Thursday, October 25, 2007

On Torture

I cannot believe I'm hearing this debate in America. Now it's Rudy G., echoing AG nominee Mukasey on "waterboarding":

Linda Gustitus, who is the president of a group called the National Religious Campaign Against Torture, began her question by saying that President Bush’s nominee for attorney general, Michael B. Mukasey (who happens to be an old friend of Mr. Giuliani’s) had “fudged” on the question of whether waterboarding is torture.

“I wanted to ask you two questions,’’ she said. “One, do you think waterboarding is torture? And two, do you think the president can order something like waterboarding even though it’s against U.S. and international law?’’

Mr. Giuliani responded: “Okay. First of all, I don’t believe the attorney general designate in any way was unclear on torture. I think Democrats said that; I don’t think he was.’’

Ms. Gustitus said: “He said he didn’t know if waterboarding is torture.”

Mr. Giuliani said: “Well, I’m not sure it is either. I’m not sure it is either. It depends on how it’s done. It depends on the circumstances. It depends on who does it.

This should be simple: torture is wrong (and it doesn't work). America is better that this.

While I oppose torture, I'm willing to allow an exception. Anyone who claims that "waterboarding" isn't torture (such as Mukasy and Giuliani) should subject themselves to being "waterboarded" on national TV. If you are willing to subject other people to such treatment, you must undergo such treatment yourself first.


Suzy said...

Clearly, America is not better than this, and probably never was, sad to say. But the fact that people come right out now and say that some forms of torture are OK, is hideous. And yes, I agree. Have them subject themselves to it, if it's so OK.

Anonymous said...

If you claim it isn't torture, how can you complain of being tortured by the same procedure?

But if they recant, and say it is torture, I would not subject them to it at all. I would however subject them to a prosecution.