Redstate

Just as long as the *Right People* are doing it, you see.

By Moe Lane Posted in Democrats — Comments (6) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

I do not say that it would be almost worth it to see Hillary Clinton elected, just to watch the congealed expressions on various antiwar movement supporters' faces as they grimly tried to pretend that no, really, this is what they were aiming for all along. I do say that seeing them go through all of that will likely give me what small comfort that I might find in a Clinton Presidency (Via Volokh):

5 Myths About Rendition (and That New Movie)
By Daniel Benjamin
Saturday, October 20, 2007; 8:28 PM

With hearings in Congress, legal cases bouncing up to the Supreme Court and complaints from Canada and our European allies, the issue of rendition is everywhere. There's even a new, eponymously titled movie in a theater near you, starring Reese Witherspoon as a bereft wife whose innocent husband gets kidnapped and Meryl Streep as the frosty CIA chief who ordered the snatch. Like most covert actions and much of the war on al-Qaeda, the practice is shrouded in mystery -- and, increasingly, the suspicion that it's synonymous with torture and lawlessness.

In fact, the term "rendition" in the counterterrorism context means nothing more than moving someone from one country to another, outside the formal process of extradition. For the CIA, rendition has become a key tool for getting terrorists from places where they're causing trouble to places where they can't. The problem is where these people are taken and what happens to them when they get there. As a former director for counterterrorism policy on the National Security Council staff, I've been involved with the issue of rendition for nearly a decade -- and some of the myths surrounding it need to be cleared up.

He then goes on to note five myths, all the while carefully promoting Myth #6 (Everything bad about the rendition process is because of George W Bush, the big meanie), but hey, it's a former Clinton staffer. Not that I would suggest that the man would also want to be a future Clinton staffer, too.

Oh, my, no. That would be cynical of me.

Read on.

Anyway, the five myths are below - the article goes into each one, with the usual mix of actual information and artful innuendo against Senator Clinton's political enemies that we've come to expect from her people*:

1. Rendition is something the Bush administration cooked up.

2. People who are "rendered" inevitably end up in a foreign slammer -- or worse.

3. Step one of a rendition involves kidnapping the suspect.

4. Rendition is just a euphemism for outsourcing torture.

5. Pretty much anyone -- including U.S. citizens and green card holders -- can be rendered these days.

Say hello to the new narrative. Presuming that Hillary Clinton actually gets the nomination - which, judging from her opposition, is not quite as likely as the sun rising tomorrow, but not by much - this will be the Approved Democratic Position on rendition. Campaign activists will be expected to act accordingly; complaints may be directed to the official campaign suggestion box, where they will be destroyed, unread. Of course, should Clinton actually win this will only be the Official Approved Democratic Position on rendition: the actual policy will most likely remain unchanged from the time of the Bush administration.

I understand that there are indeed individuals out there who find the entire concept of rendition - particularly extraordinary rendition - itself to be reprehensible, no matter who's doing it. They are unlikely to be thrilled with my above observations. Welcome to the Law of Unintended Consequences, folks: this is is what happens when you pick the wrong horse. The antiwar movement was never going to actually end the war - and now the rendition critics are inextricably associated with it, and will thus share its fate.

What? Oh, nothing too bad. Just a return to anonymity, watching others change reality.

Moe

*And, I must admit: there is something aesthetically pleasing about watching a real professional at work. The anti-Bush stuff that we've gotten over the last seven years... well, what was that Dilbert line, again? "Three monkeys, ten minutes?"