Rep. Peter King: Bush 'Should Get A Medal' For Authorizing Waterboarding

Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.), the man who is likely to become next chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, recently defended former president George Bush's candid admission in his book that he had directly authorized the use of waterboarding, an interrogation practice now considered torture.

"There was no harm done," King said Wednesday, referring to the waterboarding of alleged 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohmammed, who was subjected to simulated drowning 183 times in March of 2003. "In the big picture, to hold someone's head underwater, the chance of permanent damage is minimal and the rewards are great."

There has been a fair amount of buzz from both sides of the aisle lately about potentially seeking legal avenues to investigate the Bush administration's green-lighting of the controversial practice.

Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) suggested Tuesday that he might even be open to efforts to probe the prior sanctioning of torture.

Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) on Tuesday called more directly for investigators to pursue "full accountability for the criminal use of torture."

King, however, entirely disagreed with this mission.

"Jerry and I are friends, but he's entirely wrong on this," King told Politico. "There would've been lives lost, and Bush deserves credit for what he did."

And not just credit -- King says the former commander in chief "should get a medal."

Meanwhile, King has also recently announced his continued opposition to the use of civilian terror trials. He said that he still stands by Guantanamo military tribunals as the proper way to deliver justice to accused terrorists.

On Wednesday, Nadler discussed waterboarding on "The Ed Show." Nadler told Ed Schultz that a special prosecutor should be appointed in light of Bush's admission that he authorized the practice. "The United States has always considered waterboarding torture, except during the Bush administration," Nadler said. "Under our statute and under international law we are bound to prosecute." Scroll down for the full segment.

Comments

[cadawa]

03:37 AM on 12/18/2010

Bush can take his medal with him to prison and play with it while he sits on death row. Torture is a capital crime. That's a domestic statute.

[Littlegrr]

02:52 AM on 12/18/2010

George Bush, worst president ever, until Obama.

[carolina919]

03:53 PM on 11/16/2010

A "medal"? From "Warlords Anonymous" maybe? What kind of district and people does Rep King represent?

[ObamAtomic]

08:08 PM on 11/12/2010

HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Mike Clerebout 8 minutes ago (7:55 PM)
35 Fans
Become a fan
Unfan
A senseless resolution that hamstrings us in pour ability to protect ourselves. Would like to see it done away with.
==========================
Sociopath ,enabler of War Crimes.

[ObamAtomic]

07:15 PM on 11/12/2010

HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Mike Clerebout 0 minute ago (7:12 PM)
35 Fans
Become a fan
Unfan
I'm not forcing you to respond. I said from the very beginning I support doing what is need regardless of law or international opinion.
=================================================
It's you vs The Geneva Convention and 18 U.S.C. § 2340.

I LOL

[ObamAtomic]

07:11 PM on 11/12/2010

Mike Clerebout
“We are not discussing fighting in Iraq or Afghanistan. We are talking about small pockets of ter.orist that are plotting destruction. These are not military prisoners in any sense.”
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's you vs The Geneva Convention and 18 U.S.C. § 2340.

Modern warfare continues to evolve, and a growing proportion of recent armed conflicts are of a non-international character[14] (for instance, the Sri Lankan Civil War, the Sudanese Civil War, and the Colombian Armed Conflict). Common Article 3 deals with these situations, supplemented by Protocol II (1977). These set out minimum legal standards that must be followed for internal conflicts. International tribunals, particularly the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, have helped to clarify international law in this area.[15] In the 1999 Prosecutor v. Dusko Tadic judgement, the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia ruled that grave breaches apply not only to international conflicts, but also to internal armed conflict. Further, those provisions are considered customary international law, allowing war crimes prosecution even over groups that have not formally accepted the terms of the Geneva Conventions.

Enjoy it!

[carolina919]

03:54 PM on 11/16/2010

Facts and Truth, my friend. Truth and Facts. Thanks for posting. Fanned and Faved.....

[ObamAtomic]

04:11 PM on 11/16/2010

Thank You fanned back!

[ObamAtomic]

06:47 PM on 11/12/2010

aresponse2dotcom Curious as to how you would handle the same situation when you become president. (small p intended)

posted Nov 12, 2010 at 18:30:29 Reply Link
-----------------------------------------------------
He found you ,,,dazed,I LOL Don't let "semblence" stomping you !

[ObamAtomic]

06:45 PM on 11/12/2010

HUFFPOST SUPER USER
aresponse2dotcom 11 minutes ago (6:32 PM)
26 Fans
Become a fan
Unfan
Follow
At least there is a semblence of sanity to their positions.
---------------------------------------------------------

Indeed "semblence" is a reason of sanity! I LOL

[F Grey Parker]

05:43 PM on 11/12/2010

Bush should get a number, not a medal.

http://handthatfeedsyou.blogspot.com/2010/02/there-arent-different-versions-of-truth.html

[ObamAtomic]

03:04 PM on 11/12/2010

ConservativeWorld 22 minutes ago (2:37 PM)
225 Fans
Become a fan
Unfan
OK, so I have answered your question and now you are trying to mess with me.
Get a job will you?
---------------------------------------------
Mess with you,self important much,are you scared,is only words,,,,,,,,,
Where are those jobs.

[ObamAtomic]

02:58 PM on 11/12/2010

ConservativeWorld
---------------------------------------
A paid operative,he took 2 hours lunch ,he is back ,,,,

[pattyrenee]

01:39 PM on 11/12/2010

Republicans are wrecking America! We are doomed as a world power where people could escaped torture in other countries. No more.

[depthgauge]

01:23 PM on 11/12/2010

That is not bad idea from Rep. King. This country should at least recognize, document, and file for history that President W Bush formally and from the very top, introduce torture as an approved method for Americans to use.

[Mike Clerebout]

01:37 PM on 11/12/2010

I'm willing to give at least 2-1 odds that Bush will be looked at in this country favorably on this issue. Things are bad and they don't look to be getting better anytime soon. He will be looked at as willing to do what it took.

[depthgauge]

01:40 PM on 11/12/2010

Oh, he did what it took, not matter of legality, evidence, and lives, to start a personal war in Iraq.

[Grunty1]

02:11 PM on 11/12/2010

Then you are a bigger nutcase than I previously thought.

[ObamAtomic]

12:36 PM on 11/12/2010

ConservativeWorld 12 minutes ago (12:20 PM)
225 Fans
Become a fan
Unfan
OK. that does happen to American soldiers. Many things happen to our service people that are worse. Do I like it? NO. But it is reality.
Does that make you happy? You have my answer.
And my response is that you still think the military is a social service program when the military is a Constitutional item designed to protect our country. Elevate your game when you deal with me our keep getting crushed in debate....
===========================================
Double dipping,"When you in a hole stop digging"

“I will wait your opinion when an American soldier suffer that treatment.”

[ObamAtomic]

12:37 PM on 11/12/2010

@ConservativeWorld
---------------------------------------------
"When you are in a hole stop digging"

[Mike Clerebout]

01:45 PM on 11/12/2010

This is an as.inine argument. You are trying to pretend that terr.orist play by any set of rules. If they are willing to blow up women and children, I don't think it will take us playing rough to convince them to take of their fluffy kid gloves.

[ObamAtomic]

01:50 PM on 11/12/2010

You can continue hyperventilating all you want with your narrative..

Torture is also prohibited under 18 U.S.C. § 2340. The definition of torture used is as follows:

1. "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;
2. "severe mental pain or suffering" means the prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting from - (A) the intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severe physical pain or suffering; (B) the administration or application, or threatened administration or application, of mind-altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the personality; (C) the threat of imminent death; or (D) the threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain or suffering, or the administration or application of mind-altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or personality;

In 2004 the Immigration and Nationality Act was amended to make aliens who, whilst abroad, have committed torture, extrajudicial killings, or particularly severe violations of religious freedom, inadmissible to the United States, and therefore deportable.[2]
[edit] Prohibition under International Law

[ObamAtomic]

01:51 PM on 11/12/2010

You can continue hyperventilating all you want with your narrative..

Torture in all forms is banned by the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), which the United States participated in drafting. The United States is a party to the following conventions (international treaties) which prohibit torture: the American Convention on Human Rights (signed 1977) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (signed 1977; ratified 1992). It has neither signed nor ratified the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture.[3] International law defines torture during an armed conflict as a war crime. It also mandates that any person involved in ordering, allowing and even insufficiently preventing and prosecuting war crimes is criminally liable under the command responsibility doctrine.

[lazercat2008]

12:24 PM on 11/12/2010

And a medal for his handling of New Orleans.

And a Noble economics prize.

“You tell em, Scott!   (where is this guy now?)

"There was an announcement by the Iraqi Governing Council earlier this week about the tribunal that they have set up to hold accountable members of the former regime who were responsible for three decades of brutality and atrocities. … We know about the mass graves and the rape rooms and the torture chambers of Saddam Hussein's regime. … We welcome their decision to move forward on a tribunal to hold people accountable for those atrocities."—Bush Press Secretary Scott McClellan, White House press briefing, Dec. 10, 2003”

[aresponse2dotcom]

06:41 PM on 11/12/2010

How does one so ignorant of State and Federal relationships gain so many fans, could it be by simply regurgitating the same fertilizer over and over. N O had to ask the governor for assistance, which was refused at first, President Bush asked the Governor to mobilize the National Guard and that too was denied.
As for your second point, puzzycat, Bush had asked the congress to do something to rein in Freddy and Fanny and the dimmy house refused to take any action. The financial meltdown in this country was far more the fault of the house and senate, over the last 20 years, than the Presidents during that time period.
If you are going to lead your lemmings at least do some homework.