Waterboarding, the CIA, and Terrorism

If you haven't been following the most recent developments in the CIA water boarding saga, here is a quick update:

Several former CIA directors wrote a letter to President Obama, asking him to halt the criminal investigation of CIA agents who have used 'enhanced interrogation' techniques in the past. President Obama has declined to get involved with Attorney General Holder's process, stating that he thinks everyone should be accountable to the law, so the investigation will continue.
I have heard Christians come down all over the place on this issue. As Christians who are supposed to love everyone, how could we ever torture someone? How do we balance 'turning the other cheek' with water boarding? Can we treat Islamic terrorists however we want because they don't follow Christ, or because they hate America?

Tough questions all, and we do right in asking them. I think part of the problem for us, as Americans and as Christians living in the 21st Century, is our squeamishness about violence and death. Somehow, in a civilized society of the modern age, death is distasteful (don't miss the irony here, in the fact that the brutal murder of abortion is legal, and even encouraged).

So what does the Bible say? Really, violence is all over the Bible, New and Old Testament, and it's not nearly as prohibited as many believers think. In the Old Testament, Mosaic Law has specific rules about floggings and beatings (Deuteronomy). Samson is granted power from God to destroy the nobility of Philistine society, along with himself (Judges 16). Proverbs speaks repeatedly about rods and fools in the context of discipline. Nehemiah 13 speaks about Nehemiah - considered a wise and just ruler - cursing, beating, and pulling out the hair of his disobedient countrymen in his anger. David spared Saul at least twice, even as Saul sought to kill him (1 Samuel 24, 26), and yet he kills the Amalekite who finally does kill Saul, even though Saul asks to be killed (2 Samuel 1). In the New Testament, Peter kills 2 Christians who give money to the church, but lie about how much of their profit they are giving (Acts 5), and everyone is terrified. Jesus Himself taught us to turn the other cheek when someone strikes us (Matthew 5, Luke 6), and yet He attacks the money-changers in the temple, flipping tables in a terrible righteous anger (John 2, Mark 11) - some Bible scholars think he might have done this twice.

Focusing specifically on David and Jesus, we see the context of what the Bible teaches. When we are wronged, we are to respond in meekness, sparing our enemies and even turning the other cheek. But when God's designs are perverted by evil men and their acts, when others are threatened who are in our care, there is a place for righteous anger. In short, there is a difference between vengeance and justice. Our CIA, acting to secure the safety of America, should have great latitude to interrogate. If the CIA, FBI or the military have good evidence that the suspect knows information that can prove vital to our national defense, then I am in favor of 'enhanced interrogations' far beyond simple water boarding. Death is not too extreme a penalty in this case, depending on the crimes in question. Justice can be served without the proceedings of a court, which is a right specifically given only to American citizens in the Constitution.

In summary, justice must be our goal, not vengeance. We must make wise choices about those who defend us, and then trust their judgment. There is accountability built into our current system, and we should not just wantonly torture anyone. But when tough choices have to be made, we have to give our defenders the ability to defend us, or we will suffer the consequences. President Obama is helping to create a terrible choice for our CIA agents: defend your country and go to prison, or play nice, obey the 'rules,' and bear the terrible responsibility of another attack on American citizens. As a Christian I don't see that torture is prohibited by the Bible, and as an American I certainly hope that we do everything we can to stop evil men from doing evil things.

"Torture," and a Step Too Far

You won't find any links today, there is plenty available to read online about this topic of "torture." Extreme measures, enhanced interrogations - call them what you will. I am saddened and disappointed... not by the brave men and women of the CIA who defend us everyday, but by a President who would sell them out to gain some political points with the far left at home and abroad. To this point, should you read my previous posts, I have always respectfully disagreed with President Obama on matters of policy. I have always said I believed his intentions and motivations were pure, but that he (from my perspective) is misguided.

No more.

I cannot respect a man of so little character that he and his administration would attack the very people whose lives are on the line defending us from terror in an effort to appease radicals who fail to understand the nature of this conflict. This is monstrously wrong, and this will end badly for all of us. Even our national security is not above petty politics to this man. Make no mistake, I am very angry. I am upset. I think former Vice President Cheney had some very good questions (on Fox News): why were some documents detailing this "torture" released, but very few that show the positive results of these interrogations? Mr. Cheney has called publicly for the release of additional documents, and I truly hope those are brought forth, and I hope that all involved avoid legal problems from this. They won't of course; this is a witch hunt, after all. But I hope and pray they do.

A word on "torture:" what we have done to these terrorists does not even qualify. Sleep deprivation, loud music, forced hygiene (I am not making this up), a member of the opposite sex being in the room with you, even water boarding which simulates drowning - if only our captured soldiers, civilians and agents were so generously treated in captivity. The standard of our enemies should not become our standard for the sake of reprisal, but I ask those who go on and on about how we shouldn't "torture:" with all the time and angst you are spending defending the rights of these animals, how about the rights of their victims? Who - in this day - is standing up for the rights of the 2,996 dead Americans from September 11th? If we were treating these terrorists roughly for our own general amusement, I would join the chorus of voices saying it is wrong. We must not become the monsters we are fighting. But there are principles at stake here; these interrogations are not about the end justifying the means, but about something more.

Here is a direct quote from the White House website, the Homeland Security page:

"The first responsibility of any president is to protect the American people. President Barack Obama will provide the leadership and strategies to strengthen our security at home."

How does throwing CIA agents under the proverbial bus assist in this commitment? I agree with the 1st sentence of the quote. The principle here is that the American President has the responsibility to protect the American people. President Bush did an excellent job of this in the wake of September 11th. The second sentence has become a sad, sick joke.

Our enemies are rejoicing as this administration assists them in weakening our national defenses. I pray that someone you love does not have to pay with their lives for this folly.