CIA Confirms: Waterboarding 9/11 Mastermind Led to Info that Aborted 9/11-Style Attac

[DiveCon]

Well given that the intel on the possible attack on LA was obtained in a 1995 raid on Ramsey Bin Yussef's apartment in the Philippines, no torture was involved, and since the intel indicated said plan was only in it's conceptual stages, there was no attack to prevent. Bush's claim to have done so was just another fabrication on his part.

Now, as for just being "psychological", perhaps you and I should get together. I'll strap you head down on an incline board, put a cloth over your face and start pouring water. We'll see how long it takes you to change your tune.

i am sure you have a link to prove your point on the intel. The Washington post piece does not seem to corroborate that.

It was called "Bojinka" google it yourself .

which had absolutely NOTHING to do with the Library tower in LA
you FAIL

Bojinka plot - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Iriemon]

you are too fucking stupid
as if they WOULDNT torture because we didnt
you are sorely lacking in historical perspective

Repetitive

Don't feel like playing with children today.

I'll respond to posts that don't contain infantile insults.

you moron, you already DID respond to it
right here
http://www.usmessageboard.com/1173039-post212.html

That was yesterday. : )

 

[DiveCon]

So the intel that stopped the L.A. attack was useless?

These so called torture techniques are NOT physical in nature but rather psychological. Combined with sleep deprivation, hunger, and other methods, they are designed to weaken psychological barriers and elicit unintentional responses from prisoners.

There was no ripping out of fingernails, no breaking of bones, no Iron Maidens, no stretching on the rack etc. So the "They said anything to stop the pain" defense does not work.

The physical safety of these terrorists was taken into account every step of the way

And if one, just one, American's life was saved because of it, I have no problem with a terrorists or anyone with knowledge of a terrorist plot being subjected to them.

Well given that the intel on the possible attack on LA was obtained in a 1995 raid on Ramsey Bin Yussef's apartment in the Philippines, no torture was involved, and since the intel indicated said plan was only in it's conceptual stages, there was no attack to prevent. Bush's claim to have done so was just another fabrication on his part.

That's interesting, and blows the who DOJ memo out of the water. Do you have a source?

no, he doesnt, cause like you, he is LYING

 

[DiveCon]

Repetitive

Don't feel like playing with children today.

I'll respond to posts that don't contain infantile insults.

you moron, you already DID respond to it
right here
http://www.usmessageboard.com/1173039-post212.html

That was yesterday. : )

LOL sure it was

 

[Iriemon]

Well given that the intel on the possible attack on LA was obtained in a 1995 raid on Ramsey Bin Yussef's apartment in the Philippines, no torture was involved, and since the intel indicated said plan was only in it's conceptual stages, there was no attack to prevent. Bush's claim to have done so was just another fabrication on his part.

That's interesting, and blows the who DOJ memo out of the water. Do you have a source?

no, he doesnt, cause like you, he is LYING

You're very good at accusations and you like flaming. How good are you making valid assertions? Show the board the post where I am lying.

 

[Iriemon]

you are too fucking stupid
as if they WOULDNT torture because we didnt
you are sorely lacking in historical perspective

They are evil. So we can be evil too.

Let's all calm down, and drop terms like "evil," "liar," etc.

To me, I consider a)that the NYTimes article clearly indicated an attempt to be sure no actual injury occurs, and b) that 'high value information' was obtained.

But I must share with you the most recent report from Stratfor.com which mitigates my feelings on the subject:

After 9/11 "Collecting intelligence rapidly became the highest national priority. Given the genuine and reasonable fears, no action in pursuit of intelligence was out of the question, so long as it promised quick answers. "

" The Constitution does not speak to the question of torture of non-citizens, but it implies an abhorrence of rights violations (at least for citizens). But the Declaration of Independence contains the phrase, “a decent respect for the opinions of mankind.” This indicates that world opinion matters. "

"Defenders of torture frequently seem to believe that the person in custody is known to have valuable information, and that this information must be forced out of him. His possession of the information is proof of his guilt.Critics of torture, on the other hand, seem to assume the torture was brutality for the sake of brutality instead of a desperate attempt to get some clarity on what might well have been a catastrophic outcome. The critics also cannot know the extent to which the use of torture actually prevented follow-on attacks."

"But neither they, nor anyone else, had the right to assume in late 2001 that there was a long run. One of the things that wasn’t known was how much time there was."

" The United States turned to torture because it has experienced a massive intelligence failure reaching back a decade... There was the Torricelli amendment that made recruiting people with ties to terrorist groups illegal without special approval." (Google Church and Pike Committees.)

"But the routinization of the extraordinary is the built-in danger of bureaucracy, and what began as a response to unprecedented dangers became part of the process. Bush had an opportunity to move beyond the emergency. He didn’t. "

"U.S. President Barack Obama has handled this issue in the style to which we have become accustomed, and which is as practical a solution as possible."

I hope this was helpful.

I agree that torturing people possibly could lead to some intel that might save lives. And if we employed more violent torture techniques, it arguably would be more effecitve.

No doubt we could torture Americans accused of crims too and get useful information, like gang intellegence, info about drug smuggling, organized crime, and location of assets of the guy who didn't pay his taxes.

But I'm also motivated by another factor. Someone earlier in the thread (Sealybobo I think) said something to the effect that Americans don't torture people. IMO he was hitting on something there, which I'll expound upon, copying a post I made in another thread.

Torture has been banned by international treaty for decades. We prosecuted Japanese as war criminals for doing the same conduct the Bush DOJ sought to justify. IMO, for the US to sanction this kind of behavior stains the reputation and credibility of the US, and ultimately harms it.

Reagan called the US the shining city on the hill and the best hope for mankind. Kind of corny, and certainly we as a nation have not always lived up to that goal, but I believe that it benefits our nation to strive to the goals as Reagan spelled out.

I think that Obama saying we aren't going to do to people what we called others "war criminals" for doing to us isn't treason, but it is reaffirming the America that Reagan spoke of.

Yes, sometimes striving for those goals means there are costs. It may be that by not wholesale embracing torture as a policy, we exposure ourselves to the greater risk of an attack. By giving someone a trial, there is a chance a jury would find him not guilty and let him free.

But freedom isn't free. Living in a free society -- in the shining city on the hill -- means you have to take some reasonable risks to protect that freedom and objective.

Ultimately, I believe America wins the war on terrorism not by winnnig a battle on the ground but by winning the battle of ideas and ideals. We face a tough opponent on that score because they have religious belief they can stoke, a very powerful tool. But I think ultimately, the ideals of freedom, liberty, equality, rule of law, human rights, due process, and the other things that make America the shining city on the hill win out over the ideals of radical Islam.

I really believe that.

And so every step we take towards that ideal I think we forward our cause. If people see America acting consistent with the ideals it represents, they and America look more admirable in the battle of ideas. I think deep down, most people are attracted to the ideals of the shining city on they hill.

And conversely, every step away from ideal we take, we look more hypocritical and less noble, allowing those who oppose us to use that to debase what we are and stand for.

I believe ultimately we win by standing by what America stands for.

And so that is why I applaud Obama's action on this and on Guantanamo and his willingness to reach out and talk to other nations, even tho' there might be some short term harm, because it tells the world that we as Americans have made the decision to stand by what makes America that shining city on the hill and the best hope for mankind that Reagan spoke of.

 

[DiveCon]

That's interesting, and blows the who DOJ memo out of the water. Do you have a source?

no, he doesnt, cause like you, he is LYING

You're very good at accusations and you like flaming. How good are you making valid assertions? Show the board the post where I am lying.

ok, either you are lying or your are so deluded you dont know what the truth is

feel better now?

 

[WillowTree]

Thanks for answering. So you think others should be able to torture US citizens or soldiers this way.

Not me.

you are too fucking stupid
as if they WOULDNT torture because we didnt
you are sorely lacking in historical perspective

They are evil. So we can be evil too.

you want to be evil or you want to be dead? which asshole? which?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Torture has been banned by international treaty for decades. We prosecuted Japanese as war criminals for doing the same conduct the Bush DOJ sought to justify. IMO, for the US to sanction this kind of behavior stains the reputation and credibility of the US, and ultimately harms it.

Let's be sure we are comparing apples to apples.

"Tales were told by surviving prisoners and soldiers who found the mutilated bodies of their lost comrades. How the Japanese placed Bamboo shoots under the tied down Allied Prisoner. The bamboo shoots are rapid growing, even so it might take days for a prisoner to finally die from the sharpened Bamboo tips that pierced their body bit by painful, slowly, bit.
Some prisoners that were captured had their testicles and private parts cut off, then placed into their mouths and their mouths sewn up. Then they would send the prisoner back to the Allied Battle lines."
BBC - WW2 People's War - JAPANESE TORTURE TECHNIQUES
Abdominal slap
Attention grasp
Facial slap
Facial hold
Waterboarding
Wall standing
Water dousing
Stress positions
Cramped confinement
Confinement with insects
Walling
Interrogation Techniques - Interactive Graphic - NYTimes.com

Reagan called the US the shining city on the hill and the best hope for mankind. Kind of corny, and certainly we as a nation have not always lived up to that goal, but I believe that it benefits our nation to strive to the goals as Reagan spelled out.

I love when you quote the great Ronaldus Maximus.

Yes, sometimes striving for those goals means there are costs.

See, this is what I meant in a previous post as far as not giving proper weight. Here in NYC we lost 3000 brothers and sisters. There are numerous streets named for the victims. And you are tossing these off as simple 'costs.'
Stratfor asks this: "...would it be moral to protect the individual’s rights while allowing hundreds of thousands to die?" I ask you.

" some reasonable risks" Would you consider this phrase applicable to the duties of the President after 9/11?

"they have religious belief they can stoke..." The news reports include the information that jihadists feel that they hold out until they have reached a psychological limit. The interrogation methods are designed to make them feel just that.

I believe ultimately we win by standing by what America stands for.

And I believe that that is exactly what we see when we note how carefully the techniques were designed not to cause permanent injury.

And so that is why I applaud Obama's action... what makes America that shining city on the hill and the best hope for mankind that Reagan spoke of.

It's not fair: you know it weakens me when you mention Reagan.
But, why did he have to tell the jihadists exactly what we were prepared to do? And isn't it dishonest to cut out the parts that state how much 'high value intelligence' we obtained by these methods? Shouldn't Americans know how valuable they were? And why let AG consider charging these officials who kept us safe?

A bit off topic, but I would love to politicize this talk by reminding you how the Church Committee and the Pike Committee hurt intell collection, and how "There was the Torricelli amendment that made recruiting people with ties to terrorist groups illegal without special approval."

All of the above were Democrats. Does this have legs?

 

[Red Dawn]

DumbCON is running around calling people who don't believe in torture "pussies".


DumbCON , what exactly do you feel is brave about torturing captives who are in our custody? What is brave about torturing a dude who is a prisoner, and completely helpless and at your mercy.

What the fuck do you find brave about that?


You know what I think? I think you're a sadisitic motherfucker, who would love to torture people who are helpless and at your mercy.

Sick fuck.

 

[WillowTree]

People who don't have the stomach to do what it takes to prevent another 9-11 or worse have no place in trying to lead the country. They just need to sit down and stfu and let the grownups do what is needed. meanwhile the spineless can moan about their bleeding hearts..

 

[DiveCon]

DumbCON is running around calling people who don't believe in torture "pussies".


DumbCON , what exactly do you feel is brave about torturing captives who are in our custody? What is brave about torturing a dude who is a prisoner, and completely helpless and at your mercy.

What the fuck do you find brave about that?


You know what I think? I think you're a sadisitic motherfucker, who would love to torture people who are helpless and at your mercy.

Sick fuck.

red dumb is too fucking stupid to begin to understand what is being discussed

and that makes you one sick fuck because you are projecting your own thoughts onto other that have never said what you claim they did
that also makes you a fucking liar

 

[WillowTree]

DumbCON is running around calling people who don't believe in torture "pussies".


DumbCON , what exactly do you feel is brave about torturing captives who are in our custody? What is brave about torturing a dude who is a prisoner, and completely helpless and at your mercy.

What the fuck do you find brave about that?


You know what I think? I think you're a sadisitic motherfucker, who would love to torture people who are helpless and at your mercy.

Sick fuck.

red dumb is too fucking stupid to begin to understand what is being discussed

and that makes you one sick fuck because you are projecting your own thoughts onto other that have never said what you claim they did
that also makes you a fucking liar

that's cause he's too gullible and dosen't understand the perfection of nature and "survival of the meanest,,,,eeerrrr fittest."

 

[Iriemon]

Torture has been banned by international treaty for decades. We prosecuted Japanese as war criminals for doing the same conduct the Bush DOJ sought to justify. IMO, for the US to sanction this kind of behavior stains the reputation and credibility of the US, and ultimately harms it.

Let's be sure we are comparing apples to apples.

"Tales were told by surviving prisoners and soldiers who found the mutilated bodies of their lost comrades. How the Japanese placed Bamboo shoots under the tied down Allied Prisoner. The bamboo shoots are rapid growing, even so it might take days for a prisoner to finally die from the sharpened Bamboo tips that pierced their body bit by painful, slowly, bit.
Some prisoners that were captured had their testicles and private parts cut off, then placed into their mouths and their mouths sewn up. Then they would send the prisoner back to the Allied Battle lines."
BBC - WW2 People's War - JAPANESE TORTURE TECHNIQUES
Abdominal slap
Attention grasp
Facial slap
Facial hold
Waterboarding
Wall standing
Water dousing
Stress positions
Cramped confinement
Confinement with insects
Walling
Interrogation Techniques - Interactive Graphic - NYTimes.com

During World War II both Japanese troops, especially the Kempeitai, and the officers of the Gestapo,[64] the German secret police, used waterboarding as a method of torture. ...The Khmer Rouge at the Tuol Sleng prison in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, used waterboarding as a method of torture between 1975 and 1979.

Waterboarding used by the Imperical Japanese army, the Gestapo, and the Khmer Rouge. We're in good company.

US position pre-Bush: Waterboarding was designated as illegal by U.S. generals in the Vietnam War.[73] On January 21, 1968, The Washington Post published a controversial photograph of two U.S soldiers and one South Vietnamese soldier participating in the waterboarding of a North Vietnamese POW near Da Nang.[74] The article described the practice as "fairly common".[74] The photograph led to the soldier being court-martialled by a U.S. military court within one month of its publication, and he was discharged from the army.
Waterboarding - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reagan called the US the shining city on the hill and the best hope for mankind. Kind of corny, and certainly we as a nation have not always lived up to that goal, but I believe that it benefits our nation to strive to the goals as Reagan spelled out.

I love when you quote the great Ronaldus Maximus.

See, this is what I meant in a previous post as far as not giving proper weight. Here in NYC we lost 3000 brothers and sisters. There are numerous streets named for the victims. And you are tossing these off as simple 'costs.'
Stratfor asks this: "...would it be moral to protect the individual’s rights while allowing hundreds of thousands to die?" I ask you.

I can ask irrelevant hypotheticals too. How many hundreds of innocent people are you willing to torture and imprison to save a life?

That rational would justify torturing American citizens too.

I agree we could be marginally safer by doing inhumane things to others and giving up our freedoms. Freedom isn't free.

" some reasonable risks" Would you consider this phrase applicable to the duties of the President after 9/11?

"they have religious belief they can stoke..." The news reports include the information that jihadists feel that they hold out until they have reached a psychological limit. The interrogation methods are designed to make them feel just that.

I'm not saying all interrogation techniques should be prohibited. But ones we ourselves have prosecuted others for doing, yes.

I believe ultimately we win by standing by what America stands for.

And I believe that that is exactly what we see when we note how carefully the techniques were designed not to cause permanent injury.

You mean by doing it only 183 times to one person? You mean by doing the same thing we prosecuted others for doing? You mean by doing the same type of torture as he Gestapo?

That's showing everyone what a shining city on the hill America is.

And so that is why I applaud Obama's action... what makes America that shining city on the hill and the best hope for mankind that Reagan spoke of.

It's not fair: you know it weakens me when you mention Reagan.
But, why did he have to tell the jihadists exactly what we were prepared to do? And isn't it dishonest to cut out the parts that state how much 'high value intelligence' we obtained by these methods? Shouldn't Americans know how valuable they were? And why let AG consider charging these officials who kept us safe?

Because we are Americans. The shining city on the hill that Reagan would get misty eyed over. We don't torture people. Folks like the Imperial Japanese army, Gestapo, and Khmer Rouge to that.

A bit off topic, but I would love to politicize this talk by reminding you how the Church Committee and the Pike Committee hurt intell collection, and how "There was the Torricelli amendment that made recruiting people with ties to terrorist groups illegal without special approval."

All of the above were Democrats. Does this have legs?

Don't know enough detail to discuss and it is off topic.

 

[Tech_Esq]

I am one who would rather starve to death than kill someone and take their food.

I and others have that same moral code that makes the dangers samller then the moral abyss.

YOU can never proove they could not have stopped this without this information. That is unknowable.

If Obama get caught allowing torture will you defend him?

I wont.

First things first, do you store food in significant amounts and where do you live? It could prove useful to know where the weakest links are sometime in the future. If you don't think enough of your family to kill others to live, I have no problem with it, so I'd like to pick off the weakest ones first (all in the name of proving Darwin's theory don't you know?)

You have a lot more to worry about than a "Moral Abyss" It's quaint that you think that's the most important issue confronting you.....in a kumbaya sort of way...

You are correct Kaptain Obvious! It is impossible to "proove" a negative.

If Obama gets caught torturing suspected foreign terrorists rather than "suspected Americans," then, yes, in that unlikely and extremely hypothetical event, I will support him. (Unless at that point, he is being hypocritical because he has prosecuted Bush people for the same thing.)

 

[Tech_Esq]

Torture has been banned by international treaty for decades. We prosecuted Japanese as war criminals for doing the same conduct the Bush DOJ sought to justify. IMO, for the US to sanction this kind of behavior stains the reputation and credibility of the US, and ultimately harms it.

Let's be sure we are comparing apples to apples.

"Tales were told by surviving prisoners and soldiers who found the mutilated bodies of their lost comrades. How the Japanese placed Bamboo shoots under the tied down Allied Prisoner. The bamboo shoots are rapid growing, even so it might take days for a prisoner to finally die from the sharpened Bamboo tips that pierced their body bit by painful, slowly, bit.
Some prisoners that were captured had their testicles and private parts cut off, then placed into their mouths and their mouths sewn up. Then they would send the prisoner back to the Allied Battle lines."
BBC - WW2 People's War - JAPANESE TORTURE TECHNIQUES
Abdominal slap
Attention grasp
Facial slap
Facial hold
Waterboarding
Wall standing
Water dousing
Stress positions
Cramped confinement
Confinement with insects
Walling
Interrogation Techniques - Interactive Graphic - NYTimes.com

During World War II both Japanese troops, especially the Kempeitai, and the officers of the Gestapo,[64] the German secret police, used waterboarding as a method of torture. ...The Khmer Rouge at the Tuol Sleng prison in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, used waterboarding as a method of torture between 1975 and 1979.

Waterboarding used by the Imperical Japanese army, the Gestapo, and the Khmer Rouge. We're in good company.

US position pre-Bush: Waterboarding was designated as illegal by U.S. generals in the Vietnam War.[73] On January 21, 1968, The Washington Post published a controversial photograph of two U.S soldiers and one South Vietnamese soldier participating in the waterboarding of a North Vietnamese POW near Da Nang.[74] The article described the practice as "fairly common".[74] The photograph led to the soldier being court-martialled by a U.S. military court within one month of its publication, and he was discharged from the army.
Waterboarding - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



I love when you quote the great Ronaldus Maximus.



I can ask irrelevant hypotheticals too. How many hundreds of innocent people are you willing to torture and imprison to save a life?

That rational would justify torturing American citizens too.

I agree we could be marginally safer by doing inhumane things to others and giving up our freedoms. Freedom isn't free.



I'm not saying all interrogation techniques should be prohibited. But ones we ourselves have prosecuted others for doing, yes.


And I believe that that is exactly what we see when we note how carefully the techniques were designed not to cause permanent injury.

You mean by doing it only 183 times to one person? You mean by doing the same thing we prosecuted others for doing? You mean by doing the same type of torture as he Gestapo?

That's showing everyone what a shining city on the hill America is.

And so that is why I applaud Obama's action... what makes America that shining city on the hill and the best hope for mankind that Reagan spoke of.

It's not fair: you know it weakens me when you mention Reagan.
But, why did he have to tell the jihadists exactly what we were prepared to do? And isn't it dishonest to cut out the parts that state how much 'high value intelligence' we obtained by these methods? Shouldn't Americans know how valuable they were? And why let AG consider charging these officials who kept us safe?[/quotes]

Because we are Americans. We don't torture people. Folks like the Imperial Japanese army, Gestapo, and Khmer Rouge to that.

A bit off topic, but I would love to politicize this talk by reminding you how the Church Committee and the Pike Committee hurt intell collection, and how "There was the Torricelli amendment that made recruiting people with ties to terrorist groups illegal without special approval."

All of the above were Democrats. Does this have legs?

Don't know enough detail to discuss and it is off topic.

Irie --

Since you are apparently a great student of history, please compare and contrast the methods of "waterboarding" used by the Japanese etc and the "waterboarding" used by the United States recently.

You are taking advantage of the fact that these two techniques are known by the same name. Comparing waterboarding as done by the US recently to waterboarding done by the Japanese is like saying shooting you with a BB gun is the same as shooting you with a 120 mm Howitzer.

I look forward to your answer.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Torture has been banned by international treaty for decades. We prosecuted Japanese as war criminals for doing the same conduct the Bush DOJ sought to justify. IMO, for the US to sanction this kind of behavior stains the reputation and credibility of the US, and ultimately harms it.

Let's be sure we are comparing apples to apples.

"Tales were told by surviving prisoners and soldiers who found the mutilated bodies of their lost comrades. How the Japanese placed Bamboo shoots under the tied down Allied Prisoner. The bamboo shoots are rapid growing, even so it might take days for a prisoner to finally die from the sharpened Bamboo tips that pierced their body bit by painful, slowly, bit.
Some prisoners that were captured had their testicles and private parts cut off, then placed into their mouths and their mouths sewn up. Then they would send the prisoner back to the Allied Battle lines."
BBC - WW2 People's War - JAPANESE TORTURE TECHNIQUES
Abdominal slap
Attention grasp
Facial slap
Facial hold
Waterboarding
Wall standing
Water dousing
Stress positions
Cramped confinement
Confinement with insects
Walling
Interrogation Techniques - Interactive Graphic - NYTimes.com

During World War II both Japanese troops, especially the Kempeitai, and the officers of the Gestapo,[64] the German secret police, used waterboarding as a method of torture. ...The Khmer Rouge at the Tuol Sleng prison in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, used waterboarding as a method of torture between 1975 and 1979.

Waterboarding used by the Imperical Japanese army, the Gestapo, and the Khmer Rouge. We're in good company.

US position pre-Bush: Waterboarding was designated as illegal by U.S. generals in the Vietnam War.[73] On January 21, 1968, The Washington Post published a controversial photograph of two U.S soldiers and one South Vietnamese soldier participating in the waterboarding of a North Vietnamese POW near Da Nang.[74] The article described the practice as "fairly common".[74] The photograph led to the soldier being court-martialled by a U.S. military court within one month of its publication, and he was discharged from the army.
Waterboarding - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So, with the exception of waterboarding, you endorese the rest?

I can ask irrelevant hypotheticals too. How many hundreds of innocent people are you willing to torture and imprison to save a life?

Is it OK if it's your life?

You mean by doing it only 183 times to one person? You mean by doing the same thing we prosecuted others for doing? You mean by doing the same type of torture as he Gestapo?

WASHINGTON - President Obama’s national intelligence director told colleagues in a private memo last week that the harsh interrogation techniques banned by the White House did produce significant information that helped the nation in its struggle with terrorists.
NYT: Harsh techniques worked, intel chief says - White House- msnbc.com

And so that is why I applaud Obama's action... what makes America that shining city on the hill and the best hope for mankind that Reagan spoke of.

It's not fair: you know it weakens me when you mention Reagan.

But, why did he have to tell the jihadists exactly what we were prepared to do? And isn't it dishonest to cut out the parts that state how much 'high value intelligence' we obtained by these methods? Shouldn't Americans know how valuable they were? [/quotes]

A bit off topic, but I would love to politicize this talk by reminding you how the Church Committee and the Pike Committee hurt intell collection, and how "There was the Torricelli amendment that made recruiting people with ties to terrorist groups illegal without special approval."

All of the above were Democrats. Does this have legs?

Don't know enough detail to discuss and it is off topic.

It is important for an understanding of this topic, and it is the reason we were without required intell. Check out the Church Committee: "the United States will not fight fire with fire."

 

[Tech_Esq]

You know, it was also pointed out today that we have longitudinal studies (for the uneducated lefties out there, that means a study that took place over a long period of time) about the effects of the "harsh techniques" we use on physical and emotional stability and what if any damage is caused by these techniques.

How? You ask.

The answer.... We use all of these techniques on our soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines. During Survival, Escape, Evasion and Rescue (SEER) training, we subject our service people to all of these techniques. Information has been gathered on the attendees of these courses subsequently over the course of their careers, or in some cases, lives. The findings, there is no permanent damage done to people subjected to these techniques.

An interesting irony to Obama's policy change is that now only US servicemen can be legally tortured.

"And here we go, right down the rabbit hole"

 

[Iriemon]

Irie --

Since you are apparently a great student of history, please compare and contrast the methods of "waterboarding" used by the Japanese etc and the "waterboarding" used by the United States recently.

You are taking advantage of the fact that these two techniques are known by the same name. Comparing waterboarding as done by the US recently to waterboarding done by the Japanese is like saying shooting you with a BB gun is the same as shooting you with a 120 mm Howitzer.

I look forward to your answer.

Japanese verion:

Chase J. Nielsen, one of the U.S. airmen who flew in the Doolittle raid following the attack on Pearl Harbor, was subjected to waterboarding by his Japanese captors.[69] At their trial for war crimes following the war, he testified "Well, I was put on my back on the floor with my arms and legs stretched out, one guard holding each limb. The towel was wrapped around my face and put across my face and water poured on. They poured water on this towel until I was almost unconscious from strangulation, then they would let up until I'd get my breath, then they'd start over again… I felt more or less like I was drowning, just gasping between life and death."

Waterboarding - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

US version -

This effort plus the cloth produces the perception of ‘suffocation and incipient panic,’ i.e., the perception of drowning. The individual does not breathe any water into his lungs. During those 20 to 40 seconds, water is continuously applied from a height of 12 to 24 inches. ... The sensation of drowning is immediately relieved by the removal of the cloth. The procedure may then be repeated.

“Although the subject may experience the fear or panic associated with the feeling of drowning, the waterboard does not inflict physical pain. ... Although the waterboard constitutes a threat of imminent death, prolonged mental harm must nonetheless result to violate the statutory prohibition infliction of severe mental pain or suffering[/B]. ... Indeed, you have advised us that the relief is almost immediate when the cloth is removed from the nose and mouth. In the absence of prolonged mental harm, no severe mental pain or suffering would have been inflicted, and the use of these procedures would not constitute torture within the meaning of the statute.”

Interrogation Techniques - Interactive Graphic - NYTimes.com

a footnote to a 2005 memo made it clear that the rules were not always followed. Waterboarding was used “with far greater frequency than initially indicated” and with “large volumes of water” rather than the small quantities in the rules, one memo says, citing a 2004 report by the C.I.A.’s inspector general.

Obama releases details of post-9/11 interrogations | News for Dallas, Texas | Dallas Morning News | Latest News

What is the basis for your assertion that the US version of waterboarding was somehow done more humanely?

 

[Tech_Esq]

Irie --

Since you are apparently a great student of history, please compare and contrast the methods of "waterboarding" used by the Japanese etc and the "waterboarding" used by the United States recently.

You are taking advantage of the fact that these two techniques are known by the same name. Comparing waterboarding as done by the US recently to waterboarding done by the Japanese is like saying shooting you with a BB gun is the same as shooting you with a 120 mm Howitzer.

I look forward to your answer.

Japanese verion:

Chase J. Nielsen, one of the U.S. airmen who flew in the Doolittle raid following the attack on Pearl Harbor, was subjected to waterboarding by his Japanese captors.[69] At their trial for war crimes following the war, he testified "Well, I was put on my back on the floor with my arms and legs stretched out, one guard holding each limb. The towel was wrapped around my face and put across my face and water poured on. They poured water on this towel until I was almost unconscious from strangulation, then they would let up until I'd get my breath, then they'd start over again… I felt more or less like I was drowning, just gasping between life and death."

Waterboarding - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

US version -

This effort plus the cloth produces the perception of ‘suffocation and incipient panic,’ i.e., the perception of drowning. The individual does not breathe any water into his lungs. During those 20 to 40 seconds, water is continuously applied from a height of 12 to 24 inches. ... The sensation of drowning is immediately relieved by the removal of the cloth. The procedure may then be repeated.

“Although the subject may experience the fear or panic associated with the feeling of drowning, the waterboard does not inflict physical pain. ... Although the waterboard constitutes a threat of imminent death, prolonged mental harm must nonetheless result to violate the statutory prohibition infliction of severe mental pain or suffering[/B]. ... Indeed, you have advised us that the relief is almost immediate when the cloth is removed from the nose and mouth. In the absence of prolonged mental harm, no severe mental pain or suffering would have been inflicted, and the use of these procedures would not constitute torture within the meaning of the statute.”

Interrogation Techniques - Interactive Graphic - NYTimes.com

a footnote to a 2005 memo made it clear that the rules were not always followed. Waterboarding was used “with far greater frequency than initially indicated” and with “large volumes of water” rather than the small quantities in the rules, one memo says, citing a 2004 report by the C.I.A.’s inspector general.

Obama releases details of post-9/11 interrogations | News for Dallas, Texas | Dallas Morning News | Latest News

What is the basis for your assertion that the US version of waterboarding was somehow done more humanely?

The instance you cite of Japanese waterboarding is by far the mildest example I've ever heard recounted, but even at that the difference is that death can and did occur during the Japanese version. The reason is that the US tips the waterboardee back so that water cannot enter the lungs of the waterboardee. This prevents death from occurring.

In most cases of waterboarding by the Japanese, they used inundation, dunking and other techniques where prisoners were put under water, usually feet downward so there was a very real possibility of drowning.

Real Japanese Torture techniques

Far from your description of Japanese torture, this unclassified document produced in 1945 for General MacArthur covered what the Japanese actually did. For Example:

- kneeling with a broomstick behind the knees for a couple hours followed by interrogation then decapitation.

- putting a hose into the throat of the PW and filling his stomach with water. Then a plank was placed across the distended stomach and a Japanese soldier on each end would "see-saw" on the PW. This usually resulted in death.

Interestingly, in that document, they did not mention your cited water boarding technique.