Jun 26th, 2008
Posted by Suzanne Ito, ACLU at 1:04pm	National Security

Is it Torture When Americans Are Waterboarded?

John Yoo spit out a familiar, Mukasey-esque answer when Bill Delahunt (D-Mass.) asked if waterboarding is torture if it's an American soldier being waterboarded.

Yoo answers: "My view now is that it would depend on the circumstances."

Permalink |	National Security

1. Anonymous Says:
   Jun 26th, 2008 at 11:54pm

   Seems like the next logical question would have been - "Mr. Yoo, is would you consider waterboarding to be torture if it was performed on you?"

2. Ken Says:
   Jun 27th, 2008 at 9:48am

   Worrying about Yoo's response here is in a sense beneath the ACLU. Torture of a human, American or otherwise, is unethical and ought to be (and IS) illegal.

3. Paul Says:
   Jun 27th, 2008 at 3:41pm

   I'm a U.S. Citizen and the government has been behind torturing me for years.

4. Bob Says:
   Jun 28th, 2008 at 5:07pm

   No, it is not torture when an American is waterboarded because waterboarding is not torture.

   Now if we were to cut their testicals off, or decapitate them on video, or burn them alive, or stone them, I might think differently. But we don't do that do we?

   Stop bitching about us and start bitching about what they are doing to ANYONE that disagrees with their "God".

   I do not understand why the ACLU does not strongly condemn Terrorists.

5. Tony Says:
   Jun 29th, 2008 at 9:33am

   Hey Bob,

   You couldn't have said it better had you been the ghost of Augusto Pinochet...

   As the name ACLU denotes, it's primary mission is to ensure that the U.S. lives up to it's constitutional ideals. Obvious to everyone (including the ACLU) is the fact that terrorism, regardless of who perpetrates it, is repugnant and offensive.

   As far as waterboarding is concerned, anytime you coerce a "confession" using means that induce extreme physical or mental anguish (such as fear of drowning) you are torturing someone. Furthermore, as so many former interrogators have rightly pointed out, you risk obtaining false confessions and misleading information, simply to make the torture stop.

   Most reasonable people (including the ACLU), have no sympathy for terrorists or their methods. The ACLU and other like minded organizations are merely trying to ensure that the U.S. does not adopt the standards of those it purports to oppose.

6. Cate Jenkins Says:
   Jan 5th, 2009 at 1:37pm

   Thanks to ACLU for bringing Mr. John Yoo’s 3/14/03 memo to light. I included an attack on his legal interpretation of the federal maiming statute were in my 10/13/08 complaint to the FBI regarding exposures to World Trade Center toxics, which I will send on request (jenkins.cate@epa.gov). Mr. You claimed that only certain body parts, the limbs or extremities, were prohibited from intentional mutilation, thus justifying waterboarding as not covered under the maiming laws. Mr. Yoo conveniently omitted the phrase “any member” that is also contained in the U.S. Title 18 language, thus making it appear on the face that his interpretation was correct. In 2006, the U.S. Dept. of Justice issued a document giving the correct interpretation of the maiming statute as covering all parts of the body.