Sen. Patrick Leahy (D., Vt.) wants a commission that will get to the "truth" about torture. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) says she wants a truth commission too. And so does Rep. John Conyers (D., Mich.).
On CBS's "Face the Nation" on Sunday, Mr. Leahy said a truth commission would help get to the heart of how the recently released memos on CIA interrogation techniques were drafted. "I want to know why they did that," he said. "What kind of pressures brought them to write things that are so off the wall and to make sure it never happens again. That's why I want [a Truth Commission]."
Mr. Leahy overlooks a small point here: Under our Constitution, the truth commission is supposed to be Congress.
Our Founders didn't look to outsource our most controversial public issues to appointees. They established institutions and arrangements that would hold those who have power accountable to the American people. And when the people's lawmakers believed the people's president was misinterpreting the law, the Founders expected the former to stand up and do something about it.
Today the Democrats have an even larger majority -- plus a president who would sign such legislation. So why the call for a truth commission instead? The answer is a nasty one: If Congress made waterboarding illegal now, they would be making clear that it was not illegal before.
Andrew McCarthy is the former assistant U.S. attorney who put Omar Abdel-Rahman (the blind sheik) behind bars for the first bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993. Mr. McCarthy explained it this way to me: "When Senate Democrats didn't have the votes, they voted to make waterboarding illegal. Now they have the votes, but there's no effort to ban waterboarding. And the reason is that they are more interested in setting off a partisan witch hunt than passing a principled ban on something they say is torture."
(read entire article at link)
To answer the sensible questions asked in the article, Democrats have not outlawed torture because then they couldn't demonize Bush and Cheney for 7 years.
ReplyDeleteIt's been theater to watch Congressional Democrats pretend they weren't briefed many times by the CIA about waterboarding.
President Obama's national security director, Admiral Dennis Blair, wrote a letter last week that stated: "From 2002 through 2006 when the use of these techniques ended, the leadership of the CIA repeatedly reported their activities both to Executive Branch policymakers and to members of Congress, and received permission to continue to use the techniques."
So Congressional Democrats have lied to us for 7 years. Interesting that not one reporter has asked: who decided that democrats, as a group, should lie about this matter.
Three jihadists were waterboarded. One of them was the 9/11 mastermind. Democrats were briefed that he told them about an attacked planned for LA.
ReplyDeleteAnd now they have the nerve to act as though they knew nothing about it? They're counting on the fact that Americans have short memories or are stupid or both.
The same democrats who went into hissy fits of hysteria because of the "outing" of Valerie Plame are now demanding show trials which will out dozens of CIA agents.
ReplyDeleteDid any of these libs complain when Clinton used rendition (outsourcing torture) dozens of times? Hmmm -- nope. Not a one. Hypocrites.
The next time I have a conversation with a liberal about torture it's going to include these words:
ReplyDelete"So it's okay to torture and kill a near full term baby in a partial birth abortion but it's not okay to waterboard a jihadist suspected of trying to kill Americans or actively caught trying to kill our military men and women?"
So-called "partial birth" abortion is a red herring and you know it.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous -
ReplyDeleteAre you denying there is such a thing as partial birth abortion?
I am stating that there was never any concept of "partial birth abortion" until a bunch of over-zealous inflamed religious whack jobs dreamed up that graphic image as part of their commitment to deny women their reproductive freedom. Now, go read some unbiased statistics on late term abortions and get back to me.
ReplyDeleteI can understand how difficult it is for people to understand how often partial birth abortions are performed, Anonymous.
ReplyDeletePerhaps someone who performs partial birth abortions and is an advocate for abortions on demand will change your mind:
Ron Fitzsimmons, Executive Director of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers said in 1997 (and the numbers have increased since then) that over 3,000 partial birth abortions are performed in the US each year.
It's understandable that libs don't want to admit this procedure is done so often because it's such a repugnant procedure and undercuts their hissy fits about torture.
The Center for Reproductive Law and Policy told the NYT how many partial birth abortions were performed each year, but I understand the truth may be too difficult for libs to handle.
I'm assuming you understand that legally a partial birth abortion is any child aborted in either the second or third trimester, but that might be an overly optimistic assumption on my part.
It's hard to believe that in this day and age that some people are still denying there is such a thing as partial birth abortion.
ReplyDeleteThe number of abortions performed in the US peaked around 1980 and has been trending steadily downward since. More than 88% of abortions in the US are performed in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy (Guttmacher Institute, 2008). Slightly more than 10% of US abortions are performed between 13 and 20 weeks gestation, before viability. Only 1.1% of abortions are performed at 21 weeks gestation or beyond. A widely accepted number for fetal viability is 24 weeks.
ReplyDeleteNext time we will deal with the reasons (medical necessity vs. choice) that abortions are performed after fetal viability has been achieved.
So let me see if I have this right:
ReplyDeleteThe media, congressional Democrats and liberals in general whine and cry and have hysterics because three (count them: 3) jihadists were waterboarded. One of those jihadists was the mastermind of 9/11.
But mention that even one woman in America had a partial birth abortion, thereby torturing and murdering an innocent unborn child, and liberals shrug their shoulders and say "so what" or "right wing religious nutjobs are just making up" the fact that women have this disgusting procedure.
I can certainly see why someone above mentioned that the truth is indeed hard to hear. The hypocrisy of the liberals on this matter is a very sad commentary.
Good for Pat Kirk
ReplyDeleteHypocrisy in late-term abortion
5/5/2009 12:32 AM
Regarding torture, President Obama has said repeatedly that America's ideals and values do not allow for torture under any conditions. He believes that Americans are above meting out the same horrific practices that our enemies do; therefore, enhanced interrogation techniques like water boarding and sleep deprivation will not be used on Obama's watch.
Would someone explain then how it is legal and justifiable that abortionists like the Kansas doctor George Tiller is not questioned when he performs very late term abortions? Although I am pro-choice for women's rights before the second trimester of gestation, I am certainly against the repugnant practice of aborting babies when they are almost ready to be born. If that isn't torture, not to mention brutal and repulsive, I don't know what is.
As I understand, many Navy Seals are undergo waterboarding so they can experience it first hand as a part of survival training. Therefore, just how "torturous" is that practice? So, in America, with its rarefied ideals and vaunted values, we say "no" to harshly interrogating prisoners but "yes" to aborting extremely viable babies. I see egregious hypocrisy here.
Pat Kirk
Aiken