Waterboarding: Policy of a Cruel and Unusual President (VIDEO)

Experts say without a doubt, it is torture. History will demonstrate without a doubt, that the President supports the use of it.

(SALEM, Ore.) - Regular readers will not be shocked at my personal outrage over George W. Bush's support of torturing suspected enemies with the technique known as "waterboarding." The guy does not have our military's best interest at heart as respect for him falls to levels lower than ever expected.

Waterboarding makes the president's policies once again, the butt of bad jokes and parodies, like the video below from cartoonist Ignatius M. Dedd, creator of "Dead Guy, The Cartoon." While comics like Dedd help us find distraction and ultimately, perhaps survive the insanity of this presidency, it isn't in reality, funny at all.

The argument it always comes back to is, "What if that person has vital information that threatens the safety of American people?"

Sorry but that is the lamest reason anyone tries to put forward, it is the mantra or wimps and spineless politicians. Even if that person does know something, are we not better than that? Wasn't the justification of Manifest Destiny that we were "civilizing" the native population?

Anyone who watches the news knows that we are releasing detainees in droves from Guantanamo Bay lately, they are being released because most of them were misidentified. The cases against the ones who are truly threatening to us have been compromised by Bush policies. What good has any of it brought us?

We are not a civil or Christian country any longer, and the biggest irony is Bush's parading as a religious man as he sends thousands of his own countrymen to their death while the situation in Afghanistan, where the terrorists are located, has been ignored by his war desires.

Have we not learned that there is a line in the sand? Among other things, as a "Christian" nation, a concept I could debate for days, aren't we are supposed to remember this simple piece of Biblically inspired philosophy called "the Golden Rule?"

Isn't it simple to conclude that anything we do to our enemies, they will do to our own people if captured? I think that is terrible,

I realize Bush and Cheney and the lot do not have to consider such things, it will never happen to them. I fail to see how people in this country manage to continue this charade.

Each time I publish a piece like this I am accused of "being negative" and "bashing" George Bush, I wonder if it will happen this time? Are people really so snowed?

I hope the day comes when George W. Bush and his henchmen are tried and convicted for their crimes, crimes that have soiled our international reputation as a country with good intentions. I think every American should feel the same way. It is not easy to stand up, that is a fact, much easier to just keep your mouth shut and take it all as it comes, but I don't think that is what we are supposed to do when the problems in our nation are as clear as a slap in the face.

It's a torture technique that simulates drowning in a controlled environment. Wikipedia says waterboarding consists of immobilizing an individual on his or her back, with the head inclined downward, and pouring water over the face to force the inhalation of water into the lungs.

Experts say without a doubt, it is torture. History will demonstrate without a doubt, that the President supports the use of it.

Waterboarding has been used to obtain information, coerce confessions, punish, and intimidate for a long time. It relies on the gag reflex and people who have been subjected to it say it assaults all of a person's senses, causing them to fear for their lives.

In contrast to merely submerging the head, waterboarding elicits the gag reflex, and can make the subject believe death is imminent. The argument behind the use of this type of torture method is to cause extreme mental distress while possibly creating no lasting physical damage to the subject. That is what this government tells you, the same ones who let war veterans wither away from PTSD untreated.

In reality, Wikipedia says the psychological effects on victims of waterboarding can last long after the procedure. "Although waterboarding in cases can leave no lasting physical damage, it carries the real risks of extreme pain, damage to the lungs, brain damage caused by oxygen deprivation, injuries as a result of struggling against restraints (including broken bones), and even death."

For the younger generations, it is important to know that our nation left hundreds of living POW's to their fates during the Vietnam War, all because some who were POW's said they were tortured. Americans lost it, they were shocked and they hated the Communists for having done this to our people. In the end, President Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger used the torture of Americans to renig on a deal to pay Vietnam $2.2 billion in war reparations.

In fact, I just published a story earlier today about a Vietnam War Air Force pilot whose body was finally recovered and sent home after 35 years. What would he think of Americans legalizing the torture of human beings? Vietnam said at the time that if we didn't pay the $2.2 billion, it would cost us the return of living Prisoners of War. Sadly, they kept their word.

Man, have we ever changed as a nation, and now we have a presidential administration that shares a torture technique used by Hitler's Nazi party. Interestingly, some nations have criminally prosecuted individuals for performing waterboarding. Those countries include the United States.

Waterboarding was in the news in September 2006, after reports claimed that the Bush administration had authorized the use of waterboarding on extrajudicial prisoners of the United States.

According to ABC News, current and former CIA officers stated that "there is a presidential finding, signed in 2002, by President Bush, Condoleezza Rice and then-Attorney General John Ashcroft approving the 'enhanced' interrogation techniques, including waterboarding."

It is time to be real about this. Maybe we can't do anything right now, but real Americans need to take action when possible against the people who are making these crazy and cruel choices with our country that in turn, represent the rest of us.

---------------------------------------------------------
This video comes to you courtesy of cartoonist Ignatius M. Dedd and YouTube

------------------------------------------------------------

Tim King is a former U.S. Marine with almost twenty years of experience on the west coast as a television news producer, photojournalist and reporter. Today, in addition to his role as a war correspondent in Afghanistan where he spent the winter of 2006/07, this Los Angeles native serves as Salem-News.com's Executive News Editor. Salem-News.com is the nation's only truly independent high traffic news Website, affiliated only with Google News. You can send Tim an email at this address: newsroom@salem-news.com

Salem-News.com Top Stories

2025: Hope for the Best, Prepare for the Worst

Two Wars with No Way Out

No One Owns the Future

The Ugly Origins of Trump's America First Policy

A One-State Solution Could Transform the World

Comments

Comments are Closed on this story.

imwiseman November 21, 2009 8:26 am (Pacific time)

We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light. Quotation of Plato

Jenbluenow February 3, 2009 11:36 am (Pacific time)

My friend Christy sent me a link to a movie about radical muslims in America. These guys are absolutely nuts... they want to take over our country. http://www.thethirdjihad3.tk

SosyHooms July 28, 2008 10:32 am (Pacific time)

Hi All, Nice forum. happy to be here and hope to be more involved.
thanks, Mickael

GodsofChaos November 8, 2007 2:40 pm (Pacific time)

"But that never works when one must convince critical editor to get into paper or magazine, tough as it should be...especially if he paying for what you beat out on that old typewriter..."Henry Ruark Guess what Henry Ruark,we live in the year 2007 not 1957.We have something called the internet. I hate to break to you but,newspapers and magazines are a thing of the past. The internet is where most people get their information now. You ideology on who has right to speak is very 1950ish. In this day in age everyone can look up information. Yes you do not have to be a reporter to use Google. Now days everyone can be informed. I find your attitude snobbish. Side Note:You have been recently resorting to character assassination,change subjects,and think way to highly of yourself. Guess what I don't care less about your "authoritative opinion". What I do care about is what you have to say.

Henry Ruark November 8, 2007 1:35 pm (Pacific time)

Marine et al: Further re writing, see mine to Chaos re simple system where dialog by one writer undergoes challenge from others, used in many fields. Makes one wait until DONE something worth report, since others DOING are ready, AND waiting AND willing to respond with knowledge of their own. Never wrote re photo till had done so professionally; never wrote re Annual Report photography until after work with AR-leader; never wrote re learning media until 3yr EdD. prgrm at IU, later 12 yrs. producing in Chicago. Toughest job was editor of oldest, leading ed.magazine in Chicago, finding those with something worth ink... Too easy to get trapped and embarrassed to snitch from reading-only, as you suggest many do. But that never works when one must convince critical editor to get into paper or magazine, tough as it should be...especially if he paying for what you beat out on that old typewriter...

Henry Ruark November 8, 2007 12:13 pm (Pacific time)

Chaotic: Re-read yrs re "authoritative opinion" and discover you without clue to how professional work. Every time you publish, every other pro (in education, science, politics, culture, skills, et al) reads-you and can disagree with data and experience. It's called "the rational approach to science" among other areas,fyi; important because it dialogs one vs the others, forcing solid preparation for that proofing experience. Credibility established by yr success in dialog with yr colleagues --as intended here; but first comes honest, open approach, willingness to learn from others, and belief in documentation by those who really know, from study and further exchange with other professionals. You can see why yr scattershot approach indicates to me you simply playing games with open, honest sharer-types here. If NOT, ID self with details of bckgrnd, and let's continue direct... !!

Marine 3/5 November 8, 2007 12:07 pm (Pacific time)

Mr. Ruark's rant reminds me of how much we, as a nation, have suffered as a result of mis-informed, self-important, so-called "reporters" who are basically more interested in their own agenda and self-interest. According to Mr. Ruark, one must be a published writer in order to have a valid opinion or, a basic understanding of any given issue. Well, I've been hearing that line of crap all my life, from the same kind of people. Which is to say, those who haven't been there and done that but...they've READ ABOUT IT!!

Henry Ruark November 8, 2007 10:17 am (Pacific time)

Chaotic Chaos: Re yr last to Tim, seeing war from different viewpoint, can only say: "Thank God (the unChaotic one) for that solid, humane, decent, overwhelmingly Christian, difference !"

Henry Ruark November 8, 2007 9:03 am (Pacific time)

Chaos et al: You make my case much stronger every time you responde, C, so keep on shooting off for this sharp channel-group. Precisely as per yours, that is why professionals know what, where, why and how to judge sources, learned painful way in experience doing so in public print. What's your experience ? Where you published ? In what public presentation ? Who paid you ? What professional output can you show ? What level of education, and especially of professional training ? Lifetime solid experience can and does also qualify anyone, but we need to know what that has been before we grant credibility to anyone. Inexorably reminds me of top Salem editor, confronted by loquacious ranter who ended by stating: "And THAT's MY opinion !" Editor said: "No -that's what we call a belly-button feeling here at the shop -- because everybody has one and they are all about the same." What you display here is perhaps belly-button, perhaps even more revealing. SO keep right on, ours in this channel can handle all you send, with aplomb if not mercy.

GodsofChaos November 8, 2007 8:54 am (Pacific time)

"In this case though I feel leaving Iraq alone and staying in Afghanistan was the answer."Tim King Are you saying that it would have been better to leave the Iraq's to there fates? I am surprised you take this stance since you are against torture. I figured you would have been glad that someone who tortured his people in droves was taking out of power.Now I am confused if torture someone for vital information is wrong why is it hunky dory with you for some- one to use it to keep his masses in fear? Once again,the only thing I can come up with,is we have different definitions of good and evil. I see us going after evil men as being a force for good. You obviously see the war in Iraq differently.

GodsofChaos November 8, 2007 8:23 am (Pacific time)

"s. Will add: ANY "opinion" is only as credible as the person offering it, which is why one must establish "right to speak" by documentation from authorities --thus separating personal feelings from true cogitation-on-issue."Henry Clay Are suggesting that these authorities have no emotions,no feelings,and are perfect because they can see things truly for what they are? Are these authorities aliens,robots or gods? What makes you think that your information is 100% reliable? Just because you got it from authorities ,that some how avoid what makes us human. Everyones information is biased because everyone has a different world views,emotional reactions,and different ideology's. For example if Tim King:Was a federalist this article would have a different tune. Note:The federalist wanted to take away freedom of speech from Alien's and went farther to try to muzzle the press with "The Alien and Sedition Acts". All data is tainted by humanity because we have different view on what is and what is not important ,false information,and good. So unless your authorities were godlike beings. They are going to put feelings and emotions in their documentation.

Henry Clay Ruark November 8, 2007 6:43 am (Pacific time)

To all: Historic exploration interesting, but topic here is torture-as-U.S. policy. For that I trust Goodman, whom I know by reputation and passing professional contact, rather than Chaos, who is at best chaotic. SO here's Goodman on the topic; compare with Chaos: "A Vote for Mukasey Is a Vote for Torture" By Amy Goodman, King Features Syndicate http://www.alternet.org/story/67251/ "Judge Michael Mukasey admits waterboarding is repugnant, but refuses to say whether it amounts to torture. Yet Democratic Sens. Charles Schumer and Dianne Feinstein voted for his confirmation as U.S. attorney general anyway. Mukasey, Schumer and Feinstein should talk to French journalist Henri Alleg. An editor of a paper in Algeria, he was waterboarded by the French military in 1957, when the French were trying to crush the Algerian independence movement. The 86-year-old journalist spoke to me from his home in Paris: "I was put on a plank, on a board, fastened to it and taken to a tap [water faucet]. And my face was covered with a rag. Very quickly, the rag was completely full of water. You have the impression of being drowned. And the water ran all over my face. I couldn't breathe. It's a terrible, terrible impression of torture and of death, being near death." Journalist Stephen Grey, whose documentary "Extraordinary Rendition" airs on PBS stations this week, told me: "I, like many journalists, should issue a correction, an apology really, because we all reported waterboarding as a simulated drowning. It is clear from those who did it, this is actual drowning ... this is something that shocks the conscience and therefore is torture." Now that detail is settled, perhaps we can get on to dialog re topic, and either approve or disapprove U.S. actions here. Might add Goodman cites law applied to U.S. soldiers who used this illegal technique, and other international-law convictions. Will add: ANY "opinion" is only as credible as the person offering it, which is why one must establish "right to speak" by documentation from authorities --thus separating personal feelings from true cogitation-on-issue.

GodsofChaos November 7, 2007 8:26 pm (Pacific time)

"I would attribute both current wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and Vietnam almost directly to Truman's actions as a President."Tim King I do agree with you on Vietnam but,disagree with you interpretation on the Jewish people. You have to remember the Palestinians wanted them dead and if I remember correctly they attacked Israeli first. I think war between the two cultures was unavoidable. If any president got us in these current wars I believe it was Clinton. When were attacked during his administration he showed weakness and used Chamberlain tactics. By show this weakness it made are enemies bold. They began to believe that they could attack us and get away with it without any consequences for there actions.Side note Clinton had an opportunity to kill Osama bin Laden but decided to not take it because he did not want to offend the Islamic community.

"Like the story here, when restraint is employed in meeting goals, people can live with it."Tim King

I have question. What do think WWII would have been like if France or Britain didn't restrain themselves and did a preemptive strike on Hitler? I believe that there is a time and place for everything and sometime restraint is not the best answer and sometimes it is.

Tim King: GodsofChaos, you have to take a quick spin through the history books on how Israel began in 1947, there is a ton of information on it. While conflict with the Palestinians has existed ever since that time, there was no Israel prior to that year to have a fight with.

The Red Cross toured the Warsaw Ghettos, they knew what was going on over there. My understanding of history is that our people had not healed from the losses of WW1, and our losses paled next to those of England and France. I know where you are going with this, but Hussein was just being belligerent to keep his neighbors at bay, he had bad motives but was not a threat to us. Afghanistan however was a terrorist breeding ground ever since the Mujahadeen defeated the Soviets in '89, it was our government and others that should have paid more attention, but we were looking in other directions. If someone had killed Hitler, much suffering could have been avoided. In this case though I feel leaving Iraq alone and staying in Afghanistan was the answer.

Tim King November 7, 2007 5:52 pm (Pacific time)

GodsofChaos: there are two specific things about FDR; One is that he would not have allowed and especially not financed the French in their ambitions to retake Vietnam after the close of WWII, and the other is that he would have taken care of the Jewish people, but he would not have allowed the terrorism campaigns against the native Palestinians in the late 40's. He was on the record about both things, and Harry Truman did just the opposite. Like the story here, when restraint is employed in meeting goals, people can live with it. But when harsh approaches are taken, it can come back to haunt you in many ways, for years.

I would attribute both current wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and Vietnam almost directly to Truman's actions as a President.

GodsofChaos November 7, 2007 5:22 pm (Pacific time)

"If FDR had lived a few more years the world would be a much more peaceful place today."Tim King Why do you think FDR would have done so different that would make our world more peaceful? I don't see how by him living longer how he could have made a difference.

David November 7, 2007 5:12 pm (Pacific time)

Those who are so sure that a given person is guilty and that the evil of torture they do (or order) is necessary, should be willing to at least bet their careers on it. No one should get more than one chance to cross that line and screw it up. The reality is, it's too easy to give into your worst instincts if your position and/or the prevailing climate shield you from any significant accountability, and no consequence would stop the truly righteous from doing what they thought was right and necessary. Therefore, it's never necessary for a good government/society to endorse 'torture for a good cause'.

Tim King November 7, 2007 4:54 pm (Pacific time)

Well Marine 3/5, I certainly can't say that is not a possibility, thanks for honoring the moral argument. Marines and former Marines have to stand together on every issue they can, I believe that is very important. What a dilemma it all presents. I think our motivations need to change, as well as our system of checks and balances.

I think that most people agree at this point that right or wrong, our assistance in helping establish Israel and funding it and politically favoring the nation so strongly over the years has led us to this point. I wonder if people realize how many Israeli's are not supportive of their own government's polities? That is another subject, but then it really isn't. If FDR had lived a few more years the world would be a much more peaceful place today.

Marine 3/5 November 7, 2007 4:47 pm (Pacific time)

I understand the moral arguments. As a human being, I deplore the use of torture. However, it is folly to believe that torture is not effective. Sue November's strident denial only betrays her complete ignorance of the subject. Mr. King, I applaud your lofty ideals but, to suggest that the senario put forth by "GodsofChaos" of the possibility of a future pending attack is unrealistic betrays more than just a little wishful thinking. If recent history has shown us anything it is that a devastating attack will eventually come. There can be no denying that some attempts have already been disrupted. Golda Meir said that all great nations face a point sometime in their history when they have to compromise their principles in order to survive. The subject of torture is NOT a simple matter when it is discussed in the context of national security. Particularly when the possibility of thousands of deaths lie in the ballance.

Henry Clay Ruark November 7, 2007 4:44 pm (Pacific time)

To all: Notice neat shift from "torture" as topic to open-end debate about "religions" ? You-all have been subjected to growing paid-for static, intended to deny, defy, then destroy honest open dialog. Tell Chaos to stuff it - he will know where, probably well dollar-padded. If NOT SO, ID-self in full to editor for morefromhere.

Raven November 7, 2007 4:41 pm (Pacific time)

Julie, Ok right, none of our other Presidents have utilized torcher ever. Even during WWI, WWII, Korean War, Vietnam etc. No need to name any, as it never happened right? If you actually belive that, then I think you should take off your rose colored glasses That type of naivety is what continues to cloud this issue.

Neal Feldman November 7, 2007 4:32 pm (Pacific time)

GoC - the majority of the followers of Islam have been peaceful since its inception. Same with the followers of Christianity, Judaism, etc. Your religious bigotry is showing. As to peaceful Christians I point you at the Westboro Baptist Church and the Rev Fred Phelps for a perfect example of the 'loving peaceful' followers of Christianity. Are they the minority? Of course. Same with those you seek to use to paint the entire faith of Islam with. I have known Islamics who are some of the most peaceful and loving folks you could ever meet and I have known Christians that are the most hateful, vile and violent cretins to ever walk the Earth. And I assure you that the latter outnumber the former by a large margin. Also remember that virtually every Crusade was started by attack upon the Islamics by the Christians. You see the difference between us is that as a Wiccan I do not have a dog in the race between Islam, Christianity and Judaism. You folks can tear eachother up all you like I guess... just leave me out of it and be factual and honest, not irrational and bigotted. OK? Ah well...

GodsofChaos November 7, 2007 4:22 pm (Pacific time)

GoC - I say Islam is as peaceful and loving a religion as Judaism or Christianity are. No more no less. They are all part of the same group of faiths that also include Mormons, etc. And anyone claiming Christianity does not have a dark and violent side and history is only fooling themselves or just being outright deceitful. Some islamics are terrorists... same goes for some christians. "In both cases they are the tiny minority. Not all terrorists are islamic. Remember guys named McVeigh... Rudolph....hmmm? Ah well..."Neal Feldman Once again you are missing my point.Is Islam the religion of the terrorists? That was all I was saying. Though I would not call Islam a peaceful religion.Since the Islam has been the most violent religion in history. Though what you say is true for all religions...Islam has been a violent religion since its birth and still is a religion that promotes violence. If you are going to claim Islam has been a peaceful religion please give dates because I do not recall them ever being peaceful.They didn't end up in Spain by accident.

Neal Feldman November 7, 2007 3:48 pm (Pacific time)

Henry Ruark November 7, 2007 3:21 pm (Pacific time)

Chaos: Won't work to distort and dishevel what I wrote; ours in this channel too wise to your ongoing type. Re "enemy now", what changes them to "friends now", and is your shift perhaps for sale on basis of what they offer ?

GodsofChaos November 7, 2007 2:06 pm (Pacific time)

"But that'll never happen when we en passant condemn a whole race-or-group...which is where I came in on yours."Henry Ruark So are you saying that Islam is a peaceful religion and that the terrorists are not counted to Islam in any way? I think the terrorists would disagree with you. I was only stating the fact the the terrorists were Islamic,no not Nazi's can't blame them for everything,and that for right now they are enemies.

Neal Feldman November 7, 2007 1:35 pm (Pacific time)

GoC - do you realize how loony you appear? How your arguments in favor of torture are also arguments for a police state that is not answerable to or limited by any civilized notions of jurisprudence? Rant on, MacDuff, as the saying goes. Every post you are making in this thread supports my argument that the USA has no business torturing anyone and that allowing such means the USA that is worth protecting and defending has already vanished from the Earth. Nothing I could ever say expresses these facts better than your posts. Thank you. Ah well...

Henry Ruark November 7, 2007 1:11 pm (Pacific time)

Chaos: No misunderstanding; we all KNOW there are "terrorists" in every nation, including U.S.; and we all KNOW some nations use the phrase to cover their own tribulations leading to "extreme anti-social behavior" (!) ?? including mass murders. We all expect, accept and make exception for those so caught in the middle in their own situations that they cannot realize that millions of others know and appreciate --AND understand !-- open and honest efforts to reach real understandings --the only real road to progress and, eventually, to world peace. But that'll never happen when we en passant condemn a whole race-or-group...which is where I came in on yours.

GodsofChaos November 7, 2007 11:32 am (Pacific time)

"SO now you retreat, as all such do, into same targeting you accuse others of using, as last resort"Henry Ruark I am truly sorry. I have read my post that you are all attacking me about. I now realize that I have to put terrorists to every statement I make about the enemies we are fighting.I just assumed since I used the words that Islamic,yeah that right the "SO now you retreat, as all such do, into same targeting you accuse others of using, as last resort"Henry Ruark I am truly sorry. I have read my post that you are all attacking me about. I now realize that I have to put terrorists for the enemies we are fighting. I just figured since I have used the Islamic,no there not Jewish last time I checked, terrorists own words on what they describe us as. There are three conclusions on why you are using such a tactic to attack me. 1) It truly is a misunderstanding. 2)You knew the real meaning behind my words but decide to twist them in order to try to make me look bad so you don't have defend your idology logically. 3)My meaning was lost since you let your emotions get the better of you and you didn't read my post carefully or did not realize I was using the terrorists own words on what they think of America.

Henry Ruark November 7, 2007 11:05 am (Pacific time)

Chaos: For my money, YOU opened book on character calumny via reference to race and group stands as if all-agreed and were "equally guilty" in reflection of what you stated. SO now you retreat, as all such do, into same targeting you accuse others of using, as last resort. As Neal says: "Ah, well !!"

GodsofChaos November 7, 2007 10:00 am (Pacific time)

"I used to live in Alabama and I knew some KKK types like you...Your name suggests that you are a small man striving for significance and taking the racist , bully route."GodsofBull%andit I not the one who is judging people. I have yet to charter assassinate. Guess what in the age of the internet you have no clue who you are talking to. For all you know I could be an space alien. Yet you jumping to the conclusion that I am a white KKK member. Now who is being a bigot. Me who is just expressing his ideas in a calm manner or you who instantly judges who I am from a few posts.Do you really know me?Do you know who I like and who I don't like? Do you know every facet of my mind, imagination, and emotions? Unless I am talking to godlike being that knows everything I suggest you avoid charter assassination tactics since you know as much about me as I know about you.

GodsofChaos November 7, 2007 9:08 am (Pacific time)

"If you had even half a clue you might realize this fact."Neal Feldman "What sounds more logical Neal? Nations torture enemies to acquire information or they grab some random person of the street who knows nothing and precede to waste time and money because they feel like it. I have to go with they torture people to acquire information. What you suggest our government does is: 1) Stupid why go after people that clearly no nothing? 2) Why grab Americans off the street that would lead to bad P.R.? 3)Why waste resources on somebody that isn't even the enemy while in the middle of a war that is not based in borders or nation states and valuable information and time is the most important resource you have in such a war. "2-3 people tops" So in a war of black ops on terrorists you can't give to much information in a court room. Your vision of reality:"Your honer I will precede to give a list of all the moles we have, all the operations we have under surveillance,and a list of all weakness we have in our intelligence which led to capture of this individual so this enemy of the United States gets a fair trail." In spy on spy warfare every bit of information that you don't have to give out is one more bit of infromation that your enemy is not aware that you know. The people on this blog seem to lack an understanding of how spy on terrorists warfare works.Information is more valuable than a tank column in this type of warfare because you have to find where your enemy is first.

GodsofBull%&it November 7, 2007 9:07 am (Pacific time)

"Islamic people already are laughing at us. They think we are a bunch of weak spineless cowards. I feel like that I must point out to you that the enemy that we are fighting does not share they same value of life as we do.They do not care for our morals our progress and our freedoms" What a racist punk ! I suppose you think all "Negroes" are good at sports and love watermelon, all Jews are sneaky and greedy, and all Italians are greasy drunks. How the hell you can generalize billions of people is beyond me. I used to live in Alabama and I knew some KKK types like you...Your name suggests that you are a small man striving for significance and taking the racist , bully route. Your macho-man comments back that perception up.

Neal Feldman November 7, 2007 8:35 am (Pacific time)

GoC - as you 'tire' of the 'what if your family were tortured' questions those of us who can actually think tire of your 'moe' scenarios. And as Shrub has proven no one is safe. Anyone can be snatched off the street and whisked illegally from the country to some 'detention enter' to be tortured when they have done nothing wrong. All the torture and other criminal activity sanctioned and promoted by the Bush Administration and they have convicted what? 2-3 people tops? And nothing produced from their torture policies has prevented a single 'moe' scenario. Why do those in the employ of nations use torture? Because they are sadistic scumbag and they think they can get away with it. That is why. If you had even half a clue you might realize this fact. Ah well...

EazyMoney November 7, 2007 8:23 am (Pacific time)

Is using a taser on someone considered torture?

Henry Ruark November 7, 2007 8:11 am (Pacific time)

Chaos et al: Insights from centuries indicate that torture-used is nearly always simple release for deep resentments built by situation. "Denial" prevents torturer from recognizing true motivation, easily passed off as "we can get what he knows by applying pain." Cognitive science clearly shows truth in this scene; what follows from others still unable to understand simply reflects limited view from own characteristics and personal circumstances, including those who attribute to whole race or social group the malign elements from some-only. That's why world descends into wars, consummately caused by precisely that kind of low regard for other humans.

GodsofChaos November 7, 2007 7:55 am (Pacific time)

"Torture is NEVER acceptable. You people need counciling. Really. Is it ok to abuse a wife then if you think she might be lying to you. How about a child. No, torture is not acceptable, no way, no how. AND IT DOES NOT WORK!"Sue If it does not work sue then why throughout human history has torture been used to get information? Torture is obliviously been useful somewhere or nations and groups wouldn't employ such tactics. Why do you think we send some enemy POW's to Egypt? A nation who has no qualms about torture. I have also grown tired of what if my family was tortured question. Last time I check my wife wasn't plotting on how to kill United States soldiers by strapping a bomb on her chest and blowing herself up in a large crowd. I am not suggest we torture every POW that we come across. For several reasons. 1:The person could be an innocent. 2:It is a waste of resources since the grunts in any army rarely know valuable information and any information that they do know is usually already acquired by our government. I do support torture for know terrorists (Osama bin Laden) or leader or person who has vital information. I believe torture does work because if it didn't no one would use it to gather information.

Sue November 7, 2007 7:14 am (Pacific time)

Torture is NEVER acceptable. You people need counciling. Really. Is it ok to abuse a wife then if you think she might be lying to you. How about a child. No, torture is not acceptable, no way, no how. AND IT DOES NOT WORK!

Neal Feldman November 7, 2007 2:45 am (Pacific time)

To the torture apologists - shame upon you. You and your kind absolutely disgust me to the core. I am a firm believer in the fact that if it cannot be accomplished in the right way it should not be accomplished, period. And the fact is regardless of your naive BS that torture produces very unreliable results. In the Moe situation if the bomb goes off you try Moe and any co-conspirators, according to the laws. If we allow torture etc then our Constitution is just a worthless snot rag worthy of no respect whatever and we as a nation lose any legitimacy in the world. At that point we are no better than the lowest and most despicable tyrant and our alleged lofty ideals are exposed as merely fraudulent window dressing... lipstick on a pig. But there will always be some who will not give a rat's butt about such things. As for Shrub and Co not committing crimes, are you that delusionally naive? As for abortion doctors they have committed no crimes. Interesting those who claim Shrub and Co have committed no crimes falsely accuse others of committing crimes. Interesting indeed. Ah well...

GodsofChaos November 6, 2007 9:31 pm (Pacific time)

I'll bet that they laugh so "hard at us, they have been able to make us bury almost every last fiber of decency we once had with one single day's worth of attacks."Tim King

Islamic people already are laughing at us. They think we are a bunch of weak spineless cowards. I feel like that I must point out to you that the enemy that we are fighting does not share they same value of life as we do.They do not care for our morals our progress and our freedoms.

Note:They already think we are the great Satan.So excuse me for not believing that the Islamic people think we have any decency in the first place.

They have just one idea about America. We are infidels and we must die. Open your eyes what do you think they talk about in those "death to America rallies", ice scream flavors?

I mentioned my family being tortured. That is very possible since Islamic Terrorists have no qualms about torture.That is why I respect or men and women who protect our rights.

I love how you didn't answer my question though about what is more evil.

So let me explain why I think torture is sometimes justifiable. I see letting evil succeed by holding a moral high ground when instead I had the power to save those innocents as evil. I could not live with myself if I knew that I could have done something to advert such an attack.So ask yourself if put in such a situation.What would you do?

P.S. I seemed to hit nerve with my last post. Sorry it wasn't my attention to get you angry. I am just trying to give you another viewpoint.

JB November 6, 2007 9:20 pm (Pacific time)

How about the old gentleman beat with a baseball bat in Portland? You losers need to worry about what is going on in our own neighborhood.

Julie November 6, 2007 8:50 pm (Pacific time)

Raven-you "are very sure"? Ok, WHICH ONE? And please back that up with some factual info. I don't believe it for a second, very poor rationalization for the dehumanization, degradation and torture of MOSTLY INNOCENT people.

Tim King November 6, 2007 8:44 pm (Pacific time)

I am a father, I am a former Marine and I spend time in combat zones. You guys can sit around and endorse torture if you want to, it makes me get this sad feeling though, greatly enhanced by all the other tragic degrees we have slipped as a nation.

As far as the fictitious scenario about millions of people at risk, that is nothing but fearful thinking, and it is a fictitious scenario because nothing like that will ever happen. There is nothing to fear but fear itself and the American belief system is so corrupted with paranoia that nobody knows the values they were taught in school.

Let me throw this one back at you GodsofChaos: what if it was your mother or your little girl on the torture rack? What if it was your little brother? Your grandmother? Yeah, that's what I thought, it makes you twist inside, that is how people feel about us not because of what we say we're about but over WHAT WE DO.

Again, everyone has a right to see it their way, but all I see is a growing problem that will never be reversed, and it comes from 100% inside our borders, and our hearts, not a terrorist needed. I'll bet that they laugh so hard at us, they have been able to make us bury almost every last fiber of decency we once had with one single day's worth of attacks.

Raven November 6, 2007 8:23 pm (Pacific time)

I have to say that I totally agree with Marine 3/5 on this. It is a situation that may be neccessary at times and I am more than sure that George Bush is not the only president who has ever utilized this tool.

GodsofChaos November 6, 2007 8:20 pm (Pacific time)

"I was just raised to believe that two wrongs do not make a right, and you know that is how the Corps taught us to see things too."Tim King So how would you handle Moe? Remember earlier post. Would you just stand by and let millions of people die full knowing that there is something you could do about it? Would let men,women,children,die from a suitcase nuke just so you could claim you held a morale high ground? The reason I asking these questions is I am curious to what you think.Which is more evil letting millions of innocents die or torturing one evil nut job that wants to kill you,your family(pretend your family lives in New York City I.E. more role playing) and any other person who lives in New York City for the idea that all infidels must die. "All evil has to do to succeed is for good men to do nothing." Edmund Burke

Harry Reid (via Julie) November 6, 2007 7:53 pm (Pacific time)

This was sent to me from Senator Harry Reid:
Waterboarding is torture.
Because Michael Mukasey cannot admit to this basic fact, I will vote against his nomination.
I respect Michael Mukasey and believe he is an intelligent and capable man. However, given our recent history, it is important that our next attorney general be able to stand up to the President and for the rule of law. I am not confident that Michael Mukasey will.
Send the message: If he can't say no to torture - we say no to Mukasey.
While Michael Mukasey refuses to answer the question of whether waterboarding is torture, the precedent is clear. In 1947, Yukio Asano, a Japanese officer, was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor for performing a form of waterboarding on an American citizen.
In 2004, Daniel Levin, who was then acting assistant attorney general, volunteered to be waterboarded. Later, he told the White House "even though he knew he wouldn't die, he found the experience terrifying and thought that it clearly simulated drowning."
If Michael Mukasey cannot answer the simple question of whether or not waterboarding is torture, he should not serve as attorney general.
Our message needs to be loud and clear: If he can't say no to torture - we say no to Mukasey.
Thank you,
Harry Reid

Tim King November 6, 2007 7:51 pm (Pacific time)

Marine from 3/5: You have a right to express yourself here man, I only jump on people that are highly insulting, and I don't take your assessment of me that way. You validate my point, that is on the moral side of things, and I do not disagree that torture potentially works, no disagreement there, I'm sure the administrator has everything to do with how effective it is. I have a son who served two tours in Iraq and he agrees with you wholeheartedly, OK? But I don't and I hope other people also think we need to take the moral high road on these subjects. You don't seem to disagree with my point about what comes around goes around. As far as torture being effective in Vietnam, sure, I believe there are times that it was. And I know it was wrong then too. I was just raised to believe that two wrongs do not make a right, and you know that is how the Corps taught us to see things too. Semper fi.

Marine 3/5 November 6, 2007 7:21 pm (Pacific time)

Perhaps the argument against "torture" would be further enhanced if people would stop insisting that it "doesn't work" or, that "no useful information" can be gained through aggressive tactics. Only a fool or the obviously ignorant can believe such a fantasy. One only has to review the conduct of our own POW's during their captivity during the Vietnam War to know that torture certainly does work! While it is true that there are those who can and do resist torture to the death whithout giving in, the undeniable fact remains that those very special people are in a minute minority. It just isn't in most people to with stand ever increasing degrees of pain and/or discomfort.I suppose there will be many on this board who will deny that FACT but, for the most part, they speak from a position of ignorance not experience. If this is to be a MORAL argument, OK. But, if this discussion is to be honest, let's start by being honest in the first place. Torture clearly works. Not ALL the time but, certainly, most of the time. For a "former Marine" Mr. King's position sounds particularly naive. And before you all start jumping on me, I've spent enough time in the jungles with an EGA on my cammies to know what I'm talking about.

GodsofChaos November 6, 2007 5:48 pm (Pacific time)

"We will one day watch the Bush/Cheney trials on TV and when that day comes, I'll buy the popcorn."Jon S. Better yet one day they will be trails for abortion doctors.Besides unless something drastic happens Bush and Cheney will not be tired for anything since they have yet to break any laws.

Jon S. November 6, 2007 5:35 pm (Pacific time)

We will one day watch the Bush/Cheney trials on TV and when that day comes, I'll buy the popcorn.

GodsofChaos November 6, 2007 4:23 pm (Pacific time)

"but torture DOES NOT get usable information.The person that is being tortured will say whatever it takes to get them to stop."Sue Only if person is being tortured is not that good at his job. A master can tell the difference when someone is telling them lies or telling the truth. usually this is accomplished through by first asking questions you know the answer to but act like that is what you are really after. What this does is it helps develop a pattern.How does the person act when he is tell a lie and how he acts when tell a the truth. So torturing somebody is a mixture of causing physical pain and mental anguish and reading body language to know if he is telling lies or spilling his guts.

GodsofChaos November 6, 2007 4:04 pm (Pacific time)

"GodsofChaos: You aren't suggesting that the Nazi party didn't do this though right? I can show you a picture of U.S. Army soldiers doing this in Vietnam, I believe it started hundreds of years ago but has always continued as a practice because it is easy to do this to people, low cost."Tim King No. I thought you were implying that water boarding was a technique invented by the Nazis. I just thought I would let you know that technique was invented in the middle ages. A time period of human history that torturing was at its peak.

Tim King November 6, 2007 3:49 pm (Pacific time)

GodsofChaos: You aren't suggesting that the Nazi party didn't do this though right? I can show you a picture of U.S. Army soldiers doing this in Vietnam, I believe it started hundreds of years ago but has always continued as a practice because it is easy to do this to people, low cost.

GodsofChaos November 6, 2007 3:37 pm (Pacific time)

Man, have we ever changed as a "nation, and now we have a presidential administration that shares a torture technique used by Hitler's Nazi party."Tim King Water Boarding is actually an middle ages technique not a NAZI one.

Tim King November 6, 2007 3:36 pm (Pacific time)

Dear GodsofChaos: I do not deny that you make some good points, it is just about how far you are willing to go, and which of history's horror factories a nation is willing to be aligned with, in my case it is none. We have sufficiently demonstrated as a nation that we do not work from good intel and we have a very hard time knowing who the terrorists are, since the U.S. specifically funded almost all of them at one time or another. Maybe it is just that this is where we can take a stand and show that we are better, when the harsh reality is that we are not better. I like the civil tone of this at least, you always come up with interesting points here and I appreciate that, as much as I disagree with you on this one.

GodsofChaos November 6, 2007 3:27 pm (Pacific time)

Dear Tim King I hope you are not offended but, I agree with Bush on this issue. Let me explain why I share his views. "The argument it always comes back to is, "What if that person has vital information that threatens the safety of American people?""Tim King Yeah lets play this game shall we. A terrorist has planted a Nuclear Bomb in New York City. You are on a team that is sent to handle the situation(role play with me here). This Terrorist (we'll call him Moe) has only told you that you have 5 hours to find the bomb. You try to ask him other questions but he refuses to answer.Evacuation of the city is out of the question, to many people to move in such a short amount of time. On the flip side you don't have enough time to search for the bomb. You do have information that Moe did in fact plant the bomb. So Tim what would you do in this situation. millions of lives rest on your shoulders. The only solution I can come up with is torture. Yes I know that the odds are against us in this scenario but I would torture him if there was a slim chance to save all those lives. "Isn't it simple to conclude that anything we do to our enemies, they will do to our own people if captured? I think that is terrible,"Tim King Last time I checked the Islamic people cut their prisoner of wars heads of with a dull knife. I feel you are little naive about this. Every nation in the world tortures people to get information.Do you believe for a second that if someone was withholding information that was vital and had short time to act upon it that we would say something like this. "Well he has his rights go ahead and call Washington to to inform them why millions of people have to die to protect a enemy of the United States because we don't want to break the Geneva Conviction(which USA is the only nation in the world that even uses the Geneva Conviction as guide lines so if we really were following the golden rule treating are enemies on how they treat us we would shoot medics on the spot,carpet bomb cities and round up prisoners and mow them down with a machine gun think about the movie "the great escape". Do you seriously believe that we don't torture already? In the New York City situation they would start torturing Moe as soon as possible in the race against the clock. All this act is doing is making it more official. "It is time to be real about this."Tim King Yes lets get real about this. torture is a part of every society just as monetary systems, militarization,and language. The only difference between good societies and bad societies is how many times they are willing to cross the line. United States only tortures people if the information is vital to are survival. Russia tortures every human being that is captured and the lucky ones are killed on the spot.

Sue November 6, 2007 2:45 pm (Pacific time)

Tim: I agree, I agree, I agree. Thanks for the article. I might have missed this in your article as the subject matter makes me physically ill, but torture DOES NOT get usable information. The person that is being tortured will say whatever it takes to get them to stop. I am so ashamed that my country does this. I thought we were the human rights leaders.

[Return to Top]