In last week’s paper Alex Graham took me to task regarding a letter I’d written in which I spoke out against those who believe waterboarding should be an accepted interrogation technique.

He accused me of being a “sophist.” For those who are interested, I looked up the word in Webster’s and it basically means my thoughts were illogical. A point with which I obviously disagree, yet I must admit being referred to as a sophist has a certain ring to it.

Mr. Graham says he was water-boarded twice and, while it was frightening, at no time did he feel it was a life-threatening experience and it caused no severe physical or mental pain.

I cannot help but wonder if being water-boarded was part of Mr. Grahams military training and he knew those supervising the test were friendlies and would not allow anything to go wrong. This is in contrast to being water-boarded by enemy personnel in a damp, dark cell at a black site location in say, North Africa.

In his letter Mr. Graham said I had created a metaphor with which he disagreed. I’ll chalk this up to a misreading of my comments as I was making a straight forward “slippery slope” observation regarding the use of water-boarding and where it might lead should it be approved.

Bottom line, Mr. Graham believes water-boarding is not torture and should be allowed. He further believes that my position could adversely affect the future of the country.

I and many others strongly disagree. In fact, it is for the good of the country that we oppose torture as losing our moral high ground. Mr. Graham concludes his letter by saying, “For shame sir.” In response I wish to say: “I care for our country just as much as you do sir!”