Liz Cheney smacks down MSNBC babe with the TRUTH about so-called “torture”


I have always thought that more defenders of waterboarding and the CIA should talk about the fact that waterboarding is performed on most of our military members in survival training….we don’t “torture” our own military members….Waterboarding IS NOT TORTURE.

Liz Cheney on MSNBC talks about that and clearly lays out the process and the decisions made in waterboarding KSM and others in order to gain info and save American lives.

Norah O’Donnell, MSNBC gets smacked straight in the face with TRUTH with counters to her false assumptions….great job Liz Cheney.

Watch the video at Powerline….it is informative as well as great to watch the Lib talker meet TRUTH, perhaps for the first time all year 🙂

(H/T: Larrey Anderson at American Thinker)

Advertisements

19 Responses

  1. This exchange is pure sweetness 🙂

  2. Ever been waterboarded before? It’s torture in the purest sense of the word.

    There’s a reason why our troops go through POW training – not even the “morally superior” USA is above torturing prisoners in the name of national security.

  3. Actually, I have been waterboarded…

    I’ve also been slapped around, forced to stand for extended periods, subjected to body slams, exposed to extreme heat, deprived of water, and forced to perform stressful physical tasks despite extreme pain…and that was just over the course of a normal high school football practice! 😉

    Enough drama. I can imagine FAR better examples of “torture in the purest sense of the word”.

  4. magsol,
    No, I’ve never been waterboarded, but know those who have.

    Perhaps, you’d rather move to Afghanistan, Iran, or even venture back in time to Saddam’s Iraq for their “morally superior” procedures in treatment of prisoners and their own citizens.

    Sounds to me like you disdain your own country in the efforts to save American lives……there is a BIG difference in enhanced interrogation techniques for saving lives and performing torturous acts because you get your jollies that way as they do in many of our enemy countries.

    How is it that liberals can be so black and white on an issue like waterboarding that saves American lives, but when conservative are black and white on social morality issues, liberals scream for grayness and call conservatives narrow, ignorant and racist?

  5. @GBS: I played high school football, too. Wouldn’t exactly call that the kind of torture we’re talking about here.

    @sharprightturn: I wasn’t making the statement that other countries treat POWs any better; rather, knowing full well the reality that captured soldiers abroad are subjected to horrors I can’t even imagine, that is why POW training here is so intensive and involves waterboarding et al.

    I do agree that there is a difference, but that is an awfully fine line to walk with a lot of overlap. I’m certainly not proclaiming I know where that line is, but I do honestly believe waterboarding is completely on the other side.

    Liberals place “do no harm” on a higher pedestal than conservatives do; conservatives place a team mentality and loyalty on a higher pedestal than liberals do. Liberals view waterboarding as torture. As such, we view waterboarding is a heinous act, and dichotomies of any sort in the social arena as discrimination. Conservatives view waterboarding as a means to protect the collective’s well-being, and social dichotomies as a means to protect the collective’s values.

  6. Can,t spell “as” but no trouble with “dichotomies” In my world it would be just the opposite.

    To be sure Conservatives view waterboarding simply as an effective tool to help keep the bad guys from killing us. I guess we view mass murder as a somewhat deeper issue.

    I for one would rather see a little water in someone’s nose than seven or eight million Americans incinerated by some lunatic with a nuke and a cause.
    But I’m just an evil Conservative. What do I know?

  7. magsol,

    My quip about HS football was intended to describe some of the “torture” techniques we’ve recently read about in a different, but more benign context.

    Context is what we must keep in mind when discussing these techniques. Three high-profile individuals were waterboarded, not the hundreds captured in Afghanistan and elsewhere. Apparently, they all revealed useful information. One of these individuals, KSM, apparently revealed information about a second plan to attack Los Angeles. If true, I’d say the results were worth whatever discomfort he endured. As I said above, and I’m not joking, I’ve been on the waterboard myself. It’s not fun and it shouldn’t be routine, but we’d be foolish to remove that, along with other techniques that induce stress, from the toolbox.

  8. @Faulker: Thanks for the grammatical correction and the patronizing. Next time I’ll be sure to sling mud rather than attempt to engage in intelligent and rational discourse.

    @GBS: You raise very good points. I appreciate your thoughts, and for us it seems to boil down to your belief that waterboarding is not torture given the context, and my belief that the ends never justify the means, regardless of context. I think we should be looking for alternate methods of obtaining information, methods which (I believe) are more congruous with our country’s espoused tenets.

  9. magsol
    T’was not a grammer lesson, t’was a spelling lesson. Also I was not patronizing you, I was ridiculing your silliness.

  10. Last I checked, ridicule through condescension was the definition of patronizing. But now we’re just splitting hairs over a tangential and ultimately moot point solely because you think I’m wrong.

    Being an ass to me because you disagree doesn’t make you right; it makes you an ass. Let me know when you’re done living up to the conservative stereotype of pretentiousness and ready to actually discuss the topic at hand.

  11. magsol,

    What method(s) would you suggest in a time critical situation?

  12. magsol,

    To paraphrase Barry Goldwater:

    To feign to be an intellectual in the defense of silliness is no virtue,

    To be an “ass” in the defense of reason is no vice.

    Y’all take care now, ya’hear?

    W.M.F.

  13. @Faulkner: Thanks for proving my point, and for muting my belief that I might actually learn something constructive rather than engage in the tired patterns of non sequiturs and ad hominems that pollute bicameral discourse.

    @GBS: To be perfectly frank, I don’t have a better idea. Call it naivete, call it faith, call it blindness, call it whatever you want, but given that so many millions (across the globe, even) view the practice of waterboarding as a concession of the very beliefs we claim to protect, there has to be a better way. I’m perfectly open to being proved wrong here, but I haven’t seen anything yet to suggest there is no other way.

  14. magsol,

    I admire your honesty. Most with your perspective would not make such an admission. They would deflect, dissemble, and name-call. It demonstrates that you are at least willing to think and not blindly spout the talking points of the Left.

    For what it’s worth, I’m not a huge fan of things like the waterboard, but I came to the conclusion a while ago that much of the world is a dangerous place full of people intent on doing harm. They’ve always existed in one form or another and I really don’t care about their complaint, other than how that information can be used to prevent them from acting. We’ve seen many examples, most notably on 9/11. We’ve not seen another similar attack for no reason other than we’ve done enough (so far) to deny them the means and the breathing space.

    I would never advocate the use of this or any other similar technique on a member of a legitimate national military captured in accordance with the Law of Armed Conflict. However, the people we’re dealing with are neither criminals nor soldiers. They are something akin to foreign spies and saboteurs captured during wartime, who traditionally are denied the protections and due process afforded to those previously mentioned classes.

    Maybe we can eventually develop a chemical device that will make someone cooperative and helpful without causing so much distress. Until then, if causing these people some discomfort prevents Americans or any other of the world’s peaceful citizens from being hurt or killed, I’ve got no issue with it.

  15. Well put, GBS

  16. magsol,
    For once, instead of just pulling your chain, which for me is a sport, I think I will give you something to really think about.
    I believe it was Carl Marks who said “the end justifies the means”.
    Magsol said he believes that “the end never justifies the means”.
    Both of these are clever sayings and are equally wrong.

    Any “end” requires a “means” to implement it. Before we make a judgement as to whether a particular means is appropriate we must first measure it against the projected end.

    These value judgements are constantly being made. For instance in medicine, decisions on radical surgery, medication and other unplesent treatments are all means/end equations.

    At one time I endured Marine Boot Camp. The desired end was primarily to enhance my effectiveness in combat. You don’t even want to hear about the “means”

    You spoke about playing football. The exercises and practice required to effectively play this sport, to me were at the very least painful. But they were the means used to realize a desired end, winning games. Actually that is why I switched to baseball.

    In the area of intelligence gathering through interrogation the judgement process becomes much more complex. Interrogation is a building process wherein we glean information from different subjects and hopefully develop a broad based picture of planned enemy operations. Interrogation is not a punishment for past transgressions. It is simply a tool we use to predict and hopefully thwart future, undesireable events. Sometimes during routine and fairly benign questionings a piece of information emerges that frankly scares the bejesus out of us. The planned attack on Los Angeles could serve as an example. When that happens, and many lives are on the line, if we are fortunate enough to have access to a source of enemy strategic planning, we feel justified in making the bastard as uncomfortable as is necessary to verify the information. It is aggressive interrogation to be sure, but only within the rules of humane conduct, and is only done to realize the desirable “end” of blocking the attack.

    Many times these tasty tidbits of information are time sensitive. This means that their value is fleeting and must be verified and if possible expanded quickly.

    There again we tailor the interrogation to the situation.
    We measure the desired “end” against the required “means” to attain that desired end.

    I guess the ultimate question is; “Is the safety of America really worth all of these great moral dilemmas?”
    W.M.F.

  17. Once again this is not an argument or disagreement. This is a tool, to call conservatives evil. Plain and simple. Soon the libocrats will have the stomach to come right out and say it. It is clear they will have the media (liberal opiad) (beer courage) behind them they will no longer fear being honest about their true beliefs.
    There isn’t a way that any person born of this earth would care about any so called torture as worse than death. The only reason torture is effective is because people would surely suffer it rather than death.
    The problem isn’t that torture bothers liberals, the problem is Bush was elected to two terms. Obama clearly hasn’t removed torture or outlawed it, but that wasn’t reported in the media. Why, because any culture that thinks vacuming a fetus alive and attached to it’s biological host isn’t torture first and then death, has no moral guidelines. As for their supposed care about human rights, they forget to say it’s selective care of human rights. The human rights of woman in Islamic culture don’t count. The human rights of children in the muslim world don’t count. Only the human rights of male terrorists. You see it’s a veil of bull that they love to sling.
    It truly is the “kitchen Sink argument, when you hate someone and have not a leg to stand on, you start arguing inane subject matter just for the sake of being in the argument.
    I wish they had an argument, I am tired of asking, “what’s your point?” Or correcting their misrepresentation of history.
    Next time you are in one of these phony arguments with a liberal, ask them, “how did the KKK get their start? Wait to you hear the liberal’s version of history. How about asking them who started the “NAACP”? That history will have you howling! How about asking how many democrats voted to end slavery? Wait till you see the dear in the headlight look on that one. How about which party first nominated a minority for president; If they say Obama, please don’t pee your pants laughing. Liberals have no argument, all they have is hatred for values. Their values are that of the terrorists themselves. compare the values and see. They are fond of comparing Bush to Hitler, yet compare the history.
    But if you ask me these inept idiots already won the war. They control the press and you and I have done nothing but “tweet” our way right into obscurity. Now Obama has the White house behind his media machine and is one vote from controlling all three branches of the government. So we may be “Right”, but we still are losing. Maybe they aint so stupid after all!

  18. You do realize we prosecuted others for waterboarding our prisoners, citing that it was torture, right?

  19. Wok3 –
    Who did it and when?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: