'Inquirer' Sanctimony - A Rejoinder

By: Michael P. Tremoglie, The Bulletin --- The Philadelphia Inquirer's resident arbiter of morality and ethics, Chris Satullo, wrote a more than usual holier-than-thou column on July 1, declaring that we, as a nation, do not deserve to celebrate Independence Day because we have "sinned."This judge of civic virtue proclaimed that we have parted from the intentions of the Founders (ironic because liberals disdain the idea of original intent). This soi dissent sentinel of American civil liberties wrote:

"The America those men founded should never torture a prisoner. ... should never imprison people for years without charge or hearing. ... should never ship prisoners to foreign lands, knowing their new jailers might torture them. Such abuses once were committed by the arrogant crowns of Europe, spawning rebellion. Today, our nation does such things in the name of our safety. Petrified, unwilling to take the risks that love of liberty demands, we close our eyes." (One must wonder what "risks that love of liberty demands" Mr. Satullo has ever taken.)

Mr. Satullo's litany of American sins includes Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, CIA secret prisons, and "Rendition" of prisoners to foreign torture chambers. He does not explain what he means by these names - the readers are supposed to know without explanation. All good leftists certainly do know these terms. However, for others an explanation is required.

Abu Ghraib was a prison in Iraq in which, according to the International Committee of the Red Cross report of February 2004, prisoners deemed to have intelligence value were, "subjected to a variety of harsh treatments ... which in some cases was tantamount to torture."

Yes, prisoners were abused at Abu Ghraib. Crimes were committed, made public, investigated, prosecuted, and punishment was meted out. It is important to note that the information of what was occurring at Abu Ghraib came from a soldier - not a victim. An American soldier, the type of person the liberals in America ridicule as being a brutal loser exposed what was happening at Abu Ghraib - not a left-wing journalist. It is also important to note that our political leaders condemned the acts committed at Abu Ghraib. I think the Founders would have approved.

He mentions CIA Secret Prisons? If they are secret, why does Mr. Satullo know about them? The fact is, according to a November 2005 Washington Post article, "The secret detention system was conceived in the chaotic and anxious first months after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, when the working assumption was that a second strike was imminent. Since then, the arrangement has been increasingly debated within the CIA, where considerable concern lingers about the legality, morality and practicality of holding even unrepentant terrorists in such isolation and secrecy, perhaps for the duration of their lives. Mid-level and senior CIA officers began arguing two years ago that the system was unsustainable ..."

So, far from being the practice of a ruthless bunch of vicious thugs, this tactic was conceived with the best of intentions. People were trying prevent the murder of more innocent people. After some calm deliberation, there were second thoughts about its legality and morality.

Sometimes people do things they or others find morally objectionable to save innocent lives - the Dirty Harry or Ticking Time Bomb scenarios are often cited as examples of this.

What would Mr. Satullo do to protect himself or his family? Would he kill someone? Killing is more painful and more permanent than torture.

Another of Mr. Satullo's American sins, is the "rendition" program. What he really means is "extraordinary" rendition. Rendition occurs all the time in the form of deportation or extradition. However, extraordinary rendition is done via extralegal means.

These programs describe the capture of a suspected terrorist who is sent to another country, where allegedly torture is practiced, for interrogation. (Although it uncertain why this would be necessary since torturing of suspected terrorists was supposed to be common in the U.S.).

Mr. Satullo's condemnation of the practice of rendition is where he reveals his true motives. It seems that rendition only became a sin during the Bush administration.

The practice of "extraordinary rendition" began during the Clinton administration. However, a search of the Inquirer archives and a Google search revealed no articles written condemning rendition during the Clinton years by Mr. Satullo or the Inquirer.

It seems the only thing that Mr. Satullo really considers a sin was that the American people elected George W. Bush twice.

As for me, I will gladly pay tribute to the nation, where we do our best to protect the lives of innocent people; a nation where we will air our dirty laundry and clean it; a nation whose most promising youth have given their lives to ensure that others may be free.

So, start the parades, take out the soaring speeches, this year, once again, America deserves to celebrate its birthday.

Michael P. Tremoglie is author of the critically acclaimed novel A Sense of Duty, available at Barnesandnoble.com.