Count Basie and His Orchestra 1965
Show of the Week
All of us, every single man, woman, and child on the face of the Earth were born with the same unalienable rights; to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And, if the governments of the world can't get that through their thick skulls, then, regime change will be necessary.
On Friday evening, the White House announced that there have been over 40,000 illegal immigrants–children and adults–detained at the border in the last three months alone. Claiming that the Obama administration has made “unprecedented investments” in border security, the White House pushed for amnesty and talked up various initiatives with Central American nations to deter migration.
They did not mention any specific programs in which the Obama administration has explicitly told migrants there is no “amnesty” on the other side of the border. For all the accomplishments the memo touts, Obama has still not gone to Central America or the U.S.-Mexico border to address the crisis.
The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them. This obligation is compulsory because it is written in the Qur’an as a divine order.
‘Invite all to the Way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious.’ -- Q 16:125
So, too, the inevitable consequences for those who refuse the Da’wa call to Islam are spelled out in the Qur’an:
‘Who receiveth guidance, receiveth it for his own benefit; who goeth astray doth so to his own loss…When We decide to destroy a population, We first send a definite order to those among them who are given the good things of this life and yet transgress; so that the word is proved true against them: then it is We destroy them utterly.’
-- Q 17:15-16
From these Qur’anic citations, then, it can be seen that Da’wa, the invitation to convert or submit, is preliminary to jihad. Jihad will inevitably follow Da’wa if the call to convert or submit is ignored. But only after due warning has been given are Muslim forces free to launch attacks of military conquest.
Though satirical, Le Canard is known for excellent ties with French political insiders — especially with the Foreign Office in Paris, where, according to the paper, Kerry mocked the Israeli leader to several foreign ministers while seeking a Gaza cease-fire last week.
Bad enough to bad-mouth an allied leader to Europeans who’ve been less than supportive of your ally. Worse to do it also in the presence of officials of two nations that are patrons of the terrorists that ally is now fighting. Worst of all to do it where your foolish comments will get leaked to the public.
That Le Canard dropped its scoop Wednesday, after a host of Obama officials had spent days insisting that Kerry supports Israel, is just more salt in the wound.
This is not just about Israel. It’s about every nation pondering what it means to be a US ally.
A television reporter from Finland’s Helsingin Sanomat, the “Helsinki Dispatch,” spent the night reporting from Gaza’s Al Shifa Hospital, where she saw Hamas militants launching a rocket from the hospital’s parking lot, confirming a war crime that few journalists have dared report.
Using hospitals, schools and mosques to store weapons or as a military base is against international rules of war.
The Al Shifa Hospital, in particular, has been an area of focus after journalists reported that Hamas was using the hospital as a headquarters, but many of their reports were withdrawn, deleted on social media or actually taken off their newspaper websites because of fears for their safety and retribution from Hamas for reporting the truth.
The Helsingin Sanomat report was titled, ‘HS spent the night at a hospital in Gaza.’ Their reporter, whose name is not shown in the segment uploaded to YouTube on Friday, is reporting from outside of the hospital, where she said, “Right in the back parking lot of Al Shifa Hospital, a rocket was launched, two o’clock in the morning.”
“Really, it happened right in the area, the sound of it was really loud,” she said. “It’s true that rockets are launched here from the Gazan side into Israel.”
In a discussion on MSNBC's Hardball program about whether the government ought to consider prosecuting people involved in enhanced interrogation techniques used on some terror suspects, former U.S. Rep.
Duncan Hunter, a Republican from California, argued that the issue really comes down to waterboarding. "And," he said, "waterboarding is not torture."
In fact, said Hunter, a Vietnam veteran and former candidate for president, "We waterboard, incidentally, hundreds of our own military personnel. They waterboard themselves in training to toughen themselves up."
He added, "The Geneva Convention .. .was analyzed by the lawyers in place, and they came to the conclusion, especially about waterboarding, because that's the primary thing, that, since we do it to our own soldiers, by the hundreds, incidentally, and it doesn't hurt them, and they — and it makes them tougher, and it doesn't hurt anybody — Khalid Sheikh Mohammed gained weight after he was waterboarded — we decided that, since we do that to our own soldiers in training... we‘re not going to consider that torture. "
Hunter later challenged host Chris Matthews saying, "But the point is, if we do it, are we torturing American soldiers? You have to answer yes if you consider waterboarding to be torture."
Matthews said the difference is that U.S. service people know they are in training. They know they aren't going to be killed. "That captured person who is one of our enemies has no idea what we‘re doing when we submit him to water torture."
Said Hunter: "If we use it with our own soldiers in training, as we do waterboarding, then it should be allowed with people who have killed thousands of Americans."Now, Politifact says this is slightly misleading. Here's why:
But while the techniques may have been derived from SERE training, a different, more intense brand of waterboarding was used on terror suspects, according to recently released CIA documents.
According to a May 7, 2004, CIA Inspector General special report on interrogation techniques used on terror suspects, which has some parts redacted,
"OIG’s (Office of the Inspector General's) review of the videotapes revealed that the waterboard technique employed at (redacted) was different from the technique as described in the DoJ (Department of Justice) opinion and used in the SERE training. The difference was in the manner in which the detainee’s breathing was obstructed. At the SERE School and in the DoJ opinion, the subject’s airflow is disrupted by the firm application of a damp cloth over the air passages; the interrogator applies a small amount of water to the cloth in a controlled manner. By contest, the Agency interrogator (redacted) continuously applied large volumes of water to a cloth that covered the detainee’s mouth and nose. One of the psychologists/interrogators acknowledged that the Agency’s use of the technique differed from that used in SERE training and explained that the Agency’s technique is different because it is 'for real' and is more poignant and convincing." The report also says the CIA's Office of Medical Services has characterized the SERE waterboarding as "so different from the subsequent Agency usage as to make it almost irrelevant."
The office said its frequency and intensity raised questions about whether it was effective or medically safe.
So we think Hunter misleads a bit by equating waterboarding in training of military personnel with the technique used on terror suspects. According to the CIA inspector general's report, the technique used on the suspects was more powerful and convincing.
And in the case of one terror suspect, it was used 183 times, often in rapid succession. So to argue the technique isn't torture because it is used on American servicemen as part of training ignores that it was not used in the same way.
Still, Hunter is correct that the U.S. military has waterboarded servicemen as part of survival training. And so we rule his statement Mostly True.