Conservative Talk Show Host Waterboarded, Admits It's Torture

[redvand]

Shock jocks shock. And so it went Friday morning when WLS radio host Erich "Mancow" Muller decided to subject himself to the controversial practice of waterboarding live on his show. Mancow decided to tackle the divisive issue head on -- actually it was head down while restrained and reclining.


Turns out the stunt wasn't so funny. Witnesses said Muller thrashed on the table, and even instantly threw the toy cow he was holding as his emergency tool to signify when he wanted the experiment to stop. He only lasted 6 or 7 seconds.

"It is way worse than I thought it would be, and that's no joke," Mancow said, likening it to a time when he nearly drowned as a child. "It is such an odd feeling to have water poured down your nose with your head back...It was instantaneous...and I don't want to say this: absolutely torture."
http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/Mancow-Takes-on-Waterboarding-and-Loses.html

[RxOnco]

Then it's settled. If Mancow says it's torture...then it's torture.

[Stainless Steel Rat]

Well, I'll give the guy points for having the balls to 'walk the walk'.

Can think of a few others that I'd like to see take the challenge (you listening, Rush? p-)

[RxOnco]

I don't think anybody thinks it's a pleasant experience. This is where the argument of what exactly "torture" is and what "enhanced interrogation" is.

[redvand]

I don't have time to find it but there is a a video on www.wlsam.com (http://www.wlsam.com)

[tercio67]

The problem with torture, if we ignore the legal ramifications for a moment, is that someone while being tortured will at some point start to talk.
He will tell you exactly what you want to hear, but rarely what you need to hear.

[gaijinsamurai]

Well, I'll give the guy points for having the balls to 'walk the walk'.

Can think of a few others that I'd like to see take the challenge (you listening, Rush? p-)

x2.

And RXonco, simply creating a stupid euphemism doesn't make it any different. I can think of different terms for pedophilia, domestic violence, espionage against one's own country, and a bunch of other stuff. Doesn't change what they are.

[Breerman]

I think you have to put a bit of pressure in interrogations. Torture is not ok but methods you let your own soldiers go through in training should be ok in interrogations.

[LineDoggie]

Funny, Mancow is a Libertarian who endorsed Wayne Root in 2008.

But I guess that wouldnt make the title as interesting

[redvand]

Funny, Mancow is a Libertarian who endorsed Wayne Root in 2008.

But I guess that wouldnt make the title as interesting
For waterboarding, he took the conservative point of view.

[Ordie]

Mancow was the idiot that held up traffic on the Bay Bridge for a haircut a few years ago.

[RxOnco]

...And RXonco, simply creating a stupid euphemism doesn't make it any different. I can think of different terms for pedophilia, domestic violence, espionage against one's own country, and a bunch of other stuff. Doesn't change what they are.

And my point is: just because you call it torture, doesn't make it so.

I think there's a huge difference between what we did, and what the animals do. I just can't bring myself to equate waterboarding to elctrocution, severing fingers, pulling out fingernails, using powertools such as drills, etc...

[tercio67]

And my point is: just because you call it torture, doesn't make it so.

I think there's a huge difference between what we did, and what the animals do. I just can't bring myself to equate waterboarding to elctrocution, severing fingers, pulling out fingernails, using powertools such as drills, etc...

Crossing the line starts with convincing yourself first. After that is is usualy sustained by "but we are not as bad as them".

[RxOnco]

Well, you can call it what you want. I'll do the same.
















It's not torture.p-)

[Kit]

And my point is: just because you call it torture, doesn't make it so.

I think there's a huge difference between what we did, and what the animals do. I just can't bring myself to equate waterboarding to elctrocution, severing fingers, pulling out fingernails, using powertools such as drills, etc...

x2 Of course waterboarding is not pleasant. If it was tolerable, any disciplined jihadist can put up with it.

Take note when the host said "likening it to a time when he nearly drowned as a child." That's the psychological aspect talking. Our interrogation techniques are non-lethal and take a psychological approach.

We're not drowning anybody. We make them think we're drowning them. Thus why it cracks a lot of people. Waterboarding does not compare to the torture that physically maims combatants or endangers their lives.

[Fargin]

Is meta-discussion the correct term?

Instead of discussing the actual subject, political correctness is applied to make it a question of semantics. We're not violating anyone's rights, we're only bending them. By the way we can't violate somebody's rights, if we don't acknowledge these rights to begin with.

[Soldat_Américain]

I just say keep with the sleep deprivation and making it so the prisoner has no idea what time it is by coming in and questioning him ten minutes after the pass out...beyond that I think the line is drawn plainly but apparently sleep deprivation is considered a torture technique which is bullsh!t.

[gaijinsamurai]

And my point is: just because you call it torture, doesn't make it so.

I think there's a huge difference between what we did, and what the animals do. I just can't bring myself to equate waterboarding to elctrocution, severing fingers, pulling out fingernails, using powertools such as drills, etc...

It's not just me that's calling it torture, it's just about anyone with any credibility.

So you don't define it as such, fine. But where do you draw the line? Sticking jumper cables up the guy's ass and pretending to turn on the juice? Sticking their nuts in a vice and tightening it most of the way, but not quite completely?

I've got no problem with fighting the war on terror a little dirty, to do what it takes to win. I'm not so naive as to believe we should play by one set of rules to the extent that those who don't will exploit our humanity. But, we also know there have been kids as young as 12 captured and taken to Gitmo, as well as a few individuals who were unlucky enough to have been in the wrong place at the wrong time. What happens when an overzealous interrogator decides to define what is/isn't torture for himself, only his definitions are even looser than yours?

[Panchito12]

It's not torture, it's getting dunked with tons of water. I did it to my little sisters growing up and the UN/Amensty Intl/Al Queda/EU did not come to their aid!

[gaijinsamurai]

^You did the exact same thing to your sisters that these prisoners had done to them? I doubt that.

[RxOnco]

it's not just me that's calling it torture, it's just about anyone with any credibility.

cridibility in your mind maybe. I deem **** cheney very credible...but that's just me.

so you don't define it as such, fine. But where do you draw the line? Sticking jumper cables up the guy's ass and pretending to turn on the juice? Sticking their nuts in a vice and tightening it most of the way, but not quite completely?

as i've said before, that's exactly what we're not doing.

i've got no problem with fighting the war on terror a little dirty, to do what it takes to win. I'm not so naive as to believe we should play by one set of rules to the extent that those who don't will exploit our humanity. But, we also know there have been kids as young as 12 captured and taken to gitmo, as well as a few individuals who were unlucky enough to have been in the wrong place at the wrong time. What happens when an overzealous interrogator decides to define what is/isn't torture for himself, only his definitions are even looser than yours?

as far as i've read, only three detainees have been waterboarded. They just so happen to have been three of the ugliest creatures on the earth who we knew to be high on the aq totem. So, you're going to take that and equate it to the possibility of waterboarding some 12 year-old? Please...
and an "overzealous interrogator" will do whatever he wants...regardless of what the chosen once says about policy.

12345678910

[CMNot]

Our interrogation techniques are non-lethal and take a psychological approach.

Lethality is relevant, how?

An overzealous interrogator who does whatever they want is the last thing any of our nations need.

[California Joe]

Funny, Mancow is a Howard Stern wannabee asshole who endorsed Wayne Root in 2008.

But I guess that wouldnt make the title as interesting

Fixed it for you amigo...:)

[RxOnco]

...An overzealous interrogator who does whatever they want is the last thing any of our nations need.

That's my point. Interrogators aren't allowed to make up their own rules. Now, I'm not saying it doesn't happen. But at that point, it really doesn't matter what the policy is.

[gaijinsamurai]

RXOnco, you're reply to my post illustrates why we do indeed need to have a clear policy of what is and isn't permitted.
From my previous profession, I've had experience with questioning scumbags, some of whom were merely teenagers. I also know what it's like to get carried away with one's emotions and the need to extract confessions and be successful. Hell, I've even gone so far as to lie to people in my custody and exploit their fear of rape and bodily harm. I did what I had to do to play with their emotions, and I also know how easy it is to go one or two steps further, and use as much physical force that you can get away with. Especially with people who are scum.
But to allow everyone to define, for themselves, what is legally permissable and ethically acceptable, is only inviting trouble. I guarantee that any bit of satisfaction gained from watching these scum suffer will come back to bite us on the ass, and in the end, will not be worth it.

[California Joe]

I used to love interviewing retard teenagers with their pissed off grandmother in the room smacking them in the head...:)

Like jin said, slippery slope...

[Blue_0]

If waterboarding was done to me it would be torture.

-- Bluelight

[RxOnco]

...But to allow everyone to define, for themselves, what is legally permissable and ethically acceptable, is only inviting trouble...

I'm I missing something here? Since when are interrogators "allowed to define, for themselves, what is legally permissable and ethically acceptable?"

[California Joe]

I'm I missing something here? Since when are Vice Presidents "allowed to define, for themselves, what is legally permissable and ethically acceptable?"

Fixed it...

[Virus]

And my point is: just because you call it torture, doesn't make it so.

I think there's a huge difference between what we did, and what the animals do. I just can't bring myself to equate waterboarding to elctrocution, severing fingers, pulling out fingernails, using powertools such as drills, etc...

Now you are trying to compare physical torture with mental? I would say it isn't as easy to compare, I look at water boarding as more of a mental thing. And let's call it what it is my friend, torture is by definition, "the act of inflicting excruciating pain, as punishment or revenge, as a means of getting a confession or information, or for sheer cruelty." And pain itself, can be either physical OR mental. So don't try and beat around the bush, it is what it is whether you agree with it or not.

[RxOnco]

Since 2000...I guess.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9a/US_presidential_election_2000_map.svg/800px-US_presidential_election_2000_map.svg.png

[LineDoggie]

Fixed it for you amigo...:)


Thats true enough, though I gave up on Stern long ago.

Used to love Opie & Anthony till K-rock fired them a few months ago.

[RxOnco]

Now you are trying to compare physical torture with mental? I would say it isn't as easy to compare, I look at water boarding as more of a mental thing. And let's call it what it is my friend, torture is by definition, "the act of inflicting excruciating pain, as punishment or revenge, as a means of getting a confession or information, or for sheer cruelty." And pain itself, can be either physical OR mental. So don't try and beat around the bush, it is what it is whether you agree with it or not.

Pardon me while I cry a f*cking river over their mental anguish. I'm sorry, but "mental pain" isn't torture in my book.

[tercio67]

You were of course not aware that it was a class that at some point would end and that the intention was to not permanently harm you.

And as for killing;
Torture and killing are somewhat mutualy exclusive if your goal is to get any information.

Oh, I have gone thoug the resistence to interrogation class btw.
Cannot say I particularly liked it, but the thing is I knew it would end and would not permanently harm me.

[RxOnco]

Ok...so tell me. What do you consider to be acceptable interrogation practices?

[Panchito12]

^You did the exact same thing to your sisters that these prisoners had done to them? I doubt that.

Man the pranks that I pulled on those two ought to be recorded in a book. Including dunking in the pool almost to the point of drowning.

p.s. It's ok they once toilet papered my legs while asleep and lit the paper on fire.

[Lov3ll]

http://www.youtube.com/v/qUkj9pjx3H0

[tercio67]

The same (legal) techniques used by police forces, to start with.

A good interrogation team can work wonders, not everybody is suited to be an interrogater and it takes a lot of training.
First you take away the preconceptions of the person that is to be interrogated, this will unnerv them. Treat them humane and extend to them every curtesy you can.
The point is to get them to speak, about anything they seem to care to speak about.
By taking away their preconceptions and proving them false you undermine their total certainty and they will slowly, guided by the interrogators, start to question their vision of things as taught to them.
Once you get them to this point the real interrogation starts.
It helps to use indirect questioning rather then direct questioning.

This will take time, but reliable and verifiable information is usualy worth the wait.
Torture on the other hand tends to make the victims say anything that they think that will make the torture stop.

[RxOnco]

I'm sorry, but we're not trying to find an accomplice to a robbery. These guys flew airplanes into the f*cking World Trade Center and the Pentagon! Are they going to do it again? Who knows. We sure as hell don't have the time to get all touchy feely.

[tercio67]

While you may percieve this as 'touchy feely', we (Dutch) tend to think of it in terms of psychological warfare. Yes, warfare. There are parralels between shaping the battlefield and shaping the mind of the suspected terrorists.

But hey, sticking to waterboarding and rubber hoses. I am sure someone will be willing to confess to being secret santa if you torture them enough.

[RxOnco]

Hey, it seems to have worked. Don't fret though. B.O. has made it so that we'll just have our agents hug the intel out of 'em next time.

[Invisigoth]

These guys flew airplanes into the f*cking World Trade Center and the Pentagon! Are they going to do it again? Who knows.

Well if they flew airplanes into the world trade center, then were captured and waterboarded and might do it again, we might as well surrender. They are superhuman.

[Lt-Col A. Tack]

I'm sorry, but we're not trying to find an accomplice to a robbery. These guys flew airplanes into the f*cking World Trade Center and the Pentagon! Are they going to do it again? Who knows. We sure as hell don't have the time to get all touchy feely.

Agreed, I think the whole idea of conditioning the mentality of the person being interrogated is a reasonable option when there's no urgency or time constraint.

I'm sure sophisticated, "humane" interrogation is capable of producing very nice results but sometimes you have to settle for the expedient. And I'm guessing that any information obtained is verified.


Hasn't Cheney begun an FOIA request to show exactly what was prevented with the information using enhanced techniques?

[RxOnco]

"They" implying Al Qaeda.

[Invisigoth]

Hasn't Cheney begun an FOIA request to show exactly what was prevented with the information using enhanced techniques?

Well we all know what was achieved, the Iraq War. Yay for that.

[Lt-Col A. Tack]

Well we all know what was achieved, the Iraq War. Yay for that.

And Iraq is related to this thread how?

[seraosha]

Well we all know what was achieved, the Iraq War. Yay for that.

How do you form these opinions?
Do you have a "magic 8 ball" that you shake before posting?

[cmsuvulcan]

Well, you can call it what you want. I'll do the same.
















It's not torture.p-)

Tell Col. Chase Nielsen that. We put a man to death after the Tokyo War Crimes Trial of 1946 based on Nielsen's testimony that waterboarding is torture.

[Soldat_Américain]

http://www.youtube.com/v/qUkj9pjx3H0
Not gonna lie he's a pussy, I though water boarding was actually brutal, and that looks...not brutal with the amount of water they were using.

How do you form these opinions?
Do you have a "magic 8 ball" that you shake before posting?
The "Magic 8 Ball" of course...do you want yours in key ring size or standard?

[California Joe]

I'm sorry, but we're not trying to find an accomplice to a robbery. These guys flew airplanes into the f*cking World Trade Center and the Pentagon! Are they going to do it again? Who knows. We sure as hell don't have the time to get all touchy feely.

You're being emotional.

What do you mean "We"?

And by the way toughguy, who died and made you Chesty Puller? Maybe good old war hawk "5 Deferments" Cheney?

[Power_serj]

As far as I know, no one here is trained in interrogations. Regardless of whether or not waterboarding is torture, it is utterly useless and there are better means by which to get accurate information quicker. It's actually contained in an Army Field Manual which the CIA is now required to abide by.

It seems like no one in this thread even bothered to actually research interrogation and just put in their personal opinions based on "facts" from politicians and others who are not qualified in interrogations.

[Soldat_Américain]

Ask the Israelis...they don't torture anymore...they figure it out...why can't you.

[California Joe]

As far as I know, no one here is trained in interrogations. Regardless of whether or not waterboarding is torture, it is utterly useless and there are better means by which to get accurate information quicker. It's actually contained in an Army Field Manual which the CIA is now required to abide by.

Several of the Mods are trained and experienced in that area. That's just the military ones, not the cops or the English teacher...:)

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

I don't some of these "interrogation" techniques sound quite "interesting" might have to get the next chick I pull to try some on me.

[Lt-Col A. Tack]

Ask the Israelis...they don't torture anymore...they figure it out...why can't you.

Actually, I think there is some kind of exception for uncovering a "ticking bomb"
I'm guessing an Israeli intelligence officer would have to defend whatever decision he or she makes.

I believe the Israelis could be very helpful in crafting interrogation standards.

[Jobu]

Several senior CIA officers have come out and said that a lot of very good intel was gained through the enhanced interrogation sessions.

I'll take their word over yours.

Whether you all consider it torture or not, I really don't care. We needed to know what they knew and we needed it fast. I'm happy to know that we have people who can do the dirty work for us when it needs to be done.

[ting]

Hrmf:( With that title I was expecting Bill O'Reilly:-(

Oh well never mind:-(

[CPL Trevoga]

Several senior CIA officers have come out and said that a lot of very good intel was gained through the enhanced interrogation sessions.

I'll take their word over yours.

Whether you all consider it torture or not, I really don't care. We needed to know what they knew and we needed it fast. I'm happy to know that we have people who can do the dirty work for us when it needs to be done.

I bet if they tortured your ass, they would get some "good intel" too.

[tennesseedave]

I think you have to put a bit of pressure in interrogations. Torture is not ok but methods you let your own soldiers go through in training should be ok in interrogations.


It would be interesting to know if these techniques are still being used in SERE. If they are, then this administration has some explaining to do. It's not OK to "torture" terrorists, but it is OK to "torture" our soldiers for training. It's become common knowledge now that these techniques are used in training, but I'm not hearing any press or politicians crying about that.

[bob, just bob]

this should be a game show

[LineDoggie]

I bet if they tortured your ass, they would get some "good intel" too.
Quite Possibly, especially if he were a Terrorist about to make an Attack. If they Tortured your ass what would they get?

[Universal_Soldier]

I don't think anybody thinks it's a pleasant experience. This is where the argument of what exactly "torture" is and what "enhanced interrogation" is.

To hell with that "enhanced interrogation nonsense"!
Exactly what kind of questions makes you feel like you are about to die????

I'm not against its use on high value target. However, what I hate is the broad daylight hypocrisy and dishonesty displayed by many people on this issue just by using semantics. This is Torture and folks should not be afraid to admit it.

[MaDuce]

I think you have to put a bit of pressure in interrogations. Torture is not ok but methods you let your own soldiers go through in training should be ok in interrogations.

Be careful there, If all the techniques servicemen are exposed to during SERE POW where used on detainees the international community would **** bricks.

[Invisigoth]

And Iraq is related to this thread how?

Probably cause al-Libi confessed under enhanced interrogation to the completely debunked link between Al-Qaida and Iraq that Rumsfeld and Cheney were jonesing for all those years?

[CPL Trevoga]

Quite Possibly, especially if he were a Terrorist about to make an Attack. If they Tortured your ass what would they get?

Just f*ckin' stop with this "terrorist attack" ****. In any serious organization, they use give info on "need to know" basis. Weatherboarding wasn't illegal in 2001, it still did not stop anything.

[commanding]

"Torture" is one of those words, that is a very vague word. Can mean most anything to anyone. Listening to rap music some might say is torture, sitting on a metal roof in 118 degree heat in the Texas sun some might call torture. Shocking a man on the bare skin with a full size electric cattle prod some might call torture. Beating a man on the butt with a wooden stick some might call torture.
When President Obama, declares now how rightous he says we have now become since he is the POTUS, and we no longer will allow water boarding or other enhanced interrogation techiques, .....I wonder. Does he realize that the safety of thousands, perhaps millions of American citizens were at stake when the three terrorists were waterboarded? One was the self admitted mastermind of the September 11th attack. Could we afford to allow this admitted mass murderer to not tell all he knew?
What would President Obama do if we had a terrorist who had captured some of his loved ones? Would he then be so opposed to pouring water on the mans face and down his nose to gain information as to where they were being held? I think not. This enhanced interogation was being used purely to extract information, and not as retaliation or revenge. It was the unique discomfort of 3 men, versus the lives of thousands, perhaps millions of American citizens.

[little icebear]

Ok...so tell me. What do you consider to be acceptable interrogation practices?

Talking.


That´s where it ends. Anything else is bullsh!t and morally inacceptable.

[Dominique]

What do you mean "We"?

And by the way toughguy, who died and made you Chesty Puller? Maybe good old war hawk "5 Deferments" Cheney?

There's been a whole lot of "we" going on lately. I find it amazing the number of hard as nails armchair commandos, we've got floating around this board. I'll be more than happy to point them towards the recruiters office, as I'm sure they're ready to do their part, since "we" are all in this together.

[Kippari]

There's no clear line drawn what's torture and what's not. It all depends of the situation at hand. It's all about the purpose of the action. You waterboard someone to make them feel anquished and drowning to make them say something, it's torture. This is not the case in SERE, where the point is to teach soldiers what it's like and how to handle it.

If you allow waterboarding, you could also allow to put prisoners into giant ovens and heat it up to the point the prisoner is screaming hysterically for help when he feels hot enough. Now imagine yourself into that situation, without knowing if they are going to bake you alive. It will not kill you, but you may be left with a mental trauma. That's if you've never been in sauna.p-)

Besides, how long before the waterboarding is deemed too ineffective and they start pulling prisoners´fingernails off to get faster results? It's a slippery slope indeed.


Btw. that guy in the vid was pretty pussyass.

[budgie]

Well, I'll give the guy points for having the balls to 'walk the walk'.

Can think of a few others that I'd like to see take the challenge (you listening, Rush? p-)


Unfortunately once he's admitted it is torture he must be cast out of conservativedom. Rush wouldn't risk that...

[little icebear]

What are you? French?

You´re a disrespectful prick. French soldiers are dying in Afghanistan, you moron. Go and waterboard yourself.

[tercio67]

You apparently haven't the faintest F***ing idea. A lot of guys used to say that same **** going in, "Oh, it's just a school, they can't kill you, it's got to end some time.. Blah...Blah...Blah" In fact it's so easy that you're only on a mandatory 15 day psychological profile when you return to your unit. I loved seeing them come back and then asking them "So, how was it? As easy as you thought?"

If you haven't been through S.E.R.E.-C then you CAN'T know **** about it.


While I am not in the US armed forces, and therefore have no personal knowledge of S.E.R.E.-C, the class I attended was no fun little outing with the local girlscouts, I woke up in hospital. And they did not even use any real force to accomplish this, just some unpleasantness.
I know, I am from Europe and that makes me a Eurowussy. We will just have to agree not to agree on this.

[skipperbob]

Water boarding is torture, it was torture and it was illegal in 2001 until Bush's lawyers tried to come up with a legal excuse. How do you plan to be able to tell what is being told to you is the truth or not - more torture?
You do not get good Intel from torture, how many members of the CIA and FBI have to say that before you get the picture? All you have to do is look at the Germans in WW II. They used very sophisticated techniques in interrogating and just talking with captured aircrew's and found out a great deal that was useful to them. Lowering yourself to the level of a suspect is cowardly and it puts us in the position of accepting torture as a legitimate means to be used against Americans.

[LEB101]

i dont see how anyone in america can be against this. what if there was going to be a big attack on new york and the fbi needed to know when and who. i bet then everyone would agree that it is fine to do as long as its not abused

[Walter Sobchak]

Just listening to Mancow's show for about five minutes is torture.

It's ironic that Nancy PeloSSi is so against enhanced interrogation, considering that during the Folsom Street Fair in San Francisco, much worse goes on in daylight in sight of SF's Finest. Hell, waterboarding is tame compared to some of that stuff... really.

[sinophile]

Shock jocks shock. And so it went Friday morning when WLS radio host Erich "Mancow" Muller decided to subject himself to the controversial practice of waterboarding live on his show. Mancow decided to tackle the divisive issue head on -- actually it was head down while restrained and reclining.


Turns out the stunt wasn't so funny. Witnesses said Muller thrashed on the table, and even instantly threw the toy cow he was holding as his emergency tool to signify when he wanted the experiment to stop. He only lasted 6 or 7 seconds.

"It is way worse than I thought it would be, and that's no joke," Mancow said, likening it to a time when he nearly drowned as a child. "It is such an odd feeling to have water poured down your nose with your head back...It was instantaneous...and I don't want to say this: absolutely torture."
http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/Mancow-Takes-on-Waterboarding-and-Loses.html


I really like the font you used for this post. It can't be Arial, or is it Arial but the color is different? Its so easy to read, clean. Great font. The post not so much.

[Walter Sobchak]

Water boarding is torture, it was torture and it was illegal in 2001 until Bush's lawyers tried to come up with a legal excuse. How do you plan to be able to tell what is being told to you is the truth or not - more torture?
You do not get good Intel from torture, how many members of the CIA and FBI have to say that before you get the picture? All you have to do is look at the Germans in WW II. They used very sophisticated techniques in interrogating and just talking with captured aircrew's and found out a great deal that was useful to them. Lowering yourself to the level of a suspect is cowardly and it puts us in the position of accepting torture as a legitimate means to be used against Americans.

Let's see... three terrorists were waterboarded. Congress was fully briefed. So, if members of Congress knew, then didn't they have an obligation to stop it? Don't they control the funding?

Come on, this is what's happening:

Obama campaigned on stopping this "torture" so he could get the left-leaning hate-Bush vote away from the other Democrats who were trying to get the nomination.

Now, it's been learned that EIT resulted in attacks being stopped; one was the attack on LAX. Ex-FBI Chief Muller and Obama's own Nattional Security adviser, Admiral Blair, have said that these techniques are effective. However, Obama is in a corner and has to go through with this. But if/when we are hit again, he doesn't want anyone to say, "If we'd been using EIT, we might have uncovered this plot". So, as a way to preempt any criticism and save his political hide, he has to do two things.

One, he has to deflect any future blame to Bush/Cheney. That's tough, since they can honestly say that we were safe for seven years using their methods. So, it's now about how "al qaeda uses EIT as a recruiting tool", which is like blaming America for the actions of radical Islamists. He forgets that they hated us on 9/11 and they hate us now, regardless of what we do. Hell, being alive and breathing is provocation enough for them to hate us!

Two, is that he has to marginalize everyone who says that EIT is a useful tool. To do that, he has to villify Bush and Cheney and EIT supporters with threats of legal action. But this is where it gets tricky, because Congress was briefed at every step, and they surely can't be held accountable or culpable, or they will be under legal sanctions, too. The last time I read the Constitution, it says that Congress funds the executive branch, so the "we were powerless to stop it" argument is BS. That's why they are playing the "we weren't clearly briefed" card, even in the face of mounting evidence to the contrary.

It's pretty simple when you take your Bush/Cheney Derangement Syndrome medications and look at the fact!

[JKD]

Ex-FBI Chief Muller and Obama's own Nattional Security adviser, Admiral Blair, have said that these techniques are effective.

Admiral Blair also said:

"The information gained from these techniques was valuable in some instances, but there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means"

and

"The bottom line is these techniques have hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security."

[Fargin]

The fact is torture is no longer tollerated by the administration.

[Universal_Soldier]

Waterboarding is NOT torture by the definition of torture. I believe in using whatever means necessary to extract information from those intent on killing inocent people even if it is torture (and some torture techniques DO work to extract good intel). I would do whatever I need to to save lives of my fellow Soldiers, Countrymen and family.

You are not making any sense. Consult your dictionary dude! Go look-up the definition of turture and the definition of enhanced interrogation and see which on matches water boarding.
Look man, I support the Torture of guys like KSM anyday. They deserve no pitty. What I won't do is to claim that is "enhanced interrogation" for the sake of political correctness.

Simple and short.

[Universal_Soldier]

Still doesn't mean that they don't try to kick the crap out of America every chance they get. Still doesn't wipe out the history that they have for being passive, submissive and I know they are fighting in the 'Stan, I've ran into a few.

And you're the disrespectful prick when you believe that we shouldn't use any means necessary to keep those French Soldiers alive.

Dude, if you really served over there kudos to you. But I expected little more maturity from you when comes to our allies who are also scrificing over there. I wonder why we are begging these passive and submissive soldiers to come and help out over there.

[Power_serj]

Who cares if waterboarding is torture? The fact is that what's done is done, and there was no clear law on it in the past, therefore, no one should be prosecuted. The CIA agents were given the legal authority to do waterboarding and enhanced techniques therefore they cannot be charged. Congress should set the laws of torture in the books and shut up about it.

Someone please help me out here: There is a law in the books saying that you cannot be charged with a crime, when the act was not considered a crime until after you did the act. The interrogators should not be punished for something that was legally approved!

BTW: The only approved methods of interrogation today by U.S. interrogators is in the FM 2-22.3

http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/2182/2223.jpg (http://img193.imageshack.us/my.php?image=2223.jpg)

[JKD]

Who cares if waterboarding is torture? The fact is that what's done is done, and there was no clear law on it in the past, therefore, no one should be prosecuted. The CIA agents were given the legal authority to do waterboarding and enhanced techniques therefore they cannot be charged. Congress should set the laws of torture in the books and shut up about it.

Someone please help me out here: There is a law in the books saying that you cannot be charged with a crime, when the act was not considered a crime until after you did the act. The interrogators should not be punished for something that was legally approved!

BTW: The only approved methods of interrogation today by U.S. interrogators is in the FM 2-22.3


Americans were court martialed for waterboarding prisoners in Vietnam and The Spanish American War. And we convicted Japanese officers for war crimes for waterboarding Americans in WWII

[Dominique]

Americans were court martialed for waterboarding prisoners in Vietnam and The Spanish American War. And we convicted Japanese officers for war crimes for waterboarding Americans in WWII

No need to point out the facts, when all that matters is peoples personal opinions. :roll:

[tercio67]

Legal precedent in the USA;
In 1983 Texas sheriff James Parker and three of his deputies were convicted for conspiring to force confessions. The complaint said they "subject prisoners to a suffocating water torture ordeal in order to coerce confessions. This generally included the placement of a towel over the nose and mouth of the prisoner and the pouring of water in the towel until the prisoner began to move, jerk, or otherwise indicate that he was suffocating and/or drowning".[/URL]The sheriff was sentenced to ten years in prison, and the deputies to four years.

By defenition;
It's a clear-cut case: Waterboarding can without any reservation be labeled as torture. It fulfils all of the four central criteria that according to the United Nations Convention Against Torture (UNCAT) defines an act of torture. First, when water is forced into your lungs in this fashion, in addition to the pain you are likely to experience an immediate and extreme fear of death. You may even suffer a heart attack from the stress or damage to the lungs and brain from inhalation of water and oxygen deprivation. In other words there is no doubt that waterboarding causes severe physical and/or mental suffering – one central element in the UNCAT's definition of torture. In addition the CIA's waterboarding clearly fulfills the three additional definition criteria stated in the Convention for a deed to be labeled torture, since it is 1) done intentionally, 2) for a specific purpose and 3) by a representative of a state – in this case the US.[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterboarding#cite_note-icrt20080212-6"] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterboarding#cite_note-wallach20071104-71)

Torture, in all it's forms, tends to be shrouded in legalese and euphemisms.
This is to make it palatable.
Changing the way you define, or wish to call, torture in order for you to be able to torture with a 'clear' mind is telling enough.

To those that think that torture should be allowed for some, it does not save lives rather the opposite for it will give fuel to the preachers of hate and intolerance that send out the men that place IED's and recruit SIED's.

[Soldat_Américain]

When you say Enhanced Interrogation Techniques I have no idea what you're talking about really...semantics...this is my idea of what it should be involve this guy
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/picture.php?albumid=987&pictureid=13292

and doughnuts

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/picture.php?albumid=987&pictureid=13293

And Dom, I made this for your response about Armchair Commandos using InfranView...I just thought it was funny, couldn't find any legit pictures of dudes dressing up and sitting in a chair, however thought it was funny when I found this stuff.

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/picture.php?albumid=987&pictureid=13294
http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/%5BIMG%5Dhttp://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/picture.php?albumid=987&pictureid=13294%5B/IMG%5D

[Dominique]

And Dom, I made this for your response about Armchair Commandos using InfranView...I just thought it was funny, couldn't find any legit pictures of dudes dressing up and sitting in a chair, however thought it was funny when I found this stuff.

I'm proposing two new qualification tabs, the Armchair Commando Tab, and the Internet Tough Guy Tab, they'll be authorized for wear on any airsoft uniform, and for display as avatars, on internet message boards. That way if you can't walk the walk, at least you can talk it.

[Panchito12]

The fact is torture is no longer tollerated by the administration.

....for now. Let's have another major islamic terrorism incident in the US and the administration will either give the green light to enhanced interrogation, or it's lights out for them.

[commanding]

Legal precedent in the USA;
In 1983 Texas sheriff James Parker and three of his deputies were convicted for conspiring to force confessions. The complaint said they "subject prisoners to a suffocating water torture ordeal in order to coerce confessions. This generally included the placement of a towel over the nose and mouth of the prisoner and the pouring of water in the towel until the prisoner began to move, jerk, or otherwise indicate that he was suffocating and/or drowning".The sheriff was sentenced to ten years in prison, and the deputies to four years..

we are not talking about law for citizens of the USA, who are in prison for crimes while in the USA, we are talking about unlawful combatents, not citizens of the USA, who killed thousands of US citizens, and are being detained by the US military, to keep them off the battelfield.



By defenition;
It's a clear-cut case: Waterboarding can without any reservation be labeled as torture. It fulfils all of the four central criteria that according to the United Nations Convention Against Torture (UNCAT) defines an act of torture. First, when water is forced into your lungs in this fashion, in addition to the pain you are likely to experience an immediate and extreme fear of death. You may even suffer a heart attack from the stress or damage to the lungs and brain from inhalation of water and oxygen deprivation. In other words there is no doubt that waterboarding causes severe physical and/or mental suffering – one central element in the UNCAT's definition of torture. In addition the CIA's waterboarding clearly fulfills the three additional definition criteria stated in the Convention for a deed to be labeled torture, since it is 1) done intentionally, 2) for a specific purpose and 3) by a representative of a state – in this case the US..

so you are saying the definition of torture meets 4 criteria? 1. causing pain or suffering, 2. done intentionally 3.for a specific purpose and 4. by a representative of the state???
Then what is corporal punishment, by states, governments, school districts, etc? Paddling a student in school is done for all those 4 criteria. When i was in school, I was paddled scores of times, and shocked with an electric cattle prod by a teacher, also put out on an exterior fire escape for punishment 2 floors up. However, it did NOT cause me to plant IEDs or rain revenge on the state of Texas, the school board of Ft. Worth, the County of Tarrant, or sue anyone etc. It was corporal punishment. Didn't cause me to confess someone else gave Jimmy the black eye either, I said i did it.


Torture, in all it's forms, tends to be shrouded in legalese and euphemisms.
This is to make it palatable.
Changing the way you define, or wish to call, torture in order for you to be able to torture with a 'clear' mind is telling enough.

To those that think that torture should be allowed for some, it does not save lives rather the opposite for it will give fuel to the preachers of hate and intolerance that send out the men that place IED's and recruit SIED's.
see my comments above, I respectfully disagree with your stance, though I respect you right to your opinions and support your right to disagree.

[commanding]

Additionally, most soldiers go through training that fits the United Nations definitions of torture. You can't really define torture on the low end. And GITMO is a freaking paradise for those guys. Read the book "Inside GITMO" by Cucullu.

[Soldat_Américain]

Enemy Combatants=Prisoners of War, I love the semantics for the former administration btw.

[commanding]

Enemy Combatants=Prisoners of War, I love the semantics for the former administration btw.

I think that is the legal definition, not something made up by the Bush administration.

[Soldat_Américain]

I think that is the legal definition, not something made up by the Bush administration.
The first time I heard "enemy combatant" was right after we started the war in Afghanistan and put people in GITMO. And I never said it was made up, but it allows the holder of said detainee to not give them the same rights given to a prisoner of war.

[California Joe]

Waterboarding? Pffffffffffffffft! Whatever.



I've been married nearly 24 years.:)

[commanding]

The first time I heard "enemy combatant" was right after we started the war in Afghanistan and put people in GITMO. And I never said it was made up, but it allows the holder of said detainee to not give them the same rights given to a prisoner of war.
well the real name is "unlawful combatant" I think....here is use from 1942: (FDR was president, not Bush)




The term unlawful combatant has been used for the past century in legal literature, military manuals and case law[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unlawful_combatant#cite_note-icrc_dorman-2). The term "unlawful combatants" was first used in US municipal law in a 1942 United States Supreme Court (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Supreme_Court) decision in the case ex parte Quirin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_parte_Quirin).[26] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unlawful_combatant#cite_note-25) In this case, the Supreme Court upheld the jurisdiction of a U.S. military tribunal over the trial of several German saboteurs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabotage) in the US. This decision states (emphasis added and footnotes removed):



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unlawful_combatant#Combatants_who_do_not_qualify_for_POW_status

[commanding]

Waterboarding? Pffffffffffffffft! Whatever.



I've been married nearly 24 years.:)

Does it make you feel like you are drowning? :)

[Soldat_Américain]

Commanding, I did the wiki research, interesting stuff, tons of details on the old and newer cases...but as I was watching this war from the sidelines on the news before I was old enough to serve. I would always hear and read (unlawful) enemy combatant, when talking about those we captured and sent to Habana...why we didn't classify them as POWs I wouldn't know, I understand part of it has to do with them being stateless, but at the very beginning of the war they weren't stateless.

[Walter Sobchak]

Admiral Blair also said:

"The information gained from these techniques was valuable in some instances, but there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means"

and

"The bottom line is these techniques have hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security."

Don't pick and choose your quotes. What you are relating was from the edited version of his statement released by the White House. Read the article from the NY Times that states, in part (my underline),

"Admiral Blair’s assessment that the interrogation methods did produce important information was deleted from a condensed version of his memo released to the media last Thursday. Also deleted was a line in which he empathized with his predecessors who originally approved some of the harsh tactics after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

“I like to think I would not have approved those methods in the past,” he wrote, “but I do not fault those who made the decisions at that time, and I will absolutely defend those who carried out the interrogations within the orders they were given.”
Read the WHOLE article from the NY Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/22/us/politics/22blair.html?_r=1

And try this one, too:

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=46949

[tercio67]

...why we didn't classify them as POWs I wouldn't know, I understand part of it has to do with them being stateless, but at the very beginning of the war they weren't stateless.

POW's have rights, if you want to withold those rights you have to call them something else.
It helps if you 'redefine or reinterpret' existing law with legalese and euphemisms. Or statements that say; "it is not specificaly mentioned or listed as such". On the surfice a valid argument perhaps, but if you actualy read the treaty, and its defenition of 'torture', you will understand that no methods are specificaly mentioned and for the exact reason that if they missed one it could be construed as 'legal'.

Oh, and the argument that it would only be used against 'realy bad people', non citizens to be sure, is a non argument. The law exist and dictates your behaviour without reservations.
After WWII people have been convicted for warcrimes under the 'command' principle, this means you can not shed responsability by claiming that you did not actualy partake yourself but others under your command did it.

Condemning others for torture practises but reserving the right to use torture for yourself based on the argument that 'but we are the good guys, we will only torture them a little bit, honest...' does not come across to me as the intelligent approach. Then again you do not need to be intelligent to be a politician, just popular enough to be elected.

[Grahamr117]

....for now. Let's have another major islamic terrorism incident in the US and the administration will either give the green light to enhanced interrogation, or it's lights out for them.

Torture doesn't work, It's not an effective method as described in this thread. They will tell you whatever the **** they want.

Hell, let's just waste everyone at Gitmo. Khalid Shiek Mohammed, those 17 Uighurs..All of them. That would send a message.


EDIT: Hell, let's make it really spectacular. Like pull all the U.S staff out of Camp X-ray and carpet bomb it while Cuba watches in abject terror.

[JKD]

Don't pick and choose your quotes.
Funny, the reason I posted those quotes is because you point out that he said torture worked but failed to mention his reservations about it. As I've noticed torture supporters always do when they invoke the admiral.


What you are relating was from the edited version of his statement released by the White House.
No, I got the quote from the NYT article you reference below.



Read the WHOLE article from the NY Times:

I did read the whole article. That's where I got the quotes from.

[commanding]

Commanding, I did the wiki research, interesting stuff, tons of details on the old and newer cases...but as I was watching this war from the sidelines on the news before I was old enough to serve. I would always hear and read (unlawful) enemy combatant, when talking about those we captured and sent to Habana...why we didn't classify them as POWs I wouldn't know, I understand part of it has to do with them being stateless, but at the very beginning of the war they weren't stateless.

SA,
The way I understand it (and I may be wrong, I am not perfect by any means...ask my wife)...the enemy combatants do not wear uniforms of military, but they are engaged in "combat" (another of those words that the definition is blurred)....a large number of them in AFG and Iraq were captured ON the battlefield, although some like KSM were captured in Pakistan in an apartment in their "jammies" (old hairy back).
Many of the high value targets, are "smart" enough to stay off the actual battle field and talk others into doing their fighting.
They are not classified as POWs because the status of a POW has very finite legal qualifications, according to international "law" and conventions. For instance, the Japanese civilians in WWII, who were detained at the camp at Seagoville, Texas, were not soldiers, and not POWs. Some of them were actually from south america. From my understanding of ONE of the reasons we detained so many Japanese civilians in WWII was to be able to "trade" them for american soldier POWs the Japanese held..as most Japanese soldiers died rather than surrender, so there were very few Japanese POWs.

[commanding]

POW's have rights, if you want to withold those rights you have to call them something else.


.

Incorrect. They are not POWs as defined by international convention. There is NO subterfuge there my friend. If you do research, you will find that the detainees in GITMO have (since the early days of the 3 waterboarding events) gotten excellant care, meals, medical care, religious and cultural rights, etc. All of them eat better meals than the average American soldier, most of them are gaining weight. Still they continue to throw cocktails of feces, urine and semen at the US military guards, and many have pledged to decapitate any US guard, nurse, etc they capture. Nice guys. (sarcasm)

[tercio67]

RE: Enemy combatant

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enemy_combatant

It all comes down to defenition and interpretation it seems.

[gaijinsamurai]

I think a lot of you folks who are focusing on the fact that the recipients of torture/waterboarding/"enhanced interrogation techniques" are bad men (and they are indeed lower than scum) are missing the point. It's not about what the practice does to them, it's what it does to us.

[skipperbob]

Another thing to consider is that although there are undoubtedly some real terrorists there, there are also still many men who don't belong there, men who were turned over to us as payback for some family feud that has gone on for centuries or those who were turned in for a reward. To call someone who was a cook or a driver a terrorist is laughable. These men have been held and tortured for years with no proof of their guilt. This whole thing is a stain on the reputation of the US that wont wash away for a long time. We became the enemy that we were fighting against. We have faced much greater threats than this through the years without resorting to the tactics of the Bush Administration.

[Johnny_H02]

Torture is ****in torture, its funny because allot of the blowhards and skeptics who have actually subjected themselves to this "enhanced interrogation technique" have all come back and said "whoa holy sh*t its worse than imagined it doesn't simulate drowning you are being drowned literally" so where is the debate?

Well the people still saying it isn't can join the elite intellectual ranks of Elizabeth Hassleback in their quest to deny deny deny.

/gg

[California Joe]

The trouble with this subject is the arguments are all over the place.

-Is waterboarding torture?

-Do we even care?

-Who knew?

-Does waterboarding work?

-Is the intel gained worth the price?

-Was any accurate intel gained at all?

-Could we have gotten it all by alternate methods and not destroyed our reputation with the rest of the world?

-What did Nancy Pelosi know?

-Why is her denying knowledge somehow worse than the administration ordering it and then parsing legalities to somehow avoid the word torture?

-Does the CIA always tell the truth?

-Why doesn't **** Cheney and his harpy daughter shut the f*ck up?

Unfortunately, we are all relying on opinion and conjecture.

[California Joe]

What? Like save our lives?

There's no proof of that. You can think it, you can assume it, you can draw a correlation between drowning ****heads and us not having an airliner crashed into the Piggly Wiggly down the street or the Super Bowl but it doesn't make it factual, and actually could be nothing more than they are waiting for us to get all complacent again.

You know that our ports are still wide open right? That all of the vaunted security measures that Big **** Cheney touts haven't really happened other than to make me take off my shoes once in a while at the airport.

[Soldat_Américain]

I'm gonna go religious here and invoke the golden rule "do unto others as you wish for them to do unto you."

[gilgoul]

I just say keep with the sleep deprivation and making it so the prisoner has no idea what time it is by coming in and questioning him ten minutes after the pass out...beyond that I think the line is drawn plainly but apparently sleep deprivation is considered a torture technique which is bullsh!t.
And that is the point behind most critics arguments, they will mention waterboarding as torture, and then sleep deprivation, and isolation, and whatever gives you a tool on them.
Sleep deprivation, that is what any soldier goes throught basic at the very least.

[Soldat_Américain]

And that is the point behind most critics arguments, they will mention waterboarding as torture, and then sleep deprivation, and isolation, and whatever gives you a tool on them.
Sleep deprivation, that is what any soldier goes throught basic at the very least.

Well if the politicians claim sleep deprivation is torture I should claim PTSD already...I'm so hurt. But like I said, from there the line has to drawn in something more solid than sand.

[KVLG]

Shock jocks shock. And so it went Friday morning when WLS radio host Erich "Mancow" Muller decided to subject himself to the controversial practice of waterboarding live on his show. Mancow decided to tackle the divisive issue head on -- actually it was head down while restrained and reclining.


Turns out the stunt wasn't so funny. Witnesses said Muller thrashed on the table, and even instantly threw the toy cow he was holding as his emergency tool to signify when he wanted the experiment to stop. He only lasted 6 or 7 seconds.

"It is way worse than I thought it would be, and that's no joke," Mancow said, likening it to a time when he nearly drowned as a child. "It is such an odd feeling to have water poured down your nose with your head back...It was instantaneous...and I don't want to say this: absolutely torture."
http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/Mancow-Takes-on-Waterboarding-and-Loses.html



What some people consider to be torture, others might consider to be somethine else. After all, would members of the Armed Forces who underwent it in training consider it torture? IMO, therein lies the rub.

[commanding]

RE: Enemy combatant

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enemy_combatant

It all comes down to defenition and interpretation it seems.
You are correct, my error, the correct term I was attempting to use was "unlawful combatant" not enemy combatant. My error, blame it on misfiring brain neurons from old age.

Unlawful combatants, are the guys without uniforms I believe. (have not submitted to the higher authority of google nor god)

[commanding]

There's no proof of that. You can think it, you can assume it, you can draw a correlation between drowning ****heads and us not having an airliner crashed into the Piggly Wiggly down the street or the Super Bowl but it doesn't make it factual, and actually could be nothing more than they are waiting for us to get all complacent again.

You know that our ports are still wide open right? That all of the vaunted security measures that Big **** Cheney touts haven't really happened other than to make me take off my shoes once in a while at the airport.

CJ, actually from what I hear there is as much "proof" as you can have of something that did not happen, but it is classified and Pres. Obama will not release that info like he did the interragation techniques info.
Of course it is fairly hard to prove something that did not happen...like the 3 or 4 guys who recently were attempting to carbomb a church and shoot down US military aircraft in upstate NY, before they were nabbed by the FBI. Just saying...

[Ngati Tumatauenga]

Is the USA a signatory to the GC's?

Article 5
Where, in the territory of a Party to the conflict, the latter is satisfied that an individual protected person is definitely suspected of or engaged in activities hostile to the security of the State, such individual person shall not be entitled to claim such rights and privileges under the present Convention as would, if exercised in the favour of such individual person, be prejudicial to the security of such State.

Where in occupied territory an individual protected person is detained as a spy or saboteur, or as a person under definite suspicion of activity hostile to the security of the Occupying Power, such person shall, in those cases where absolute military security so requires, be regarded as having forfeited rights of communication under the present Convention.

In each case, such persons shall nevertheless be treated with humanity, and in case of trial, shall not be deprived of the rights of fair and regular trial prescribed by the present Convention. They shall also be granted the full rights and privileges of a protected person under the present Convention at the earliest date consistent with the security of the State or Occupying Power, as the case may be.


http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/92.htm

No excuse then.

[3rdMillhouse]

Another thing to consider is that although there are undoubtedly some real terrorists there, there are also still many men who don't belong there, men who were turned over to us as payback for some family feud that has gone on for centuries or those who were turned in for a reward. To call someone who was a cook or a driver a terrorist is laughable. These men have been held and tortured for years with no proof of their guilt. This whole thing is a stain on the reputation of the US that wont wash away for a long time. We became the enemy that we were fighting against. We have faced much greater threats than this through the years without resorting to the tactics of the Bush Administration.

You make it sound like the majority of the inmates in Gitmo are innocent people, who just wound up to be in the wrong place, in the wrong hour. The question you should really be asking youselves is "How many terrorist attacks, here in America, have been prevented thanks to intel obtained during these interrogations?

[Walter Sobchak]

Funny, the reason I posted those quotes is because you point out that he said torture worked but failed to mention his reservations about it. As I've noticed torture supporters always do when they invoke the admiral.

No, I wrote that he said they were effective. I didn't "cherry-pick" any quotes, either. Further, anyone who hasn't been off-planet has heard from the prevailing media that Admiral Blair has "reservations", but the fact that he also says they are apparently effective and that EITs were applied under the prevailing law at the time is left out of discussions of Blair's comments.

So, creative omission is rather common, especially as it related to Blair's full statement. Of course, the White House said that his statement was edited as most news releases are, and somehow... just somehow, one of the two salient points of his statement was cut during said "routine" editing. Yeah... riiiiiight!



No, I got the quote from the NYT article you reference below. I did read the whole article. That's where I got the quotes from.

So, how did you miss the reference to potentially one of the two most important points the Admiral made being... errr, 'edited' out? Oh, were you just editing your response for brevity?

[JKD]

So, how did you miss the reference to potentially one of the two most important points the Admiral made being... errr, 'edited' out? Oh, were you just editing your response for brevity?
I didn't miss anything. You referenced that he said torture was effective. I provided some of the rest of what he had to say on the matter. The part that people who support torture always leave out.

[SilentType]

Waterboarding is certainly an unpleasant and uncomfortable experience, but the three people that were waterboarded had no physical marks or any physical injury that resulted from it.

Where in the Constitution does it extend protections to Terrorists? Did our Founding Fathers show intent to include Terrorists captured overseas and held outside the United States as the class of people protected under it? I'm not aware that the U.S. ever agreed to extend the treatment of prisoners of war or civilians during a war to Terrorists. So, I'm still not certain exactly where the legal argument against it comes from. It's more of a moral argument really isn't it?

It could be effective in a "ticking time-bomb" situation where you had not a complete picture, but could use evidence you had to provide you to some degree the ability to determine whether it's good intel.

It's obviously a very troublesome issue that people are sharply divided about. I believe even those who are firmly against it might see things differently if it was up to them to prevent a terrorist attack.

What we need is for a set of regulations that under some established set of circumstances allows for acts that may provide discomfort to terrorists. I believe that would be a sane and rational compromise that would not compromise our national security or moral values.

[Ngati Tumatauenga]

Where in the Constitution does it extend protections to Terrorists? Did our Founding Fathers show intent to include Terrorists captured overseas and held outside the United States as the class of people protected under it? I'm not aware that the U.S. ever agreed to extend the treatment of prisoners of war or civilians during a war to Terrorists. So, I'm still not certain exactly where the legal argument against it comes from. It's more of a moral argument really isn't it?

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showpost.php?p=4148940&postcount=120

[Walter Sobchak]

I didn't miss anything. You referenced that he said torture was effective. I provided some of the rest of what he had to say on the matter. The part that people who support torture always leave out.

First of all, you presume that I support torture. Both highly subjective assumptions of your part. I don't think that you and I and a lot of other fairly reasonable people can agree on what "torture" is.

Second, you omitted to show both points of Admiral Blair's statement in your haste to quote; the part you quoted is in every news account and wholly obvious to anyone following this issue, but the second part of that and, some would say equally important, you omitted. I don't think that you and most people who would sacrifice America's security for the sake of terrorists' "rights" (the corollary to "supporting torture") either don't know about positive EIT results or are unwilling to acknowledge them.

Missing too is any acknowledgment of the LAX terror plot that was apparently foiled by EIT-gained information. Oh, wait... Obama will release classified memos describing EIT, but when it comes to the information gleaned from those techniques, he plays the "Classified" card. That's BS in most people's universe... but this is pure partisan politics and is thus, exempt, right?

[JKD]

First of all, you presume that I support torture. Both highly subjective assumptions of your part. I don't think that you and I and a lot of other fairly reasonable people can agree on what "torture" is.

Second, you omitted to show both points of Admiral Blair's statement in your haste to quote; Because you had already provided the other side.
Let me walk you through it:
you wrote:

Ex-FBI Chief Muller and Obama's own Nattional Security adviser, Admiral Blair, have said that these techniques are effective.
which is what they said. I never denied they said it or "omitted" it since you had already posted it. I simply added a couple of things he "also" said.

To balance out what he said, I then replied(I just added the bold):

Admiral Blair also said:

"The information gained from these techniques was valuable in some instances, but there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means"

and

"The bottom line is these techniques have hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security."
Which is obviously true since it's a direct quote.



the part you quoted is in every news account and wholly obvious to anyone following this issue, but the second part of that and, some would say equally important, you omitted. I don't think that you and most people who would sacrifice America's security for the sake of terrorists' "rights" (the corollary to "supporting torture") either don't know about positive EIT results or are unwilling to acknowledge them.
I don't for a second doubt you can get people to talk under torture.


Missing too is any acknowledgment of the LAX terror plot that was apparently foiled by EIT-gained information.
As admiral Blair said:
"there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means"


Oh, wait... Obama will release classified memos describing EIT, but when it comes to the information gleaned from those techniques, he plays the "Classified" card. That's BS in most people's universe... but this is pure partisan politics and is thus, exempt, right?
I think most people know you can get people to talk under torture. They could have gotten them to admit they were Daffy Duck.

[Walter Sobchak]

As admiral Blair said:
"there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means"


I think most people know you can get people to talk under torture. They could have gotten them to admit they were Daffy Duck.

So, if there are memos - or intelligence reports - that say the three terrorists admitted to being Daffy Duck or gave good, actionable intelligence, let's see those. After all, the details of EIT have been leaked, so they are of debatable value going forward, so why not declassify the results of those interrogations? One can only guess that there is a lot to hide which would make Obama's position more untenable, especially if/when the US is hit again.

Also, any number of the other hundreds of persons interrogated, it's clear that "other means" were used. Are the results comparable? I doubt it, otherwise both the EIT results and non-EIT results would have been on Page 1 of the NY Times long ago. If they had any evidence that EIT was not effective, we would have seen it. Because they declassify what supports their claim without declassifying the full scope of the evidence makes it look like they are hiding something. It's not there, otherwise we would have seen it along with the EIT memos, which makes this a political gambit with America's safety in the balance.

Dealing with political chicanery and intrigue is a lot like playing poker. Sometimes, you can tell a lot more from what you can't see than what is apparent.

This argument is really moot, because in the future, we will have to live with those "other means" of interrogation, and hope that they get results. But, Like President Bush used to say, we have to be correct 100% of the time. The terrorists only have to get it right once. I guess that if/when we are hit again, al qaeda will at least respect us more for not waterboarding their compatriots. Damn, and that will be a great day for America, won't it!

[HellToupee]

You make it sound like the majority of the inmates in Gitmo are innocent people, who just wound up to be in the wrong place, in the wrong hour. The question you should really be asking youselves is "How many terrorist attacks, here in America, have been prevented thanks to intel obtained during these interrogations?


Why should we be asking questions that have no answers?

That sort of thinking can be applied to citizens, how many more murderers can be caught if we are allowed to torture confessions out of suspects....

[eskachig]

Waterboarding is certainly an unpleasant and uncomfortable experience, but the three people that were waterboarded had no physical marks or any physical injury that resulted from it. Electric shocks don't have to leave physical marks or injuries.

Torture is repugnant not only because of its physical scars, but for the mental damage that it can cause to a personality. It breaks people, sometimes for life.

[BMUS]

I'm pretty sure this already has been mentioned but I just don't have the time to go through all the pages right now, although this is a very intresting and delicate topic.

Anyways; considering the issue over waterboardings status as torture, we all know that this was a japanese method used on american soldiers during WWII, right?

Ya'll know what happend to those scumbags afterwards, right?

[klassylady25]

Let's face it the Japenese were sadistic and not as controlled in their methodology.

[philbob]

the trouble with this subject is the arguments are all over the place.

-is waterboarding torture?
yes

-do we even care?
yes

-who knew?
alot of people on both sides of the aisle and many of them would use this to attack someone they didnt like

-does waterboarding work?
yes

-is the intel gained worth the price?
yes

-was any accurate intel gained at all?
yes, based off the fact the messiah redacted the memo's, and not only that reserves the right to continue the policy

-could we have gotten it all by alternate methods and not destroyed our reputation with the rest of the world?
probably

-what did nancy pelosi know?
enough to be complicit

-why is her denying knowledge somehow worse than the administration ordering it and then parsing legalities to somehow avoid the word torture?
becuase she and her pathetic ilk used it as an issue to advance their cause when they could of put a stop to it much ealier then an election year

-does the cia always tell the truth?
no

-why doesn't **** cheney and his harpy daughter shut the f*ck up?
becuase the democrats can't move on

unfortunately, we are all relying on opinion and conjecture.
very true


123456678900

[philbob]

With all this talk on both side about the founding fathers, people please keep this in mind the constitution is NOT a suicide pact. Thomas Jefferson offered the earliest incarnations of this phrase....

[commanding]

Electric shocks don't have to leave physical marks or injuries.

Torture is repugnant not only because of its physical scars, but for the mental damage that it can cause to a personality. It breaks people, sometimes for life.

So your stance is that electric shocks are torture???

[commanding]

I have a question for the anti-waterboarding folks. Say for talking sake that radical Islamic terrorists, similar to Mohammad Atta, and 30 others of his ilk, have planted 20 "real" nuclear bombs (not dirty bombs, but grade A nuclear bombs) in various cities around the USA, and they are set to go off all at once, within 36 hours. We have luckily captured two of the ring leaders of this plot. The POTUS declares martial law, and we know the two guys we have do know the locations of the 20 bombs. Should we just sit back and let them "spill the beans" at their own discretion? Or, should we resort to enhanced interrogation techniques. 36 hours will not be enough time for sleep deprivation to work, etc. What say ye?

[Jobu]

You're trying to tell me a guy named Mancow is a conservative radio host?

lol, okay.

[KVLG]

I'm pretty sure this already has been mentioned but I just don't have the time to go through all the pages right now, although this is a very intresting and delicate topic.

Anyways; considering the issue over waterboardings status as torture, we all know that this was a japanese method used on american soldiers during WWII, right?

Ya'll know what happend to those scumbags afterwards, right?

IMO, Ann Coulter has said some interesting things about the matter. Jokes aside.

"Contrary to MSNBC hosts who are afraid of bugs, water and their own shadows, waterboarding was most definitely not a "war crime" for which the Japanese were prosecuted after World War II -- no matter how many times Mrs. Jonathan Turley, professor of cooking at George Washington University, says so.

All MSNBC hosts and guests were apparently reading "Little Women" rather than military books as children and therefore can be easily fooled about Japanese war crimes. (MSNBC: The Official Drama Queen Network of the 2012 Olympics.)

Given what the Japanese did to prisoners, waterboarding would be a reward for good behavior.

It might be: waterboarding PLUS amputating the prisoner's healthy arm, or waterboarding PLUS killing the prisoner. But waterboarding on the order of what we did at Guantanamo would be a reward in a Japanese POW camp.

To claim that the Japanese -- architects of the Bataan Death March -- were prosecuted for "waterboarding" would be like saying Ted Bundy was executed for engaging in ****** harassment.

What the Japanese did to their POWs made even the Nazis blanch. The Japanese routinely beheaded and bayoneted prisoners; forced prisoners to dig their own graves and then buried them alive; amputated prisoners' healthy arms and legs, one by one, for sport; force-fed prisoners dry rice and then filled their stomachs with water until their bowels exploded; and injected them with chemical weapons in order to observe, time and record their death throes before dumping them in mass graves.

While only 4 percent of British and American troops captured by German or Italian forces died in captivity, 27 percent of British and American POWs captured by the Japanese died in captivity. Japanese war crimes were so atrocious that even rape was treated as only a secondary war crime in the Tokyo trial, similar to what happens during an R. Kelly trial.

The Japanese "water cure" was to "waterboarding" as practiced at Guantanamo what rape at knifepoint is to calling your secretary "honey."

The Japanese version of "waterboarding" was to fill the prisoner's stomach with water until his stomach was distended -- and then pound on his stomach, causing the prisoner to vomit.

Or they would jam a stick into the prisoner's nose so he could breathe only through his mouth and then pour water in his mouth so he would choke to death.

Or they would "waterboard" the prisoner with saltwater, which would kill him."

Did the Bush Administration do any of that?

[Ngati Tumatauenga]

So your stance is that electric shocks are torture???

You'd be comfortable for electric shocks to be administered to your children and grandchildren?

You were fine with electric shocks being applied to you at school, as you allege?

You enjoyed it and asked for more?

[ggk]

I have a question for the anti-waterboarding folks. Say for talking sake that radical Islamic terrorists, similar to Mohammad Atta, and 30 others of his ilk, have planted 20 "real" nuclear bombs (not dirty bombs, but grade A nuclear bombs) in various cities around the USA, and they are set to go off all at once, within 36 hours. We have luckily captured two of the ring leaders of this plot. The POTUS declares martial law, and we know the two guys we have do know the locations of the 20 bombs. Should we just sit back and let them "spill the beans" at their own discretion? Or, should we resort to enhanced interrogation techniques. 36 hours will not be enough time for sleep deprivation to work, etc. What say ye?

no...... torture doesnt work. ...they will tell you what you want to hear, they will lie...they will do everything to ease the pain. thats why torture doesnt work.









and maybe you watch to many '24'

[Jobu]

they will tell you what you want to hear, they will lie...they will do everything to ease the pain. thats why torture doesnt work.


That's why you check if it's corroborated, duh. You don't just take their word for it.

What kind of moron interrogators do you think we have?

[eskachig]

So your stance is that electric shocks are torture???Uh, yeah? In what bizarre world is "shocking people until they tell you what you want to know" not considered torture?

And guys, 'ticking time bomb' scenarios are so tired.


Sleep deprivation, that is what any soldier goes throught basic at the very least.It's all in the degree of sleep deprivation. A certain amount of it can be used to keep someone disoriented, but basically healthy. It can also reliably drive someone insane, and even kill them. At the moment I believe that 11 days without sleep is the limit allowed, and that's pretty close to the limit that a healthy human being can take, and permanent damage may easily result from time much less than that. For instance, type 2 diabetes is a potential side effect.

[Kilgor]

So your stance is that electric shocks are torture???

Have you ever been electrocuted?

I have and its not fun

[Hot Lips]

Have you ever been electrocuted?

I have and its not fun

I don't believe you. Here hold these wires for a minute...

There are a great many things that are not fun, but not being fun is the point of trying to force information out of someone.

[Ngati Tumatauenga]

That's why you check if it's corroborated, duh. You don't just take their word for it.

What kind of moron interrogators do you think we have?

How do you check that it's corroborated? By torturing soemone else until their story matches?


but not being fun is the point of trying to force information out of someone.

Yeah?

I thought the point was to extract accurate and timely information.

[Jobu]

How do you check that it's corroborated? By torturing soemone else until their story matches?

Well you can compare it to other information you have already gathered or send someone to collect further information to see if what was said in the interrogation holds water, and so on and so forth.

Just as is done with all other intel. You don't assume it's true and you don't assume it's false. You check it out.

[Hot Lips]

Yeah?

I thought the point was to extract accurate and timely information.

Gee whiz, ya think?

Certainly the most effective, proven means of acquiring information should be pursued first. And I doubt that process is the same for every individual. But when other means have failed, depending on what is at stake, I'm not going to say I'm adverse to supporting the use of less warm and fuzzy methods.

[little icebear]

I don´t know about the rest around here, but I´m convinced. Wonder why we stopped torturing people in the first place.
Must have been some naive idiot of a flower-picking, treehugging liberal who came up with this nonsense.

[Ngati Tumatauenga]

Well you can compare it to other information you have already gathered or send someone to collect further information to see if what was said in the interrogation holds water, and so on and so forth.

Well, one of the main excuses being used here is that the information required is time sensitive, therefore you cant afford to spend the time to collect further information for analysis, so instead you torture.

Also, you may not have any other information to begin with or information so vague as to be worthless.


Gee whiz, ya think?

No idea, which is why I attempted to clarify your vague statement.


Certainly the most effective, proven means of acquiring information should be pursued first. And I doubt that process is the same for every individual. But when other means have failed, depending on what is at stake, I'm not going to say I'm adverse to supporting the use of less warm and fuzzy methods.

So, once again, to clarify, you support the employment of torture?

[BudW]

What else could they do to get answers say please? the USA was under attack.

[Jobu]

Well, one of the main excuses being used here is that the information required is time sensitive, therefore you cant afford to spend the time to collect further information for analysis, so instead you torture.

Also, you may not have any other information to begin with or information so vague as to be worthless.


Take it case by case. I'm not about to lose sleep over it.

[ggk]

you torture, you corroborate...yeah you dont care if its not fun....you might get the information ...most of the time you dont get any....torture are not some new science people... its old and its not effective.

the only thing that torture are good for are to create fear or create hate..... and guess what....its not fun too when the enemy do it to you....when the enemy do it they dont discuss about information, timing or method...they do it for fun...they electrocuted you for fun. Because they are EVIL.

if you fell in love for the same method then you are EVIL.

[Hot Lips]

So, once again, to clarify, you support the employment of torture?

It's not pleasant, but I view it as a potential necessary evil.

I think any method would be situational, needs to account for the individual, what is at stake, etc and I'm not going to feign being adverse to the pursuit of such measures where appropriate checks and balances indicate it may provide an opportunity to save lives.

I'd also support consequences for taking action that could not be reasonably justified.

Do I think saving the lives of holocaust, Oklahoma City bombing, or Sept 11 victims, to name a few, might be worth such tactics if we had very good reason to believe someone had critical information? Yes.

How you go about defining checks and balances, situational appropriateness, etc... that's where it gets sketchy and I would look to experts in their field to indicate what and when something might yield results and the potential for success.

[Ngati Tumatauenga]

It's not pleasant, but I view it as a potential necessary evil.

I'll take that as a 'yes' then.


How you go about defining checks and balances, situational appropriateness, etc... that's where it gets sketchy and I would look to experts in their field to indicate what and when something might yield results and the potential for success.

So, you believe the United States should withdraw from being a party and signatory to the Geneva Convention's, particularly relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, specifically article 5, as to remain so whilst committing acts of torture would make them hypocrites and criminals in the eye's of international law?

Article 5
Where, in the territory of a Party to the conflict, the latter is satisfied that an individual protected person is definitely suspected of or engaged in activities hostile to the security of the State, such individual person shall not be entitled to claim such rights and privileges under the present Convention as would, if exercised in the favour of such individual person, be prejudicial to the security of such State.

Where in occupied territory an individual protected person is detained as a spy or saboteur, or as a person under definite suspicion of activity hostile to the security of the Occupying Power, such person shall, in those cases where absolute military security so requires, be regarded as having forfeited rights of communication under the present Convention.

In each case, such persons shall nevertheless be treated with humanity, and in case of trial, shall not be deprived of the rights of fair and regular trial prescribed by the present Convention. They shall also be granted the full rights and privileges of a protected person under the present Convention at the earliest date consistent with the security of the State or Occupying Power, as the case may be.



http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/92.htm

[Hot Lips]

If that's what it ultimately takes to protect our nation and save lives. Sure.

If an individual is willing to withhold information to actively participate in depriving others of life and remain non-responsive to more desirable methods, screw'em if pain, discomfort, or fear isn't to their liking.

I could probably be swayed if there is something I'm not taking into account. I couldn't fathom it being one of the first things interrogators would resort to as a standard, which could be every bit as disturbing as realizing you had even a remote chance of saving hundreds or even millions of lives and did nothing.

[Ngati Tumatauenga]

If that's what it ultimately takes to protect our nation and save lives. Sure.

But will it protect your nation?

Or will it destroy it by trashing everything you apparently stand for?


If an individual is willing to withhold information to actively participate in depriving others of life, screw'em if pain, discomfort, or fear isn't to their liking.

This of course will extend to include rapists, serial killers, paedophiles, members of drug gangs and other criminal organisations, and of course anyone who whilst not directly committing a crime, "withholds information".

Seeing as all of those mentioned actively participate in depriving others of life, yes?

So, once again to clarify, what you're advocating is a complete revamp of the concept of human rights as America sees it?

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

Always thought Hot Lips was a kinky dominatrix.

[toki]

Ok...so tell me. What do you consider to be acceptable interrogation practices?

The ones that don't make the person talk for the sole reason to get out of the procedure. It's in most cases worthless. No physical scars needed. If you keep someone awake for 3 days he will have no scars either, but what is it worth when he tells you heaven is green, just to get sleep.


What else could they do to get answers say please? the USA was under attack.
Huh? So they waterboarded 10pm on sept. 11?

[Hot Lips]

But will it protect your nation?

Or will it destroy it by trashing everything you apparently stand for?

I suppose that depends on what is at stake and the checks and balances in place.


This of course will extend to include rapists, serial killers, paedophiles, members of drug gangs and other criminal organisations, and of course anyone who whilst not directly committing a crime, "withholds information".

I don't think so. It's a rather extreme measure for exceptional circumstances (e.g., not a general standard).


Seeing as all of those mentioned actively participate in depriving others of life, yes?

Not necessarily since I'm talking about pro actively saving lives from a crime in motion, not quality of life and more often than not many lives versus a one-to-one scenario as in the case of war or fighting terrorism.


So, once again to clarify, what you're advocating is a complete revamp of the concept of human rights as America sees it?

I don't personally see it as being revamped, just more honest. Would most of us support a police officer accused of beating a pedophile that knows the whereabouts of an endangered child who is withholding that information in order to escape the consequences of his/her actions and/or bring about the death of that child? You bet.

I don't have all the answers, but I'm not going to feign being adamantly opposed to the concept.

[RxOnco]

the ones that don't make the person talk for the sole reason to get out of the procedure. It's in most cases worthless. No physical scars needed. If you keep someone awake for 3 days he will have no scars either, but what is it worth when he tells you heaven is green, just to get sleep.

well...we don't exactly know how valuable it really was seeing as how b.o. Won't allow the release of the documents. Those involved, including the beloved **** cheney, said it was responsible for saving lives. You guys keep saying that the information given during these interrogations is worthless. How do you know?

huh? So they waterboarded 10pm on sept. 11?

thanks president clinton. We don't have to actually have planes crashing to understand that another attack might happen at any moment. Not being from the states, you might not understand the fact that we didn't know when or where the next one would come. I might also point out that we've not been attacked since 9-11-2001. Coincidence?

12345678910

[toki]

thanks president clinton. We don't have to actually have planes crashing to understand that another attack might happen at any moment. Not being from the states, you might not understand the fact that we didn't know when or where the next one would come. I might also point out that we've not been attacked since 9-11-2001. Coincidence?

Not being from the states i was kettled through airport immigration numerous times and even interrogated (in 2007 while being talked to like a common criminal). As annoying but also understandable as it is, you won't filter the ones that in the end could do harm. Same goes for any other measure. You would need to close your borders for any foreigner to have a proper argument.

Anybody who sells their agenda by "no attack since 9/11" because we waterboard "terrorist scum" is simply lying to himself. Don't push an agenda with such a vague statement. "Normal" police work, gathering of intelligence and surveillance thwarted quite a few attacks here. Or at least lead to arrests, trials etc. don't think the holy grail/recipe of fighting terrorism is carried by the US. You simply connect two dots and call it the ultimate truth.

PS: quoting inside tags is a bit annoying when you want to reply.

[RxOnco]

Not being from the states i was kettled through airport immigration numerous times and even interrogated (in 2007 while being talked to like a common criminal). As annoying but also understandable as it is, you won't filter the ones that in the end could do harm. Same goes for any other measure.

Anybody who sells their agenda by "no attack since 9/11" because we waterboard "terrorist scum" is simply lying to himself. Don't push an agenda with such a vague statement. "Normal" police work, gathering of intelligence and surveillance thwarted quite a few attacks here. Or at least lead to arrests, trials etc. don't think the holy grail/recipe of fighting terrorism is carried by the US.
You simply connect to dots and call it the ultimat truth.

PS: quoting inside tags is a bit annoying when you want to reply.

Airport security sucks for all of us, trust me. Welcome to the world post 9-11.

I'm not lying to anyone. I also didn't attribute anything specifically to "no attacks." I just happen to take notice that we've not been attacked since the evil Bush Doctrine took hold. You know, Patriot Act...torture...War...stuff like that.
"Normal" police work does, in fact, work. But so does this other stuff. The thing with "normal" police work is...it usually takes place after the crime.

[toki]

Still airport security won't get the real dangerous people. Since they're too normal to be detected. Security is alot about mathematical probability, but also illusion and political promises.


The thing with "normal" police work is...it usually takes place after the crime.

No, i'm talking about the 4 month surveillance that led to the arrest of 3 islamist bomb makers here. That's also police work. We also didn't have any terrorist atatcks since the early nineties, and never any successful larger islamist attack IIRC. But many thwarted attempts. Could i pin point it and make a universal statement out of it? No. All i know is that some of the ways you promote are illegal here for a reason.

[RxOnco]

Still airport security won't get the real dangerous people. Since they're too normal to be detected. Security is alot about mathematical probability, but also illusion and political promises...

Today's increased security would have likely stopped the 9-11 attacks as the box cutters used would have likely been picked up.

[redvand]

Mancow was just asked the question:
Should Islamic extremists still be waterboarded to get information to protect this country?
He said "Absolutely, Do it."

[redvand]

The new waterboarding

In April, the district attorney in Vilas County, Wis., announced that he was seeking volunteers for a forensic test to help his case against Douglas Plude, 42, who is scheduled to stand trial soon for the second time in the death of his wife. The volunteers must be female, about 5-feet-8 and 140 pounds, and will have to stick their heads into a toilet bowl and flush. Plude is charged with drowning his wife in a commode, but his version (which the prosecutor will try to show is improbable) is that his wife committed suicide by flushing herself.

[Dominique]

The thing with "normal" police work is...it usually takes place after the crime.

It does? And what do you base this on? Actual experience in law enforcement and security, or are you just guessing?

[11 Bravo]

Several of the Mods are trained and experienced in that area. That's just the military ones, not the cops or the English teacher...:)

So your the english teacher eh.

[Ngati Tumatauenga]

I suppose that depends on what is at stake and the checks and balances in place.

Well, what's at stake is the moral superiority of the USA. Something that judging by countless examples past and present, you all hold dear.


I don't think so. It's a rather extreme measure for exceptional circumstances (e.g., not a general standard).

General or otherwise, it will be a standard.


Not necessarily since I'm talking about pro actively saving lives from a crime in motion, not quality of life and more often than not many lives versus a one-to-one scenario as in the case of war or fighting terrorism.

What's the difference?

For instance, annihilating a drug cartel in Columbia/Burma/Peru and it's shipment routes all the way to the USA will save countless lives and billions of dollars.

Isn't there a much vaunted "War on drugs"?

Or is it the fact that the 'shop front' suppliers are mostly American citizens?


I don't personally see it as being revamped, just more honest. Would most of us support a police officer accused of beating a pedophile that knows the whereabouts of an endangered child who is withholding that information in order to escape the consequences of his/her actions and/or bring about the death of that child? You bet.

What about beating the family of the pedophile to discover his whereabouts?

Is that acceptable?

If not why not?


I don't have all the answers, but I'm not going to feign being adamantly opposed to the concept.

I don't expect you too. But if you're going to advocate it I want to understand your reasons why.

[Jobu]

Just trying to figure how your country is going to live with itself if it makes such a massive change to it's dearly held set's of values.

Our values are not a suicide pact. They're more a set of guidelines. When it makes sense to discard them temporarily in order to deal with a serious problem, most of us have no problem justifying it. We've done it before, we'll probably do it again. Nobody over here is losing any sleep over KSM getting some water poured on his face. Thanks for your concern.

How could we live with ourselves fter fire bombing Dresden and nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki? We not only lived with it, most of us could recognize that at the time it was necessary. The greater evil was not the bombing of cities, it was the continuation of the war. Likewise, the greater evil was not enhanced interrogations, it was failing to stop the next attack.

[Jobu]

I'm just trying to figure out how the moral ambiguity of the members advocating torture here, ironically mainly American, rest's against the virtues and values as touted by America and Americans.

Don't mistake Obama's rhetoric with reality.

I believe the polls show that most people don't give a crap about what interrogation techniques were used.

[kkbou]

After World War II, we convicted several Japanese soldiers for waterboarding American and Allied prisoners of war. At the trial of his captors, then-Lt. Chase J. Nielsen (http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123046197), one of the 1942 Army Air Forces officers who flew in the Doolittle Raid and was captured by the Japanese, testified: "I was given several types of torture. . . . I was given what they call the water cure." He was asked what he felt when the Japanese soldiers poured the water. "Well, I felt more or less like I was drowning," he replied, "just gasping between life and death."
Nielsen's experience was not unique. Nor was the prosecution of his captors. After Japan surrendered, the United States organized and participated in the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, generally called the Tokyo War Crimes Trials. Leading members of Japan's military and government elite were charged, among their many other crimes, with torturing Allied military personnel and civilians. The principal proof upon which their torture convictions were based was conduct that we would now call waterboarding.

--from the WASHINGTON POST

[RxOnco]

Our values are not a suicide pact. They're more a set of guidelines. When it makes sense to discard them temporarily in order to deal with a serious problem, most of us have no problem justifying it. We've done it before, we'll probably do it again. Nobody over here is losing any sleep over KSM getting some water poured on his face. Thanks for your concern.

How could we live with ourselves fter fire bombing Dresden and nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki? We not only lived with it, most of us could recognize that at the time it was necessary. The greater evil was not the bombing of cities, it was the continuation of the war. Likewise, the greater evil was not enhanced interrogations, it was failing to stop the next attack.

I think this post got lost in the midst of bickering. I thought it was spot on Jobu.

[ilmakas]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/20/playboy-journo-bets-he-ca_n_189280.html

is this posted in here? anyway, another guy who tries out waterboarding...

[hsh2]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/20/playboy-journo-bets-he-ca_n_189280.html

is this posted in here? anyway, another guy who tries out waterboarding...

hehe i like how he says that nothing can be so bad that you can't endure 15 seconds of it. he should have an ingrown toenail and a badly infected toe (deep red in color) as a consequence, and then get the anesthesia prior to the operation.
the surgeon takes a normal needled syringe and injects the anesthesics in an already pressurized and painful toe, but makes sure the needle comes as close as possible to the bone (otherwise it wouldn't be throrough enough) and does that whole procedure 2-3 times for the entire toe to be numb. it takes around 10 seconds max but when he's finished you have sweat running down your face, it's absolutely terrible.
i had six operations of that kind over a few yrs time (the last one in sep 2005), honestly wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy....

anyway, another waterboarding video:
http://current.com/items/86417301_kaj-larsen-goes-waterboarding.htm

[toki]

Our values are not a suicide pact. They're more a set of guidelines. When it makes sense to discard them temporarily in order to deal with a serious problem, most of us have no problem justifying it. We've done it before, we'll probably do it again. Nobody over here is losing any sleep over KSM getting some water poured on his face. Thanks for your concern.

How could we live with ourselves fter fire bombing Dresden and nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki? We not only lived with it, most of us could recognize that at the time it was necessary. The greater evil was not the bombing of cities, it was the continuation of the war. Likewise, the greater evil was not enhanced interrogations, it was failing to stop the next attack.

You make it seem as it is a topic of foreign policy, non US citizens on non US land.
Would you give the green light for this stuff in the US with American citizens? If not, it's pointless anyway. A very real danger, as seen lately are citizens.

[commanding]

You'd be comfortable for electric shocks to be administered to your children and grandchildren?

You were fine with electric shocks being applied to you at school, as you allege?

You enjoyed it and asked for more?

yes, yes and yes.
sorry to be so late in replying...busy you know. I was shocked by an electric cattle prod, by my 6th grade teacher, in class, in front of the entire class. a number of the students asked to be shocked, and the teacher did in fact shock us with it. it was a full fledged cattle prod, as he was a rancher and drove a cattle truck to his teaching job. a nother of his cute punishments was to have a student (not me) shovel the cow sh1t out of the back of the truck. LOL.
I think a lot of you guys, who do not live in the states, and specifically do not live in texas, are way to misled, about how we think, and what we strive for. I for one, do not hold any conceptions that I long to be "morally superior" to anyone else in the world. Jeez!

[commanding]

by the way, as it relates to the torture-not torture, morally superior discussion....I watched the national geographic television special, on several nights ago, about 3 or so hours, of the lead up to Sept. 11, 2001 and the attacks on the United States by AQ. I think, I wish, that every person in america, should try to relive, watch, the films of the 9-11 attacks, at least once a month. We become so complacent..we forget the horror. The horror of the twin towers as they collapsed with those firemen, and others inside, which ripped their bodies apart into millions of pieces. the horror of the office workers, leaping to their death from the upper floors of the towers. the horror of the terrorists, slitting the throats of the pilot and copilot and stabbing a passenger on each of the hi-jacked airplanes. The heroism of the passengers of flight 93, who by their heroism, caused the death of the hijackers on that flight and saved the lives and the institutional symboll of the U.S. capitol building.
I know the terrorists will again try to topple the capitol building in D.C....they always come back like rats. I hope we do not loose sight of the threat...I hope we keep our guard up. and if need be I hope we submit any captured AQ members to whatever is necessary to make them tell everything they know. I have no qualms about it. whatever it takes...let's get er done. U.S.A.!!!

[RxOnco]

You make it seem as it is a topic of foreign policy, non US citizens on non US land.
Would you give the green light for this stuff in the US with American citizens? If not, it's pointless anyway. A very real danger, as seen lately are citizens.

As long as it's legal, I'd say do whatever gets the job done. Terrorists are terrorists, whether foreign or domestic. However, you can't compare the two.
Once again, we get this slippery slope bullsh1t. This isn't 24. We're not out waterboarding band robbers and car thieves. We did it on THREE people. Three very high value individuals which, in all likelihood, possessed intel on future or current terror operations.

[a_very_ex_STAB]

by the way, as it relates to the torture-not torture, morally superior discussion....I watched the national geographic television special, on several nights ago, about 3 or so hours, of the lead up to Sept. 11, 2001 and the attacks on the United States by AQ. I think, I wish, that every person in america, should try to relive, watch, the films of the 9-11 attacks, at least once a month. We become so complacent..we forget the horror. The horror of the twin towers as they collapsed with those firemen, and others inside, which ripped their bodies apart into millions of pieces. the horror of the office workers, leaping to their death from the upper floors of the towers. the horror of the terrorists, slitting the throats of the pilot and copilot and stabbing a passenger on each of the hi-jacked airplanes. The heroism of the passengers of flight 93, who by their heroism, caused the death of the hijackers on that flight and saved the lives and the institutional symboll of the U.S. capitol building.
I know the terrorists will again try to topple the capitol building in D.C....they always come back like rats. I hope we do not loose sight of the threat...I hope we keep our guard up. and if need be I hope we submit any captured AQ members to whatever is necessary to make them tell everything they know. I have no qualms about it. whatever it takes...let's get er done. U.S.A.!!!

How would torture have prevented all that? All your feds needed to do was to arrest the guys in your flight schools who one of your agents had been raising suspicions about.
Simples.

As for waterboarding we executed Japs for it in 1945. If you carry on with it you're also potentially putting your own people at risk of prosecution for war crimes in the future. It's not worth all the baggage that comes with it IMO.

And spare me the 'ticking bomb' scenario and Ann Coulter quotes plz :roll:

[RxOnco]

by the way, as it relates to the torture-not torture, morally superior discussion....I watched the national geographic television special, on several nights ago, about 3 or so hours, of the lead up to Sept. 11, 2001 and the attacks on the United States by AQ. I think, I wish, that every person in america, should try to relive, watch, the films of the 9-11 attacks, at least once a month. We become so complacent..we forget the horror. The horror of the twin towers as they collapsed with those firemen, and others inside, which ripped their bodies apart into millions of pieces. the horror of the office workers, leaping to their death from the upper floors of the towers. the horror of the terrorists, slitting the throats of the pilot and copilot and stabbing a passenger on each of the hi-jacked airplanes. The heroism of the passengers of flight 93, who by their heroism, caused the death of the hijackers on that flight and saved the lives and the institutional symboll of the U.S. capitol building.
I know the terrorists will again try to topple the capitol building in D.C....they always come back like rats. I hope we do not loose sight of the threat...I hope we keep our guard up. and if need be I hope we submit any captured AQ members to whatever is necessary to make them tell everything they know. I have no qualms about it. whatever it takes...let's get er done. U.S.A.!!!

I also watched that. It reminded me of the anger I felt in the days after 9-11. I think people forget sometimes.

[commanding]

As long as it's legal, I'd say do whatever gets the job done. Terrorists are terrorists, whether foreign or domestic. However, you can't compare the two.
Once again, we get this slippery slope bullsh1t. This isn't 24. We're not out waterboarding band robbers and car thieves. We did it on THREE people. Three very high value individuals which, in all likelihood, possessed intel on future or current terror operations.

x2 very well said. I am not saying to pull the toenails out of every battlefield captive...but as the saying goes, when it comes to the big guys with the info...."everything is on the table". And the three guys did have intel that was valuable and saved lives.

these (terrorist) guys fully intend to kill every last person who does not meet their view of a rightous religious person.

[eskachig]

Well I see it as going too far. Enough professionals have spoken out against these tactics to make me doubt that they were absolutely essential, and the very concept hurts the outcome of the mission in a very practical sense. At the very least nobody in power has had the sheer balls yet to suggest that electrical shocks are an acceptable method of obtaining information.

[RxOnco]

...and the very concept hurts the outcome of the mission in a very practical sense...

How does it hurt the mission?

[toki]

As long as it's legal, I'd say do whatever gets the job done. Terrorists are terrorists, whether foreign or domestic. However, you can't compare the two.
As long as it is legal? That won't help alot anyway. The next logic step is the "white middle class native American" AQ terrorist. It already happened here. and those terrorist have to be fought like high calibre criminals, if you're not about to breach the constitution of your country.

[a_very_ex_STAB]

How does it hurt the mission?

Because it gives propaganda ammunition to your enemies which ultimately and inevitably results in more people coming home in a box.

Talk about stating the bleedin' obvious :roll:

It never ceases to amaze me that so many people on here seem to be so enthusiastic about compromizing the mission.

Surely 'maintenance of the aim' is one of the first principles of war.

[commanding]

How would torture have prevented all that? All your feds needed to do was to arrest the guys in your flight schools who one of your agents had been raising suspicions about.
Simples.

As for waterboarding we executed Japs for it in 1945. If you carry on with it you're also potentially putting your own people at risk of prosecution for war crimes in the future. It's not worth all the baggage that comes with it IMO.

And spare me the 'ticking bomb' scenario and Ann Coulter quotes plz :roll:

I do not know that torture would have prevented 9-11...but it is possible. As to what WOULD have prevented 9-11, if they terrorists had not been terrorists, that would have done the trick.
As for your country executing Japanese after WWII for waterboarding....wars are fought with gloves off. AFter the war is over, the winner declares the high ground and executes whom ever he pleases. It has been that way since the beginning of time. In war, all sides commit acts that are terrible and had the other sides won, some of our big guys would have been executed I am quite sure. So that dog don't hunt.

I don't watch or listen to Ann Coulter, .....

[commanding]

Because it gives propaganda ammunition to your enemies which ultimately and inevitably results in more people coming home in a box.

Talk about stating the bleedin' obvious :roll:

It never ceases to amaze me that so many people on here seem to be so enthusiastic about compromizing the mission.

Surely 'maintenance of the aim' is one of the first principles of war.

Everything we do to harm the enemy, gives him propaganda ammunition (your words) which utlimately results in more troops coming home in a box.
You can not let the enemy, shape your actions, by his threats of propaganda. Refusing to let the enemy shape your actions, is not comprimising the mission. The mission is to win the war.

[a_very_ex_STAB]

Everything we do to harm the enemy, gives him propaganda ammunition (your words) which utlimately results in more troops coming home in a box.
You can not let the enemy, shape your actions, by his threats of propaganda. Refusing to let the enemy shape your actions, is not comprimising the mission. The mission is to win the war.

So are you saying that it's a good thing that people who might not otherwise take up arms against coalition forces decide to take up arms because they believe coalition forces use torture?

[a_very_ex_STAB]

Well I see it as going too far. Enough professionals have spoken out against these tactics to make me doubt that they were absolutely essential, and the very concept hurts the outcome of the mission in a very practical sense. At the very least nobody in power has had the sheer balls yet to suggest that electrical shocks are an acceptable method of obtaining information.

Quoted for truth

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

I'll gladly volunteer to put myself in the chair to test out torture provided Hot Lips is the one giving it.

It's for the troops!

[Jobu]

That's such a cop out.

Newsflash, the Islamists don't hate us because of the methods we use to fight them. Saying that they hate us because KSM was waterboarded is just about the stupidest argument I've yet heard.

What was their excuse for 9/11, we looked at them funny?
What was their excuse for the Cole, Khobar, 1993, or the embassies in Africa?

People need to wake the **** up and realize that these people have been at war with us for decades. We were too stupid to do anything about it until after 9/11.

[a_very_ex_STAB]

That's such a cop out.

Newsflash, the Islamists don't hate us because of the methods we use to fight them. Saying that they hate us because KSM was waterboarded is just about the stupidest argument I've yet heard.

What was their excuse for 9/11, we looked at them funny?
What was their excuse for the Cole, Khobar, 1993, or the embassies in Africa?

People need to wake the **** up and realize that these people have been at war with us for decades. We were too stupid to do anything about it until after 9/11.

Well I guess you're happy to take full responsibility for oiling the wheels of the jihadist propaganda machine then.

Way to go!
:roll:

PS do AQ give you a recruitment bonus?

If you haven't realized yet that this campaign against terror isn't only going to be won with bombs and bullets then I hope there are at least some people who are more intelligent than you actually in the chain of command.

[RxOnco]

Because it gives propaganda ammunition to your enemies which ultimately and inevitably results in more people coming home in a box.

Talk about stating the bleedin' obvious :roll:

It never ceases to amaze me that so many people on here seem to be so enthusiastic about compromizing the mission...

More ammunition?

6-25-1996 - 19 U.S. military personell killed at Khubar Towers in Saudi Arabia. Pre Waterboarding
http://tbn3.google.com/images?q=tbn:RqAnHx1go9feCM:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3c/AnschalgInZahran1996_KhobarTower.jpg (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3c/AnschalgInZahran1996_KhobarTower.jpg&imgrefurl=http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:AnschalgInZahran1996_KhobarTower.jpg&usg=__J5M5Jnu6wdtX6CaAaLtParXbKZ8=&h=1305&w=1967&sz=1322&hl=en&start=5&um=1&tbnid=RqAnHx1go9feCM:&tbnh=100&tbnw=150&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dkhubar%2Btowers%26hl%3Den%26um%3D1)

8-7-1998 - Close to 300 killed in U.S. Embassy bombings in Africa. Pre Waterboarding.


http://tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:YSLxmho6VdPeUM:http://www.globalsecurity.org/security/profiles/images/east_africa_tanzania1.jpg (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.globalsecurity.org/security/profiles/images/east_africa_tanzania1.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.globalsecurity.org/security/profiles/truck_bombing_at_us_embassy_dar_es_salaam.htm&usg=__iq9SmcJ9POX3G8_EYwf2GD9DzYM=&h=596&w=390&sz=57&hl=en&start=1&um=1&tbnid=YSLxmho6VdPeUM:&tbnh=135&tbnw=88&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dus%2Bembassy%2Bbombings%2Bafrica%26hl%3Den%26um%3D1)

10-10-2000 - 17 U.S. sailors killed aboard the USS Cole. Pre Waterboarding.
http://tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:fdlJHlqueUAWKM:http://timrileylaw.com/images/USS%2520Cole%2520LNG.jpg (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://timrileylaw.com/images/USS%2520Cole%2520LNG.jpg&imgrefurl=http://timrileylaw.com/LNG_TERRORISM.htm&usg=__-dmfjdcPq0MDYyDwE5uHcb5NBYw=&h=355&w=624&sz=28&hl=en&start=16&um=1&tbnid=fdlJHlqueUAWKM:&tbnh=77&tbnw=136&prev=/images%3Fq%3DUSS%2Bcole%26hl%3Den%26um%3D1)

9-11-2001 - Thousands die. Pre waterboarding.
http://rhymeswithright.mu.nu/archives/images/wtc-9-11.jpg

And lets not forget the more personal minds of our "equals."

Daniel Pearl-Beheaded-Pre waterboarding
http://tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:I45FjDn50CaO3M:http://www.tribuneindia.com/2002/20020129/world1.jpg (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.tribuneindia.com/2002/20020129/world1.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.tribuneindia.com/2002/20020129/world.htm&usg=__7q1ELLn3EVJRg3O9qrZzbVmOSZ4=&h=205&w=230&sz=18&hl=en&start=9&um=1&tbnid=I45FjDn50CaO3M:&tbnh=96&tbnw=108&prev=/images%3Fq%3Ddaniel%2Bpearl%26hl%3Den%26um%3D1)

Nicholas Berg-Beheaded-Pre waterboarding
http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:thx4o1lXg-gVAM:http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2004/05/13/15BERG_A,1.jpg (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2004/05/13/15BERG_A,1.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/05/13/1084289819984.html&usg=__Zk3e1tqSBRUHcRz48h0loCXlczI=&h=232&w=200&sz=10&hl=en&start=10&um=1&tbnid=thx4o1lXg-gVAM:&tbnh=109&tbnw=94&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dnicholas%2Bberg%26hl%3Den%26um%3D1)

Paul Johnson-Beheaded-Pre waterboarding
http://tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:081p5c4pbpgbmM:http://www.cbc.ca/gfx/photos/johnson_paul_cp_5959831.jpg (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.cbc.ca/gfx/photos/johnson_paul_cp_5959831.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2004/06/18/saudi_hostage040618.html&usg=__wTE4BMHJXoHK9lkk0BNJ2Mwk-O4=&h=206&w=210&sz=9&hl=en&start=16&um=1&tbnid=081p5c4pbpgbmM:&tbnh=104&tbnw=106&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dpaul%2Bjohnson%26hl%3Den%26um%3D1)

This is just a few in the long list of "Pre waterboarding" events. So spare me the "we're just creating more violence" crap.

It never ceases to amaze me how some people are so enthusiastic about forgeting the past.

[Jobu]

Well I guess you're happy to take full responsibility for oiling the wheels of the jihadist propaganda machine then.

Way to go!
:roll:

PS do AQ give you a recruitment bonus?


Oh yea I forgot the liberal mantra, "we brought it on ourselves" as if we are to blame every time the enemy, which has been at war with us for decades, latches onto whatever they find is the most recent convenient excuse for terrorism.

[a_very_ex_STAB]

Oh yea I forgot the liberal mantra, "we brought it on ourselves" as if we are to blame every time the enemy, which has been at war with us for decades, latches onto whatever they find is the most recent convenient excuse for terrorism.

You guys seem to be the only ones quoting mantras. You can quote as much as you like about 'we brought it on ourselves'

I'm talking about the way forward you're wallowing in the past - for the hell of it it would appear :roll:

[ggk]

pre-waterboarding?...lol

[commanding]

yeah....I wallow in the past, 9-11 and beheading and such. I am just weird that way. I do not turn the other cheek. your arguments are so lame, they amaze me.

[Rogue_Kop]

Funny, Mancow is a Libertarian


i found it amusing too

[ggk]

there no such thing as pre-waterboarding man...this method have been used waaay earlier by a lot of government including the american .....even before you were born.

[a_very_ex_STAB]

yeah....I wallow in the past, 9-11 and beheading and such. I am just weird that way. I do not turn the other cheek. your arguments are so lame, they amaze me.

Where did I say anything about 'turning the other cheek'
I'm not a Christian
Have you always had problems with reading comprehension?

[RxOnco]

there no such thing as pre-waterboarding man...this method have been used waaay earlier by a lot of government including the american .....even before you were born.

Go back and read the posts...My "Pre Waterboarding" reference is specific to the waterboarding discussed in this thread to answer to those who say that techniques like waterboarding will only serve to rally the enemies and create more violence. Clearly, our enemies will do whatever they want regardless of our actions.

[ggk]

my bad...need to sleep. sorry

[toki]

Go back and read the posts...My "Pre Waterboarding" reference is specific to the waterboarding discussed in this thread to answer to those who say that techniques like waterboarding will only serve to rally the enemies and create more violence. Clearly, our enemies will do whatever they want regardless of our actions.

You're really missing something here. Your real enemies are either very small in number (a few thousand) or really big (milions to a bilion). Depending on your point of view. The real physical enemy is miniscule compared to the possible number of recruits.

You have to face the fact that you will never defeat the enemy if you only see it as a physical battle, it's a Hydra. "America under attack", "The bad guys are on the plate - blaaam blaaam!" You can kill 500.000 extremists and this will not help any american who dares to leave the US, or will create stability and security. I know you ill call that "appeasement" and it's worthless "because the bad guys hate our freedom!". In reality you have to find a way, that makes the Hydra stop growing heads.

[RxOnco]

I think you need to do a search on Islamic Extremism.

"They" will always hate "us." We didn't wrong them in a way that can be mended somehow. They HATE us, and everything about us.

There will never be peaceful resolution between Israel and Palestine...because of hate. There will never be a peaceful resolution to our ongoing conflicts. It's gone on for thousands of years and will continue.

[ggk]

^^^a fatalist.......it figures.

[Jobu]

You're really missing something here. Your real enemies are either very small in number (a few thousand) or really big (milions to a bilion). Depending on your point of view. The real physical enemy is miniscule compared to the possible number of recruits.


I don't think we should be chasing our tails over whatever the latest convenient excuse is for their choice to be terrorists.

[toki]

I don't think we should be chasing our tails over whatever the latest convenient excuse is for their choice to be terrorists.

The first part of my post was obviously easier to answer.
And i agree with ggk, the only answer seems to be fatalism.

[Jobu]

That's because the second part of your post is a straw man. Nobody sees it as "only" a physical battle.

[RxOnco]

I don't disagree with the term "fatalism." At least I can admit the fact that nothing will change without one side being annihilated.
While keeping blind eyes on the fact that, for generations, there have been countless efforts to "get along" with each other. Each has failed.

[RxOnco]

...You can kill 500.000 extremists and this will not help any american who dares to leave the US, or will create stability and security...

My thoughts exactly. The only option is to not stop at 500,000 rather continue until they're all dead. We both know that won't happen. Therefore, it's going to be a neverending battle. Hence, your fatalism tag.

[toki]

That's because the second part of your post is a straw man. Nobody sees it as "only" a physical battle.
Many do, based on the thousands of posts i read here. (the one above this one, for example, hehe)

Though with one thing i agree with you, we're chasing our tails. It doesn't really get anywhere.

[RxOnco]

Many do, based on the thousands of posts i read here. (the one above this one, for example, hehe)

Though with one thing i agree with you, we're chasing our tails. It doesn't really get anywhere.

Where in any of my posts have you read that this is a strict "physical" battle. I believe I've beat the "we're battling religious extremists" drum enough. Maybe I need to go back to it.

[Ngati Tumatauenga]

I was discussing my opinion, whereas you were the one addressing American's in general terms.

A quick look in the forum rules tells me there isn't one against that.

Regardless I've gone back to your first off topic post and cleaned them all up.

From now on stay on track or face the consequences.

[JKD]

Torture Doesn't Work

by Matthew Alexander


A former senior interrogator in Iraq says that abusing prisoners results in unreliable information, costs American lives, and it still hasn’t turned up Bin Laden.

There are valid reasons why we haven’t had enough with “torture sanctimony,” as Christopher Buckley puts it in an article in The Daily Beast, and let me start with the most important—it’s going to cost us future American lives in addition to the ones we’ve already lost.

Our policy of torture and abuse of prisoners has been Al Qaida’s number one recruiting tool, a point that Buckley does not mention and is also conspicuously absent from former CIA Director General Michael Hayden and former Attorney General Michael Mukasey’s argument in the Wall Street Journal. As the senior interrogator in Iraq for a task force charged with hunting down Abu Musab Al Zarqawi, the former Al Qaida leader and mass murderer, I listened time and time again to captured foreign fighters cite the torture and abuse at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo as their main reason for coming to Iraq to fight. Consider that 90 percent of the suicide bombers in Iraq are these foreign fighters and you can easily conclude that we have lost hundreds, if not thousands, of American lives because of our policy of torture and abuse. But that’s only the past.

Somewhere in the world there are other young Muslims who have joined Al Qaida because we tortured and abused prisoners. These men will certainly carry out future attacks against Americans, either in Iraq, Afghanistan, or possibly even here. And that’s not to mention numerous other Muslims who support Al Qaida, either financially or in other ways, because they are outraged that the United States tortured and abused Muslim prisoners.

In addition, torture and abuse has made us less safe because detainees are less likely to cooperate during interrogations if they don’t trust us. I know from having conducted hundreds of interrogations of high ranking Al Qaida members and supervising more than one thousand, that when a captured Al Qaida member sees us live up to our stated principles they are more willing to negotiate and cooperate with us. When we torture or abuse them, it hardens their resolve and reaffirms why they picked up arms.

Former officials who say that we prevented terrorist attacks by waterboarding Khalid Sheikh Muhammad or Abu Zubaydah are possibly intentionally ignorant of the fact that their actions cost us American lives. And let’s not forget the glaring failure in these cases. Torture never convinced either of these men to sell out Osama Bin Laden. And that’s the other lesson I learned in Iraq.

Coercion convinces a detainee to give you the minimum (and often an altered minimum) amount of information. Note that KSM only provided information that was downward from him in the Al Qaida hierarchy. I saw the same results in Iraq. When other interrogators used fear and control to force detainees to provide information, that information, at best, was always downward or lateral in direction. Why? Because a detainee knows that they can sell out the people below them or even future operations and the organization will survive. It’s been over seven years since 9/11 and we have yet to bring Osama Bin Laden to justice. He continues to recruit new terrorists, especially with our past policy of torture and abuse as a recruiting tool.So when I look at the squandered opportunity to locate him through KSM or Abu Zubaydah, I see failure.

Contrast that with my interrogation team in Iraq. We used relationship-building approaches, leveraged the best of our American culture (tolerance, cultural understanding, and intellect), and we ultimately found the head of Al Qaida in Iraq by being smarter, not harsher. We captured Al Qaida terrorists, some very high-ranking leaders, who never provided information. But we didn’t resort to torture or abuse because we knew that it would have made us hypocrites to sell out the very principles that we were defending. We also knew that it would cost us the lives of our brothers and sisters in arms, our fellow soldiers. Instead, we used those as opportunities to become better interrogators and then concentrated on other avenues to achieve our mission. We can lose a battle and still win a war.

My extensive experience demonstrates that we can effectively interrogate without using torture and abuse. We do not have to choose between terror and torture. We are Americans and we are smarter and better than that.

Matthew Alexander is a pseudonym for a 14 year veteran of the U.S. Air Force. As the leader of an elite interrogations team in Iraq, he conducted more than 300 interrogations and supervised more than 1,000. He served in three wars and was awarded the Bronze Star Medal in 2006.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-04-20/torture-doesnt-work/

[ggk]

now, thats a good read.

[RxOnco]

Once again, the "torture is being used as a recruiting tool" line is bullsh1t. These guys will recruit regardless. They found plenty of recruits for the 9-11 attacks. It was there well before, and it will be there after.
Unless you believe that, since Obama stopped the "torture", AQ is going to stop recruiting. Nonsense.

Until B.O. allows for the release of all the documents, we'll never know whether or not it worked.

[Jobu]

Source? It appears to be a blog.

And after reading it, even if it were legit, I still think it's a waste of time to worry about what the latest convenient excuse is for our enemies. If not Abu Ghraib, they'd find something else just as they had many times before any of this were discussed.

I'll ask again. What was the convenient excuse for 9/11? It sure wasn't waterboarding.

[JKD]

Once again, the "torture is being used as a recruiting tool" line is bullsh1t.

I'm sure the man will be heart broken to know that you think all of his first hand experience and knowledge on the matter is bullsh1t.

[ggk]

Once again, the "torture is being used as a recruiting tool" line is bullsh1t. These guys will recruit regardless. They found plenty of recruits for the 9-11 attacks. It was there well before, and it will be there after.
Unless you believe that, since Obama stopped the "torture", AQ is going to stop recruiting. Nonsense.

you probably dont understand the article.

.....do you know the attempt to retake Abu Gharib by iraqi insurgent few years back? do you know why they did it?...learn something new today...it seems you think its okay to be evil in order to fight evil. If you are as fatalist as that...the very principal that hold the american value will be loss. Infact...it devalue our principle as a human being.

Not to mention for a millionth time from as early as the Egyptian empire until the vietnam war....expert have told us all torture doesnt work!

[JKD]

Source?

I provided a link.

Google his name. He has a book and has been on the news.

[Ngati Tumatauenga]

But we didn’t resort to torture or abuse because we knew that it would have made us hypocrites to sell out the very principles that we were defending.

The point of it all.

[RxOnco]

I'm sure the man will be heart broken to know that you think all of his first hand experience and knowledge on the matter is bullsh1t.

I don't discount the fact that it's used as a recruiting tool. I discount the fact that it's THE recruiting tool. As was said earlier, these guys are "religious" extremists. They'll rally around the evils of Coca-Cola if it gathers a following.
Furthermore, I don't know who this guy is and how credible he is. Thanks for the service, but he can keep his bleedin' heart opinions to himself.



you probably dont understand the article.

.....do you know the attempt to retake Abu Gharib by iraqi insurgent few years back? do you know why they did it?...learn something new today...it seems you think its okay to be evil in order to fight evil. If you are as fatalist as that...the very principal that hold the american value will be loss. Infact...it devalue our principle as a human being.

I'm not going to argue that the repeated playing of a few a$$hats over our MSM infuriated the masses. Much to your dismay though...up until now (evidently), we've not been talking about Abu Gharib. We've been discussing waterboarding. Remember that technique used on THREE people.

Not to mention for a millionth time from as early as the Egyptian empire until the vietnam war....expert have told us all torture doesnt work!

From your own words: "expert have told us all torture doesn't work!" So, by definition, some torture must work.

[ggk]

i knew i should stop when in this argument...you starting playing the semantics card :|

[Ngati Tumatauenga]

As was said earlier, these guys are "religious" extremists.

Incorrect assumption.


Thanks for the service, but he can keep his bleedin' heart opinions to himself.

As a matter of interest, what's your service?

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?title=Matthew-Alexander&videoId=212890

[philbob]

A quick look in the forum rules tells me there isn't one against that.

Regardless I've gone back to your first off topic post and cleaned them all up.

From now on stay on track or face the consequences.

Oh wow a threat when you start to loose the debate... very intresting:roll:

[JKD]

Thanks for the service, but he can keep his bleedin' heart opinions to himself.

His "bleedin' heart opinions" produced intelligence that led to the location and death of Abu Musab Al Zarqawi.

[RxOnco]

Can't stream video from work...sorry.

I'm sure this guys has some validity in his statements. I'm also sure he has some of his own biases. Don't get me wrong...I mean no disrespect to the fact that he served. I've got brothers that is serving and has served over in Iraq. I'm simply saying that just because he says it, doesn't mean it's so.

[Ngati Tumatauenga]

Oh wow a threat when you start to loose the debate... very intresting:roll:

No, attacks on the messenger rather than the message and thread driven off topic when someone else starts to loose the debate.

You or anyone else want to start a thread about anti-Americanism in general or me in particular, go for it.

Otherwise stay on the topic.

[little icebear]

Once again, the "torture is being used as a recruiting tool" line is bullsh1t. These guys will recruit regardless. They found plenty of recruits for the 9-11 attacks.

You mean like... 19?

[Jobu]

I think the topic has been settled. Most of us don't give a crap if KSM or Abu Zubaydah were waterboarded and many of us don't buy the argument that it's an excuse for terrorism.

We've heard these kinds of arguments before. Didn't people tell us a few years ago that the Palestinian-Israeli issue was the #1 recruiting issue for terrorism? Before that someone told us it was the presence of Westerners on holy ground during/after Desert Storm. Before that it was something else and before that something else. It's bullcrap.

[philbob]

I think the topic has been settled. Most of us don't give a crap if KSM or Abu Zubaydah were waterboarded and many of us don't buy the argument that it's an excuse for terrorism.

We've heard these kinds of arguments before. Didn't people tell us a few years ago that the Palestinian-Israeli issue was the #1 recruiting issue for terrorism? Before that someone told us it was the presence of Westerners on holy ground during/after Desert Storm. Before that it was something else and before that something else. It's bullcrap.

agreed lock this board

[MaverickCowboy]

Agreed. Lock.

[Ngati Tumatauenga]

agreed lock this board

Really?

Lock the entire board?

No.

[RECON DOC]

Really?

Lock the entire board?

No.

You know Ngati, You're not exactly my favorite person on mp.net. Hell I don't even really like you. But after reading this thread I must say you're unwittingly winning me over. Not that you could give a ****.
I'm with you 100%.

Cheers

[Ngati Tumatauenga]

You had me at "hello"...

[philbob]

really no sence in keeping it open the best awnser to situation was given by Jobu, for those who want it unrepently are wrong and the ones who say no waterboarding or 'torture' are wrong both sides are entrenched and not willing to give way this thread not going anywhere productive so might as well close it.

[RECON DOC]

really no sence in keeping it open the best awnser to situation was given by Jobu, for those who want it unrepently are wrong and the ones who say no waterboarding or 'torture' are wrong both sides are entrenched and not willing to give way this thread not going anywhere productive so might as well close it.

Simple. If you're tired of the thread, stop looking in it.

[Ngati Tumatauenga]

really no sence in keeping it open the best awnser to situation was given by Jobu, for those who want it unrepently are wrong and the ones who say no waterboarding or 'torture' are wrong both sides are entrenched and not willing to give way this thread not going anywhere productive so might as well close it.

Well, unfortunately for you this isn't a democracy, ironic that given the topic and all it's connotations.

But if you're so 'het up' about it then feel free to canvass the 7,407 active members for a yes or no. Majority can rule.

Or petition the admin to become a Moderator.

Or skitter away.

[Gleipnir]

Settled? By Jobu?
I am going to have to say I disagree.
Best Answer?
Far from it.
I'll take Matthew Alexander's word over his and RxOnco's.
Furthermore, Jobu has proven time and time again that he will not be swayed from his opinions, no matter what.
He reminds me of Molly Sims when she appeared on the TV show Politically Incorrect.

[a_very_ex_STAB]

Does that mean the torture junkies who've watched too much '24' are waving the white flag on this one?

[commanding]

no...... torture doesnt work. ...they will tell you what you want to hear, they will lie...they will do everything to ease the pain. thats why torture doesnt work.



and maybe you watch to many '24'

I have never once watched "24"...if that eases your mind. Perhaps you have watched it too much.

[commanding]

Does that mean the torture junkies who've watched too much '24' are waving the white flag on this one?

I don't watch crap like that. Torture by its nature, does work. More importantly waterboarding works and it ain't even torture.

I bet if Admiral Stockdale were alive and you asked him he would admit torture did work for the NVA. Even though McCain is against "torture" I bet he would admit he broke under torture by the NVA.

there was a line in a movie once, paraphrasing, it went something like this: (Crimson Tide)

Some of the things they do, uh, defy belief. Their training program is simplicity itself. You just stick a cattle prod up their ass and you can get a horse to deal cards.

[Ngati Tumatauenga]

I don't watch crap like that. Torture by its nature, does work.

Say's who?

You've got an experienced interrogator on the previous page saying otherwise. He's a guy who's seen it used and fail.

Provide some evidence to the contrary. First hand type evidence that is.


More importantly waterboarding works and it ain't even torture.

Again, say's who?


there was a line in a movie once, paraphrasing, it went something like this: (Crimson Tide)

So it's not '24' that teaches you how these things work, it's Hollywood in general. Figures.

Lipizzaner stallions are forced to conduct actions that are completely unnatural for normal horses and are bred specifically to do this.

Regardless of whether your predilections towards cattle prods are favoured, how does that equate to torture, other than animal cruelty?

[Jobu]

You heard them, I won the thread. :P

As for evidence that it does work, I look to Mukasey, Blair, etc. The people who ultimately see the end result of the info gained from the interrogations after the analysts have gone through it all with a fine toothed comb and determined what it all meant to the big picture. The guy on the ground sees success or failure according to his personal experience. This Matthew fellow says he believes it was a failure because it hasn't led to Obama's capture. Really? Is that the measure of success?

We have the CIA telling us that half of what we know about Al Qaeda's structure came from these interrogations. If you ask me, that's sounds like pretty damn valuable information and I'm not about to apologize for it.

[philbob]

simple. If you're tired of the thread, stop looking in it.


well, unfortunately for you this isn't a democracy, ironic that given the topic and all it's connotations.

But if you're so 'het up' about it then feel free to canvass the 7,407 active members for a yes or no. Majority can rule.

Or petition the admin to become a moderator.

Or skitter away.


baaawwwwwwwwwwwwwww

[commanding]

Say's who?

You've got an experienced interrogator on the previous page saying otherwise. He's a guy who's seen it used and fail.

Provide some evidence to the contrary. First hand type evidence that is.


gee, I can't provide "first hand" evidence....but I could write a blog under an assumed name if that is your best argument is the supposed air force vet of 3 wars who won't give his real name. Don't believe everything on the web.




Again, say's who?

says KLM...




So it's not '24' that teaches you how these things work, it's Hollywood in general. Figures.

Lipizzaner stallions are forced to conduct actions that are completely unnatural for normal horses and are bred specifically to do this.

Regardless of whether your predilections towards cattle prods are favoured, how does that equate to torture, other than animal cruelty?

It doesn't, I just thought it was a apropriate quote considering the cattle prod discussion. Since you have seen the movie also, and you watch the mindless television 24 series...I could say "figures" about your education in how these things work also.
Do you even know who Admiral Stockdale was?

[commanding]

A CIA man admits that the waterboarding broke one of the three guys they waterboarded in 35 seconds. link:

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/Story?id=3978231

note that is not someone's blog written in their mom's basement in their underwear, that is ABC news.



A leader of the CIA team that captured the first major al Qaeda figure, Abu Zubaydah, says subjecting him to waterboarding was torture but necessary. In the first public comment by any CIA officer involved in handling high-value al Qaeda targets, John Kiriakou, now retired, said the technique broke Zubaydah in less than 35 seconds.
"The next day, he told his interrogator that Allah had visited him in his cell during the night and told him to cooperate," said Kiriakou in an interview to be broadcast tonight on ABC News' "World News With Charles Gibson" and "Nightline."
"From that day on, he answered every question," Kiriakou said. "The threat information he provided disrupted a number of attacks, maybe dozens of attacks."
Kiriakou said the feeling in the months after the 9/11 attacks was that interrogators did not have the time to delve into the agency's bag of other interrogation tricks.
"Those tricks of the trade require a great deal of time -- much of the time -- and we didn't have that luxury. We were afraid that there was another major attack coming," he said.
Kiriakou says he did not know that the interrogation of Zubaydah was being secretly recorded by the CIA and had no idea the tapes had been destroyed.
there is more on the above link...just don't have time to spoon feed you today...

[JKD]

gee, I can't provide "first hand" evidence....but I could write a blog under an assumed name if that is your best argument is the supposed air force vet of 3 wars who won't give his real name. Don't believe everything on the web.


He's written other things, including a book, and made numerous tv appearances. You know something about him that no one else does?

Here's a lengthy and detailed article written by Mark Bowden about the non-torturous means used to find Zarqawi
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200705/tracking-zarqawi

[Ngati Tumatauenga]

gee, I can't provide "first hand" evidence....

Figures.


but I could write a blog under an assumed name if that is your best argument is the supposed air force vet of 3 wars who won't give his real name. Don't believe everything on the web.

So you're saying he's a fake and a liar?

Based on what evidence, you don't agree with him?

Funny how for a fake he's all over the news...


says KLM...

He told you himself?

Wrote a book?

Gave an interview?

Got the source?


It doesn't, I just thought it was a apropriate quote considering the cattle prod discussion. Since you have seen the movie also, and you watch the mindless television 24 series...

I watch '24'?

Say's who?

Quote where I've said I watch that program. After all that is the only way you could "know".

Bet you don't answer that question.


I could say "figures" about your education in how these things work also.

You could except I'm not the one using Hollywood as an example of how reality is, therefore you'd just look stupid.


Do you even know who Admiral Stockdale was?

Sure do. Too bad about that interview.

He came across as a very confused, somewhat irrational old man...

[Gleipnir]

This Matthew fellow says he believes it was a failure because it hasn't led to Obama's capture. Really? Is that the measure of success?


???????????

[Ngati Tumatauenga]

This Matthew fellow says he believes it was a failure because it hasn't led to Obama's capture.

Yeah, you "win", alright.

You torture apologist's are doing a real demolition job on the rest of us.rofl

[EasyC]

Is there something missing out of that video, or is that basically what waterboarding consists of?

[commanding]

Sure do. Too bad about that interview.

He came across as a very confused, somewhat irrational old man...

Admiral James Stockdale...you should read up on him....despite what you might believe, "old men" were once young men, and were heroic in the extreme if they were Stockdale. What you maybe took for "confused and irrational" was physical damage, permenant damage to his hearing, legs, body from years of torture by the NVA.

He was a heroic man, one of the most highly decorated Navy combat veterans, I think 26 combat decorations, the Medal of Honor, 4 silver stars, etc. He was severely injured by the NVA, he lost most all his hearing, he could barely walk, etc.

Read up on him and get back to me.