1115.org

On Wednesday, I wrote (in the context of the Senate vote to declare waterboardling firmly illegal beyond possibility of equivocation):

Members of the Senate have one more opportunity today to show us what they’re really made of, to show us how firmly and deeply they are in Bush’s camp (and his back pocket) when it comes to trampling on civil liberties and on our traditional values as a society, to show us how much or how little they care about those civil liberties and those traditional values.

Looks like Joe Lieberman read that and said to himself, “What the hell, I may as well show exactly what I believe in, beyond possibility of equivocation”:

Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman reluctantly acknowledged Thursday that he does not believe waterboarding is torture, but believes the interrogation technique should be available only under the most extreme circumstances.

Lieberman was one of 45 senators who voted Wednesday in opposition to a bill that would limit the CIA to the 19 interrogation techniques outlined in the Army field manual. That manual prohibits waterboarding, a method where detainees typically are strapped to a bench and have water poured into their mouth and nose making them feel as if they will drown.

The Senate passed the measure.

“We are at war,” Lieberman said. “I know enough from public statements made by Osama bin Laden and others as well as classified information I see to know the terrorists are actively planning, plotting to attack us again. I want our government to be able to gather information again within both the law and Geneva Convention.”

In the worst case scenario — when there is an imminent threat of a nuclear attack on American soil — Lieberman said that the president should be able to certify the use of waterboarding on a detainee suspected of knowing vital details of the plot.

“You want to be able to use emergency tech to try to get the information out of that person,” Lieberman said. Of course, Lieberman believes such authority has limits. He does not believe the president could authorize having hot coals pressed on someone’s flesh to obtain that information.

The difference, he said, is that waterboarding is mostly psychological and there is no permanent physical damage. “It is not like putting burning coals on people’s bodies. The person is in no real danger. The impact is psychological,” Lieberman said. Lieberman said that his position on waterboarding differs from that of Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who he has endorsed as a presidential candidate. As a prisoner-of-war in Vietnam, McCain was tortured. McCain, he said, believes waterboarding is torture.

Almost everything Lieberman said is totally untrue:
— Waterboarding has always been regarded as torture by all civilized nations, before the Bush presidency bent our national moral compass. The US prosecuted waterboarding as a war crime after World War II.
— It is not entirely clear that waterboarding is within the law, but it is universally recognized to be in contravention of the Geneva Conventions.
— It is bullsh*t to say that “waterboarding is mostly psychological and there is no permanent physical damage”. In fact: “Although waterboarding can be performed in ways that leave no lasting physical damage, it carries the risks of extreme pain, damage to the lungs, brain damage caused by oxygen deprivation, injuries (including broken bones) due to struggling against restraints, and even death.[4] The psychological effects on victims of waterboarding can last for years after the procedure.[5]” The psychological wounds can last for years after the wounds from “putting burning coals on people’s bodies” would heal.
— It is bullsh*t to argue that waterboarding can be expected to produce reliable information that would actually help to avert the imminent catastrophe that’s conveniently invoked to justify making waterboarding (and other forms of torture) permissible.