Is waterboarding torture?

[STAGE 2]

Due process, human rights, "all men are endowed by their Creator"... its all just junk. We should scrap our laws, our morality, and our code of conduct so we can fight the War with No End.

So many of us have traded liberty and morality for a perception of safety. We are way off course as a nation, and bear little resemblence to the Republic founded by our betters.

Same fallacious argument. All men may be endowed by their creator, but the actions that they perform may waive these endowments. Believing in the constitution does not mean that I think someone in the Sudan should have 2nd amendment rights, or someone in kabul should have due process. If they don't want to fight for it, or if they don't want it thats their business. My business is my nation. Thats is.

Since the laws of my nation and the constitution don't prohibit waterboarding, then I don't know what the hub bub is.

 

[Playboypenguin]

But I can say the same for you as well. For all of your academic arguments about the "intelligence community" they too are operating on hearsay

Not true. The official stance of the intel community is available to anyone that wishes to research protocol and public record. There is nothing hearsay about it. It is recorded in multiple texts and memos.

You miss the point entirely. You said that the entire intelligence community thinks waterboarding is useless. The CIA IS the intelligence community. Even if I were to agree that it was only a small faction within the CIA, the fact that they are arguing for its use, used it successfully, and are still petitioning for it to be available tells me that there is NOT the consensus that you claim there is.

You are missing the point. All indications point to the fact that they DID NOT ask to be allowed to waterboard but were steered to break protocol by Cheney...and then there is absolutely no evidence that it was even successful afterwards. Just some him-hawing and alluding vaguely to dubious successes to try and validate the act after being caught with their hand in the cookie jar.

Do you trust this administration so much that you would take their word for anything? Especially knowing they have lied before?

 

[mesabi]

When you said "they are the enemy whether they pick up a weapon or not", that is including everyone. If they are not picking up a weapon against us how are they still considered the enemy? That would Include you and me as the enemy. We are not picking up weapons to use against the U.S. but to you, are still considered the enemy.

 

[Erik]

This is a very interesting read concerning a complicated issue. I'm torn on it. I'm against torture, but someone damn well better be waterboarding someone if it leads to immediately valuable actionable information. Ahh, so is waterboarding torture? The proverbial million dollar question... What if there was a waiver? Sign here to be waterboarded by us or given over to them for whatever they'll decide on? Them being a sympathetic ally, of course. Or just do away with the pretext of caring what our allies do? Complicated... Very complicated.

---
The Amendment arguments, 1st, 4th, 8th... they're only appropriate in our system, in our country. Don't care about using the info as evidence? There goes the anti waterboarding 1st A argument. Not planning on using any of the evidence seazed at trial? There goes the forth. The waterboarding is not being conducted as punishment, but to gather intelligence? There goes the 8th. And so on...

 

[Hawg]

Looks like my last post was deleted so I'm out of it.

 

[STAGE 2]

Not true. The official stance of the intel community is available to anyone that wishes to research protocol and public record. There is nothing hearsay about it. It is recorded in multiple texts and memos.

So the intelligence community has waterboarded enemies in the past with unsatisfactory results? If not then they are basing their findings on conjecture and hearsay.

You are missing the point. All indications point to the fact that they DID NOT ask to be allowed to waterboard but were steered to break protocol by Cheney...and then there is absolutely no evidence that it was even successful afterwards. Just some him-hawing and alluding vaguely to dubious successes to try and validate the act after being caught with their hand in the cookie jar.

Here's the problem. Even the CIA official that has since come out in opposition to waterboarding DID NOT DISPUTE ITS EFFECTIVENESS. He's against it, but he said it works very well.

Again, this is a matter of you saying "I don't believe". Because you don't believe doesn't mean the evidence doesn't exist. We have several people sitting in cells because of the intelligence gained. I suppose you don't believe that either?

Do you trust this administration so much that you would take their word for anything? Especially knowing they have lied before?

Its funny that you mentioned that, because the latest senate report clearly stated that nowhere was it found that the administration lied.

However to answer your question, yes I will give this administration the benefit of the doubt in this area. Like I said before there are areas to be vigilant and there are areas to put to slack in the leash. A little discretion is a good thing where terrorists are concerned.

 

[mesabi]

Well I don't know about the administration after Bush told America that Jesus Christ told him in a dream to invade Iraq... After that, I have had my doubts...

 

[Playboypenguin]

I am going to address this separately.

Its funny that you mentioned that, because the latest senate report clearly stated that nowhere was it found that the administration lied.

Do I need to provide you links to Bush bold face lying about not wire tapping without a warrant just days before it being exposed that he was doing just that? And then provide links to him denying he ever said he wasn't doing it even though it is on tape?

 

[STAGE 2]

I am going to address this separately.

Of course you are because that means you won't have to address any of my rebuttals. Thats what you've been doing for the last 2 pages. I'm guessing its because the logic of your position in untenable. As I said before, even the guy who is against it doesn't dispute its effectiveness.

For all of your replys, you seem to want to talk about everything but the subject itself. You bring up Bush, musings on torture generally, morality and so an and so forth. When confronted, you simply stick your fingers in your ears and say "I dont believe it". Thats perfectly fine, but lets not be deluded into thinking that such a response establishes anything.

As I said before, everyone is free to their opinions, however if they are going to challenge the assertion that waterboarding has been sussessful where other methods have failed, then what they need is evidence, and specific evidence at that.

Do I need to provide you links to Bush bold face lying about not wire tapping without a warrant just days before it being exposed that he was doing just that? And then provide links to him denying he ever said he wasn't doing it even though it is on tape?

No because none of that has to do with what I wrote above. After a long and laborious process, after years of hearing "Bush lied kids died" a bipartisan commission couldn't find any evidence of it.

Whether Bush hedged on the wiretapping is a separate issue for a separate thread. However for the purposes of this discussion, lets say I agree with you. That still isn't evidence that waterboarding doesn't work and is actually an ad hominem of sorts.

 

[Playboypenguin]

Of course you are because that means you won't have to address any of my rebuttals.

I fully intend to respond to your other statements too. I was just on my Blackberry at the time. It does not take much to respond to "cause they told me so on Fox news" though.

No because none of that has to do with what I wrote above.

It is about credibility and therefore all his actions are relevant. He has shown he is more than willing to lie about activities and then even so bold as to lie about something he can easily be called upon. He is a bold faced liar with an almost psychotic disregard for reality.

 

[Playboypenguin]

So the intelligence community has waterboarded enemies in the past with unsatisfactory results? If not then they are basing their findings on conjecture and hearsay.

Don't try and muddy the waters. The topic is what the official stance of the US intel community is regarding torture and if waterboarding is considered torture. It is not hard to find if you are willing to look or if you have ever been trained. They stress it very strongly and clearly in AIT. There is no room for debate. The current debate is a distraction and a fallacy. The US has a clear record of denoting waterboarding as torture and has prosecuted foreign combatants for it's use on Americans.

Here's the problem. Even the CIA official that has since come out in opposition to waterboarding DID NOT DISPUTE ITS EFFECTIVENESS. He's against it, but he said it works very well. The US has a well established record of denoting waterboarding as torture and has prosecuted foreign combatants for it's use and the CIA has a clear policy against torture. That is why the administration had to muddy the waters by confusing people with labels because they could not dispute the anti-torture stance.

Again, this is a matter of you saying "I don't believe". Because you don't believe doesn't mean the evidence doesn't exist. We have several people sitting in cells because of the intelligence gained. I suppose you don't believe that either?

Once again, if it is effective and so much has been gained, where are the trials? Where are the convictions? You are once again confusing justification with validation. It is one thing to say something off the record to try and justify your actions and try and cover your ass regarding future probes and possible prosecutions and another thing to present evidence and information that would validate your actions.

 

[mesabi]

Just because something is effective, does that mean it is right to do so? I mean murder is an effective way to get another persons possessions, but does that mean its right to do so?

Alot of the posts bring up that these people are not American citizens and should not get our constitutional rights. I agree, but there also Human Rights.

I know that I will get the they did it to us, so we should do it to them... That may have worked on the playground when we were all 3 or 4 years old, but lets grow up.

 

[Erik]

On trials and convictions...

Who wants trials and convictions? And why? Trials and convictions are for criminals. Combatants are not criminals. Ahhh, but the Court recently muddied those waters. I predict many more captured and "turned-over-to terrorists," or outright dead ones, in the future.

If that phrase, TOT Terrorists, catches on... remember, you read it here first.

 

[Playboypenguin]

Who wants trials and convictions? And why? Trials and convictions are for criminals. Combatants are not criminals. Ahhh, but the Court recently muddied those waters.

The court did not "muddle" the waters. The court stepped in and reminded the current administration that all men have a right to due process. The powers that be do not have the right to declare someone less than human or pronounce someone guilty without proof.

I doubt you would see this as a bad thing if the government decided to accuse you of being a terrorist.

 

[homefires]

Yes it's torcher! Let me put your head in a pillow case and poor water over it long enough. You will call your mother all sorts of things if I tell you too! Hell You would confess to any and all. Any One Any Person can be broke given enough time. Nature preprogrammed you to survive and that's the way it is.

 

[Playboypenguin]

Nature preprogrammed you to survive and that's the way it is.

While the government does train it's soldiers to resist interrogation techniques, the one thing they do stress during training is that you WILL break under torture and WILL cooperate with the enemy. In fact a guy stands in front of the room and tells you point blank that "It does not matter how tough you think you are, everyone from medic to special forces will be crying like a baby and turning on your momma."

 

[STAGE 2]

Don't try and muddy the waters. The topic is what the official stance of the US intel community is regarding torture and if waterboarding is considered torture. It is not hard to find if you are willing to look or if you have ever been trained. They stress it very strongly and clearly in AIT. There is no room for debate. The current debate is a distraction and a fallacy. The US has a clear record of denoting waterboarding as torture and has prosecuted foreign combatants for it's use on Americans.

I'm not trying to muddy anything. You keep harping on the fact that the intel community considers waterboarding torture. Well I want to know what they are basing this judgement on.

If its fair for you to question the results of waterboarding based on honesty, then certianly its fair for me to ask what the "community" is basing their findings on. Have they actually waterboarded anyone? Have they seen it be unsuccessful?

I don't know about you but the scientific method would seem to dismiss any "consensus" anyone had if they didn't actually have any real results. Even more so if there were data to the contrary which there is.

So which is it. Have these people had any legitimate experience with waterboarding enemies?

Once again, if it is effective and so much has been gained, where are the trials? Where are the convictions? You are once again confusing justification with validation. It is one thing to say something off the record to try and justify your actions and try and cover your ass regarding future probes and possible prosecutions and another thing to present evidence and information that would validate your actions.

Effectiveness has nothing to do with prosecutions. I don't know why you think it does. As someone who formerly worked in intelligence you more than anyone here should understand why we wouldn't take these high profile detainees to trial. After all, we are holding them indefinately so there isn't any pressing need for punishment, and the administration is trying to stop these people from gaining access to our legal system.

As far as validation, again I point you to the cia interrogator who has since come out in opposition to waterboarding and is critical of the administration. Even he said that it was highly effective. He explained in detail how obstinate and uncooperative these men were and how they quickly broke when waterboarded. Clearly you should believe him since he isn't an administration crony right? And then there are the other terrorists that are now in custody as a direct result of the information gained.

There's just way too much stuff for you to explain away here.

 

[STAGE 2]

Alot of the posts bring up that these people are not American citizens and should not get our constitutional rights. I agree, but there also Human Rights.

Human rights...LOL. Yes, lets invoke human rights for people that blow up school children, kidnap and decapitate innocent people, and fly planes into buildings in the name of religion.

Sorry, but rights, whether human or otherwise, can only be claimed by those who don't commit atrocities.

 

[Erik]

"The court did not "muddle" the waters. The court stepped in and reminded the current administration that all men have a right to due process. The powers that be do not have the right to declare someone less than human or pronounce someone guilty without proof."

The Court overturned legal precedent dating back centuries. A monumental act of judicial legislation from the Court's bench.

It, that act, is to be respected, for that is our system.

"I doubt you would see this as a bad thing if the government decided to accuse you of being a terrorist."

If I were a foreign enemy combatant, in a foreign land or on US soil, I would laugh at the notion that American criminal and civil law applied to me. I'd laugh harder, captured, that it was being applied to me. Which I imagine is precisely what our enemies are doing.

---

TOT 'em.

 

[Monsterman]

Hell yeah it is!

And no, NO I don't like the government doing that!

To think, there are people at the Guantanamo Bay prison who are probably innocent! I hope this crap isn't going down over there.