House Passes Ban On Waterboarding

(AP)  The House of Representatives on Thursday approved an intelligence bill that bans the Central Intelligence Agency from using waterboarding, mock executions and other harsh interrogation methods.

The 222-199 vote sent the measure to the Senate, which still must act before it can go to President Bush. The White House has threatened a veto.

The bill, a House-Senate compromise to authorize intelligence operations in 2008, also blocks spending 70 percent of the intelligence budget until the House and Senate intelligence committees are briefed on Israel's Sept. 6 air strike on an alleged nuclear site in Syria.

The 2008 intelligence budget is classified, but it is more than the $43 billion approved for 2007.

Most of the bill itself also is classified, although some portions were made public. One provision requires reporting to the committees on whether intelligence agency employees are complying with protections for detainees from cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment. Another requires a report on the use of private contractors in intelligence work.

It is the first intelligence authorization conference bill Congress has produced in three years.

The White House threatened to veto the measure this week in a lengthy statement, highlighting more than 11 areas of disagreement with the bill.

The administration particularly opposes restricting the CIA to interrogation methods approved by the U.S. military in 2006. That document prohibits forcing detainees to be naked, perform sexual acts, or pose in a sexual manner; placing hoods or sacks over detainees' heads or duct tape over their eyes; beating, shocking, or burning detainees; threatening them with military dogs; exposing them to extreme heat or cold; conducting mock executions; depriving them of food, water, or medical care; and waterboarding.

Waterboarding is a particularly harsh form of interrogation that involves strapping down a prisoner, covering his mouth with plastic or cloth and pouring water over his face. The prisoner quickly begins to inhale water, causing the sensation of drowning.

The CIA is known to have waterboarded three prisoners but has not used the technique since 2003, according to a government official familiar with the program who spoke on condition of anonymity because the information is classified. CIA Director Michael Hayden prohibited waterboarding in 2006. The U.S. military outlawed it the same year.

The intelligence authorization bill also creates a new internal watchdog to oversee all the intelligence agencies. It requires Senate approval for the first time of two agency heads the National Reconnaissance Office, which manages the nation's spy satellites, and the National Security Agency, the outfit that conducted warrantless wiretapping on American phone and computer lines in what the White House calls the Terrorist Surveillance Program.

Separately on Thursday, the Senate Judiciary Committee rejected legislation that would have protected telecommunications companies from civil lawsuits over helping the government eavesdrop on Americans' communications without court orders. The legislation would have made the government the defendant in such lawsuits, rather than telecommunications companies. The 5-13 vote sank the measure pushed by Sen. Arlen Specter, a Republican who hoped it could be a compromise in the dispute over whether to immunize the companies from lawsuits.

In competing legislation written in October, the Senate Intelligence Committee granted legal immunity to telecom companies. The House passed a bill that does not protect the companies. The White House has also threatened to veto that bill.

Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell was briefing the Senate in a closed session about the matter on Thursday.

[mudrose-2009]

===Sorry rafterman time doesn''''''''t move all that fast.===
posted by muddy

Which is why the world is a sh*t hole of violence, death and destruction.

Posted by rafterman1

And that''s the reason why we should amend the Constitution to address all the violence, death and destruction? Are you sane?

[mudrose-2009]

Then what do we do when a situation comes up that isn''''t directly addresed in the Constitution? Ignore it and hope it goes away? All we have is the spirit of the Constitution to guide us and to try and interpret what the founding fathers would have done.
Posted by rafterman1

The Constitution, by its silence, means it does not address issues like abortion or g/ay rights so stop trying to amend it by judicial fiat.

[mudrose-2009]

===No they couldn''''t have imagined a country where the right to abortion existed either===

By the way, in the 18th and 19th centuries, abortion was allowed in some situations by both English and American common law. So the founding fathers imagined it just fine - and didn''''t addresss it in the Constitution.

Posted by rafterman1


And I''m sure it was unfetted, at will and partial birth? Sorry rafterman time doesn''t move all that fast. And the spirit of the Constitution is a load of garbage. We don''t create laws by judicial fiat. We don''t go outside to international law to create new rights and we don''t regard the Constitution as a living, breathing documents. That''s not spirit, that''s dismantling the Constitution. Sorry ratty, no spirit, just law. Congressional or Constitutional.

[mudrose-2009]

The Founders couldn''t imagine anyone insinuating the Religion could not be practiced in the public square. It would have been unheard of. They couldn''t imagine medicare/medicaid, Schip. They couldn''t imagine anyone trying to call the First and Second Amendments unconstitutional. They couldn''t imagine people not be responsible for themselves, their care. They couldn''t and wouldn''t know what the hell this country is today that you lefties are trying to make of it.

[mudrose-2009]

===What a Constitutionalist, Polly-Wanna as opposed to a Constructionist?===
posted by muddy

A Constitutionalist believes in a fairly strict interpretation of the Constitution, both the written word and, in the presence of a future that the founding fathers could not possibly have imagined, the spirit. Americans conducting torture is against both the written word (no cruel or unusual punishment) and the spirit of the Constitution.

Posted by rafterman1

No they couldn''t have imagined a country where the right to abortion existed either. They couldn''t imagine a country where g/ay marriage would even be contemplated. They couldn''t imagine a country where judges go outside the constitution to grant new rights. They couldn''t imagine judges legislating. They couldn''t imagine a lot of things, but apparently the lefties feel that the Constitution is a living, walking document subject to interpretation anyway they d/amn well please.

[antoniof123]

The 222-199 vote sent the measure to the Senate, which still must act before it can go to President Bush. The White House has threatened a veto.

So the GOP says torture is OK. So folks if you believe in torture then vote for the GOP they are just as bad as the Islamic fundamentalist oh wait they are the Christan fundamentalist so yes they are just as bad. They are digging a hole so deep they will never get out.

McCarthy was not lesson enough for these clowns they just don''t learn or can''t not sure which one and if it makes a difference.

[abdoul_pasha]

Goodevening!

[mudrose-2009]

Telling the CIA they cant torture is like telling the army they cant shoot their guns. Making a detterent presence isnt always sufficient.

Posted by verifyuser

Could you clarify, please. I''m not sure of your last sentence.

[mudrose-2009]

Mudrose, you know, the more posts of yours that I read, the more I become convinced that you are one of those people who actually erote at the very thought of inflicting pain on a fellow human being. I bet you if you had an opportunity of doing it with immunity, you wouldn''''t even need a reason, you would do it simply for elation. Your mind has come to the point of repeating mantras without understanding them; you know, like : you don''''t like torture, you must hate our troops. How sick!


posted by ajayvee

See, that''s why I know you never served in the military. What do you think the military is for? Do you think the military is for the service of humanity? Or do you think the military is for defense? But if you want to sing Kumbia that''s your business. Don''t bother me with your so-called moral righteousness. Especially when the Dimnowits advocate abortion, euthanaisa, etc.

[ajayvee]

Mudrose, you know, the more posts of yours that I read, the more I become convinced that you are one of those people who actually erote at the very thought of inflicting pain on a fellow human being. I bet you if you had an opportunity of doing it with immunity, you wouldn''t even need a reason, you would do it simply for elation. Your mind has come to the point of repeating mantras without understanding them; you know, like : you don''t like torture, you must hate our troops. How sick!