On the December 16 broadcast of National Public Radio's Morning Edition, Scott Silliman, executive director of Duke University's Center on Law, Ethics and National Security, claimed that “waterboarding, I think, would clearly be prohibited” under Sen. John McCain's (R-AZ) amendment barring “cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment” of prisoners in U.S. custody. But Silliman's interpretation of what the bill “clearly” prohibits is apparently not shared by the Bush administration. Host Renée Montagne failed to note that the administration, whose responsibility it will be to comply with the legislation, refused to rule out “waterboarding” as an unacceptable interrogation technique.

According to a November 18 ABC News report, “waterboarding” is a technique whereby:

The prisoner is bound to an inclined board, feet raised and head slightly below the feet. Cellophane is wrapped over the prisoner's face and water is poured over him. Unavoidably, the gag reflex kicks in and a terrifying fear of drowning leads to almost instant pleas to bring the treatment to a halt.

From the December 16 broadcast of NPR's Morning Edition:

MONTAGNE: Could you give us an example? Cruel and inhuman and degrading treatment: What would that be? A stress position that goes beyond a couple of hours?

SILLIMAN: Exactly, Renée. What we're talking about would be use of excessive physical force such as beatings, or food, drink, or sleep deprivation for extended periods of time, where it starts to affect physical health. Or something I think the listeners have probably heard about, waterboarding, I think, would clearly be prohibited under McCain's amendment.

But, as a December 16 New York Times editorial pointed out, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, in a December 15 appearance on CNN's The Situation Room, refused to define waterboarding as “torture” or say whether the technique was a legal method of interrogation. On the program, anchor Wolf Blitzer pressed Gonzales twice to state whether waterboarding would be an acceptable technique, and both times, Gonzales refused to answer. Instead, Gonzales referred broadly to “torture” -- which is not literally what the McCain amendment addresses (the amendment enacts broader prohibitions than what would be considered “torture under current law”) -- and refused to rule out any particular interrogation method, saying that whether a particular method would be illegal “would be something that would have to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.”

From the December 15 edition of CNN's The Situation Room:

BLITZER: I want to move on talk about the Patriot Act, but one final question on this issue of torture. I guess some people say it depends on your definition of the word “torture.” One very sensitive interrogation technique is this waterboarding, where the detainee or the suspect thinks he is drowning. Is that something that you think is acceptable?

GONZALES: What I will tell you is that the Congress has defined what torture is, and it is the intentional infliction of severe -- I emphasize the word severe -- the intentional infliction of severe physical or mental pain or suffering. That is the definition that Congress says. That kind of conduct would constitute torture.

BLITZER: And waterboarding: Is that severe?

GONZALES: Well, again, that would be something that would have to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. But -- the Congress -- Wolf, I'm not going to get into a discussion or debate with you about specific techniques. What I can reassure you is that we know what Congress has said torture means, and we try to provide guidance to ensure that everyone is meeting the standards as prescribed to us by Congress.