Torture officially legal now for the US.

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: TallBill
I'm so fucking happy that he vetoed this bullshit bill. We waterboard our captives to get information to save lives of american troops and civilians. The bad guy just cuts of our captives heads.

I know signatures tend to fade into the background, and that some people just ignore them on purpose, so I figured mine might bear repeating...

Implicit in the term 'national defense' is the notion of defending those values and ideas which set this Nation apart...it would indeed be ironic if, in the name of national defense, we would sanction the subversion of one of those liberties...which makes the defense of the Nation worthwhile. -- Chief Justice Earl Warren, US v Robel

I think the usefulness of torture has been wildly overstated, but what strikes me as worse is how quickly people are willing to forget that there are things we're supposed to stand for besides safety. And once you've discarded your ethics in the name of efficiency, it's awfully hard to get them back.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: TallBill
I'm so fucking happy that he vetoed this bullshit bill. We waterboard our captives to get information to save lives of american troops and civilians. The bad guy just cuts of our captives heads.

I know signatures tend to fade into the background, and that some people just ignore them on purpose, so I figured mine might bear repeating...

Implicit in the term 'national defense' is the notion of defending those values and ideas which set this Nation apart...it would indeed be ironic if, in the name of national defense, we would sanction the subversion of one of those liberties...which makes the defense of the Nation worthwhile. -- Chief Justice Earl Warren, US v Robel

I think the usefulness of torture has been wildly overstated, but what strikes me as worse is how quickly people are willing to forget that there are things we're supposed to stand for besides safety. And once your discarded your ethics in the name of efficiency, it's awfully hard to get them back.

QFT

 

[Noobtastic]

:lips: my (_!_). There is NOTHING to chill about.

ok?

In addition to being prohibited by U.S. law, TORTURE is outlawed under the Geneva Conventions throughout the civilized world at any time, for any ostensible "reason."

so?

according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E...ention_on_Human_Rights

the eu recognizes that the use of the five techniques of sensory deprivation and even the beatings of prisoners are not torture. Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights it was ruled makes such actions the lesser offense of "inhuman or degrading treatment"[2]. The European Court of Human Rights ruling that sensory deprivations and beatings do not rise to the level of torture is the present relevant law in Europe.[3]

geneva convention is such an abused scapegoat...seriously.

There's a reason they're called LAWS.

self-righteous much?

There's a reason why the laws of all nations that are signatories to treaties bind those nations as much as any of their own written laws.

you are deluded.

There's also a reason why nazi war criminals were tried and convicted after WW II.

wtf?

There's also a reason why Former Yugoslav President, Slobodan Milosevic was tried at the Hague for war crimesm although he died before he was convicted, four years into his trial, and the charges against other Serb war criminals remain in force to this day.

....this relates to torture, how?

And all I'm saying is, you're so full of shit, your ass is jealous.

i confess.

Your kind of thinking is exactly why George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and the entier Bushwhacko administration are traitors to our nation.

???

If they are never charged for their crimes in this country

what crimes?

I hope the International Court has the balls to charge them for their crimes once they're out of office.

who cares about the international court? you have a vicious habit of questioning everything that is authority yet worship the "courts" and "laws". im just confused where your loyalties lie.

Exactly how much would you support illegal torture if the powers that be decided wrongly that YOU were one of those to be torturtured?

i dont support illegal torture. i recognize the legitimacy of torture and its use in effectives (though small) in many wars. im not the one huffing and puffing and screaming traitor and chief like a bipolar creepazoid.

There is no metaphor. It's a direct statement. TORTURE IS EVIL.

right.

If you support that evil... I'll say that word again... EVIL... then YOU ARE such evil. :thumbsdown: :|

nice fallacy.

Only a lying, murderous putz would have the timerity to invoke the name of your alleged "savior" and "prince of peace" in an attempt to justify behavior so contradictory to his message.

what?

You're the jackass who equated illegal torture to a jaywalking.

uhh, no. i equated the process of prosecuting torture to jaywalking. COMPREHENSION IS KEY

 

[Noobtastic]

:lips: my (_!_). There is NOTHING to chill about.

ok?

In addition to being prohibited by U.S. law, TORTURE is outlawed under the Geneva Conventions throughout the civilized world at any time, for any ostensible "reason."

so?

according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E...ention_on_Human_Rights

the eu recognizes that the use of the five techniques of sensory deprivation and even the beatings of prisoners are not torture. Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights it was ruled makes such actions the lesser offense of "inhuman or degrading treatment"[2]. The European Court of Human Rights ruling that sensory deprivations and beatings do not rise to the level of torture is the present relevant law in Europe.[3]

geneva convention is such an abused scapegoat...seriously.

There's a reason they're called LAWS.

self-righteous much?

There's a reason why the laws of all nations that are signatories to treaties bind those nations as much as any of their own written laws.

you are deluded.

There's also a reason why nazi war criminals were tried and convicted after WW II.

wtf?

There's also a reason why Former Yugoslav President, Slobodan Milosevic was tried at the Hague for war crimesm although he died before he was convicted, four years into his trial, and the charges against other Serb war criminals remain in force to this day.

....this relates to torture, how?

And all I'm saying is, you're so full of shit, your ass is jealous.

i confess.

Your kind of thinking is exactly why George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and the entier Bushwhacko administration are traitors to our nation.

???

If they are never charged for their crimes in this country

what crimes?

I hope the International Court has the balls to charge them for their crimes once they're out of office.

who cares about the international court? you have a vicious habit of questioning everything that is authority yet worship the "courts" and "laws". im just confused where your loyalties lie.

Exactly how much would you support illegal torture if the powers that be decided wrongly that YOU were one of those to be torturtured?[q/]

i dont support illegal torture. i recognize the legitimacy of torture and its use in effectives (though small) in many wars. im not the one huffing and puffing and screaming traitor and chief like a bipolar creepazoid.

There is no metaphor. It's a direct statement. TORTURE IS EVIL.

right.

If you support that evil... I'll say that word again... EVIL... then YOU ARE such evil. :thumbsdown: :|

nice fallacy.

Only a lying, murderous putz would have the timerity to invoke the name of your alleged "savior" and "prince of peace" in an attempt to justify behavior so contradictory to his message.

what?

You're the jackass who equated illegal torture to a jaywalking.

uhh, no. i equated the process of prosecuting torture to jaywalking. COMPREHENSION IS KEY

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Originally posted by: TallBill
I'm so fucking happy that he vetoed this bullshit bill. We waterboard our captives to get information to save lives of american troops and civilians. The bad guy just cuts of our captives heads.

Um....yeah right...Do you ever read news articles, or are you just basing this on watching "24"?

 

[ericlp]

Originally posted by: tagej
What a sad thing, that our nation, a nation that touts itself as a beacon of freedom, a nation that used to be what other countries aspired to emulate, has sunk to the point of officially saying "yeah, we torture people when we think it might get us some info, whether or not they are guilty of anything". Sigh. Hopefully, the next president, whoever that is, will help clean up the disaster in the wake of Bush Jr.

Heard of Karma lately? Hey! If it's ok for us to do it... Then maybe they will start doing it back... Read the bible...an eye for an eye...

I think it's BS... I can't believe this country is so pathetic to let a loser like bush get away with the shit he does. Everyone just give the nut case the green light. I think bush is going to get sued many many times once he leaves office. He better start the "I don't recall" Real soon just like Reagan did...

 

[Noobtastic]

Originally posted by: ericlp

Originally posted by: tagej
What a sad thing, that our nation, a nation that touts itself as a beacon of freedom, a nation that used to be what other countries aspired to emulate, has sunk to the point of officially saying "yeah, we torture people when we think it might get us some info, whether or not they are guilty of anything". Sigh. Hopefully, the next president, whoever that is, will help clean up the disaster in the wake of Bush Jr.

Heard of Karma lately? Hey! If it's ok for us to do it... Then maybe they will start doing it back... Read the bible...an eye for an eye...

I think it's BS... I can't believe this country is so pathetic to let a loser like bush get away with the shit he does. Everyone just give the nut case the green light. I think bush is going to get sued many many times once he leaves office. He better start the "I don't recall" Real soon just like Reagan did...

tortures been sanctioned by democratic presidents and worldly leaders way before bush.

this is NOT a partisan issue.

making torture illegal would only be a false comfort...

 

[ericlp]

Originally posted by: Noobtastic

Originally posted by: ericlp

Originally posted by: tagej
What a sad thing, that our nation, a nation that touts itself as a beacon of freedom, a nation that used to be what other countries aspired to emulate, has sunk to the point of officially saying "yeah, we torture people when we think it might get us some info, whether or not they are guilty of anything". Sigh. Hopefully, the next president, whoever that is, will help clean up the disaster in the wake of Bush Jr.

Heard of Karma lately? Hey! If it's ok for us to do it... Then maybe they will start doing it back... Read the bible...an eye for an eye...

I think it's BS... I can't believe this country is so pathetic to let a loser like bush get away with the shit he does. Everyone just give the nut case the green light. I think bush is going to get sued many many times once he leaves office. He better start the "I don't recall" Real soon just like Reagan did...

tortures been sanctioned by democratic presidents and worldly leaders way before bush.

this is NOT a partisan issue.

making torture illegal would only be a false comfort...

Do us all a favor and go TROLL elsewhere....

Thanks...


Oh and you have been *WARNED*

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Noobtastic

Originally posted by: Harvey

In addition to being prohibited by U.S. law, TORTURE is outlawed under the Geneva Conventions throughout the civilized world at any time, for any ostensible "reason."

so?

according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E...ention_on_Human_Rights

the eu recognizes that the use of the five techniques of sensory deprivation and even the beatings of prisoners are not torture. Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights it was ruled makes such actions the lesser offense of "inhuman or degrading treatment"[2]. The European Court of Human Rights ruling that sensory deprivations and beatings do not rise to the level of torture is the present relevant law in Europe.[3]

[/quote]

Exactly how much of a lying, EVIL POS do you want to prove yourself to be? There is NO SUCH QUOTE on the page at your link. In fact, the only statement addressing "inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment" is:

Article 3 - prohibition of torture

Article 3 prohibits torture, and "inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment". There are no exceptions or limitations on this right.

This provision usually applies, apart from torture, to cases of severe police violence and poor conditions in detention. The European Court of Human Rights has further held that this provision prohibits the extradition of a person to a foreign state if they are likely to be subjected there to torture. This article has been interpreted as prohibiting a state from extraditing an individual to another state if they are likely to suffer the death penalty. This article does not, however, on its own forbid a state from imposing the death penalty within its own territory.

Originally posted by: Noobtastic

geneva convention is such an abused scapegoat...seriously.

YOU are the only goat.[/quote][/quote]

Originally posted by: Noobtastic

Originally posted by: HarveyThere's a reason they're called LAWS.

self-righteous much?

Self-righteousness has nothing to do with it. This is about absolute imperatives of right and wrong. The entire civilized world has long recognized that torture is imperitively wrong. Our Constitution and the laws of our nation define torture as wrong. The only ones arguing to the contrary are your Traitor In Chief, his entire criminal cabal and ass licking neocon sycophants like you, and all of you are absolutely, imperitively wrong and absolutely, imperitively evil.

Originally posted by: Noobtastic

Originally posted by: Harvey

There's a reason why the laws of all nations that are signatories to treaties bind those nations as much as any of their own written laws.

you are deluded.

Yeah... Right... I know. So were our nation's founding fathers when they drafted our cherished Constitution. They were even more deluded when they added the Bill of Rights. So was Abraham Lincoln when he freed the slaves. So was the government of the United States of America when we signed the first Geneva Convention in 1882 and ratified and incorporated it as part of our laws again and again as the Conventions were updated.
.
.

Originally posted by: Noobtastic

Originally posted by: Harvey

You're the jackass who equated illegal torture to a jaywalking.

uhh, no. i equated the process of prosecuting torture to jaywalking.

[/quote]

Uhh, NO! That is a lie. You said:

i would compare the concept of illegal torture to jay walking.

I see nothing in your statement that refers to "the process of prosecuting" illegal torture. I see only a statement directly equating one to the other, and I noticed that in your first statement, at least, you acknowledged that torture is illegal... something you conveniently omitted from your non-existent reference of any "process of prosecuting" torture.

Of course, you've already made the point that our nation's laws and ethical and moral standards are meaningless to you. I believe the word for that is sociopath.

COMPREHENSION IS KEY

Obviously something of which you have NONE, along with morals, ethics or even the faintest clue about the principles of justice and humanity on which this nation was founded.

If you want to do something to clean up the environment, please consider leaving the planet.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
Hopefully this can open the door to impeachment proceedings, as the Congressional Mandate was a device to back up and clarify the wording in the Constitution.

Bush is refusing both the Congressional Mandate and the Constitution.

Hey Capt,

You can't impeach a President for vetoing a bill. It is his Constitutional right.

The U.S. military specifically prohibited waterboarding in 2006. The CIA also prohibited the practice in 2006, and says it has not been used since three prisoners encountered it in 2003.

^ No need to get your panties in a wad. It was done a grand total of 3 times back in 2003, against some very nasty characters. AND it's already been prohibited for 2 years. (So Congress is now basically passing legislation to outlaw already prohibited practices? I suppose I'm the only one that sees absurdity in that.)

Next year we'll have a Dem President and Congress can fvck up the CIA all they want.

Fern

 

[Double Trouble]

Originally posted by: Fern
So Congress is now basically passing legislation to outlaw already prohibited practices? I suppose I'm the only one that sees absurdity in that.

If it was already prohibited and could not be used, why exactly would the president have to veto the legislation? Obviously it couldn't cause any negative impact if something that was not used was outlawed. The fact that the president veto'd the bill clearly says "we will need to subject people we suspect of having information to torture, and we need to legally be able to do so". Sheesh.

Next year we'll have a Dem President and Congress can fvck up the CIA all they want.

I'm not so certain there will be dem president, but fortunately McCain can be counted on to put an end to this "the end justifies the means" mentality that so permeates the current administration. Sure, if we had Bin Laden in our hands I'm sure we'd all like to subject him to some interesting things, but subjecting people to torture -- especially people who have not been tried and convicted of anything at all -- degrades the US and puts us on the same level of countries like Iran, North Korea, Sudan, China etc. Not exactly a list I'd be proud to be on.

 

[teclis1023]

Originally posted by: Noobtastic
torture has and will always be an effective method of extracting information under the right conditions.

You'll find a lot of people with a lot more knowledge than you who would contest that statement. The merits of information extracted under torture has been found to often be false; created under coercion.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: tagej

Originally posted by: Fern
So Congress is now basically passing legislation to outlaw already prohibited practices? I suppose I'm the only one that sees absurdity in that.

If it was already prohibited and could not be used, why exactly would the president have to veto the legislation?
-snip-

I was referring to waterboarding in my post (I specifically mentioned waterboarding). Waterboarding is what has been prohibited.

This legislation outlaws techniques other than waterboarding.

Yes, McCain opposes waterboarding but be also voted "no" to this legilation because of the other things outlawed.

I suppose if this bill only outlawed waterboarding it would have been signed.

Contrary to the thread title, torture is not now officially legal.

What's really going on is a struggle to define or decide what measures actually constitute torture. We're simply not going to be able adhere to the UN's definition of torture, contrary to some people's desire. Fotr example, the UN has declared that tasers are 'torture". I don't see that being adopted here in the US.

Fern

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
Hopefully this can open the door to impeachment proceedings, as the Congressional Mandate was a device to back up and clarify the wording in the Constitution.

Bush is refusing both the Congressional Mandate and the Constitution.

You're an idiot.

The constitution gives the President the right to veto any bill he wants.
You can't impeach him for doing so.

If congress wants it can override the veto, and even then they can't impeach Bush for the veto.

 

[ProfJohn]

BTW in typical P&N fashion the thread title is 100% wrong.

The bill was to outlaw waterboarding aka "torture" which means that waterboarding aka "torture" is already legal in the country.

There for there is no "legal now" aspect about this, it has always been legal.

A correct thread title might be "Bush vetos bill to outlaw torture" or something like that.
Of course such a thread title isn't as exciting nor is it trollish like the current one.

 

[jackschmittusa]

Just think of the advertising advantages as we try to sell our brand of democracy to the world. We could assure potential leaders that they will be free to arrest and detain indefinitely people they make up a class name for (enemy combatant worked so well for us), assume people are guilty and torture them, monitor all of their citizens' personal communications to find out who is bad.

We could argue that becoming a dictator to gain absolute power is so 20th century. Head of a democratic nation is so much more refined and dignified. Same powers, less scorn.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
BTW in typical P&N fashion the thread title is 100% wrong.

The bill was to outlaw waterboarding aka "torture" which means that waterboarding aka "torture" is already legal in the country.

There for there is no "legal now" aspect about this, it has always been legal.

A correct thread title might be "Bush vetos bill to outlaw torture" or something like that.
Of course such a thread title isn't as exciting nor is it trollish like the current one.

That's not very good reasoning. Waterboarding is already illegal. What Congress was doing with this bill was destroying the wiggle room that Bush was trying to have on the issue. Ie. Instead of bothering to wrangle with his stupid ass on just how inhumane and degrading waterboarding was, (again, already confirmed to be torture/war crimes under previous US jurisprudence) they just flat out wrote a law that says "you can't do specifically this". Just because a new law might address the same action more specifically then others in absolutely no way affects whether or not it was already illegal under other laws.

You can't honestly believe what you wrote there... it's obviously false. It sounds like something taken off a right wing blog actually.

 

[John P]

nm

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat

Originally posted by: TallBill
I'm so fucking happy that he vetoed this bullshit bill. We waterboard our captives to get information to save lives of american troops and civilians. The bad guy just cuts of our captives heads.

Um....yeah right...Do you ever read news articles, or are you just basing this on watching "24"?

24. It's become so demonized that to do it requires specific approval from the president, so basically instead of proclaiming its illegality and scoring points with the world and Americans, the president has left open the chance of water boarding in case one of the characters from 24 has his finger on a nuclear detonator and needs to be waterboarded.

There for there is no "legal now" aspect about this, it has always been legal.

This country outlaws or outlawed torture because it claimed to adhere to Geneva Conventions. Bush just vetoed a bill that included a total ban on waterboarding and therefore with it not being banned, it is legal.

A correct thread title might be "Bush vetos bill to outlaw torture" or something like that.
Of course such a thread title isn't as exciting nor is it trollish like the current one.

You can play with words and semantics if it makes you feel better. The gist of my message would not be changed by a disingenuous sterilization in the manner you propose and thus I standby the original title. It is exciting because it's an exciting topic.

(John P before post-edit) I think I know the answer, which would make you all hypocrites.

Wow, I really get to decide now, under duress, what will happen to a prisoner? That is fantastic. I think next time a person charged with murder of a family is caught, we should allow the remaining family members to beat and dismember him, should they want to. Who cares if he's convicted or not.

In any case, you've just condoned torture, which puts you in line with the bush administration and in line with nations like north korea and sudan and out of line with nations like canada and australia.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
BTW in typical P&N fashion the thread title is 100% wrong.

The bill was to outlaw waterboarding aka "torture" which means that waterboarding aka "torture" is already legal in the country.

There for there is no "legal now" aspect about this, it has always been legal.

A correct thread title might be "Bush vetos bill to outlaw torture" or something like that.
Of course such a thread title isn't as exciting nor is it trollish like the current one.

That's not very good reasoning. Waterboarding is already illegal. What Congress was doing with this bill was destroying the wiggle room that Bush was trying to have on the issue. Ie. Instead of bothering to wrangle with his stupid ass on just how inhumane and degrading waterboarding was, (again, already confirmed to be torture/war crimes under previous US jurisprudence) they just flat out wrote a law that says "you can't do specifically this". Just because a new law might address the same action more specifically then others in absolutely no way affects whether or not it was already illegal under other laws.

You can't honestly believe what you wrote there... it's obviously false. It sounds like something taken off a right wing blog actually.

I wasn?t talking about the semantics of the bill; I was talking about the thread title and its dishonesty.

Congress tried to pass a bill, the president vetoed the bill. Nothing changed.

Yet the OP wants us to believe that something has changed and that ?torture (is) officially legal now.?

However, no one passed a bill that makes torture legal ?now? what has been legal in the past is still legal today. There is no ?now? involved in this whole debate.

But a thread titled ?Bush vetoes bill to outlaw waterboarding? isn?t as troll worthy as what we ended up with.

 

[RightIsWrong]

Originally posted by: Noobtastic
A law prohibiting torture would NEVER be enforced. This argument is pointless.

Why do you think torture camps are located OUTSIDE of the US?

It's a good thing that the Geneva Convention rules apply internationally then.

 

[RightIsWrong]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Oh yeah, I forgot who you are. You aren't banned yet? You're one of those people that forces people to argue against you like a crazy person. (or maybe someone with Asperger's) I'm glad that you're done... because you will contribute nothing useful to this thread.

As someone with Asperger's and someone that has a son with it, me and my entire family would like to send you a very heartful FUCK YOU DICKHEAD!


For those of you who are wondering, this is not an appropriate way to express disagreement here in P&N.

Rainsford
AnandTech Politics and News Moderator

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat

Originally posted by: TallBill
I'm so fucking happy that he vetoed this bullshit bill. We waterboard our captives to get information to save lives of american troops and civilians. The bad guy just cuts of our captives heads.

Um....yeah right...Do you ever read news articles, or are you just basing this on watching "24"?

24. It's become so demonized that to do it requires specific approval from the president, so basically instead of proclaiming its illegality and scoring points with the world and Americans, the president has left open the chance of water boarding in case one of the characters from 24 has his finger on a nuclear detonator and needs to be waterboarded.

Really???? And you know this how?

From what I've seen, the facts say that we torture on a regular basis. We may not waterboard, but we still torture people.

That German citizen that the CIA kidnapped and took to Afghanistan, and then released after they found out they got the wrong guy? He was tortured.

What about the Iraqi general that was strapped into a sleeping bag, and ended up being suffocated to death because his interrogators were sitting on his chest? Sounds like torture to me. What about reports of torture at Gitmo and other places? No of that counts to you I guess?

Please tell me of the telling need to torture these people, and what terrible terrorist event they prevented? Oh that's right, they DIDN'T have any knowledge, and we knew it. An ex-Iraqi general has nothing to do with terrorism, and the even if the first guy had been a terrorist, he wasn't grabbed in the middle of a crisis (or suspected crisis). They were tortured on the premise that it is OK to torture now, so they did.

And these are ONLY the people we know about. How many others are tortured that we don't know about? Last year, Bush said we don't torture. Then it became, "we don't waterboard", then more recently it became, "well, we waterboard, but only three people". What's the next change going to be?

When a witness lies to you multiple times, how can you trust him anymore? Next year, after Bush is finally gone, it may come out that hundred's were waterboarded. We just don't know, because Bush feels that he is above the law and doesn't have to answer to anyone.

 

[Atreus21]

Originally posted by: tagej
What a sad thing, that our nation, a nation that touts itself as a beacon of freedom, a nation that used to be what other countries aspired to emulate, has sunk to the point of officially saying "yeah, we torture people when we think it might get us some info, whether or not they are guilty of anything". Sigh. Hopefully, the next president, whoever that is, will help clean up the disaster in the wake of Bush Jr.

It comes as no surprise given the following statement:

What a sad thing, that our nation, a nation that touts itself as a beacon of freedom, a nation that used to be what other countries aspired to emulate, has sunk to the point of officiall saying "yeah, we have no problem killing our own children for the sake of convenience."

If we don't abhor infanticide, we've lost the right to be indignant when torture is allowed.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
I wasn?t talking about the semantics of the bill; I was talking about the thread title and its dishonesty.

Congress tried to pass a bill, the president vetoed the bill. Nothing changed.

Yet the OP wants us to believe that something has changed and that ?torture (is) officially legal now.?

However, no one passed a bill that makes torture legal ?now? what has been legal in the past is still legal today. There is no ?now? involved in this whole debate.

But a thread titled ?Bush vetoes bill to outlaw waterboarding? isn?t as troll worthy as what we ended up with.

Thank you for joining in. Now, lie down in the circle with everybody else. The koolaid should take effect in a moment and we'll all fly away to space in the great saucer.

Really???? And you know this how?

I know because I read in the link that waterboarding requires presidential approval. I wasn't making mention of other torture types.