Posted on 04/26/2009 12:42:52 PM PDT by Bill Dupray
Let's just put this out there right now. If Liz Cheney wants to be president, she's got my vote. She is asked by Norah O'Donnell about the "torture" techniques and Cheney astutely denies the premise that it is torture at all. She points out that the very same techniques, including waterboarding, are done to our own military as training for being captured. Therefore, by definition, it cannot be torture. She also points out that the techniques were very effective in gaining vital intelligence, which prevented future attacks.
By the end, O'Donnell is unhinged, foaming at the mouth, and yelling at Cheney.
(Excerpt) Read more at patriotroom.com ...
O'Donnell is unhinged and foaming at the mouth all the time.
only someone who’s extremely confident in themselves will put themselves in the lion’s den. Impressive performance. She held herself up well
I love the way she just calmly steamrollers O’Donnell. But I wouldn’t want to meet her in a dark alley. She really marshals her facts, speaks with clarity, and does not allow herself to be distracted or upset. She is not patronizing or catty, simply clear and direct.
She can sure make herself look ugly. Liz Cheney is a marvel! She totally kept her cool, knew exactly what to say. If I had been up there, I would have been pulling O’Donnell’s hair out.
Cheney does a good job. I do wish, however, that she had paused and asked: “Nora, you’re not actually interviewing me, are you? You’re just arguing with me. You’re pushing — pushing hard, I might add — the Obama administration’s opinion on this matter and rather than interview me as a guest on your show, you’re trying to shout me down. Nora, why do you think your viewers try to get heir news from other sources??”
1. We know and have been told time and again that “torture doesn’t work”.
2. We know that waterboarding and/or harsh interrogation techniques were extremely effective and “worked”.
3. Therefore, by definition, waterboarding is not a torture.
Liz is like her father, the media will hate her.
Clear, calm, sticking to her arguments, she all but obliterates the trash thrown at her with appeals to emotions, personal attacks, etc etc etc. I enjoy that in her father. When he talks he just cuts through all the BS and makes a point that is so pointed and sharp that it cuts right into those trying to make things fuzzy and spin nonsense into some argument which isn’t.
Wow - she was amazing. I’m sure her parents are very proud of her.
Wow! Slam dunk from another courageous Cheney.
I didn’t realize Norah went so far over to the dark side. What a shame. She does sound like her questions came directly from the white hut.
I am so glad to hear somebody point out that Al-Qaeda does not adhere to the Geneva Conventions.
Me too! She certainly is her father's daughter. Same cool...same command of the facts...same steely resolve.
You do mean 'husband', don't you?
Oops....I just noticed it was ‘Liz’ and not ‘Lynne’.
Geneva Convention- The enemy is not fighting under the flag of a nation, abides to no rules of warfare, is non unidentifiable, has no real chain of command, and by NO standard is regarded as a lawful combatant which the Geneva Convention addresses. These people are alive because of two reasons ONLY: (benevolence) of on scene troops who chose not to shoot them and a nation that chose not to bring swift justice onto them, which would have been customary; a nation that saw (intelligence) value in them staying alive. That's it! their lives were over the day we caught them. In our own civil war, WWI, WWII, Korea had either side run across a combatant engaging in the activities they did, out of uniform, fighting under no flag, they would have been immediately hung!
The US Constitution- Since when do rights afforded to American citizens apply to Egypt ions in Afghanistan fighting against us there and held in detainment outside the US?
We lost the moral high ground- No we didn't. Nothing we did is illegal and we waterboard our own troops in training. There was no loss of life, limb, or eyesight. Those that we're fighting don't care about rules of warfare and they do torture, even before we waterboarded anyone. it's a nonsense argument.
Let's put this in perspective. We waterboarded three people and two of them gave us critical information that helped prevent other attacks. Those opposed to this argue that hypothetically we could have gotten this information through other means. So they argue using an “if, maybe or possible,” which of course you can't disprove (Another fallacy).
As usual, once you take out all the feelings and illogical thinking, what are they really left with? Well, one thing they will have for sure, their shared hatred for Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney.
Why is Liz Cheney speaking on this matter?
Cheney does a good job. I do wish, however, that she had paused and asked: “Nora, you’re not actually interviewing me, are you? You’re just arguing with me. You’re pushing — pushing hard, I might add — the Obama administration’s opinion on this matter and rather than interview me as a guest on your show, you’re trying to shout me down. Nora, why do you think your viewers try to get heir news from other sources??”
________________
BRAVO!!!!!!!!! I agree, people must start calling them out and putting their feet to the fire.
Not just because I agree with Liz, but when you cook away all the nonsense, like the “well, we might have, could have, possibly gotten the information out of them in other ways,” all you end up with is a bunch of illogical arguments and rhetoric. The reason why people such as the host of this MSNBC show prevail is because they own the microphone.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.