Senate report concludes: no proof of contact between

[kandrathe]

Funny how you aren't running your mouth about the US's use of torture.

After all, if we were to make one of your comparisons... Let's see...

The KGB used torture...

From Bob woodward's book, Veil;

Hezbollah had kidnapped four Soviet diplomats from Beirut during the fall of 1985. One they murdered straightaway. The others they held in captivity. In response, the KGB seized the relative of a Hezbollah leader. As part of Moscow's anti-terrorism policy, the KGB "castrated him, stuffed his testicles in his mouth, shot him in the head and sent the body back to Hezbollah. The KGB included a message that other members of the Party of God would die in a similar manner if the three Soviets were not released." Shortly afterward, Hezbollah set free the three remaining Soviet hostages. Soviet interests in Lebanon were never similarly menaced again. Russian President Vladimir Putin and his cadre of KGB veterans certainly have a policy template to deal with the abduction and recent vicious murders of four Russian Embassy workers in Baghdad.

At the same time the KGB was making a point, in the middle east...

• April 18, 1983, an Islamic Jihad suicide bomber drove a truck loaded with explosives into the U.S. Embassy in Beirut, killing 60 people, including 17 Americans<>
  
• Jan. 18, 1984, an Islamic Jihad gunman killed Malcolm Kerr, the president of the American University of Beirut,<>
  
• Six months later, another Islamic Jihad suicide bomber attacked the U.S. Marine barracks at the Beirut airport, killing 241 American servicemen.<>
  
• A few months later, Islamic Jihad kidnapped William Buckley, the CIA station chief in Beirut, whom they tortured and eventually murdered.<>
  [st]What did the US do in response to any of the above?
  
  From below;

  You might want to note that this law means that the president can consider just about anything under the sun an 'acceptable' level of torture. If you think that it's only scare tactics, you are quite and wide, naive, or ignorant.

  The section I underlined is the portion you refuse to understand. Prior to the bill the president had the same power, and after the bill the power is diminished in that it is defined rather than nebulous. Every new law passed by Congress is a curtailment of power and/or rights. The "OMG the presidents power is out of hand!" crap is pure BS. Show me any law that Congress has passed that gave the President more power than he had that was not given to him by the Constitution!