Debate on Torture,waterboarding, and the AG.

The Democrats injected torture into the debate as a red herring against the confirmation of Judge Mukasey as our new Attorney General. Mukasey was given broad support from Republicans and Democrats like Dianne Feinstein before and after the political theater started. Sen. Schumer issued a statement Sunday evening saying Mukasey could become "a consensus nominee": "

While he is certainly conservative, Judge Mukasey seems to be the kind of nominee who would put rule of law first and show independence from the White House, our most important criteria. "For sure we'd want to ascertain his approach on such important and sensitive issues as wiretapping and the appointment of US attorneys, but he's a lot better than some of the other names mentioned and he has the potential to become a consensus nominee."

If the question about his confirmation is really over waterboarding (or is it a "Wink,Wink" thing between the nominee and the Senate) then let's have an adult debate about waterboarding and Judge Mukasey's opinion keeping in mind these points:

• Do we want the entire world to have the advantage of knowing our interrogation methods?

ABC News has already broadcast the six "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques" instituted in mid-March 2002. Their investigation revealed that only 3 have been waterboarded by the CIA. Quite frankly, the enhanced techniques are pretty weak. Throw in an "Indian burn" and the techniques described bear a striking resemblance to Boy Scout camp. I wouldn't be too scared knowing the worst thing that could happen to me is I get my shirt collar ripped or a belly slap.

• Do we expect Iran, North Korea, the Taliban, or al-Queda to follow in our footsteps if we publicly outlaw "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques" as John McCain and Colin Powell have suggested?

It is my opinion that the enemy we currently face will be undeterred by our adherence to the Geneva Conventions. An excellent book that details the years of training that interrogators go through develop the discipline to effectively match wits with Taliban and al-Queda for uninterrupted 24-hour shifts at a time to collect information bit-by-bit is "The Interrogators" by Chris Mackey (fictional name). The author makes the point that his team got less sleep than the terrorists because they had formal duties on top of interrogations

• Does the Attorney General have a say in interrogation techniques or is the prohibition on torture a statutory issue? or Do the professionals of the CIA, Army,etc. have time to clear their methods through a lawyer in DC?

Interestingly, when the harrumphing senators who accuse Mukasey had a chance, twice, to specifically proscribe waterboarding, they passed on it. They could have done so in both the Detainee Act of 2005 and the Military Commissions Act of 2006. Instead, they passed the buck, settling on opposition to "cruel, human and degrading" practices.

Rather than buying into what Dick Durbin and Patrick Leahy say about the Judges' answers to their let's educate ourselves by looking at what the Judge said. Specifically, on the subject of waterboarding, Judge Mukasey wrote:

I do know ... that waterboarding cannot be used by the United States military
because its use by the military would be a clear violation of the Detainee Treatment Act (DTA). That is because waterboarding and certain other coercive interrogation techniques are expressly prohibited by the Army Field Manual on Intelligence Interrogation, and Congress specifically legislated in the DTA that no person in the custody or control of the Department of Defense (DOD) or held in a DOD facility may be subject to any interrogation techniques not authorized and listed in the manual."

Waterboarding is clearly against the law for the American military. Waterboarding is clearly prohibited by the Convention Against Torture and the Geneva Convention. It was again prohibited by the Detainee Treatment Act, which only covers military interrogations.

A powerful politician said this about torture and the "ticking bomb" scenario:

;"In the event we were ever confronted with having to interrogate a detainee with knowledge of an imminent threat to millions of Americans," then the decision to depart from standard international practices must be made by the president, and the president must be held accountable."

That politician was none other than Hillary Clinton.