Why Cheney Is Wrong

Tonight I had the sickening experience of listening to Sean Hannity argue that water boarding is fine and that the President has the right to order it to protect America. His guest made a statement that Sean Hannity vigorously agreed with. The guest said. “There is nothing in the Constitution that prevents the President from doing this”. Oh gee I guess that is what you call a “non-activist” approach to the Constitution! Yet Hannity and his fellow travelers will preach to us about the value of a “Strict Constructionist interpretation” of the Constitution! Then they will preach “the lessons of history” as if we Democrats don’t know how freedom can be lost to the feels good solution to problems!

Well the video below shows the reason why you don’t torture! President Obama said it in his speech today! We want enemy troops to surrender to ours! They will do so if they can expect good treatment. Giving them good treatment SAVES AMERICAN TROOPS! Remember the video below how the Iraqi troops could not wait to surrender and were happy to do so! Would they be so enthusiastic after hearing Cheney?

The video above shows the good that can happen when we follow our American ideals and values! If enemy troops were to fear being water boarded or mistreated they would hold out longer thus more American lives would be lost! If they were higher ups they might even commit suicide and then we would never get the information we needed by traditional methods of interrogation! We must follow the Geneva Convention as President Obama has advocated.

Dick Cheney has criticized our President for trying to appeal to allies with his approach. Well listen to Dick Cheney in the video below when questioned in 1994 about the first Iraqi War. Note that he wanted to have allies join with us. He did not consider it wrong to appeal to allies.

The problem is that we all know that America will be attacked again and the Republicans want to set the Democrats up. Rudy Giuliani, if he were President would most likely do what he attempted as mayor and want to extend his term! Yes the lessons of history are something that Republicans preach but never learn. Our nation survived a Civil War and still had elections.

Now here is a scenario for Republicans to consider! If we allow water boarding to be defined as not constituting torture then what is to stop “enhanced interrogation techniques” from coming to a police station near you? If we allow the smirking George Bush to get away with his statement, “this is America and we don’t torture” and his definition to enter our legal code then a future President could do the same to his opponents! Am I being paranoid?

Well now what if we had a President who was “a pal of terrorists”! What if this same President wasn’t a “real American” and wanted to water board his opponents during some trumped up crises! Now you Republicans do believe President Barrack Hussein Obama is not a real American and a “pal of terrorists” don’t you? This just shows how opportunistic and shabby the Republicans are in their arguments! Republicans should be the first to make sure “water boarding” is defined as torture and illegal. But then again they lied about Obama being a pal of terrorists, because if he were Anti-American they should be the first to out law him having the authority to use it.

As I have mentioned in prior posts I would accept a limited, open and transparent “Allan Dorchowitz Court Torture Warrant” in the event of a terrorist nuclear bomb. But then again I would not desire to turn the operation of America’s ports over to the Dubai. You know the country that Halliburton has moved their corporate headquarters to. Yes Dubai that allowed covert shipments to Pakistan of materials needed by them to make nuclear weapons!

Dick Cheney is wrong that he and his fellow traveler George Bush protected us from a second attack! The first WTC attack happened in 1993! The second in 2001. It takes them a while to set up a new attack! The Republicans did not do anything spectacular. Yet the NEWS MEDIA never challenge them on this! This constitutes ANTI-LIBERAL NEWS MEDIA BIASES!

We live in a dangerous world but we must still balance security with the rule of law! The President swears to defend the Constitution of the United States not to follow the “feels good solution”! Time to learn the lessons of history else we will suffer in America our own “Reichstag Fire”!


  1. I am afraid I have to disagree. Although I find your argument compelling to not to use torture. The fact remains that a situation can arise where torture may be justified when nothing else has worked and many lives could be saved. It is not a tool that I would take away from our commander and chief, but I do agree that it is a tool that should be used sparingly.

    P.S. The Geneva Convention only applies to soldiers in uniform. Not terrorists and spys.

  2. Phil Cartier says:

    points to ponder:
    In the aforementioned TV show, Dick Cheney only referred to waterboarding in reference to non-military combatants. The video of Iraqi soldiers is irrelevant. They aren’t in Guantanomo, and to the best of my knowledge none of them were treated inappropriately under the Geneva Convention or commonsense humane treatment.

    What constitutes torture?
    Does beheading, a common tactic of al Quaeda, not count because it is quick(if you ignore weeks and months of threats and faked attempts). Does firing rockets and guns from civilian homes count as torture. The Wikipedia has it right. “… severe pain, whether physical or mental….” The rack shown in the article was definitely torture. Many of the conditions US POW’s suffered in Vietnam were torture. Waterboarding does not come close in terms of physical or mental pain.

    The FBI, state and local police legally can’t use any kind of physical interrogation techniques, so waterboarding would not be allowable to them anyway. A red herring. Of more concern, and a real torture technique sometimes used by local police it to put the suspect into a holding cell to be beaten up by the other inmates.

    The 1993 WTC attack? According to the Administration it was not an attack by a terrorist organization, but a group of common criminals. The Clinton administration had plenty of warning about a potential attack before the 1993 bombing and had plenty of warning about the seriousness of the al Quaeda organization afterward but chose to do nothing serious about it. In fact they instituted the “wall” between the CIA, FBI, other intelligence organizations and government departments. Without those intelligence sharing bans it is almost certain that the WTC attackers would have been apprehended before carrying out their attack.

  3. First I was out sick and did not get to moderate my blog. My apologies you are certainly most welcome to post comments even if they disagree with mine.

    I would say both comments don’t fully understand my idea. I have no problem whatever in water boarding the three individuals that we did it to. My issues are without judicial restraint and oversight where does it end?

    If we define Water boarding as not being torture then any American Citizen could be water boarded by a future Administration (Republican OR Democrat) or even by your local police. After “this is America and we don’t torture”, to use George Bush’s statement.

    My idea is to 1. Define Water boarding for what it is – TORTURE! 2. Then go ahead and actually use it against the three who received it! I would refer you to the Alan Dorcowitz proposal.

    The problem is
    1. That we used other forms of torture against Iraqi trainees and both John McCain and Gen. Porteaus have said it was the greatest mistake we did and they extended that to water boarding the Getmo 3.
    2. While I would WHOLE HEARTEDLY support the TORTURE of the three Al Qaeda prisoners if done under a “Torture Warrant” as per Alan Dorchowitz’s proposal, I fear that this was not done with the intent of America’s valid national security interestss but rather to force a false confession to justifiy the Iraqi War. If you followed by posts on this war you will note I was and STILL favor the initial invasion but not the social engineering experiment that followed.

    Remember we excel at “Shock and Awe” but we suffer when we try to have an extended occupation. By doing so we lost our Military Deterrent against other rogue nations. WHY because as I have mentioned they do not fear being overthrown and replaced with a democracy. They simpy fear being overthrow! Now when you change our “definition” of victory to success at a Social Engineering Experiment rather than mere overthrow what fear do other nations have of us since they know we cannot move on to them since we will be mired in Iraq.

    If you follow my blog I am NOT a PC liberal. Yes I am a European style Social Democrat. But my military and defense ideas are more in line with Ronald Reagan!

    Thank God we are testing “Star Wars” style weaponry. I have supported in this blog all along!