Cheney’s Tortured Paycheck
By SusanUnPC on May 23, 2009 at 12:30 PM in Bush administration, Bush/Cheney, Current Affairs, Dick Cheney, Media, Radio, Torture
Before looking at Cheney’s efforts to cash in on torture, check out a Chicago rightwing radio host who initially believed waterboarding was not torture:
If you want to read what all the bloggers are saying about the experiment by WLS radio host Erich “Mancow” Muller, go here. It is VITAL to note that this man was in a controlled setting and knew that he could stop the torture at any time. Now try to imagine that you’re being held under the control of others, having no rights, and being subject to their every whim — dependent on them not just for sustenance, but for one’s very next breath, and never knowing when or if the waterboarding will stop. Don’t you think you’d say ANYTHING to get it to stop? Of course you would.
Mancow is the latest in a string of media personalities taking the plunge, so to speak, in getting first hand experience with torture. Not a one has come out of the experience pooh poohing waterboarding as just a little water being splashed on one’s face.
So, what has Dick Cheney –who is constantly touting himself as the pro-torture expert — really been up to? Fighting the GOOD fight? Or, perhaps …
AHA! So is this why Dick Cheney has been on your television screens for weeks now?
Cheney Seeks Book Deal on Bush Years and More
WASHINGTON — With his sustained blitz of television appearances and speeches, former Vice President Dick Cheney has established himself as perhaps the leading Republican voice against President Obama.
Not a bad time, then, to be in the market for a multimillion-dollar book contract.
Mr. Cheney is actively shopping a memoir about his life in politics and service in four presidential administrations, a work that would add to what is already an unusually dense collection of post-Bush-presidency memoirs that will offer a collective rebuttal to the many harshly critical works released while the writers were in office and beyond.
What’s this worth? And, just for your entertainment, here’s what the other Bushies are angling to get:
the money isn’t bad, either.
A person familiar with discussions Mr. Cheney has had with publishers said he was seeking more than $2 million for his advance. That sum may prove hard to get in this economic climate, especially given his generally low approval ratings, which publishers view as a potential — but not certain — harbinger for sales.
While Mr. Bush got an advance estimated to be well into the millions for a look into 12 of his most important decisions, his payout is not believed to be as large as that of former President Bill Clinton for his memoirs, which drew a $15 million advance.
Mr. Rumsfeld was not paid an advance by his publisher, Sentinel, of Penguin Group USA, and has committed to donating his share of any proceeds to his nonprofit foundation. (Mr. Bush, Mr. Clinton, Mr. Cheney, Mr. Rumsfeld, and Mr. Obama, for that matter, were represented in their contract talks by the Washington lawyer Robert B. Barnett.)
Mr. Cheney’s friends say he does not need the money and has made clear in his talks that he is eager to give a full accounting of his life in politics that will debunk his many critics.
According to a person familiar with a meeting that Mr. Cheney had with a publisher, the former vice president is proposing a memoir that would function not only as the story of his role in four Republican administrations but also as a history of “the entire Republican ascendancy going back to Nixon.” This person did not want to be named because of the confidentiality of the talks.
Mr. Cheney has talked with houses including HarperCollins and Simon & Schuster, where Mary Matalin, his close friend and adviser, is editor in chief of Threshold, the conservative imprint that is also publishing Mr. Rove’s book. Marji Ross, president and publisher of the conservative publisher Regnery, said she and others at the house had talked informally to Mr. Cheney and Mr. Barnett. But Ms. Matalin’s long history with Mr. Cheney has made her imprint a logical home for his book.
John Hannah, a senior adviser to Mr. Cheney at the White House, said that when he spoke to Mr. Cheney a few weeks ago the former vice president was trying to figure out how to strike a balance between his life story and his hotly debated tenure serving with Mr. Bush. “The question was, Do you do the 40 years in Washington, given all his experiences in different jobs and perspectives?” Mr. Hannah said. “Or do you need to do something fairly quickly to answer and to discuss the last eight years?”
As the talks continue, Mr. Cheney is writing out his thoughts longhand in an office above his garage in Virginia and is in frequent contact with the other newly minted Bush administration authors, right on up to Mr. Bush.
A report by U.S. News & World Report about a visit by Mr. Cheney to Mr. Rumsfeld’s Washington office in March prompted speculation that they were trying to match up their stories, which a Rumsfeld spokesman, Keith Urbahn, denied. He said there was likely to be a greater divergence of views in the coming books than some might expect.
Mr. Rumsfeld, who is working almost full time on his book, feeding dictation to aides culling his personal papers, often differed with counterweights in other departments, like Ms. Rice. “There’s a great deal of truth to the adage of where you stand is where you sit,” Mr. Urbahn said.
Ms. Rice has a three-book deal with Crown, Mr. Bush’s publisher. Douglas Brinkley, the historian, said she indicated to him late last year that she deemed it appropriate to wait for the president to publish his book, scheduled for 2010, before she published hers on the White House.
So, if you’re not ordering torture, why not merchandise it?
(Release: November 13)
on sale for only $16.95.
has a spatula.)
8% Off at $11.95, with a rare five-star ranking by 294 customers: 
And check out these: 
("This crazy redhead is on to something. Her pink Rambler story alone is worth the price of the book," writes 
- “Richard Sale’s reportage on Washington, the CIA, the American armed forces, and foreign intrigue has created a perfect background for this account of the steady growth of President Clinton as a master of the game of nations.”--W. Patrick Lang, former head of Middle East Operations, DIA
"Anne C. Heller's stunning biography of Ayn Rand" uses a "plethora of newly unearthed research and fresh insight."
Well, this might explain his recent “speech”…starting off a book tour?
First of all let me be clear, I’ve NEVER been a supporter of torture and I’ve ALWAYS considered “waterboarding” torture, therefore it shouldn’t be done.
However, what I just saw didn’t look like other methods I’ve known to be waterboarding. Can someone, Larry, help here? That as far as I can tell was somene just pouring water over someone’s head, which of course someone CAN drown and which stands to reason FEELING like he was going to drown.
As far as I was aware, they were using “techniques” that made folks FEEL like they would drown because they would fill clothes with water, pushing it up to face, mouth, nose, etc.
Just pouring water over their nose and mouth is litterally drowning someone.
I watched a couple years ago, Kaj, from Current tv, go through the procedure.
http://current.com/items/76347282_getting-waterboarded.htm
watch their very good demonstration.
My understanding of effective waterboarding is that it is controlled drowning–controlled in the sense that it stops short of causing death. The whole idea is to take subjects up to the point where they are totally convinced that this line is actually being crossed. That point involves extreme panic at the edge of lost consciousness.
Which by any other name would be called torture.
Actually, I think Cheney has two reasons for placing himself in the spotlight: greed and fear. I’m sure that the prospect of a lucrative book deal is appealing, although he’s doubtless earned more deferred compensation from Halliburton than he could ever spend, but I also think he’s genuinely afraid of prosecution. He’s making a concerted effort to politicize the issues of torture and civil liberties violations so that any attempt to prosecute will be seen as partisan and tainted. He’s making a concerted effort to nip any investigation or prosecution (at least in the US) in the bud. Such prosecution would not only place him at direct risk for imprisonment, but might also expose details about many of the no-bid contracts awarded during the Bush Administration during the discover process. I’m sure that Cheney and his associates would prefer that such details never saw the light of day.
I concur. Cheney is one of those truly malevolent people (and an abject coward, as well) who find refuge in patriotism while wrapping themselves in a flag they’ve never served. He should be locked away, never to be heard from again.
I would agree with one addition.
BO, inspite of his rhetoric, “would prefer that such details never saw the light of day” either.
So while events may over take their agendas, the puss that oozes out of Cheny’s mouth and BS out of BO’s, they will continue to muddy the debate to avoid dealing with violations of the Constitution and laws of this nation.
Remember while Cheney was at Halibuton, they were violating the emargo on shipping parts to Iran.
You’re spot on, teakwood. Both That One and Dickless are weeping pustules
Cheney’s out to poison the jury pool
The 3 animals that were waterboarded were confessed murders.
I would have been happy to intermittently and slowly slice their body parts off.
My son is in LA and I’ve been to Ground Zero.
So cry me a river. Torture is too good for them. They should have been executed by now.
I really have never understand people that have a problem with torture and the death penalty but are happy to have a fetus shredded on it’s way out of the womb.
CAROL HAKA
Wow! Those are certainly some pro-life sentiments there!
I’m sorry – I must have misunderstood.
You are up for shredding fetus’ but pouring water over a murdering terrorist is torture.
Please explain, I want to understand your position.
It’s kind of like all of those that want to drive Hummer’s out in California who keep us dependent on foreign oil so that there are no oil wells 50 miles off shore.
I also assume you want Guantanemo Bay closed as long as the terrorists are shipped somewhere else other than your backyard.
Hypocrisy is not a virtue, and I am happy to say I no longer call myself a Democrat now that I see the inconsistant behavior associated with that title.
CAROL HAKA
That is the most stupid statement I’ve seen on this website in a long while. I am neither “pro-abortion”, which is a misnomer or pro-choice. I am also very much against torture. You are the one with disjointed logic, toodles.
I’m confused too – you’ve been to ground zero and your son is in LA (both presumably mentioned as reasons for your thinking on torture). Do you mean LOS ANGELES? Because I hope everyone I pass here in LA doesn’t have those gruesome thoughts as a consequence of living here.
I am surprised you didn’t use the term “baby” instead of “fetus.” In any case, I never said I liked the idea of abortion; I don’t. It doesn’t mean that I go along with all the pro-life people on abortion who will hang ‘em high when they think they have a murderer on their hands.
I’ve been around for a long long time and I’ve read through all the arguments pro and con, so I have my opinion about this issue, and I do not think it is the same issue as the one this post is about, so I won’t go into it. I also won’t call a fetus a baby unless I am sure it is. And I won’t call a man a terrorist unless I am sure he is. And I won’t torture him to make him into one.
Being a raving sadist doesn’t win anyone over to your side. Perhaps you need anger management.
Very nicely done, Diana.
Without Due Process?
Explain to me how this conforms to our Constitution?
Without Due Process?
Explain to me how this conforms to our Constitution?
Terrorists in foreign lands are not covered under our Constitution or the Geneva Convention.
You know diddly about our Constitution, it governs what we do not what others do and it doesn’t matter what land-it goes with us.
Read a little and gain some knowledge then come back and interact.
And you know even less what is covered by The Geneva Conventions–there is more than one, but I’m sure you know that.
You should go gain some knowledge and try and support your misunderstanding.
CAROL HAKA
This coming from a person who hates abortion but likes torture. I’d say you, Carol, are the one with a great deal of misunderstanding as well as a great deal of inconsistency. You really need to stop listening to those shrill voices in your head as they are up to no good.
Sorry, Carol, but they are, for better or worse, they are.
Those not in a uniform of a nationalized army, still fall under Article 4 (vs Art 3) of the GC.
And this is as it should be, otherwise people like journalists, missionaries and doctors could be rounded “LEGALLY” as “terrorists” and killed.
Now, of course, some already are rounded up and beheaded in quite the gruesome manner. But those doing the horrible deeds can be punished under international law. If we suddenly disregard Art 4, then international law no longer applies and it’s open season on ANY non-uniformed, non-military coalition person.
The journalist held and since released from Iran (of all places) was released, in part, no doubt, due to international laws like the GC.
With respect, Carol, I think you’re missing the point. I don’t want any administration to have the power to imprison without trial. I don’t want any administration to have the power to torture. I don’t trust Dick Cheney with that power, I damned sure don’t trust Barack Obama with that power, and I wouldn’t trust Hillary, Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, or Sarah Palin with it, either.
Once these mechanisms are in place, they can be used against anybody.
Are some of the people in Guantanamo (and elsewhere) thugs and killers? You bet they are. Some (perhaps most, in fact) aren’t. Confessions gained by torture are meaningless – if you don’t believe that then you have to believe that the “war crimes confessions” elicited by the torture of US servicemen during Korea and Vietnam were valid. Furthermore, you’ve implicitly legitimized that torture.
Where do you draw the line, Carol? If it’s okay to torture Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, then is it okay to torture Nichols or McVeigh? After all, they committed the second-bloodiest act of terror in US history. Is it okay to torture Eric Rudolph? If it’s okay to torture him, is it okay to torture those who may have provided him aid and comfort in an effort to find him? If it’s okay to torture them, then is it okay to torture other Right to Lifers because they may have, knowingly or unknowingly, provided financial assistance to them? How about anybody with a “Respect Life” bumpersticker – after all, they might possess knowledge that could stop a clinic bomber.
How much do you trust those in power?
This isn’t a NIMBY issue for me – I live in Colorado, and I’d be perfectly happy to see these guys sentenced to life in the Florence Supermax…after they’re convicted. They can cool their heels in the same facility that housed Gotti, Nichols, Rudolph, etc.
I’d much rather see that than see Barack Obama have the power to round up anyone he thinks is “dangerous”, detain them without trial, and torture them until they confess to something.
Carol, you make a good point. I don’t understand why there is such an uproar (for the sake of argument)if some terrorist (IE– those who are dedicated and plotting to kill Americans) are tortured yet these same ones who are complaining over Americas enemies being tortured are for the most part, absolutely silent about a helpless innocent fetus being aborted including the babies who are left to die after a botched abortions!
What has this country come to when many Americans show more concern over the rights of a damn terrorist (many who have been successful in killing Americans) than it does over the innocent and defenseless?
“when many Americans show more concern over the rights of a damn terrorist…”
I don’t see it as simply as what their rights to be treated are – I see it as what does my moral compass say about how *I* should treat *others*. That’s why any arguments that says people not in uniform can be treated any old way don’t work with me – I think the Constitution was meant to be a guide about how we are to treat others, not a guide as to who we can deny humane treatment.
“(many who have been successful in killing Americans)….”
Well, when their guilt isn’t “established” until AFTER they’ve been tortured, saying they should be tortured because they must be guilty is rather circular logic…
The ends justifying the means is all they have since they can’t justify committing a wrong to rectify a previous wrong so they use the ends justification. That that is also an illogical argument escapes them entirely.
I agree Carol… Imagine the “fear” and Psychological “stress” all those folks felt as they looked out the window of the plane as it flew towards the ground, WTC, and Pentagon… Or those seconds before they hit the ground after jumping from 100 stories up….
Sorry that I can;t be so self-righteous and sanctamonious as those who want to whine about persons being made to feel “unconfortable” during an “interrogation”…
Thats why we need to stop all of this before 9/11 is repeated.
Were it that we could do that. It is like being a passenger on the Titanic and telling everybody you see an iceberg… but nobody believes in icebergs anymore. Or so the captain says.
This is nothing compared to what my abusive ex-spouse did to me. Woman are beaten and tortured in your own back yards and how many people out there are willing to step in? Very few I found, especially if the abuser has money or affluence.
Please forgive me for not getting on this bandwagon but honestly I’ve lived through much worse and I never hurt anyone or anything in my life.
Sorry for your pain and suffering.
I hope you got out and can heal.
CAROL HAKA
I am sorry for your pain and suffering also.
However, I know many women and organizations with both men and women involved who try to help women in abusive relationships.
I lived through and emotionally abusive marriage and almost died by my own hands simply because I wanted out. I did get out, and I have no desire for anyone, male or female, for any reason to feel tortured.
No offense, but the terrorists are for the most part, rugged, hardened men who live under extreme conditions in environments in which most of us would consider torture. They aren’t soft, fat, out of shape people living on easy street (although Khalid Sheikh Mohammed looks to have fit that description).
Also, and this is unreal for me to be defending Cheney, but what Cheney is doing is in response to the attacks Obama is hitting him with, first with the selective release of classified CIA intelligence and secondly with the verbal barrage Obama constantly attacks the Bush administration with.
Obama was asking for this response from Cheney, and frankly, he isn’t handling it too well and now he probably regrets doing it.
It looks like Obama will never leave campaign mode and assume a leadership role, but instead feels the need to attack others and in some cases America itself in order to promote himself.
This time it’s bit him is the ass, and now I hope Cheney lives at least another 4 years so he can take Obama to the woodshed when he so rightly deserves it.
I have to agree with you. Cheney provides the foil to Obama that many of us would have liked to see during the election campaigns. Hillary furnished this contrast only to a degree due to her opponent being a fellow “Democrat.” McCain didn’t provide it at all due to character constraints around notions of honorability. Everyone else was afraid not to pull punches for fear of being labeled a racist. Among candidates, only Sarah Palin had the audacity to challenge Obama regarding his past associations, his overall motivations in running for office, and his general intentions around governing a country he obviously has major philosophical issues with; she of course got criticized by the more codependent members of her party for doing so.
I would expect the various players in the prior administration to pen books on their views and experiences – regardless of what else is taking place on the political scene – as has happened throughout our history. Any nexus there is peripheral.
Cheney articulates what many believe: Obama is dismantling our security. Regardless of how one feels about him personally, Cheney inspires more confidence than Obama in this realm. By his very nature and multiple loyalties – to say nothing of his speeches and ill-conceived initial actions – Obama raises doubts about his capacity and willingness to keep the country safe. And then he flip-flops.
Yes, and the media is still after her children for doing so. Cheney is easier to hate than Bush, because Bush was painted as ignorant by the media. How do you hate somebody ignorant for their decisions? But Cheney has been labeled by the media as evil. It is easy to hate evil, when the media is helping us to identify it. The media has no problem with jihad evil, just Cheney’s evil-lite evil. We will probably get hit again, and Obama will then blame it on Cheney for speaking out. Then again nothing is ever Obama’s fault. He just has all the privileges of power with none of the accompanying responsibilities. Must be nice to be Barack.
Hey Doc
Bloom is off the rose in regards to Obama
Cheney is rising because Obama is a reckless rookie that sides with the terrorists.
I’m looking forward to supporting
Liz Cheney for political office
She is also a big winner now.
Hey Seattle, yes this too shall pass. Obama is all smoke and mirrors and the smoke is lifting. Cheney is going to look like some sort of an oracle before we are done, I am afraid.
Obama is dismantling more than just our secruity. At the rate Obama is going Im not sure what will be left of our country in 4 years.
If Cheney is considered evil, then I would hate to think of what to call Obama; Satanic ???
AMEN TO THAT!
Obama is quickly move to the top of the list for WORST PRESIDENT IN THE HISTORY OF AMERICA and he has only held the job for a few months. I can only hope that the American people wake up to what they have done by electing this creep so that they won’t do it again in four years.
Geeze, I wonder how much both the Clintons made off of their books? I guess it’s only ok to write a book and promote it if
A: You’re a Democrat
B: You are against torture, but are for
partial-birth abortions.
C: You take an oath to blame everything
on the Bush/Cheney administration for
at least another 150 years
Watch a video on actual beheadings of hostages and then try and make a valid statement against waterboarding.
Well, since you put it that way, I’m all for torture but only if it is Cheney getting the works. If he were any sort of man, he’d do it just to prove himself right. Oh, I forgot, lily-livered, yellow, dickless Cheney is a coward who has spent his wretched life serving himself, letting others get bloody for him. Never mind.
It would be interesting to see what Cheney would admit to if he were waterboarded.
I believe you can get most anyone to say anything to make the pain stop. (There are the occasional William Wallaces). With that in mind I wouldn’t be surprised if, after torture, Cheney didn’t admit to voting for Obama and supporting the Democrats on everything.
There nothing relative about the method death.
“Watch a video on actual beheadings of hostages and then try and make a valid statement against waterboarding.”
I absolutely do not get this logic. If one thing is considered worse than the other, only the worse one gets the label? So, I guess all the DV women should just be quiet, because that’s less worse than beheading. And definitely the anti-abortion people should be quiet, because most of the fetuses are aborted before they have developed a central nervous system – it’s not torture if you can’t feel it.
Why in the world would only the most extreme of anything be allowed to fit the definition? Sorry, makes no sense to me.
Lessa, its true many women and children and even some men go through horrible pain at the hands of others in our country. I am so sorry to hear this has happened to you as well. I can releate, however I must say I don’t think there is a bandwagon, there are a lot of folks on the site who have been going at this particular issue for quite some time; with varying degrees of opinion of both sides of torture. I also have been through some serious physical beatings in a previous time, and this is part of why I am opposed to torture. Torture in its definition is difficult in the discussion, as witnessed frequently over the last month here. What I have read( or imagined) is an assumption on either side that there is an automatic political alignment because of this issue.(not saying you). I believe this is far from true.
I think many people are surprised at how others feel about torture and why. I know I am in some ways very surprised there is support to the degree there is, but have come to understand why each person believes the way they do. This particular divide in opinion seems to be on equal footing with last years racial fingerpointing, with much judgement made, and great damage done.
I won’t argue anymore on this issue, I have expressed often enough what I think about torture. I have taken my stand, and cannot see a way to change this.
In Iran they torture homosexuals by gluing their buttocks together and force feeding them laxatives. In Pakistan, a woman “guilty” of adultery was stoned to death. Acid is thrown at school girls faces disfiguring them for life. A woman that committed murder as a child was recently executed,hanged, while her male partner in crime was sentence to prison. In Iran, a pregnant woman was publicly flogged for “adultery.” People are still beheaded, women are burn alive for failing to produce a son, and nine year old girls married to 50 year old men.
Ask all those poor souls if they would prefer to be water board for their “crimes” in lieu of what was done to them. What do you think they would choose??
Since you think this way, would you then also agree then that foreign governments can waterboard our soldiers or citizens? Would you want a relative or acquaintance waterboarded? It seems to me that when we torture, we give other countries license to do the same as they can just shrug and point to the U.S. We don’t exist in a vacuum and what we do and say has an effect, sometimes to our detriment.
There’s those pesky unintended consequences again.
There is nothing that can prevent people that behead journalist live on television, and teach five year olds to hate us, and look forward to growing up so they can blow themselves up to kill us.
No, I would not want any harm done to our soldiers. But, war is ugly. And it is uglier in that part of the world where they do not believe in a gentlman’s war. They used two mentally challenged women to blow themselves up a public square. They buried alive widow women that lost their husbands in battle. They buried girls alive for flirting. I hate to say this, but there is NOTHING that can change the heart of evil fanatics. And believe their GOD is Supreme above all, and with unbridle passion blow themselves up in the name of their god.
They count on that we have morals and second thoughts against torture. As that would be our weakness and their strength. Hey, you can not torture us because you are Americans. But we as fanatics can do what ever we please, we have done so for centuries.
There is a reason why in battle through out history, soldiers of our enemies surrender to Americans as they know they would fair better as POWs under the Americans. Then to be tortured or killed by their own countrymen for turning yellow.
To the contrary–our strength is due to our moral compass. When you behave like the enemy, you become the enemy. Only cowards and the criminally insane torture. To torture is un-American.
Thank you BFB!
Larry has said that the best tactic for the CIA, in getting foreign nationals to work with them is the prospect of getting them and their families into the US.
If torturing people and denying them due process becomes the American way, the shining city on the hill concept is forever gone.
How can we believe we are BETTER than these societies if we emulate them?
You’re welcome.
Spot on. We can’t and that is where the rubber meets the road.
It’s always surprising for me to see that there are people still thinking in black and white/either or ways. I work for animal rights a lot. That is my passion. It does not mean that I do not know about the horrible things done agains women and homosexuals around the world. But humans individually are limited in their time and money. Each person has to make choices about what they really want to put their efforts and money toward.
I do not like torture used in my name and with the help of my tax dollars–never have, never will.
I will always support women’s rights around the world and rights of homosexuals to live with the same rights as heterosexuals.
But my major efforts go toward animal rights because in my life, it’s always been my animals who hhave been my main emotional support.
I abhor the situations you describe, but I can also aabhor the torture of men, who may be hardened and not nice at all.
I think if you ask those women and homosexuals, they would ask that people be kind to other people.
“Ask all those poor souls if they would prefer to be water board for their “crimes” in lieu of what was done to them. What do you think they would choose??”
What relevance does that possibly have to whether waterboarding is torture? Again, this is that “only the worst gets to count” argument.
The same logic would have the girls with the acid scarred faces chooses their own fate rather than being stoned to death – so then the acid treatment wasn’t torture, because they felt something else would be worse. This logic makes no sense. More than one thing can be torture, and there are different degrees of it.
O.K. but our resolve will again strengthen when we get hit again. I have always believed water boarding to be torture. There is no doubt of that. But, this is still a war, and an unconventional one at that. Maybe Obama has a better method to fight an unconventional war, against religious fanatics who would just as soon be dead as remain alive. Somehow though, I think he is just playing up for popularity, and that he really doesn’t have a clearly defined method or plan. I am unconvinced that showing these fanatics our morally superior Western justice system is going to win them over. It hasn’t done much for our domestic prisoner population. I am not saying the Bush & Co. method was all that thought out either, it wasn’t. But in all fairness, 9-11 did suddenly change the world as we know it. It will never be the same again. Obama can’t give to us something he doesn’t have to give. War is still ugly, no matter how elegant or enlightened he may feign to be.
Did I hear correctly that BO is on board w/EIT in the case of a national emergency? Does this include waterboarding?
today maybe yes..tomorrow maybe no…
Oh no…. they waterboarded someone who bragged about personally decapitating Daniel Pearl! Oh the horror! They waterboarded someone who broke down and gave details that allowed the breakup of further terror plots! Oh the horror! I feel so bad for these poor innocent terrorists. Maybe we should go back to the Clinton Era and use Rendition. Turning terrorists over to countries like Egypt to be beaten to within an inch of their lives to obtain info. Now that was humane. Not that I had a problem with Rendition either, since in the war against terror you do what you have to in order to avoid more attacks. And I’m sorry to inform you that there is no magical truth serum you can inject these suspects with that is going to make them talk. Besides, the ACLU and bleeding heart liberals would probably take issue with that as well. We could shower them with good will and decency, but it’s likely these same liberals and the ACLU would claim it was a form of brain washing. Hand wringing and navel gazing is a sign of weakness to an enemy that hides behind innocent women and children. They take advantage of that weakness. India gave considerable aid to Pakistan after their last earthquake. What India got for this gesture of compassion was further jihadist attacks. In a war that does not have the enemy clearly charging over the hills waving their flag, where a seemingly quiet, law abiding and non descript neighbor could be part of a cell planning the next attack, intelligence, no matter how it is gathered, is in fact the end justifying the means. When defending your home you don’t need the enemy to love you. You need them to fear you! If they loved you they wouldn’t have attacked you in the first place! This is no time for America to second guess itself. What I am seeing lately from the MSM and the weaklings in the White House and Congress is rather alarming, bringing to mind the quote; “I have seen the enemy and the enemy is us.”
That or quit taking prisoners altogether. Some of the crew at Guantanamo are probably going to wind up millionaires at taxpayer expense once they get in to our courts, get off on evidence technicalities or statute of limitations and then sue us for holding them. Think of how many terrorist schemes they could fund with an entire gaggle of millionaire terrorists living within our borders legally. It would be like bin Laden on steroids. Maybe then, some folks could finally be proud for the first time in their lives.
Chris G… Docelder… 2 Brilliant posts!! Kudos to you both!
Sure, like I believe you or Cheney. Let’s see a credible link with some objective evidence. Oh, you don’t have any. Too bad but I I think your hyperbole and histrionics are a bit much, Goob.
We never stopped using rendition.
The more THEY can focus attention on what constitutes torture, who allegedly performed acts of torture, whether it is legal or necessary in general or only in a specific extreme instance, whether it yields valuable information, etc., etc., the more THEY can deflect attention from the vast literature that has appeared in the last five or six years that utterly refutes the standard explanation of 9/11 and points to a criminal conspiracy at the highest levels.
Interesting posit
For all those Christians out there, remember the saying of Jesus on the Cross: “Father, forgive them for they know not what they do.”
I think He would say this equally for the people who torture as for the people who terrorize.
So what? They all write books. Is this per se proof that Cheney doesn’t have anything valid to say when it comes to challenging current POTUS?
The NQ administrators have made it clear that they don’t like Cheney. But many others here appreciate that he’s putting POTUS on defense, because no one else seems up to the task.
I happen to believe that Cheney is genuinely making his case for the actions of the Bush administration. And that’s a fair role for him to undertake, especially since current POTUS blames Bush-Cheney every 5 seconds for all the problems he inherited.
I don’t promote torture, but it’s necessary to keep this in context: both parties in Congress were briefed on waterboarding post 9/11, and the overwhelming sentiment at the time was that the US had to do whatever was necessary to protect the nation from further acts of terrorism. Which Dems went on record objecting to waterboarding?
The Cheneys (Dick & Liz) make a fair point when they ask that ALL the memos, not just those selected by BHO, be released so that the entire situation can be judged with all information available.
Let’s just keep in mind that the memos that are in evidence (release or not) were those ALLOWED BY CHENEY to exist.
Any memo counter to Cheney/Addington/Yoo/Beaver’s will to torture was never considered and entered into the debate.
So I’d posit a guess that if all “the” memos were released, they’d be pro-torture. Not because there weren’t dissenting or opposing viewpoints that refute the War Council.
The W administration wouldn’t allow for dissenting voices to be part of their history.
—
And as far as Cheney taking oZero to task? I will take (and have taken) oZero to task for a great many things, but I refuse to change my morals and become pro-torture overnight just because Cheney is speaking against him.
The enemy of my enemy is NOT my friend.
Oh, the tortured logic of Torture Logic!!
Two wrongs = two wrongs
Right and wrong are both relevant positions. Both only exist in our minds, and neither exist in reality. In reality, we are at war, in a war we are in no way capable of dealing with at this time. We are wholly incapable of dealing with an enemy driven by religious fanaticism, who would just as soon die as to live. Look how we handled Waco. None of those folks were terrorists, just fanatics. We couldn’t deal effectively with the milquetoast Davidians, and we aren’t prepared to deal with Jihadists. We are too consumed with ideas or right and wrong.
We’re also too consumed with material goods. Perhaps we should forget about them as well. These sorts of arguments don’t wash for me. If we are to think of ourselves as civilized, then we must act in a civilized manner. To do anything less makes us animals, just like those we are at war with. The U.S. can only use the do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do argument once. After that it is open season on soldiers, including our own. Did anyone ever actually stop and think about that? One cannot be supportive of the soldiers and pro-torture at the same time without putting them at great risk.
Some thoughts to ponder on Memorial Day.
Opinions are formed in reality. There is an actual world. Neurobiology and neuropsychology are all pointing to the fact that, unlike what some people believe, there is truth. And since there is truth, there is right and there is wrong when dealing with reality. It’s in our brains; what is in brains and what is “mind” are important questions that haven’t been answered and aren’t yet close to being answered. But the advancing science of the brain points to right and wrong as being not just in our minds–it comes from our body’s life in a real world and the fact that all our separate bodies live in the same real world.
Hi Susan! Back when the pres inauguration was taking place, I heard the Cheney’s were moving to McClain, VA and I asked “Why would he want to live a stones throw from DC when he and his neocons were no longer relevant. If there was one single person in the late administration of GWB who NEEDED to be gone for all our sakes, it was Dick Cheney.
Someone has posited the explanation he wants to redeem himself and Bush with historians. And you say possibly because he is writing a book. There is another explanation and it makes me sick: He still has considerable power and is still advancing his agenda.
FOX news is giving him the forum to revise history and to make his case for torture, Gitmo, renditions and all the other wonderful things he and Bush accomplished.
This man is a lying sack of beans! You know it, I know it, the intelligent posters at nq know it and, most of all, Washington knows it. As long as he is anywhere near our government, the stench and rot will continue to hang over Washington like a poison.
Now, coming as no surprise to many here, Obama is continuing the same policies and despite his pretty words, is centralizing the power in the White House. When will we ever learn political parties are not part of the promise of the Constitution. How would Jefferson, Adams, Franklin et al react if they could visit the country they helped give birth to and see how their experiment has evolved into nothing more than a power struggle every four years in which any method is justified to retain it or advance an ideology? I think they would say, “Treason”.
Spot on, Elise.
I think you’re absolutely right, Elise. “Treason” is the word and it’s the word we should be using.
Since when we quote the New York Times as if it were a realiable news source, anyway?
Don’t like Cheney, but don’t like the NYT even more. I call them traitors to this Country.
Интересно даже для бухгалтера
))))
It’s Greek to me.
ROFL
It says “It’s interesting even for an accountant”.
There was another Russian who posted recently, and they responded to a post that was literally a year old, saying, in Russian, “Well, everyone has been talking about this already”, as if NQ had posted old news. Somehow they must not have understood that it was a year old post – but then, how did they find it? It was weird.
May have caught it in a search engine; or the archive. It is strange.
Thanks, Lorac, I got everything but the “бухгалтера”. It’s been 30 years since I took Russian, I never learned the word for “accountant”, and I don’t have a Russian dictionary
.
I’m amazed I could make as much sense of it as I did.
I was preparing to write my own opinion. but Chris g. says it better than I can. I wholeheartedly agree!
Comment by Chris G. | 2009-05-23 14:26:23
Oh no…. they waterboarded someone who bragged about personally decapitating Daniel Pearl! Oh the horror! They waterboarded someone who broke down and gave details that allowed the breakup of further terror plots! Oh the horror! I feel so bad for these poor innocent terrorists. Maybe we should go back to the Clinton Era and use Rendition. Turning terrorists over to countries like Egypt to be beaten to within an inch of their lives to obtain info. Now that was humane. Not that I had a problem with Rendition either, since in the war against terror you do what you have to in order to avoid more attacks. And I’m sorry to inform you that there is no magical truth serum you can inject these suspects with that is going to make them talk. Besides, the ACLU and bleeding heart liberals would probably take issue with that as well. We could shower them with good will and decency, but it’s likely these same liberals and the ACLU would claim it was a form of brain washing. Hand wringing and navel gazing is a sign of weakness to an enemy that hides behind innocent women and children. They take advantage of that weakness. India gave considerable aid to Pakistan after their last earthquake. What India got for this gesture of compassion was further jihadist attacks. In a war that does not have the enemy clearly charging over the hills waving their flag, where a seemingly quiet, law abiding and non descript neighbor could be part of a cell planning the next attack, intelligence, no matter how it is gathered, is in fact the end justifying the means. When defending your home you don’t need the enemy to love you. You need them to fear you! If they loved you they wouldn’t have attacked you in the first place! This is no time for America to second guess itself. What I am seeing lately from the MSM and the weaklings in the White House and Congress is rather alarming, bringing to mind the quote; “I have seen the enemy and the enemy is us.”
For me, this all revolves around what your a prioris are and what your conception of honor is.
Dick Cheney is many things (most of which I detest) but he is, at least, consistent. His a prioris are, pretty clearly: “might makes right” and “the ends justifies the means”. The fact that his actions have destroyed the reputation of the US and tarnished our honor perhaps beyond repair, matter not a whit to Mr. Cheney, he achieved his objective and he doesn’t really give a damn about the consequences to the country.
I believe he is making these speeches and writing this book as part of a preemptive strike (he’s fond of those) to crush any attempt to hold him accountable for his actions.
That’s the crucial part to remember about all these guys: they want to do the crime but they don’t want to do the time. Cheney has no honor, that’s what makes him detestable and, in the end, that’s what will condemn him before history. If he had any honor, he could/would say something like: “I ordered and encouraged these acts in the firm belief that they were absolutely necessary for the survival of the Republic. I knew at the time that these acts were far outside the normally accepted boundaries of behavior, even in a war situation. I knew that they might be considered contrary to the letter and spirit of both US and international law. Nevertheless, I ordered them, believing there were no alternatives to getting the vital information they provided. I, personally, accept full responsibility for ordering these acts and if there are any legal or moral repercussions, I alone will bear that burden.”
But then, he would have to be a different man than the Dick Cheney we know and loathe.
One more point: I’m sure how baby-killing abortionists got into this debate but:
1. It’s a personal choice for the woman involved, to be cliched: if you don’t like abortions, don’t have one.
2. I’ll believe the “pro-life” crowd is serious when they start offering to adopt and bring up the children they don’t want aborted, not before. I hear that some of the them do just that – kudos to them, as for the rest of the “pro-life” folks: if you’re not willing to adopt the little tykes, I’m not interested in anything you have to say.
And, last, apparently the death penalty debate made an appearance as well. Personally, I’m not against killing the occasional human – we do it all the time both wholesale (war) and retail (murder) and there are some people who truly do deserve death (”I’ve got a little list, they never would be missed” – thank you, G&S)… but, seriously, we’ve learned not to kill people out of pique, or vengeance or for profit; for various reasons we can all name but the best reason to be against the death penalty is, I think, because we don’t want to cede that power to the state. Bad enough that we already let the state ask (volunteer army) and even demand (the draft) that we put our lives on the line to defend our country but the to accede to the death penalty means that we give the state final control over our life itself. To me this is unacceptable and represents a very dangerous transfer of power from the individual to the state.
None of that means much in a world where our “allies” traded with Saddam under the table. We are mourning over the death of something that died decades ago. We haven’t had the moral high ground since the end of WWII. But with revision of the atom bomb… maybe not even that. When we can’t even let Truman be a hero for making hard decisions… then why should Cheney care about world opinion? We don’t elect Presidents and Vice Presidents for popularity’s sake… at least we didn’t used to.
Can’t say I agree, Docelder. I think the difference between Truman and Cheney is night and day. Truman made hard decisions for the good of the country based on the hard realities of a very real war. By dropping atomic bombs he arguably saved lives and almost certainly prevented Stalin from overrunning Western Europe. Cheney made easy decisions for the good of himself and his friends at the expense of the country and then created an unnecessary war to try and justify his actions.
And, btw, GWB was ‘elected’ because he was perceived as being a more popular guy to get along with than that dweeb Al Gore.
You’re spot on about Truman. In addition, the Japanese had two opportunities to surrender. That they didn’t cannot be laid at the feet of Truman. Beside, the fire-bombing of Tokyo killed far more people.
How many landmark buildings were bombed and leveled in the “real” war as opposed to the “fake” one? I would say this war is every bit as real. Just because a recognized government hasn’t declared war on us does not mean that a sect of a radical religion hasn’t done so. No, we are at war and have been since 9-12, the dissonance comes from not seeing that.
If he (W) really was elected, but who knows with the way voting is managed nowadays.
Even if you think Cheney is entirely wrong about the issues of interrogation and detention, is it nevertheless possible that he believes he is right and believes promoting his views will better national security? Is it possible that he has non-venal motives?
It is shallow and frankly not too bright to ascribe a financial motive a 68-year old millionaire many times over (remember his tenure with the reviled Halliburten), who is presently driving to StarBucks and spending time with his grandkids when he’s not speaking out. He doesn’t need the vituperation and hatred showered upon him by the Left in this country, and you can be sure that his recent speeches and appearances have only increased the death threats the Secret Service must guard against.
So, again, assuming he is dead wrong on these issues, is it possible that he is not evil?
If he isn’t evil, then he is an abject moron and liar.
He s not evil. He just represents our past as a nation, a nation that was. That nation stood for something. That nation believed in America enough to make the hard decisions to protect her. Nobody currently in the White House has enough conviction to do the right thing in the face of the criticism Cheney is taking. Why is he doing this… because it is all he knows what to do. He believes he is right and that the nation is in imminent danger. He is not alone. You can hate him for that, yell at me for saying it, but deep down a lot of us know where he is coming from. Right or wrong is a value judgment. Safe or unsafe is less abstract. Right now we are feeling pretty safe, that could change at anytime.
Cheney is Chicken Little huffing and puffing about terrorists who could have been stopped had he and Shrub done one thing right (e.g., seal the borders, actually go after bin Laden, refrain from invading Iraq, and concentrating on Afghanistan). They didn’t and I don’t want to hear any more of his lame-ass histrionics. The two of them screwed the pooch but instead of an apology all we get are Dickie’s unknown facts, false generalizations, and lies. I don’t like That One but I despise Cheney the Coward.
Safety is a truly nebulous term. My version of safety will not be the same as yours. Cheney once again is using his patented illogic by using the fallacy of equivocation. That yellow-belly should return to the crawl-space under that rock where he was hiding the last 8 years.
Imagine someone who does not already share your frothing hatred of Cheney reading your post. Is there as much as a 1% chance that you have convinced that person of anything? The answer – as you know – is no.
So why did you write it?
Because, for some people, it feels kinda good to hate.
And it appears for some people, passive aggressive baiting is the norm.
Well, little turd, you are the half-wit who asked the question above and I obliged you with an answer. I frankly don’t care what you, an obvious bushbot, think about me. In fact, I think I may just get myself banned and cordially invite you to go fuck yourself. How does that work for you?
Nice one Berfle
Thanks, AC. Between the left-wing loonies and the right-wing nutbags, I’m surprised any responsible adult can get a post in edgewise on this blog. Frankly I’m fed up with the Tweedle-Dum and Tweedle-Dumber extremists.
Well, if you’re going to be so logical about it what can one do but agree.
bravo, berfle!
Everybody agrees Afghanistan was necessary. What isn’t clear yet is that Afghanistan is another potential Vietnam for us. If it was necessary to shock and awe Afghanistan… nobody has disputed that one… Then does that mean it is necessary to finish Afghanistan and try to rebuild it? Why? Why not let Afghanistan be the “shear pin” for terrorism? Since it is the place on this Earth most inhospitable and most like the surface of the moon… let it be the melting pot for Jihadsts. So what? Just confine them there and let that be the trash dump of the Jihad world. We didn’t invent Jihad, but since it exists, let it exist in Afghanistan. Let Afghanistan be Jihad Mecca. It is better there than Pakistan. It is better there than most anywhere. I think Bush and Cheney knew this. I think they are a lot smarter than most give them credit for. But Obama wants us to send more troops to Afghanistan, which will destabilize Pakistan by forcing terrorists to leave… We aren’t going into Pakistan without the draft. Choose your poison.
If this “war on terror” is so important, then we need a draft. It is time to separate the real patriots from the armchair warriors.
In fact, I’d like to see Cheney lead the charge a la Teddy Roosevelt, who was a real man.
Oops, I forgot that Cheney has other priorities and isn’t a man but a sneering, surly coward.
We can also point to serial killers who “loved” their own families. We can point to wealthy men in history and in legend who could never have enough wealth. He may not be evil along the lines of a serial killer, simply because he would never dirty his fingers doing the work and wants others to do it. But he has contributed greatly to spreading evil behavior using our tax dollars.
Hear, hear, bravo!
That is one I hadn’t though of before. With the sorts of extremist losers we’re putting in office (who are then appointing idiot judges from both extremes), giving that sort of power to the state seems a bit rash.
A question; How many names are users allowed to use on NQ? Seeing familiar patterns from past problem children.
Like I said in another thread I think we need to leave this mess in the past and go on…
Otherwise we will have a bigger mess than we ever anticipated…
There were probably just as many Dems involved in the knowledge of this as there were Reps….
This country is being and is going to be torn apart with this mess and then what… While we split the nation apart sharing our wartime secrets with the world look at our vulnerability to ?????
Obama needs to start thinking about the welfare of America, instead of picking apart previous events and being a world idol.
Yes it would be nice if the Obama administration would work on America.
I think I understand your point, but what are we saying if we don’t investigate and prosecute? It seems to me we’d be saying that it doesn’t really matter if people broke the law – and that would encourage others in power to try to get away with it themselves in the future. So, I don’t think it’s really about the past.
And as far as I’m concerned, anyone who is guilty should be prosecuted – I don’t care if there are dems caught up (I’m sure there are!). If it’s illegal, it’s illegal for dems as well as republicans.
I see people writing that we should torture or else we’ll be seen as weak and others will attack us. Why doesn’t that same logic apply to prosecuting lawbreakers in Congress? It could be said that if we don’t prosecute them, we are weak (have no real principles as a nation), and future Congress people will do the same thing.
It also doesn’t have to tear the country apart. If a prosecution is held in a fair and just manner, according to the Constitution, we might actually be able to form some common ground of belief about this subject after listening to all the evidence. It can be done at the same time as we go ahead with governing the country. It’s not an either / or situation at all.
I am not pro torture, but Let’s not forget that those Americans on the planes that were hijacked on 9/11 were subjected to the ultimate torture of being used as weapons to kill thousands of other Innocents.U.S.Pilots having their throats slashed while stewardesses watched in horror and screaming men, women and children had to wait for certain death at the hands of Mastermind Khaled Sheikh Muhammad. and he got waterboarded?? Waaaah!!!!!!!!!!!! We are being mean!!! stop it!!!! He should have been shot after he gave up any info he had period.
Alas, Eisenhower, Marshall, McArthur, and Bradley are spinning in their graves. It must be difficult for you, given that your very own (and first one) Messiah, Dubya, did not get bin Laden so your penchant for bloodlust could be sated.
Wow. The right wing nutbags haven’t change in 8 years. They have the original-recipe Kool-Aid as apposed to the new and unimproved variety chugged by the obamabots.
Right-wing nutbag/left-wing nutbag–a distinction lacking any substantive difference.
Yeah, why not, let’s go back to lynching based on emotional gut reactions of who must be guilty, and just give up the rule of law. Why not – it works for Iran.
Just in case people are still commenting on this post: Here’s a good opinion piece in today’s (Sunday’s) Denver Post:
http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_12424310
An excellent read, Diana. Thanks for the link!
I agree Carol… Imagine the “fear” and Psychological “stress” all those folks felt as they looked out the window of the plane as it flew towards the ground, WTC, and Pentagon… Or those seconds before they hit the ground after jumping from 100 stories up….
Sorry that I can;t be so self-righteous and sanctamonious as those who want to whine about persons being made to feel “unconfortable” during an “interrogation”…
Now that was torture.
A nuke is planted in a major US city.
YOUR children live there.
Waterboarding a terrorist would reveal the location and allow intervention to prevent the disaster.
Your “moral compass” won’t allow it?
I call bullshit. If anyone truthfully would let their kids die instead of a terrorist having water poured over them with no physical harm, they are sicker in the head than the terrorist.