Americans. Don't. Torture.

One of the most irritating aspects of the Mr. Bush's administration (aside from all the other irritating aspects) is the insistence that the interrogation technique that America condemned when it was used by the Khmer Rouge - namely, water boarding - is now not only legal, but absolutely necessary to conduct the "War on Terror" ("War of Terror" might be more apt). With the wingnuts and Administration officials screeching about the "Ticking Bomb" scenario, many people also buy into the idea.

The are a number of problems with Mr. Bush's recent veto of a bill that would prevent the CIA and other groups from using water-boarding and other torture techniques.

First and foremost, waterboarding IS torture. The Japanese and Gestapo used the technique in World War II. And early form of it was used during the Spanish Inquisition. Most famously, it was used by Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge. US troops used it in Vietnam, but they did so illegally - during that other failed act of aggression 40 years ago, the generals designated the technique illegal.

Which brings me to the next point. Not only is waterboarding torture - and thus illegal under the Geneva Convention - but it is also illegal under US law. The fact that Mr. Bush has made it
legal by fiat - presidential signing statements and executive orders - shows how little respect he has for the Constitution and seperation of powers. Perhaps he never saw School House Roch as a child, but only Congress can make the laws, and the President cannot enact a line-item veto, which is effectively what his use of Presidential Signing Statements amount to. The truly egregious part is that he has not been hauled before Congress to at the least testify. We as a country have slowly moved from outrage over the actions of this Administration to apathy, as it becomes expected that the Executive can do whatever he or she pleases.

Thirdly, waterboarding and torture do not work. Let me repeat: waterboarding the torture do. not. work. People subjected to torture will say anything to have the torture stop, whether they know anything or now. Additionally, the "ticking bomb" scenario - the idea that we need to be able to torture, in case there is a bomb in a major city somewhere and the only choice is torture or destruction - is pure Hollywood fantasy. Such events might happen in 24, but in the real world they are not only unlikely - according to experts, "Ticking Bomb" scenarios are impossible.

Even if such a scenario were to occur, torture would not help. In order to obtain useful information from suspects, an interrogator needs to build a relationship with the suspect, which takes weeks. Psychological attacks work much more effectively than physical abuse.

The list could go on. The fact remains that Mr. Bush cannot veto a bill banning waterboarding because waterboarding is already illegal and immoral. The bill should never have gone through Congress in the first place: they had already passed an anti-torture bill a few years ago. What Congress should have done was object to Mr. Bush's signing statement on that bill - which effectively turned a bill designed to close loopholes into a massive loophole on the question of torture.

However, the political ramifications of this act - if it is properly publicized - could be enormous. While the Republicans will couch the veto in the language of National Security, the Democrats - if they are clever - will beat the Republicans over the head with this veto. I am no fan of the Democrats, mind you. I just desire some remuneration for what will be 8 long years of law breaking, illegal war, and the erosion of the economy. I say, send the war criminals off to the Hauge and let them answer for their crimes before the international community.