that strive to put an imaginary distance between the American people and the terrorist enemy. Apparently using the term “war” where terrorists are concerned is starting to feel a bit dated. So henceforth we’re advised by the administration to think of the fight against terrorists as, quote, “Overseas contingency operations.” In the event of another terrorist attack on America, the Homeland Security Department assures us it will be ready for this, quote, “man-made disaster” – never mind that the whole Department was created for the purpose of protecting Americans from terrorist attack.
The speech is great. Think what you want of him, but he's putting himself out there and backs up what he did and has no shame in it. And he's not going to let the CIA agents who work at Gitmo get hung out to dry.
He makes some excellent points. One of which, on the idea that waterboarding is a recruitment tool for the enemy. What recruitment tool did they use in the years before 9/11? They used out entire way of life. Our freedom of religion, the roles of women here, our pop culture ... and it was enough for the 19 highjackers. They don't need waterboarding to hate us. They hate us because of who we are.
And he also notes that President Obama has retained the right to use the enhanced interrogation techniques, should he ever see a need to do so.
And another thing ... he can say what President Clinton can't say: After 9/11, we were not hit again. For 7.5 years they kept us safe. Now you can view that one of two ways ... that 9/11 was a one hit wonder and that there is no on-going threat. Or that the actions taken by the leaders of the CIA, FBI, NSA, DOD and the White House saved lives and stopped attacks.
Obama's speech is here, I haven't had a chance to read the whole thing. But I will. He makes good points in the beginning about fighting two wars and giving more support to Afghanistan. I'm sure it's an eloquent speech. I'll update with comments after I finish it.
ANd as the American Spectator says, Cheney's speech is pretty irrelevent. He's not the President, and Obama's policies are what will lead our nation. But as AS says as well ... if we are attacked again, and even the current President says that it's possible, this administration saying "we did our best" is not going to be good enough for an American people that eagerly awaited the 9/11 Commission and wanted answers on how their government failed them in it's most important task.
Comments