Speaking rudely to terrorists is against American ideals but blowing up children is not?

By 5 Comments 1,718 views

dead children drones

Killing children is part of the American ideal. It’s who we are, says Obama.

On behalf of the democrats on the SSIC Sen. Dianne Feinstein released a report describing what she called “torture.” There has been much harrumphing about what is and what is not consistent with American values and what we stand for as Americans.

Torture is “contrary to our values” says Barack Obama:

President Obama said Tuesday he hopes a Senate report detailing “troubling” CIA interrogation practices will help the U.S. prevent actions “contrary to our values” in the future.

“One of the strengths that makes America exceptional is our willingness to openly confront our past, face our imperfections, make changes and do better,” the president said in a statement issued shortly after the release of the report.

He stated:

That is why I unequivocally banned torture when I took office, because one of our most effective tools in fighting terrorism and keeping Americans safe is staying true to our ideals at home and abroad.

It was the dog whistle that summoned the left to bark its outrage in concert.

Osama Bin Laden could have been captured alive, but they just killed him outright. Ever wonder why? Barack Obama has pursued a course that frees him from worrying about the treatment of detainees. He doesn’t capture any, he just kills them. It’s much tidier and voters don’t seem to mind. Then again, there is no gaining any intelligence information from them either. There’ll be no slapping them in the face, no speaking to them rudely and no forcing them to listen to AC/DC. Much better, unless you’re a child.

You can’t help but wonder why the left is so fired up about speaking rudely to genuinely bad people and not other US actions- such as burning and dismembering of children in Obama drone strikes.

The Obama regime claims its drone strikes have been subject to rigorous review:

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration on Monday offered its first extensive explanation of how American officials decide when to use drones to kill suspected terrorists — a tactic that the government often treats as a classified secret even though it is widely known around the world.

“Yes, in full accordance with the law — and in order to prevent terrorist attacks on the United States and to save American lives — the United States government conducts targeted strikes against specific Al Qaeda terrorists, sometimes using remotely piloted aircraft, often referred to publicly as drones,” John O. Brennan, President Obama’s top counterterrorism adviser, said before the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.

Have a look at the effects of death from the sky on children:

Psychological Trauma

One man described the reaction to the sound of the drones as “a wave of terror” coming over the community.

“Children, grown-up people, women, they are terrified. . . . They scream in terror.”(p. 81)

-Interviewees also reported a loss of appetite as a result of the anxiety theyfeel when drones are overhead. Ajmal Bashir, an elderly man who has lost both relatives and friends to strikes, said that
“every person— women,children, elders – they are all frightened and afraid of the drones

. . .

[W]hen [drones] are flying, they don’t like to eat anything . . . because they are too afraid of the drones.” Another man explained that, “We don’t eat properly on those days [when strikes occur] because we know an innocent Muslim was killed.

. We are all unhappy and afraid.” (p. 84)

Is this not the left’s very definition of torture?

Obama personally selects the targets and is ultimately responsible for the collateral damage. i.e. dead children.

It is hard to imagine how anything could motivate an enemy more than killing of their children- 200 so far. More of Obama’s handiwork is here. Warning- these images are hard to look at.

America’s drone war “radicalises foot soldiers, tribes and entire villages in our region.”

– Pakistan Ambassador to the United States Sherry Rehman, July 2012

The left says depriving the really bad people of sleep is awful. What do you call this?

Where’s the outrage?

DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education. DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed. Except for liberals being foolish.

5 Responses to “Speaking rudely to terrorists is against American ideals but blowing up children is not?”

  1. 2

    Bill

    In a 3 Stooges episode, Curley sits on a cactus and has his butt loaded with cactus quills. Moe and Larry begin to remove them; Moe is pulling them out, one by one with a pliers but Larry is cutting them off flush with a scissors. Moe asks Larry what he is doing and Larry responds, obliviously, “They don’t show”.

    Moe slaps Larry.

    This is how the left views enhanced interrogation VS drone strikes; well, they react the way they are told to react. They are told the enhanced interrogation methods are cruel, inhumane and un-American while the drone strikes, used instead of capturing valuable sources of information, well, “They don’t show”.

    I’m all for the drone strikes and I don’t really care how many of a terrorist’s family, whatever their age or gender is, gets killed. In fact, I’m for killing them all because even the youngsters are raised and educated to hate the west and, eventually, kill. Likewise, I am all for mining every bit of information out of captured terrorists and making them pay dearly for their chosen occupation. What I DON’T like is the double standard, hypocritical use of national security to further a failing political agenda. This puts our lives, our nation and the security of the entire world at risk. Liberals never seem to consider anyone else but themselves.

  2. 3

    another+vet

    The left’s threat list: conservatives, Republicans, the military, intelligence agencies, law enforcement, non-leftist cause businesses, the unborn, etc.

    The left’s sympathy list: terrorists, law breakers, anyone who is anti-American, etc.

    The reason why the go ahead to kill OBL was given was political. He was regarded as a means to an end. Kill him and then you can claim GWOT is over with thus allowing for the expansion of AQ and its affiliates which is exactly what has happened. Someone who was committed to our national security would have given the go ahead to whack OBL AND would have kept pressing on with GWOT. No abandoning Iraq. No announcing troop withdrawl dates in Afghanistan. No arming AQ backed rebels in Syria. No decimating reductions in our military. Etc. The current strategy has been a failure that wasted years of sacrifice and effort. Drone strikes don’t win wars. About the only positive is that we haven’t had another large scale 9/11 style attack on our homeland. Given our porous southern border and PC mentality, we have been lucky. Our luck ran out once before on 9/11/2001 and history has a tendency to repeat itself.

  3. There’s an old English word that comes to mind when I evaluate the contents of “Politician Speak”, It’s “Reprobate”. Websters definition, as an adjetive would be “morally corrupt :depraved”. In addition, there is a connotation that defines a person in this state as someone who believes Right is wrong and that Wrong !s right and there you have it! The Congress of the United States of America, a disturbed grouping of modern day reprobates that cannot distinguish right from wrong. Senator Feinstein and her husband, 2 distinguished members of American politics, who work the system to garner huge amounts of money for themselves while spouting to the world that “talking rude” to terrorists is wrong! They are completely reprobate and don’t even realize it! Again, she legislates that the good guys in California MUST have no more than 10 bullets in their firearm while the bad guys will be carrying 16 or more. Put them in a gun fight… extrapolate… the finale? The Commander & Chief, really? A man who’s total experience with regards to war, terrorists, knowlage of military Tactics , etc., is Zero. Yes, lets put him in charge!

    It appears we have a brief window of opportunity, possibly 2 years to attempt to raise up a standard against this tidal wave of insanity. Obviously, the assumption is based on the possibility that there are still enough members of Congress that haven’t drank the koolaid?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *