First, what the U.S. engaged in was enhanced interrogation, not torture. And even then it was selectively used on certain high level terrorists who had knowledge of other attacks that were planned. And it's just one tool among many that the government uses against terrorists. No point in taking it off the table because it offends the delicate sensibilities of liberal pansies.
I think the pansies are the politicians who are afraid to lock down the country. If they are concerned about the diplomatic ramifications of shutting down immigration from terrorist sponsoring countries, then they should let people in on official business....and watch them. That's what Homeland Security is supposed to be for.
In the resultant quid pro quo, those terrorist sponsoring countries would let Americans into their country who are likewise only on official business, corporate or governmental, and then everyone is happy.
I don't see the problem with it. Americans don't want Muslims around, for the most part, due to the sheer discomfort of what they might represent, and Muslims should have no desire to live in a country they consider decadent (the USA). No, but instead of getting tough with terror, they punk out and let thousands of Muslims into the country and torture people while the NYC subways are getting wireless internet underground in the aftermath of the subway terror attacks of London and Madrid. Dumb.
