LIVE RESULTS: Primary Night in America
Pentagon Does 'Not Believe' Aid to Temporary Pier Is Reaching Residents of Gaza
Just Wait Until You Hear Kirby's Reasoning for Why the WH Is Offering...
Biden and Democrats Put Political Agenda Ahead of Workers Amid FDIC Scandal
Meet the Gaslighting, Newsweek Butchers a Tucker 'Exclusive,' and Psaki Gets Lost in...
Major Shakeup at the World Economic Forum: 'Global Elitism Is on Notice'
Here's When Merrick Garland Will Testify Before the House Judiciary Committee
'Race Is Still Open,' Top Pollster Says
FBI Was Authorized to Use 'Deadly Force' in Mar-a-Lago Raid
Here's How Unused COVID-19 Funds Will Be Spent Under New Senate Bill
'Never Seen Such a Spectacle': Alan Dershowitz Was 'Shocked' by What He Saw...
Supreme Court Will Not Hear Parents’ Challenge to a Woke School District’s Transgender...
McConnell: Unlike Certain Others, I Will Offer Zero Condolences for the 'Butcher of...
A Swim Club Allowed a ‘Transgender’ to Use the Women’s Facilities. Here’s How...
Fossil Fuels Are the Answer to Asia’s Hot Summers

More Democrat Naivete

From this morning's New York Times:

Mr. Blair [Obama nominee for intelligence director] also suggested that some interrogation procedures [for detainees] would need to remain secret so potential adversaries could not train to resist them.


“We don’t want to provide open intelligence support for those who are coming after us,” he told members of the Intelligence Committee.

Remarkably, as the piece goes on to detail, congressional Democrats, including Sen. Dianne Feinstein, oppose this common sense approach.  She, among others, wants to legislate what methods can be used -- making the information unavoidably public.

It shouldn't take a rocket scientist to realize two things: If we publicize which interrogation methods can (or cannot be used), first, our enemies can be trained to resist them.   Second, our forces lose the psychological advantage that comes with being able to threaten an unresponsive terrorist with certain measures (even if he has no intention of using them) -- because, in fact, his adversary knows as well as he does what's actually allowed.  This is like handing a not-insubstantial weapon to our enemies. 

Surely if the Obama White House is willing to restrict access for journalists to its own political activities, it should be willing to restrict access to information about American interrogation methods for our enemies.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member


Trending on Townhall Videos