So impeachment is off the table. Well, screw that.
Our Monkey in chief is endorsing terrorism by vetoing limits on torture.
Bush speaks:
He said he rejected the intelligence bill, passed by Senate and Congress, as it took "away one of the most valuable tools in the war on terror"
read the whole fabulous article here
He should not be allowed to speak. Everything he says is the misguided-black-and-white-with-us-or-against-us-no-room-for-diplomacy ideals that we all learned in the second grade.
Unfortunately, where most of us moved on as we turned 9, GWBush appears to have stopped right there. Preferring to learn how to be the biggest bully around instead of how to work with people. And somehow this friggin idiot got appointed president of what used to be the greatest nation on earth. Thanks to him, now we're just the world's biggest police state.
The people out there that are not in the CIA (and some who are) agree that torture does not produce actionable items in the war against terror. They also agree that waterboarding is torture. For some reason Bush and his handlers have found some sort of legal definition (a la "I did not have sex with that woman") that allow them to sleep at night by splitting hairs.
I don't know how they rationalize it but it must be something like this: The 16th century French didn't use waterboarding, so it must not be torture.
Our next president must be anti-torture. Nothing else matters. Human rights are the most important thing there is.
On a personal note to George W. and Laura Bush, you make me ashamed of my religion. I would like for you to stop telling people you are United Methodists. It's hard enough in this world to explain why I go to church without having to explain why I go to a church that has the same name over the door as the religion that you claim to be. The doctrine of my church has never supported torture, it never will. You are liar.
More on waterboarding from Mindfully.org
The current practice of waterboarding was known previously as "the water cure." It involves tying the victim to a board with the head lower than the feet so that he or she is unable to move. A piece of cloth is held tightly over the face, and water is poured onto the cloth. Breathing is extremely difficult and the victim will be in fear of imminent death by asphyxiation. However, it is relatively difficult to aspirate a large amount of water since the lungs are higher than the mouth, and the victim is unlikely [but quite possible] actually to die if this is done by skilled practitioners. [No definition of skilled practitioners provided by Wikipedia, but when used with the word torture, it should probably be found in close proximity to executioner or bully. Required qualities for such a practitioner would be a rather low self esteem and a desire to see others suffer. These qualities are regularly found in armed services and guards. Furthermore, people doubt this are generally those same people who would perform torture on others. It is nothing more than a sadistic practice that has no positive outcome on gaining truthful information. Quite the contrary, even the military has stated repeatedly that tortured prisoners state what their torturers want to hear in order to stop the torture. This fact is obvious once someone experiences waterboarding. Experiencing waterboarding is to experience drowning.] Waterboarding may be used by captors who wish to impose anguish without leaving marks on their victims as evidence.


















3 Comments
He probably doesn't think it is much because he used to dunk the heads of nerds into the toilet in the boys bathroom in high school. In turn, maybe his head ought to be dunked into a toilet bowl.
Here's a little nugget of information I learned (off of "The Daily Show" of course). American GIs were waterboarded by the Japanese during World War II (WWII). After the war, they were executed for it.
So, it's torture when it's done to us, but it's not torture when we do it to them?
Where is an asteroid when you need one…
And just to twist the knife a little more, seems that GW's "Justice" Department has officially walked away from the Microsoft monopoly case:
http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/03/10/bush-adminstration-lets-vole
Is there *anything* positive to say about this guy?