April 23, 2009
That said, there are others who disagree – but still believe that waterboarding might be appropriate. One, Deb Saunders, makes this important observation.
Some maintain that the CIA might have learned what it needed to know without waterboarding. But as one memo reported, before the questioning got tough, "KSM resisted giving any answers to questions about future attacks, simply noting, 'Soon you will know.'"
The questioning got tougher. As the memo noted, the CIA believes that "the intelligence acquired from these interrogations has been a key reason why al Qaeda has failed to launch a spectacular attack in the West since 11 September 2001."
And: Once "enhanced techniques" were used on KSM, interrogations "led to the discovery of a KSM plot, the 'Second Wave,' Â… to use East Asian operatives to crash a hijacked airliner' into a building in Los Angeles."
Do I like waterboarding? No, but it is not life threatening; in extreme cases, I can live with it. And I'll take waterboarding over a 9/11 in Los Angeles any day.
So, my friends, ask yourself this – which city are you willing to see destroyed in order to protect the purported rights of terrorists? How many of your fellow Americans are you willing to sacrifice in order to avoid troubling your conscience? And do you truly believe that those whose decisions differed from what yours would have been on this matter merit criminal punishment? Indeed, let me ask it more explicitly – when confronted with a choice between American patriots and America’s enemies, why do you side with the latter?
Posted by: Greg at
01:09 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 341 words, total size 2 kb.
19 queries taking 0.0074 seconds, 28 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.