If Cheney believes he can PROVE "torture saved us"-why does he OPPOSE a full investigation?

[kpete]

Torture and truthiness
If Dick Cheney believes he can prove that torture saved us from terrorist attacks, why does he oppose a full investigation?

By Joe Conason

Reuters/Larry Downing


April 27, 2009 | Defenses for the Bush administration’s advocates and perpetrators of “enhanced interrogation” –- that euphemism for torture from the Nazi era –- are narrowing as the public learns more about their appalling record. The repeated claims that waterboarding, for example, was not illegal or should not be categorized as torture sound increasingly feeble to anyone who understands that we have prosecuted such acts as war crimes for more than a century, whether committed by our enemies or our own personnel.

So the ultimate justification is not that torture isn’t torture or that torture is lawful and constitutional, but simply that torture works –- as Dick Cheney insists -- and that specific acts of torture curtailed terrorist plots and saved lives. The former vice president says that previously classified information will vindicate the cruelties and abuses endorsed by him, former president George W. Bush, former CIA directors George Tenet and Michael Hayden, and a host of lesser figures from the old regime.

It is a claim long overdue for scrupulous examination, rather than inflated proclamation on talk radio and cable television. The surest sign that Cheney and his supporters don’t believe their own boasts is their horrified resistance to a bipartisan truth commission -- which could undertake the essential task of gathering documents, hearing testimony and sorting out facts from propaganda. Despite the constant repetition of warnings that without torture we would be left vulnerable to terrorism, the record so far offers scant proof that the Bush administration’s crude brutality somehow rescued the nation from disaster.

more:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2009/04/27/torture/

[Duer 157099]

1. Because he's a dick.

It's so simple, most people overlook it.

[Webster Green]

2. If Cheney was hanged as a war-criminal, he would never torture again.

I think he should get a trial though, which is more than his victims get.

[MrPerson]

7. We would need a sturdy rope. Cheney is very obese.

[NoSheep]

9. I wonder if that affects his insurance coverage? (smirk)

[eppur_se_muova]

15. And if that works, it's OK. nt

[Fridays Child]

3. I wonder if Cheney is talking about this and criticizing Obama so that...

...if he is ever investigated and prosecuted, he will have laid the groundwork for making the case, in the court of public opinion, that a personal vendetta is being waged against him. Your average, chip-on-the-shoulder right wing nut would latch onto that idea faster than you can say "Bob's your uncle," and Cheney does know how to manipulate his minions.

[NoSheep]

10. That sounds about right to me.

[Canuckistanian]

4. You would think he'd want to celebrate his achievements

I mean by his standards, the whole world should be cheering for the results he got.

Why doesn't he want to share this glorious triumph with the world?

[proud patriot]

5. Because Cheney is full of Shit

I call his bluff.

[Fool Count]

6. It doesn't matter if it "saved us" or not,

it is still illegal either way. This whole debate on effectiveness of torture is completely
beside the point. It is illegal not because it does not work, but for other, more fundamental,
reasons. It would for sure be hundred times more effective for rapid extraction of information
instead of torturing the suspected terrorists to torture their little children. Are we going
to argue next that we should do that too, in order to "save us"? In any case, we live in a
democracy, and all the torture advocates are more than welcome to argue their point, form
their own torture party, elect pro-torture congressmen, legalize it, and then torture the
beejeezus out of whoever that is that the new law intends to victimize. Until then torture will
remain illegal, and the criminals committing it must be in jail.

[Maraya1969]

13. Welcome to DU Fool Count!

:yourock:

[malaise]

17. Well said

Welcome to DU :fistbump:

[bighughdiehl]

8. Gee Dick

I mean, if you "have nothing to hide" as your brainwashed followers like to say WRT warrantless wiretaps and such...then why shouldn't we investigate?

[seafan]

11. The 2 documents Cheney wants are probably from his *shadow* interrogators.

Y'all know.... the private contractors answering to Cheney, who tortured to get the *evidence* Cheney wanted to *justify* invading Iraq. Hell, we can be pretty sure that those 2 documents were cooked up to say how *wonderfully productive* Cheney's torture contractors were.


We've seen this movie before.

Cheney lumbers over to the CIA and beats on the analysts to give him what he wants. That pesky Joe Wilson flaps his gums about the bogus yellowcake story about Saddam. The CIA issues a report early on, that states torture is notoriously unreliable for accurate information.

So Cheney forms his own shadow interrogators to bypass the CIA. Porter Goss, the Bush stooge inserted as head of CIA from 2004-2006, oversees the destruction of the torture tapes. Why? Because the identity of the contractors will be exposed.



Damn these people to hell.

[Skittles]

12. because he is a lying piece of shit

[bleever]

14. We, some of us, dreamed of a day, when our shouting into the wind

was no longer necessary.

And now, the wind carries the chorus of history's full fervor, and we have some measure of rest.

But there remains the restless feeling that if justice is not done, it remains a fungible asset that can yet be bought out.

[librechik]

16. If it works, let's use it on everybody!

Let's start with Gonzo, he seemed to have an awful lot of trouble remembering important facts. I wonder how he would do after a good couple of waterboarding sessions? Maybe he would remember how it was effective and what info we got from waterboarding those missing detainees....

[beltanefauve]

18. It's all part

of that Authoritarian mindset. Government is our Daddy, according to these people, and if the government or its so-called leaders lie, steal, commit "enhanced interrogation tactics", wage war based upon false pretenses, etc., etc., then its for our own good. To even have the audacity to question that is a sign of "disrespect" to these people. To put it simply, questioning authority in any way, shape or form just doesn't compute, especially when you consider "American exceptionalism", that its okay when we do it. (If any other nation were to do this, then it would be an outrage, unless of course there were something to gain in looking the other way)