Monday, November 12, 2007

Waterboarding

If you have been following the news lately, you have probably heard about a controversy called "waterboarding". The question is whether our government should be passing off prisoners in "temporary custody" to countries that engage in the practice of "waterboarding", something that has, up to now, been regarded as torture. Those in favor of the practice regard it as a "useful" way of extracting information from suspects. Those opposed to it are shocked that torture should be used ANYWHERE in the 21th century, much less in association with the United States of America.

Before we become comfortable with such a technique, we have to deal with a few points:
  • The value of the end goal (saving lives from terrorism) needs to outweigh the cost (national integrity and moral standing in the international community). If we are willing to sacrifice our own virtue for that price, then what price are we willing to pay against the threats that will take MILLIONS of American lives (i.e. cancer)?
  • By lowering the bar of how prisoners are treated, we need to accept and expect that our own military forces will be treated in this way by foreign countries. Granted, there are brutal enemies out there who have always been willing to torture and kill their prisoners, but those have always been just a few rag-tag extremists. Now we will be lowering the moral standard for civilized nations.
  • We need to be prepared to deal with the consequences of such a policy. In the past, there have been some who have hated America because they viewed us as lazy and rich. Now a new breed will arise that hate us for torturing their fathers, uncles and neighbors. The net result will be trading a single prisoner in our custody for an unknown batch of terrorists out in hiding. Does this make us safer?

Read the following description of Waterboarding (taken from Wikipedia), and decide for yourself.

- Wayne

____________________________________

Waterboarding is a torture technique that simulates drowning in a controlled environment. It consists of immobilizing an individual on his or her back, with the head inclined downward, and pouring water over the face to force the inhalation of water into the lungs. Waterboarding has been used to obtain information, coerce confessions, punish, and intimidate. In contrast to merely submerging the head, waterboarding elicits the gag reflex, and can make the subject believe death is imminent. Waterboarding's use as a method of torture or means to support interrogation is based on its ability to cause extreme mental distress. The psychological effects on victims of waterboarding can last long after the procedure. Although waterboarding in cases can leave no lasting physical damage, it carries the real risks of extreme pain, damage to the lungs, brain damage caused by oxygen deprivation, injuries as a result of struggling against restraints (including broken bones), and even death.
Numerous experts have described this technique as torture. Some nations have also criminally prosecuted individuals for performing waterboarding, including the United States.
The practice garnered renewed attention and notoriety in September 2006, when further reports claim that the Bush administration had authorized the use of waterboarding on extrajudicial prisoners of the United States. ABC News reported that current and former CIA officers stated that "there is a presidential finding, signed in 2002, by President Bush, Condoleezza Rice and then-Attorney General John Ashcroft approving the 'enhanced' interrogation techniques, including water boarding." According to Republican United States Senator John McCain, who was tortured as a prisoner of war in North Vietnam, waterboarding is "torture", "no different than holding a pistol to his head and firing a blank" and can damage the subject's psyche "in ways that may never heal."


Wednesday, November 07, 2007

"Bob the Adulterer" for President

Prominent evangelical Christian leader Pat Robertson today announced support for presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani, proving that the Giuliani's patented mind control mechanism is indeed a grand success.

Reasons for Robertson's support of Giuliani:
  • Giuliani is tough on terrorists
  • Giuliani is tough on crime
  • Giuliani is a fiscal conservative (meaning Pat's estate assets will be well taken care of)

What no longer seems to matter to Robertson:

  • Giuliani is fine with the slaughter of millions of unborn Americans
  • Giuliani is liberal on gay rights
  • Giuliani was unfaithful to his marriage (Read: adulterer)

I have to wonder if this will sway more social conservatives towards Rudolf Giuliani...or away from Mr. Robertson. In Mr. Giuliani, we find a new alignment of political positions, that is neither Republican nor Democrat. It is merely expedient politics, that which will gain him the most votes on any given stand. Unecumbered by morals or convictions, Giuliani stands as the mirror opposite of a principled statesman. And now, the country knows where Pat Robertson stands as well.


Trivia for the day...did you know that if you Google "Giuliani" and "adultery", you get 173,000 hits?

High Infidelity: What if three admitted adulterers run for president and no one cares?, by Steve Benen

Giuliani Comes To Aid Of Accused Child Molester

The Betrayal of Marriage

The New Adultery Rules

Giuliani's new Republican Family Value: "ADULTERY" T-shirt