Just how ‘necessary’ does Cheney find torture?

December 19, 2005

Dick Cheney chatted with ABC News’ Terry Moran yesterday for an interesting interview, some of which will be aired tonight on Nightline. One exchange stood out for me.

Moran: Are you troubled at all that more than 100 people in U.S. custody have died — 26 of them now being investigated as criminal homicides — people beaten to death, suffocated to death, died of hypothermia in U.S. custody?

Cheney: No. I won’t accept your numbers, Terry. But I guess one of the things I’m concerned about is that as we get farther and farther away from 9/11, and there have been no further attacks against the U.S., there seems to be less and less concern about doing what’s necessary in order to defend the country.

In general, I’m hesitant to ascribe sentiments that are left unsaid, but given the context, doesn’t this sound a bit like Cheney is offering tacit support for torture? Moran asked about instances of abuse and Cheney’s immediate response is that we should keep doing “what’s necessary.” It wasn’t exactly a comforting response.

Neither, for that matter, was this exchange on the NSA surveillance program.

Moran: The Constitution calls for a court, a co-equal branch of government, as a check on the power of the executive, to give a say-so before an American or someone in America is surveilled, or searched, or spied upon.

Cheney: This has been done, Terry, in a manner that is completely consistent with our obligations and requirements, I can assure you.

Cheney “assures” us? Exactly how much credibility does this guy think he has left?

“I won’t accept your numbers”

The Bush administration in a nutshell, creating their own reality and all.

  • And the once great nation now sulks, hiding behind shadows of the coporeal and of the mind, quietly and assuredly destroying the very fabrics which once made it strong.

  • ,em>…one of the things I’m concerned about is that as we get farther and farther away from 9/11, and there have been no further attacks against the U.S., there seems to be less and less concern about doing what’s necessary in order to defend the country.

    Do think that what really upsets him is that it has become more difficult to whip the public up into a paranoid frenzy? Just something to think about.

  • Yeah we should just take Cheney’s word for it. That comment alone tells you where he is and how stupid/sheep-like he thinks people are.

  • “…as we get farther and farther away from 9/11, and there have been no further attacks against the U.S., there seems to be less and less concern about doing what’s necessary in order to defend the country.”

    What I don’t understand is the irrational group fear implied by this statement. What happened on 9/11 was awful, but I don’t spend every day of my life afraid it will happen to me. It isn’t like there were terrorist attacks on a daily basis in the US and 9/11 was just the final straw.

    For the most part, terrorism in the US has been isolated incidents, few and far between.

    It reminds me of the episode of The Simspon’s where Lisa sold Homer a rock that kept tigers away by asking Homer if he saw any tigers around. Specious reasoning.

  • Actually, he can’t assure me.

    “Assure” carries the meaning of dispelling doubts, as opposed to just “asserting”.

    He can try, and he can “make assurances”, but he can’t remove my doubts, least of all that way.

  • Cheney says to Moran, “…I can assure you.”

    And Moran’s follow-up question is……….?

  • I wonder why reporters don’t ask the logical follow up questions?

    When Cheney says “I don’t accept your numbers, Terry.” Isn’t the logical response, “Okay what are your numbers Cheney? ”

    In press interview after interview the next questions aren’t asked even when it is so obvious what those questions should be.

    • Comments are closed.