The King of Pointland

Eight Tenths of a Mile to Obama

This is the line I waited in to see Barack Obama speak today. He filled an 18,000-seat arena.

Water Torture

Sunday's Washington Post contains a must-read Op-Ed:

Last week, much to my dismay, government officials testified before Congress that the United States has used the interrogation technique known as waterboarding and would like to hold out the option of using it in the future. As someone who has experienced waterboarding, albeit in a controlled setting, I know that the act is indeed torture. I was waterboarded during my training to become a Navy flight crew member. As has been noted in The Post and other media outlets, waterboarding is "real drowning that simulates death." It's an experience our country should not subject people to.

It's truly remarkable, and yet it bears repeating: I live in a country whose government has recently used torture to extract information from prisoners, a government that continues to defend the practice.

The administration steadfastly denies that waterboarding is torture, though they sometimes have trouble saying so with a straight face. Here is the Director of National Intelligence in a recent interview:

For all McConnell’s insistence on change, he often thinks like a traditional spy. During one conversation, I asked McConnell, “Have we gotten meaningful information through torture?”

“We don’t torture,” he responded automatically.

...

Waterboarding was not a part of the training when McConnell went through SERE, although it sometimes has been. “You know what waterboarding is?” he asked. “You lay somebody on this table, or put them in an inclined position, and put a washcloth over their face, and you just drip water right here”—he pointed to his nostrils. “Try it! What happens is, water will go up your nose. And so you will get the sensation of potentially drowning. That’s all waterboarding is.”

I asked if he considered that torture.

McConnell refused to answer directly, but he said, “My own definition of torture is something that would cause excruciating pain.”

Did waterboarding fit that description?

Referring to his teen-age days as a lifeguard, he said, “I know one thing. I’m a water-safety instructor, but I cannot swim without covering my nose. I don’t know if it’s some deviated septum or mucus membrane, but water just rushes in.” For him, he said, “waterboarding would be excruciating. If I had water draining into my nose, oh God, I just can’t imagine how painful! Whether it’s torture by anybody else’s definition, for me it would be torture.”

I queried McConnell again, later, about his views on waterboarding, since this exchange seemed to suggest that he personally condemned it. He rejected that interpretation. “You can do waterboarding lots of different ways,” he said. “I assume you can get to the point that a person is actually drowning.” That would certainly be torture, he said. The definition didn’t seem very different from John Yoo’s. The reason that he couldn’t be more specific, McConnell said, is that “if it ever is determined to be torture, there will be a huge penalty to be paid for anyone engaging in it.

Yesterday President Bush gave an interview on Fox News Sunday, where he again defended the practice:

BUSH: First of all, whatever we have done was legal, and whatever decision I will make will be reviewed by the Justice Department to determine whether or not the legality is there. And the reason why there is a difference between what happened in the past and today, there is a new law.

And so to answer your question, whatever we will do would be legal. The American people have got to know that what we did in the past gained information that prevented an attack. And for those who criticize what we did in the past, I ask them, which attack would they rather have not permitted — stopped?.

Which attack on America did they — would they have said, well, you know, maybe it wasn't all that important that we stop those attacks. And I will do what is necessary to protect American within the law. That is what you have got to understand.

Two arguments are made. The first is that waterboarding was legal under existing laws when we engaged in it. That's nonsense. Torture was illegal under U.S. and international law the day Bush took the oath of office. The second argument is more troubling. Bush asks "which attack would they rather have not ... stopped?" This is a defense of torture. Perhaps the President believes waterboarding is illegal now that "there is a new law." If so, could he not ask the same question again if high value prisoners come into our custody? Is there anything we shouldn't do if it we think it will save American lives? Where does it end?

Carrier Grade: F

Dear Sun,

If you're marketing highly reliable hardware and software, it would be nice if your own e-commerce systems were highly reliable. For the second day in a row I can't check an order:

This is lame.

-David

Update: I followed the "feedback" link and scolded them. I received a non-form email response within a few hours from "Elaine." We sent a few emails back and forth troubleshooting the problem, and I just received a call from Elaine explaining what was going on. Summary: they're transitioning to a new system, and, during the transition, they're experiencing issues with those parts of the site that haven't been updated yet. In the mean time, she provided a workaround which should allow me to track my order within the next few hours.