The final word on torture?
President Bush vetoed a bill that would have banned waterboarding, said the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, but Congress should override this "odious veto" so he doesn't have final say. "Splashing water over a terrorist's face" to get life
What happened
President Bush over the weekend vetoed a bill that would have effectively banned waterboarding by barring interrogation techniques not allowed in the Army Field Manual. But CIA Director Michael Hayden said the move wouldn’t change much, because U.S. interrogation programs “are fully consistent with the Geneva Convention and current U.S. law, and are most certainly not torture." (U.S. News & World Report)
What the commentators said
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
“Congress must overturn this odious veto,” said the Seattle Post-Intelligencer in an editorial. “Claiming, as Bush does, that treating these suspects worse than we do any other sort of criminal is somehow justifiable in that it might prevent terrorist attacks is specious at best.” The end doesn’t justify the means.
In dealing with terrorists, it certainly does, said the Harrisonburg, Va., Daily News-Record in an editorial. These are people “who consider innocent civilians to be legitimate targets and who gleefully shout that they love death more than Westerners love life.” Interrogators don’t always have “the luxury of time” when trying to get answers to thwart the next attack. “Splashing water over a terrorist’s face to gain life-saving information is quick, effective, and hardly heinous.”
Following the Army Field Manual wouldn’t keep interrogators from aggressively questioning prisoners, said The New York Times in an editorial. “It simply forbids the use of techniques that are regarded by most civilized people as abuse and torture, including sexual abuse, electric shocks, mock executions and the infamous form of simulated drowning known as waterboarding.” Bush “misled” Americans by saying waterboarding is necessary and legal, so we’ll have to wait for the next president to “restore the rule of law.”
Please put that “shopworn torture narrative” to rest, said National Review in an editorial. All Bush’s “sound veto” did was resist an effort to hand al Qaida “the full menu” of our interrogation options so they could train terrorists how to resist. This isn’t about any particular method; it’s about keeping extremists guessing so interrogations will be effective. Besides, “waterboarding, or simulated drowning, is rough stuff, but it should not be mistaken for the heinous cruelty that sensible people recognize as genuine torture.”
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
-
What should you be stockpiling for 'World War Three'?
In the Spotlight Britons advised to prepare after the EU tells its citizens to have an emergency kit just in case
By Elizabeth Carr-Ellis, The Week UK Published
-
Carnivore diet: why people are eating only meat
The Explainer 'Meatfluencers' are taking social media by storm but experts warn meat-only diets have health consequences
By Elizabeth Carr-Ellis, The Week UK Published
-
Scientists want to fight malaria by poisoning mosquitoes with human blood
Under the radar Drugging the bugs
By Devika Rao, The Week US Published
-
The JFK files: the truth at last?
In The Spotlight More than 64,000 previously classified documents relating the 1963 assassination of John F. Kennedy have been released by the Trump administration
By The Week Staff Published
-
'Seriously, not literally': how should the world take Donald Trump?
Today's big question White House rhetoric and reality look likely to become increasingly blurred
By Sorcha Bradley, The Week UK Published
-
Will Trump's 'madman' strategy pay off?
Today's Big Question Incoming US president likes to seem unpredictable but, this time round, world leaders could be wise to his playbook
By Sorcha Bradley, The Week UK Published
-
Democrats vs. Republicans: who are the billionaires backing?
The Explainer Younger tech titans join 'boys' club throwing money and support' behind President Trump, while older plutocrats quietly rebuke new administration
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
US election: where things stand with one week to go
The Explainer Harris' lead in the polls has been narrowing in Trump's favour, but her campaign remains 'cautiously optimistic'
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
Is Trump okay?
Today's Big Question Former president's mental fitness and alleged cognitive decline firmly back in the spotlight after 'bizarre' town hall event
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
The life and times of Kamala Harris
The Explainer The vice-president is narrowly leading the race to become the next US president. How did she get to where she is now?
By The Week UK Published
-
Will 'weirdly civil' VP debate move dial in US election?
Today's Big Question 'Diametrically opposed' candidates showed 'a lot of commonality' on some issues, but offered competing visions for America's future and democracy
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published