Bin Laden is dead

[LuckyKBoxer]

Some of us have, that's why we accept the illegality of it, the immorality of it, and the plain wrongness and contradictory nature of it.

But, Emperor George the Dim said he was above the law and could do what he wanted, and Prince Dick the Rabid did agree, and they had a fool pen a tome for the ages, which was passed down unto the faithful who hold it as Gospel against the evils of the unbelievers. You know, the legal community.

Me, I'd love to see them both waterboarded.
Anyway, gotta run, have to go watch that documentary "Lil Bush". The episode where Lil Cheny's black heart bursts is on.

umm Obama has carried on the practice, or at least allowed it to continue..

 

[Bob Hubbard]

you might as well asked them to translate your farts into english

I now have my summer project.....with the help of a triple bean burrito

umm Obama has carried on the practice, or at least allowed it to continue..

Community Organizer Obama is well covered here, but yes he's also not quite right. He's also in the documentary. Something about building a house for the poor which lil Cheney burns down for the insurance money.

 

[Big Don]

ok, i'll agree with you there. Me too. I'd hold a fire sale. :d

groan!

 

[The Last Legionary]

 

[billc]

Luckyboxer, they don't want to understand how the C.I.A. actually used waterboarding to get the information. They call it torture as if it has anything in common with pincers, and pliers and batteries connected to sensitive parts of the anatomy. It is not even close. If they would read "Courting Disaster," or the book "Master Mind," they would understand the process of information gathering that was used. They waterboarded KSM three times. He broke, and decided that he had had enough. He then went on to conduct lectures for intelligence analysts on the al queda network, their leadership, their financing, how they moved people around the world, he told them everything. Before he was waterboarded he didn't tell them anything. He was also ready for the water boarding through his terrorist training. When they were pouring the water on him, he knew exactly how long they could pour the water and would show them he was counting the seconds on his fingers.

I was listening to Dennis Miller today at work. He made the point that if you knew one of these jerks had knowledge of a bomb attack, and you didn't waterboard him, that would be the immoral act. To let innocent people die, when a non-lethal, safe, and mild form of coercian will get the information you need would be wrong.

The people on the other side of the argument throw out the word torture in order to silence the argument. Torture brings to mind intense pain, long term damage, and physical injury, and is nothing like the water boarding the C.I.A. used. Oliver North was on the radio show I listen to in the morning, Don And Roma out of chicago, he said he has been waterboarded 3 times, and when he was an instructor at S.E.R.E. he waterboarded trainees. He has no problem with using it. Of course a british writer, an older british writer, and a shock jock know more than a S.E.R.E instructor.

 

[billc]

Two medal of honor recipients who were held with John McCain as P.O.W.'s during the vietnam war also disagree that waterboarding is torture. Both men were tortured horribly by the vietnamese socialists. Bud Day says it is harsh treatment but not even close to actual torture. I'll listen to these men over a writer and a shock jock.

Leo Thorsness:
http://www.looktruenorth.com/securi...orsness-torture-thoughts-on-memorial-day.html

If someone surveyed the surviving Vietnam POWs, we would likely not agree on one definition of torture. In fact, we wouldn't agree if waterboarding is torture. For example, John McCain, Bud Day and I were recently together. Bud is one of the toughest and most tortured Vietnam POWs. John thinks waterboarding is torture; Bud and I believe it is harsh treatment, but not torture. Other POWs would have varying opinions. I don't claim to be right; we just disagree. But as someone who has been severely tortured over an extended time, my first hand view on torture is this:

Torture, when used by an expert, can produce useful, truthful information. I base that on my experience. I believe that during torture, there is a narrow "window of truth" as pain (often multiple kinds) is increased. Beyond that point, if torture increases, the person breaks, or dies if he continues to resist.

Colonel Bud Day:

http://olotliny.wordpress.com/2009/...-of-honor-recipient-prisoner-of-war-survivor/


I just talked to MOH holder Leo Thorsness http://www.pbs.org/weta/americanvalor/stories/thorsness.html who was also in my sq in jail…. as was John McCain … and we agree that McCain does not speak for the POW group when he claims that Al Gharib was torture… or that “water boarding” is torture.

Point out the stupidity of the claims that water boarding …which has no after effect… is torture. If it got the Arab to cough up the story about how he planned the attack on the twin towers in NYC … hurrah for the guy who poured the water.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Sigh.

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

United States law

The United States Supreme Court in Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain, said that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights "does not of its own force impose obligations as a matter of international law."[182] However, the United States has a historical record of regarding water torture as a war crime, and has prosecuted as war criminals individuals for the use of such practices in the past.
In 1947, the United States prosecuted a Japanese civilian who had served in World War II as an interpreter for the Japanese military, Yukio Asano, for "Violation of the Laws and Customs of War," asserting that he "did unlawfully take and convert to his own use Red Cross packages and supplies intended for" prisoners, but, far worse, that he also "did willfully and unlawfully mistreat and torture" prisoners of war. Asano received a sentence of 15 years of hard labor.[115] The charges against Asano included "beating using hands, fists, club; kicking; water torture; burning using cigarettes; strapping on a stretcher head downward."[183] The specifications in the charges with regard to "water torture" consisted of "pouring water up [the] nostrils" of one prisoner, "forcing water into [the] mouths and noses" of two other prisoners, and "forcing water into [the] nose" of a fourth prisoner.[184]
Following the attacks of September 11, 2001, several memoranda, including the Bybee memo, were written analyzing the legal position and possibilities in the treatment of prisoners.[185] The memos, known today as the "torture memos,"[186] advocate enhanced interrogation techniques, while pointing out that refuting the Geneva Conventions would reduce the possibility of prosecution for war crimes.[187][188] In addition, a new definition of torture was issued. Most actions that fall under the international definition do not fall within this new definition advocated by the U.S.[189][190]
In its 2005 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, the U.S. Department of State formally recognized "submersion of the head in water" as torture in its examination of Tunisia's poor human rights record,[45] and critics of waterboarding[who?] draw parallels between the two techniques, citing the similar usage of water on the subject.[citation needed]
On 6 September 2006, the U.S. Department of Defense released a revised Army Field Manual entitled Human Intelligence Collector Operations that prohibits the use of waterboarding by U.S. military personnel. The department adopted the manual amid widespread criticism of U.S. handling of prisoners in the War on Terrorism, and prohibits other practices in addition to waterboarding. The revised manual applies only to U.S. military personnel, and as such does not apply to the practices of the CIA.[191] Nevertheless Steven G. Bradbury, acting head of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Office of Legal Counsel, on 14 February 2008 testified:

There has been no determination by the Justice Department that the use of waterboarding, under any circumstances, would be lawful under current law.[192]
​

In addition, both under the War Crimes Act[193] and international law, violators of the laws of war are criminally liable under the command responsibility, and they could still be prosecuted for war crimes.[194] Commenting on the so-called "torture memoranda" Scott Horton pointed out

the possibility that the authors of these memoranda counseled the use of lethal and unlawful techniques, and therefore face criminal culpability themselves. That, after all, is the teaching of United States v. Altstötter, the Nuremberg case brought against German Justice Department lawyers whose memoranda crafted the basis for implementation of the infamous "Night and Fog Decree."[195]
​

Michael Mukasey's refusal to investigate and prosecute anyone that relied on these legal opinions led Jordan Paust of the University of Houston Law Center to write an article for JURIST stating:

it is legally and morally impossible for any member of the executive branch to be acting lawfully or within the scope of his or her authority while following OLC opinions that are manifestly inconsistent with or violative of the law. General Mukasey, just following orders is no defense![196]
​

On 22 February 2008 Senator Sheldon Whitehouse made public that "the Justice Department has announced it has launched an investigation of the role of top DOJ officials and staff attorneys in authorizing and/or overseeing the use of waterboarding by U.S. intelligence agencies."[197][198]
Both houses of the United States Congress approved a bill by February 2008 that would ban waterboarding and other harsh interrogation methods, the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008. As he promised, President Bush vetoed the legislation on 8 March. His veto applied to the authorization for the entire intelligence budget for the 2008 fiscal year, but he cited the waterboarding ban as the reason for the veto.[199] Supporters of the bill supporters lacked enough votes to overturn the veto.[200]
On 22 January 2009 President Barack Obama signed an executive order that requires both U.S. military and paramilitary organizations to use the Army Field Manual as the guide on getting information from prisoners, moving away from the Bush administration tactics.[201]

But, lets go read a couple of books by guys who were discredited during the last major debate on this.Former military interrogator and author of How to Break a Terrorist, Matthew Alexander, characterizes Thiessen's book "Courting Disaster" as 'a literary defense of war criminals'. The book is a one sided defense of torture, carefully omitting the 'con' argument. The post-war trials of Japanese war criminals punished for torture, including waterboarding, and examples where law enforcement officials have been discharged or even imprisoned for the activity are not even mentioned. People much more knowledgeable than me have gone through this book and debunked it cover to cover.

 

[billc]

Well the book "Courting disaster," covers exactly what the Japanese did and it isn't what the C.I.A. did. the Japanese waterboarding consisted of forcing water into the victims abdomen and intestines to the point that the abdmen swelled to the point of causing massive pain and agony. Once they could not force more water into the victims body, the japanese interrogator would jump with both feet on the vicitms stomach forcing the victim to forcibly expel the water and the process would start over again. They did this not only to extract informatin but for fun.

THIS IS NOT THE WAY THE C.I.A. CONDUCTED WATERBOARDING, which is why it is important to know the difference. The inquistion and the Kmer Rouge also are usually mentioned because they tortured with water as well and once again, it was not what the C.I.A. did. To say it is is to be innaccurate and misleading to say the least. Saying that what the japanese, inquistition and the kmer rouge did is the same as what the C.I.A. did is lazy argumentation. It is not even close to being the same thing. Not even remotely close.

 

[billc]

A new one for information about the waterboarding of KSM:"Master Mind"

http://www.amazon.com/Mastermind-Ar...=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1304737432&sr=1-1

from the info on the book:


* How KSM's waterboarding helped the CIA stop terror plots already in motion, saving thousands of lives
* How the ACLU and Janet Reno raised $8.5 million to fund the legal defense of KSM and other admitted terrorists

 

[elder999]

e. The inquistion and the Kmer Rouge also are usually mentioned because they tortured with water as well and once again, it was not what the C.I.A. did. To say it is is to be innaccurate and misleading to say the least. Saying that what the japanese, inquistition and the kmer rouge did is the same as what the C.I.A. did is lazy argumentation. It is not even close to being the same thing. Not even remotely close.

Odd. This



is what the Khmer Rouge did-it's painted by one of their victims.

This:

Is a CIA waterboarding, or, actually, SERE training waterboarding.

What, pray tell, is the difference? Other than "Khmer Rouge=evil, CIA=good?"

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Odd. This



is what the Khmer Rouge did-it's painted by one of their victims.

This:

Is a CIA waterboarding, or, actually, SERE training waterboarding.

What, pray tell, is the difference? Other than "Khmer Rouge=evil, CIA=good?"

The difference is obvious.
The CIA lets you wear a tee shirt, and have your hands in your pocket.
MAJOR DIFFERENCE!!!

/sarcasm

 

[billc]

From "Courting Disaster."

"...In Phnom Penh, a man named Kaing Guek Eav-a.k.a. "dutch" was facing prosecution for his crime as commander of the Kmer Rouge torture prison...a prisoner is submerged in a life-sized box full of water, handcuffed to the side so he cannot escape or raise his head to breathe..."

"During Dutch's reign of terror at S-21, more than 14,000 men, women and children were tortured there. Only seven people survived."

Yeah, that is the same as what the C.I.A. did...Not even close.

Funny, the picture shows the kmer rouge doing an example of waterboarding, first, when was the drawing made and by who, but more importantly, if the picture is accurate, ***you can see it is done to our own troops as part of sere training, or at least it was, courting disaster reports that most courses stopped using it because all the trainees broke, and they were not short or long term harmed by it. If you do it like I am sure the Kmer rouge did it, they harmed the person, The C.I.A. did not.

The C.I.A. waterboarded 3 men. All Terrorist leadership, to save innocent lives from maiming and death. Once the men cooperated the waterboarding stopped. Lives were saved at little cost to the terrorists.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

From "Courting Disaster."

"...In Phnom Penh, a man named Kaing Guek Eav-a.k.a. "dutch" was facing prosecution for his crime as commander of the Kmer Rouge torture prison...a prisoner is submerged in a life-sized box full of water, handcuffed to the side so he cannot escape or raise his head to breathe..."

"During Dutch's reign of terror at S-21, more than 14,000 men, women and children were tortured there. Only seven people survived."

Yeah, that is the same as what the C.I.A. did...Not even close.

Funny, the picture shows the kmer rouge doing an example of waterboarding, first, when was the drawing made and by who, but more importantly, if the picture is accurate, ***you can see it is done to our own troops as part of sere training, or at least it was, courting disaster reports that most courses stopped using it because all the trainees broke, and they were not short or long term harmed by it. If you do it like I am sure the Kmer rouge did it, they harmed the person, The C.I.A. did not.

The C.I.A. waterboarded 3 men. All Terrorist leadership, to save innocent lives from maiming and death. Once the men cooperated the waterboarding stopped. Lives were saved at little cost to the terrorists.

.

Former military interrogator and author of How to Break a Terrorist, Matthew Alexander, characterizes Thiessen's book "Courting Disaster" as 'a literary defense of war criminals'. The book is a one sided defense of torture, carefully omitting the 'con' argument. The post-war trials of Japanese war criminals punished for torture, including waterboarding, and examples where law enforcement officials have been discharged or even imprisoned for the activity are not even mentioned. People much more knowledgeable than me have gone through this book and debunked it cover to cover.

 

[billc]

Law enforcement officers should be arrested and tried if they waterboard people. It is against the law to do that to U.S. citizens. The C.I.A. doing it in foriegn countries to terrorist leadership to save lives is another story entirely.

I like the way some of these arguments go. I support limited waterboarding for specific types of prisoners under strict guidelines and people say I support torture, implying that I support cutting flesh, filling stomachs with water and jumping on them, pulling fingernails, using electrodes and other types of actual torture. I do not support torture, but that doesn't stop the posters here.

Let me try.

Some posters here have stated that the wound powder we now use for our soldiers originated from National socialist medical experiments on living people. They stated that even though it was gained in a bad way, they approve its use because they don't want to waste that knowledge. So here goes.

Apparently, they support performing medical experitments on living and consious people if it brings about useful information. There is no reason to ever experiment on living people, but apparently these posters do. Shame on them.

See how that works out there?

 

[shesulsa]

One of the biggest fallacies embraced by individuals such as these is that the US doesn't engage in the kind of activities we criticize (and sometimes invade) other countries for.

 

[billc]

Here is an article about water boardin and its effectiveness:

http://www.sundriesshack.com/2007/12/11/cia-agent-waterboarding-saved-lives/

From the article:

he word “torture” carries a certain number of very weighty connotations that I’m not sure apply to waterboarding. Should it be a regular part of our interrogations? Of course not, and I’m very glad that it isn’t. Let us remember here that for all the sturm und drang over waterboarding, it has been used only three times since 9/11, it hasn’t been used since 2003, and a bipartisan group of our duly-elected officials had oversight over the program and registered no meaningful objections to it when it was in use. What we do know now, and many of us strongly suspected for some time, is that waterboarding was at the extreme point of a very carefully-followed and strictly-approved continuum of interrogation techniques. It was not used recklessly, as you might have gathered from the shrill MSM coverage and the frantic accusations from the left. But it has to be on the table. It has to be part of the continuum. Because of all the extreme things we could do, this one is by far the least damaging and it works.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

"Some posters" here would be me. You can mention me by name Bill. I won't get offended.

Law enforcement officers should be arrested and tried if they waterboard people. It is against the law to do that to U.S. citizens. The C.I.A. doing it in foriegn countries to terrorist leadership to save lives is another story entirely.

I like the way some of these arguments go. I support limited waterboarding for specific types of prisoners under strict guidelines and people say I support torture, implying that I support cutting flesh, filling stomachs with water and jumping on them, pulling fingernails, using electrodes and other types of actual torture. I do not support torture, but that doesn't stop the posters here.

No. You don't support torture, except in X, Y and Z cases. That's what you've said.
As I've said, torture is illegal, in the US and outside the US.
Your argument that the CIA doing it elsewhere somehow makes it legal, makes as much sense as me arguing that I shouldn't get a traffic ticket in Canada because the speedlimit in NY is different.

Let me try.

Some posters here have stated that the wound powder we now use for our soldiers originated from National socialist medical experiments on living people. They stated that even though it was gained in a bad way, they approve its use because they don't want to waste that knowledge. So here goes.

Apparently, they support performing medical experitments on living and consious people if it brings about useful information. There is no reason to ever experiment on living people, but apparently these posters do. Shame on them.

See how that works out there?

No. I don't support medical research on unwilling subjects. But to discard it would be a waste.

 

[billc]

But if you support using national socialist medical experiments on living patient discoveries then you must support just doing medical experimentation in general to get even more knowledge, hence, that would make you just as guilty and bad. See how that works. It would help if people actually described what the C.I.A. did and what real torture looks like.

 

[shesulsa]

Real torture = waterboarding.

Pretend torture = foreplay.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Real torture = waterboarding.

Pretend torture = foreplay.

That's why I always have extra clamps on the fun shoots.