Discomfiture is not physical or mental pain no matter how serious it gets.
I think it is amazing that these “brave jihadis” are willing to blow themselves and many innocents to bits, for the sake of allah, but pour a little water up their noses and they start singing like CANARIES!
All of a sudden DEATH is not a good idea.
They are cowards and their buddies that make up the Islamic/Commie 5th column in this country are merely trying to garner sympathy for the cause.
I’m getting tired of this ‘waterboarding is torture’ routine. We strap criminals into electric chairs or onto tables for lethal injections. We tell these individuals what we’re going to do to them, and they usually have a decade or two to think about it before they’re intentionally killed. If we can do that, then pouring water into the noses of three people we have no intention of killing shouldn’t elicit anything more than a yawn. Before 9/11, the liberal definition of torture had more to do with getting lousy seats for Phantom of the Opera. It’s infuriating that the prissies in this country have controlled this conversation for 7 years. Pray that Cheney’s ticker holds up for a few more years. We desperately need him to continue his dialogue. Sorry for the rant. Not enough sleep.
“No one seriously disputes that waterboarding intentionally inflicts serious physical and mental pain.”
I infer Mr Davis does not taken Dick Cheney seriously. Big mistake.
We've seen pro-abortion people like Lanny argue that when you see it active during a televised abortion that it doesn't mean a thing.
If Lanny would to learn what torture is really about there are any number of people who'd love to show him.
My reading of the law is that the intent of the person doing the waterboarding or other activity is the controlling factor in determining whether it is torture, not the activity itself. If waterboarding was done for the primary purpose of inflicting pain or exacting punishment, it could be held to be torture, but if done for the purpose of obtaining needed information or to train your own troops, it would not be torture.
Mr. Davis and others try to focus attention on the activity (waterboarding) and obscure the intent which was perfectly legitimate. They may manufacture a political issue, but I can't see even a liberal judge buying it as a legal argument.
Just as an aside, I once heard of a man who had his arm torn from the socket by a rescue crew trying to pull him from a well that caved in. Under Mr. Davis’ approach, the rescue crew could have been charged with torture.