« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

The nuance of the pro-torture Left (HRW edition).

Because it's different when THEY do it, you see.

Good term, Wizbang: I like it. Anyway, via Dissenting Justice (via Instapundit) we can see in miniature the… ah, evolution of our opposite numbers on the Online Left’s stance on Obama’s reversion to rendition. Our hypocrites for the day are Human Rights Watch*:

April 7, 2008 to at least January 19, 2009:

The US government should:

·Repudiate the use of rendition to torture as a counterterrorism tactic and permanently discontinue the CIA’s rendition program;

Some time after January 20, 2009:

“Under limited circumstances, there is a legitimate place” for renditions, said Tom Malinowski, the Washington advocacy director for Human Rights Watch. “What I heard loud and clear from the president’s order was that they want to design a system that doesn’t result in people being sent to foreign dungeons to be tortured — but that designing that system is going to take some time.”

Translation: all that stuff about the need to end rendition? “Oh, that’s just what we call pillow talk, baby, that’s all.”

Moe Lane

PS: Remember.  Eastasia.  We’ve always been at war with Eastasia.

*Notice that the name is Human Rights Watch: not, say, Human Rights Defense. Betcha they’ll be doing a lot of watching over the next four years, let me tell you.

Crossposted at Moe Lane.

COMMENTS

  • Socrates

    Obama is Change. Anything else can stay outwardly the same, but will be changed by the expanding penumbra of his protective presence.

  • Wayne

    not as he does. Wonder which list of countries he’s looking at? Maybe he’ll render all of them to Venezuela, so Hugo can release them, or at least fly them back to Iraq or Afghanistan, first class, of course. Or try to convince Ahmedinnerjacket he’s a nice guy, and just run them up to the border and drop them off to Iranian Quds force?

  • Princeliberty

    http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/02/the-rendition-c.html

    Check out the insane Andrew Sullivan. This was all evil under Bush but is right and just under Obama.

    I wonder if Obama announced that homosexual was wrong if Sullivan would announce he is into girls now?

  • Rod_Patrick

    That’s Obama.

    He’s the Change we can hardly believe in.

    We are fighting against liberals and dems…. politicians with no specific stance at all. All they care about is personal glory/power.

  • anodized

    We’ve seen examples of rendition gone wrong, i.e., Khaled Masri. What does rendition gone right look like? How is what Obama doing different?

    “The clear abandonment of the Bush-Cheney torture program makes the detention and rendition of terror suspects much less worrying – both in terms of the damage done to reliable intelligence and the moral cost of betraying core Western values.”

    No torture makes it ok, at least according to Andrew Sullivan.

    The wider point stands: those who criticized Bush over this tactic ought not fawningly give Obama a pass.

  • jimmuy8

    There really wasn’t any actual, you know, proof that there was real life torture going on under Bush. Oh, I know: Lots and lots of smoke-like stuff proves there must be a raging forest fire. But, the definition of “torture” was really: Anything Bush does.

    The bottom line: Bush said he didn’t torture any suspects and everyone called him a liar vs. Obama says he won’t torture any suspects and everyone believes him.

    Neither Bush nor 0 will ever reveal just what rules they follow. So, it comes down to trust. And if you didn’t trust Bush, then you have no reason to now trust 0.

    Trust Dear Leader (or die).