We've been listening to the Senate politicize the waterboarding issue for quite awhile now. Both Democrats and Republicans have been hitting Attorney General nominee Mukasey over the head with the issue, all because Mukasey said he wasn't familiar with the waterboarding technique and thus couldn't form an opinion as to whether it was torture or not, though Mukasey condemned torture. It seems all the major windbags on the Hill have had their say about it. Now we even have citizens waterboarding themselves in protest (For the record, I volunteer to waterboard Harry Reid, as a patriotic duty).
Well, here's a wizbang of an idea for our pontificating Congressional braintrust. Instead of complaining about Mukasey and playing endless political games over waterboarding, how about Congress, which I'm pretty sure is THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT, the ones who make the laws for chrissakes, how about they MAKE WATERBOARDING ILLEGAL if they don't approve of the technique. How about if the LAWMAKERS MAKE A LAW ! Golly gee ! Then it's case closed. End of story. A law like that would make the waterboarding question a very simple one for Mukasey to answer.
But then there would be no political issue to pimp.
We all know torture is bad, just as we know murder is bad, stealing is bad, lying is bad, etc. I know these things, you know these things, Democrats know these things, Republicans know these things, and the president knows these things. So, why do we sometimes condone these things ? We do, you know. The worst sin of all, murder, is okay sometimes: If it's in self-defense, for example, or war. Abortion is the taking of a human life. Is that not murder ? On stealing, how bad would it be for a starving person to steal an apple from a fruit stand ? I think we could forgive that indiscretion, couldn't we ? And I doubt there's even one of us who hasn't told a lie, even though we all condemn lying. The reason that we sometimes condone bad behavior is due to CONTEXT, which every one of our blowhard pols seems to ignore.
Here's a real life true example of context for you:
You're an american interrogator and you have terrorist Khalid Shaikh Mohammed in custody. Khalid has already masterminded the 9/11 attacks, the 1993 World Trade Center attack, the Bali nightclub bombing, the Richard Reid shoe bombing attempt, and numerous other terrorist attacks and foiled attacks. Your ethical dilemma is: how far will you go to find out what Khalid knows, when such knowledge could save hundreds, thousands, or tens of thousands of lives ?
America waterboarded his murderous terrorist butt.
Critics insist torture doesn't work, that it doesn't provide any reliable information.
But if waterboarding is torture, then it sure worked on Khalid, because he sang like a canary.
And don't expect me to shed any tears for that scumbag, ever.
About This Blog