• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama Rules Out Charging C.I.A. Agents in Interrogations

Re: Waterboarding Used 266 Times on 2 Suspects

talloulou said:
Moderator's Warning:
Title changed to match title of cited article. Please read breaking news guidelines.
Click to expand...

This is also a duplicate post from one a moderator posted which I had asked to be deleted or merged.

Sorry about the violations and duplicate thread. :2wave:
 
Re: Waterboarding Used 266 Times on 2 Suspects

Gibberish said:
Why? It is fully possible for a captive to be water-boarded 6 times for 31 days. This suspending common sense would require the act to be impossible, which it is not.
Click to expand...

If you understood the legal definition of torture, it requires physical harm; I would submit that being water boarded 6 times a day for 31 days without any evidence of physical harm pretty much destroys the Left Wing and Democrats claims that water boarding can be construed as a form of torture.
 
Re: Waterboarding Used 266 Times on 2 Suspects

dclxvinoise said:
I guess I don't really understand your outrage here. The article does mention left-wing bloggers, but not as a resource. From the very thing you pasted here it merely mentions that these things were discovered in a report by left-wing bloggers.
As for the anonymous intelligence officers it doesn't try to pass them off as legitimate sources and even mentions that they spoke to them only on the condition that they remained anonymous.
Also, how exactly does your personal outrage over this issue qualify as breaking news?
Click to expand...

Using blog sites and "anonymous" sources for credible news should outrage anyone concerned with honest investigative journalism.

This story should never have been printed in anything BUT the Star Weekly or National Enquirer. It is the same level of journalistic garbage.

But then, when it serves a particular partisan political view, Liberals and Democrats think credible honest journalism can be waived for sensationalist suspect articles with little investigation, sourcing and vetting.
 
Re: Waterboarding Used 266 Times on 2 Suspects

Truth Detector said:
This is also a duplicate post from one a moderator posted which I had asked to be deleted or merged.

Sorry about the violations and duplicate thread. :2wave:
Click to expand...

Moderator's Warning:
merged the two similar threads. :2wave:
 
Re: Waterboarding Used 266 Times on 2 Suspects

Truth Detector said:
If you understood the legal definition of torture, it requires physical harm; I would submit that being water boarded 6 times a day for 31 days without any evidence of physical harm pretty much destroys the Left Wing and Democrats claims that water boarding can be construed as a form of torture.
Click to expand...

So hypothetically, would you be willing to undergo waterboarding, since there's no actual physical harm?
 
Re: Waterboarding Used 266 Times on 2 Suspects

Kandahar said:
So hypothetically, would you be willing to undergo waterboarding, since there's no actual physical harm?
Click to expand...

Obviously you don't understand why one undergoes water boarding or you would not ask such absurd questions.

Why would anyone have to, or want to willingly go through water boarding? Under going water boarding is not something one volunteers for, it is done to those who pose a great risk to our citizens and to obtain critical information to prevent future acts that place citizens under risk.

I would suggest you direct your questions to our military staff that have actually undergone this act. They will tell you with more credibility than you'll ever get from the New York Times that they were subjected to it without suffering any "physical" harm.

:roll:
 
Re: Waterboarding Used 266 Times on 2 Suspects

Kandahar said:
So hypothetically, would you be willing to undergo waterboarding, since there's no actual physical harm?
Click to expand...

That could be said about anything we do to prisoners. Would you be willing to go to jail, be in solitary confinement, eat crappy food from a tray shoved into your cell, etc.

Pointless question. My unwillingness to do something doesn't mean that something should be off the table for prisoners.

Not supporting waterboarding here - just pointing out the irrelevance of the question.
 
Re: Waterboarding Used 266 Times on 2 Suspects

Truth Detector said:
Obviously you don't understand why one undergoes water boarding or you would not ask such absurd questions.
Click to expand...

Yes, why DOES one undergo waterboarding? To get information, right? And why are people willing to "talk" if they are waterboarded?

Truth Detector said:
Why would anyone have to, or want to willingly go through water boarding? Under going water boarding is not something one volunteers for, it is done to those who pose a great risk to our citizens and to obtain critical information to prevent future acts that place citizens under risk.

I would suggest you direct your questions to our military staff that have actually undergone this act. They will tell you with more credibility than you'll ever get from the New York Times that they were subjected to it without suffering any "physical" harm.
Click to expand...

Bull****. Nearly everyone who has voluntarily undergone the process has said that they were scared of drowning and did indeed feel like they were tortured. In fact, I am not aware of ANY accounts of people saying "No big deal" after they were waterboarded.
 
Re: Waterboarding Used 266 Times on 2 Suspects

Kandahar said:
Bull****. Nearly everyone who has voluntarily undergone the process has said that they were scared of drowning and did indeed feel like they were tortured. In fact, I am not aware of ANY accounts of people saying "No big deal" after they were waterboarded.
Click to expand...

I see you also have issues comprehending the difference between "scared of drowning", "feel like", "sensation of drowning" and physical harm.

The only BS here is the crapola being shoveled out by Liberals and Democrats for purely partisan political purposes.
 
Re: Waterboarding Used 266 Times on 2 Suspects

Truth Detector said:
Using blog sites and "anonymous" sources for credible news should outrage anyone concerned with honest investigative journalism.
Click to expand...

I don't know about outrage, but I agree that they should be criticized in those specific situations. However, I don't see how they used blog sites as a source. As for the anonymous sources, they stated that they were anonymous so they weren't hiding anything. They didn't even indicate the credibility of those sources. They merely mentioned them for what they were.

This story should never have been printed in anything BUT the Star Weekly or National Enquirer. It is the same level of journalistic garbage.
Click to expand...

Oh come on. That's a bit of an absurd comparison. Have you ever read the National Enquirer or Star Weekly?

But then, when it serves a particular partisan political view, Liberals and Democrats think credible honest journalism can be waived for sensationalist suspect articles with little investigation, sourcing and vetting.
Click to expand...

I never said that. I just think that your outrage is a bit overboard especially considering that your assertions are incorrect and grossly exaggerated. Plus you said in your subject that they were lies. Even if you were correct in your assertions, how is information from blogs and anonymous sources "lies"? It's unproven and even unverified, but not a lie. It's not a lie until it's proven incorrect.
 
Re: Waterboarding Used 266 Times on 2 Suspects

Truth Detector said:
If you understood the legal definition of torture, it requires physical harm; I would submit that being water boarded 6 times a day for 31 days without any evidence of physical harm pretty much destroys the Left Wing and Democrats claims that water boarding can be construed as a form of torture.
Click to expand...

Torture does not require physical harm and even if it did require physical harm it does not require the physical harm to be visible for X days. I don't see how someone can say making someone feel like they are going to die of drowning 6 times a day is not torture.

Making someone go mentally insane through emotional and psychological techniques can be classified as torture as well.
 
Orius said:
No one will ever be brought to justice for the tortures that went on in Gitmo because the administration doesn't care. All that matters to me is that it happened, and the details are now public. The U.S. no longer has the right to cry out against other nations that employ torture.
Click to expand...

Agreed.
Neither can UK or any other western country that helped directly or indirectly US to torture people.

Well, it is way dark down here when we are off our high stool of morality :(

US may not charge it's CIA agents but i want the M15/6 agents to be dragged by the hair infront of the law lords
 
Last edited:
Re: Waterboarding Used 266 Times on 2 Suspects

Gibberish said:
Torture does not require physical harm and even if it did require physical harm it does not require the physical harm to be visible for X days. I don't see how someone can say making someone feel like they are going to die of drowning 6 times a day is not torture.

Making someone go mentally insane through emotional and psychological techniques can be classified as torture as well.
Click to expand...

There's levels to torture; especially mental torture. Just being captured would arguably be torturous. Being imprisoned would be torturous for some.

I honestly don't know enough about waterboarding to have an educated opinion. However from what I do no it rarely results in any permanent damage. It's certainly not up there with chopping off digits, limbs, or a beheading.

But seriously if we argue from the standpoint that anything that causes mental duress is torture then where does that end? Most anything can be torturous to some. Showering naked in the presence of others could cause mental anguish.

I know I'd rather be waterboarded than go to prison, have my fingernails plied off one by one, or my hands chopped off.
 
Re: Waterboarding Used 266 Times on 2 Suspects

talloulou said:
There's levels to torture; especially mental torture. Just being captured would arguably be torturous. Being imprisoned would be torturous for some.

I honestly don't know enough about waterboarding to have an educated opinion. However from what I do no it rarely results in any permanent damage. It's certainly not up there with chopping off digits, limbs, or a beheading.

But seriously if we argue from the standpoint that anything that causes mental duress is torture then where does that end? Most anything can be torturous to some. Showering naked in the presence of others could cause mental anguish.

I know I'd rather be waterboarded than go to prison, have my fingernails plied off one by one, or my hands chopped off.
Click to expand...

Chopping off limbs or beheading someone is more then just torture, it's barbaric.

What someone considers or does not consider torture is arbitrary so there must be defined qualifications and perspective. Making someone feel like they are drowning is torture, to me. The same as any other method you can see in a traditional medieval torture chamber. Forcing someone to kill their own children would also be considered torture to me. Even though no physical harm is done to the individual.
 
Waterboarding Used 266 Times on 2 Suspects

Remember all of those Bushies, especially AHOLE Cheney claiming that waterboarding was only used three times?

The legacy of the Bush Administration and all of those that supported his policies continues to go even lower despite with each revelation the seeming belief that it can't get any lower!
Waterboarding Used 266 Times on 2 Suspects

By SCOTT SHANE - The NY Times
Published: April 19, 2009

C.I.A. interrogators used waterboarding, the near-drowning technique that top Obama administration officials have described as illegal torture, 266 times on two key prisoners from Al Qaeda, far more than had been previously reported.

The C.I.A. officers used waterboarding at least 83 times in August 2002 against Abu Zubaydah, according to a 2005 Justice Department legal memorandum. Abu Zubaydah has been described as a Qaeda operative.

A former C.I.A. officer, John Kiriakou, told ABC News and other news media organizations in 2007 that Abu Zubaydah had undergone waterboarding for only 35 seconds before agreeing to tell everything he knew.

The 2005 memo also says that the C.I.A. used waterboarding 183 times in March 2003 against Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the self-described planner of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

The New York Times reported in 2007 that Mr. Mohammed had been barraged more than 100 times with harsh interrogation methods, causing C.I.A. officers to worry that they might have crossed legal limits and to halt his questioning. But the precise number and the exact nature of the interrogation method was not previously known.
Click to expand...
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/20/world/20detain.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=waterboard&st=cse
 
Re: Waterboarding Used 266 Times on 2 Suspects

Gibberish said:
Chopping off limbs or beheading someone is more then just torture, it's barbaric.

What someone considers or does not consider torture is arbitrary so there must be defined qualifications and perspective. Making someone feel like they are drowning is torture, to me. The same as any other method you can see in a traditional medieval torture chamber. Forcing someone to kill their own children would also be considered torture to me. Even though no physical harm is done to the individual.
Click to expand...

Anything involving bodily harm and injury in an effort to intimidate or manipulate would qualify for me. However emotionally feeling tortured would not. Stress would not. Allowing for mental duress to count as torture pretty much means anything and everything could be torturous. If it is true that waterboarding generally causes no permanent bodily harm or injury then I don't object to it.
 
Re: Waterboarding Used 266 Times on 2 Suspects

talloulou said:
Anything involving bodily harm and injury in an effort to intimidate or manipulate would qualify for me. However emotionally feeling tortured would not. Stress would not. Allowing for mental duress to count as torture pretty much means anything and everything could be torturous. If it is true that waterboarding generally causes no permanent bodily harm or injury then I don't object to it.
Click to expand...

How about my below scenario? Would you consider it torture?
Forcing someone to kill their own children would also be considered torture to me. Even though no physical harm is done to the individual.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Waterboarding Used 266 Times on 2 Suspects

Truth Detector said:
I see you also have issues comprehending the difference between "scared of drowning", "feel like", "sensation of drowning" and physical harm.

The only BS here is the crapola being shoveled out by Liberals and Democrats for purely partisan political purposes.
Click to expand...

You're splitting hairs. How are you defining "physical harm"? Cuts, bruises, and broken limbs? You're reduced to arguing the legalese of the term torture because you know perfectly well that it's an abuse of human rights. Civilized people don't do things like this.
 
Does causing a single drip of water ever 45 seconds to drip on someone's forehead physically cause any real damage other than anguish do to uncontrollable repetitive skin action? Isn't that one of the worst chineese tortures?

No need to mafiaze the government and sweet package it.
 
Re: Waterboarding Used 266 Times on 2 Suspects

Gibberish said:
How about my below scenario? Would you consider it torture?
Click to expand...

Um yeah. It's obvious to me that killing someone's child, relative, spouse, love, etc involves bodily harm. Anything that causes actual physical bodily harm that is done with the intent of intimidating or manipulating would clearly be torture. I know there are mental forms of anguish that are often implemented however I don't think we should work to get the legal definition to include them otherwise anything and everything will be considered torture and we won't be able to capture a prisoner during a war unless we aim to keep them at the Hilton. :mrgreen:

Waterboarding is said to generally do no actual bodily harm. Any stress from the process is mental and there is no intent to damage the actual physical body.

As a side note I saw some goofy kids waterboarding each other at a protest a few years ago. I'm not sure what their point was. Or why they were doing or even if they were doing it right. If they were doing it right other than a lot of sputtering and coughing it didn't actually seem all that bad. I don't get the hysteria. Once it's over, it's over and there's no physical damage.
 
Last edited:
Re: Waterboarding Used 266 Times on 2 Suspects

Kandahar said:
You're splitting hairs. How are you defining "physical harm"? Cuts, bruises, and broken limbs? You're reduced to arguing the legalese of the term torture because you know perfectly well that it's an abuse of human rights. Civilized people don't do things like this.
Click to expand...

War isn't civilized and that's just a god damn fact of life. When there is no more war I will agree that we ought not to do anything untoward to anyone and we all shall live as one.

But we're more than a mile from that and in the meantime it's fairly stupid to talk about prisoners of war and civil behavior. Human rights go out the freaking window when strangers who don't know each other are ready and willing to kill one another at the bequest of their government.
 
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMkaI8Ad4po"]YouTube - Obama Defends Release of Interrogation Memos[/ame]
 
Obama open to prosecution, probe of interrogations
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama left the door open Tuesday to prosecuting Bush administration officials who devised the legal authority for gruesome terror-suspect interrogations, saying the United States lost "our moral bearings" with use of the tactics.

The question of whether to bring charges against those who devised justification for the methods "is going to be more of a decision for the attorney general within the parameters of various laws and I don't want to prejudge that," Obama said. The president discussed the continuing issue of terrorism-era interrogation tactics with reporters as he finished an Oval Office meeting with visiting King Abdullah II of Jordan.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom