To be clear, I do not believe in torturing terrorists. Not even in a Jack Bauer, ticking time bomb scenario. I believe it is wrong, and I know it is ineffective.
But there are others among us who do believe in torture.
Like this guy:
...the president should have the legal authority to order things like waterboarding.
And this guy:
HANNITY: I am for enhanced interrogation.
And of course, this guy:
Former Vice President Dick Cheney reiterated his praise for waterboarding Al Qaeda terrorists on Monday, calling it a "well done" technique that gathered valuable information from unusually bad guys.
"I'm a strong believer in it," Cheney told a National Press Club audience. "I thought it was well done."
So why have they been silent for the past week?
When defending the use of torture "enhanced interrogation," the defenders love to cite the hypothetical ticking time bomb scenario, plucked right from the plots of fictional television shows.
It goes like this:
Our government has an extremely dangerous terrorist in custody. The terrorist threatens that further dangerous acts are planned but refused to elaborate. The government must, therefore, torture the terrorist in order to prevent those further attacks and save the lives of innocent Americans.
Of course, we know that this doesn't work.
"It's extremely ineffective, and it's counterproductive to what we're trying to accomplish...When we torture somebody, it hardens their resolve...The information that you get is unreliable..."
But let's put that aside for a moment. Let's indulge the sadistic fantasies of those who insist that torture is necessary. Let's pretend that torture isn't illegal. Let's even pretend it's effective.
So here's a simple question:
Why haven't former Vice President Dick Cheney, right wing blowhards Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity, and all other torture apologists called for the waterboarding of Scott Roeder, the terrorist who assassinated Dr. George Tiller?
After all, Roeder certainly fits every requisite of the ticking time bomb scenario. He murdered an innocent American in cold blood. He has committed other acts of terror in the past. He has known links to other extremists, including well-funded extremist organizations (read: terrorist cells).
And, most importantly, he has said that other attacks are planned:
"I know there are many other similar events planned around the country as long as abortion remains legal," Roeder said. When asked by the AP what he meant and if he was referring to another shooting, he refused to elaborate further.
Roeder's refusal to "elaborate further" on other planned attacks requires, under the ticking time bomb exception, immediate waterboarding, doesn't it? Is this not the very scenario under which the torture apologists justify such enhanced interrogation?
Roeder is unapologetically stating -- no, threatening -- that more innocent Americans will die. Unless, of course, we can get him to talk.
Isn't this what Cheney would call a "no brainer"?