| Page 4 of 5 < > |
Playing Constitutional Chicken
|
Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
|
"Let me be clear on one crucial point: it is the terrorists whom we won over with humane methods in the 1990s who continue to provide the most reliable intelligence we have in the fight against al-Qaeda. And it is the testimony of terrorists we tortured after 9/11 who have provided the most unreliable information, such as stories about a close connection between al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein."
Indeed, Rand Beers writes about Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi and the fruits of torture: "Al-Libi, an al-Qaeda operative, was interrogated by both the United States and Egypt, and -- as was publicly reported -- tortured by Egyptian authorities. During these sessions, he claimed that Iraq had trained members of al-Qaeda to use chemical and biological weapons.
"Al-Libi's testimony was used by the Bush administration to substantiate its allegations that Iraq was prepared to provide al-Qaeda with weapons of mass destruction. Coupled with the claim that Iraq was on the verge of acquiring nuclear weapons, the administration stated that when Iraq possessed nuclear capabilities, al-Qaeda would as well. Of all of the pieces of intelligence assembled in the lead-up to war, this one was the most chilling: the prospect of weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons, under Osama bin Laden's control. And so we went to war to prevent this nightmare from occurring."
Al-Libi later recanted his confession. "He said that he had invented the information because he was afraid of being further abused by his interrogators."
Wesley K. Clark writes: "The honor of the American man-at-arms is one of our most potent weapons. It is enshrined in the Geneva Conventions. It encourages our enemies to surrender to us on the battlefield. It protects any of our own soldiers who may have been captured. It encourages noncombatants and civilians to trust us and cooperate willingly. And it does not countenance the abuse of captives in our care. . . .
"Today, in the struggle to finish off the extremists plotting against us, it won't be torture and fear that win the day for America. Far from it. Nations that torture end up despised and defeated. No, to win we'll have to live up to the values we profess, the belief in human rights, equal justice, fair trials, and the rule of law. These ideals are potent weapons. They will give us allies, friends, information, and security--but only if we live them."
Backbone Sighting
Siobhan Gorman writes in the Wall Street Journal (subscription required): "Defying White House demands to pass a surveillance measure to expand domestic spy powers and provide legal immunity for companies that assisted the government with warrantless eavesdropping, House Democrats are drafting a new proposal that refuses to grant immunity. It would also create a commission to evaluate the warrantless spy effort dubbed the Terrorist Surveillance Program.
"By resisting White House pressure to accept the immunity provision, the proposal virtually ensures that the heated debate over how to revise domestic surveillance laws will continue past this week, as lawmakers prepare to depart Friday for a two-week recess. A temporary measure to expand spy powers expired Feb. 16."
This Just In
Warren P. Strobel writes for McClatchy Newspapers: "An exhaustive review of more than 600,000 Iraqi documents that were captured after the 2003 U.S. invasion has found no evidence that Saddam Hussein's regime had any operational links with Osama bin Laden's al Qaida terrorist network.
"The Pentagon-sponsored study, scheduled for release later this week, did confirm that Saddam's regime provided some support to other terrorist groups, particularly in the Middle East, U.S. officials told McClatchy. However, his security services were directed primarily against Iraqi exiles, Shiite Muslims, Kurds and others he considered enemies of his regime. . . .
"President Bush and his aides used Saddam's alleged relationship with al Qaida, along with Iraq's supposed weapons of mass destruction, as arguments for invading Iraq after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
"Then-Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld claimed in September 2002 that the United States had 'bulletproof' evidence of cooperation between the radical Islamist terror group and Saddam's secular dictatorship.



