NRO's Murdock: "Waterboarding is something of which every American should be proud"
In a November 5 National Review Online column -- "Waterboarding Has Its Benefits" -- contributing editor Deroy Murdock wrote that "[w]aterboarding is something of which every American should be proud," adding that "[t]hough clearly uncomfortable, waterboarding loosens lips without causing permanent physical injuries (and unlikely even temporary ones)." In fact, according to medical experts on the effect of torture, waterboarding results in both short and long-term negative consequences for mental and physical health, including possible risk of death, as Media Matters for America has repeatedly documented.
In his column, Murdock asserted that "[w]aterboarding makes tight-lipped terrorists talk. At least three major al-Qaeda leaders reportedly have been waterboarded, most notably Khalid Sheik Mohammed." Murdock further wrote:
Appropriately enough, waterboarding is not used on American citizens suspected of tax evasion, sexual harassment, or bank robbery. Waterboarding is used on foreign Islamic-extremist terrorists, captured abroad, who would love nothing more than to blast innocent men, women, and children into small, bloody pieces. Some of them already have done so.
Waterboarding has worked quickly, causing at least one well-known subject to break down and identify at least six other high-profile, highly bloodthirsty associates before they could commit further mass murder beyond the 3,192 people they already killed and the 7,715 they already wounded.
Though clearly uncomfortable, waterboarding loosens lips without causing permanent physical injuries (and unlikely even temporary ones). If terrorists suffer long-term nightmares about waterboarding, better that than more Americans crying themselves to sleep after their loved ones have been shredded by bombs or baked in skyscrapers.
In short, there is nothing "repugnant" about waterboarding.
Contrary to Murdock's assertions, Allen S. Keller, M.D., director of the Bellevue Hospital Center/New York University Program for Survivors of Torture, said in written testimony to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence: "To think that abusive methods, including the enhanced interrogation techniques [in which Keller included waterboarding], are harmless psychological ploys is contradictory to well established medical knowledge and clinical experience. These methods are intended to break the prisoners down, to terrify them and cause harm to their psyche, and in so doing result in lasting harmful health consequences." He said of waterboarding specifically, "Long term effects include panic attacks, depression and PTSD [post traumatic stress disorder]," and said it poses a "real risk of death."
Keller described waterboarding as follows:
Water-boarding or mock drowning, where a prisoner is bound to an inclined board and water is poured over their face, inducing a terrifying fear of drowning clearly can result in immediate and long-term health consequences. As the prisoner gags and chokes, the terror of imminent death is pervasive, with all of the physiologic and psychological responses expected, including an intense stress response, manifested by tachycardia, rapid heart beat and gasping for breath. There is a real risk of death from actually drowning or suffering a heart attack or damage to the lungs from inhalation of water. Long term effects include panic attacks, depression and PTSD. I remind you of the patient I described earlier who would panic and gasp for breath whenever it rained even years after his abuse.
Finally, Murdock's description of the congressional wrangling over Michael Mukasey, President Bush's nominee for attorney general, as "not quite torture, but it sure has been painful," echoed CNN's recent portrayal of the process as "political torture," and the description, by Time magazine's Ana Marie Cox, of former Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales' questioning by Congress in August as "legislative waterboarding."
A similar column -- "Three Cheers for waterboarding!" -- bearing Murdock's byline appeared on the Scripps Howard News Service website on November 1; HumanEvents.com on November 2; and on the Sacramento Bee's website on November 4.
Do we have any volunteers to waterboard Deroy Murdock?
No problem since it ain't torture anyway he wont have a problem with it
I don't know why you would want to waterboard an innocent person who is simply looking out for this country. You and other far left wingers seem to suggest that there isn't any difference between terrorists and American citizens. According to you, "those terrorists really aren't all that bad. Those bad right wingers who want to water board those innocent terrorists should be water boarded themselves." I've never met so many people who love to sympathize with terrorists.
Do you want America to be known as a nation that tortures people. I don't.
Read this very slowly and carefully. because anyone in the intelligence business that is honorable, decent, and patriotic knows this simple fact that is apparently lost on you: TORTURE DOESN'T WORK
I don't want our nation to use actual torture such as cutting off arms and legs, breaking bones, etc. But we certainly should use these mild forms of coercive interrogation that don't cause extreme physical harm. And the fact is that these forms of interrogation have worked against high profile terrorists.
Are you really this obtuse? Have you actually read the threads about this with comprehension?
Torture doesn't work. It doesn't achieve the objective of getting reliable information. People who claim it does are just plain wrong.
And it debases the country that resorts to it in ignorance and superstitious fear.
Listen to K Olbermann's comment from last night.
He supposes that torture might be possibly used to bring out all kinds of false threats, because we know that people who are tortured will say anything to get it to stop.
Thereby the fear level is raised by the administration using this "intelligence" which in turn raises the fear level and gets lemmings like Rino to march in lock step because their ilk are scared little boys who need a big strong daddy to protect them - even if it means shredding the constitution as well as common human decency.
"Waterboarding is something of which every American should be proud,"
Do we need any further proof that the political right wing of this country is completely insane? This is shameful...it is embarrassing to admit that Murdock is an American.
We should always be proud of the fact that we're doing everything we can to protect this country from terrorists. We should be proud of the fact that the far left has not succeeded in implementing their Terrorist Bill of Rights.
See above, but it deserves repeating to you:
TORTURE DOESN'T WORK
Only in your mind. We've gotten valuable information from several high profile terrorists from using harsh interrogation techniques. But if you have a better idea for getting information from terrorists I'd like to hear it. I'll support anything that works. If simply being nice to the terrorists and giving them gifts and so forth works then I'll be all for simply doing that. So if you can come up with a few examples of how being nice to the terrorists provided us with valuable information then I'll support your idea.
Besides the fact that any of these techniques are illegal and imoral, you are a putz for what you are saying.
Think about who is telling you that we are getting good info from torture. It is all people attached at the hip to the administration. Meanwhile, everyone else, including a ever increasing list of generals and intelligence agents, are shouting that torture has never worked and we have never gotten any good info from it.
If you disagree, please give me an example of anybody not involved in the current debate who has said that torture works and has shown evdidence to that effect.
Please give one verifiable example of high-value information we've gotten through torture.
I doubt that you can - because, once again for the constitution haters, TORTURE DOESN'T WORK
Even better - we could get Deroy Nurdock to waterboard Mark Levin.....
Repeat after me:
I'm an American and I'm proud to give up my humanity!
JUSTICE AND TRUTH IN THE USA! FACT CHECK:
FROM CBS NEWS - 60 MINUTES
"The image that's been portrayed is, we sat around the campfire and said, 'Oh, boy, now we go get to torture people.' Well, we don't torture people. Let me say that again to you. We don't torture people. Okay?" Tenet says.
"Come on, George," Pelley says.
"We don't torture people," Tenet maintains.
"Khalid Sheikh Mohammad?" Pelley asks.
"We don't torture people," Tenet says.
"Water boarding?" Pelley asks.
"We do not – I don't talk about techniques," Tenet replies.
"It's torture," Pelley says.
"And we don't torture people. Now, listen to me. Now, listen to me. I want you to listen to me," Tenet says. "The context is it's post-9/11. I've got reports of nuclear weapons in New York City, apartment buildings that are gonna be blown up, planes that are gonna fly into airports all over again. Plot lines that I don't know – I don't know what's going on inside the United States. And I'm struggling to find out where the next disaster is going to occur. Everybody forgets one central context of what we lived through. The palpable fear that we felt on the basis of the fact that there was so much we did not know."
"I know that this program has saved lives. I know we've disrupted plots," Tenet says.
=============================================
I think I have to call this one for Murdock. Waterboarding is not 'torture', and as the director of the CIA said, it has saved lives.
"Waterboarding is not 'torture', and as the director of the CIA said, it has saved lives."
Oh My God...what a compelling argument you make! What logic! What evidence!
No...make that, "WHAT EVIDENCE???"
You people on the right have very low standards, don't you?
Just about as low as their morals....
We have very high standards. I believe that when we want information from an enemy combatant we should give them cupcakes and have them watch Oprah and Dr Phil for 24 hours a day.
When they finally realize how nice and sweet we really are they will not want our country destroyed and will give up the information - realizing how wrong they have been all these years.
See - I'm beginning to think like a liberal.
"I believe that when we want information from an enemy combatant we should give them cupcakes and have them watch Oprah and Dr Phil for 24 hours a day."
Let's cut to the chase...what you are saying in your narrow-minded right wing way is that it is impossible to obtain valuable information from a detainee without torture. What you are saying is that it is impossible to protect ourselves from terrorism without breaking the law.
I don't want small-minded people like you any where near a position of authority. You are spineless little weasels who sell America short...
Before you sell my methoods short try watching Oprah and Dr. Phil for 24 hours straight on a cupcake sugar high. It's not illegal but it will have you wrything in pain.
You make this too easy.
You can try to be as cute as you want but if you believe your original post you should really do some soul searching...
Irony, by "soul searching," you must mean 'search for a soul.'
You make this too easy.- WC4ME
I'll probably regret asking, but who makes what easy?
You posted a lame worn-out strawman, got smoked, and tried to recover with the equally tired "it was a joke".
Just wondering, do you far right mutants ever get depressed at having to explain your every thought* as a joke?
* well, not every thought, just the ones that more honest people call you on.
"You people on the right have very low standards, don't you?" Irony.
Media Matters finds an obscure source with a far off opinion and you people think (1) it's mainstream news and (2) it is a shared opinion among conservatives.
What you make easy is illustrating the absurdity of the headlines here and how the minions just follow along. Look at the number of posts in response to my post - you all fall for it. The fact that you can not recognize blatent foolishness says much about why you so easily swallow these tidbits of "conservative media bias" as if it were a full meal.
Media Matters is trying so hard to prove that there is an overwhelming right bias in the news that it has to look under the smallest rock to find it. Chances are if you have to dig that deep to find a problem, the problem isn't very big to begin with.
"Media Matters finds an obscure source with a far off opinion and you people think (1) it's mainstream news and (2) it is a shared opinion among conservatives."--wc4me
I think you would be hard pressed to find a more mainstream conservative publication than National Review. The "obscurity" argument you are attempting to make doesn't quite cut it.
If it makes you feel better remove the word "obscure" from my above post - my points still stand.
If you folks cant recognize blatent absurdity how can you be expected to sift through the borderline spin?
I agree that this is "blatant absurdity". I fail to see your point that MMFA has done something wrong in pointing it out. However absurd the statement is, it appears to have been expressed with all due sincerity.
He makes it easy enough for you to embarass yourself with dumb stories that you THINK are cute but are actually stupid and expose you as a soulless creature without a shred of human decency. Yeah make fun of people who take the decency and values of our country seriously. You are sick and need the help of a mental health professional
And LEST WE FORGET:
There is not one occasion, of torture producing useful information throughout the Iraq War time, nor from experts who examined torture techniques historically, through the past several wars.
John McCain tells it best: "Under torture, you will say anything you think your torturer wants to hear, just to make it stop."
FURTHER, this Jack Bauer of "24" idea that the "ticking bomb" can be located if we just torture the terrorists a bit more is INSANE.
Just to start, these guys they were torturing had been held for MONTHS (now YEARS), and any "actionable" information they MIGHT have has long since expired in timeliness. Secondly, these guys do the same thing WE do, which is share information only on a "need to know" basis. The few who might have a "bigger picture" ... well, Bush "doesn't think about them very much" and they remain at large.
Finally, torture is illegal, internationally. Just because Bush decided he was ABOVE enforcing treaties (which have the force of AMERICAN LAW), doesn't mean torture isn't still illegal. It just means Bush has so far managed to stave off investigations by keeping details secret.
The Administration's fallback, non-answer position is to just claim "We don't torture", and then refuse to discuss "techniques". Brilliant.
We cannot be proud of torture, unless we have forsaken our very souls as a nation. We should be ASHAMED these actions are taking place in our name, and only because the NeoCons lack the morals and imagination to do interrogations properly, which is more effective and is LEGAL.
Certainly, there is a craven pleasure in causing pain to our enemies. It seems "right" to the vengeful mind to treat prisoners suspected of being terrorists with the utmost inhumane methods, the harsher the better.
By turning this into a nation KNOWN to torture, the terrorists have won a great victory over America. Bush handed it to them. We used to be the good guys, and now we're no better than those (few) we're fighting.
We should be ASHAMED. (and SOMEBODY should be going to prison over this.)
Right on Tex exactly so
"We should be ASHAMED. (and SOMEBODY should be going to prison over this"
We should be ashamed of the fact that we've allowed 45 million innocent unborn babies to be murdered since 1972. We should be PROUD of the fact that we've done everything we can to protect ourselves from GUILTY scumbag terrorists who kill innocent women and children. We should be proud of the fact that we've shown these terrorists no mercy. And apparently it's all right for us to shoot a bullet through a terrorists' head on the battlefield, but yet we can't poor a little water over them when we have them captive. That might possibly be the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard of.
Since you insist on being un-American, please surrender your citizenship to the nearest govt office and move to a country more similar to your beliefs - such as Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, or North Korea.
Rino,
Glad to see you here. Before, you mentioned that you believe every verse in the Bible. I just wanted to get your take on Matthew 25:38-40:
"25:38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in ? or naked, and clothed thee? 25:39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? 25:40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me."
Can you think of anyone less among us than someone suspected of terrorism? Would you waterboard Jesus?
Secondly, Matthew 5:7:
"Blessed are the merciful for they shall obtain mercy."
I just wanted to get the wingnut view of the Bible out here as long as you are changing the subject.
The way that individuals should live their own lives is different from the policies that the government should have. We as individuals should forgive others for what they've done, and we should be compassionate and merciful. But at the same time, that doesn't mean that the government shouldn't have the right to administer justice and punish evil doers. The Bible clearly differentiates between what individuals should do in their own lives and the what the government does in order to maintain peace.
Yes, but aren't interrogators individuals? Doesn't obedience to God come before obedience to country? Should they torture/waterboard Jesus? Would you waterboard Jesus if you were an interrogator?
Secondly, if there is such a clear differentiation between individuals and governments, why do rightwingers oppose gay marriage, abortion, legalization of prostitution and/or drugs so vehemently almost entirely on religious grounds? It looks to me like you are simply picking and choosing which morality applies to the state and which applies to the individual in a seemingly arbitrary fashion.
The Bible makes it clear that killing is all right in certain circumstances but murder isn't. It makes it clear that punishment is ok in certain circumstances, but a person shouldn't do such things out of vengeance or hate. The Bible makes it clear that it's perfectly all right for a soldier fighting for his country to kill on the battlefield, and I think that that concept should carry over to treatment of detainees as well.
Well there are several problems with your reasoning and its applicability to the quotes above.
1. Although, I agree that killing can be justified, most theologians argue it is only justified in a "Just War" or self-defense. I don't agree that the war in Iraq is a "just" one. It is an illegal war of aggression. And it is hard to argue self-defense when these people are entirely under our custody. Sorry, but it just doesn't wash.
2. Support for waterboarding and/or other forms of torture in this country is directly related to "vengeance and hate". We keep hearing that everything changed after 9/11. We didn't accept waterboarding before 9/11, but suddenly it is okay for some? I suspect vengeance and hate are the main reasons it is now acceptable.
3. In both the Guantanamo example and the Bible verses I mentioned above, "Prisons" are the place specifically mentioned. I suppose the fact that the terror suspects are also strangers and brethren would apply as well. However, I think any overriding argument about war in general (even for the sake of argument) is missing the point. Jesus also tells us to love our enemies in Matthew 5:43-44:
5:43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. 5:44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
It seems that Jesus, himself is a proponent of Rapport Building. Not to mention, this is right after he tells people to forget about "an eye for an eye" and start "turn[ing] the other cheek".
It also would seem no excuse to perform immoral acts as a torturer at the direction of the state, when God has dominion over everything as the Bible says.
4. Your explanation also allows for Christians (and by extension everyone) to commit heinous acts of torture, rape, beheading/murder/genocide in war as long as it isn't done with vengeance or hate. Well I suppose that would excuse any number of historical villains from the terrorists themselves to Stalin, Hitler to Pol Pot as long as they could claim they weren't acting out of vengeance or hate.
"The Bible clearly differentiates between what individuals should do in their own lives and the what the government does in order to maintain peace."--Rino
Oh, please!?! Now you're just making stuff up. If not, give me book, chapter and verse, because in my penticostal religious upbringing, I've heard a lot of things that were difficult to comprehend, but that wasn't one of them. Spill it. . .
As I said on another thread - you really don't have a clue !
Dude, your strawman arguments are pathetically weak.
"Let's cut to the chase...what you are saying in your narrow-minded right wing way is that it is impossible to obtain valuable information from a detainee without torture"
It is impossible to get information out of a detainee without using any harsh methods at all. Being nice and talking to them won't work. Name, rank, and serial number won't work. It should be obvious that by protecting the terrorists you are jeapordizing our intelligence gathering and our national security.
For the third time -
TORTURE DOESN'T WORK
Now be a good boy and go back to jerking off to reruns of "24" torture scenes.
I'm glad that you're such an expert. Maybe we should let you be a CIA interrogator so that you can give the terrorists cupcakes and cookies and tea and make them feel all warm and fuzzy. You can become friends and learn all of their valuable info!
This is from further down the thread:
We have very high standards. I believe that when we want information from an enemy combatant we should give them cupcakes and have them watch Oprah and Dr Phil for 24 hours a day. When they finally realize how nice and sweet we really are they will not want our country destroyed and will give up the information - realizing how wrong they have been all these years.See - I'm beginning to think like a liberal.
WC4ME, actually you’re thinking would be in line with WWII vet who interrogated Nazis.
When about two dozen veterans got together yesterday for the first time since the 1940s, many of the proud men lamented the chasm between the way they conducted interrogations during the war and the harsh measures used today in questioning terrorism suspects.
Back then, they and their commanders wrestled with the morality of bugging prisoners' cells with listening devices. They felt bad about censoring letters. They took prisoners out for steak dinners to soften them up. They played games with them.
"We got more information out of a German general with a game of chess or Ping-Pong than they do today, with their torture," said Henry Kolm, 90, an MIT physicist who had been assigned to play chess in Germany with Hitler's deputy, Rudolf Hess.
"We did it with a certain amount of respect and justice," said John Gunther Dean, 81, who became a career Foreign Service officer and ambassador to Denmark.The interrogators had standards that remain a source of pride and honor.
"During the many interrogations, I never laid hands on anyone," said George Frenkel, 87, of Kensington. "We extracted information in a battle of the wits. I'm proud to say I never compromised my humanity."
Several of the veterans, all men in their 80s and 90s, denounced the controversial techniques. And when the time came for them to accept honors from the Army's Freedom Team Salute, one veteran refused, citing his opposition to the war in Iraq and procedures that have been used at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.
I don't think there is any expert here. We can only rely on their opinions. Most of the ones I read have made a solid case against the use of torture/coercive interrogation. Most of the people who want torture have made vague and dubious claims as to its effectiveness.
We have very high standards.
Which you ignore on a daily basis....
It ironic thing about your post is that many interrogators believe rapport-building works much better than torture does. And you haven't seemed to even consider it.
You realize that 24 is fiction don't you?
Rapport-building has the added benefit of admissability of evidence in court.
Your prefered methods are so stupid that they practically guarantee the evidence is inadmissable in any non-kangaroo court of law. The suspects will either go free or be held forever without trial - a further embarrassment to our country's reputation.
I don't care if you start "thinking like a liberal" or not. The important part for you would seem more simply to start thinking PERIOD.
Before I can respond please tell me what you believe my "preferred methods" are?
Your snide mockery of rapport-building as coddling can only lead me to reasonably conclude that you prefer the opposite extreme caricature - torture.
Please consider the words of one interrogator who challenged the administration with this advice on the "coercive interrogations":
"No. 1, it’s not going to work," said Col. Brittain P. Mallow, the commander of the task force from 2002 to 2005.
"No. 2, if it does work, it’s not reliable. No. 3, it may not be legal, ethical or moral. No. 4, it’s going to hurt you when you have to prosecute these guys. No. 5, sooner or later, all of this stuff is going to come to light, and you’re going to be embarrassed."
Your snide mockery of rapport-building as coddling can only lead me to reasonably conclude that you prefer the opposite extreme caricature - torture.
If you are familiar with most of my posts at this web site they are to debunk the myth of "conservative media bias" Media Matters tries to promote. The issues themselves are secondary to that "mission" of Media Matters. The snide mockery that you indeed picked up on is an absurd reflection of the foolishness of the original story. If these are the depths that Media Matters has to flock to confirm their "mission" I'd say pickings are slim.
Not really. This kind of theme has been very strong amongst mainstream conservatives and conservative media figures. Countless attempts have been made to minimize the issue of torture from Limbaugh's "Club Gitmo" and Abu Ghraib foolishness to Duncan Hunter and Hannity speaking on the virtues of Rice Pilaf served to terror suspects.
I agree absolutely that it is absurd stuff, but no idea seems too absurd for conservatives these days.
Actually, Rino Hunter came along just in time to prove my point.
: )
We have very high standards. I believe that when we want information from an enemy combatant we should give them cupcakes and have them watch Oprah and Dr Phil for 24 hours a day. When they finally realize how nice and sweet we really are they will not want our country destroyed and will give up the information - realizing how wrong they have been all these years.See - I'm beginning to think like a liberal.
WC4ME, actually you’re thinking would be in line with WWII vet who interrogated Nazis.
When about two dozen veterans got together yesterday for the first time since the 1940s, many of the proud men lamented the chasm between the way they conducted interrogations during the war and the harsh measures used today in questioning terrorism suspects.
Back then, they and their commanders wrestled with the morality of bugging prisoners' cells with listening devices. They felt bad about censoring letters. They took prisoners out for steak dinners to soften them up. They played games with them.
"We got more information out of a German general with a game of chess or Ping-Pong than they do today, with their torture," said Henry Kolm, 90, an MIT physicist who had been assigned to play chess in Germany with Hitler's deputy, Rudolf Hess.
"We did it with a certain amount of respect and justice," said John Gunther Dean, 81, who became a career Foreign Service officer and ambassador to Denmark.The interrogators had standards that remain a source of pride and honor.
"During the many interrogations, I never laid hands on anyone," said George Frenkel, 87, of Kensington. "We extracted information in a battle of the wits. I'm proud to say I never compromised my humanity."
Several of the veterans, all men in their 80s and 90s, denounced the controversial techniques. And when the time came for them to accept honors from the Army's Freedom Team Salute, one veteran refused, citing his opposition to the war in Iraq and procedures that have been used at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.
Thank you Pearlene - however my post was simply an illustration of the absurdity of the headline.
The headline is absurd and stupid, but MMFA is just showing what that dufus said. I don't see your point.
I was illustrating the absurdity by being absurd. Sarcasim as a tool of communication helps weed out the thinkers from the knee jerk responders.
So you are saying MMFA shouldn't address absurd ideas on the right because they are too absurd? If that is what you are getting at, I simply could not disagree more.
My original post was not in response to the MMFA story but to Irony's post and implication that this is typical right wing thinking. I was playing off that theme and being just as absurd as the headline. You guys took it as gospel.
It was interesting to see how it developed because as I said - if you could not pick out the blatent foolishness and absurdity how are you to judge the borderline spin?
Well, I guess I can see your point. But then again, nobody got your joke but you.....so the problem is probably with your writing, not with our ability to get your jokes.
Surly there must be a place somewhere between "cookies,milk,and TV watching" and waterboarding,where interrogators can go for the information they need.This whole idea is crazy. What has become of us as a people that we are tolerating this.
And you believe Geroge Tenet that we have not used torture. I am amazed by that level of credulity. In the same converaation, Tenet seems to be saying that the torture that they never used may have have worked. Of course, no evidence is presented that it worked. I suppose the nonexistent torture and the people it may (or may not) have worked on are all classified anyway. I find it easier to refuse to believe Tenet's convoluted attempt at an excuse.
I think I have to call this one for logic and reality. JuTru will receive a nice consolation prize.
JuTru will receive a nice consolation prize.
A year's supply of Rice-a-Roni, The San Francisco Treat.
:-)
Tenet's remaining integrity (if any remained) was destroyed by 60 Minutes yesterday.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/01/60minutes/main3440577.shtml
What
Tenet's remaining integrity (if any remained) was destroyed by 60 Minutes yesterday.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/01/60minutes/main3440577.shtml
What
aWhy should we doubt the word of George "Slam-Dunk" Tenet? I mean....really?
Umm, static electricity maybe? I reached for my mouse and managed to post 2 mangled posts.
What a shameless political hack. The appointees of the Shrub administration will be studied for years, as an example of what happens when a president tries to politicized the entire US goverment.
In one possible future, historians will sit around and ponder how the people of the United States were stupid enough and scared enough to willingly embrace Fascism.
As bad as most of Shrub's appointees are, George Tenet was not one of them -- Clinton's the one to blame for that bit of idiocy.
"I think I have to call this one for Murdock. Waterboarding is not 'torture', and as the director of the CIA said, it has saved lives."--justus
Okay. That was really compelling. Especially the part where the former DCI denied stuff. The CIA doesn't deceive people...wait...they don't lie that much...okay wait, no - nevermind.
I think the technicallity the administration is using is rendition and/or committing torture on foreign soil (perhaps by third parties). All of which is torture, but just not to the current administrations self-serving and nonsensical definition of it.
It's inhumane. It is an abomination to inflict that degree of pain on another human being.
There is no proof that torture saves lives. There are only assertions of its usefulness.
The most successfull interrogators of WWII "broke" their subjects by playing chess with them. They built relationships with their captives and convinced them to provide information because they role modeled to them that we are a good and moral people.
Yes - those Fisher-Spassky chess matches were really just espionage exchanges of information.
I'm sorry. Was Bobby Fisher a WWII interrogator?
Were you under the delusion you are clever? Let me disabuse you of tha delusion you are pathetic
Sure it saved lives because the partisan head of the CIA said it did. Waterboarding IS torture period. It was torture when we sentenced Japanese to prison for doing it to American soldiers and called it a war crime in the Tokyo Trials its STILL torture. Its sick the way some people will justify ANYTHING.
Exactly. Waterboarding was a war crime when used on our people.
JUSTICE,
We called waterboarding torture when it was being done to U.S. soldiers. Why isn't it torture now? Which time were we lying?
And you know if George Tenet says it, it must be a 'slam dunk'.
This goes down as one of the dumbest comments ever. This is the kind of thing that even makes a soul-less conservative blush.
In fact, according to medical experts on the effect of torture, waterboarding results in both short and long-term negative consequences for mental and physical health.
OK, I know I am being nit picky but MMFA states medical experts, as in plural but only mention Dr. Keller, and also state that there are long term physical and mental effects, but I could only find mental effects. Any help, maybe I read it wrong. What are the long term physical effects and who are the other medical experts?
dave
I'm not suggesting that 'waterboarding' doesn't muss up a person's hare a little bit, but as the former director of the CIA stated: It saved lives.
This was not a theoretical statement. It was based on the facts after 9/11 in the real world.
What I'm afraid of is that many people at MMFA are falling for the propaganda of the enemy. It is a part of the terrorist playbook to cry "torture" no matter how they are treated.
Now we may have to deny the terrorist thugs comfy chairs and espresso in the morning. But please stop blubbering over those scum.
There is something very wrong with you.
ROUNDHOUSE:
What you have to realize is that there are people who have a mindset that has been very useful for tyrannical monsters throughout history.
The Hitlers and Stalins could never have been as "successful" as they were without teams of willing lieutenants who would do anything asked of them without question and without moral judgment.
The posters in here, notably "justus", who act EAGER to torture, reveal themselves as being of that amoral sociopathic mindset that serves POWER with glee.
If ever, God forbid, America found itself setting up concentration camps, we can tell who would be first in line applying for the job.
Serial killers confound law enforcement, because killing usually has a MOTIVE, and that helps catch the killers. With sociopathic serial killers, they kill because they LIKE it.
I think that too often we project our own humanity onto some very demented people because, being empathetic and nurturing, it's too frightening to realize how deeply sick these rightwing authoritarians are.
"It is a part of the terrorist playbook to cry "torture" no matter how they are treated"
So where can I get a copy of this playbook? Where did you get a copy of it and do you have security clearance?
Or did you just hear it from Rush or Hannity and take it as gospel halleluah truth.
"being empathetic and nurturing"
Yes, it's very empathetic and nurturing to promote a policy that allows 45 million innocent unborn babies to be murdered. I can't even begin to describe how compassionate that is. In reality, the only people you are compassionate to are the real scum bags. Innocent people don't get the same compassion.
"Yes, it's very empathetic and nurturing to promote a policy that allows 45 million innocent unborn babies to be murdered."--rino
What policy would that be? No one is promoting abortion as policy. It is left up to the individual to decide for his/herself. You are showing your authoritarian stripes when you dismiss the rights of individuals in lieu of your personal/religious preference.
Secondly, you completely ignore admonishment from Jesus himself on how to treat prisoners, brethren and/or strangers. Hypocrite.
If abortion is bad, then invading a country that was NO threat to us, deposing it's leader, killing thousands of innocent women, children and elderly (again who were NO threat) get almost 4000 of our own soldiers slaughtered for no reason except the greed and insanity of that POS in the white house. - who is now trying the same tactics on yet ANOTHER country.
Bottom line - Killing is killing and killing is WRONG. - but apparently it's okay to torture and kill for BUSHIE and his "cause"
Yes, those evil right wingers are now just going to round up everybody in concentration camps and kill them all! I can't believe you uncovered our secret plot! Seriously, how much more paranoid and crazy can you possibly get?
Just look at the dialogue we get from rightwingers these days. The hugely popular Ann Coulter says the only way to talk to a liberal is with a baseball bat. You have Michael Savage (no.2 in radio ratings) saying frequently that liberalism is a mental disorder. I hear noted conservatives frequently talking about the death of liberalism as a good thing.
You may think such statements are benign, but I have seen how things started with this kind of rhetoric in Germany and Rwanda among other places. It always starts with rhetoric and ends when no one is left to kill or enslave.
I have no doubt that what Tex says is true for a surprisingly large portion of the population. Just go to freerepublic and see for yourself. It ain't pretty. I hope to God none of these folks ever gain power.
I agree with you. I heard that cranking the air conditioning too low was also torture. I think MMFA maybe making this out to be bigger than it is as they only quote one "expert" and claim long term physical effects, but none can be found.
You people are below contempt. Your beliefs are unamerican and inhumane. If something needs to be debated about whether it is torture, it should be avoided. As far as waterboarding goes, it has been considered torture by the Geneva conventions for 100 years. We signed that treaty, which makes it national law under the Constitution. We signed it because we used to be a proud, decent, moral country. We also did not want others to torture our citizens.
Imagine for a minute that another country was holding our citizens without due process or geneva convention rights and was admitting that they were being waterboarded and subjected to other torture methods.
I heard a clip from Bush I, where he was recalling the Gulf War and a scene where US soldiers surrounded an Iraqi soldier in a fox hole. He was scared, and our troops said, "We won't hurt you, we're Americans". He started crying as he retold that story, I imagine because of the horrendous damage that his son did to our morales and our reputation. We used to be the example for the rest of the world, we used to be proud of our standing in the world. We used to be able to set an example for the actions of other countries. We are now no more than a third-world regime that happens to have a huge amount of fire-power.
Anyone who wants to argue in favor of torture or anything approaching it can get the hell out of my country. We don't need you and we don't want you here. Go live in Pakistan. You are destroying our country and you are on the fast track to hell. I'm sorry that you are so scared of the muslim boogie man, but you are destroying yourself and all the rest of us with your disgusting views.
"...many people at MMFA are falling for the propaganda of the enemy. It is a part of the terrorist playbook to cry "torture" no matter how they are treated."
Are you for real? Waterboarding has been torture since The Inquisition. It was reportedly used by the Gestapo and the Khmer Rouge. It's not a question of coddling terrorists...an insulting, sophomoric distraction used by sophomorically simplistic people who populate the right wing. If we have to break the law and abandon the honorable principles of what it is to be American in order to fight terrorists then we are truly screwed...it's just a matter of time before we fall.
But it's you folks on the right who think America is so weak we have to break the law and abandon our principles to combat terrorism. It is the right wing that has no faith in America...and I suspect one of the reasons is that they've been too busy chasing money all of their lives to have ever understood what being an American really means. You guys would resort to behaving like a bunch of savages...no better than terrorists. The country needs protection from you as much as from terrorists.
It was used in the Spanish Inquisitions, we put Japanese interrogators in prison for using it and called it a war crime. There isnt any question it is torture. I think YOU are brainwashed and are buying the propaganda not us.
Here's why accepting waterboarding and other methods of torture is so dangerous. Proponenents argue the torture is only used on known terrorists, where actionable intelligence is likely to be discoverd. Eventually, some goverment or military official is going to name someone a "terrorist", have that person declared an "enemy combatant" and then tortured until they confess and name additional conspirators. All the while the person is simply a political opponent or dissenter. History teaches us that this will happen, over and over. We have already seen where persons who oppose this occupation of Iraq declared to be treasonous. (1) It is a small step on a very steep and slippery slope to have a person accused of being a traitor, arrested and then "interrogated harshly" until the confession and incriminating testimony are extracted, all in the name of "THE WAR on TERROR!!! ". 1 [link to www.worldnetdaily.com]
I think these uber-patriot jingofascists who are touting the virtues of waterboarding have watched one too many episodes of "24". They probably believe that Wyatt Earp could shoot the guns out of bad guys' hands, too.
I think Batman had a little can of Truth Spray in his utility belt, too. Why don't the Bushskies have their top scienticians looking into that?
See, I am just a grasshopper learning from masters like yourself and Tex, "uber-patriot jingofascists". I am humbled.
Consider a christmas toy soooo, insane.
No thanks Mudock, why are we having a discussion about the national use of torture and its deffinition. I prefer a non torture America. It might make you feel real good. It screws up so much of our national identity. It accomplishes so little of any value.
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1599861,00.html
http://civilliberty.about.com/b/a/257618.htm
There is a scene in George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four where the torturer, identified as O'Brien, has rigged up would-be revolutionary Winston to a machine that creates unimaginable torment. "How many fingers am I holding up?" O'Brien asks him as he holds up one hand with four fingers extended. "Four," Winston replies. "And if the party says that it is not four but five, how many?" O'Brien asks. "Four," Winston responds again. O'Brien cranks up the machine and interrogates Winston over and over until he does, in fact, see five fingers.And that's how torture generates confessions.Last week, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed allegedly confessed to orchestrating the 9/11 attacks, coordinating planned attacks on 16 other countries, and personally killing Daniel Pearl. But he seems to have no real idea how the 9/11 hijackers were recruited, it is unlikely that al-Qaeda would have had one person orchestrate attacks in 17 countries from a single location, and there is videotaped evidence that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed did not, in fact, kill Daniel Pearl. So what are we to make of this? Reuters quotes the experts:
Mary. I heard Khalid Sheikh Mohammed even confessed to killing JFK... ;>)
...and Jimmy Hoffa. ;>)
...and Princess Di, too!
They had to threaten to waterboard KSM again just to get him to shut up.. ;>)
Yes, I believe you are right, but not before he blurted out that he started the Reichstag fire
Unfortunately, the cretins who are behind our current foreign policy seem to think of "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but as a handbook.
Have you read Baer's book"See No Evil"? He states that the CIA would've been much more effective with intelligence had the US not gotten so caught up with political correctness.
Stupid political correctness. If we didn't have that, torture would be cool.
; )
And waterboarding the guy's CHILD before his eyes iseven MORE effective!
Isn't it? Isn't the same argument you guys use to justify torture equally useful to justify threatening the guy's children? Maybe just hold a gun at the back of the child's head--you know, where she can't see, except reflected in her father's eyes?
Becaue, as the National Reviews says, the ends justify the means, don't they?
If you can get some important information out of someone, then why not pour water over the little girl's head and let her father watch? After all, it's not torture, is it? She'll be a little upset, and maybe choke a little, but no permanent damage will be done....
And, come to think of it, why notdo it to her without her clothes? That's not torture either...
Let me put it to you another way: do you know what the word evil means.
It is the weak-minded, unimaginative and morally equivocal who would combat evil by being evil.
George H. W. Bush acknowledged what our troops told Iraqi captives on the battlefield; "We're Americans. We're not going to harm you." And he started to weep.
http://www.newshounds.us/2007/11/04/george_herbert_walker_bush_cries_during_fox_news_sunday_interview.php
He knows this is no longer true. His son tortures prisoners. He imprisons people without trial. George H.W. Bush has wept on other occaisions which onlookers could only conclude that he's ashamed of what his son has done to this country.
As well he should be.
Indeed, because he helped put the would-be dictator-chimp and his Svengali (Cheney) there.
I guess these Generals and Admirals are just unAmerican "phoney soldiers":
Retired Generals to Patrick Leahy on “Waterboarding”, and Mukasy nomination. 11/5/07 http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200711/110507a.html
“[…] The Rule of Law is fundamental to our existence as a civilized nation. The Rule of Law is not a goal which we merely aspire to achieve; it is the floor below which we must not sink. […] In this instance, the relevant rule-the law-has long been clear: Waterboarding detainees amounts to illegal torture in all circumstances. To suggest otherwise-or even give credence to such a suggestion-represents both an affront to the law and to the core values of our nation. […]”How can a person who identifies themself with the religious right accept torture? I'm a realist. In war nasty things are going to happen on all sides. It's not like we're playing a game of basketball The truth is lives are on the line. But when I read some of the posts on this msg board I wonder why some of these Christians don't stop worrying about the Koran and start paying attention to the message in our own Bible.
I suspect it's because they are violating the first commandment "Thou shalt have no other gods before Me."
Their god is the god of BEING RIGHT, which they worship above all others. They share this god with the Muslim fundamentalists.
I've finally figured it out! The last seven years have just been one gigantic global version of the Saw movies. Osama bin Laden is that jigsaw guy and he has gotten us to completely compromise our entire belief system in order to supposedly save ourselves. Meanwhile, we have actually destroyed ourselves in the process.
I've said it before, but I'm going to keep on it unitl I hear other people start saying it:
WATERBOARDING (along with torture, Abu Girab, Guantanamo Bay, suspension of Habeus, Suspension of Geneva, much of the patriot act, etc...) is/are nothing more that NATIONAL EMBARRASSMENTS!
Al Quaeda destoys BULDINGS. Republicans are DESTROYING OUR VALUES! DESTROYING EVERYTHIGN THAT MAKES (or made) THIS CONUTRY GREAT!
Saving lives? People will die anyway (just later). Can't stop that (just delay it) but OUR VALUES, and the CONSTITUTION were meant to LIVE ON! They were meant to safegaurd our lives and our liberty FOREVER. But these guys don't want to safeguard that! They want to "save" us, at the expense of what makes us WORTH SAVING!
Listen people: Al-Queda cannot defeat us militarily. It's a mathematic impossibility. They're are not enough airplanes to crash donw on us to physically destroy or militarily conquer the country. All they can do (and this has started, make no mistake - they are winning this battle hands down) is to scare our people into letting our leaders take away our freedom, and all that we value as AMERICANS, for they sake of security. W. and his cronies are doing this. They are doing Al-Quaeda's bidding. They are destroying our freedom.
It is crystal clear: Our leaders have no values.
Hear, hear. Great post
Eddie, you aren't just a nice guy (though that's admirable, too). You are a truly good person.
NICEGUY:
The airliner attack was a one-shot deal. Even on THAT DAY, when the unthinkable was learned by the airliner over Pennsylvania, the passengers realized they would not be facing the usual hostage situation. When they heard that the terrorists intended to crash the plane, they fought back.
Never again will terrorists be able to take over an airliner, because the passengers now have no reason to expect a "peaceful settlement". That ploy worked once, and never again.
Right on. I totally agree with you. (I'm actually a little shocked it happened then! Boxcutters?!) I just hope we're right.
Many of you right wing nutcases think that waterboarding isn't torture, and you believe it's okay for us to use this technique on the "terrorists." So I must ask: If some of our troops are captured, is it okay if they are subjected to waterboarding by Islamic radicals?
I doubt I'll get an answer.
Rick, the answer you will most likely get is that the Islamofascists will kill any of our troops they capture, not waterboard them. That may be true, but therein lies what I think is one of the unspoken justifications for torture the right wing goobers believe...if you can't kill the Islamofascists then torture them to exact punishment.
That's probably the way they would answer it, if they attempt to at all. [crickets chirping] they'll take a 90 degree turn from questions that provoke a cognative response, then start spouting AM-HateTalkRadio and Fox "News" talking points, then conclude by telling us how stupid we are.
All I want to know is: Would it be okay if Islamic radicals waterboarded our captured troops?
No it's not OK to waterbroad our troops. But they arent terorists. When they decide its torture we should stop doing it. But for now maybe we should stop until they decide if its torture. But we have to stop the terorists any way we can and keep our country safe and our troops safe. I'm not trying to be unreasnable but I think there is an answer to this problem with out everyone fighting each other about it.
And that answer would be.....?
The answer is that if it might be construed as torture, don't do it.
We've always taken the moral high ground in how we treat our prisoners.
Our policies have never been based on what is done to our citizens held by other countries but on American values.
If American values now include anything that could be determined to be torture then we've become our own enemy.
Funny how that concept of "moral high ground" is suddenly so unfathomable to the "values voters". This reminds me of that incident a while back when an American soldier was video-taped shooting an unarmed wounded Iraqi. The Jingofascists couldn't understand why the soldier should be held accountable. Some even wanted to give him a medal. While I would not necessarily prosecute a soldier who does something like that in the heat of combat, we also shouldn't condone such actions as official policy. We have to give combat soldiers some room for error, but we cannot allow intentional cruelty to go upunished, either. But there's that pesky gray thinking again....conservatives just hate it.
You've hit it. It is punishment by small people, nothing more. It is the same as capital punishment. They don't care if you show them mountains of evidence that it is not a deterrant, or that innocent people were roped up in the system and killed. They simply don't care because they have this Wild West wet dream about being the sidekick of some hard*ss sheriff (they could never be the actual one doing the hurtin', even in their fantasies).
I'm sorry that all those right-wingers were ignored by your mommies, or were given atomic wedgies by the bigger kids in school, or virgins through college, or are told what to do by your wife, or are secretly gay and hate yourself for it, or whatever reason you have for your psychoses. Regardless, it does not excuse their actions, and it certainly does not excuse us for not shouting them down and not allowing them to have any power whatsoever.
"Waterboarding is something of which every American should be proud"
I love the way conservatives think. You can torture people with pride, but you can't go around ending sentences with a preposition. And for those who say they can't find any long-term physical effects from waterboarding, you should have read the article.
"There is a real risk of death from actually drowning or suffering a heart attack or damage to the lungs from inhalation of water."
I really think death can be considered a pretty long-term physical effect. They still haven't found a cure for it.
I can only take comfort in the trend I see in the Bush administration's approval numbers. Bed-wetting pussies like the torture-condoning losers who post here are shrinking in numbers.
I couldn't really blame those who reacted entirely on emotion and fear after 9/11, and it's good to see that many have come around to remembering what America is about.
Hopefully the political pendulum is swinging away from the idiocy of the past 7 years, and the diminishing group of paranoid sheep will find themselves locked up in their bunkers, wearing star-spangled adult diapers, quivering away with Fox news on the tube, waiting to die.
Well,
Shall WE announce this to the world? Let's see, " Americans should be proud of waterboarding", Since its utilitarian results offer up Intel at a minimum of discomfort.
Murdock's statement is symptomatic of how far WE have descended from the lofty principles of our OWN Declaration of Independence and Constitution , both of which had their original premises promulgated and based on the inherent 'Natural Rights of Man AND for the religiously inclined, bestowed by a Creator.
A culture reared in the Rambo-esque and Jack Bauer antics of '24' fame has become desensitized to the norms which ought to govern a civilized people and such a sentiment stands diametrically opposed to a Nation conceived in Liberty, thoroughly undermining any claim to God-given guidance. Gee, who would the enlightened carpenter from Galilee have waterterboarded? Perhaps, Judas should have been wb'd by Peter.
We mock international prohibitions against obvious sanctions already determined by multi-lateral and legal consensus to be defined as tortuous practices and then claim to the world that it is our inherent right to abrogate our signed and Constitutionally binding agreements AND essentially define for ourselves what is acceptable. What more can WE expect when the a newly designated candidate for Attorney General appearing before Congressional review can't answer or has no opinion on whether waterboarding constitutes TORTURE ??????
There is only one such term for such egregious behavior..... HYPOCRITES!!!
The slide to barbarism from such an uncritical understanding of such a practice is NOT very far away. Oh HELL, WE are already there AND by doing so, WE have put every American soldier, diplomat and citizen in danger of reciprocated and potentially abusive treatment . After all, PAYBACK is a b_tch!!!!!!!
"[w]aterboarding is something of which every American should be proud,"
I am truly ashamed. If this statement is true then the United States of America should and deserves to fall -- as it has shredded its Constitution, reputation, and decency.
"Waterboarding is something of which every Amercian should be proud"
NOT THIS AMERICAN, MURDOCK!!!
"I'm not suggesting that 'waterboarding' doesn't muss up a person's hare a little bit, but as the former director of the CIA stated: It saved lives. "
- justicetruthus8276 / Monday November 5, 2007 08:17:01 PM EST
Aw geez, now were torturing rabbits? or is the bad spelling torturing me?
"Aw geez, now were torturing rabbits?"
Wouldn't surprise me in the least if they stooped to that level. NOTHING surprises me anymore with that loony bunch. They do not seem to place a high value on life... unless it suits their egotistical fantasies.
This waterboarding thing and the psychos on the Right who are gung ho about it once again are just chickenhawks. Like they haven't served in any war so they also have never been tortured. And anecdotal bullsh*t spewed on Fux News don't count as 'first-hand' experiences and descriptions of it. They can stage waterboarding scenes until Hell freezes over but what the comatose masses fail to understand is that those 'stages' do not come even close to reality.
Just ask John McCain. While I do not agree with his politics he is correct on the issue of torture and THAT is a stance of which we should be proud - not some single-digit IQ level trash written by some sheltered loser 'pundit'.
I understand that the "Slippery Slope" is a logical fallacy, but it can be an entertaining exercise, nonetheless. Suppose that we follow the reasoning of the Jingofascists and concede that waterboarding is not torture, since it causes "no lasting physical damage". Given that green light, what other "techniques" can they think of which also leave "no lasting physical damage". Shoving hot needles under the fingernails? Surely that would heal in a matter of weeks. Bludgeoning with a bar of soap in a sock? I understand that it leaves only a few marks. How about slapping the soles of the feet with a leather strap? I'll bet the art of accupuncture is a goldmine of places where you can stick a needle which will cause excruciating pain, yet leave no lasting physical damage. Maybe we could drill out their teeth with no novacaine, like that scene in "Marathon Man". Teeth can be replaced, after all.
"Is it saaaaaffffffffe?"
That was a sadistic scene. Olivier was brilliant though... just plain evil. Wonder if Bush/Cheney get off on that part...
I would imagine so. They probably get their kicks watching Jack Bauer shoot turrists in the kneecaps and getting instant confessions about the location of nuclear devices.
Actually, it wouldn't surprise me if they are developing even more effective "non-torture" techniques that push the envelope while we're distracted by the waterboarding broohaha. These coerced "confessions" are quite useful to them politically. When they claim they've thwarted X number of terror plots, who's to prove them wrong? It's pretty much the same scam used by Pet Psychics. If I tell you what your dog is thinking, how will you check my accuracy? Ask the dog?
Murdock is resorting to an old Soviet tactic:
"Respond to a damaging truth by promoting a more outrageous lie"
When someone can make a statement so 1) blatantly ignorant, 2) contemptible of international law, and 3) absent any shred of morality or humanity, his future byline under his screen image on TV should be:
Deroy Murdock - American Jihadist.
And, it just came to mind....since they have assured us that waterboarding ain't torture, maybe our police should start using it to get confessions out of criminals? After all, the average American is still more likely to be a victim of random crime than to die from a terrorist attack. If waterboarding is so effective, and so benign, I suggest we start teaching it in our law enforcement academies immediately. Just think of the money we could save...three hours of waterboarding is MUCH cheaper than a six month jury trial. We could save enough money to pay for another war!
maybe our police should start using it to get confessions out of criminals? After all, the average American is still more likely to be a victim of random crime than to die from a terrorist attack.
Apparently GHOULIANI has already done that. He "claims" he did, anyway.
To paraphrase a famous quote made by the late Los Angeles mayor Sam Yorty to latino activist Oscar Zeta Acosta (The Brown Buffalo) "You know nothing is gonna change until you burn down some buildings."
All you couch potatoes should think about that.
Keith Olbermann's Special Comment from last night.
Subject: Waterboarding and the criminal administration.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21644133/
I watched that. I don't know if he writes that stuff himself, but it's brilliant. He does a good job of distilling the disgusting nature of our current administration. It amazes me that people who so vilified Bill Clinton can turn around and support Bush and Cheney's excesses without blinking.
I'm sure at one time, David Duke, Strom Thurmond, or someone, said "Lynching is something of which every Americans should be proud." Problem is, the irony is completely lost on Mr. Murdock I'm sure.
Adversus Rino I.Since my comment is a bit long, I am posting it in three sections: Adversus Rino I, Adversus Rino II, and Adversus Rino III. I hope those who read it think that it was worth it.Without even getting into issues such as whether waterboarding is torture according to your definition vs. my definition vs. David Addington's definition; without even raising the issue as to whether it works or not, e.g., without even trying to determine the truth of the claim that it has been used successfully to thwart terrorist plots, there is a consistency test for measuring the acceptability of the logic of the likes of Rino Hunter et al (e.g., Judge "I don't know it until I see it" Mukasey) on the issue of torture in general and waterboarding in particular.Suppose Rino's son was a CIA agent engaged in covert operations in Pakistan or wherever. Suppose he was captured by the bad guys, you know, Al Qaeda. Suppose they waterboarded him to try to get information about what he was up to.Now, suppose we were successful in capturing those bad guys some day, and even figured out a way to bring them to trial rather than lock them up and throw away the key with no judicial process whatsoever.Further suppose that the only concrete evidence we had against at least one of those bad guys, let's call him Mohammed, was that he engaged in waterboarding Rino's son, nothing else.Would Rino say that his conceptions of morality and justice would justify him in agreeing with the prosecutors who brought a criminal charge against Mohammed precisely for waterboarding? Even though waterboarding does not rise to the level of ipso facto criminal behavior for Rino, at least as he has apparently argues above? I mean, if it were ipso facto criminal behavior, he could not, with any consistency, excuse it in the case where the good guys are doing it to the bad guys.Continue at Adversus Rino II
Adversus Rino IIDoes Rino really want to argue that it all depends who is doing the waterboarding to make that specific act, apart from everything else, criminal? Is his understanding of morality and justice a matter of arguing that that at least in this case it's about the end justifying the means?If so, does Rino understand why we would never want him to have the responsibility for teaching logic or moral theory to anybody, despite the fact that he might otherwise be an estimable human being?Now, let's ratchet up the stakes for Rino.Say, for whatever inexplicable reason, that Mohammed was his wayward John Walker Lynd type son who had actually gone over to the dark side and engaged in the waterboarding for the evil Al Qaeda – in this case of his own brother, but if that's too complicated (some brothers DESERVE waterboarding for what they did to their siblings when they were younger!) we can simply make it any old CIA agent and not Rino's other son.Continue at Adversus Rino III
Adversus Rino IIITwo questions for Rino:1. Would Rino support waterboarding his own son, baptized Rino Jr, but now known as Mohammed, in order to get him to admit to having waterboarded the CIA agent, the son of whomever?2. Assume that Rino has principled scruples about Mohammed's 5th amendment rights of not being able to be forced – I'll say! – to testify against himself. So let's shift the example slightly. Assume Mohammed, Rino's wayward son, did not actually waterboard the CIA agent, but there was good reason to think that he knew, say, Ahmed did, even, let's say, though he had tried to argue against it at the time because he, Mohammed, thought it was ipso facto criminal behavior. But he was unsuccessful in persuading Ahmed not to waterboard the CIA agent. Would Rino agree that it was OK to waterboard Mohammed in order to get him to divulge the fact that it was Ahmed who had engaged in the criminal behavior of waterboarding the CIA agent?Now I don't really know for sure, and I AM open to being surprised about this, but I would not at all be surprised to see Rino, if he is still checking to see whether anyone has said any new mean things about him in this thread, agreeing that it was OK to waterboard Mohammed in this hypothetical scenario, if only to try to achieve some consistency with his earlier statements about the matter. That is, I suspect that even Rino might prefer to try to salvage his position from he charge of inconsistency, even if it meant, alas, making Mohammed go through waterboarding.As long as it was only a verbal concession on his part.But why do I have the feeling that if the example were real and not hypothetical, i.e., if his (admittedly) wayward son, Mohammed, were REALLY about to be waterboarded, that Rino would abruptly switch sides in the argument – even if it meant swallowing a bit of inconsistency?In short, why do I have the feeling, which admittedly I can't prove, that Rino, in his theory of morality and justice, is not so delicately positioned somewhere between a tribalistic blowhard and a hypocrite?
For those who feel the only way we can get useful information from criminals and "Bad Guys" is via torture, I might point out that we have extensive knowledge regarding street gangs and organized crime - often more than the criminals themselves. I do not recall us torturing individuals to discover this information. Instead, we used the method already described within this thread as "rapport building". It is amazing - the technique the experts say is extremely effective is called "useless" by the WingNuts...and the technique the experts say is extremely ineffective is called "Wonderfully necessary" by the same WingNuts....