Paul Krugman reveals his ignorance (again)

Yes, I know the NYT columinist is a Nobel-prize winner. So who am I to argue with him? The problem is, his prize was in economics, which stands to reason, because he is an economist.

But now he feels as if he is an expert in everything else: Politics, War, The Middle East, and even morality. You name it, and Krugman has an opinion on it. An opinion which is unlikely to ever change. Especially when the name "Bush" is involved.

In his recent blog entry Krugman states:

Let’s say this slowly: the Bush administration wanted to use 9/11 as a pretext to invade Iraq, even though Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. So it tortured people to make them confess to the nonexistent link.

There’s a word for this: it’s evil.

Hmmm... forget that it was normally Krugman and his ilk who usually ridiculed Bush for his (as they saw it) simplistic use of the word "evil". And let's forget for one moment that the "torture" he's talking about was simply waterboarding. Heck, we'll even forget that Bush never claimed a link between Iraq and 9/11 in the first place. And let's even forget that if Bush was really torturing for that one purpose, he could have easily found someone who would have confessed to it. But he did not, and there was no such person.

Here's the other problem with such hyperbole: "Evil" is the blatant disregard for life and liberty. Period.

People who torture for fun are evil. People who torture for money are evil. People who torture in order to save innocent lives may be misguided, insensitive, or flat-out wrong, but they are not evil. The comic-book character "The Punisher" did this all the time, and he was considered a hero. A flawed hero, but a definitely a hero nonetheless.

I don't support the waterboarding technique. But neither am I going to smear those who used it against the most ruthless organization in the world.

Bonus: David Nieporant predicted the Krugman column 7 years ago!