So today, I vetoed it.

George Bush vetoed the Torture Bill.
In this weeks' radio address he explained that"The main reason [the CIA program to detain and question key terrorist leaders] has been effective is that it allows the CIA to use specialized interrogation procedures to question a small number of the most dangerous terrorists under careful supervision. The bill Congress sent me would deprive the CIA of the authority to use these safe and lawful techniques."
The bill, S.1943, basically insists that all United States government agencies should adhere to the 19 interrogation methods that are outlined in the United States Army Field Manual [pdf]. It also aimed to prohibit the following actions:

1. Forcing an individual to be naked, perform sexual acts, or pose in a sexual manner
2. Placing a hood or sack over the head on an individual, or using or placing duct tape over the eyes of an individual
3. applying a beating, electric shock, burns or other forms of physical pain to an individual
4. subjecting an individual to the procedure known as 'waterboarding'
5. Subjecting an individual to threats or attack from a military working dog
6. Inducing hypothermia or heat injury on an individual
7. Conducting a mock execution of an individual
8. Depriving an individual of necessary food, water or medical care.

Presumably, these 8 items are the "safe and lawful" techniques Bush was referencing. While the "safe"ness and "lawful"ness of each of these items is dubious, the CIA's use of waterboarding and the present administration's refusal to classify it as torture have alarmed peace loving hippies and and members of the military alike.

Obviously, this veto is infuriating from a human rights perspective, and there are plenty of activists making that point. I would really just like to point out that this veto is annoying as shit and completely childish. This administration has asserted and added presidential powers that should not exist. Even though the military rigorously complied a manual for how to deal with enemy combatants, it is Gdubs who feels he is wise enough to decide who should and should not be tortured. And even though military experts defended and encouraged this bill, through this act of veto the president insists it is he who has the final say (guess who you gotta ask if you wanna waterboard someone.)

Just as offensive is the twisted logic that is used to justify this decision. Clearly, whoever wrote this speech assumed that whoever was listening had no powers of analysis and is completely nervous and paranoid. The rhetoric of fear and tone of impending doom in today's speech (the danger remains") is deplorable. And tired. The the kind of thoughtless allegiance it encourages is disgusting. Bush reasons that because the field guide is a public document, the "terrorists" can read up and become impervious to our interrogation methods, and therefore, secret methods are necessary. What it neglects to explain is that the field guide describes types of interrogation methods (eg. good cop/ bad cop) which are based on psychology and human dynamics and aren't necessarily things you can study for. Furthermore, it does not necessarily follow that terrorists wouldn't be able to prepare themselves for unknown physical torture. The biggest problem with this reasoning is the fact that physical torture notoriously yields false information and bad confessions.

Perhaps George Bush is depending on waterboarding and other methods of coercive torture because he once heard somewhere that "nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition !":