Cheney formally requests release of two CIA memos on detainees

posted at 5:25 pm on April 24, 2009 by Allahpundit

When he talked to Hannity about this, I thought he meant he had general recollections that coercion had produced good intel and was going to ask the agency to review its records and declassify anything it found. Nope — he’s got two documents very specifically in mind, which means he must be awfully confident they’ll say what he thinks they say. The One’s strategy here pretty clearly was to give his base a satisfying Two Minutes Hate by releasing last week’s memos and then to declare that we don’t need any prosecutions or investigations because it’s time to move forward. Instead, the base and the media blew up and Cheney came out swinging to defend his legacy and now Obama’s got a royal clusterfark on his hands that’s only going to get more regal if/when the docs Cheney requested are released. No wonder the White House has suddenly lost its appetite for torture show trials. If 71 percent of the public is already willing to condone torture at least on rare occasions, what’ll the number be if those two memos prove Cheney right about waterboarding having prevented attacks?

At the Telegraph, Gerald Warner says good going, President Pantywaist:

That is why he opened Pandora’s Box by publishing the Justice Department’s legal opinions on waterboarding and other hardline interrogation techniques. He cynically subordinated the national interest to his partisan desire to embarrass the Republicans. Then he had to rush to Langley, Virginia to try to reassure a demoralised CIA that had just discovered the President of the United States was an even more formidable foe than al-Qaeda…

Obama promised his CIA audience that nobody would be prosecuted for past actions. That has already been contradicted by leftist groups with a revanchist ambition to put Republicans, headed if possible by Condoleezza Rice, in the dock. Talk about playing party politics with national security. Martin Scheinin, the United Nations special investigator for human rights, claims that senior figures, including former vice president Dick Cheney, could face prosecution overseas. Ponder that – once you have got over the difficulty of locating the United Nations and human rights within the same dimension.

President Pantywaist Obama should have thought twice before sitting down to play poker with Dick Cheney.

As Karl noted in the Greenroom, the only prominent Democrat left who wants to delve further into this subject is Pelosi, and after the beating she took yesterday for her “lame excuse,” expect her to have a change of heart too. Presumably the plan going forward is to let the matter drop and then, when Cheney gets his docs, to accuse him of trying to refight old battles from which the country’s moved on. Savor the irony.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Ann:

Who is He?

Terrye on April 24, 2009 at 6:53 PM

TORTURE is illegal in America.
Otherwise Bybee wouldn’t have had to write memos redefining it.

strangelet on April 24, 2009 at 6:49 PM

No , Obama has made exemptions.

the_nile on April 24, 2009 at 6:54 PM

What was Bush’s nickname for Cheney? It should be “pit-bull.” Go git em!

Mallard T. Drake on April 24, 2009 at 6:54 PM

as long as we don’t ask those countries to torture information out of them for us, what do we care where they go?
sesquipedalian on April 24, 2009 at 6:50 PM

Ah, I see, so sending detainees to Egypt rather than say, Switzerland is no problem?

Why do you THINK we send them to Egypt rather than Switzerland, so they can send back some nice photos of the Sphinx?

Haysoos Marimba, my retaining wall has better sense than some of you.

Bishop on April 24, 2009 at 6:54 PM

I mean Christ, these people can not even decide what torture is. It is whatever they say it is.

Terrye on April 24, 2009 at 6:55 PM

Why do you THINK we send them to Egypt rather than Switzerland

Bishop on April 24, 2009 at 6:54 PM

because they speak arabic.

sesquipedalian on April 24, 2009 at 6:57 PM

TORTURE is illegal in America.
Otherwise Bybee wouldn’t have had to write memos redefining it.
strangelet on April 24, 2009 at 6:49 PM

By torture you mean having to stand in place for extended periods, being confined to a room for 23 hours a day or being forced to hold a heavy object over your head?

Bishop on April 24, 2009 at 6:57 PM

because they speak arabic.
sesquipedalian on April 24, 2009 at 6:57 PM

Why, are the detainees going to be questioned?

Bishop on April 24, 2009 at 6:58 PM

Terrye on April 24, 2009 at 6:55 PM

I have to admit the perpetual media love fest with this guy is getting a little tortuous for me.

hawkdriver on April 24, 2009 at 6:59 PM

The bottom line is if a democrat president had been in office during 9-11 and followed the same policies as bush … you wouldn’t hear a peep from these trolls. They’d be telling you what a great job their president has done keeping America safe.

darwin on April 24, 2009 at 6:59 PM

I love it. I told you Cheney eats fools like Barry for breakfast.

anniekc on April 24, 2009 at 6:59 PM

as long as we don’t ask those countries to torture information out of them for us, what do we care where they go?

sesquipedalian on April 24, 2009 at 6:50 PM

When you begin to believe that a liberal mind can’t sink any lower into the swamp of hypocrisy along will come one to offer further proof as to how utterly wrong you can be.

Yoop on April 24, 2009 at 7:01 PM

The bottom line is if a democrat president had been in office during 9-11 and followed the same policies as bush

Funny thing is Bill Clinton actually had teh WOT start on his watch. His sole responce was to bomb a baby milk factory in the Sudan and waste millions of dollars in tomahawk strikes against Osama who knew in advance they wre comming.

The Cole bombing, the first attack on the WTC, the Kenya bombings all were done under ther Clintons. And we did redition and arrests then as well.

The Left was silent then.

William Amos on April 24, 2009 at 7:02 PM

as long as we don’t ask those countries to torture information out of them for us, what do we care where they go?

sesquipedalian on April 24, 2009 at 6:50 PM

“Outsourcing” that the left can agree with.

thomasaur on April 24, 2009 at 7:04 PM

I don’t know about the rest of you, but my idea of torture would be to be forced to sit quietly and listen to Barry’s books on audiotape. I’d cave almost immediately.

anniekc on April 24, 2009 at 7:04 PM

Let the DoJ, the Justice branch, deal with them.
Like the Founders intended.

I hope they hang ‘em high.

strangelet on April 24, 2009 at 5:52 PM

I realize the Jefferson quote below was posted by others but I have to respond when I see such rubbish as the comment above is!

Strangelet, it would seem one of our nation’s most influential founders Thomas Jefferson would completely disagree with you. I have highlighted the important parts for you in the hopes you will understand how ignorant your comment is:

“Strict observance of the written law is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation. To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to the written law, would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the ends to the means.”

-Thomas Jefferson

It’s much like Maslow’s hierarchy of needs (if you’re not aware of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs Strangelet you may want to educate yourself) in that survival needs always come first. As is so well pointed out in Jefferson’s above quote placing adherence to the law above the survival of our republic and it’s people’s is utterly absurd and if you had even one functioning synapse strangelet you would know this to be true!

Liberty or Death on April 24, 2009 at 7:04 PM

“Outsourcing” that the left can agree with.
thomasaur on April 24, 2009 at 7:04 PM

Taking jobs from good American interrogators, this is an outrage.

Bishop on April 24, 2009 at 7:05 PM

I don’t know about the rest of you, but my idea of torture would be to be forced to sit quietly and listen to Barry’s books on audiotape. I’d cave almost immediately.

anniekc on April 24, 2009 at 7:04 PM

Expect the queen of England to go jihadi on us ?

hehe

William Amos on April 24, 2009 at 7:05 PM

Dick Cheney: Strong horse

Nancy Pelosi: Weak horse

Barack Obama: Lambkin

smellthecoffee on April 24, 2009 at 7:10 PM

When you begin to believe that a liberal mind can’t sink any lower into the swamp of hypocrisy along will come one to offer further proof as to how utterly wrong you can be.

Yoop on April 24, 2009 at 7:01 PM

hey, let me know when obama sends somebody abroad to be tortured. he won’t. he never said he would. the news you heard was that they maintained the administration’s position in a trial to protect the secrecy of information about bush’s extraordinary rendition program. to protect the disgraced ex-president.

sesquipedalian on April 24, 2009 at 7:11 PM

I think I’ll be making a 10×13 of Cheney for my living room.

Let’s just keep Sandy Berger away from those memos.

I still love the title of the Fox News documentary on Sandy Berger: Socks, Scissors, Paper, the Sandy Berger Caper

Glenn Jericho on April 24, 2009 at 7:14 PM

Anthony D. Romero, Executive Director of the ACLU said of the decision: “Eric Holder’s Justice Department stood up in court today and said that it would continue the Bush policy of invoking state secrets to hide the reprehensible history of torture, rendition and the most grievous human rights violations committed by the American government.

sesquipedalian on April 24, 2009 at 7:14 PM

the news you heard was that they maintained the administration’s position in a trial to protect the secrecy of information about bush’s extraordinary rendition program. to protect the disgraced ex-president.
sesquipedalian on April 24, 2009 at 7:11 PM

So President Obowa is protecting people who were complicit in crimes against humanity, in torture? How do you sleep at night knowing you voted for a guy who would use his power to protect criminals?

Bishop on April 24, 2009 at 7:17 PM

sesquipedalian on April 24, 2009 at 7:11 PM

To ‘protect the disgraced ex-president’.

Yeah right!

Do you actually believe what you write?

Then what was the purpose of releasing the few memo’s they did the other day (edited for content of course)?

RedbonePro on April 24, 2009 at 7:18 PM

“Obviously you need to preserve some tools — you still have to go after the bad guys,” said an Obama administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity when discussing the legal reasoning. “The legal advisers working on this looked at rendition. It is controversial in some circles and kicked up a big storm in Europe. But if done within certain parameters, it is an acceptable practice.”

Don’t worry though, this quote comes from that conservative rag known as the LA Times.

Bishop on April 24, 2009 at 7:20 PM

Continued:

“”Under executive orders issued by Obama recently, the CIA still has authority to carry out what are known as renditions, secret abductions and transfers of prisoners to countries that cooperate with the United States.””

Bishop on April 24, 2009 at 7:21 PM

strangelet, you still didn’t answer whether you meant to “literally” hang them.

hawkdriver on April 24, 2009 at 6:14 PM

Did it ever answer?

Because if it comes to that, people like it better watch its own a**.

Now go complain to the FBI, strange fruit.

baldilocks on April 24, 2009 at 7:21 PM

i love dick cheney!

Ghoul aid on April 24, 2009 at 7:21 PM

How do you sleep at night knowing you voted for a guy who would use his power to protect criminals?

Bishop on April 24, 2009 at 7:17 PM

i’m not happy about it. but i also understand the national security factors involved.

To ‘protect the disgraced ex-president’.

Yeah right!

Do you actually believe what you write?

RedbonePro on April 24, 2009 at 7:18 PM

sorry, it felt really nice to type it out and couldn’t control myself.

sesquipedalian on April 24, 2009 at 7:22 PM

Actually, come to think of it, if anybody besides terrorists are worthy of being tortured, the ACLU surely ranks up there…

RedbonePro on April 24, 2009 at 7:22 PM

MY country doesn’t torture.
strangelet on April 24, 2009 at 6:31 PM

Is that the latest blurb you all were instructed to keep repeating?

baldilocks on April 24, 2009 at 7:25 PM

i’m not happy about it. but i also understand the national security factors involved.

I see, protecting “criminals” is subordinate to national security interests but nothing else is, at least you set that straight.

Bishop on April 24, 2009 at 7:26 PM

I mean Christ, these people can not even decide what torture is. It is whatever they say it is.

Terrye on April 24, 2009 at 6:55 PM

It is so with all Leftists; it’s one of their tactics–keep changing the definition of words, terms and concepts and “forgetting” that a given definition was different yesterday or even in the same sentence. It’s like have a conversation with my great-aunt, a dementia sufferer, only she can’t help it.

The dimmer members of the Left don’t do consciously either, but they are at fault because, at some point, they “drank the kool-aid” willingly and knowingly.

baldilocks on April 24, 2009 at 7:30 PM

“But if done within certain parameters, it is an acceptable practice.”

exactly.

I see, protecting “criminals” is subordinate to national security interests but nothing else is, at least you set that straight.

i’m fairly certain that justice will be served, if not in court, then by history. the details may emerge now or years/decades later… that’s not my primary concern.

sesquipedalian on April 24, 2009 at 7:35 PM

Martin Scheinin, the United Nations special investigator for human rights, claims that senior figures, including former vice president Dick Cheney, could face prosecution overseas. Ponder that – once you have got over the difficulty of locating the United Nations and human rights within the same dimension.

Could we have a Tea Party and throw the United Nations into the East River?

Steve Z on April 24, 2009 at 7:38 PM

Haven’t read any of the comments but I don’t know how anyone thinks that The Won is sorry he started this mess when he announced today he’s going to release pictures of detainees around MEMORIAL DAY. Plus he said he had read the documents that Mr. Cheney referred to and doesn’t think they show what Mr. Cheney says. So even if they do, they won’t by the time he’s done with them. Creative redaction.

Cindy Munford on April 24, 2009 at 7:40 PM

So even if they do, they won’t by the time he’s done with them. Creative redaction.

Cindy Munford on April 24, 2009 at 7:40 PM

Maybe V.P. Cheney wants to see how the docs. that they release compare to his copies? ; )

thomasaur on April 24, 2009 at 7:45 PM

exactly.

Apparently those parameters consist of sending prisoners to such garden spots as Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan, even though the prisoners themselves aren’t actually from those countries.

I wonder why they would send them there? Hmmm…

Bishop on April 24, 2009 at 7:45 PM

Did anyone see the Egypt caught a bunch of Hezbolah today that planned to carry out strikes in Egypt and Israel supposedly on the orders of Iran and Hassan Nasrallah. Who admitted that one of those captured was a member of Hezbolah.

Cindy Munford on April 24, 2009 at 7:52 PM

thomasaur on April 24, 2009 at 7:45 PM

I have think V.P. Cheney is smarter than the average bear. If there are bets taken my money is on him. He’s not Darth Vader, he’s Yoda.

Cindy Munford on April 24, 2009 at 7:54 PM

Can you imagine having your testicles grabbed and pulled on. How about being repeatedly kicked in the groin and/or stomach, fingers pulled back until broken then reset with no pain killers, hair yanked, eye balls scratched, cuts made until you bled, black eyes, forced to carry five gallon buckets filled with liquid while treading water or held under water, choking, all the while grasping for air but getting water instead.

Torture?

Maybe to some, but for me it was a season playing waterpolo along with my Red Cross training for life or death situations as a certified lifeguard. Sorta like in the movie the Guardian..

theblacksheepwasright on April 24, 2009 at 8:02 PM

LOL … this Democratic crusade to prosecute the Bush administration is A GIFT FROM GOD to us.

I mean seriously – this is what happens when you try to take campaign rhetoric into political policy.

First of all … JUST TRY AND ARREST BUSH OR CHENEY … G’Head – I double dog dare you. Arrest them – and you will have THOUSANDS of angry TeaBaggers outside the courthouse … but they won’t be carrying signs this time. So yes – just go ahead and good luck with that.

There are many other reasons why the Dem’s are going to get absolutely destroyed in this endeavor – but that’s the main one.

Torture … has not been legally defined in America. And you can’t argue that something we do to our own troops as a part of their training regimen is torture. Try to affix a definition to that term now – and you run into “ex post facto” … lil Constitutional thing ya know.

Democrats were INVOLVED – oh yeah they were!

I’m absolutely giddy about this prospect! PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE bring Bush up on charges!!!

HondaV65 on April 24, 2009 at 8:03 PM

Apparently those parameters consist of sending prisoners to such garden spots as Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan, even though the prisoners themselves aren’t actually from those countries.

I wonder why they would send them there? Hmmm…

Bishop on April 24, 2009 at 7:45 PM

i am generally against extraordinary rendition. especially if the victims get tortured – i don’t support it, no matter who does it. it’s fine, for example, if we’re dumping useless terrorists left to us by the disgraced ex-president, and they later get tortured for whatever reason we’re not involved in. that’s not our responsibility. nonetheless, handing over people to other countries if we know they’ll get tortured is immoral and against the law. the president should be sanctioned against doing it. it’s very different, though, from institutionalizing torture, developing and applying these methods ourselves at the orders the president.

sesquipedalian on April 24, 2009 at 8:07 PM

“Well he didn’t tell us anything in the previous 182 go-rounds, but this next one will surely break his spirit”?

e-pirate on April 24, 2009 at 5:49 PM

.
Show me where it is reported that the ’182 go-rounds’ were fruitless.
Eighteen years in the intelligence community taught me that the whole story is very seldom revealed in its entirety in a single presentation. There is a need to collect and connect the dots or the pieces of the puzzle if you prefer. It appears you would never complete the puzzle.

News2Use on April 24, 2009 at 8:09 PM

Hey faux Barry…
When are you going to release your:
BIRTH CERTIFICATE???

byteshredder on April 24, 2009 at 8:10 PM

The good news the left is hyperventilating over this issue. I live in a Big Ten university town and there have been a number of letters from liberals excoriating the Prez on his failure to prosecute evil CIA types. To a fault, each letter to the editor lamented their building disillusionment. Granted, the salve of socialized medicine will ease the pain but HE is expending political capital through more unforced errors.

moxie_neanderthal on April 24, 2009 at 8:15 PM

<MY country doesn’t torture.

strangelet on April 24, 2009 at 6:31 PM

You’re right…none of the interrigation techniques were torturous…you just proved our point. douche.

Equality 7-2521 on April 24, 2009 at 8:19 PM

i’m fairly certain that justice will be served, if not in court, then by history. the details may emerge now or years/decades later… that’s not my primary concern.

sesquipedalian on April 24, 2009 at 7:35 PM

So if a court rules something, you will automatically accept it as true? Does that include the Clinton-appointed Federal Judge in Manhattan who issued a 2003 legal ruling that Iraq was in fact involved in the 9/11 attacks?

Del Dolemonte on April 24, 2009 at 8:29 PM

if we’re dumping useless terrorists left to us by the disgraced ex-president,

sesquipedalian on April 24, 2009 at 8:07 PM

LOL! So your cool hero “inherited” those terrorists?

Don’t forget, the evil Bush “inherited” the 9/11 attacks, because they were supposed to happen on Clinton’s watch. bin Laden said so.

Del Dolemonte on April 24, 2009 at 8:31 PM

As for how mover’s and shaker’s goes…

I really dig good ol’ turd blossom.

SilverStar830 on April 24, 2009 at 9:02 PM

As for how mover’s and shaker’s goes…

I really dig good ol’ turd blossom.

SilverStar830 on April 24, 2009 at 9:03 PM

oops…sorry for double post.

that was weird =/

SilverStar830 on April 24, 2009 at 9:03 PM

You know…I think I’ve finally figured out the difference between republicans and democrats on the whole “terrorism” issue, and the biggest contributing factor was Ed’s show yesterday.

Republicans: open about what they believe needs to be done to protect the country and people of the United States. They get legal advice to make sure that they aren’t torturing anyone, and let those that need to know what they think has to be done to keep people safe.

Democrats: believe that “what you don’t know can’t hurt you” and would rather have someone else do the dirty work, whatever it takes, as long as they don’t know about it. IE: stick their fingers in their ears and go “NA NA NA NA..don’t tell me! If I don’t “know” about what you are doing its all okay!” And then turn around and blame those that actually DID the dirty work when things turn against the democrats.

Highlar on April 24, 2009 at 9:06 PM

e-pirate betrays an unfortunately not uncommon attitude towards terrorism. For many folks in America, 9/11 was just something they saw on TV.

They live in a quiet, safe area of the States and believe that terrorism can’t reach them. They have the luxury to engage in sanctimonious arguments because they’re not at the pointy end of the spear.

walkingboss on April 24, 2009 at 9:27 PM

And this is a prime example of that:

So, in other words, sometimes it is OK?
redshirt on April 24, 2009 at 6:17 PM

Yes. Sometimes it is ok. But it is NEVER legal.
You need a special waterboard? Built to government torture standards?
F*ck off, criminal.
MY country doesn’t torture.

strangelet on April 24, 2009 at 6:31 PM

strangelet is perfectly fine with torturing someone…as long as its not he/she that is doing it, and they don’t know about it! How else could it be ok to do sometimes, but not legal? Its okay to do sometimes (as long as someone else is doing it), but not legal (when its convenient/politically empowering to turn on those that DID the necessary “torturing”). That’s a pretty sad attitude to take.

Highlar on April 24, 2009 at 9:30 PM

Dick Cheney is my hero.

Zorro on April 24, 2009 at 10:20 PM

Cheney smacking Bambi around has made my week.

I hope he doesn’t let up on him or the rest of the Dhimmis either. If the freaking POTUS wants to cede our national security and attempt to make political hay out of targeting those who put the U.S. first to make himself feel good then someone has got to step in. It seems Cheney fits that bill.

SimplyKimberly on April 24, 2009 at 10:24 PM

what’ll the number be if those two memos prove Cheney right about waterboarding having prevented attacks?

Presumably the plan going forward is to let the matter drop and then, when Cheney gets his docs, to accuse him of trying to refight old battles from which the country’s moved on. Savor the irony.

The problem is the media won’t cover it the way they should. Just like letting Dems call Bush a liar on WMDs, when those same Dems made the same case for 13 years. The media never held their feet to the fire. Do you think, if Cheney gets the docs, that the media is going to suddenly say “thank you Bush/Cheney, you were right all along and you saved thousands of lives by giving baths to 3 smelly terrorists!”?

Please! The corruption is so bad now that word of what really happened will never make it to the people.

RightWinged on April 24, 2009 at 11:54 PM

hey, let me know when obama sends somebody abroad to be tortured. he won’t. he never said he would. the news you heard was that they maintained the administration’s position in a trial to protect the secrecy of information about bush’s extraordinary rendition program. to protect the disgraced ex-president.

sesquipedalian on April 24, 2009 at 7:11 PM

That’s called rendition.

Barack Oblahblah upheld the practice within 2 days of taking office.

Chaz706 on April 25, 2009 at 12:00 AM

These lefties need to learn about what happened when Patty Hearst was kidnapped by the SLA. She was tortured by their own lefty types.

maggieo on April 25, 2009 at 12:30 AM

strangelet, you still didn’t answer whether you meant to “literally” hang them.
hawkdriver on April 24, 2009 at 6:14 PM

Did it ever answer?
Because if it comes to that, people like it better watch its own a**.
Now go complain to the FBI, strange fruit.
baldilocks on April 24, 2009 at 7:21 PM

Okfine.
Literally hang them then.
Like when we hung the japanese waterboarders.

After World War II, an international coalition convened to prosecute Japanese soldiers charged with torture. At the top of the list of techniques was water-based interrogation, known variously then as ‘water cure,’ ‘water torture’ and ‘waterboarding,’ according to the charging documents. It simulates drowning.” Politifact went on to report, “A number of the Japanese soldiers convicted by American judges were hanged, while others received lengthy prison sentences or time in labor camps.”

Pardon, fair Juliette, but I was busy on this torture thread.
AllahP serves us an embarassment of riches ce soir.
;)

The Laird has gone off to bed. Its a good thread though.
Deep.
The MacLeod remainds me of my Shakespeare professor and Prospero….

This rough magic….I here abjure…and deeper than ever plummet sound..
I’ll drown my book

strangelet on April 25, 2009 at 2:47 AM

Im curious to see how long Obarfo will wait to release the memos Dick Cheney wants. He could drag it out forever.

becki51758 on April 25, 2009 at 9:04 AM

All the dems are going to back down pretty damn quick now that Cheney has gone on the offensive because they know that he knows that they all knew (like that one, huh?).

and maybe this whole matter will be put to rest.

and for the former “torture” lawyer being on the 9th circuit, well, hot damn.

kelley in virginia on April 25, 2009 at 9:15 AM

Wait, we’re going to lose a city now?
The worst terrorist attack to hit America killed 3000 people, .01% of the population of New York.

Is it your belief the next attack by some guys in caves will take out a city?

e-pirate on April 24, 2009 at 6:10 PM

Gee, thanks for the math – I guess, since it was only .01%, it must be acceptable.

The point is, the next attack could, in fact, be larger, or smaller, or the same size. So, we should do whatever is necessary to prevent the next attack. If that includes waterboarding, or any of the other means currently being called aggressive or enhanced interogations, that’s fine.

Remember, the methods we used don’t cause permanent physical harm; they appear to have been used in a small number of cases; they were used on people that were absolutely known bad actors.

Given the circumstances, remarkable restraint was shown.

See, this is logic.

massrighty on April 25, 2009 at 5:47 PM

vice president cheney please keep telling the truth on these jerks

wade underhile on April 25, 2009 at 7:41 PM

handing over people to other countries if we know they’ll get tortured is immoral and against the law.
sesquipedalian on April 24, 2009 at 8:07 PM

Which law?
We have executive orders put in place for America during the Ford years, but nothing I saw on Lexis/Nexis regarding the US Code of Justice says anything about sending prisoners away to foreign judicial systems regardless of whether they will face extrordinary methodes of quesioning, or even torture.

Put up or shut up.

Few Things Considered on April 26, 2009 at 10:32 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3