Bush, on 'waterboarding'

Mike 1972 · 11-11-2010 09:04PM

I said I didnt want to derail the thread any further but Ill make one more post on the subject and let you have the last word if you like.

One can mourn a person without necessairly endorsing everything they might have done but only to a point.

When one is prepared to go to the trouble of making a long/expensive journey (this is 1974 were talking about) to a funeral of someone (who just happens to have been a terrorist) one isint related to and by all accounts is only vaugely acquainted with the notion that ones motives are entirely apolitical is a bit of a streach to say the least.

Not slinging mud just describing the facts as they appear to me and I never suggested that atttending someones funeral was in any way illegal.

Nodin · 11-11-2010 09:11PM

Mike 1972 wrote: »

I said (....)
Not slinging mud just describing the facts as they appear to me and I never suggested that atttending someones funeral was in any way illegal.

No, you just implied they were terrorist sympathisers to counter my fairly obvious point they were innocent, described the dead individual as a "suicide bomber" ...............

Pauleta · 11-11-2010 11:20PM

I support Jack Bauer's "Methods"

Holybejaysus · 11-11-2010 11:22PM

scientific1982 wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LPubUCJv58

I am so going to try that on someone the next time I'm drunk at a house party.

Nodin · 11-11-2010 11:30PM

Pauleta wrote: »

I support Jack Bauer's "Methods"

Jack Bauer isn't real.

When CIA officials subjected their first high-value captive, Abu Zubaida, to waterboarding and other harsh interrogation methods, they were convinced that they had in their custody an al-Qaeda leader who knew details of operations yet to be unleashed, and they were facing increasing pressure from the White House to get those secrets out of him.
The methods succeeded in breaking him, and the stories he told of al-Qaeda terrorism plots sent CIA officers around the globe chasing leads.

In the end, though, not a single significant plot was foiled as a result of Abu Zubaida's tortured confessions, according to former senior government officials who closely followed the interrogations. Nearly all of the leads attained through the harsh measures quickly evaporated, while most of the useful information from Abu Zubaida -- chiefly names of al-Qaeda members and associates -- was obtained before waterboarding was introduced, they said.

(my bold)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/28/AR2009032802066.html?hpid=topnews

Johro · 11-11-2010 11:38PM

Helix wrote: »

is it physical though? isnt it more the mental thing that your body thinks youre going to die, when in actual fact youre not

its making you think one thing when the truth is the opposite, so imo its as much mental torture as physical

I would think it's both. My post was a reply to you saying it was 'only' mental torture.

Johro · 11-11-2010 11:39PM

enfant terrible wrote: »

So to be clear your ok with mental torture just not physical torture?

No.

enfant terrible · 11-11-2010 11:40PM

Nodin wrote: »

Jack Bauer isn't real.

(my bold)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/28/AR2009032802066.html?hpid=topnews

Hard to know who to believe though George Tenet the former head of the CIA said:

"I know that this program has saved lives. I know we've disrupted plots," Mr. Tenet said in a "60 Minutes" interview set to air Sunday before the release of his new book. "I know this program alone is worth more than the FBI, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the National Security Agency put together have been able to tell us," he said.

http://www.nysun.com/national/tenet-aggressive-interrogations-brought-us/53222/

Johro · 11-11-2010 11:42PM

Snow-Monkey wrote: »

My opinion is, if a human has been proven to be a member of a terrorist organisation, or broke the law, they forfit all of there human rights.

Funny. That's what happens now.

GLaDOS · 11-11-2010 11:43PM

It is most definitely physical, the sensation of cold water on the face activates the mammalian diving reflex, which makes your body genuinely believe it is drowning and react accordingly

Nodin · 11-11-2010 11:46PM

enfant terrible wrote: »

Hard to know who to believe though George Tenet the former head of the CIA said:

"I know that this program has saved lives. I know we've disrupted plots," Mr. Tenet said in a "60 Minutes" interview set to air Sunday before the release of his new book. "I know this program alone is worth more than the FBI, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the National Security Agency put together have been able to tell us," he said.

http://www.nysun.com/national/tenet-aggressive-interrogations-brought-us/53222/

Well he could say 'Apart from the many other failures during my time as head of the CIA, we can also add the use of torture', but that isn't how the world works.

sponsoredwalk · 11-11-2010 11:52PM

US must begin criminal investigation of torture following Bush admission

Amnesty International today urged a criminal investigation into the role of
former US President George W Bush and other officials in the use of
"enhanced interrogation techniques" against detainees held in secret US
custody after the former president admitted authorizing their use.

In his memoirs, published yesterday, and in an interview on NBC News
broadcast on 8 November 2010, the former President confirmed his
personal involvement in authorizing "water-boarding" and other
techniques against "high value detainees".

"Under international law, the former President's admission to having
authorized acts that amount to torture are enough to trigger the USA's
obligations to investigate his admissions and if substantiated, to
prosecute him," said Claudio Cordone, Senior Director at Amnesty
International.

"His admissions also highlight once again the absence of accountability
for the crimes under international law of torture and enforced
disappearance committed by the USA."
In his memoirs, former President Bush focused on the cases of two
detainees held in the secret programme.

Abu Zubaydah was held at various undisclosed locations from April 2002 to
September 2006. In August 2002, he was subjected to "water-boarding" in
which water is used to begin the process of drowning, more than 80 times.
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was arrested on 1 March 2003 in Pakistan and
transferred to secret CIA custody. That same month he was "water-
boarded" 183 times, according to a report by the CIA Inspector General.

After three and a half years being held incommunicado in solitary
confinement in secret locations, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was transferred
to military custody in GuantÃ¡namo, where he and Abu Zubayhdah remain
held without trial, along with more than 150 others.

Water-boarding was far from the only technique alleged to have been used
against Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Abu Zubayhdah and others held in the
secret programme that violated the international prohibition of torture and
other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.

Other techniques included prolonged nudity, threats, exposure to cold
temperatures, stress positions, physical assaults, prolonged use of
shackles, and sleep deprivation.

"Under international law, anyone involved in torture must be brought to
justice, and that does not exclude former President George W Bush,"
said Claudio Cordone.

"In the absence of a US investigation, other states must step in and carry
out such an investigation themselves."
http://www.amnestyusa.org/document.php?id=ENGNAU2010111019469&lang=e

International law, that old formality...?

enfant terrible · 11-11-2010 11:54PM

Nodin wrote: »

Well he could say 'Apart from the many other failures during my time as head of the CIA, we can also add the use of torture', but that isn't how the world works.

He didn't say that though he said they got useful information.

bobblepuzzle · 11-11-2010 11:55PM

I believe that after Sep 11th, and even before people like Abu Zubaydah had a lot of **** to answer for, especially as regards training camps in Afghanistan and their association with the upper echelons of al Qaeda.

However, unless there is real and clear evidence against a suspect, then Waterboarding or any other torture mechanism should not be used in my opinion.

Remember when the three IRA men were picked up in a part of a jungle in Columbia, known to be full of rebels and the dip****s tell authorities they are on holiday.

I mean, despite hard evidence, they where clearly training the rebels, most likely in return for cash for the IRA.

But this is the kind of crap the Americans have to put up with as regards high-profile members of al Qaeda... its not much different, so I guess where do you draw a line?

Savage Tyrant · 11-11-2010 11:57PM

Snow-Monkey wrote: »

My opinion is, if a human has been proven to be a member of a terrorist organisation, or broke the law, they forfit all of there human rights.

Aside from the other points made, what about the fact that what many consider to be a terrorist organisation, many others consider a valid army. And vice versa.
Nobody, not for any reason, should have the right to decide another person is no longer entitled to human rights.

Nodin · 12-11-2010 12:00AM

enfant terrible wrote: »

He didn't say that though he said they got useful information.

...which he would do, because to say otherwise would be to admit to failure. The person he refers to specifically in his memoir as having given useful information is in fact the person mentioned in the article I linked earlier.

Johro · 12-11-2010 12:00AM

Cmdr Keen wrote: »

I believe that after Sep 11th, and even before people like Abu Zubaydah had a lot of **** to answer for, especially as regards training camps in Afghanistan and their association with the upper echelons of al Qaeda.

However, unless there is real and clear evidence against a suspect, then Waterboarding or any other torture mechanism should not be used in my opinion.

Remember when the three IRA men were picked up in a part of a jungle in Columbia, known to be full of rebels and the dip****s tell authorities they are on holiday.

I mean, despite hard evidence, they where clearly training the rebels, most likely in return for cash for the IRA.

But this is the kind of crap the Americans have to put up with as regards high-profile members of al Qaeda... its not much different, so I guess where do you draw a line?

I think a feeling of solidarity may have been a factor?:rolleyes:

bobblepuzzle · 12-11-2010 12:03AM

Johro wrote: »

I think a feeling of solidarity may have been a factor?:rolleyes:

Enlighten us with their struggle if you would? And also, why the IRA would be spending their own lack of money on such an adacious plan?

enfant terrible · 12-11-2010 12:08AM

Nodin wrote: »

...which he would do, because to say otherwise would be to admit to failure. The person he refers to specifically in his memoir as having given useful information is in fact the person mentioned in the article I linked earlier.

It only says "according to former senior government officials" or does it say in the article who is claiming they got no useful info from all the interrogations.

bobblepuzzle · 12-11-2010 12:11AM

Savage Tyrant wrote: »

Aside from the other points made, what about the fact that what many consider to be a terrorist organisation, many others consider a valid army. And vice versa.
Nobody, not for any reason, should have the right to decide another person is no longer entitled to human rights.

Any organisation that commits atrocities against civilians are a bunch of cowards.... how about attacking "legitimate" political targets or military installations. How does putting a bomb in the street and running away and killing some of your own in the process further your aim? It only strengthens the opponents resolve... same for al-Qaeda and the Taliban, they toppled the WTC, killed thousands WHO DO NOT MAKE FOREIGN POLICY and look what happened... they are under ground

Johro · 12-11-2010 12:18AM

Cmdr Keen wrote: »

I believe that after Sep 11th, and even before people like Abu Zubaydah had a lot of **** to answer for, especially as regards training camps in Afghanistan and their association with the upper echelons of al Qaeda.

But this is the kind of crap the Americans have to put up with as regards high-profile members of al Qaeda... its not much different, so I guess where do you draw a line?

Okay, but I believe that, way before Sep. 11th and after, American foreign policy had a lot to answer for.The terrorist attack on the twin towers was horrible, and innocent people were killed, but there's a real hypocrisy at play. What about all the crap the CIA's pulled these last, say, 60 years? Propping up corrupt regimes and dictators, setting up training camps to train soldiers with the purpose of quelling popular uprisings? They were everywhere people sought to fight oppression. On the wrong side.
The bible-bashing Bush seemed to have forgotten 'You reap what you sow'. And none of what you say validates the argument for torture.

Savage Tyrant · 12-11-2010 12:18AM

Cmdr Keen wrote: »

Any organisation that commits atrocities against civilians are a bunch of cowards.... how about attacking "legitimate" political targets or military installations. How does putting a bomb in the street and running away and killing some of your own in the process further your aim? It only strengthens the opponents resolve... same for al-Qaeda and the Taliban, they toppled the WTC, killed thousands WHO DO NOT MAKE FOREIGN POLICY and look what happened... they are under ground

Same for the US Armed Forces and the british Armed Forces too then I assume?

bobblepuzzle · 12-11-2010 12:22AM

Johro wrote: »

Okay, but I believe that, way before Sep. 11th and after, American foreign policy had a lot to answer for.The terrorist attack on the twin towers was horrible, and innocent people were killed, but there's a real hypocrisy at play. What about all the crap the CIA's pulled these last, say, 60 years? Propping up corrupt regimes and dictators, setting up training camps to train soldiers with the purpose of quelling popular uprisings?
The bible-bashing Bush seemed to have forgotten 'You reap what you sow'. And none of what you say validates the argument for torture.

I think you are forgetting there was a COLD WAR at play... why do people forget that??? The Russians were at exactly the same game and commited worse attrocities than anyone to the West of the Iron Curtain in the war...

UBL received support from the CIA to get the Russians out of Afghanistan, and he turned his back on them when the Russians were gone.... hypocrisy indeed...

bobblepuzzle · 12-11-2010 12:26AM

Savage Tyrant wrote: »

Same for the US Armed Forces and the british Armed Forces too then I assume?

I was talking about terrorist organisations, not soveriegn armies, that is a different debate my friend... try the Politics forum

Johro · 12-11-2010 12:27AM

Cmdr Keen wrote: »

I think you are forgetting there was a COLD WAR at play... why do people forget that??? The Russians were at exactly the same game and commited worse attrocities than anyone to the West of the Iron Curtain in the war...

UBL received support from the CIA to get the Russians out of Afghanistan, and he turned his back on them when the Russians were gone.... hypocrisy indeed...

I'm talking about South America too. There, the CIA weren't averse to setting of bombs which killed civilians and then claiming them to be the work of 'rebel groups'.

Savage Tyrant · 12-11-2010 12:29AM

Cmdr Keen wrote: »

I was talking about terrorist organisations, not soveriegn armies, that is a different debate my friend... try the Politics forum

Yes, but it seems we disagree on what defines a terrorist organisation....... I can tell you first hand that no other organisation has instilled more terror in my family than the british Armed Forces.
A soverign army does not automatically disqualify it from being also a terrorist one.

bobblepuzzle · 12-11-2010 12:31AM

Johro wrote: »

I'm talking about South America too. There, the CIA weren't averse to setting of bombs which killed civilians and then claiming them to be the work of 'rebel groups'.

The CIA aren't innocent by any means, and commited attrocious acts but you have to look at it in the context of the time... two superpowers in an Ideological struggle for dominance... it was a different era

Johro · 12-11-2010 12:43AM

Cmdr Keen wrote: »

The CIA aren't innocent by any means, and commited attrocious acts but you have to look at it in the context of the time... two superpowers in an Ideological struggle for dominance... it was a different era

Not so different though. The West is still very willing to ignore human rights issues in the interests of trade. Money is power, power is money. Let's not get carried away here. Hypocrisy rules.

bobblepuzzle · 12-11-2010 01:15AM

Johro wrote: »

Not so different though. The West is still very willing to ignore human rights issues in the interests of trade. Money is power, power is money. Let's not get carried away here. Hypocrisy rules.

Afghanistan is a legitimate war, fought on the basis that its ruling Taliban at the time harboured those who attacked the USA on September 11th

Iraq less so... although I was glad to see the end of Saddam, I am so ****ing annoyed at the way they screwed it up from day one! Alas 7 years later, and there's still load of body bags going home to the respective countries... unbelievable

Nodin · 12-11-2010 01:42PM

enfant terrible wrote: »

It only says "according to former senior government officials" or does it say in the article who is claiming they got no useful info from all the interrogations.

In 2009, it was admitted that he wasn't a member of al qaeda, that he wasn't involved in the 2001 attacks, or in the 1998 attacks in Kenya. You can look it up.

"While CIA officials have described him as an important insider whose disclosures under intense pressure saved lives, some FBI agents and analysts say he is largely a loudmouthed and mentally troubled hotelier whose credibility dropped as the CIA subjected him to a simulated drowning technique known as waterboarding and to other "enhanced interrogation" measures. "
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/17/AR2007121702151_pf.html

He told them everything he knew before they started torturing him, afterwards he told them what they wanted to hear.

Bush, on 'waterboarding'

Comments