CYNICAL

Funny how people work so diligently to control the flow of information when truth contradicts behavior. The Yankees’ ARod has been masterful at this, urging us to cheer on his home run trots with zero acknowledgement of illegal drugs... oops... When new information surfaced discrediting him, then he decided to be honest with us. I am certain he must now be telling the truth. As he said in an interview with ESPN’s Peter Gammons, upon the discovery of his past lies, “Today, I'm here to tell the truth, and I feel good about that.” Good, good... you should feel good, Alex... now that you are being completely honest. Of course, you are.

The current truth debate seemingly rests in our nation’s capital, discerning the appropriateness of “waterboarding.” Waterboarding, as you know, is an interrogation technique that immobilizes one in custody on his back with his head inclined downward; water is then poured over his face and breathing passages, simulating drowning, allowing the person to believe they are about to die. Waterboarding is as old as the Spanish Inquisition. The argument about its appropriateness is valid.

In the wake of 9/11, when the death of 2,974 mostly American civilians was freshly disturbing, as a nation, we were seemingly more apt to fervently attain information on the masterminding of such evil. As with all events, as time passes, so does the fervency. Current public opinion (which let me remind you, is not always an immense source of wisdom) tells us that some of our past national information-attaining attempts are no longer acceptable. Waterboarding reigns at the top of that list.

Wanting to conform to public opinion (as such is known to be accompanied by certain political advantages), many rushed to publicly declare waterboarding an atrocity (often declared soon after invoking the name of a specific, for-now-unnamed, former administration). Less emotionally driven, President Obama and Sen. John McCain both expressed valid concern that the technique violates American ideals.

The conflict arises, however, for House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). Rep. Pelosi jumped on the atrocity bandwagon, declaring the method as “torture,” even though she was the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee. On April 23rd, she stated, “We were not told of waterboarding or any other enhanced interrogation methods used.”

It was then reported that in Sept. of 2002, 4 members of Congress, including Pelosi, met in secret for a first look at a unique CIA program designed to wring vital information from reticent terrorism suspects in U.S. custody. For more than an hour, the bipartisan group was given a virtual tour of the CIA's overseas detention sites and the harsh techniques interrogators had devised to try to make their prisoners talk.  Among the techniques described was waterboarding. No objections were raised.

Ah, how the fervency wanes...

Working diligently to control the information flow, Pelosi backtracked this week and admitted she was briefed on said interrogation methods, but insisted she did not know they “were used." Then on Friday, with others in the meeting discounting that proclamation, Pelosi acknowledged she was told they would be used, although interestingly, that account also conflicts with CIA records.

What is the truth? Does anyone feel good about this one?

And we wonder why many of us are cynical about politics... about the dishonesty... about Republicans and Democrats alike... about the motivation for conforming to public opinion... or saving one’s own skin.

AR