It’s interesting, though, that Congressional leaders, in particular the Democratic leaders, were pushing for more aggressive, harsher interrogation techniques. And, the “legal panels” assembled by the various MSM outlets agreed the harsher interrogation techniques were legal and within the constitutional authority of the President as military commander in chief. These “legal panels” also declared those captured on the battlefield were not entitled to any GC or constitutional protections because they were illegal combatants. Even “Johnny Taliban” was (and is) not entitled to such protections, including after his transfer from military custody to federal custody because of his battlefield capture.

I wonder what the next, “new” thing the MSM will discover.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

It’s amazing that detailed decisions of this type were decided at the very highest level of government. It shows how concerned Administration officials were to do the right thing and protect the American people at the same time remain within the law.

And the fact that waterboarding was used only 3(?) times underscores how reluctant the Administration was to engage in aggressive tactics.

All the hours and hours and hours that Dems and their “peace” activist allies spent catterwalling about waterboarding might have given an impression to the less well informed that we did it all the time. Many more people were waterboarded by Code Pink in protests than by the U.S. government to save American lives.

Like or Dislike: 0  0