<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Obama&#039;s Enemies List: A Growing List of Obama&#039;s Enemies &#187; waterboarding</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.obamashitlist.com/tag/waterboarding/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.obamashitlist.com</link>
	<description>Are you on OBAMASHITLIST?</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 10:25:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Mukasey Responds to McCain on Torture</title>
		<link>http://www.obamashitlist.com/2011/05/13/mukasey-responds-to-mccain-on-torture/</link>
		<comments>http://www.obamashitlist.com/2011/05/13/mukasey-responds-to-mccain-on-torture/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 May 2011 17:19:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>richwas</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[admiral-michael]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[department]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[director]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[harsh]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intelligence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[interrogators]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[knowing-the-man]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[michael-mukasey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mukasey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[time]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[waterboarding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[words]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.obamashitlist.com/2011/05/13/mukasey-responds-to-mccain-on-torture/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Former attorney general Michael Mukasey has responded to the assertions John McCain has made over the past few days regarding the effectiveness and legality of torture. McCain had claimed that Mukasey had wrongly stated that waterboarding and other such interrogation methods had led to the killing of Osama bin Laden, implying that Mukasey was dishonest or misled. Mukasey fires right back :]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.obamashitlist.com/2011/05/13/mukasey-responds-to-mccain-on-torture/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bush, Obama, Ground Zero…</title>
		<link>http://www.obamashitlist.com/2011/05/05/bush-obama-ground-zero%e2%80%a6/</link>
		<comments>http://www.obamashitlist.com/2011/05/05/bush-obama-ground-zero%e2%80%a6/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 May 2011 07:57:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>concernedcoloradoan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stupid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jimmy-carter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[much-the-same]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[people]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[president]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[president-bush]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[protesters]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stupid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stupid-tomorrow]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[successor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[supreme-court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[waterboarding]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.obamashitlist.com/2011/05/05/bush-obama-ground-zero%e2%80%a6/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ &#8230;and the Law of Unintended Consequences : &#8220;Former President George W. Bush has declined an invitation to join President Barack Obama at a New York City ceremony later this week marking the death of al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden, NBC News reported on Tuesday.&#8221;  The - &#8216;ostensible&#8217; is too strong a word; &#8216;primary&#8217; probably works better - reason is that former President Bush chooses to not emulate Jimmy Carter&#8217;s horrible example by insinuating himself into national affairs; but there&#8217;s certainly speculation as to what the secondary reasons are.  Allahpundit&#8217;s suggestion that Bush desires to avoid what AP didn&#8217;t, but I will, call a Wellstone funeral-style campaign op makes a certain amount of sense.  Then again, so does Instapundit&#8217;s commenter&#8217;s observation that perhaps Bush didn&#8217;t feel like being insulted to his face by President Obama, in much the same way that Obama went after Rep. Paul Ryan and the US Supreme Court in venues where they had to sit there and take the hits.  I favor the latter as being the secondary reason. And that&#8217;s where the Law of Unintended Consequences kicks in.  It is actually very likely that President Obama has no intention of listening to the fools on his side who want to use the event for Bush-bashing, if only because it&#8217;s not the antiwar movement that the President needs to woo right now; even their protesters are committed to voting for him*.  Obama needs independents and the disaffected portion of his 2008 vote, and those two demographics like seeing their Presidents take the high road.   So you&#8217;d think that he&#8217;d take it, right? But we don&#8217;t actually know that the President is going to be that smart (more accurately, that he&#8217;s going to be that not-dumb); tomorrow&#8217;s speech could possibly be yet another endless exercise in tedious sniping and dull hyper-partisanship.  And if Obama isn&#8217;t going to be that smart, and Bush had gone&#8230; well.  That would have been the last straw.  I know that this is incomprehensible to many on the Left, but more people than the Left thinks still like George W. Bush - and watching him have to sit there silently while his successor tries (unsuccessfully) to bully him would touch them (us) off.  And that would be bad for the President, because by and large the people who still like Bush have been holding back a bit on going after Obama hammer and tongs on national security. Again, is it high probability that Obama will be stupid tomorrow? &#8230;Again, no.  But because it isn&#8217;t zero probability, it&#8217;s too risky; which means that Obama&#8217;s feel-good bullying attempts have pretty much eliminated a chance at a nice, bipartisan celebration that would have given him some credibility with independent voters on national security. Karma.  It&#8217;s what&#8217;s for dinner. Moe Lane ( crosspost ) *Even though they&#8217;ve just validated waterboarding as a valid technique in the GWOT . ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.obamashitlist.com/2011/05/05/bush-obama-ground-zero%e2%80%a6/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why Waterboarding Works: Osama bin Laden’s Gruesome End</title>
		<link>http://www.obamashitlist.com/2011/05/04/why-waterboarding-works-osama-bin-laden%e2%80%99s-gruesome-end/</link>
		<comments>http://www.obamashitlist.com/2011/05/04/why-waterboarding-works-osama-bin-laden%e2%80%99s-gruesome-end/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 May 2011 19:24:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>markboabaca</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Afghanistan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[afghanistan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[coffee and markets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[follow-brad]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[house]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[importance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[markets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[osama bin laden]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pakistan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[podcast-feed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[waterboarding]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.obamashitlist.com/2011/05/04/why-waterboarding-works-osama-bin-laden%e2%80%99s-gruesome-end/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Download audio here Download Podcast &#124; iTunes &#124; Podcast Feed On today&#8217;s edition of Coffee and Markets , Brad Jackson is joined by Pejman Yousefzadeh and Elizabeth Blackney to discuss the importance of Osama bin Laden&#8217;s death photos, and why waterboarding is an important tool in the war against terrorism. We&#8217;re brought to you as always by BigGovernment and Stephen Clouse and Associates . If you&#8217;d like to email us, you can do so at coffee[at]newledger.com. We hope you enjoy the show. Related Links: Closer look at bin Laden&#8217;s compound White House Weighing Release of Bin Laden Photographs from Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Deck of Aircraft Carrier &#8216;Cheney&#8217;s assassination squad&#8217; just killed bin Laden Pej: Means To An End Republicans note harsh interrogation helped bin Laden operation Follow Brad on Twitter Follow Pej on Twitter Follow Elizabeth on Twitter ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.obamashitlist.com/2011/05/04/why-waterboarding-works-osama-bin-laden%e2%80%99s-gruesome-end/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
<enclosure url="http://newledger.com/podcasts/CoffeeandMarkets050411.mp3" length="0" type="audio/mpeg" />
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Leon Panetta: Okay, I Admit it.  Waterboarding Gave Us Some of the Information That Led to the Killing of bin Laden</title>
		<link>http://www.obamashitlist.com/2011/05/04/leon-panetta-okay-i-admit-it-waterboarding-gave-us-some-of-the-information-that-led-to-the-killing-of-bin-laden/</link>
		<comments>http://www.obamashitlist.com/2011/05/04/leon-panetta-okay-i-admit-it-waterboarding-gave-us-some-of-the-information-that-led-to-the-killing-of-bin-laden/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 May 2011 09:48:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>georgiana wren</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[aaron-worthing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[body]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[director]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[girl]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[interrogation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[location]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[torture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[waterboarding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[white]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.obamashitlist.com/2011/05/04/leon-panetta-okay-i-admit-it-waterboarding-gave-us-some-of-the-information-that-led-to-the-killing-of-bin-laden/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ [Guest post by Aaron Worthing; if you have tips, please send them  here .  Or by Twitter @AaronWorthing.] That’s not a quote, obviously, but well, how else do you interpret this ? CIA Director Leon Panetta stomped on the White House’s political script when he told Tuesday night’s broadcast of NBC Nightly News that the waterboarding of jihadi detainees contributed information that led to the location and killing of Osama bin Laden. “We had multiple series of sources that provided information with regards to this situation… clearly some of it came from detainees [and] they used these enhanced interrogation techniques against some of those detainees,” he told NBC anchor Brian Williams. When asked by Williams if water-boarding was part of the “enhanced interrogation techniques,” Panetta simply said “that’s correct.” So, um, can we stop claiming that waterboarding  doesn’t work? I mean let’s back up a little.  Just about everyone opposes hard-core torture, like ripping out fingernails and electroshock (except maybe in a ticking bomb scenario).  And only a few loons want us to limit our interrogation to name, rank and serial number.  The question is when does interrogation become torture, and one thing you can say for certain is that waterboarding is close to the line.  It might be barely over it, or barely under it, but it&#8217;s clearly a close call.  So I completely respect anyone who says it is torture even if I disagree. But the most ridiculous claim is that it supposedly doesn’t work.  Now of course pressuring anyone in any way to get a mere confession is of dubious value.  Torturing a guy to say “I did it,” is unreliable.  But if they are telling the truth, they can tell you things that are objectively verifiable.  Consider, for instance, this classic scene from Dirty Harry: The context of the clip is this.  The psychopath had buried a girl alive and claimed he would give the location of the girl (giving them the chance to save her) if they paid a ransom.  They paid, with Eastwood delivering it, but the man refused to give the location, and so the torture in that scene followed.  So it was a “ticking bomb” scenario.  Also, alluded to and not shown, they find the girl where the psycho said, but she was already dead.  If memory serves she never had a chance of being saved in time. Now if that hypothetical went to trial, the confession would be excluded from evidence (and in theory the body might be, too).  Why?  Not because it was unreliable.  Even in isolation the mere fact he knew where the girl was buried was highly incriminating.  But instead all of it, including the fact he knew where the body was, would be excluded on the theory that even then torture is not justified, and thus they wanted to remove an important incentive to police to engage in such conduct. So let’s please stop the childish claim that waterboarding—hell, even torture—cannot be effective.  And let’s instead have the adult conversation about whether we as a people believe it is morally justified and if so, when. [Posted and authored by Aaron Worthing.] ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.obamashitlist.com/2011/05/04/leon-panetta-okay-i-admit-it-waterboarding-gave-us-some-of-the-information-that-led-to-the-killing-of-bin-laden/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>President Obama defended by John Yoo.</title>
		<link>http://www.obamashitlist.com/2011/03/26/president-obama-defended-by-john-yoo-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.obamashitlist.com/2011/03/26/president-obama-defended-by-john-yoo-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Mar 2011 01:00:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>georgiana wren</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stupid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[antiwar-senator]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[antiwawr movement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[barack obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[conclusion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[democratic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[john yoo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[liberation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[president]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[president obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[senator]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[senator-obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[usual]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[war]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[waterboarding]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.obamashitlist.com/2011/03/26/president-obama-defended-by-john-yoo-2/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ In some ways, John Yoo&#8217;s argument (&#8221; Antiwar Senator, War-Powers President &#8220;) is almost&#8230; superfluous.  The basic point is straightforward enough: President Obama, just like every other President since 1973 , has come to the conclusion that the War Powers Act is in fact an unconstitutional and onerous restriction on the executive branch&#8217;s constitutionally mandated oversight of military affairs.  This conclusion follows the usual evolutionary arc: as Yoo helpfully points out, Senator Obama and Candidate Obama had a fairly different view of unilateral action than does the (theoretically) better-educated and (theoretically) more experienced President Obama.  Couple that with the further detail that the usual Democratic suspects will not be trying to repeat with Libya their largely ineffectual push against the liberation of Iraq ( Kuchinich and Dean , to give just two examples, have already been effectively whipped back into place), and one is left to conclude that there was a lot of deliberate lying about motivations being made over the last decade by the Democratic party. Again, this is almost superfluous.  John Yoo is arguing on Barack Obama&#8217;s behalf.  His major complaint is that Obama&#8217;s doing a worse job than George W Bush did*. John Yoo .  The guy who did the waterboarding memos. There are antiwar progressives asking themselves right now, Were we really this stupid?  Did we really let the Democratic party shake us down for money and time and effort and votes, just so we could have it rubbed in our faces that they cared less about our beliefs than they would a used tissue?  Are we really this easy to manipulate? - and the answer is, of course, &#8220;yes.&#8221;  They&#8217;re also quite abysmally stupid.  And the best part?  They still have no excuse for not anticipating this.  Even the abysmally stupid should have seen this coming.  That they chose not to is an ironic testament to the power of human delusion.  Or possibly it&#8217;s just funny.  I can&#8217;t quite decide which. Via Instapundit , who is enjoying putting the boot in as much as I am. Moe Lane ( crosspost ) ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.obamashitlist.com/2011/03/26/president-obama-defended-by-john-yoo-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>President Obama defended by John Yoo.</title>
		<link>http://www.obamashitlist.com/2011/03/26/president-obama-defended-by-john-yoo/</link>
		<comments>http://www.obamashitlist.com/2011/03/26/president-obama-defended-by-john-yoo/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Mar 2011 01:00:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Linda</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stupid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[antiwar-senator]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[barack obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[barack-obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[conclusion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[democratic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[john yoo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[president]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[senator]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[senator-obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stupid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[war]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[waterboarding]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.obamashitlist.com/2011/03/26/president-obama-defended-by-john-yoo/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ In some ways, John Yoo&#8217;s argument (&#8221; Antiwar Senator, War-Powers President &#8220;) is almost&#8230; superfluous.  The basic point is straightforward enough: President Obama, just like every other President since 1973 , has come to the conclusion that the War Powers Act is in fact an unconstitutional and onerous restriction on the executive branch&#8217;s constitutionally mandated oversight of military affairs.  This conclusion follows the usual evolutionary arc: as Yoo helpfully points out, Senator Obama and Candidate Obama had a fairly different view of unilateral action than does the (theoretically) better-educated and (theoretically) more experienced President Obama.  Couple that with the further detail that the usual Democratic suspects will not be trying to repeat with Libya their largely ineffectual push against the liberation of Iraq ( Kuchinich and Dean , to give just two examples, have already been effectively whipped back into place), and one is left to conclude that there was a lot of deliberate lying about motivations being made over the last decade by the Democratic party. Again, this is almost superfluous.  John Yoo is arguing on Barack Obama&#8217;s behalf.  His major complaint is that Obama&#8217;s doing a worse job than George W Bush did*. John Yoo .  The guy who did the waterboarding memos. There are antiwar progressives asking themselves right now, Were we really this stupid?  Did we really let the Democratic party shake us down for money and time and effort and votes, just so we could have it rubbed in our faces that they cared less about our beliefs than they would a used tissue?  Are we really this easy to manipulate? - and the answer is, of course, &#8220;yes.&#8221;  They&#8217;re also quite abysmally stupid.  And the best part?  They still have no excuse for not anticipating this.  Even the abysmally stupid should have seen this coming.  That they chose not to is an ironic testament to the power of human delusion.  Or possibly it&#8217;s just funny.  I can&#8217;t quite decide which. Via Instapundit , who is enjoying putting the boot in as much as I am. Moe Lane ( crosspost ) ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.obamashitlist.com/2011/03/26/president-obama-defended-by-john-yoo/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>George W. Bush: Damn Right I Approved of Waterboarding</title>
		<link>http://www.obamashitlist.com/2010/11/04/george-w-bush-damn-right-i-approved-of-waterboarding/</link>
		<comments>http://www.obamashitlist.com/2010/11/04/george-w-bush-damn-right-i-approved-of-waterboarding/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Nov 2010 04:20:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>IDontThinkSo0001</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[book]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[color]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[country]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[criminal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fifth-amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[history]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[logic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[person]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[time]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tips]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[waterboarding]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.obamashitlist.com/2010/11/04/george-w-bush-damn-right-i-approved-of-waterboarding/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ [Guest post by Aaron Worthing; send your tips here .] Today’s comment bait is brought to you by the Washington Post which says ( for now at least ): In his book, titled &#8220;Decision Points,&#8221; Bush recounts being asked by the CIA whether it could proceed with waterboarding Mohammed, who Bush said was suspected of knowing about still-pending terrorist plots against the United States. Bush writes that his reply was &#8220;Damn right&#8221; and states that he would make the same decision again to save lives, according to a someone close to Bush who has read the book. The WaPo presented this as an example of it being a revelation.  Personally I thought to myself “what else is new?”  And the WAPO insinuates that “human rights experts say could one day have legal consequences for him. “  As for whether it is torture or not, I think you have to divide it between the legal question and the moral question, although you will see some interaction between the two.  Morally, I would say that wherever the line between torture and tough interrogation is, waterboarding is very close to that line.  I think it is on the right side of the line, as something unpleasant but not actually torturous.  But I respect people who disagree.  Still those who do disagree need to get off their high horse and recognize the issue is a little more subjective than they are generally pretending it is. As for whether it is legally torture, well, here is the current wording of the U.S. Code : “torture” means an act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control; So, you ask, what does phrase like “severe physical or mental pain or suffering” actually mean?  Well, the law gives some specific examples like death threats, but outside of that I have no idea.  And in fact no one does with any certainty.  And I know enough about the history of the statute to know that it wasn’t any clearer at the time the waterboarding occurred. And indeed in the criminal law that presents a very severe problem.  There is something in our criminal law called the doctrine of lenity .  It means that when interpreting the criminal law, the courts will interpret it in favor of the accused.  This rule is designed to prevent any accused from being convicted based on an activist decision of the court.  So if we tried to put Bush on trial for the waterboarding, it would be hard, probably impossible to convict him for that reason alone. Further, there is an inherent Fifth Amendment Due Process problem presented when you try a person under a law so vague that it gives persons no notice of what exactly is being banned.  Of course we have a lot of criminal laws on the books and among common law crimes that are very vague.  Often cruelty to animal laws are vague, to name an example.  But in that case, the courts interpret it to only include what us lawyers call mallum in se .  That is conduct that is inherently wrong, in contrast to mallum prohibitum , which are items that are only illegal because they are unlawful.  So throwing a puppy in a blender (safe, funny link) is inherently wrong, but failing to get your puppy neutered is only wrong if the law requires you to do so.  And I think the unstated idea is that if the act is sufficiently wrong in and of itself, then you really don’t need a clear statute to put you on notice that you could get in trouble for ordering it.  That certainly seems to be the logic of trying the Nazis at Nuremburg, given that they were tried based on crimes that were not even actually crimes at the time they committed them, a violation of the principle against retroactive criminal laws embodied in the ex post facto clause of the constitution. All of which brings us back to that moral judgment.  Again, it is pure hysteria to pretend that waterboarding is clearly and unambiguously torture.  It’s more than a little subjective.  And as such, I don’t see how you can call it such clear mallum in se that Bush should be placed in legal jeopardy for doing it.  And I haven’t even mentioned that Bush would surely have available to him the justification of defense of others which could potentially relieve him of criminal liability if it was found to be torture or otherwise unlawful. But on the other hand, if I was Bush’s legal advisor I would tell him flat out: do not ever leave the country.  These protections I outlined apply on sporadically in the rest of the world. [Posted and authored by Aaron Worthing.] ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.obamashitlist.com/2010/11/04/george-w-bush-damn-right-i-approved-of-waterboarding/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Don&#8217;t Cry for Jay Bybee, the Torture Memo Boss Who Became a Judge</title>
		<link>http://www.obamashitlist.com/2010/07/19/dont-cry-for-jay-bybee-the-torture-memo-boss-who-became-a-judge/</link>
		<comments>http://www.obamashitlist.com/2010/07/19/dont-cry-for-jay-bybee-the-torture-memo-boss-who-became-a-judge/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Jul 2010 09:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>markboabaca</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Barack Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[alberto gonzales]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[david cole]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[entry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[friend-via]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[john yoo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jpeg]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[national-security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[the-federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[torture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[torture-memo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[waterboarding]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.obamashitlist.com/2010/07/19/dont-cry-for-jay-bybee-the-torture-memo-boss-who-became-a-judge/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Filed under: Bush Administration , Terror , National Security Sitting pretty on the federal bench, an unrepentant Jay Bybee, torture memo author, wants you to feel his pain. ]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.obamashitlist.com/2010/07/19/dont-cry-for-jay-bybee-the-torture-memo-boss-who-became-a-judge/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>AG Eric Holder Will Hold Khalid Sheikh Mohammed Trial in New York?</title>
		<link>http://www.obamashitlist.com/2009/11/14/holder-khalid-sheikh-mohammed-new-york-trial/</link>
		<comments>http://www.obamashitlist.com/2009/11/14/holder-khalid-sheikh-mohammed-new-york-trial/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Nov 2009 05:18:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>markboabaca</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Eric Holder]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[khalid sheikh mohammed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[new york]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[terrorist attack]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[waterboarding]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.obamashitlist.com/?p=237</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From HotAir.com: Holder says he seeks justice for the families of the victims. Some of the families may want a spectacle of a trial in which KSM and his cohorts get to inveigh against the US and its people and call millions to jihad through the US media. That doesn’t seem like justice to many [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.obamashitlist.com/2009/11/14/holder-khalid-sheikh-mohammed-new-york-trial/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

