Well you need to get out more often then Lemon Tea…there are many Americans that view the special circumstances of war time does require an Interrogation Technique that will save lives.

I suggest that you read the post by Deber…and take a look at the opinions of Michael Hayden, Porter Goss, George Tenet, John Deutch and Robert Mueller. Real Americans with real facts. I didn’t invent this…

Thank you Jen. I do want to clear up one thing here; I am a person of peace. I do not support killing of the innocent, abortion or otherwise.

However, even in nature, there are times when survival does not look much like "peace". Survival is an innate and God given right. When Thousands of American lives are in the balance, Enhanced Interrogation Techniques serve a real purpose. Not only do they protect and preserve the life of the subject, but they use that very innate desire to survive by which to save other lives.

I stand for peace through common sense.

"Presidents from George Washington to George W. Bush have used executive orders as prerogative powers of the presidency. John Locke, many of whose theories were influential with the Framers of the Constitution, wrote in the Second Treatise that in emergency situations when the legislative branch was unable to act, the executive could suspend ordinary governing arrangements to deal with the emergency. According to Locke, the executive was only justified in doing this when he had the consent of the citizens and when he was acting in their best interests. Locke’s notion of the prerogative power has been used to justify modern use of prerogative powers by presidents, particularly during wars. Among the most important prerogatives of modern presidents is the executive order, a formal tool to manage the executive branch. When presidents use executive orders as a prerogative during wartime, they are rarely challenged by the public, Congress or the courts. For a president to legitimately and constitutionally use this power, he or she must base his or her action on the commander-in-chief powers in the Constitution or a relevant federal law. This paper examines the modern use of executive orders as a prerogative power in wartime. Using case-study analysis, this paper will examine the following executive orders: Franklin D. Roosevelt’s order interning Japanese Americans during World War II; Harry S. Truman’s order seizing the nation’s steel mills during the Korean War; George H.W. Bush’s order freezing Iraqi and Kuwaiti assets during the Persian Gulf Conflict of 1990-1991; and George W. Bush’s military orders allowing those defined as enemy combatants to be tried by military tribunals following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. A model of theoretical and constitutional acceptability is devised to classify these orders and determine the implications for executive power and constitutional democracy. The theory of this paper is that presidents must consider both the theoretical limits set by Locke in the Second Treatise, as well as the constitutional limits of the American political system, when using executive orders during wartime. The executive order is not an unlimited prerogative power and the analysis in this paper will seek to highlight some needed limits on presidential prerogatives."

http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/0/4/2/0/0/p42003_index.html

I agree that it is not a liberal or conservative issue.   Until this case study has been completed, it clearly falls under a presiding president’s authority to do so.