We are diverging off topic here, but I do find that a rather fascinating contention coming from you.

As for Bush's waffling, he could open an IHOP just on his own record of them.
- WMDS......FREEDOM AND DEMOCRACY

- I'll fire the person in this administration, if I find they are involved in Plumgate.
- Actually, I'll let him resign, get convicted, and then pardon him

- I have the power to establish Gitmo, and do whatever I deem necessary
- Oh. OK. I can't, so I'll do now what I should have done then

- The US shouldn't nation build.
- Get the cranes ready

- We need a strong military
- Let's weaken it

- My economic plan means prosperity for all
- Well...anyone got an extra twenty until my unemployment check arrives ?

- My leadership will restore integrity in Washington
- Diogenes would walk right through the Beltway without stopping


I could go on and on.

Just look at where your nation is now, and where it once was, internally and internationally.

Compare that to almost any other time in your nations history.

Your nation has not been this divided since possibly the Civil War.

Then come back and tell me again about this wonderful man that sits in the White House today.

This thread has nothing to do with liking Bush, or not liking Bush.

It's based on carefully thought out , and researched conclusions, which I and others have presented and which you can review.

Like him, don’t like him, no matter, at least you can’t honestly claim that he waffles on every controversial issue or caves under political pressure.

this whole waterboard debate shows you who is a patriot and who is a communist/socialist

probably giving us the crap generals who had us stalled in iraq. im sure anybody good would have wanted to leave when draft dodger, convicted, pardoned by carter, fact convienently taken out of wikipedia, took office.

since we are throwing around opinions...
imho, Bush has never explored alternatives in any thing he has done, therefore, he has never made competent decisions, he doesn’t take advice from others, those that have disagreed with him have been dismissed (literally), he only sees success, failure is not an option, this is his reality, even with the fiasco that Iraq has become, he has never admitted anything but success there, which is part of his delusional way of seeing the world, to call himself “the “Decider” shows his hellish side, for he will not adjust to others at all even when things would have been greatly improved…

from the time he sat for seven stunned minutes to present, anyone with an open mind and has taken a pysch101 course could see this man has true psychological problems, America is too partisan now to go down that avenue, but history will have volumes on the psychological issues this president has and the “state of mind” that contemporary Americans had to “accept and condone” his immoral decisions…

this whole waterboard debate shows you who is a patriot and who is a communist/socialist

so Senator McCain is not a patriot but a communist/socialist and is running for president...WOW!!!

This opinion interprets the federal criminal prohibition against torture codified at 18 U.S.C. §§ 2340-2340A. It supersedes in its entirety the August 1, 2002 opinion of this Office entitled Standards of Conduct under 18 U.S.C. §§ 2340-2340A.

That statute prohibits conduct "specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering." This opinion concludes that "severe" pain under the statute is not limited to "excruciating or agonizing" pain or pain "equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily functions, or even death."

The statute also prohibits certain conduct specifically intended to cause "severe physical suffering" distinct from "severe physical pain."

MEMORANDUM OPINION FOR THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL

Torture is abhorrent both to American law and values and to international norms. This universal repudiation of torture is reflected in our criminal law, for example, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2340-2340A; international agreements, exemplified by the United Nations Convention Against Torture (the "CAT") (1); customary international law (2); centuries of Anglo-American law (3); and the longstanding policy of the United States, repeatedly and recently reaffirmed by the President. (4)

Section 2340A provides that "[w]hoever outside the United States commits or attempts to commit torture shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both, and if death results to any person from conduct prohibited by this subsection, shall be punished by death or imprisoned for any term of years or for life." (9) Section 2340(1) defines "torture" as "an act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control." (10)

In interpreting these provisions, we note that Congress may have adopted a statutory definition of "torture" that differs from certain colloquial uses of the term. Cf. Cadet v. Bulger, 377 F.3d 1173, 1194 (11th Cir. 2004) ("[I]n other contexts and under other definitions [the conditions] might be described as torturous. The fact remains, however, that the only relevant definition of 'torture' is the definition contained in [the] CAT. . . ."). We must, of course, give effect to the statute as enacted by Congress. (11)

Congress enacted sections 2340-2340A to carry out the United States' obligations under the CAT. See H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 103-482, at 229 (1994). The CAT, among other things, obligates state parties to take effective measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under their jurisdiction, and requires the United States, as a state party, to ensure that acts of torture, along with attempts and complicity to commit such acts, are crimes under U.S. law. See CAT arts. 2, 4-5. Sections 2340-2340A satisfy that requirement with respect to acts committed outside the United States. (12) Conduct constituting "torture" occurring within the United States was--and remains--prohibited by various other federal and state criminal statutes that we do not discuss here.

the lefties boy is a freaking CONVICTED felon.

put that up against gw who flew the f-102 our nations hottest plane at the time, which killed plenty of our pilots and some of the german pilots we sold them to

this whole waterboard debate shows you who is a patriot and who is a communist/socialist

What pray tell would you have him do during that extremely crucial 7 minutes? Launch a nuclear strike? More than likely he heard the same as we did, and it took a lonnnnnnggggg time for it to register it was an actual attack, and at that time everyone was clueless as to who it was.

So , here's the question.

An interrogator actually manages to get into that one in a million situation where a ticking bomb is about to go off. After trying every other course, and realizing time is running out, he decides to torture a prisoner in some way.

The end result is that a hundred people are saved from certain death by the information obtained.

The prisoner is not suffering from any long term problems from the torture, but did experience extreme pain during it.

Do you convict the interrogator for the maximum penalty, do you reduce it, or do you let him walk out scott free of any penalty whatsoever ?

1. IMHO means it's an opinion, so it's good that you caught that

2. when something is in white it's because you are quoting someone else, the "pigeonhole" was actually your team member, peter's, comment not mine

it's good to see you saw it as asinine as I did (which was my point)

what would I have wanted Bush to do those 7 minutes?
hummm
excuse himself from the class
to minimize a terrorist attack on himelf, remove himself from the public eye
get up-to date with the facts of what has happened and what MAY happen
see that the VP is where he should be, and of course ask Cheney, what he as
president should do...a given of course
contact the CIA and see what they know
contact NORAD for minute by minute blows of what has happened and may happen
call his wife and tell her he loves her in case anything happens to him

geez, you think 7 minutes of funk is better than any action?

staying on topic, a president who sits stunned for 7 minutes after our nation is attacked does not have the IQ to decide (as nona gives him power to do) if waterboarding is torture

They practice operation security as well you know. Id personally by the way guestimate that 1 minute should be the limit- I have been citing 40 seconds because that was the time the origional interview stated in getting the information.

Plans dont always change you know. 911 was in the works for a while. Maybe some minor changes, but the same basic plan.

And one of the things about operational security is that anyone who knows someone is in enemy hands is going to be changing their plans pretty quickly. Terrorists are not madmen either, and they are acting with pretty much the same level of intelligence and care towards their operational ends as anyone else is.

It's not like they are staring into the mirror every morning wondering how much "evil" they can do. To them it's just a valid a cause as yours is.