WATERBOARDING. IT'S TORTURE STUPID!!!

To the best of my knowledge, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfield, Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, and Mark Levine (who I believe is a constitutional lawyer) all maintain the position that Waterboarding is not torture and is therefore constitutional. None of the above persons has been waterboarded and the only person I know who claims to have been waterboarded and maintains it wasn't torture was a female caller on a radio talk show who claimed to have been water boaded during Navy Survival Training. Given the fact that the Navy has pretty much banned hazing one can only wonder what kind of strict restrictions they would impose on training courses designed to simulate enhanced interrogation techniques.

If you came off the waterboard thinking: ...it wasn't bad..., then it wasn't. It also means the interrogators who waterboarded you didn't do it right because waterboarding is suppose to be torture...it is the point of the whole thing...it is an end unto itself.

Yeah, yeah I know there is the official rule book of waterboarding that specifies how much water, how fast, how long, blah, blah, blah. In an enhanced interrogation scenario you are operating out the box because you are dealing with special circumstances to begin with. So what really happens? Well you can pretty much bet that the observers who ensure that the waterboarding proceedure is done by the "book" have to step out of the room for something and as soon as they are out of the room a soaking towel or T-Shirt is slapped over the face and nose of the subject and a running water hose is jammed downed the subjects throat.

Hey what about when a subject A is being waterboarded while another subject B is being interrogated while subject B is being forced to watch the waterboarding of subject A. Is the waterboarding of subject A considered torture under those circumstances since the waterboarding isn't being used to ellicit any information at all from subject A. Wouldn't that be considered general purpose abuse at the least?

The process continues until the desired results are achieved and about that time the observer makes their way back into the room so that they can attest that nothing beyond the bounds of rules and regulations occured during the interrogation.

Finally, to end the debate on the lawfullness of waterboarding I submit, to any half-witted languaged twisting attorney or general purpose blow hards in general, that regardless of whether waterboarding meets your definition of torture or not, waterboarding was, is and always will be a form of duress and is therefore constitutionally prohibited and barred by the Geneva Convention.

Enough said!!!