Tuesday, March 11, 2008

Waterboard Ban Veto Holds: CIA May Use "Harsh" Interrogation Techniques

From a certain point of view, this is bad news: "House fails to override Bush's veto on CIA waterboarding bill" Associated Press, March 11, 2008).

As a result of this failure, terrorists are now subject to harsh interrogation techniques such as waterboarding.

Many members of Congress, however, may draw satisfaction from the fact that they have gone on public record as valiantly striving to protect terrorists from agencies which try to hamper the terrorists' efforts to wage holy war against what they think are the enemies of Islam.

I can't help but feel that many of this nation's leaders are more concerned about what people who hate America think, than what reasonable steps can be taken to keep terrorists from killing thousands of Americans.

There are quite a few different opinions on the ban on waterboarding. I've replaced parts of a few 'relevant' expressions with "*," since I have a "pg" standard for this blog's posts.
  • " 'This is no time for Congress to abandon practices that have a proven track record of keeping America safe' " (President Bush)
  • A response to "Why Bush's waterboarding Veto is a Good Thing [PIC]" suggestion that legalized waterboarding would permit president Bush to be waterboarded:
    "Hey people are you f***ing idiots. Waterboarding is not legal and never was. Waterboarding is a aggravated assault which is a felony. Just because a person is in police custody does not mean that the police can assault the prisoners. The people who have waterboarded other people and will do so in the future are criminal felons. The whole veto a ban on waterboarding a big f***ing joke just to make idiots like you believe that it is legal in the first place, and you are eating it up." (digg.com political opinion section)
  • A set of statements and responses:
    • "So, before Liberals denounce an interrogation procedure which isn't even torture, ask yourself this - which foiled attack would you trade for not having waterboarded the likes of Kkalid Sheikh Mohammed?"
      Response: "lol
      What a f***ing DUPED SUCKER!!!"
    • "What about listening to your Intelligence Community when it gives you the following briefings that you ignore in 2001:
      'Bin Ladin Public Profile May Presage Attack' (May 3)
      'Terrorist Groups Said Co-operating on US Hostage Plot' (May 23)
      'Bin Ladin's Networks' Plans Advancing' (May 26)
      'Bin Ladin Attacks May Be Imminent' (June 23)
      'Bin Ladin and Associates Making Near-Term Threats' (June 25)
      'Bin Ladin Planning High-Profile Attacks' (June 30)
      'Planning for Bin Ladin Attacks Continues, Despite Delays' (July 2)"
      "you could list those briefing titles for years and years, they were received by Clinton every week also"
      Response: "I don't thank soldiers for s***. Nobody thanks me for doing my job."
    (Stern Fan Network)
  • "Someone needs to waterboard Bush ... while George Sr., Barbara, his two drunken 'Girls Gone Wild' daughters and his plastic b**** h*** wife watch. I'm guessing they'd laugh."
    "F*** George Bush, f*** his stupidity, f*** his greed and dishonesty, and f*** his embarrassment of a presidency. Fortunately, it will be over soon." (WTF: Issues)
There doesn't seem to be much middle ground. I'm inclined to agree with people who don't want terrorists to kill Americans, and who do not regard America as the source of all nastiness in the world.

One thing is certain: The current presidency will soon be over.

The next administration will discover that they live in the same world that the rest of us inhabit. One of the divisive issues in that world is that there are people who want to kill Americans: and Americans who don't want to be killed.

What keeps me from regarding the 'debate' over how to deal with wannabe mass murderers as a sort of mildly obscene joke is that the issue is real: and what's decided may have deadly consequences for people who aren't trying to kill others.

Previous Posts about Waterboarding in this Blog

Including why I don't think that waterboarding is "torture." Or, if it is, then final exams should be banned, too.

"Odd Allies: Opposition to Waterboarding and Web Censorship"
Another War-on-Terror Blog (March 9, 2008)
"Waterboarding: the Moralizing Has Begun"
Another War-on-Terror Blog (March 9, 2008)
"Waterboarding: Harsh, Yes - But is it Torture?"
Another War-on-Terror Blog (March 9, 2008)
"Waterboarding: What is it? Why Do it?"
Another War-on-Terror Blog (March 8, 2008)
"Waterboarding Ban Set for Veto Tomorrow: Let the Moralizing Begin"
Another War-on-Terror Blog (March 7, 2008)

No comments:

Unique, innovative candles

Visit us online:
Spiral Light CandleFind a Retailer
Spiral Light Candle Store


Note! Although I believe that these websites and blogs are useful resources for understanding the War on Terror, I do not necessarily agree with their opinions. 1 1 Given a recent misunderstanding of the phrase "useful resources," a clarification: I do not limit my reading to resources which support my views, or even to those which appear to be accurate. Reading opinions contrary to what I believed has been very useful at times: sometimes verifying my previous assumptions, sometimes encouraging me to change them.

Even resources which, in my opinion, are simply inaccurate are sometimes useful: these can give valuable insights into why some people or groups believe what they do.

In short, It is my opinion that some of the resources in this blogroll are neither accurate, nor unbiased. I do, however, believe that they are useful in understanding the War on Terror, the many versions of Islam, terrorism, and related topics.