WASHINGTON, March 11, 2008
Bush's Veto Of Anti-Torture Bill Stands
House Democrats Fail To Override President's Veto Of Bill Banning Waterboarding
-
The bill would have banned waterboarding, a technique which makes the person being interrogated feel like he is drowning. (CBS)
The vetoed legislation would have limited the CIA to using only the 19 interrogation methods approved in the Army field manual. That guidebook bans the use of waterboarding, a technique that simulates drowning. CIA Director Michael Hayden has confirmed that the spy agency used the technique on three terrorist suspects in 2002 and 2003.
The 225-188 House roll call was 51 votes short of the two-thirds majority required to overturn a veto. Bush has vetoed seven bills during his tenure, and only once has Congress mustered the votes to override his veto.
The interrogation limits are part of a bill authorizing intelligence spending for the current fiscal year. Bush vetoed it on Saturday. It is the first intelligence authorization bill produced by Congress in three years.
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes, D-Texas, attempted to frame the vote as a human rights referendum. "This is about torture," he said, a refrain repeated by other Democrats who spoke in support of the override.
Republicans portrayed their support for Bush's veto as a stand against a bill they say is riddled with pork-barrel projects like a National Drug Intelligence Center and a study of the national security implications of global warming.
"This is an ill-advised bill," said Rep. Pete Hoekstra of Michigan, the top Republican on the Intelligence Committee. He likened the bill to giving al Qaeda terrorists the American "playbook" on interrogation.
"What are the priorities of this House? How are we going to keep America safe?" he said.
The president said his veto was not specifically about waterboarding but about wanting the CIA to have the flexibility to use legal and effective interrogation methods that are not listed in the Army field manual.
"I cannot sign into law a bill that would prevent me, and future presidents, from authorizing the CIA to conduct a separate, lawful intelligence program, and from taking all lawful actions necessary to protect Americans from attack," Bush said in a statement.
Nevertheless, Bush said the attorney general has deemed waterboarding legal under domestic and international law.
Hayden has prohibited the CIA from using waterboarding since 2006, but it remains a possibility in future interrogations. It can be approved for use on a case-by-case basis by the president and attorney general.
The 19 interrogation techniques allowed in the Army Field Manual include the "good cop/bad cop" routine; making prisoners think they are in another country's custody; and separating a prisoner from others for up to 30 days.
Among the techniques the field manual prohibits are:
- hooding prisoners or putting duct tape across their eyes.
- stripping prisoners naked.
- forcing prisoners to perform or mimic sexual acts.
- beating, burning or physically hurting them in other ways.
- subjecting prisoners to hypothermia or mock executions.
© MMVIII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.Add a Comment See all 307 Comments- hey jwhitman..i got something for you to get upset about..
"The mud buildings were an al Qaeda in Iraq torture chamber and operational headquarters.
Abu Mohammed says he was chained up here for two weeks and saw 13-year-old children killed. When al Qaeda fled, they left little behind.''
OF COURSE YOU CANNOT COMPLAIN ABOUT THIS TO YOUR PIMP - Reply to this comment
- Let us say that all good men shall(The full House of Republicans whom voted for torture)) line up behind Bushwacker to take a waterboarding. How many would go thru with it when Bush CHICKENED out.
- Reply to this comment
- j-whitman:
jwind11 DOES get to me at times. I just dislike some of his/her(?) rhetoric. I do think they had a point about providing support, though....fair is fair. - Reply to this comment
- RickNuber,,,, jwinds posts never change it''s allways an endless circle of diversion
- Reply to this comment
- RickNuber,,,, jwind got to you didn''t she ?? --- I have been reading her posts for several months
- Reply to this comment
- -sigh-
jwind11 is right about at least one thing. Everyone here needs to start providing empirical proof for non-opinion statements, including me.
Not everyone who reads this forum has the advantage of having read each other''s posts for several months. In order for this to be productive in any way, we need to be able to include new posters in the dialog. - Reply to this comment
- similar to peoples posts on here, they seem far fetched, and i am just wanting numbers for them to back it up...
Posted by jwind11
So what is so far fetched about Bush turning Iraq into a terrorist breeding ground? Perhaps that''s why he wants to keep methods of torture legal...he knows we''ll need it someday. - Reply to this comment
- jwind11:
You are using sound logic there. No sarcasm. - Reply to this comment
- jwind,,,,, How does the vast majority of Americans including conservatives & many republicans who are indeed by choice liberal act ????
- Reply to this comment
- I''''d be suspicious. The Bears don''''t win much :-(
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by RickNuber at 01:07 PM : Mar 12, 2008
good point, so if i posted that the bears won, people would be skeptical, right? so i would need numbers (score) to back it up right? similar to peoples posts on here, they seem far fetched, and i am just wanting numbers for them to back it up....i have never agreed or disagreed , but if they don''t have numbers to back it up, they shouldn''t be posting - Reply to this comment
- jwind11:
You just danced around the question. Please provide an answer. - Reply to this comment
- jwind11, william19491:
How do you define who is a "liberal"? You seem to use that word a lot, and I''''d like to know how you make that judgment.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by RickNuber at 01:06 PM : Mar 12, 2008
oh my, you are kidding right? if you are ashamed at being a liberal, then quit acting like one - Reply to this comment
- jwind11:
I''d be suspicious. The Bears don''t win much :-( - Reply to this comment
- jwind,,,, I''''m serious, get over your obsession with spelling & deversions & get on with the problems facing this country
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by j-whitman at 01:02 PM : Mar 12, 2008
people being unable to spell, read and write is a major problem in this country!! and other countries to. what is your excuse that you can''t spell? is that the presidents fault? yes or no? - Reply to this comment
- jwind11, william19491:
How do you define who is a "liberal"? You seem to use that word a lot, and I''d like to know how you make that judgment. - Reply to this comment
- You have every right to ask for numbers to support someone''''s claims, even if it is only asked of people you consider "liberal". But if someone DOES provide numbers, what''''s the point if you dismiss them out of hand? Doesn''''t that kind of defeat the purpose?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by RickNuber at 01:02 PM : Mar 12, 2008
if i post on here that the Bears won the football game...i better know the score if someone ask me for it....right? if i don''t know the score....then how do i know the bears won? - Reply to this comment
- jwind,,,, I''m serious, get over your obsession with spelling & deversions & get on with the problems facing this country
- Reply to this comment
- jwind11:
You have every right to ask for numbers to support someone''s claims, even if it is only asked of people you consider "liberal". But if someone DOES provide numbers, what''s the point if you dismiss them out of hand? Doesn''t that kind of defeat the purpose? - Reply to this comment
- whitman....i am serious, you are over 30? is that safe to say? and a first grader spells better than you. i guess i would misdirect my anger about that at someone else to.....my question is this, who are you going to misdirect your anger of being unable to spell in 2 years from now?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by jwind11 at 01:00 PM : Mar 12, 2008
you should look to yourself, then maybe your parents, then school system that you went to....i really don''t think bush had anything to do with you being unable to spell - Reply to this comment
- whitman....i am serious, you are over 30? is that safe to say? and a first grader spells better than you. i guess i would misdirect my anger about that at someone else to.....my question is this, who are you going to misdirect your anger of being unable to spell in 2 years from now?
- Reply to this comment
- hey jwhitman..i got something for you to get upset about..
