A Conservative's view on waterboarding

[bigrebnc1775]

See his empty hands? Suicide missions, booby traps, escape routes...


Let me know when that Navy SEAL tells the story of why he felt the need to shoot.

Yep I wear a bomb pack to bed at night.

Let me know when that Navy SEAL tells the story of why he felt the need to shoot

They had their orders Bin Ladn was not to be brought back in alive.

No, they knew they had the authority to kill him if they had to...

It never was their intent to bring him back alive. Are you kidding? Bin Laden fac a Obamush and Holder type trial? Obamush did not want that it would have made him look like a hypocrite, an any evidence they had would have been thrown out in court. And another reason as I have already said thy had no evidence that Bin Lade had any cnnecions with the attacks on the world trade center.

 

[Charles_Main]

"WHEN US Representative Steve King learned that Osama bin Laden had been killed by US troops in Pakistan, he couldn’t resist a little crowing about the efficacy of torture. “Wonder what President Obama thinks of water boarding now?’’ the Iowa Republican tweeted on May 2.

It was an outrageous remark, but King wasn’t going out on a limb. A parade of others, mostly Republicans, have joined him in claiming that the death of bin Laden had vindicated the use of waterboarding — the most notorious of the “enhanced interrogation techniques’’ the Bush administration employed to extract information from senior Al Qaeda detainees....

...I don’t know whether waterboarding was indispensable to rolling up bin Laden; for every interrogation expert who says it was, another expert argues the opposite. But the case against waterboarding never rested primarily on its usefulness. It rested on its wrongfulness. It is wrong when bad guys do it to good guys. It is just as wrong when good guys do it to Al Qaeda....

The killing of bin Laden was gratifying, but it was no vindication of torture. Republicans rightly argue that much credit is owed to George W. Bush, who launched an effective war on terror and pursued it with fierce resolve. But Bush was wrong to permit waterboarding, and wrong to deny that it was torture. I don’t agree with Obama on much, but when it comes to waterboarding, he is right. America will defeat the global jihad, but not by embracing its most inhuman values."

Ends don’t justify the means - The Boston Globe

Jeff Jacoby (columnist) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I would not call Water Boarding Torture in the classic sense of the word. I Also not call it a good thing. I understand and support the fact that in Rare Cases, Like the 3 times we have done it, It may save thousands of Lives. I want The people tasked with defending this country from another 9/11 or worse. To have it as a possible tool, to be used only in extreme cases where we have good reason to believe there person to be water Boarded has intel that could Stop a major Terrorist attack.

It may sound hypocritical but I would never support it's being used on a US citizen, even one who is a Terrorist. I take that stand because of my Loyalty to the Constitution.

The Method in which we water Boarded the 3 People we did. Was basically designed to be the least Cruel Form of Coerced Interrogation possible. It is by no means fun, or Comfortable. Rather it is a terrifying experience, Uncomfortable but not really Painful. In comparison to the Methods most people think of when they hear Torture, or the Methods used against out own Troops countless times, most of the enemies we have ever fought. Make Water Boarding look like a fun time.

Call me what ever you want, but I want my government to have the ability to defend us from Attack. Defense is one of the Few things I believe we are suppose to rely on our Federal Government for. The is no reason for us to extend our Constitutional rights to our enemies caught over seas. None IMO.

 

[Valerie]

Yep I wear a bomb pack to bed at night.



They had their orders Bin Ladn was not to be brought back in alive.

No, they knew they had the authority to kill him if they had to...

It never was their intent to bring him back alive. Are you kidding? Bin Laden fac a Obamush and Holder type trial? Obamush did not want that it would have made him look like a hypocrite, an any evidence they had would have been thrown out in court. And another reason as I have already said thy had no evidence that Bin Lade had any cnnecions with the attacks on the world trade center.

U.S. insists firefight at Osama compound; won't release photos | Reuters

FBI — USAMA BIN LADEN

"It was justified as an act of national self-defence," Holder told the Senate Judiciary Committee, citing bin Laden's admission of being involved in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the United States that killed nearly 3,000 people.

He said a trove of information seized from the compound would likely lead to more names being added to U.S. terrorism watch-lists.

 

[JimH52]

Look last time you cannot claim a moral high ground on one issue and cheer about the death of an unarmed man.

So, you are an OBL sympathizer?

No I for truth an honesty which it seems the left has a hard time finding. You cannot not say waterboarding is wrong and turn around and cheer at the death of an unarmed man.

First I am not cheering. Secondly, the unarmed man was a mass murderer, who had access to weapons. That unarmed man, with proper preplanning, could have pressed one button when the Seals approached him and blown the entire compound to bits.

You really think that the Seals and Obama didn't think of that? Do you think that a mass murderer such as he woudn't have taken such drastic steps. If he had a plan such as that and the Seals had waited for him to press that button, then you on the far right would argue that the mission was poor planned and Obama is incompetent.

Me thinks you speak from both sides of your mouth...

 

[bigrebnc1775]

"It was justified as an act of national self-defence," Holder told the Senate Judiciary Committee, citing bin Laden's admission of being involved in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the United States that killed nearly 3,000 people.

He said a trove of information seized from the compound would likely lead to more names being added to U.S. terrorism watch-lists.

U.S. insists firefight at Osama compound; won't release photos | Reuters

October 16, 2001-- An interview with Osama bin Laden was published in a Karachi-based Pakistani daily newspaper, Ummat, on September 28, 2001. In this interview, bin Laden says of the September 11 attacks in the US:
"I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other people. Such a practice is forbidden even in the course of a battle.

Bin Laden: AUTHENTIC INTERVIEW

Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI. When asked why there is no mention of 9/11 on Bin Laden’s Most Wanted web page, Tomb said, “The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.”

Surprised by the ease in which this FBI spokesman made such an astonishing statement, I asked, “How this was possible?” Tomb continued, “Bin Laden has not been formally charged in connection to 9/11.” I asked, “How does that work?” Tomb continued, “The FBI gathers evidence. Once evidence is gathered, it is turned over to the Department of Justice. The Department of Justice than decides whether it has enough evidence to present to a federal grand jury. In the case of the 1998 United States Embassies being bombed, Bin Laden has been formally indicted and charged by a grand jury. He has not been formally indicted and charged in connection with 9/11 because the FBI has no hard evidence connected Bin Laden to 9/11.”

FBI says, it has “No hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11”

 

[Wicked Jester]

For those interested in the details of the Bin Laden death photo's, this is what Inhofe described after viewing them yesterday. Paraphrasing:

Extremely gruesome, taken approximetely 30 seconds to 1 minute after hit.......He was shot in the left eye with an ex round that exploded in the skull, exited through his right ear taking a major portion of the brain out the exit wound, and causing part of the brain to exit through the left eye entrance wound where brain is hanging out of.....You can see into the head through the left eye wound.......ID is easily made that it's no doubt Bin Laden by the pictures of the body after it has been cleaned up prior to burial at sea.....He's dead.

Sounds cool!......Now, ya' all enjoy your dinner!

 

[Valerie]

So, you are an OBL sympathizer?

No I for truth an honesty which it seems the left has a hard time finding. You cannot not say waterboarding is wrong and turn around and cheer at the death of an unarmed man.

First I am not cheering. Secondly, the unarmed man was a mass murderer, who had access to weapons. That unarmed man, with proper preplanning, could have pressed one button when the Seals approached him and blown the entire compound to bits.

You really think that the Seals and Obama didn't think of that? Do you think that a mass murderer such as he woudn't have taken such drastic steps. If he had a plan such as that and the Seals had waited for him to press that button, then you on the far right would argue that the mission was poor planned and Obama is incompetent.

Me thinks you speak from both sides of your mouth...

Right? Who's really disposing of American lives, Navy SEAL lives, for the sake of............OBL?

 

[Foxfyre]

As I look at the sometimes tedious and monotonous back and forth on a thread like this, I submit two observations:

1. Just as I opined, the leftwing ideologues ignored an opportunity to actually think about the difference between policy and reality in a crisis situation.

2. And I now further opine that had waterboarding been used during the Obama Administration to obtain information useful in killing Osama bin Laden or thwarting furture mass murders via terrorist attack, the same people condemning the procedure would likely be defending it now. And I doubt that many conservatives would hold much different positions that what they now hold.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

So, you are an OBL sympathizer?

No I for truth an honesty which it seems the left has a hard time finding. You cannot not say waterboarding is wrong and turn around and cheer at the death of an unarmed man.

First I am not cheering. Secondly, the unarmed man was a mass murderer, who had access to weapons. That unarmed man, with proper preplanning, could have pressed one button when the Seals approached him and blown the entire compound to bits.

You really think that the Seals and Obama didn't think of that? Do you think that a mass murderer such as he woudn't have taken such drastic steps. If he had a plan such as that and the Seals had waited for him to press that button, then you on the far right would argue that the mission was poor planned and Obama is incompetent.

Me thinks you speak from both sides of your mouth...

First I am not cheering.

You'll have to speak up I can't hear you over the cheering.

Secondly, the unarmed man was a mass murderer, who had access to weapons.

1. It's never been proven he had anythig to do with the attacks the one who gave finacal support was killed and the mastermind was captred and is in Gitmo right now.
2. The last report sad there were no weapons in the oom he was in.

could have pressed one button when the Seals approached him and blown the entire compound to bits.

Really? did they find any explosives? Bin Laden was in his sleep clothes so not likely he would be wearing a suicde vest on in his home.

You really think that the Seals and Obama didn't think of that? Do you think that a mass murderer such as he woudn't have taken such drastic steps. If he had a plan such as that and the Seals had waited for him to press that button, then you on the far right would argue that the mission was poor planned and Obama is incompetent.

What I think is that you liberals need to get your shit together, you cannot claim the moral high ground and say waterboarding i wrong and turn around and say shooting an unarmed man is ok.

 

[Valerie]

As I look at the sometimes tedious and monotonous back and forth on a thread like this, I submit two observations:

1. Just as I opined, the leftwing ideologues ignored an opportunity to actually think about the difference between policy and reality in a crisis situation.

2. And I now further opine that had waterboarding been used during the Obama Administration to obtain information useful in killing Osama bin Laden or thwarting furture mass murders via terrorist attack, the same people condemning the procedure would likely be defending it now. And I doubt that many conservatives would hold much different positions that what they now hold.

That's not the case with me. Who are you talking about exactly?

 

[Trajan]

well Buckley got water boarded you know...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8jWNfVSk9k]YouTube - William F. Buckley gets Waterboarded[/ame]

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Yep I wear a bomb pack to bed at night.



They had their orders Bin Ladn was not to be brought back in alive.

No, they knew they had the authority to kill him if they had to...

It never was their intent to bring him back alive. Are you kidding? Bin Laden fac a Obamush and Holder type trial? Obamush did not want that it would have made him look like a hypocrite, an any evidence they had would have been thrown out in court. And another reason as I have already said thy had no evidence that Bin Lade had any cnnecions with the attacks on the world trade center.

U.S. insists firefight at Osama compound; won't release photos | Reuters

FBI — USAMA BIN LADEN

"It was justified as an act of national self-defence," Holder told the Senate Judiciary Committee, citing bin Laden's admission of being involved in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the United States that killed nearly 3,000 people.

He said a trove of information seized from the compound would likely lead to more names being added to U.S. terrorism watch-lists.

Where does it say he was wanted in connaction with the attacks on the world trade center?
CAUTION
Usama Bin Laden is wanted in connection with the August 7, 1998, bombings of the United States Embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya. These attacks killed over 200 people. In addition, Bin Laden is a suspect in other terrorist attacks throughout the world.
'
And one more time

Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI. When asked why there is no mention of 9/11 on Bin Laden’s Most Wanted web page, Tomb said, “The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.”

Surprised by the ease in which this FBI spokesman made such an astonishing statement, I asked, “How this was possible?” Tomb continued, “Bin Laden has not been formally charged in connection to 9/11.” I asked, “How does that work?” Tomb continued, “The FBI gathers evidence. Once evidence is gathered, it is turned over to the Department of Justice. The Department of Justice than decides whether it has enough evidence to present to a federal grand jury. In the case of the 1998 United States Embassies being bombed, Bin Laden has been formally indicted and charged by a grand jury. He has not been formally indicted and charged in connection with 9/11 because the FBI has no hard evidence connected Bin Laden to 9/11.”

FBI says, it has “No hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11”

 

[Wicked Jester]

As I look at the sometimes tedious and monotonous back and forth on a thread like this, I submit two observations:

1. Just as I opined, the leftwing ideologues ignored an opportunity to actually think about the difference between policy and reality in a crisis situation.

2. And I now further opine that had waterboarding been used during the Obama Administration to obtain information useful in killing Osama bin Laden or thwarting furture mass murders via terrorist attack, the same people condemning the procedure would likely be defending it now. And I doubt that many conservatives would hold much different positions that what they now hold.

I would praise Obama just as highly for ordering it back into the toolbox, as I have for making the call to go in and get his sorry ass.

Fact is, we are going to get hit again. It's just a matter of when, and how. And it will most likely happen on his watch......We've already seen three attempts on his watch, one successful, and two that luckily failed.

What disturbed me about his attitude, was his speech yesterday concerning the border, it's security, and how he immaturally started making jokes like some idiotic frat boy.....He has no intention of sealing off that border whatsoever. If we get hit big, chances are the perpertators will have come through that border....And all he can do is make Alligator and moat jokes.

It's all about politics and votes to him. Don't want to piss off the hispanic base after all.

 

[Foxfyre]

As I look at the sometimes tedious and monotonous back and forth on a thread like this, I submit two observations:

1. Just as I opined, the leftwing ideologues ignored an opportunity to actually think about the difference between policy and reality in a crisis situation.

2. And I now further opine that had waterboarding been used during the Obama Administration to obtain information useful in killing Osama bin Laden or thwarting furture mass murders via terrorist attack, the same people condemning the procedure would likely be defending it now. And I doubt that many conservatives would hold much different positions that what they now hold.

That's not the case with me. Who are you talking about exactly?

I'm saying that the leftwing will NOT even look at, much less discuss, what they would do in a crisis situation in which hundreds or thousands of innocent lives were at stake. The conservatives have at least acknowledged they would not apply the standard policy at such times. I used an illustration from a scene in "Guarding Tess" and said it would be ignored. It was.

And I think I know how it works well enough to believe that had the Annointed One been the one to use waterboarding to get useful information on the whereabout of bin Laden instead of that happening during the Bush Administraation, we probably would not have enough discussion about it to fill twenty seven pages of a thread now.

 

[JimH52]

Ha Ha on Buckley...

 

[Valerie]

As I look at the sometimes tedious and monotonous back and forth on a thread like this, I submit two observations:

1. Just as I opined, the leftwing ideologues ignored an opportunity to actually think about the difference between policy and reality in a crisis situation.

2. And I now further opine that had waterboarding been used during the Obama Administration to obtain information useful in killing Osama bin Laden or thwarting furture mass murders via terrorist attack, the same people condemning the procedure would likely be defending it now. And I doubt that many conservatives would hold much different positions that what they now hold.

That's not the case with me. Who are you talking about exactly?

I'm saying that the leftwing will NOT even look at, much less discuss, what they would do in a crisis situation in which hundreds or thousands of innocent lives were at stake. The conservatives have at least acknowledged they would not apply the standard policy at such times. I used an illustration from a scene in "Guarding Tess" and said it would be ignored. It was.

And I think I know how it works well enough to believe that had the Annointed One been the one to use waterboarding to get useful information on the whereabout of bin Laden instead of that happening during the Bush Administraation, we probably would not have enough discussion about it to fill twenty seven pages of a thread now.

The current administration did act on intelligence that was obtained by President Bush.


In my my book, some things go way beyond politics... I think it's sad some people have such little faith in the intentions of their fellow Americans...

 

[bigrebnc1775]

That's not the case with me. Who are you talking about exactly?

I'm saying that the leftwing will NOT even look at, much less discuss, what they would do in a crisis situation in which hundreds or thousands of innocent lives were at stake. The conservatives have at least acknowledged they would not apply the standard policy at such times. I used an illustration from a scene in "Guarding Tess" and said it would be ignored. It was.

And I think I know how it works well enough to believe that had the Annointed One been the one to use waterboarding to get useful information on the whereabout of bin Laden instead of that happening during the Bush Administraation, we probably would not have enough discussion about it to fill twenty seven pages of a thread now.

The current administration did act on intelligence that was obtained by President Bush.


In my my book, some things go way beyond politics... I think it's sad some people have such little faith in the intentions of their fellow Americans...

The current administration did act on intelligence that was obtained by President Bush.

So val, when are you going to put your politics to the side?

 

[Trajan]

"WHEN US Representative Steve King learned that Osama bin Laden had been killed by US troops in Pakistan, he couldn’t resist a little crowing about the efficacy of torture. “Wonder what President Obama thinks of water boarding now?’’ the Iowa Republican tweeted on May 2.

It was an outrageous remark, but King wasn’t going out on a limb. A parade of others, mostly Republicans, have joined him in claiming that the death of bin Laden had vindicated the use of waterboarding — the most notorious of the “enhanced interrogation techniques’’ the Bush administration employed to extract information from senior Al Qaeda detainees....

...I don’t know whether waterboarding was indispensable to rolling up bin Laden; for every interrogation expert who says it was, another expert argues the opposite. But the case against waterboarding never rested primarily on its usefulness. It rested on its wrongfulness. It is wrong when bad guys do it to good guys. It is just as wrong when good guys do it to Al Qaeda....

The killing of bin Laden was gratifying, but it was no vindication of torture. Republicans rightly argue that much credit is owed to George W. Bush, who launched an effective war on terror and pursued it with fierce resolve. But Bush was wrong to permit waterboarding, and wrong to deny that it was torture. I don’t agree with Obama on much, but when it comes to waterboarding, he is right. America will defeat the global jihad, but not by embracing its most inhuman values."

Ends don’t justify the means - The Boston Globe

Jeff Jacoby (columnist) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I am of the mind that there is the consideration of the/a mechanism of 'degree', in everything.

The form of water boarding practiced, say, by the Japanese with sea water and with no regard for the health of the prisoner along with profligate use, is not what we employed.

The NY times ran a comprehensive treatise on exactly how we performed a water boarding 'session' ala, doctor standing by,constant health checks of the prisoner and very limited employment etc etc. Every safe guard that could be taken, was.

Making an excuse? No, I'll cop to sppting water boarding straight away.

Making an excuse for its use period, as in an argument for/of mitigation of use, yes,
I'll cop to that too.

I believe it should only be employed by authority of the President, period.

Why? I believe Churchill summed it up for me best; ' It is no use saying, 'We are doing whats 'right', you have got to succeed in doing what is necessary".

 

[Trajan]

As I look at the sometimes tedious and monotonous back and forth on a thread like this, I submit two observations:

1. Just as I opined, the leftwing ideologues ignored an opportunity to actually think about the difference between policy and reality in a crisis situation.

2. And I now further opine that had waterboarding been used during the Obama Administration to obtain information useful in killing Osama bin Laden or thwarting furture mass murders via terrorist attack, the same people condemning the procedure would likely be defending it now. And I doubt that many conservatives would hold much different positions that what they now hold.

well put.

 

[Valerie]

"WHEN US Representative Steve King learned that Osama bin Laden had been killed by US troops in Pakistan, he couldn’t resist a little crowing about the efficacy of torture. “Wonder what President Obama thinks of water boarding now?’’ the Iowa Republican tweeted on May 2.

It was an outrageous remark, but King wasn’t going out on a limb. A parade of others, mostly Republicans, have joined him in claiming that the death of bin Laden had vindicated the use of waterboarding — the most notorious of the “enhanced interrogation techniques’’ the Bush administration employed to extract information from senior Al Qaeda detainees....

...I don’t know whether waterboarding was indispensable to rolling up bin Laden; for every interrogation expert who says it was, another expert argues the opposite. But the case against waterboarding never rested primarily on its usefulness. It rested on its wrongfulness. It is wrong when bad guys do it to good guys. It is just as wrong when good guys do it to Al Qaeda....

The killing of bin Laden was gratifying, but it was no vindication of torture. Republicans rightly argue that much credit is owed to George W. Bush, who launched an effective war on terror and pursued it with fierce resolve. But Bush was wrong to permit waterboarding, and wrong to deny that it was torture. I don’t agree with Obama on much, but when it comes to waterboarding, he is right. America will defeat the global jihad, but not by embracing its most inhuman values."

Ends don’t justify the means - The Boston Globe

Jeff Jacoby (columnist) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I am of the mind that there is the consideration of the/a mechanism of 'degree', in everything.

The form of water boarding practiced, say, by the Japanese with sea water and with no regard for the health of the prisoner along with profligate use, is not what we employed.

The NY times ran a comprehensive treatise on exactly how we performed a water boarding 'session' ala, doctor standing by,constant health checks of the prisoner and very limited employment etc etc. Every safe guard that could be taken, was.

Making an excuse? No, I'll cop to sppting water boarding straight away.

Making an excuse for its use period, as in an argument for/of mitigation of use, yes,
I'll cop to that too.

I believe it should only be employed by authority of the President, period.

Why? I believe Churchill summed it up for me best; ' It is no use saying, 'We are doing whats 'right', you have got to succeed in doing what is necessary".

America always does what's necessary...