Marc Thiessen, former chief speechwriter to President George W. Bush, does not pull any punches in his recently published book, Courting Disaster: How the CIA Kept America Safe and How Barack Obama is Inviting the Next Attack (Regnery Press, 2010). He thinks that Enhanced Interrogation Techniques (EITs) utilized by the Bush administration following 9/11, notably waterboarding, extracted key information from captured Al-Qaeda terrorists – information that prevented another attack from occurring on American soil. He scolds the mainstream media, liberal politicians, and activist lawyers. And if you couldn't tell from the title, Thiessen thinks that pretty much every decision made thus far by President Obama related to the War on Terror is the wrong one.
Pundits frequently refer to Thiessen as a Bush “loyalist” or “apologist,” and I think both of these terms are fitting. Throughout the book, his defense of Bush administration officials is unwavering. He attributes negative perceptions of interrogators, and more importantly misinformation on the results of interrogation techniques used against terrorists like Khalid Sheik Mohammed, to the mainstream media. “The more information that comes out the more evidence there is that CIA interrogations worked,” he says, claiming that interrogations revealed information on several terrorist plots around the world.
Thiessen's defense of EITs is a moral one, as well as a practical one. “There should be no question that some form of coercion is morally acceptable when innocent lives are at stake,” he says, also claiming that coercive interrogation is consistent with Judeo-Christian values. Furthermore, “Critics...are effectively arguing from a position of radical pacifism.”
Thiessen is absolutely right to point out the absurdity of comparisons often made between the CIA's use of waterboarding and the fact that the same tactic was used by the Khmer Rouge regime in
Indeed, Thiessen spends far too many pages attempting to construct a sort of left-wing conspiracy around groups like the Center for Constitutional Rights, a pro-bono legal group that represents terrorist detainees at Guantanamo Bay and other political “radicals” in court. He claims that “there is a 'fifth column' of left-wing attorneys working hand-in-hand with terrorists to undermine American policy in the struggle with violent extremism.” But just like when liberals resort to slandering conservative think tanks as “polluter-funded” or “bankrolled by corporations,” Thiessen's discussion of the perceived motives and money behind “the Left” is irrelevant, purposely distracting, and like much of Courting Disaster, far too simple.
Obama's decisions to end EITs, release previously classified CIA documents, close CIA “black sites” around the world, push for an independent “Truth Commission,” and to close Guantanamo Bay, don't make Thiessen happy, to name a few. Many of his concerns are valid, and we need to have a debate over whether Obama is indeed making us less safe. But the starting point should take into account all evidence, talk to those with no legacy to defend, and be careful not to deduce black and white conclusions from issues as complex as interrogation and the broader War on Terror.
Be the first to comment on this article!