Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Vindicating Cheney (Obama isn’t going to subject us to another self-inflicted disaster)
National Review ^ | 5/15/2009 | Rich Lowry

Posted on 05/15/2009 6:01:27 AM PDT by SeekAndFind

Dick Cheney is getting vindication from an unlikely source — the very Obama administration he’s bedeviling in all his TV interviews.

The former vice president has dared to defend the Bush administration from the charge it ran a torturing, Constitution-shredding criminal enterprise for years under the guise of the “War on Terror.” He’s been duly subjected to the Two Minutes Hate — on an endless loop — from all the people who want him to slink to an undisclosed location never to emerge again.

Cheney’s defense is so notable because he’s so lonely. As the Bush administration is accused of war crimes, other Bush stalwarts have fallen silent. Where is Condi Rice (who at least defended herself when challenged on waterboarding by a fourth-grader the other day)? Where is former national-security adviser Steve Hadley? Where is George W. Bush, who wants to maintain post-presidential decorum but might bestir himself to stand up for the people who protected the nation during his presidency?

No, this is a job for a man with stomach of steel, who can take satisfaction in Obama’s Cheney-like turn. Obama has decided to “delay” the release of photos of detainee abuse — maybe secrecy does have an important role in national-security affairs. Obama is considering indefinite detention of terrorists on U.S. soil and reviving military commissions — maybe the system of detention and trials the Bush administration created wasn’t so lunatic after all.

The photo reversal brought thunderous denunciations from the Left. The American Civil Liberties Union, whose Freedom of Information Act request seemed set to force the release of the photos, huffed that Obama had adopted “the stonewalling tactics and opaque policies of the Bush administration.” Human Rights Watch decried “a blow to openness, accountability.” Obama might have led them to believe that he shares the juvenile, unalloyed commitment to transparency in all things of an ACLU litigator, but he apparently prefers to be commander in chief.

When Gen. Ray Odierno, commander in Iraq, and other military officials told the president that release of the photos endangered our troops, Obama took notice. They only applied his own logic to the case. During his Europe trip, Obama said, “When we saw what happened in Abu Ghraib, that wasn’t good for our security — that was a recruitment tool for terrorism.”

So why release more advertisements for the enemy? It’s not necessary for accountability, since abuses at detention facilities can be investigated without splashing the photographic evidence on every front page in the Middle East. Images are uniquely powerful. Jane Mayer’s indictment of Bush interrogation policies, The Dark Side, could be translated into Arabic and given to every male age 18-24 in the Middle East, and the terrorist dial would barely move. Publish one humiliating picture and it becomes the recruiting poster from hell.

To the extent Guantanamo Bay has stoked terrorist recruitment, it probably has more to do with the photos of the facility from its earliest days — with captives bound, in orange jumpsuits — than anything that happened there. The most infamous photo from Abu Ghraib — of a man with a black hood over his head, his arms outstretched — has negatively branded the War on Terror for millions, no matter how sincerely we hope to protect Muslims from the depredations of the vile murderers in their midst.

Obama isn’t going to subject us to another self-inflicted disaster in the information war. At least not yet. If he wants to keep the photos permanently under wraps — and show he’s truly willing to buck the loudest faction in his own coalition — he can’t rely on the courts, where he’s now appealing the decision to release them. He’ll have to issue an executive order exempting the photos from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.

Hmm — an executive order protecting secrecy in a sensitive matter involving national security. Who does that remind you of? If it’s not enough to make Cheney smile, it should get a well-earned smirk out of him.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rich Lowry is the editor of National Review


TOPICS: Editorial; Government; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: cheney; vindicated

1 posted on 05/15/2009 6:01:27 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Cheney is a loyal American, true to his oath to the Constitution, and true to his duty to the United States of America, her people, and her interests.

Obama and his administration are marxist ideologs who are only true to that ideology which has thems drunk on what they perceive as their path to more and more power, and who twist their interpretation of their oath...and everything else...to that end.

His decision to not release the photos, IMHO, needs to be guaged in that light...which is a light that is based on his actions, statements, and activities over many years.

THE AUDACITY OF TRUTH ABOUT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA

BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA IN HIS OWN WORDS

NOW WE KNOW WHAT A COMMUNITY ORGANIZER DOES

OBAMA, THE STOCK MARKET, AND ENERGY

THE AUDACITY OF TRUTH ABOUT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA'S UPBRINGING

IT'S TIME FOR A RETURN TO THE OLD SCHOOL

2 posted on 05/15/2009 6:05:06 AM PDT by Jeff Head (Freedom is not free...never has been, never will be. (www.dragonsfuryseries.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

If Obama issues the executive order, then I’ll believe Obama has listened. Right now I just think he’s trying to buy cover and “wash his hands” with independents and he’ll let the courts release the photos anyway.


3 posted on 05/15/2009 6:06:55 AM PDT by rhombus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Hmm — an executive order protecting secrecy in a sensitive matter involving national security.
Who does that remind you of?
If it’s not enough to make Cheney smile, it should get a well-earned smirk out of him.

Do not underestimate the power of the Cheney Side.


4 posted on 05/15/2009 6:13:39 AM PDT by McGruff (Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency - Barack Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: McGruff

What a great picture of Dick Cheney! I love this man! Sic ‘em Cheney!


5 posted on 05/15/2009 6:16:23 AM PDT by Ditter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I believe his reversal on the pictures was done for two reasons: 1) he doesn’t want them released before he goes to Egypt to apologize to the Muslims and 2) when he returns and the pictures are leaked soon after he will have plausible deniability. “Hey, I didn’t want them released”.


6 posted on 05/15/2009 6:16:46 AM PDT by Clink (The more you complain, the longer God lets you live.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: McGruff

Hey! Who is the naked babe reflecting in the VP’s sunglasses?


7 posted on 05/15/2009 6:36:37 AM PDT by guardian_of_liberty (We must bind the Government with the Chains of the Constitution...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

He stands alone.

Where are the pubs?

no unity.

pubs are screwed


8 posted on 05/15/2009 6:37:59 AM PDT by devistate one four (I will run to the sound of gunfire! TET68)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: devistate one four

I’d rather have 1 Dick Cheney than 1 million RINOs in the GOP.


9 posted on 05/15/2009 6:42:31 AM PDT by Anti-MSM (Personal responsibility...what a concept!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Anti-MSM

No kidding. He has a love for the country that shines through all of BS that is thrown at him.

Right now I see him as the leader of the party.


10 posted on 05/15/2009 6:48:39 AM PDT by devistate one four (I will run to the sound of gunfire! TET68)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Clink

I agree with you. The other possibility is that there are still some people in government agencies whom he doesn’t yet control and they have been able to kick up enough of a fuss to prevent him from going ahead with this. In that case, it will only be a matter of time, because he is consolidating unheard of power and the old system of dispersed power and “local” decisions is fast disappearing.

That said, I think your connection between his upcoming mosque-grovel and the delay in releasing these photos is probably right on target. He’ll make sure they’re released, just not right now.


11 posted on 05/15/2009 6:55:32 AM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Clink

Well how about that! Right after I posted my reply, I saw a story that said the photos are being “leaked.”


12 posted on 05/15/2009 6:57:27 AM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Thank you Mr. Cheney.


13 posted on 05/15/2009 7:02:35 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer (The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: guardian_of_liberty

Are you like me and always looking for naked babes? I saw her too.


14 posted on 05/15/2009 8:06:05 AM PDT by Piquaboy (Military veteran of 22 years in Navy, Air Force, and Army.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

0bama owes the Bush administration an apology. If I were Cheney I’d ratchet it up and demand an apology when 0bama did nothing but demonize them for military tribunals and then with this photo flap and it just shows what political demons they are and is damning evidence of what frauds they are. What exactly are the plans for the Guantanamo terrorists? They are showing themselves for what they are.


15 posted on 05/15/2009 11:08:30 AM PDT by bushfamfan (United States of America: July 4, 1776-November 4, 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson