• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

“Everybody’s entitled to be an idiot.”

Impressively dumb. Congratulations.

Republican obstruction dressed up as bipartisanship. Again.

The next time the wall street journal editorial board speaks the truth will be the first.

I see no possible difficulties whatsoever with this fool-proof plan.

Wow, you are pre-disappointed. How surprising.

Republicans do not pay their debts.

It’s always darkest before the other shoe drops.

This really is a full service blog.

Stop using mental illness to avoid talking about armed white supremacy.

Roe isn’t about choice, it’s about freedom.

New McCarthy, same old McCarthyism.

That’s my take and I am available for criticism at this time.

Republicans don’t trust women.

My years-long effort to drive family and friends away has really paid off this year.

And we’re all out of bubblegum.

Let me eat cake. The rest of you could stand to lose some weight, frankly.

fuckem (in honor of the late great efgoldman)

A snarling mass of vitriolic jackals

You cannot shame the shameless.

I’d hate to be the candidate who lost to this guy.

Thanks to your bullshit, we are now under siege.

Everyone is in a bubble, but some bubbles model reality far better than others!

… riddled with inexplicable and elementary errors of law and fact

Mobile Menu

  • Winnable VA House Races
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • War in Ukraine
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • 2021-22 Fundraising!
You are here: Home / The Torture Party

The Torture Party

by John Cole|  December 7, 200711:09 am| 40 Comments

This post is in: Republican Crime Syndicate - aka the Bush Admin.

FacebookTweetEmail

After months of playing the coy game of “if torture is so bad, why don’t you specifically outlaw it,” Bush and the dead-enders are going to get what they want:

In a sharp rebuke to White House counterterrorism policy, a Congressional conference committee has voted to outlaw the harsh interrogation techniques used by the Central Intelligence Agency against suspected high-level terrorists.

The vote to require all American interrogators to abide by the Army Field Manual, which prohibits coercive methods, came during negotiations of the Senate and House intelligence committees over the annual intelligence authorization bill. It will not be the last word on the subject; the full House and Senate must still pass the bill, and it would likely face a veto by President Bush.

But passage of the interrogation restriction — by one vote in a tense, three-hour meeting on Wednesday behind closed doors — reflected Congress’s growing disenchantment with the harsh tactics authorized by the White House after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. It was the latest setback for the administration’s insistence that what it calls “enhanced” interrogation techniques are a critical part of gathering intelligence to thwart future terrorist attacks.

Bush can then veto it, and the NRO can cheer him for protecting us all.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « When Wingnuts Write
Next Post: In Defense Of Romney »

Reader Interactions

40Comments

  1. 1.

    r€nato

    December 7, 2007 at 11:18 am

    Bush can then veto it, and the NRO can cheer him for protecting us all.

    and if the veto is overridden, Bush will ignore it anyway ‘cuz he said the magic word, ‘war’, and that gives him the right to do whatever he wants.

  2. 2.

    jenniebee

    December 7, 2007 at 11:23 am

    Aw, shit. It already was outlawed. Passing another bill reiterating the illegality of it just gives credence to the argument that waterboarding wasn’t illegal under the earlier law because the earlier law just said “no torture” which nobody really thought meant “no waterboarding torture.” So basically, this just exonerates the bastards who did it previously. And it means that the tortuous practice that wasn’t specifically mentioned in this bill that the CIA moves to next, the door will be open to the same kind of argument – if you meant that you didn’t want us to use thumbscrews and the rack, why didn’t you say no thumbscrews or racks when you said no waterboarding? It means that outlawing torture is now a game of whack-a-mole.

    Woot!

  3. 3.

    John Cole

    December 7, 2007 at 11:30 am

    Aw, shit. It already was outlawed.

    I know that. You know that. We all know that. The current dead-ender position on torture is almost like someone getting caught for animal cruelty and stating: “Sure, there are all these vague international laws and treaties and of course several domestic laws against generic animal cruelty, but nowhere did I see that it is against the law to gouge out the eyes of kittens and skullfuck them. If you think that is so bad, have Congress outlaw it. Until then, I will consider it enhanced play techniques.”

    We have reached a level of heightened absurdity.

  4. 4.

    Ned Raggett

    December 7, 2007 at 11:37 am

    Bush can then veto it, and the NRO can cheer him for protecting us all.

    Does a flat whimper count as a cheer?

  5. 5.

    Napoleon

    December 7, 2007 at 11:39 am

    Of course what they are passing could be worded in a way to handle that concern “where as it is illegal to waterboard as a violation of the torture provisions of USC Section ___,”

  6. 6.

    Xenos

    December 7, 2007 at 11:42 am

    Passing another bill reiterating the illegality of it just gives credence to the argument that waterboarding wasn’t illegal under the earlier law because the earlier law just said “no torture” which nobody really thought meant “no waterboarding torture.”

    And if the fix is in with Roberts and Alito, they know their posteriors are covered. Since Alito got away with lying in his confirmation hearings, and Roberts will not recuse himself as required, they will get away with it, I fear.

    Plan B will need to involve rendition to The Hague. The first couple years of the Obama/Richardson presidency is going to be pretty interesting.

  7. 7.

    Tim F.

    December 7, 2007 at 11:46 am

    As long as we’re banning specific practices, the CIA can just switch to a type of waterboarding that Congress did not specifically ban. Agreed with others who point out that blanket bans on torture already ban what we do and Congress would be better off forcing the courts to rule on that. Really, if SCOTUS wants to invalidate Geneva and legalize whatever sadistic crap Blackwater’s police academy dropouts can think up then we might as well get on with it.

  8. 8.

    Zifnab

    December 7, 2007 at 12:03 pm

    It will not be the last word on the subject; the full House and Senate must still pass the bill, and it would likely face a veto by President Bush.

    SIGNING STATEMENTS BITCHES!

    “As chief executive officer and functional illiterate, I hereby interpret this bill to prohibit water boarding and other aforementioned forms of interrogation, except in the instances of a Jack Bauer Senario, when dealing with people we’re really super sure are already guilty of something, or when an enemy combatant just isn’t telling us what we want to hear.”

    Unfortunately, SCOTUS has already ruled on a number of these Bush Doctrine cases and found them all wanting. And that still hasn’t prevented travesties like Gitmo to persist. I can’t really fault Congress for reiterating exactly how much they disapprove of torture. I can, however, fault the general apathy within the system. At a certain point, “But the President Told Me To Do It” is no longer an acceptable excuse for men in uniform. Every General still in uniform, every commanding officer who hasn’t been busted for disobeying orders, every grunt with a pair of sponges hooked up to a car battery, ultimately has blood on his hands in this.

    We’re looking at an ethical problem that, horrifically, extends far beyond 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

  9. 9.

    gypsy howell

    December 7, 2007 at 12:16 pm

    But passage of the interrogation restriction — by one vote in a tense, three-hour meeting on Wednesday behind closed doors

    Now there’s something we can all be proud of. It only passed by one vote.

  10. 10.

    Tom Hilton

    December 7, 2007 at 12:24 pm

    It was the latest setback for the administration’s insistence that what it calls “enhanced” interrogation techniques are a critical part of gathering intelligence to thwart future terrorist attacks.

    Like hell it’s a ‘setback’. I mean, sure it would be a setback if it weren’t vetoed, or if the veto were overridden, and if the administration didn’t just ignore it anyway. But we know that the first if isn’t going to happen, the second is extremely unlikely, and the third is highly improbable. So, ‘setback’–not so much.

  11. 11.

    Punchy

    December 7, 2007 at 12:29 pm

    the full House and Senate must still pass the bill, and it would likely face a veto by President Bush.

    Likely? I just spit pop on my keyboard. Yeah, and I’d likely nail Jess Alba if she asked me. It’s entirely likely.

  12. 12.

    Snarkilicious

    December 7, 2007 at 12:31 pm

    Well, if a bill banning torture is going to get vetoed, then clearly we need a bill that requires torture, at least in some circumstances.

    Not of foreign detainees and POWs, however, that would violate the Geneva Conventions.

    But how about setting a manditory punishment for US officials that are guilty of serious war crimes, that they be tortured to death over a period not less than 6 months.

    Yes, it may be cruel. But sadly, in 2007 it’s anything but “unusual”.

  13. 13.

    ImJohnGalt

    December 7, 2007 at 12:45 pm

    if you meant that you didn’t want us to use thumbscrews and the rack, why didn’t you say no thumbscrews or racks when you said no waterboarding? It means that outlawing torture is now a game of whack-a-mole.

    Why are you against the Invisible Hand? Legislation such as this is the sort of the thing that fosters the type of innovation that America has been, of late, outsourcing to Asia. This could be just the kick in the ass that our torture industry needs to overtake the DPRK.

  14. 14.

    Ian Thorpe

    December 7, 2007 at 12:47 pm

    In principe this debate is a fine thing but let’s be honest, when the security services operate outside their own or allied nations, without supervision, they are going to do what the hell they please.

  15. 15.

    Redhand

    December 7, 2007 at 1:45 pm

    Do you think that Bushco would appreciate the irony of his vetoing legislation outlawing torture? Think of it! What is this country coming to that such a scenario is even conceivable, much less mentioned as a probability?

    Of course, nothing surprises me about this lawless idiot nowadays. His obvious public lying about when he knew the conclusions of the new NIE is just a case at point. I saw the video of Dana Perino, his press flack, reduced to saying “the president was truthful” as the only cover for the screaming contradictions in Administration’s own statements about what he knew, and when.

    Ths presidency is a JOKE.

  16. 16.

    Svensker

    December 7, 2007 at 1:56 pm

    Sorta OT, but sorta not, emptywheel at FDL has a post up re Sen. Whitehouse’s speech today where he reveals declassified OLC determinations of the President’s “powers” — which are, surprise, surprise, total.

    Link is here

  17. 17.

    Cindrella Ferret

    December 7, 2007 at 1:59 pm

    Bush can then veto it, and the NRO can cheer him for protecting us all.

    Jonah should feel much better about his Brave Foray into Terrorist Liberal Country. What with all those dangerous meanies up in Taxachusetts and all!

    Be strong Jonah–the Former Cheerleader’s got your back, bro.

  18. 18.

    Punchy

    December 7, 2007 at 2:02 pm

    Time for a VERY simple question:

    How does one veto a bill outlawing torture without thus quite implicitly saying “we like to torture”??

  19. 19.

    Ninerdave

    December 7, 2007 at 2:04 pm

    I am pro skullfucking kittens

  20. 20.

    Cyrus

    December 7, 2007 at 2:04 pm

    Veto? People seriously expect it to get to Bush? My money’s on a procedural filibuster.

  21. 21.

    Dreggas

    December 7, 2007 at 2:21 pm

    Svensker Says:

    Sorta OT, but sorta not, emptywheel at FDL has a post up re Sen. Whitehouse’s speech today where he reveals declassified OLC determinations of the President’s “powers”—which are, surprise, surprise, total.

    Wait a second, when the hell did determinations of the presidents powers need to be classified and the OLC have the ability to classify them? They’re spelled out in the fucking Constitution!

  22. 22.

    Ellison, Ellensburg, Ellers, and Lambchop

    December 7, 2007 at 2:27 pm

    But how about setting a manditory punishment for US officials that are guilty of serious war crimes, that they be tortured to death over a period not less than 6 months.

    LeftyLogic, Part 37:

    Waterboarding captured terrorists to prevent further attacks = horrible crime against humanity

    Death to Republicans because you don’t agree with them = sweet, wet-dream justice

    Nuance. Smart. Tough. Insane. Childish.

  23. 23.

    cleek

    December 7, 2007 at 2:32 pm

    They’re spelled out in the fucking Constitution!

    nope. you see there’s this other document that explains that the President is actually King and Congressmen merely courtiers. it’s passed down from president to president in a secret ceremony. the power is only to be used in emergencies, but according to the tenets of Republicanism, everything that threatens the GOP is an emergency.

    b.t.w, in that new Nick Cage movie, National Treasure, he actually finds the document.

  24. 24.

    Dreggas

    December 7, 2007 at 2:43 pm

    Ellison, Ellensburg, Ellers, and Lambchop Says:

    But how about setting a manditory punishment for US officials that are guilty of serious war crimes, that they be tortured to death over a period not less than 6 months.

    LeftyLogic, Part 37:

    Waterboarding captured terrorists to prevent further attacks = horrible crime against humanity

    Death to Republicans because you don’t agree with them = sweet, wet-dream justice

    Nuance. Smart. Tough. Insane. Childish.

    EEELGibberish, Part LOSTCOUNT: I’m a blithering idiot, oh and I drool on myself.

  25. 25.

    Dreggas

    December 7, 2007 at 2:46 pm

    cleek Says:

    They’re spelled out in the fucking Constitution!

    nope. you see there’s this other document that explains that the President is actually King and Congressmen merely courtiers. it’s passed down from president to president in a secret ceremony. the power is only to be used in emergencies, but according to the tenets of Republicanism, everything that threatens the GOP is an emergency.

    b.t.w, in that new Nick Cage movie, National Treasure, he actually finds the document.

    Not surprising, after all the movie was made by Disney…

  26. 26.

    Svensker

    December 7, 2007 at 3:05 pm

    Wait a second, when the hell did determinations of the presidents powers need to be classified and the OLC have the ability to classify them? They’re spelled out in the fucking Constitution!

    Golly! Are you like totally pre-9/11 or what? The Constitution is NOT an Islamofascist suicide bomb pact, ya know.

  27. 27.

    Tsulagi

    December 7, 2007 at 3:22 pm

    No real props to the Democrats on this one. Yeah, we have been down this road before. So have they, and they know what’s down this road too and they’re not addressing it.

    Before MCA, remember McCain’s Detainee Treatment Act anti-torture amendment? Over Bush’s veto threat, it passed the Senate by a vote of 90 to 9. Similar veto-proof numbers in the House. But Mr. Maverick, in conference going ass up for the administration helped gut his own legislation. It would now only apply to DoD, not civilian intelligence agencies like CIA. Military interrogations would be bound by the Army Field Manual.

    Still, not nearly good enough for Decider Man’s decider. A good article in the Concord Monitor reported…

    Bush’s advisers spent days composing a statement in which the president would declare support for the veto-proof bill on detainee treatment. Hours before Bush signed it into law on Dec. 30, 2005, Cheney’s lawyer intercepted the accompanying statement “and just literally takes his red pen all the way through it,” according to an official with firsthand knowledge.

    Addington substituted a single sentence. Bush, he wrote, would interpret the law “in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President to supervise the unitary executive branch and as Commander in Chief.”

    Top officials from the CIA, Justice, State and Defense departments unanimously opposed the substitution, according to two officials. None of that mattered. With Cheney’s weight behind it, White House counsel Harriet Miers sent Addington’s version to Bush for his signature.

    He signed that one. Ahhhh, what would a democracy be without signing statements? Iraqis, take note for future reference. Signing statements are democracy enhancers.

    But wait, still not good enough! A good post in the Belgravia Dispatch notes the signing statement, plus what happened next. Even though you got McCain to gut his legislation, and you have that signing statement Republicans won’t stand up to, go for total and humiliating victory over the evildoer Congress that dared question the administration.

    Military interrogation constrained by the Army Field Manual? No problem for a Cheney/Rumsfeld Pentagon, simply rewrite the damn manual. Problem solved. They got honor and integrity like that.

    So yeah, let’s do the kabuki all over again this time under Democratic leadership in Congress.

  28. 28.

    Tsulagi

    December 7, 2007 at 3:23 pm

    Oops, forgot the Belgravia Dispatch link for my comment above.

  29. 29.

    RSA

    December 7, 2007 at 3:36 pm

    But how about setting a manditory punishment for US officials that are guilty of serious war crimes, that they be tortured to death over a period not less than 6 months.

    LeftyLogic, Part 37:

    Waterboarding captured terrorists to prevent further attacks = horrible crime against humanity

    Death to Republicans because you don’t agree with them = sweet, wet-dream justice

    EEEL logic: Being found guilty of serious war crimes = Being Republican (i.e., not agreeing with liberals)

    I think. It’s hard to see a different interpretation. What does that say about wingnut political assumptions?

  30. 30.

    Rick Taylor

    December 7, 2007 at 3:51 pm

    The Republican party has been the torture party and the American country the torture country ever since 2004.

  31. 31.

    Cyrus

    December 7, 2007 at 4:13 pm

    Ellison, Ellensburg, Ellers, and Lambchop Says:

    But how about setting a manditory punishment for US officials that are guilty of serious war crimes, that they be tortured to death over a period not less than 6 months.

    Death to Republicans because you don’t agree with them = sweet, wet-dream justice

    EEEL, do you really think that everyone guilty of serious war crimes are Republicans? Clearly, you must hate America.

    But I see RSA beat me to it. Oh well.

  32. 32.

    Philip the Equal Opportunity Cynic

    December 7, 2007 at 4:52 pm

    Ths presidency is a JOKE.

    Yeah, but at least we elected a good ol’ boy from Texas (ha!), a real salt of the earth type who works an honest day for an honest living out on the ranch, rather than some effete egghead intellectual rich pussy from Massachusetts.

    People dumb enough to fall for Rove’s tricks deserve what they get. I was dumb enough to fall for it in 2000 (well, not really, I voted Libertarian, but I wasn’t unhappy with the outcome) and I deserve it, a little.

  33. 33.

    12across

    December 7, 2007 at 5:35 pm

    Who the fuck cares what happens to terrorists. They want to destroy this country and everything good and decent we stand for. They torture our citizens, we should give it back to them ten fold.

    I’ll never understand why liberals get all whiney about some terrorists supposed rights. Civil rights are meaningless when you’re dead and dead is exactly what we’ll be if we don’t get them to talk.

  34. 34.

    binzinerator

    December 7, 2007 at 5:45 pm

    I’d likely nail Jess Alba if she asked me. It’s entirely likely.

    Likely? If you had a room full of Jess Albas randomly uttering words for an eternity, then one of them just might end up saying “Please fuck me”.

    And it would be almost as likely as you blinking out of this universe through a random wormhole opening underneath you and blinking into a universe of Jessica Albas whose only language consists of three words: “Please fuck me”.

    In other words, highly unlikely.

    I feel sorry for you. Emma Thompson’s gonna call me way before you hear squat from Alba.

  35. 35.

    Anne Laurie

    December 7, 2007 at 7:49 pm

    Like hell it’s a ‘setback’. I mean, sure it would be a setback if it weren’t vetoed, or if the veto were overridden, and if the administration didn’t just ignore it anyway. But we know that the first if isn’t going to happen, the second is extremely unlikely, and the third is highly improbable. So, ‘setback’—not so much.

    “Hypocrisy is the tribute Vice pays to Virtue.”

    Whatever happened to the regime Voltaire was talking about, anyways?

  36. 36.

    Svensker

    December 7, 2007 at 8:36 pm

    They want to destroy this country and everything good and decent we stand for

    .

    Well, with George Bush and the Torturers, seems like the “terrorists'” dreams have come true. Y’all HAVE destroyed everything good and decent we once stood for. Thanks bunches!

  37. 37.

    bago

    December 8, 2007 at 12:11 am

    Doesn’t Satan eternally torment souls?
    Does eternal torment count as torture?
    Did Bill O’Reilly call kos Satan?

    Was John way ahead of the curve on the Great Orange Satan?

    The answer to all of the above is “yes”.

  38. 38.

    GeoX

    December 8, 2007 at 12:12 am

    I’ll never understand why liberals get all whiney about some terrorists supposed rights. Civil rights are meaningless when you’re dead and dead is exactly what we’ll be if we don’t get them to talk.

    To paraphrase Stephen Colbert, that should play well in New Hampshire, where the state motto is “live free or do whatever it takes to make sure I don’t die.”

  39. 39.

    Equal Opportunity Cynic

    December 8, 2007 at 1:13 am

    @GeoX:

    I believe the NH state motto is based on the immortal words of Patrick Henry — “Give me liberty, or…. or…. at least keep me safe, King!”

  40. 40.

    Phoenician in a time of Romans

    December 8, 2007 at 11:46 pm

    How does one veto a bill outlawing torture without thus quite implicitly saying “we like to torture”??

    “Security”, my little bitch, “security”.

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

VA Purple House Delegates

Donate

Political Action

Postcard Writing Information

Recent Comments

  • BigJimSlade on Burying the Lede (Oct 1, 2023 @ 12:59am)
  • Origuy on Burying the Lede (Oct 1, 2023 @ 12:53am)
  • Elizabelle on Burying the Lede (Oct 1, 2023 @ 12:48am)
  • Sister Golden Bear on Burying the Lede (Oct 1, 2023 @ 12:45am)
  • Odie Hugh Manatee on Burying the Lede (Oct 1, 2023 @ 12:41am)

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
We All Need A Little Kindness
What Has Biden Done for You Lately?

Balloon Juice Meetups!

All Meetups
Talk of Meetups – Meetup Planning

Fundraising 2023-24

Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Twitter / Spoutible

Balloon Juice (Spoutible)
WaterGirl (Spoutible)
TaMara (Spoutible)
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
TaMara
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
ActualCitizensUnited

Join the Fight!

Join the Fight Signup Form
All Join the Fight Posts

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Cole & Friends Learn Español

Introductory Post
Cole & Friends Learn Español

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2023 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!