Republican Presidential hopeful Rick Santorum has one for John McCain, telling a radio show host on Tuesday that Mr. McCain, a man who was a documented, tortured, prisoner of war for 5 years, “doesn’t understand how enhanced interrogation works.”
Mr. Santorum was referring to an op-ed written by John McCain, in which Mr. McCain stated that the capture and killing of Osama Bin Laden had nothing to do with enhanced interrogation or water-boarding. In the op-ed, Senator McCain states that after talking to CIA Director Leon Pinetta, he was under the impression that “none of the three detainees who were waterboarded provided Abu Ahmed’s real name, his whereabouts or an accurate description of his role in al-Qaeda.”
Santorum said on the show;
“Everything I’ve read shows that we would not have gotten this information as to who this man was if it had not been for information from people who were subject to enhanced interrogation, and so this idea that we didn’t ask that question while Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was being water-boarded, he doesn’t understand how enhanced interrogation works. I mean, you break somebody, and after they’re broken, they become cooperative.”
Personally, I think it’s a rather strange coincidence that Santorum used the word “broken” in describing the point where enhance interrogation or torture begins producing information. And even stranger is the fact that he used the word in trying to dispute Senator McCain’s op-ed.
It is common knowledge that John McCain suffered many broken bones in his arms and legs from the events in 1968 that lead to his capture as a prisoner of war and his bout with torture. And even today, the effects of those events can still be seen in the limited movements of Mr. McCain.
If Santorum is correct with his “broken” claim, then we must wonder exactly what information did John McCain give while he was being broken. Maybe Mr. Santorum knows something we don’t.
One reply on “Rick Santorum Questions John McCain’s Torture Claims”
Interesting point you make Ez. McCain can easily stop that noise by admitting that his being tortured never caused him to give up any information that would have jeopardized national security. If he remains silent after Santorum’s taunt, then that would be very suspicious indeed! Another point would be that information derived from torture is only pertinent if the tortured REALLY KNOWS SOMETHING. And how could the torturer ever be sure? If a tortured individual does not have the info sought but is threatened with continuous torture– than hell! that person is gonna start making shit up to get it to stop.