Is Another Man's "Harsh Interrogation"...  The week is slipping away and I wanted to weigh in on the torture debate before it fades away, which surely it must as it's political shelf life is due to expire.

"Torture" is one those issues where the extremes on either end destroy the possibility of rational argument.  Kinda like those fringies on the abortion and illegal immigration debate, where I would just like to slap one side and backhand the other.  Of all the issues to avoid getting into a semantics argument about torture ranks right up there.

First of all this is an old issue.  If those against water boarding are so concerned about how its practice reflects so poorly on our stature then why in the hell will they not just STFU about it?  Does there advertising our evil help their cause? 

Well, in this case, like most issues where an honest search for logic yields nada, it's all politics.

And please, if I hear one more Democrat, especially the naked Emperor, pontificating about losing our "moral bearings" as a nation - - I'm gonna puke. Now they are saying torture boils down that which "shocks the conscience".  Give me a break. 

Here's a question President Ohole breath: If pretending to drown a known suspect in order to extract life-saving information shocks YOUR conscience - - how can leaving an abortion surviving fetus to die NOT?Hmmmmm?  The baby has added insult of being completely innocent.

- - Until that question is answered you, you pompous pissant, hypocritical hologram, duplicitous douche bag, disingenuous turd of a human being, have absolutely no grounds, none, whatsoever, on which to lecture me or anyone else on morality.  At.  All.  Period. Ever.
 
Glad I got that off my chest. 

Anyway, perhaps the lefts most insipid talking point is that torture helps recruit terrorists.  Huh?  So, if I understand their line of reasoning, kid glove treatment and access to our legal system, is more of a deterrent than harsh interrogation?  How does that work exactly?  Is it like the Al Quaeda recruiting coach posts this on their locker room bulletin board to get them all riled up before the big jihad?  How old are these people, 4? 

But what can we expect? This is the same crowd, while assuming the moral high ground no less, can simultaneously be against the death penalty for criminals but are perfectly OK with enacting laws that prevent medical assistance, a death sentence, for the aforementioned botched abortion survivor.   

Let's give this a little perspective and context too shall we?  Here are some archival photos of Saddam Hussein's Abu Grahib prison instruments of torture:

 
That saw doesn't appear none too sharp, as though surgical hygiene was of any concern.   I'd have posted some of resulting photos of this art form but it made me sick to look at them.

Here's an account from a reporter who saw some footage of the techniques employed with these tools.
 
One journalist present was New York Post's Washington bureau chief Deborah Orin, who wrote of "savage scenes of decapitation, fingers chopped off one by one, tongues hacked out with a razor blade – all while victims shriek in pain and the thugs chant Saddam's praises."

That, my friends, is torture.  So is this:



  

And no, this is not a re enactment of the Passion.  It's torture, real torture.  Eye gouging, bone-breaking, bloodletting torture.

And another thing, if torture enhances recruitment why has no one referred us to all the torture that Carter, Reagan, Bush 1, and Clinton must have been doing?  That's the problem with President Narcissus, he doesn't realize history started before he penned his biography. 

The other thing that proves beyond all doubt this all political is the idea that they refuse to release any classified documents hat show the interrogation methods worked.  Put rather succinctly by someone in a position to know but also has the added advantage of not being Dick Cheney; 

" In other words, without enhanced interrogations, there could be a hole in the ground in Los Angeles to match the one in New York.
Mark Thieesen  / Washington Post  April 19, 2009

This issue cannot die son enough because it so damaging on so many levels.  Unfortunately the only reason it will die is because its political usefulness will have run out. 

It cannot go further for 3 main reasons;

1) Obama cannot allow a witch hunt because an honest accounting of the authorization would have to include top congressional Democrats.

per Rep Hoekstra
“We were briefed, and we certainly understood what C.I.A. was doing,” Mr. Goss said in an interview. “Not only was there no objection, there was actually concern about whether the agency was doing enough.”

Ahem, Nancy Pelosi and other Dem leadership were at the same meeting. 

2) Prosecuting former legal advisors would represent a complete and utter about face on Eric Holders position on detainees.  In 2002 he said this:

"they are not, in fact, people entitled to the protection of the Geneva Convention. They are not prisoners of war."
 
Sounds pretty unequivocal to me.  And besides, Holder has another stinky entrée on his plate; his law firm is counsel of record for 17 of the detainees.  I'm no lawyer but sometimes a conflict of interest is so obvious even a heartlander might notice.  That may be hear nor there, but enhancing the possibility that this controversy could take root and blossom can't bode well for the Attorney General.  Best to just let this one fade away. 
 
3) Allowing the obsessed Bush-hating devotees their pound of flesh would become a distraction from all the larger agenda items.   

Obama has more than he can handle without a whipped up bunch of lefties hogging the center ring in this circus.  The war he calls a mistake is taking a turn for the worse on his promises of a date certain withdrawal. (like we all said it would)   The Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan are getting more aggressive in direct proportion to Obama's perceived weakness.  Protest against big government of historic proportion, both the government and the protest, has instilled a sense of reality in the country in contrast to his fantasy that we can borrow and spend our way to prosperity.  All this plus an economy that is not likely to improve anytime soon renders the debate inconvenient. 

Perhaps worst of all for him, these problems have been under his management more than three months so the blame Bush excuse is nearing its expiration date as well.