Unable to distinguish between reality and a TV show, Blogging Tory Paul E. Marek hypothesizes the most amazing hypotheses:
A child porn ring abducts your 5 year old daughter.
The police catch one of the abductors, who refuses to give up his fellow members. The police intend on using "enhanced" interrogation techniques to discover the whereabouts of your little girl.
But, in a fit of "progressive" high dudgeon you insist that the police do no such thing. Your child, as a result, becomes a rape victim and is never found again except as a star in kiddie porn videos, even though "enhanced" techniques may have saved her.
Wow, that is some kind of impressive. I am always amazed by how much is known with absolute certainly in these fictional scenarios:
- You know your daughter's been abducted.
- You know it was by a child porn ring.
- You know the person you have in custody is one of the abductors.
- You know your daughter's still alive.
- Finally, you know that your only recourse is torture, despite the fact that offering someone a sweetheart deal to cut his sentence is sometimes an amazingly persuasive thing to do.
And yet, with all that absolutely undebatable knowledge at hand, you curiously have no idea where your daughter might be. None whatsoever. That's always struck me as a little odd but, what the heck, inventing wildly improbable scenarios seems to be the only stunt left in the torture apologist's bag of rationalizations.
Is anyone surprised?
BY THE WAY, has anyone else ever noticed that the people who are perfectly fine with torture because nothing could ever conceivably go wrong are the same ones who are furious with Canada's Human Rights Commission because the CHRC represents an out-of-control, unaccountable government bureaucracy whose arbitrary and unfounded accusations have the power to utterly ruin the lives of innocent citizens?
Really, the cognitive dissonance must be staggering.
WTF? Apparently, Mr. Marek understands full well the underlying fatal flaw in the justification of torture:
Enhanced interrogation works when the subject has important information to divulge. Enhance interrogation doesn't work when the subject has no important information to divulge.
And yet, after openly admitting that "enhanced interrogation" has no value when there is no information to be obtained, Marek still has no issue with torture.
The mind reels. Truly, it reels. I don't know what to say.