• Andrew Ramonas
    Lobbying Reporter
  • Beth Frerking
    Editor in Chief
  • David Brown
    Vice President/Editor, ALM
  • Diego Radzinschi
    Photo Editor
  • Jenna Greene
    Senior Reporter
  • Marcia Coyle
    Chief Washington Correspondent
  • Mike Scarcella
    Washington Bureau Chief
  • Todd Ruger
    Capitol Hill Reporter
  • Tony Mauro
    Supreme Court Correspondent
  • Zoe Tillman
    D.C. Courts Reporter

« Blog Induction | Main | Durbin v. Mukasey »

January 30, 2008



No progress has been made when we argue over what constitutes torture. What would Mukasey define as torture if not simulated drowning? How far can one proceed with the treatment of another human being before one sees it as cruel and unusual? If waterboarding isn't torture or cruel and unusual punishment would Mukasey approve waterboarding for use by "police" for interrogation purposes? How about FBI in their interrogation os suspects? Human rights is not a concept we extend to one subset in the world, it is something we believe "all people" are entitled to have. Apparently Mukasey sees some people deserving different rights than others. For that reason alone he should be excused from office. He has no business being the Attorney General.

Thomas Cantwell

Let's break this down a bit for the Republicans (who indicate they generally care a bit more about what Jesus says....)

Would Jesus Waterboard?

If we choose to adopt the methods used during the Sapnish Inquisition or by the Khmer Rouge, we become just like them - what a shame that people even consider "maybe" as a valid answer.


I never thought I'd live to see torture's legitimacy actually debated in the USA. What was the point of beating the Nazis only to become just like them? Shame!

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad