What If Waterboarding Was Never Used

So what if we didn't water board those 3 prisoners. (Yes, the CIA only ever used it on 3 prisoners). What if we didn't force the issue and use enhanced techniques, and the thwarted attack on Los Angeles was allowed to happen? And then imagine that it was discovered that we had prisoners in custody with knowledge of the pending event. Then what if Bush appears in front of the country and said, "we could have used harsher techniques to get the information from him, but America doesn't torture." Calls for his impeachment would have come immediately.

The press and the bloggers accused President Bush of "allowing" the 9/11 attacks to happen because there was intelligence that something, not what, but something, was being planned. If the second wave, revealed through water boarding of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, was allowed to succeed because KSH was not talking and we weren't forcing the issue, what would the hue and cry have been? Had that happened, the press would not be asking the question of why we engaged in "torture" via water boarding, but would instead be asking why we didn't do everything in our power to find out the information. There would have been Congressional hearings on why exactly we didn't go Jack Bauer on their asses. President Bush would have been accused of being weak and unable to protect the United States.

Because the attack didn't happen, people have the audacity to second guess the CIA and the President in a very tough situation. If the attack had happened, what interrogation methods would have been called for?

Do we really value our lofty values and principles more than the lives of our citizens? If you find that another 3,000 Americans could be killed, is standing on your principles really the right thing to do? Personally, if I thought somebody had that knowledge, I'd be prepared to do way more than water board them. I'd far rather save lives than say we don't torture.

Teleprompter Malfunctions - Vast Right Wing Conpsiracy Suspected

Sources indicate that the teleprompter the President uses to speak to his family over breakfast seriously malfunctioned this morning. The teleprompter was pulling a feed from Fox News instead of the words that were originally programmed. This resulted in the President speaking to his wife and children about the increase in spending compared to the decrease in revenue. The President was reportedly "mad as a hornet" over the malfunction.

Sources inside the White House have revealed that a vast right wing conspiracy is suspected. They believe that Republicans and other extremists, knowing that the President is incapable of coherent speech without the teleprompter, are attempting to sabotage the message of the current administration. They believe this was a test to see if the teleprompter could be hacked and the president's message replaced with their own. They are reportedly very grateful that this was identified over breakfast and did not advance to the daily briefing where the teleprompter is also used.

We have also been told that Homeland Security Secretary, Janet Napolitano, uses this attack to justify the identification of Americans in the Conservative movement as potential terrorists. The CIA will no longer be monitoring communications with Al Qaeda but will instead be monitoring calls into talk radio.

Napolitano said, "We believe that the terrorists who attacked the White House listen to talk radio and will be calling in to take responsibility." With that statement, the Democrats in Congress are pushing to have the Fairness Doctrine re-established stating that the imbalance on talk radio is leading to terrorism within the country.

A new Teleprompter Czar will be appointed shortly to ensure that the hack is not repeated.