The Debatable Land

The Torture Team

Dick Cheney in an interview with ABC News:

CHENEY: On the question of so-called torture, we don't do torture. We never have. It's not something that this administration subscribes to. Again, we proceeded very cautiously. We checked. We had the Justice Department issue the requisite opinions in order to know where the bright lines were that you could not cross.

The professionals involved in that program were very, very cautious, very careful -- wouldn't do anything without making certain it was authorized and that it was legal. And any suggestion to the contrary is just wrong. Did it produce the desired results? I think it did.

I think, for example, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who was the number three man in al Qaeda, the man who planned the attacks of 9/11, provided us with a wealth of information. There was a period of time there, three or four years ago, when about half of everything we knew about al Qaeda came from that one source. So, it's been a remarkably successful effort. I think the results speak for themselves.

And I think those who allege that we've been involved in torture, or that somehow we violated the Constitution or laws with the terrorist surveillance program, simply don't know what they're talking about. 

KARL: Did you authorize the tactics that were used against Khalid Sheikh Mohammed?

CHENEY: I was aware of the program, certainly, and involved in helping get the process cleared, as the agency in effect came in and wanted to know what they could and couldn't do. And they talked to me, as well as others, to explain what they wanted to do. And I supported it.

KARL: In hindsight, do you think any of those tactics that were used against Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and others went too far?

CHENEY: I don't.

KARL: And on KSM, one of those tactics, of course, widely reported was waterboarding. And that seems to be a tactic we no longer use. Even that you think was appropriate?

CHENEY: I do.

That's one way of looking at it, I suppose. I suspect Cheney would say the US should still be waterboarding prisoners. The fact that - supposedly - it has banned the practice could be considered, y itself, an unfortunate admission that it is, in fact, torture. After all, it it ain't, then why would you ban it?

For an alternative view, there's the US Senate report - published with no dissenting views - that makes it clear that the systematic torture and abuse of prisoners was not the work of a few "rotten apples" but came from the very top of the American government. We know this, of course, but it's useful to have it confirmed by the Senate, even if that body, unsurprisingly, has done its best to bury its own report.

"So-called torture" is an interesting formulation too, isn't it? Does Cheney deny the existence of torture itself, or perhaps he just takes the view that if the US is doing something that cannot, by definition, be torture. 

[Via Andrew Sullivan who continues to lead the pack in covering all this]

Dick Cheney's Mission to Destroy Europe

I don't nornally write about Euroloonies, partly because I have trouble taking the European Parliament any more seriously than I do the Liberal Democrats. That is to say, it - and they - cross my mind no more than twice a year. But this, via the indomitable Trixy, is sufficiently priceless as to merit attention:

Questions over the funding of the No campaign in Ireland on the Lisbon Treaty referendum
Raising a point of order, Co-President Daniel Cohn Bendit (Greens/EFA , Germany) said: "Last weekend, the Irish press revealed that there possibly exists a link between the financers of the no-campaign in Ireland and the Pentagon as well as the CIA. This was a very interesting story and the explanation given was that Europe should not become too strong. I would ask the President to please clarify this matter and suggest that we also ask the Council as well as the Commission to inform us next time, because if this story turns out to be true it would be an interesting fact indeed, confirming what lies behind the €1.2 million which was used to finance the no-campaign in Ireland. I therefore would like to ask the President to please look into the matter so that we receive information and achieve transparency."

Of course, people who bore on about "transparency" invariably have plenty to hide themselves. Not that anyone would ever suggest such a thing about the European Parliament. Oh no. Nonetheless, it's also reassuring that, despite everything, some things never change: members of the European Parliament are still reliably, even reassuringly, loopy.

Cheney's anti-war argument...

Cheney makes the anti-war case rather convincingly (in the light of recent events). Of course he's speaking in 1994, explaining why the first Bush administration declined to press for regime change in Iraq after the liberation of Kuwait (or, rather, after restoring Kuwait to its own less than liberal regime):

Now, sure, this clip is doubtless amusing many people. But perhaps Cheney was wrong twice? Wrong not to have pressed on to Baghdad in 1991 and wrong to have supported doing so in 2003. Perhaps all he predicts in this exchange would have come to pass. On the other hand, perhaps the George HW Bush administration would have managed any resulting chaos rather more effectively than has George W Bush's.

The Cheney Primary?

Not a great surprise that Dick Cheney should look kindly on Fred Thompson's odd campaign for the Presidency, given that the Vice-President's daughter has already signed up to this nonsense. Nonetheless it was good of Cheney to essentially confirm this on Larry King Live:

"I'm totally neutral in the upcoming presidential contest. I will support the Republican nominee. And the fact that others have signed on with Fred or John McCain or Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, they're all good men. I hope one of them is the next president of the United States. But I haven't gotten involved in any of those efforts."

Emphasis added of course.

Cheney Derangement Syndrome

This is, perhaps, the funniest thing I've read all year. Possibly this century.

Reviewing Steve Hayes' biography of Dick Cheney, Ira Stoll dreams of a Cheney run for the Presidency. Yes, really.

The book quotes Senator McCain as saying, "Dick doesn't like campaigning." Nothing in the Hayes book suggests that Mr. Cheney is about to do it — except for that the vice president spent nearly 30 hours cooperating with the author and apparently gave the okay for many of his friends and colleagues to grant similar access. The Richard Cheney described in this book isn't vain enough to do that simply for his reputation in history. My own guess — okay, hope — is that Mr. Cheney has taken a look at the Republican presidential field and sees an opening. If Iowa and New Hampshire Republicans start receiving copies of " Cheney" in their mailboxes, Mr. Cheney's popularity may yet begin to climb.

Perhaps. On the other hand, this paragraph might be thought somewhat pertinent:

The Washington Post's polling expert, Richard Morin, noted that at 18% approval, Vice President Cheney was less popular than Michael Jackson after he was tried for child abuse and O.J. Simpson after he was tried for murder. Mr. Hayes quotes Mr. Morin as reporting that Mr. Cheney was "less popular with Americans than Joseph Stalin is with Russians."

This is, in one respect, rather unfair. Stalin, after all, is popular. Nearly one in five Russians think him their best leader since 1917 and 50% have positive or very positive views of Uncle Joe. George W Bush can only dream of Stalin's approval rating.

Could there be a more pertinent illustration of the GOP's crippled state than this pining for Uncle Dick?