He had to. There was no choice.
Why?
Because if he had signed the ban, then he would have been tacitly admitting that the practice was wrong. And Bush is psychologically incapable of admitting that anything he does, or that he endorses, is wrong.
The bottom line is that if the United States is going to preach high morality and ethics at other countries, then we must have clean hands. And as long as this country supports torture for any reason, then our hands are filthy.
I have no doubt that if, a year from now, a similar bill lands on Clinton or Obama’s presidential desk, they’d sign it. What I’d be curious to know is if John McCain, who knows a thing or two about torture himself, would veto it. See, on the one hand, he talks a good game about deploring torture…but on the other hand, he voted against the bill. It’s a duplicity that his opponents should be trying to highlight.
PAD
• 
“And then you’ll be perfectly safe.”
Sean–you forgot to mention the sample taking.
Bill’s scenario keeps running around in my head. Someone takes either my wife or my kid. Would I torture them? Would I beat the ever-loving snot out of them? Would I make them watch the videos I’ve edited? (SURELY that’s against the Geneva Convention!) I might. I really might, I’ll admit it. But look at all the cop movies and military movies and so on. There’s always, as Fairly Odd Parents puts it, The Renegade Cop Who Doesn’t Play By The Rules. Now, as many of those characters as I’ve written, in reality they WOULDN’T WORK. First off, you get someone that breaks the rules often enough, unless his name is either Kirk or McLean, they’re either going to end up in jail, a psyche ward, or some other unsavory place. Maybe politics. Second, organizations like police departments or the military run ON rules. Get someone who breaks them often enough, the people they run into won’t respect their authority and might take matters into their own hands, creating total anarchy. Everyone has to play by the rules, otherwise the rules are worthless. Torture’s against the rules. It won’t prevent an imminent attack, indeed, it might CAUSE one.
Alas, Jerry, did you expect anything else?
At least he’s on the right side, even if it’s for a weak reason. We can only hope that no instance of torture being used effectively to prevent an imminent threat ever surfaces; while you, myself and Rene would still oppose it, those who argue against it for purely pragmatic reasons may have to re-evaluate their moral stance, such as it is.
Posted by Eric L. Sofer
I’m a man – not a brave or heroic one – and if I were being tortured, I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t have the guts to stay silent, and I’m just as certain that I would say ANYTHING, sign anything, to get the torture to stop.
As Lenny Bruce said “Whoa, man – ask me anything you want to know! If I don’t know anything, I’ll make stuff up! Just don’t give me that hot lead enema!!”
Posted by Sasha
The water that drips in is aspirated directly into the lungs — thanks to the vacuum the plastic creates.
Sounds unlikely (though if it does actually happen, this may be another case of “practice trumps theory”), since there isn’t any significant airflow to push it along, and, if the “plastic wrap” technique is in use, the head is lower than the chest, so gravity can’t do it, either.
Whether or not, though, the technique is about a four on a scale that runs from playing Barry Manilow in your cell at high volume 24/7 at “one” to Lenny’s hot lead enema at 10, and isn’t something anyone who claims to be a Good Guy ought be doing…
Posted by Bill Mulligan
We can only hope that no instance of torture being used effectively to prevent an imminent threat ever surfaces; while you, myself and Rene would still oppose it, those who argue against it for purely pragmatic reasons may have to re-evaluate their moral stance, such as it is.
Well, actually, since at least one genuine example seems to exist from the current not-a-war in Iraq (Special Forces officer who used “forceful interrogation” to get info that foiled an attack. And was subsequently in danger of court-martial, though i don’t know if that ever happened.), if you accept that “one counter-example invalidates the postulate”, then such peoples’ arguments *are* already Pretty Shaky, at least.
I accept both arguments against torture, myself:
(A) It *usually* doesn’t work, and, even if you *do* get info, the info is (at the very least) suspect,
and,
(B) It’s morally *wrong*, especially if you’re trying to present yourself as the Good Guy.
Jerry, you and Bill haven’t been responding to posts directed at you. I’ve been responding to posts directed at me.
I don’t know you, and your inability to leave me alone demonstrates you are a police-brutality inquiry waiting to happen. Jesus Christ.
So again, My apologies to you both.
At this risk of merely echoing Sean’s response:
Fair enough, Pat. 🙂
The water that drips in is aspirated directly into the lungs — thanks to the vacuum the plastic creates.
Sounds unlikely (though if it does actually happen, this may be another case of “practice trumps theory”), since there isn’t any significant airflow to push it along, and, if the “plastic wrap” technique is in use, the head is lower than the chest, so gravity can’t do it, either.
The water slowly draws up courtesy of suction. Apparently, only a tiny amount of liquid is necessary to acheive the effect. The plastic wrap technique is simply more effective in getting the subject to suck in water.
For interest, there’s a post from the Straight Dope website by someone who apparently self-waterboarded himself (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=448717) to determine for himself whether or not it was torture. Although he offers no physical evidence (pictures, video, etc.), the description concurs with what I’ve read elsewhere about the technique so I’m inclined to believe him.
“And if I were the bad guy, I’d lie like a cheap rug and make you flush those two hours away running to pointless locations.”
With a trained terrorist/soldier, that’s probably what happens. But with a kidnapper…admitedly a bad guy…facing abuse at the hands of concerned parent who acts as those killing the kidnapper isn’t beyond him…that might elicit a truthful response. The difference being that the terrorist usually won’t kind being killed, while the kidnapper might actually still care about staying alive, and rather whole.
Which is exactly why we generally don’t allow the families of victims to be in close proximity to the accused/convicted. Because I’ve got a very strong feeling…God forbid… that if I ever was presented with the opportunity to enact revenge upon someone that had taken one of my children away from me, I would, as much as I was able to.
Hey bobb, can you look at this?
http://jjchandler.wordpress.com/2008/03/04/and-this-is-why-my-job-sucks/
Micha threw your name out as someone who might be a good idea man here. Sucks #2 is the problem.
Thanks.
The main issue that most arguments over torture dance around, but rarely lands on, is the presumption of guilt. Every hypothetical says something along the lines of “You have a terrorist in custody” instead of the usually more accurate “You have a person you think might be a terrorist in custody.” This isn’t a simple semantic distinction, but a very important one.
Would you (torture/waterboarding supporter) support the use of waterboarding on a person that may in fact be a completely innocent bystander? That, in my opinion, is the core question that needs to be asked.
I dunno if there’s much to be done. Since the states closed all the Mental Health Hospitals/Institutions, there’s really not much the state can do for folks like this. If this guy’s family could be tracked down, you could probably get a court to declare him incompetant and appoint a legal guardian. But I don’t know where the funds to pay for his care would come from.
Posted by: Dustin Westfall
Would you (torture/waterboarding supporter) support the use of waterboarding on a person that may in fact be a completely innocent bystander? That, in my opinion, is the core question that needs to be asked.
But, see, we never torture anyone who’s innocent – they all confess!
Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury under Henry VIII and Edward VI (one of the three commemorated by the Martyrs’ Monument in Oxford*; Latimer and Rdiley** were the other two.), recanted his Protestantism under torture during Bloody Mary’s campaign against “heretics”.
According to Wikipedia:
*Which is right across the street from the “Eagle and Child” (or “Bird and Baby”), the pub where Tolkien, Lewis and their fellow Inklings met, BTW.
**As in, “Be of good comfort, Master Ridley, and play the man; we shall this day light such a candle, by God’s grace, in England, as I trust shall never be put out.”
But, see, we never torture anyone who’s innocent – they all confess!
Indeed. A classic Soviet joke:
One nasty morning Comrade Stalin discovered that his favorite pipe was missing. Naturally, he called in his henchman, Lavrenti Beria, and instructed him to find the pipe. A few hours later, Stalin found it in his desk and called off the search. “But, Comrade Stalin,” stammered Beria, “five suspects have already confessed to stealing it.”
Jerry, if your jay-walker is autistic, he’s not perceiving his environment conventionally. It might be worthwhile to devote some time to discern what he’s actually interacting with and finding a way to provide him an alternative.
If your jay-walker is something like Parkinsonian, his condition may be framed in terms of “will.” Parkinson’s is conventionally considered a deficit of “will,” like the frozen woman in the book and the film version of “Awakenings” who borrowed the will to walk forward from crumpled paper balls she dropped in front of her. Maybe your jay-walker is borrowing his very will to move forward from something like the painted line in the middle of the road. He may not consider sitting frozen as a statue all day an acceptable alternative behavior.
Hi.
If you are looking to make a little extra cash in your spare time, I need 3 people to help me with some online projects.
Each project will take no more then an hour to complete and I pay $20 for each
one you complete.
Please
email me for full details.
Interesting note: even the “24” TV show, that should be seen as a metaphor of post-9/11 America’s fears and anxieties, torture is NOT presented as something to be categorically defended.
There were 5 separate occasions where good guys have been framed by villains and forced to endure torture in the hands of other good guys.
Also, the dehumanizing effect of torture also on the torturer is sometimes shown in the character of Jack Bauer, as he finds himself more and more apart from the world of common people. Torture is like slavery; it’s so vile that it degrades not only the victim, but everyone.
Thanks Mike. And I mean that non-sarcastically for a change. Good guesses, one was one of my first guesses, but both of those are nonstarters. I’ve learned enough from Crisis to know that his current state was accidentally… chemically… induced. Or so they believe from their observations of him. He took a trip once and it really did blow his mind. Thing is, it can apparently be fixed with regular medication. We just can’t get him into “the system.”
Posted by: Sasha
But, see, we never torture anyone who’s innocent – they all confess!
A classic Soviet joke:
One nasty morning Comrade Stalin discovered that his favorite pipe was missing. Naturally, he called in his henchman, Lavrenti Beria, and instructed him to find the pipe. A few hours later, Stalin found it in his desk and called off the search. “But, Comrade Stalin,” stammered Beria, “five suspects have already confessed to stealing it.”
Can’t remember if it was Beria or Dzerzhinski (but i’m inclined to think it was Iron Felikx) who said “Any fool can arrange an accident. It takes an artist to perform a suicide.”
Maybe you should check a local 12-step program if they have any members with what looks like a chemically-induced neurotransmitter-imbalance. Maybe they have someone who’s been where John is.
Because raping and pillaging a foreign country under specious pretenses is ok, but getting your knob polished by a 1,000 an hour høøkër is unforgiveable.Impeach, Impeach the NY Senate cries! Hypocrisy is not a crime, it’s part of the job description. America has no moral compasses, they were sold to Dubai.
ok, so it may have prevented attacks, but it also provides a lot of false leads-and if leading Generals and Ex CIA people say it’s torture (which violates international law) THEN IT”S Torture.
Bush won’t sign it because it’s his own arrest warrant.
CIA Ops only lasted 14 seconds. Khalid Mohammed lasted over 2 minutes. Who are the cowards and pansies, I ask you.
Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Gonzo,Mucousy…
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/Investigation/story?id=1322866
Hypocrisy is not a crime
Well, no, it’s not. Prostitution and money laundering is.
At any rate, Spitzer staying on would be a gift to his enemies and a major drag on his party and the progressive ideals he supposedly espoused. I haven’t heard too many people calling for him to stick it out but I guess he has at least one supporter here. probably not enough.
Well, we Brazilians (and Latin Americans, and also mostly Europeans) usually think that the only “crime” involving sex is anything to do with minors or without consent. One of our former Presidents had a bášŧárd son, our current President had a girlfriend that aborted a child.
It’s just hard for us to understand how Americans can make such a big deal of a person’s bedroom habits.
The guy may have broken a law by hiring a prostitute, but we all know that a politician breaking a minor law that had nothing to do with sexual morality wouldn’t cause such a ruckus.
I don’t think prostitution should be outlawed…regulated, maybe, as many service industries are…licensed, probably. But beyond that, impeachment at the Federal level has to be attached to some high crime or misdemeanor…which illegal money transfers would probably suffice…not sure about state requirements. But I don’t think the calls for his resignation are so much tied to hypocrisy, it’s more what his hypocrisy involves. It’s impossible to trust a prosecutor and executive to enforce the very laws that he’s breaking.
Posted by bobb alfred
I don’t think prostitution should be outlawed … regulated, maybe, as many service industries are … licensed, probably.
Prostitution is a classic case of one of those crimes where “good citizens” run with the fox and hunt with the hounds – through no doing of my own, i have known (and was aware of their profession) more than one sex worker within SF fandom.
Given the level of clientele at least one of them worked at, it wouldn’t have surprised me if at least a few of her regulars were people who would have been shocked, simply shocked at her arrest, and would have been very righteous about the Evials of Prostitution. (Rather like the surprising number of eveangelical Bible-thumpers who seem to get caught with their pants at half-mast; often in the presence of virile young men.)
But beyond that, impeachment at the Federal level has to be attached to some high crime or misdemeanor … which illegal money transfers would probably suffice … not sure about state requirements.
There is also the Mann Act – which makes it illegal to transport women across state lines for “immoral purposes” – originally aimed at the prostitution rings and white slavers/pimps who use terror, drugs and force to keep their girls in line, but also applicable to someone who imports a girl for his own delectation, which he did.
But I don’t think the calls for his resignation are so much tied to hypocrisy, it’s more what his hypocrisy involves. It’s impossible to trust a prosecutor and executive to enforce the very laws that he’s breaking.
Especially because he bult his career on alleged absolute rectitude and going after people who did things like money laundering. Fox/Hounds.
There is also the Mann Act – which makes it illegal to transport women across state lines for “immoral purposes” – originally aimed at the prostitution rings and white slavers/pimps who use terror, drugs and force to keep their girls in line, but also applicable to someone who imports a girl for his own delectation, which he did.
Actually, the Mann Act makes it illegal to cross state lines for non-commercial, consensual “immoral” activities. So all you unmarried New Yorkers who want to take a romantic weekend on the Jersey shore or Cap Cod with your fiancee? Federal law breakers!
There is also the Mann Act – which makes it illegal to transport women across state lines for “immoral purposes” – originally aimed at the prostitution rings and white slavers/pimps who use terror, drugs and force to keep their girls in line, but also applicable to someone who imports a girl for his own delectation, which he did.
Actually the Mann Act prohibits even non-commercial, consensual “immoral” activities. So all you unmarried New Yorkers planning a nice romantic weekend on the Jersey Shore or Cape Cod with your fiancee? Federal law breakers!!
(Yeah, it’s a archaic law.)
Whoops, double post. Hate it when that happens. My bad.
Especially because he bult his career on alleged absolute rectitude and going after people who did things like money laundering. Fox/Hounds.
Money laundering is usually done to facilitate a “victim” crime. Prostitution is a victimless crime. I don’t see hypocrisy in someone fiercely prosecuting the one while commiting the other.
It’s like that guy who posited there are 5 psychological foundations of morality. Liberals usually only really consider 2 of them: harm/care and fairness/reciprocity. Conservatives have 3 additional foundations: purity/sanctity, ingroup/loyalty, authority/respect.
After I’ve read that, I really understood why morality discussions between most liberals and conservatives are fated to frustrate…
Prostitution doesn’t have to be a victimless crime, when the prostitute is forced or coerced or otherwise not fully willing to participate. Which is why legalization and licensing would pretty much remove all the social arguments against prostitution, and leave only the moral and religious ones.
There’s hair’s width of difference between the street worker that takes on Johns and the younger woman that marries the rich old guy because…he’s rich. It’s usually just a matter of when the money officially changes hands.
Posted by: Sean D. Martin
Actually the Mann Act prohibits even non-commercial, consensual “immoral” activities. So all you unmarried New Yorkers planning a nice romantic weekend on the Jersey Shore or Cape Cod with your fiancee? Federal law breakers!!
Some years ago, at a convention, a young lady said to me “Good thing this hotel is in Chicago instead of East Chicago”. “Why?” says i. “Because in Illinois what we just did is merely fornication. In Indiana it’s Crimes Against Nature, and it’s a felony.”
It’s just hard for us to understand how Americans can make such a big deal of a person’s bedroom habits.
As an American, it’s hard for me to understand it as well.
I just find it funny that of all the things Spitzer could get nailed for (no pun intended), it’s his involvement in prostitution that brought him down.
It’s just hard for us to understand how Americans can make such a big deal of a person’s bedroom habits.
Hmmm, I think it’s time to bury that myth. You can find plenty of politicians from other countries who lost their positions from sex scandals–England in particular has a long and rich history of such things, scandals that have amused us all. And I note that the French (!) president has just raised quite the number of eyebrows for (shockers!) dating and marrying his girlfriend!
As for Spitzer, here’s a list of what he might be indicted for (from wcbs):
* Money laundering for trying to conceal the source and recipient of financial transactions.
* Tax evasion, if he was a knowing party to an all-cash business that wasn’t filing taxes.
* Violation of the Mann Act for paying for the trip from New York to D.C. by the call girl known as “Kristen.”
* Misuse of state resources, if he used his state-issued credit card for hotels or meals with prostitutes as well as if he was being protected by State Troopers during his dalliances.
* And finally, soliciting prostitution.
There’s also the question of whether Spitzer used campaign funds for these trysts, which opens up a whole other litany of charges from fraud to federal election violations.
Ironically:
The prostitution charge carries the least severe possible sentence. Ironically, one of the first bills Spitzer signed into law raised the penalties for Johns, the men who patronize prostitutes, from a maximum of three months, to now up to a year in jail. Money laundering has a maximum of 20 years.
Cue the coronet music—Wha wha whaaaaaaaa…
Plus there’s the offense for which there is no law, which is setting up his lawyer wife to run for senator.
England in particular has a long and rich history of such things, scandals that have amused us all. And I note that the French (!) president has just raised quite the number of eyebrows for (shockers!) dating and marrying his girlfriend!
Sorry, I should have expressed myself clearer, Bill. The British can make a great deal of noise and derive great amusement from the pecadillos of their politicians, but I don’t think British politicians are removed from their posts because of them.
The French President… I’ve read about a French law that is indeed considered too lenient with celebrities, seems like they can sue reporters for intruding on their privacy much more easily than in most other countries. Anyway, does the President lost any political prestige or approval because of this story with the girlfriend? I’m not sure.
The urge to gossip and laugh at these indiscretions seems universal, but I think only the US, among the western nations, also actually punishes them. Well, maybe with the exception too of Italy, that suffers a lot of influence from the Vatican.
Oh, and at the prices the girl was charging? I very much doubt she was being coerced or anything. For those prices I’d have sex with the guy myself…
” Anyway, does the President lost any political prestige or approval because of this story with the girlfriend? I’m not sure.”
As a matter of fact, this one has lost quite a bit of support. Too flashy, too quick, too “bling bling”. That wedding has done almost as much for his downfall in populrity (and it was really quick), than his broken promises (something one should expect from politicans) or his 170 % pay raise (yes, you read that right!).
“And if I were the bad guy, I’d lie like a cheap rug and make you flush those two hours away running to pointless locations.”
I just love people who think they’re tough. They break FAST.
“Can we just dispense with the “ticking time bomb” scenario, folks? Until someone can provide at least one example where this has actually been the case in real life (Go ahead. We’ll wait.), let’s just leave it out.”
Zubaida?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2007/12/11/ST2007121100844.html
“Zayn Abidin Muhammed Hussein abu Zubaida, the first high-ranking al-Qaeda member captured after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, broke in less than a minute after he was subjected to the technique and began providing interrogators with information that led to the disruption of several planned attacks, said John Kiriakou, who served as a CIA interrogator in Pakistan.”
Now, of course, he IS CIA, which means that has to be taken with a grain of the salt. But it’s getting warmer…
Arguments against it’s being effective are inaccurate. This is especially true if the subject desires to avoid pain, and the information is verifiable. (For instance, if an interrogator was interrogating someone about a computer password, and had the suspect computer reasily available, it wouldn’t take long to determine whether the information being provided was accurate.)
As for the morality… I submit that the “moral high ground” is illusory territory. No one has it. There’s no such thing as moral combat. It’s much baser than that. A moral victory is worth the paper it’s printed on, but history books (which contain the paper that will be printed) will be written by the guys who win the temporal victory, and if they’re not you, they’re going to paint you as the immoral ones, anyway.
Ask the Carthaginians.
So win, and settle up after.
I just love people who think they’re tough. They break FAST.
Oh I’d talk all right. I’d talk before the broken glass touched my skin. I’d talk when you raised your voice or wrote a hurtful letter to the editor. But why would I tell the truth? Seems to me if you want the truth you have to make the guy want you to win–torture is unlikely to do it.
So…had a lot of experience torturing people, have we? What’s your favorite technique? Sharks with frikken laser beams attached to their heads?
Nah. They’re too hard to get a hold of.
Nah. They’re too hard to get a hold of.
Posted by: Bill Mulligan
Hmmm, I think it’s time to bury that myth. You can find plenty of politicians from other countries who lost their positions from sex scandals–England in particular has a long and rich history of such things, scandals that have amused us all.
As Flanders & Swann once said – “Nil Combustibus Profumo” – There’s no smoke without fire.”
Of course, it wasn’t the canoodling with Christine Keeler and Mandy Rice-Davies that brought Profumo down, it was the fact that among Keeler’s other “close friends” (at the height of the COld ar) was a Soviet Embassy attache who was quite possibly a spy. Had it been just Christine and Mandy, it quite possibly wouldn’t havetorched his career (though his marriage – if he was amrried) would be a different question, i suspect.
Posted by: Rene at March 13, 2008 12:39 PM
Sorry, I should have expressed myself clearer, Bill. The British can make a great deal of noise and derive great amusement from the pecadillos of their politicians, but I don’t think British politicians are removed from their posts because of them.
Unless, like Profumo, they also involve the possibility of compromise to National Security or an obvious conflict of interest in some way.
Well, there’s the rub (fnar! fnar!). There’s always the possibility of blackmail when a politician exposes himself (fnar!) to this sort of thing. There’s talk that the prostitution ring Spitzer used was associated with the Gambinos or some other crime family. Cripes, that’s right out of GODFATHER 2!
Given the way Spitzer was able, with the complicity of a willing press, to go after companies with wild abandon, I could see a lot of ways for disreputable people to have mad big big money if they had the governor’s, um, ear. To me, the biggest surprise is that he was able to do this for so long without anyone finding out. The guy has a lot of enemies and/or people who could have used the info to their advantage. It would not shock me if it turns out that he was compromised at some point, which would elevate this into a major deal, far beyond a mere sex scandal.
The French too? That is depressing, Gérard. If you can’t count on the French to be tolerant on such matters, then you can’t count on anybody (no offense meant to the French, we Brazilians also have a reputation as sexually liberated, something I think we should not be ashamed of).
The funny thing is, the more I read of this Spitzer, the more I feel sorry that he is gone. A dude that had the balls to challenge all those untouchable Wall Street white-collar guys? We need more politicians like him.
Wasn’t a ticking time-bomb scenario, and didn’t lead to any captures that have even gone to trial.
First, this should clarify somewhat what techniques the U.S. used and whether our waterboarding can or can not get water into the lungs.
” Waterboarding involves wrapping plastic or fabric around a detainee’s face then pouring water over the top until it is forced up the nose and down the throat to simulate drowning.”
**********************************************************************
”Abu Zubaida was seized in a gun battle in Pakistan in the spring of 2002. For weeks he refused to talk and remained ideologically zealous, defiant and unco-operative. Then he was flown to a secret CIA prison – believed to be in Afghanistan – and strapped to a board with his feet in the air.”
”Cellophane was wrapped around the Al Qaeda man’s face and water was forced up his nose and into his throat to make him think he was drowning.”
”The suspect lasted only 35 seconds before he broke.”
””It was like flipping a switch,” said Mr Kiriakou.”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=501278&in_page_id=1811
________________________________________________________________________
”I just love people who think they’re tough. They break FAST.”
I never said that I wouldn’t break over time. But if the point of torture was to extract information from me in two hours or less, why do you think that I wouldn’t lie to you in order to make you stop torturing me? We’re not talking about an example where I can look forward to years of imprisonment with multiple visits by an interrogator to pry secrets from me. We’re talking about a timeframe of two hours or less with the only objective of the interrogator being to get one specific piece of information from me. If my only way to “win” or to hurt you is to lie for a couple of hours and that lie will temporarily stop you from torturing me, you don’t think I’ll do that? You don’t think that “they” (whoever “they” are) will do that?
””Can we just dispense with the “ticking time bomb” scenario, folks? Until someone can provide at least one example where this has actually been the case in real life (Go ahead. We’ll wait.), let’s just leave it out.””
”Zubaida?”
Odd, but I don’t seem to recall Abu Zubaida’s interrogation being part of a ticking time bomb scenario. I could be wrong here, but somehow I doubt it.
Besides, Bush and crew trumpeted Abu Zubaida’s arrest and confession as a victory over a major al-Qaeda player, but some intelligence and law enforcement sources have said he did little more than help with logistics for al-Qaeda leaders and their associates. He wasn’t a major player and he wasn’t a major, highly trained operative.
Also, John Kiriakou didn’t actually see the interrogation and, even if he had, it wouldn’t have been mush to crow about. Ron Suskind, formally a journalist with that notorious liberal rag The Wall Street Journal, interviewed a number of people about Abu Zubaida. The information that he got from them and wrote about in The One Percent Doctrine was that Abu Zubaida was borderline retarded and didn’t have more than minor, tactical information about al-Qaeda. Even if you’re not a fan of his, other people in the intelligence field have made similar statements.
Besides, half of what our government has claimed that it learned from him has proven to have been established information prior to his torture session. Bush claimed in September 2006 that he disclosed Khalid Sheikh Mohammed — or KSM — was the mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks and his nickname of “Mukhtar”. The CIA, according to documents released through the 9/11 Commission report, new that in August of 2001. That’s prior to 9/11 itself and well prior to Zubaida’s torture. He told his interrogators about Ramzi bin al-Shibh’s role in 9/11. We knew that as far back as December of 2001. The federal grand jury indictment of Zacarias Moussaoui had that in and was part of the public record.
I think that Daniel Coleman, a retired FBI official involved in his interrogation, said it best with this little gem:
“I don’t have confidence in anything he says, because once you go down that road, everything you say is tainted. He was talking before they did that to him, but they didn’t believe him. The problem is they didn’t realize he didn’t know all that much.”
Gotta love an honest man. Well, unless you’re George Bush or you work for him…
”Arguments against it’s being effective are inaccurate. This is especially true if the subject desires to avoid pain, and the information is verifiable. (For instance, if an interrogator was interrogating someone about a computer password, and had the suspect computer reasily available, it wouldn’t take long to determine whether the information being provided was accurate.)”
Because, as we all know, we’re always capturing computer nerd terrorists who have had no training whatsoever in torture resistance, keep there laptops with them at all times and took the time to put the location of the bomb they just planted in their “To Do” documents folder. The scenario that you’ve laid out is only just slightly more likely to happen on a regular basis than the ticking time bomb scenario. And if you do get that, you better hope that the other team a) gives all of their guys all the top level pass codes and secrets and b) that they never bother changing them when major guys get picked up. Some do, some don’t and some are smart enough to play you like a fiddle by passing false information through compromised pass codes.
” As for the morality… I submit that the “moral high ground” is illusory territory. No one has it. There’s no such thing as moral combat. It’s much baser than that.”
No, it isn’t illusory territory. And we’re not talking about the actual combat here. We’re talking about the treatment of prisoners and you can get information through means other than torture.
First, this should clarify somewhat what techniques the U.S. used and whether our waterboarding can or can not get water into the lungs.
” Waterboarding involves wrapping plastic or fabric around a detainee’s face then pouring water over the top until it is forced up the nose and down the throat to simulate drowning.”
**********************************************************************
”Abu Zubaida was seized in a gun battle in Pakistan in the spring of 2002. For weeks he refused to talk and remained ideologically zealous, defiant and unco-operative. Then he was flown to a secret CIA prison – believed to be in Afghanistan – and strapped to a board with his feet in the air.”
”Cellophane was wrapped around the Al Qaeda man’s face and water was forced up his nose and into his throat to make him think he was drowning.”
”The suspect lasted only 35 seconds before he broke.”
””It was like flipping a switch,” said Mr Kiriakou.”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=501278&in_page_id=1811
________________________________________________________________________
”I just love people who think they’re tough. They break FAST.”
I never said that I wouldn’t break over time. But if the point of torture was to extract information from me in two hours or less, why do you think that I wouldn’t lie to you in order to make you stop torturing me? We’re not talking about an example where I can look forward to years of imprisonment with multiple visits by an interrogator to pry secrets from me. We’re talking about a timeframe of two hours or less with the only objective of the interrogator being to get one specific piece of information from me. If my only way to “win” or to hurt you is to lie for a couple of hours and that lie will temporarily stop you from torturing me, you don’t think I’ll do that? You don’t think that “they” (whoever “they” are) will do that?
””Can we just dispense with the “ticking time bomb” scenario, folks? Until someone can provide at least one example where this has actually been the case in real life (Go ahead. We’ll wait.), let’s just leave it out.””
”Zubaida?”
Odd, but I don’t seem to recall Abu Zubaida’s interrogation being part of a ticking time bomb scenario. I could be wrong here, but somehow I doubt it.
Besides, Bush and crew trumpeted Abu Zubaida’s arrest and confession as a victory over a major al-Qaeda player, but some intelligence and law enforcement sources have said he did little more than help with logistics for al-Qaeda leaders and their associates. He wasn’t a major player and he wasn’t a major, highly trained operative.
Also, John Kiriakou didn’t actually see the interrogation and, even if he had, it wouldn’t have been mush to crow about. Ron Suskind, formally a journalist with that notorious liberal rag The Wall Street Journal, interviewed a number of people about Abu Zubaida. The information that he got from them and wrote about in The One Percent Doctrine was that Abu Zubaida was borderline retarded and didn’t have more than minor, tactical information about al-Qaeda. Even if you’re not a fan of his, other people in the intelligence field have made similar statements.
Besides, half of what our government has claimed that it learned from him has proven to have been established information prior to his torture session. Bush claimed in September 2006 that he disclosed Khalid Sheikh Mohammed — or KSM — was the mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks and his nickname of “Mukhtar”. The CIA, according to documents released through the 9/11 Commission report, new that in August of 2001. That’s prior to 9/11 itself and well prior to Zubaida’s torture. He told his interrogators about Ramzi bin al-Shibh’s role in 9/11. We knew that as far back as December of 2001. The federal grand jury indictment of Zacarias Moussaoui had that in and was part of the public record.
I think that Daniel Coleman, a retired FBI official involved in his interrogation, said it best with this little gem:
“I don’t have confidence in anything he says, because once you go down that road, everything you say is tainted. He was talking before they did that to him, but they didn’t believe him. The problem is they didn’t realize he didn’t know all that much.”
Gotta love an honest man. Well, unless you’re George Bush or you work for him…
”Arguments against it’s being effective are inaccurate. This is especially true if the subject desires to avoid pain, and the information is verifiable. (For instance, if an interrogator was interrogating someone about a computer password, and had the suspect computer reasily available, it wouldn’t take long to determine whether the information being provided was accurate.)”
Because, as we all know, we’re always capturing computer nerd terrorists who have had no training whatsoever in torture resistance, keep there laptops with them at all times and took the time to put the location of the bomb they just planted in their “To Do” documents folder. The scenario that you’ve laid out is only just slightly more likely to happen on a regular basis than the ticking time bomb scenario. And if you do get that, you better hope that the other team a) gives all of their guys all the top level pass codes and secrets and b) that they never bother changing them when major guys get picked up. Some do, some don’t and some are smart enough to play you like a fiddle by passing false information through compromised pass codes.
” As for the morality… I submit that the “moral high ground” is illusory territory. No one has it. There’s no such thing as moral combat. It’s much baser than that.”
No, it isn’t illusory territory. And we’re not talking about the actual combat here. We’re talking about the treatment of prisoners and you can get information through means other than torture.
While the book opens stating the urgency for heads of state to devote time to the study of armed conflict, the first actionable principle of the Art of War is (translated for modern readers) that you must follow moral law. Winning hearts and minds creates for your army the urgency to fight, and demoralizes the army of your opponent.
What Carthaginian military commander is read by the military today?
Viagra 50mg x 10 pills = US $ 3.00
Viagra 100mg x 10 pills = US $ 4.00
http://bestviagracheap.com/
Hello, I wanted to get a few datafeeds for my affiliate store from commission junction and they expected me to pay $200(!).
Has anyone actually tried the CJ datafeeds and if so, are they worth the expense?
thanks in advance
Stefan
=================================
http://www.palpecterez.org
H. Klinton vs. Obama. How you think who will win elections?