data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3bc81/3bc814c3fc0fb4fb01d4c19a815dea00d240efbe" alt=""
Gregory D.
Lee
Read Greg's bio and previous columns here
February 4, 2008
Interrogation by
Democrats: Hugs Instead of Waterboarding
Over the last few
months there have been non-stop assaults on the CIA for allegedly
torturing captured Al Qaeda members. Questions have arisen if a
particular “enhanced interrogation technique,” known as waterboarding,
is torture or not. Last week the question surfaced again when Attorney
General Michael Mukasey refused to rule on the legality of waterboarding
for the Senate Judiciary Committee. In a moment of political
grandstanding, the committee’s chairman, Patrick Leahy, insisted the AG
rule on the issue despite the CIA and Pentagon having banned it in 2006.
During the primary
debates, some candidates were asked a hypothetical question if they
would authorize waterboarding a terrorist if it was certain he knew the
secret location of a nuclear device set to go off in this country. I was
hoping to hear a candidate say he or she would personally waterboard the
terrorist in the Oval Office to get the information, but no such luck
with this bunch. At least Mitt Romney and Hillary Clinton didn’t
completely rule it out.
Waterboarding obviously works or so many liberals wouldn’t condemn it.
Just ask Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, who quickly confessed to personally
beheading Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl and being the
architect of the events of 9/11.
Considering all the torture techniques ever devised, waterboarding is
like giving a terrorist a wet kiss. This is in contrast to an Al Qaeda
interrogator cutting your head off and handing it to you. I’m not
suggesting the U.S. stoop to such levels, but our interrogators
shouldn’t be told that their only option is to give terrorists hugs,
either.
Let’s assume waterboarding is definitely torture and should be
universally banned, even at primary debates. What politically correct
alternatives should U.S. interrogators use? I suppose interrogators
could continuously play the theme songs to “Gilligan’s Island” or “The
Beverly Hillbillies” until the terrorist reaches near insanity
and gives up Bin Laden. The point is that, of all the so-called torture
techniques ever devised, waterboarding is the least likely to cause
permanent physical damage. Its use has been proven effective in
eliciting actionable information from otherwise uncooperative bad guys
who want to kill you, your children, your culture, your religion and our
country. Who is Ted Kennedy to criticize CIA interrogation methods when
he knows full well that more people have drowned at Chappaquiddick then
from waterboarding?
Liberals who are against waterboarding have already succeeded in giving
terrorists taxpayer-funded legal representation in U.S. courts. They are
seeking to shut down Guantanamo Bay and transfer prisoners to America.
Yale Law School attorneys are suing former and current U.S. government
officials for their role in capturing or prosecuting terrorists and
enemy combatants. Congressional Democrats hesitate to renew or make
permanent an updated Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, leaving
America “deaf” to future planned attacks.
Those on the left
seek to reverse every inroad made in the global war on terror by using
legislation and the courts to prevent and discourage government
officials from doing their duty.
Why isn’t it obvious
to liberals that Al Qaeda terrorists should not be provided with U.S.
taxpayer-funded attorneys and sent to this country to stand trial as
“enemy combatants?” During World War II, eight Nazi saboteurs, including
two American sympathizers, were captured in New York. These men were
swiftly tried by a military tribunal and convicted – and most were
promptly executed.
There seem to be no
limits to the aid and comfort liberals are willing to give terrorists.
Don’t they realize their efforts tie the hands of our intelligence and
law enforcement assets in making this country safer than it was before
9/11? Of course they do. A defeated America seems to be their ultimate
goal. Correct me if I am wrong, but it seems that every opportunity the
far left has to dismantle an effective institution such as the Boy
Scouts, the military, Christianity or the CIA, they take.
In any event, no
matter where you stand politically, when the day comes the CIA learns
that a nuclear bomb is about to explode in your hometown and a terrorist
who knows its location is being interrogated, let’s hope our
interrogators have the tools necessary to do their jobs without fear of
being sued.
Gregory D. Lee is
a retired DEA Supervisory Special Agent and the author of three criminal
justice textbooks. He can be reached through his website:
www.gregorydlee.com.
© 2008 North Star
Writers Group. May not be republished without permission.
Click here to talk to our writers and
editors about this column and others in our discussion forum.
To e-mail feedback
about this column,
click here. If you enjoy this writer's
work, please contact your local newspapers editors and ask them to carry
it.
This
is Column # GL001.
Request permission to publish here. |