Defining Torture and Paine

By Douglas V. Gibbs

Glenn Greenwald, liberal writer extraordinaire, has likened the plight of an entire young nation during the Revolutionary War to the treatment of detainees captured because they waged war against American Troops and the American People. In his article, "Thomas Paine v. the Right's torture defenders," Mr. Greenwald is willing to utter that the treatment of people who desire to topple all non-Muslim entities worldwide somehow are similar to the young Americans who fought selflessly against a tyrannical British Government. Somehow, in Mr. Greenwald's mind, torture equals anything that may be considered unpleasant.

I wonder if making the Gitmo prisoners sleep on beds not approved by the orthopedic association is torture to Mr. Greenwald, and his Leftist buddies?

In Greenwald's article he takes pop shots at GOP Congressman Peter King for daring to speak out against Eric Holder's decision to investigate the CIA interrogators. Specifically, he cites court cases to prove that the terrorists fall under the Geneva Convention.

Greenwald also proclaims that "scores of people have died in American custody as a result of interrogation tactics," thus placing the lives of these cold blooded killers as more important than the lives of Americans (and he's lying, by the way - "scores" have not died as a result of American interrogation tactics).

Glenn also cites Ronald Reagan and his signing of the Convention Against Torture which compels the U.S. to prosecute anyone authorizing torture.

He even evokes Thomas Paine's name, and his writings about "barbarity" in his pamphlet called "Common Sense." Who does he think he is comparing the "plight" of the murderous terrorists to the war the revolutionaries fought to forge this nation?

Ultimately, the whole argument comes down to the definition of torture. Greenwald obviously knows how to roll over and bark like his Leftist handlers have taught him to do, but my question is: Can Glenn Greenwald think for himself?

What is torture? Is it discomfort? Or is it physical harm to the individual? Does the extreme nature of what these terrorists do warrant the enhanced interrogation techniques being used to gather information to save American lives?

Are these murderous terrorists, that could care less about your rights, tortured by the very fact that they are being held? Is it torture every time we even look at them wrong? Maybe they should have been just killed in the field. Maybe our troops should take careful aim and make sure these killers meet Allah sooner. That way, at least they won't be tortured by being captured.

Imagine if one of these people broke into your home and slaughtered your family without feeling remorse, later declaring to an applauding crowd they did it for the Jihad, and Allah. Would you feel so merciful if your family's blood was on their hands? Would you be so worried about whether or not they went through a few enhanced interrogation methods to get more information out of them to stop others like them from killing more families?

Thomas Paine was right. We should not punish innocent soldiers from an enemy country who is only doing what they were ordered to do. But these Islamic terrorists are not innocent soldiers fighting a war between nations. They are blood-thirsty jihadists doing the killing because they want to. They do it because they hate all that is non-Muslim. They do it because they believe they will receive an eternal reward for killing your family, your friends, and all of your fellow Americans. And Mr. Greenwald, these people that you are trying to protect would kill you, too, in a heartbeat, if given the chance.

I don't believe they are being tortured. If the tables were turned, however, I guarantee they would torture you - and to them, that involves permanent physical disfigurement.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Thomas Paine v. the Right's torture defenders - Glenn Greenwald, Salon