George W. Bush violated Human rights, and claimed it stopped Foreign Terror attacks, which it didn't

Thank you for taking this debate, despite my absolutely Mike Moore-esque claim. I will be rational from here on out. Now, by Human rights, I mean natural rights (life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness), and the bill of rights (more specifically, the first, fifth, sixth, and eighth). Granted, some rights are fairly suspended whilst in prison, but some are unalienable. Natural rights: people's ability to have all three (or at least the latter two) have been stripped without the fair process of trial. First amendment: If it doesn't make you suspicious that every one of the detainees at Gitmo are Muslim (1), it should. That is disgustingly close to infringing upon the freedom of religion. Although it is technically for prisoners of war, not all of the detainees had ties to the war, or even lived in the countries of choice (2). Fifth amendment: While not actually violated, it has been stretched to the limit based on the clause about war. However, the Bush administration has found a way to be able to link almost anyone to the war. Also, it's hard to plead the fifth whilst being water boarded. Eighth amendment: Bush vetoed a Waterboarding ban (3). Waterboarding is torture. It does not simulate the feeling of drowning. It is basically controlled drowning. Call it what you want, but if waterbording isn't torture, what is? And, I do believe that torture is illegal, because of the freedom from cruel or unusual punishment. "Secondly, Pro must prove that Bush claimed that "it", i.e. human rights violations, stopped foreign terror attacks. A verified quotation from Bush stating "My violation of human rights stopped foreign terror attacks." would establish the point." Very well. I hope you trust the British. About Gitmo, "And one thing I'm not going to do, though, is I'm not going to jeopardise the safety of the American people" (4). that is a fancy way of saying, "If we let these guys go, America is in danger of being attacked again." "What was stopped, of course, was foreign terror attacks on the scale of 9/11, or anything close to the scale of 9/11, within the United States. That is an important claim by Bush, and an accurate one." I can't deny that. However, as I said, in 225 years, we never had one. Why is it so amazing that he prevented them for eight, when really, in his term, there have been more foreign terrorist attacks than any other president. Although I could not find a direct Bush quote, although I'm sure there is one, here is former press secretary Ari Fleischer's take on it, "He has kept us safe. We have not been hit since 2001. That's a monumental accomplishment" (5). He, if anyone knows the president well, and unlike the heroic press secretary, "Scotty" McClellan, he has kept his views and allegiances in the same place, and although he was not press secretary at the time, he still very much represented the president's views. I would still take any of his press secretaries (except Scotty and obviously Tony Snow) as the word of the former president. I look forward to rounds 2 and 3, and now that we have evidence, we can now move on to the resolution. (1) http://www.globalsecurity.org... (2) http://www.time.com... (3) http://en.wikipedia.org... (4) http://news.bbc.co.uk... (5) http://www.usnews.com...