Lieberman Endorses Waterboarding Since 'It's Not Like Using Hot Coals' on People

Yesterday, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) "reluctantly acknowledged" that he doesn't believe waterboarding is torture. According to the Connecticut Post, Lieberman downplayed the severity of the waterboarding because it doesn't inflict permanent physical damage:


In the worst case scenario -- when there is an imminent threat of a nuclear attack on American soil -- Lieberman said that the president should be able to certify the use of waterboarding on a detainee suspected of knowing vital details of the plot.
"You want to be able to use emergency tech to try to get the information out of that person," Lieberman said. [...]
"It is not like putting burning coals on people's bodies. The person is in no real danger. The impact is psychological," Lieberman said.
Lieberman appears to be mimicking his close friend Sen. John McCain's (R-AZ) pandering to the right wing. Like Lieberman, McCain voted against banning waterboarding this week, even though he had previously called the technique "very exquisite torture."

Until recently, Lieberman had also raised objections to the Bush administration's interrogation practices:
- In 2006, Lieberman said that "the most effective way to get information from a suspect is persistent, long-term questioning. 'If terrorists are tried and convicted of committing a terrorist act, they should be subject to the death penalty,' he said." [AP, 9/18/06]
- As recently as December, Lieberman said, "Obviously, waterboarding is a rough, to put it mildly, technique." He added that he hadn't "resolved absolutely" whether waterboarding should be allowed to "gather information that would stop an imminent terrorist attack." [CNS News, 12/12/07]

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. AlterNet’s journalists work tirelessly to counter the traditional corporate media narrative. We’re here seven days a week, 365 days a year. And we’re proud to say that we’ve been bringing you the real, unfiltered news for 20 years—longer than any other progressive news site on the Internet.

It’s through the generosity of our supporters that we’re able to share with you all the underreported news you need to know. Independent journalism is increasingly imperiled; ads alone can’t pay our bills. AlterNet counts on readers like you to support our coverage. Did you enjoy content from David Cay Johnston, Common Dreams, Raw Story and Robert Reich? Opinion from Salon and Jim Hightower? Analysis by The Conversation? Then join the hundreds of readers who have supported AlterNet this year.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure AlterNet remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to AlterNet, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

Close