Congress Wants to Define "Torture"

California Dem. Congresswoman Jane Harmon pitched her proposed legislation that would establish a legal framework for interrogation on O'Reilly tonight.

She said the law said her proposed law, "would make it clear that torture is never permitted; however, there are certain specified ways you can do 'stuff' more than just asking questions." But doing so would require an affidavit by the Attorney General, or in some cases, a finding by the president.

The result of this process would be an interrogation field manual that would apply to all interrogations, everywhere. This could protect US interrogators by taking Abu Ghraib-esque charges away from the MSM, but how are we going a bill like this through Congress?

How, in the current media environment, can a sufficiently tough bill be moved through when Liberal Congress members and their lapdogs in the media will wail about any interrogation procedure more severe than "just asking questions?" Pity the poor Army intelligence officer who has to testify about the efficacy of sleep deprivation, disorientation, or making a captured al Qaeda terrorist think he's being interrogated by someone using the same "interrogation field manual" Osama uses.

And how in the world would an AG or a president ever be able to allow somewhat inhumane, but highly effective and necessary proceedures, unless their approvals can be confidential? But what in Washington is truly confidential?

Like so many Liberal policies, this is an idea that feels like a good thing, but is anything but.