Astoundingly, amidst the
recent clamor over Barack Obama's drone program we have seen the
media turn into hypocrites. Shock of shocks ... how can it be?
But when the President who an overwhelming majority of media
members voted for was running for President, they parroted his
message of compassion, and American humility, and the need for us
to talk to our enemies instead of torturing them.
Being in the solid minority of media members who held that we
either kill the guys who are trying to kill us, or at the very
least, extract information about when they are next going to try to
kill us, I couldn't have disagreed more strongly.
Then President Obama threw some curveballs at the media that
supported him. He kept all of President Bush's senior defense
advisors. Kept his Secretary of Defense. And even increased the use
of drones and kills by drones in the war on terror.
The media that supported him -- predictably -- didn't say much
about it, because they were never principally all that upset about
the stuff they were criticizing President Obama's predecessor
about. They were merely pandering to public opinion because they
hated President Bush (mostly for stuff unrelated to the war, like
abortion and sex) and they knew that piling on in the area of
defense, torture, and such would increase the overall fury and
drive Obama to victory. (Notice how it didn't even matter that John
McCain held many of the same beliefs, and they pummeled him just
In recent days, however, President Obama's drone program has
come under observation. He has killed American citizens without the
benefit of a trial or a verdict. He has ordered the deaths of
Americans -- in fact -- without so much as charges or
And I'm okay with that.
In broad general principles, Americans have always viewed those
who betrayed the nation -- and by betrayal it is easy to agree that
collaborating with those who have taken an oath to eliminate us all
fits the definition -- deserve to lose their rights as citizens,
and be counted among the enemy dead.
There were Americans among the dead in Japan and Germany
following World War II and there was no need to shed tears because
they had shifted loyalties to align themselves with those who
sought our end.
In the war on terror, these "Americans" have surrendered their
identities, loyalties, and abilities for the purposes of
strengthening the efforts of those who would nuke us all if they
but had the capacity to. In a technically legal sense -- as in only
on paper -- they may be Americans. But they have taken different
names, different looks, different views, different languages, and
different locales as "home." So how are they yet "Americans?"
Further, the taking up of arms (which should be meant to include
laptops with strategic plans, attendance in training camps, and the
assistance in jihad against U.S. targets, persons, and interests)
is the most overt act of treason, betrayal, and threat that can be
communicated. Some have gone so far as to create dogma and
propaganda for the enemy, asserting overt threats against their
nation of origin. For these reasons and more, if they die as a
result of a drone strike, Americans should not be confused about
the issue of conscience. They are responsible for their choices,
and we are responsible for ours. The neutralization of their threat
makes Americans safer.
The media makes many of these arguments in their defense of the
President. They are rational arguments, and I agree with them.
But many of these same priorities and neutralizations can be
achieved by capturing the same operatives. However in capturing
them, there is one added bonus: information.
If capturing these individuals and interrogating would yield us
greater knowledge of coming plans and attacks, doesn't it make
sense that harvesting that information and then letting them sit
and think about their sins would be equally beneficial? What if
after sitting and thinking about things over long periods of time
we could even recruit 1 to 3% of them to become covert operatives
for us? What if we could get them to re-infiltrate old networks,
former circles that we can't penetrate, and continue the stream of
information for us long term? Doesn't this ultimately make much
The media will scream, "What you're advocating is torture." But
it doesn't have to be ....
Torture consists of methods used where bones are broken,
permanent damage is done to the subject's body, and long-term
effects emerge as part of that person's physical reality. One only
need to look at the difficulty Senator McCain has pulling his arms
back and you understand that true torture took something from his
life that he cannot reclaim.
But water-boarding does none of that .... Sure it scares the
jihad out of them. It makes them believe they are about to see
Jesus. But it is not torture. Because it is not torture, we have
used it in the training of our own forward serving military men and
women in SERE school.
And for the jokers who would still try to argue "morality," does
one honestly believe that water-boarding -- but allowing the person
to continue living -- is less moral than turning them into
The agenda-driven media has had its naked partisan fervor
Common sense would tell us they are wrong. Based mostly on moral
Because while killing evildoers is more honorable than letting
them kill again, getting them to give us greater amounts of
information so that we can stop their attempts before they start is
even more honorable.
It's just so sad that the majority of talking heads can't
understand the difference between the two.
Kevin McCullough (firstname.lastname@example.org) is the nationally
syndicated host of "The Kevin McCullough Show" weekdays and
"Baldwin/McCullough Radio" Saturdays (9-11 p.m. EST) on more than
600 radio stations. His newest best-selling hardcover from Thomas
Nelson Publishers -- "No He Can't: How Barack Obama is Dismantling Hope
and Change" -- is in stores now.
This column is printed with permission. Opinions expressed in 'Perspectives' columns published by OneNewsNow.com are the sole responsibility of the article's author(s), or of the person(s) or organization(s) quoted therein, and do not necessarily represent those of the staff or management of, or advertisers who support the American Family News Network, OneNewsNow.com, our parent organization or its other affiliates.