Jonathan Alter titled his most recent article in the June 14 issue of Newsweek, Cheney’s Tortured Logic. The story is about enhanced interrogation techniques—that’s benign politicolegaleze for torture. Alter actually says in the article that Eric Holder the US Attorney General is wrong for assigning a federal prosecutor to delve into the matter, which I wholeheartedly agree with and have said so in previous blogs and to my wife, when she’ll listen. My criticism of Alter is that I think he added gratuitous spice to the article in order to sell it to Newsweek. Controversy sells magazines, therefore the tweaks that were sure to draw applause and consternation at the same time. If you didn’t have an opportunity to read what I’m referring to here they are, followed by my consternation-revealing remarks. And I quote:

          “Two words jumped out at me from Cheney’s Fox News interview last week. Chris Wallace asked, “So even in those cases where CIA interrogators went beyond the specific legal authorization, you’re OK with it?” Cheney answered, “I am.” Alter says in his article to that, “That unadorned ‘I am’ was terrifying.”

          Please, Mr. Alter, terrifying? I think not. There are many of us who believe Cheney simply puts words and actions, no matter how unpopular, to how we feel. I do not engage in conversations promoting the torture of known terrorists that may have information critical to saving the lives of innocent people. However, have no doubt, if it were my responsibility to save one innocent I’d torture until I got verifiable information. Call me immoral, some would. Call me a hero, some would do that too but be assured I wouldn’t indulge in debate over the morality of such an act while waiting for a bomb to explode. Neither would Cheney. What would you call Cheney, Mr. Alter, if he authorized, condoned, encouraged, participated in the torture of someone who had foreknowledge of an event that would most certainly injure or even kill one of your family members?

          Secondly, Mr. Alter said, “As much as I’d like to see Cheney frog-marched out of Jackson Hole and sent to prison…” My problem with this remark is Alter’s apparent lack of respectful decorum when speaking of a former elected official who spent the better part of his life serving the USA. And frog-marched out of Jackson Hole, wouldn’t that be humiliating and possibly torturous? Many legal scholars as well as political ethicists would find that extremely unreasonable and bordering on criminal. Frog-marched, that sounds terrifying.

The title should actually read, Not a Saint, a Messiah, a Seer, a Superman Among Them. I’m talking of course about our political leadership, and not just Obama’s administration but all that came before. Some administrations accomplished wonderful things, at a cost I might add. Of course some wreaked havoc. Some have done both, none have been perfect. Good men do some amazingly dim-witted things and once in a while the not-so-bright, not-so-good conquer amazing challenges. With that said I bring you to the subject of Eric Holder Jr., the attorney general of the United States, and his plan—according to Newsweek, July 2009—to resurrect the probe of Bush-era interrogation methods. Holder commented to an associate that when he read the Bush administration’s torture policies it ‘turned my stomach.’ During a speech at West Point Holder invoked a George Washington-ism to help support the concept of decency even when hosting prisoner’s of war. It was at the Battle of Trenton where General Washington said, “…captive British soldiers were to be treated with humanity, regardless of how colonial soldiers captured in battle might be treated.” No doubt, Holder is a good man, aspiring to be an example of Washington’s comment. He was appalled with the Bush-era interrogation policies, a sentiment I’m sure many would share. And standing before the cadets, his words crafted to inspire, he pointed the way to moral primacy. I would want my grandchildren to hear him and learn. Idealism. Now, move idealism to one side and make room for a little pragmatism. When faced with the practicality of life pragmatism trumps idealism at about every turn. A soldier goes to war thinking he must fight for the freedom of his country, fight so that his family will be safe from the enemy, fight for liberty and so on. All wonderfully idealistic notions but when the first bullet zings overhead that notion vanishes, and from there on out the soldier is fighting for one thing and only one thing—to stay alive. The idea Holder thinks he must ‘show the way’, in the case of severe interrogation methods is at best naïve and at worst dangerous to any person or agency tasked with accumulating actionable information necessary for the protection of our sovereign nation. There are new interrogation parameters that must be set in place and many interrogation methods that need to be scrubbed but, in the words of a very wise mother, “Don’t through the baby out with the bath water.”