Is it ok to torture terrorists to prevent more attacks?

NOTE: This post incorporates excerpts taken from the following article:

About that Senate Report: The CIA and Alinsky’s Rule No. 4

From PJ Media, Dec. 9th, 2014, by Michael Walsh, Read the full article HERE

Obama teaching AlinskyJust in time for Grubergate, Senator Dianne Feinstein of California has decided to horn in on the show with the release of the Senate’s report on the “enhanced interrogation techniques” of the Bush administration.  Those would be the same techniques that eventually led to the discovery and killing of Osama bin Laden, but never mind. Today of all days, the Ugly Truth must be told, in all its media-ready glory.

Still, stop and ask yourself why. Why now?  Who cares?

The vast majority of Americans won’t lose any sleep over the fates of the prisoners in Guantanamo or those stashed away in rendition prisons in various dark and savage corners of the world. They’re getting what’s coming to them. They asked for it.

But then think about Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals and its famous Rule No. 4: “Make the enemy live up to his own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.”

To the Obama administration and most of the surviving Democrats in Congress, the enemy, of course, is conservatives and Republicans, not radical Islam. (Hillary Clinton recently said in a speech that, based on her crackerjack stint as secretary of state, the U.S. needs to respect and empathize with our enemies, by whom she meant our Islamic friends we just haven’t met yet.)

What the Democrats are doing is classic Alinskyism, posturing as the defenders of the American Way and hoping like hell that nobody remembers that rendition prisons began under the Clinton administration. Beginning in the early 1990s and continuing to this day, the Central Intelligence Agency, together with other U.S. government agencies, has utilized an intelligence-gathering program involving the transfer of foreign nationals suspected of involvement in terrorism to detention and interrogation in countries where — in the CIA’s view — federal and international legal safeguards do not apply.

Suspects are detained and interrogated either by U.S. personnel at U.S.-run detention facilities outside U.S. sovereign territory or, alternatively, are handed over to the custody of foreign agents for interrogation. In both instances, interrogation methods are employed that do not comport with federal and internationally recognized standards – the program is commonly known as “extraordinary rendition.”

Frankly, I don’t care whether our guys tortured terrorists if that’s what it takes to prevent more 9-11 attacks. If it were up to Obama, we’d have to read them their Miranda rights before questioning them. Isn’t it interesting that as dirty as the left fights politically, they want our military and spies to follow Marquess of Queensberry rules when dealing with enemies who are prepared to kill our citizens at every opportunity.

Add to this the Agency’s proven track record in deception, disinformation and double-talk and you have a perfect storm of reputedly abhorrent activities that democrats are prepared to lay at the doorstep of the Bush presidency, and more importantly, Republicans in general. This is obviously designed to be an issue to be used against Republicans during the 2016 elections.

The Agency never much liked the Bush administration, and the Bush administration never much liked it, which is why the administration tried to counter the CIA by setting up its own intelligence force at the Pentagon, the Defense Clandestine Agency, as part of the also-ran Defense Intelligence Agency:

The Agency was not about to let that happen. And, confronted with a dying but still vengeful Democrat soon-to-be minority in Congress, and controlled by an Obama appointee, John Brennan — perhaps the least respected man in the entire Intelligence Community — it decided to get out front with this politically opportune mea culpa to keep its Democrat civilian masters happy and the Pentagon wolf from the door.

Somewhere in Hell, Hillary Clinton’s mentor and Barack Obama’s role model (Saul Alinsky) is smiling.


Tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to Is it ok to torture terrorists to prevent more attacks?

  1. tiretramp says:

    Why doesn’t the CIA & GOP show the MUSLIM torture Chambers and methods and

    interview few Survivalists Show the headless bodies and heads including the kids.

    GOP, DAMN! Take off the gloves and put on your brass knuckles and grow some BALLS,


    • Garnet92 says:

      It makes me sick to hear all of the bleeding heart liberals crying about our “mistreatment” of terrorists who would like nothing better than to behead those same liberals.

    • upaces88 says:

      There are many ways to torture…most don’t work. The most EFFECTIVE is “water boarding. Water Boarding”The fear of drowning is greater that a “hot iron” held to the skin.

  2. Hardnox says:

    Excellent post. You bet it’s a concocted event meant to destroy republican credibility for 2016. The left has completely screwed up our intel gains in our fight against the islamonazis. ISIS is proof of that fact yet no one on the right will point it out.

    The left is stuck on Bush Derangement Syndrome. It sells well to the lemmings and the media will play it to the hilt.

    • Garnet92 says:

      Absolutely right Nox and when something happens again (and it will) they’ll lament that we didn’t connect the dots when they’re the ones erasing the dots and making it difficult or impossible to prevent another attack. But, no matter, they’ll still blame Bush.

  3. Crawfish says:

    The islamists do not meet the definition of legal combatant under the Geneva Accords. Since they have taken up arms, without meeting that definition, they are illegal combatants and have forfeited all human rights protections.
    We know what they do to those they capture, military and civilian.
    When fighting subhuman satanallah worshippers, there is no rule book.

    • captbogus2 says:

      Gotta agree. Instead of filling up Gitmo or some other place with a bunch that, no matter how long incarcerated, will return to the battlefield, it would be much better to just double tap all of them when and where.

    • Garnet92 says:

      Right Craw, we owe them NOTHING and anything ANYTHING we can do that will help to keep our citizens safe is fair game. Like you say, there is NO rule book.

  4. Clyde says:

    Take a bow, Garnet. Damn right this crapola is STRAIGHT out of Alinsky. THIS is what happens when the “media” decides to throw ALL objectivity out the window, and REFUSES to vet ANYONE who is not a republican. All in the name of “history” you see. We can give up on the repubs growing a set. Those are so far back they can use them for tail lights.

    • Garnet92 says:

      Thanks Clyde. Ofugyou learned his Alinsky lessons well – oh, and he also learned his Cloward-Piven strategies well too. He’s used concepts from both to prevent our country from operating the way our Constitution requires and our founding fathers expected.

      He has been a truly transformative figure in our history and I hope that he is finally getting the damnation that he deserves. He will be hated by the majority of U.S. citizens (except the felonious blacks) by the time that he expires – and he deserves every curse we can put on him.

  5. Kathy says:

    Oh hell yes! Guys who fly planes into buildings and behead innocent people don’t deserve fair treatment.

    As to the timing of this – I question the timing of just about everything that happens in DC. Back-to-back or simultaneous events are part of the plan to overload us so we don’t stay focused too long on any one event.

    • Garnet92 says:

      As usual, you’re right Kathy. Any would-be terrorist doesn’t deserve even human treatment – they should be given NO slack and WHATEVER IT TAKES to “convince” them to rat on their pals is fair game.

      I too question the release of this report. As you say, nothing this administration does is accidental or coincidental, it is always to mitigate the damage of released info or to camouflage it with other static.

  6. Hardnox says:

    Your post reminds me of an Aussie parliament member opining about torture of islamonazis: “red is positive, black is negative, make sure his nuts are wet”. 🙂

    • Garnet92 says:

      You just knew that this was coming … “what a shocking thing to say” … I’m sorry, I just couldn’t let the opportunity slip by. BTW, would that fry his electicles? With testilctricity?

      I can’t speak for other guys, but hook up my “boys” to voltage, and I won’t just talk, I’ll speak in tongues.

  7. Gunny G says:

    Terrorists are no covered under the Geneva Convention. Torture them in the field, give them a fast trial, and a summary execution. Problem solved.

  8. vonMesser says:

    Red is positive. Black is negative. Water increases conductivity.