Conservative talk show host waterboarded, admits it is torture

[Zur]

See, this is what I mean. It is EXTREMELY unlikely that questions like this are being asked. The fact of the matter is that nobody in the current administration is going to release any more information about the methods or the effectiveness, because any level of effectiveness is adverse to their goal of releasing this information in the first place.

What questions are there besides (who, what, where, how, when):
- Where is Al Qaeda ?
- Where is Bin Laden ?
- What attacks are planned ?
- Who are your friends ?
- Where have you been ?
- Who have you talked with ?
- ...

Also to know if an interrogation technique is effective, you'd have to know what the information is, if it's actually useful to anyone and if it offers any advances towards the goal being pursued.

Of course, you'd have to make sure that the person interrogated is a terrorist in the first place and that's probably more difficult than it sounds since none of them are wearing uniforms and are doing everything possible to be confused with ordinary civilians.

I guess it depends on what kind of "human rights" you think murderers should be afforded. If you are for capital punishment (for anyone) then that is a pretty hypocritical stance. I find it really hard to sympathize with these people at all.

It's ok to violate human rights if the person you're violating is less human than you are. That's the reality we're living now since the beginning of the millenium and tough luck to the guy who is on the wrong end of the stick. And capital punishment is supposed to be about taking someone's life swiftly in a humane fashion.

 

[Crotale]

do you?

Laugh out loud all you want, smart@ss. I do work with intel, but am not IN intel. Kinda goes with my job (air combat maneuvers and electronic warfare tactics).

Try reading "The Craft of Intelligence" by former CIA intel guru Allen Dulles. There's lengthy discussion on torture citing exactly why it doesn't work.

Wel, if you look at it solely form that point of view, no interrogation techniques work or are valid, so why not have that beer and pizza and call it a day, hmm?

Great job ignoring the point entirely.

How so?

We can't play world police and torture people at the same time, period. Bottom line.

Dude, have you read anything I've posted? When you can prove that our folks are breaking limbs and leaving these prisoners to rot in their own filth, come back and try again to sway me to your views. Sure, you have every right to be disgusted with these techniques, but you know what? Not everything is cut-and-dried black and white in every case. Sometimes you have to take a harder stance than just asking someone to tell you what they know.

 

[FuLLBLeeD]

It's ok to violate human rights if the person you're violating is less human than you are. That's the reality we're living now since the beginning of the millenium and tough luck to the guy who is on the wrong end of the stick. And capital punishment is supposed to be about taking someone's life swiftly in a humane fashion.

This seems to be the general thought of most conservatives, though I think this kind of thinking stems more from Christianity. (They're filthy dirt people, THEY'RE NON CHRISTIANS!)

I hate terrorists as much as the next guy, but America should be held responsible for their actions. Torture is inhumane, and we have no real evidence to support it actually works except for Cheney (and if you can trust him, well then I don't know what to tell you.)

When we waterboard, we are becoming what we despise most. In order to truly win against an enemy like this, you must rise above cowardly tactics like waterboarding.

I'm pretty sure our founding fathers wouldn't be to happy if they found out what when down during the Bush administration.

EDIT: Crotale, if I recall correctly, he does discuss non-inhumane interrogation methods that have been very successful in the past in that book.

 

[pine]

This seems to be the general thought of most conservatives, though I think this kind of thinking stems more from religious zealotry.

fixed.

This debate shouldn't be about religion anyways. I'm sure plenty of Christians in this country are against waterboarding and plenty of non-Christians are for it (see in this thread: kiff)

When we waterboard, we are becoming what we despise most. In order to truly win against an enemy like this, you must rise above cowardly tactics like waterboarding.

I really think the more relevant fact is that it doesn't work. If I had a responsibility to protect my countrymen against deaths by organized extremists I would want to do anything possible to do that job to the best of my ability. But I also firmly believe that torturing detainees is useless and completely counter-productive. Guess this has been mentioned here already though.

 

[Larkin]

I'm pretty sure our founding fathers wouldn't be to happy if they found out what when down during the Bush administration.

I love when lefties bring up the founding fathers. They almost always bring up something where they had no well known opinion on, but usually ignore their opinions on things like how the government should be run which are well known facts. Always good for a laugh and then a heavy sigh.

 

[Sir_Brizz]

I really think the more relevant fact is that it doesn't work. If I had a responsibility to protect my countrymen against deaths by organized extremists I would want to do anything possible to do that job to the best of my ability. But I also firmly believe that torturing detainees is useless and completely counter-productive. Guess this has been mentioned here already though.

And if that is the case, I'm against it.

This seems to be the general thought of most conservatives, though I think this kind of thinking stems more from Christianity. (They're filthy dirt people, THEY'RE NON CHRISTIANS!)

Wow, it's really impossible to have a reasonable discussion with you since clearly anyone who disagrees with you is a psychotic religious freak.

I hate terrorists as much as the next guy, but America should be held responsible for their actions. Torture is inhumane, and we have no real evidence to support it actually works except for Cheney (and if you can trust him, well then I don't know what to tell you.)

And maybe they should if they are doing something wrong according to the law. I think you'll have a hard time convincing anyone that anything should be done, though, because of the number of people who would have to be implicated.

I'm pretty sure our founding fathers wouldn't be to happy if they found out what when down during the Bush administration.

I'm pretty sure that our founding fathers wouldn't be happy with a lot that has happened in the last 100 years, I'm even 100% positive that they wouldn't be happy with what's happened in the last three months.

Also to know if an interrogation technique is effective, you'd have to know what the information is, if it's actually useful to anyone and if it offers any advances towards the goal being pursued.

Of course, you'd have to make sure that the person interrogated is a terrorist in the first place and that's probably more difficult than it sounds since none of them are wearing uniforms and are doing everything possible to be confused with ordinary civilians.

Okay, so do you know of a single person who was waterboarded that was not a verifiable terrorist?

It's ok to violate human rights if the person you're violating is less human than you are. That's the reality we're living now since the beginning of the millenium and tough luck to the guy who is on the wrong end of the stick. And capital punishment is supposed to be about taking someone's life swiftly in a humane fashion.

Wow... you're really going to act like this is new since 2000 and that prior to that the world was a Utopian cloud that no impure thing could enter?

This has been happening for CENTURIES, for one thing. And for another thing, I'm pretty sure you cannot conclusively prove that there are no other allies that are doing the same thing. It doesn't have to take place in an offshore prison, you know.

Capital Punishment is killing someone. You can't excuse killing just because it's done in an "acceptable" way.

 

[FuLLBLeeD]

I love when lefties bring up the founding fathers. They almost always bring up something where they had no well known opinion on, but usually ignore their opinions on things like how the government should be run which are well known facts. Always good for a laugh and then a heavy sigh.

Yeah bro, George Washington totally hooked up the British's nuts to car batteries.

 

[Jacks:Revenge]

(air combat maneuvers and electronic warfare tactics).

Neither of which have anything to do with human intelligence.

if you look at it solely form that point of view, no interrogation techniques work or are valid, so why not have that beer and pizza and call it a day, hmm?

What?
No, we are talking strictly about torture.
That book gives numerous explanations (citing examples of use, testimony, other experts opinions, etc) of why torture doesn't work. But it also gives numerous explanations of how other methods (NOT torture) are much more effective and actually do work.
This issue is not black and white. You can't say "well if torture doesn't work then nothing works." There are plenty of interrogation techniques that do wonders which don't require hurting a person at all but they take time.

When we captured Saddam, he didn't want to talk to us at all, he despised his captors. But we left him in relative isolation and allowed him to only speak openly with this one guy (he's written a book about it since, can't remember his name at the moment). This guy would visit Saddam regularly and provide as his only real chance for neutral human interaction. He would treat Saddam very kindly, listen to his ramblings, let him read poetry, etc. Eventually Saddam completely opened up to this guy and we learned a lot about Iraq and his regime that we hadn't known before.

Being nice to someone is a much more efficient means of information extraction than torture.

Sometimes you have to take a harder stance than just asking someone to tell you what they know.

No, you don't.

 

[Sir_Brizz]

Heh.... I think waterboarding is probably pretty low on the totem pole as far as torturing techniques goes.

Also, I think solitary confinement is just as bad as waterboarding for most people (after a certain period of time). Regular people who are not allowed to know the date or time eventually start to go insane (there have been actual studies done on this).

 

[Larkin]

Yeah bro, George Washington totally hooked up the British's nuts to car batteries.

So they didn't do it and therefore they are against it? That's a wild assumption there. Even if they were for human rights, that doesn't mean they were for or against torture. Its nothing but an assumption that is based on nothing.

 

[FuLLBLeeD]

So they didn't do it and therefore they are against it? That's a wild assumption there. Even if they were for human rights, that doesn't mean they were for or against torture. Its nothing but an assumption that is based on nothing.

What I'm trying to say is that there is no real basis for torturing people. It's ineffective and inhumane.

 

[hal]

Gonna go ahead and assume hal.

Uh... why are you just "gonna go ahead and assume hal"?

 

[Crotale]

Neither of which have anything to do with human intelligence.

Uh, yes it does. As we train, we use information gained through multiple sources, including humint. Please do not tell me what my job is and where my information comes from when you do not have a clue.

What?
No, we are talking strictly about torture.
That book gives numerous explanations (citing examples of use, testimony, other experts opinions, etc) of why torture doesn't work. But it also gives numerous explanations of how other methods (NOT torture) are much more effective and actually do work.

The author of the book may be a subject matter expert (assuming his credentials are valid) and that makes his opinion more worth listening to than yours. That said, however, since I have not read the book, I cannot cite or comment.

This issue is not black and white. You can't say "well if torture doesn't work then nothing works." There are plenty of interrogation techniques that do wonders which don't require hurting a person at all but they take time.

That is my point. You cannot put this in a black and white frameset. The fact that sometimes, time is of the essence and you do not have certain luxuries. But hey, if these guys and their buddies never attacked us, we would not be having this conversation.

When we captured Saddam, he didn't want to talk to us at all, he despised his captors. But we left him in relative isolation and allowed him to only speak openly with this one guy (he's written a book about it since, can't remember his name at the moment). This guy would visit Saddam regularly and provide as his only real chance for neutral human interaction. He would treat Saddam very kindly, listen to his ramblings, let him read poetry, etc. Eventually Saddam completely opened up to this guy and we learned a lot about Iraq and his regime that we hadn't known before.

You do realize that isolation is used as a form of torture? Besides, with Saddam, we had to play it very cool since he had been the leader of a country. Saddam most likely talked because he knew that his own countrymen were going to execute him and he had little to nothing to lose. Besides, Saddam was a coward and not an in-the-field terrorist. There is a substantial difference in the mindset there. I'd say your argument is not very strong.

Being nice to someone is a much more efficient means of information extraction than torture.

No, you don't.

So, if I'm nice to you then you will give me valid and real answers to any and all questions I ask? Seriously, no smart@ass crap? I'd like to see this technique work with some of the jihadists over there. Got any proof other than some dude who wrote a book?

 

[DeletedAccount69]

What a *****.

 

[Jacks:Revenge]

Uh, yes it does. As we train, we use information gained through multiple sources, including human.

Ok, but your job has nothing to do with the physical act itself of human information extraction and the psychology involved in that process.

The author of the book may be a subject matter expert (assuming his credentials are valid)

you demand to know Allen W. Dulles credentials?? Wow, you're pretty sheltered aren't you?

Google is your friend, but here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allen_Dulles

The fact that sometimes, time is of the essence and you do not have certain luxuries.

/facepalm. The ticking time-bomb situation you see on TV and in the movies does not exist.

Again, real terrorists do not operate so conveniently for us to be able to pull some of them off the battlefield and suddenly foil their plans. These terrorists have immense patience and all the time in the world to enact their plans. You cannot round up a group of them and expect to prevent anything that wasn't already taken off the table.

You do realize that isolation is used as a form of torture?

I said "relative isolation."
It wasn't total isolation like you might see in prison where someone is kept in the dark and without human contact. This was merely an isolation from a general prison population (private cell, showers, meals, etc) which allowed him interaction but he could only speak personally to this one man.

Besides, Saddam was a coward and not an in-the-field terrorist. There is a substantial difference in the mindset there. I'd say your argument is not very strong.

And your argument is any stronger? Do you realize what you just said? Saddam was not a field terrorist.
Guess what? Neither were half the detainees we had in Gitmo. The highest ranking members we had captured functioned more like managers and organizers. The so-called "Masterminds" are the people who sit behind a desk. They were not field terrorists, and once you pull someone from the field, they fall completely out of the loop when it comes to the current state of their plans.

Regardless, this is beside the point. You are simply making assumptions about the psychology of a person who you cannot even begin to relate to or truly understand. I'm not saying I can either, but I'm not the one basing my argument on conjecture.

So, if I'm nice to you then you will give me valid and real answers to any and all questions I ask? Seriously, no smart@ass crap? I'd like to see this technique work with some of the jihadists over there. Got any proof other than some dude who wrote a book?

Do you even read what I type? Better question; do you even read what you type??
I've been nice to you. You are the one who's called me a smartass several times now. What, because I used some knowledge I gained from reading a book by a credible individual? You ask me if I have any "proof." But that's the wrong question.
Neither of us has "proof" since this is not a 2-tone issue; what we have is evidence for our argument.
The difference is that I have drawn mine from the published work of the former, most veteran head of the CIA. So far, you have only told me a little bit about your job, made some assumptions about how a terrorist and the former leader of the Iraqi dictatorship thinks, and then called me a smartass for referencing a book by "some dude."

 

[xMurphyx]

What happened to good old fashioned espionage? Luring in traitors with money and new lives, employing undercover agents, hacking and infiltrating critical systems and whatnot. To quote M: "I miss the cold war."
As if the only way to get your hands on intel were to torture people... How do you think other countries get by?
Just to pour some salt in a wound: Great intel you got there, btw. Torture was totally worth it. Where were the WMDs again?

"But the evil terrorists do it too!"
Oh really, I guess that's why they are called TERRORists. Not only are their views wrong, their ways are too! Why don't you go down there and slaughter a few thousand civilians? Just to get the point across that you don't appreciate their view of the world. Seems to have worked for the terrorists. Naw, that's wrong, right? That would be like 911.

But inflicting suffering on a bunch of brown people no one really cares about outside a discussion about morals is ok, I guess.
Besides, waterboarding does no permanent physical damage! How great is that? Surely it must be legal. You know what else does no permanent physical damage? Jerking off lil' kids. I wonder why that's illegal. Lefty propaganda, perhaps.

You know what's funny? The discussion started out about whether or not waterboarding should be considered torture, because torture is illegal and morally wrong so it if was torture it would be illegal and morally wrong as well. The idea that torture might be a valid tool for gathering intelligence didn't even come up.
As difficult it is for me to comprehend how anybody would NOT consider waterboarding torture (besides someone who really wants to torture and tries to find a loophole in the definition of torture so he can torture without getting prosecuted) - you picked up speed and now you are saying torture on the whole is ok, because hey, it might get you some intel you wouldn't have gotten otherwhise.

The mind reels. Criminals should lose certain human rights, because they commited a crime to achieve their goals. They couldn't do it legally so those cowards and weaklings had to resort to illegal ways to achieve their goal. Surely despicable behaviour!
But it's ok to torture someone, which is illegal (not even saying it's right or wrong, although it's obviously wrong. Just that it's illegal), to achieve one's goal if there is no easier, legal, way? Interesting...

I guess it's ok, because it helps protect American values and citizens. Well, you don't seem to care much about values if you are so fast to switch to barbary mode so it's down to citizens really.
Maybe the citizens should decide if they want people tortured in their name, then? I thought conservatives want people to have the right to decide how to defend themselves...
As far as I know, the citizens already decided. Torture is illegal. That was an informed decision and it's not going to be tipped over by the note that, you know, sometimes it could be handy...

Crotale: You work with intel? Fine, but you don't have a hand in extracting it from unwilling persons, so your opinion isn't any more valid than his.

 

[BillyBadAss]

Without pointing fingers or going into any specifics, does it seem like the conservative right really has no clue how things really work in the world and outside the U.S. Borders? Have any of them ever traveled outside the U.S. other than for work and interacted with people of other cultures? It really seems like a lot of their understanding of terrorists comes from movies and the show 24 and is taken as fact.

I guess the best way to describe the conservative party in America is a group of people that don't think about others and how their ways are selfish, and also a group of people that know nothing about how other people live or willing to learn about it. Cable T.V. doesn't provide everything you need to know.

 

[N1ghtmare]

By torturing we stoop to the level of the people we are trying to eliminate.

It isn't an argument of whether it works or not.

 

[Sir_Brizz]

this thread is reaching all time lows now.

 

[TossMonkey]

To be honest I thought they used chemicals or fire or electric clamper things on your nipples for torture...

Couldn't he have just held his breath for a while? I'm pretty certain I can think of worse torture methods than water. I mean, didn't they have a rack only a couple hundred years ago? That thing where they stretched your limbs?