Media Madmen Mad Blog

The title of this post references an ABC News article that exposes two psychologists who allegedly designed the CIA interrogation program which included “waterboarding” as an enhanced interrogation technique. I will not link to that article because I think it is wrong to expose the names of these men who will likely be subjected to “dog and pony” show trials. But the very title of this story is designed to inspire anger because of the $1,000 a day reference. Well guess what? My company regularly charged $1,000 a day PLUS expenses for my time and my job had nothing to do with national security.

But remember the outrage by the left over the outing of Valerie Plame? Just to refresh my memory I went to some lefty blogs but again won’t link to any of that garbage.

I Madblogged about the release of the torture documents on April 22 and still stand by my statement that any proceedings would be politically motivated. President Obama has flipped and flopped so many times on whether to pursue criminal charges against Bush Administration officials over torture I can’t even keep up with it all. I think he was against it before he was for it but I’m not positive.

Now this from former Federal Prosecutor and National Review Online Contributing Editor Andrew C. McCarthy.
. A tip of the hat goes to Michelle Malkin:

Andrew C. McCarthy

The invitation email (of April 14) indicates that the meeting is part of an ongoing effort to identify lawful policies on the detention and disposition of alien enemy combatants—or what the Department now calls “individuals captured or apprehended in connection with armed conflicts and counterterrorism operations.” I admire the lawyers of the Counterterrorism Division, and I do not question their good faith. Nevertheless, it is quite clear—most recently, from your provocative remarks on Wednesday in Germany—that the Obama administration has already settled on a policy of releasing trained jihadists (including releasing some of them into the United States). Whatever the good intentions of the organizers, the meeting will obviously be used by the administration to claim that its policy was arrived at in consultation with current and former government officials experienced in terrorism cases and national security issues. I deeply disagree with this policy, which I believe is a violation of federal law and a betrayal of the president’s first obligation to protect the American people. Under the circumstances, I think the better course is to register my dissent, rather than be used as a prop.

Read the whole letter here.

If we are going to hold trials, let’s allow the Judicial Branch to handle it and not the Executive, Legislative or agenda driven mainstream media branches.