Is making one feel the sensation of drowning constitutional? That is one of the questions being asked today in America over the subject of waterboarding. According to current U.S. law waterboarding is illegal form of interrogation. This law was only past in 2009. The eighth amendment states that “excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishment inflicted”. Wouldn’t one consider the sensation of dying cruel and unusual? Many politicians in the upcoming election are facing questions such as this. Several Republican candidates believe that the U.S. should bring back waterboarding as a method of interrogation. One the Democratic side candidates consider waterboarding as a form of torture and is unconstitutional. So one must ask, is waterboarding unconstitutional?
Waterboarding is a form of water torture or interrogation in which water is poured over a cloth covering the face and breathing passages of an immobilized captive, causing the individual to experience the sensation of drowning. The process can lead to both physical and psychological pain. Under the the definition of torture ‘the action or practice of inflicting pain on someone as punishment or to force them to do or say something, or for the pleasure of the person inflicting the pain” one can determine waterboarding is a form of torture. Cased closed since waterboarding is torture it is constitutional, but then why has it been practiced in America up into the Bush Administration? After the 9/11 attacks the CIA waterboarded three prisoners in Guantanamo Bay.The CIA says they gained valuable information, but was it worth it?
Waterboarding has been happening as far back as the Spanish Inquisition. It was used for punishing and forcing confessions. The tactics were later used during World War II as well as the Korean War. Information gathered in this manner was usually not reliable. In the Korean War a U.S. airman “confessed” that the U.S. planned to use biological weapons against the North Koreans. After the 9/11 attacks prisoner Khalid Shaykh Muhammad fabricated his stories so that his interrogators would hear everything they wanted to hear. At the time vice president Dick Cheney claimed that waterboarding produced phenomenal results. However, there is no evidence proving that the techniques used to interrogate the prisoners prevented any attacks or saved any lives.
So is waterboarding constitutional? Legally speaking no, but was still used throughout American history up to the 21st century. The practice of it is clearly a form of torture and the results from its use prove to be ineffective. Although the Obama Administration has banned the practice of waterboarding in the military, it has a possibility for coming back once a new president is sworn into office. This may become a serious issue in the future of the country.
Resources -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterboarding
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/10/AR2005121000934.html
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/john-mccain-waterboarding-liar-interrogation/2016/02/08/id/713308/
Summary - The subject of this article is the results of the Nevada and South Carolina primaries. The article also demonstrates the “winners” and “losers” from polling results during the primaries. The article lists the candidates that were the “winners” in the primaries. Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump both took first in their respective parties. The article also take into account the candidates that did not win but showed surprising results such as Marco Rubio. The article then covered the “losers” in the primaries. They pointed out candidates such as Bernie Sanders, Jeb Bush, and Ted Cruz.
Analysis - After reading the article one can clearly review the results from the recent primaries. The use of polling covers how candidates were doing before and after the primaries. The article also gives clear analysis of who the winners and losers of these primaries were. Not only does it show the actually winners it covers the people who still gained from the recent primary. The coverage of the losers is also good. The article explains why Jeb Bush dropped out when he did and how Bernie Sanders and Ted Cruz are going to have a tough time coming back from the loss. However, this article only covers one of the many primaries to come.
