Bob Barr At CPAC: 'How Would You Like To Be Waterboarded?'

One-time Libertarian presidential candidate Bob Barr riled the conservative CPAC crowd on Friday, when he declared that civilian courts were appropriate for handling terrorists and insisted that -- if a trial was what they wanted -- those who used waterboarding should be brought before a judge.

The Georgia Republican appeared on a panel about the balance between national security and personal freedoms.

Pointing to the passage of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Barr insisted that America already had the laws in place to handle terrorist acts like the failed Christmas Day airline bomb plot. Those who suggested that "an idiot on that airline flying into Detroit on Christmas Day" needed to be sent to a military tribunal were "allowing our leaders to have their cake and eat it too."

"There is nothing magical about a military tribunal," Barr said, as boos from the audience began cascading around him. "They don't have, necessarily, better lawyers than in a civilian sector. I think I have a lot more faith in our U.S. attorneys who are non political, than my colleagues on the other side of this debate do. We can try them. We should try them. That is precisely... what our law provides for. And if next time we are faced with a situation we say: 'Oh, you know, we want to have them go to the military. Let them torture them for a while. It's not enhanced interrogation techniques. Waterboarding is torture. How would you like to be waterboarded? Try that!"

Needless to say, Barr was alone with his sentiments. Following him on the dais was Viet Dinh, a professor at Georgetown University Law Center and one of the authors of the USA Patriot Act.

"I think Congressman Barr's implication of the act passed in 1996 is rhetorical but not relevant because since 1996 there have been a couple other laws, one the authorization of the use of military force after 9/11," Dinh explained. "Two, the military commission act, which explicitly and expressly authorized the use of military commissions to try unlawful enemy combatants for acts that are not only contrary to the unites states law but contrary to the law of nations and the laws of war."

Comments

[hardlyhikin]

03:42 PM on 02/22/2010

Am I the only one who notices that none of these conservatives are really in agreement with each other on most issues? They boo Bob Barr for his position on water boarding; they boo Mike Huckabee for telling them their influence is waning, they boo Ron Paul for winning a plurality of their own straw poll, Sarah Palin is now on the outs with them... These are all people you would assume are their stars!

Do any of them really know what they want except "less government" and more "freedom and liberty" (for them, not necessarily for anyone else).

[edwcorey]

01:18 PM on 02/22/2010

Dien is typical of immigrants from totalitarian regimes, who come here and support totalitarianism from the other side. When I lived in Southern California I knew some Russian emigre body builders who loathed Santa Monica (where they lived) and called it "Soviet Monica" because the city had rent control. I think Tom Hayden was the state assembly then, and they cursed him all day, not leaving out his wife, Jane Fonda.

[Imhotep40]

12:28 PM on 02/22/2010

Every once in a while there's a beacon of light in a sea of darkness . . . . .well done Barr, well done.

[BadgersBite]

12:22 PM on 02/22/2010

Barr is no Jack Bauer

[smebird]

10:31 AM on 02/22/2010

I would guess that Bob Barr is perfectly aware of the depth of ignorance that fuels supporters of waterboarding and other means of torture. Let's simply acknowledge him for speaking the truth and not belittle an act we desperately need to see multiplied.

[shryock]

09:47 PM on 02/21/2010

"How would you like to be waterboarded?"
the problem, bob, with asking that question of those who support the technique is that they cannot imagine ever being in the situation the detainees are in. they lack the ability to do so. for them, the idea that holds most weight is their understanding that anyone in prison is only there because they are guilty of something, and they themselves personally would never ever ever be in prison. not because they believe themselves to be perfect, necessarily, but because they believe they would never be arrested. they cannot in any way imagine that something like that could happen to them. if you get arrested, that means you have done something wrong. and the farther away geographically the jail is, the more likely that every prisoner in it is guilty. the magical 'that would never happen to me' thinking precludes actually thinking about what waterboarding is like for those to whom the technique is applied.
the second problem, bob, is that those who support the technique also believe magically that no u.s. soldier could ever be endangered by our action in waterboarding our own prisoners. they find it outrageous that any foreign country would dare waterboard a u.s. soldier.
you cannot convince a waterboard supporter that they themselves would believe it was torture if it was done to them is in any way a valid argument because they absolutely believe it could never happen to them.

[Sinister Minister]

03:34 PM on 02/21/2010

I never thought I would see this day. Bob Barr against torture. I'm impressed, there may be hope for amerika yet.

This is the guy that co-sponsored ( with the Newt ) legislation that would make it a mandatory death penalty for anyone crossing a US border with 100 doses of a controlled substance

[redsongia]

12:07 AM on 02/22/2010

The guy is correct for the first time ever. He's right on that a military tribunal isn't magical, either.

I'm so sick of that freaking debate. Unemployment is like 10% and Cheney wants to debate the fine points of exactly how it is guys already in custody (read: problem basically solved) will be formally sentenced to more jail. The upshot is, they're going to jail, now let's talk about health care, so when I'm old, I have the luxury of affording 17 heart attacks like Dick, shoot em in the face Cheney.

[randyjet]

11:12 AM on 02/21/2010

Too bad Mr. Dihn forgot about the laws of warfare applying to US forces in the case of torture. The US has broken those laws, and the perps need to go to prison for it. Better yet, put THEM before the military commissions too.

[taddles]

11:01 PM on 02/21/2010

It's sad seeing the son of a Vietnamese refugee who fled Viet Nam because of the brutality of a totalitarian regime turn to that same stunted intellectual ideology that his family died to get him away from. He justified torture, the same torture the N. Vietnamese government used against his father....sad that a son can stray so far away from the path of his family that he justify the torture of his own father.

[LouEstes]

10:31 AM on 02/21/2010

THE only reason they support torture is to shield Cheney from being held accountable for straying from their judeo christian value of the Golden Rule.
Torture free having been our policy is to protect OUR soldiers, not Cheney.

[den1953]

09:43 AM on 02/21/2010

The fact that people in the Republican party can close it eyes to water boarding as long as it doesn't happen to them is truly sad the very same chicken hawks that have been running our country would wilt at any torture tactics that would be applied to them.

[AbeMartin]

09:19 AM on 02/21/2010

Bob obviously has failed CPAC's "litmus" test for doctrinal "purity." He is the antithesis of the new party faithful--a Conservative with a functional brain and an ethical compass.

[FlameOnH8]

04:25 AM on 02/21/2010

Sensible viewpoint gets booed at CPAC? NO WAY!!!!!!!
/sarcasm off

[ManUTd1989]

03:16 AM on 02/21/2010

our aviators are waterboarded...it's called the the SERE.

[keepemhonest]

09:47 AM on 02/21/2010

Man

Are you in need of an education. Allow me to educate you

1. The SERE program is to TRAIN our soldiers in case they are captured by ROGUE countries who engage in ILLEGAL T O R T U R E.
SERE is NOT a program meant nor designed to be a means by which we submit captured detainees.

2. USA signed & ratified TREATIES agreeing NOT to T O R T U R E ....

3. The US Constitution DEMANDS our government abide by all ratified Treaties.

4. Therefore, if we T O R T U R E we are in violation of the US Constitution and International Laws.

5. IF: You don't like the Treaties we signed then petition our government to dissolve those Treaties .... UNTIL THEN: IF we T O R T U R E then we are W A R CRIMINALS.

Seriously, if you believe in a God or KARMA - those who illegally T O R T U R E D - regardless of what side they are on - will certainly GET THEIR COMEUPPANCE. I only hope I live long enough to see ChainE get his.

[ManUTd1989]

05:09 PM on 02/21/2010

wow...

did I have an opinion either way, or did you just spend a message assuming I was making one?

what about my comment was debatable?

we have the SERE training, and we waterboard aviators. I was just throwing info in so everyone was on the same page. I didn't say water boarding was good or bad, useful or useless.

[LeftRight]

11:41 AM on 02/21/2010

And that's in a TRAINING environment for the SPECIFIC purpose of teaching them to resist the torture that is waterboarding!

[ManUTd1989]

05:09 PM on 02/21/2010

exactly, did I say anything else?

[jedgarmihelic]

02:02 AM on 02/21/2010

I voted for him, and I would do it again. Social libertarianism makes sense. The economic component of the platform is a mess however.

[keepemhonest]

09:48 AM on 02/21/2010

Exactly

[ywcachieve]

01:46 AM on 02/21/2010

Cowards only want waterboarding for other people.

[keepemhonest]

09:48 AM on 02/21/2010

Exactly ... that is the best comment I've read on the matter.