implicit art

Off-topic, but I have to put this out there.

The constant Republican talking point on this topic is that if Democrats (and others) sincerely feel that waterboarding is torture, then they should explicitly state as such and make it illegal. Currently, the law reads “acts of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment” as torture. They’d like to turn the debate into a Democratic problem, claiming that there is a reasonable argument against its being torture, and that since it is questionable, it is the Dems fault that they are carrying out said torture.

The Democratic response is that it is not questionable. All over the world, Americans or not, all military interrogators and officers (the second link goes on to explain that we prosecuted the Japanese for War Crimes when they used it in WWII), former POWs, or yes, even Bush lawyers, who have undergone or used waterboarding agree that it is torture. And this is a valid point, and the reason the Mukasey confirmation debate has carried on – to paraphrase Jon Stewart, “how could he not know waterboarding was going to be on the test?” It is undeniably torture.

But we still need to answer the off-topic-attempt-to-refocus Republican talking point: why not make it illegal explicitly? The Dems response of “we shouldn’t have to” does not hold water. The real response is: then what?

Then what? Do we have to list every known form of torture, and every one that could potentially be invented in the next hundred years? And when you make a new method not yet on the list and use it, you can say, again, that it was not explicitly illegal? And the cycle begins again. This is a horrible and stupid precedent to set. I cant believe that anyone is letting them get away with this kind of reasoning; the media should be ashamed, and the Democratic leadership should take it on with some sense.

Now that that’s out of the way, let me restate that the world, and America, agree that waterboarding is torture. The experts agree that waterboarding is torture.

Jerks.