White House hints, but won’t say, that waterboarding is legal

Between CIA revelations, months of reports, detainee testimony, and John Kiriakou’s very public comments, there is no longer a question as to whether Bush administration officials used waterboarding to torture suspects. But the White House can’t concede reality because a) the Bush gang has to maintain the fiction that it opposes torture; and b) torture is still illegal.

It led to an Abbott-and-Costello-like press briefing with Dana Perino yesterday. A reporter asked whether the questioning of Abu Zubaydah conformed with “the interrogation program approved by President Bush.” Perino would only say, “All have been done within the legal framework that was set out after September 11th…. The entire program has been legal.”

After the obligatory, “The United States does not torture,” we saw this exchange.

Q: But when you have a former CIA officer, John Kiriakou, now saying that waterboarding was used — since you’re saying the interrogations were legal; he’s saying on the record now, waterboarding was used in at least one case. You’re saying waterboarding is legal?

PERINO: Ed, I’m saying I’m not commenting on any specific technique. I’m not commenting on that gentleman’s characteristics of any possible technique. I’ve given you a very general statement about interrogations being legal, limited and —

Q: You just said it was legal.

PERINO: I’m sorry?

Q: You said it was within the legal framework.

PERINO: Yes.

Q: Everything that was done.

PERINO: Yes.

Q: So waterboarding is legal.

PERINO: I’m not commenting on any specific techniques.

Got that? We know U.S. officials used waterboarding, Perino wants us to know U.S. officials’ techniques were legal, but she doesn’t want us to connect point A to point B. She can’t say waterboarding is legal (it’s not), she can’t say it’s illegal (it is), so she can’t say anything coherent at all.

And best of all, the reason Perino won’t comment on waterboarding is because — get this — terrorists might be listening to the White House press briefing. Fortunately, the press corps didn’t find this persuasive, either.

Q: Dana, can I come back to the waterboarding question? I understand the rationale for not wanting to discuss specific techniques — it’s to not tip off America’s enemies, to help them train as to how to evade what questioning they get. After a retired team member is on nationwide television explaining exactly what was done, is there an al Qaeda operative anywhere who doesn’t know that this might be in the arsenal?

PERINO: Obviously, al Qaeda listens closely to everything that we do and say, and that’s something that we should be — that we should keep in mind…. [M]atters of sensitivity should remain classified and not spoken about publicly.

But therein lies the point: it’s already been spoken about publicly. At great length. This isn’t a secret; it’s a torture technique developed during the Spanish Inquisition, and prosecuted by previous administrations as a war crime. It’s in the news, it’s in congressional hearings, it’s even in presidential debates.

So what on earth is Dana Perino talking about?

Maybe the Perinobot is trying to implement their latest torture method, wherein they subject everyone to their finest dumbass excuses, and thereby make all the people who still care about the image of the United States want to kill themselves.

  • It’s an edict of King George XLIII. Of course waterboarding is legal.

    Do we need to be reminded that September 11 happened?

  • “She can’t say waterboarding is legal (it’s not), she can’t say it’s illegal (it is), so she can’t say anything coherent at all.”

    You almost make it sound as if she sometimes says something which is coherent…

  • She may have a point.

    Bin Laden could have been watching the Press Conference from his cave. And if he learns that waterboarding is going down, he can issue a memo requiring ALL terrorists to start practicing simulated drowning.

  • “so she can’t say anything coherent at all.”

    Does she ever, on any topic?

    Just more of the dumbing down of the world to the lowest and least common denominator. In every aspect of life.

  • Waterboarding is legal, according to loyal Bushies and assorted wingnuts, because The Decider says it is legal.

    In a time of war, The Decider is the ultimate arbitor of what the law allows.

    In short if the president acts, that action is legal.

  • so she can’t say anything coherent at all.

    Missing the point here. Her job is to propell the propaganda so the truthiness can sink in.

  • Perhaps KG-43 needs to be reminded that he’s supposedly the head-of-state for a signatory to UNCAT—which, if I’m reading the various articles of that treaty correctly—pretty much implicates a whole lot of Bu$hylvanians in the commission of war crimes.

  • When the media fails to call BS at the top of their lungs about so many of the Bush lies this is what you get: an administration that lies with impunity. Why not lie if the stenographers and their “editors” won’t nail them on it.

  • Let’s stop calling it “simulated” drowning. It is “controlled” drowning! The victim is actually drowning, but it’s controlled by a medical expert. This needs to be corrected/pointed out every time we see it.

  • JRS Jr,
    We don’t outlaw specific techinques. If we do, and someone creates a new technique or alters an existing technique, then we have to outlaw that technique as well (once we find out about it). We have outlawed characteristics. This technique fits those characteristice, ergo it is torture (thus illegal).

  • What peterado said in #9, the stenographer media ultimately enables BushCo to lie with impunity. If it wasn’t for them, BushCo would not get away with blatantly lying and acting like this kind of BS constitutes legitimate information.

    Also, what rickles said in #10. We can be pretty sure that over the centuries that waterboarding has been used, more than a few torturers have killed their victims, and they didn’t do it with a “simulation” of drowning. It’s not “simulated drowning”, and to use that term is to concede that they haven’t killed anyone doing it, and we definitely don’t know that’s the case.

  • The President is the symbolic personification of the country, therefore the President is the country. The President has never personally waterboarded anyone, therefore the country has never waterboarded anyone, so the U.S. does not torture. Hey, this is easy. Move over, Dana.

  • What Perino was thinking while asked about:
    Cuban Missile Crisis – “It had to do with Cuba and missiles, I’m pretty sure.”
    Waterboarding – “It has to do with water and boards, I’m pretty sure.”

    CB, why do you keep dissecting non-sense. They don’t want to answer the question, so regardless of logic, the question will not be answered. Ya know, great, we have pointed out their flimsy excuse is flimsy. Good job, now let’s move along. Perino will not be answering waterboarding or Libby questions this week, next week, or anytime in the near future.

    It amazes me that people actually put thought into the excuse.

  • Did BUSH direct Water Torture via live video feed?
    The CRIME is always proportional to the cover up

    When a CIA agent is on eight networks in one day spilling
    the beans with impunity, somebody is pulling his strings
    and what we are getting is the latest fall back story.

    Something VERY IMPEACHABLE must be behind this one.
    Obstruction of Congress seems certain already.

    That is a huge crime, and Congress members are not witnesses
    you cannot refute or silence (easily). So, the crimes that the
    Obstruction of Congress crimes covered up must be even worse.

    My best bet. The reason interrogations started being video taped
    was to live feed them home to Langley, and then to whoever in the chain of command that wanted to watch and to whoever gave the
    orders and directed the torture, to the Decider.

    More at link

  • Dana Perino is a babe. How dare you take issue with her just because she is lying through her teeth.

    Tony Snow, Scott McClellan and Ari Fleischer all lied too and aren’t nearly as babelicious. Would you all like to go back to them. No…I thought not. Leave the spokesmodel alone!

  • Please call Speaker Nancy Pelosi (202) 225-0100 and remind her that she is supposed to represent “We the People..” and tell her to put IMPEACHMENT back on the table, where it should have been already.

  • Comments are closed.