People got water up their nose;
When four members of Congress met “in secret for a first look at a unique CIA program designed to wring vital information from reticent terrorism suspects in U.S. custody” in 2002, they were given a virtual tour of “the CIA’s overseas detention sites and the harsh techniques interrogators had devised to try to make their prisoners talk.” One of the members of this small group? Nancy Pelosi.
Among the techniques CIA officers described to the group, and thus Pelosi, was waterboarding.
More: “Next thing you know, someone’s going to say the Clinton co-presidency thought Saddam had a nuclear program and backed regime change.”
A nudge is as good as a wink to a blind bat. Say no more. Say noooo more!
Hypocrisy reigns supreme!
I believe Canada does not use waterboarding as an interrogation method, however it would be interesting to question Karlheinz about ALL his Canadian greased politician palms while he is in waterboard mode.
Or Gagliano for that matter.
The linked article is quite correct, on both points
1) It is torture, and thus illegal
2) That much hyprocrisy abounds right now, in that those who could have objected didnt.
I dont know know if the failure to object is worse than the proposal to torture in the first place.
The sad thing is you really dont get reliable information from torture anyway.
And Joe, I would be shocked if Canada engages in that practice.
KHS is under a Speakers Warrant….Parliament can do whatever it wants, quite frankly…including torture, there is no judicial oversight in a Speakers Warrant….Cromwell did. It is whatever the house decides. All joking aside that should give people some pause, knowing the instrument exists.
I see Pat Martin as Lord Protector now (shiver…..) Back to being on topic…….
Stephen – by what criteria do you assert that water boarding is torture? Is this from personal observation or just a hunch you have? Is it because some politician says it is? Maybe its because some politicians you don’t like say it isn’t. What say you?
I’ve been wondering how long it would take for something like this to surface.
For those who don’t know: every intelligence service is formed of two quite different, and often competitive, components, called in CIA “Operations” and “Analysis”. Operations is spies, agitators, and subverters, people who go to other countries and actually do things. Analysts collect, collate, and analyze (d’oh) the output of Operations, and produce data in a form the leadership can use as well as new information and instructions for Operators.
By its very nature Analysis lends itself to bureaucratization, and that’s happened in spades. CIA has now existed for long enough that there is essentially no communication between the two. It is the bureaucrats in Analysis who have been doing the leaking and obstructionism that has fed the hysterical derangement of the Democrats, and the Operations people — and those few of their management who have not been co-opted by the politicians and bureaucrats — are now discovering that their asses are on the line as a result. There ought to be more very interesting things coming out over the next little while as Operations tries to cover its ass by doing to Analysis as they have been done to.
Regards,
Ric
Gee, Nancy lied? Say it ain’t SO!
Ever notice how these Democrat leadership types get caught this way almost weekly, saying one thing and doing another?
Ever notice how all the scandals (besides the sex scandals, obviously) seem to involve Republicans doing what they said they were going to?
This is THE reason I vote Conservative. If a Conservative says he’s for something, most likely he will make policy that matches what he said. When a Liberal or a DemocRat says they are for something, most likely they will make policy which shows they were lying.
Must suck to be a Liberal supporter, eh? You never get what you want, even when your side wins.
Different Bob,
It has nothing to do with politicians who say it isnt.
I have been a verbal supporter of GWB for awhile and I dont regret the moral support (being Canadian it can be nothing other than that) So lets get that one off of the table.
This is a probelm with this debate, which the linked article points out. Support for the invasion or the surge or approval of interrogation techniques, no matter what they are has become a political issue….goodness I hate to see the day when your political affiliation depends on whether or not you support a particular type of “aggressive interrogation”.
However, you touch on a legitmate point, what is the definition of torture, which to be clear is seperate from your choice to use it.
Generally accepted that things that simulate death or incur legitimate fear of death would be considered toruture. The best example is a mock execution. No bullets in the gun, so no intent to kill, but the victim doesnt know that. No physical scars etc. However, the fear of reasonable expectation of death of considered torture.
Waterboarding simulates drowning and the panic associated with it. If it didnt why do it?
Thats the defintition under which it becomes torture.
I get less concerned about the “discomfort” or sleep deprivation, depending ont he extremes to which they are being taken.
So lets assume that it is torture for the moment. Are there circumstances under which torture could be used….sure….the sophomoric ticking time bomb scenario. But I dont know if thats where the US was or is. However, I a not in the room, so to speak, and if is deemed successful and a necessary technique then so be it. Then those who engage in it should be willing to call it what it is and justify their actions based on results or circumstances, that is the moral choice.
It is the same moral choice as Latimer. DOnt say it wasnt murder, it was, but you can argue punishments and justification based on circumstances and outcomes. Changing the definition is moral cowardice.
No, Stephen, you have mistaken what’s going on.
This is purely and simply a political tug of war, with the power of politicians and bureaucrats at stake. Whether or not waterboarding is torture is precisely as relevant to the “debate” as the design of a hammer is to what the house will be like.
For the record, your analysis seems to me both correct and mature. All that really does is make you and your analysis a functional and effective tool for the cynical bastards to wield.
Regards,
Ric
Stephen said: “I dont know know if the failure to object is worse than the proposal to torture in the first place.The sad thing is you really dont get reliable information from torture anyway. And Joe, I would be shocked if Canada engages in that practice.”
Stephen, you have pushed one of my buttons. My apologies for the following rant if it perturbs your calm on this Sunday.
Given the historical realities of life and war, if minions of our Canadian government on occasion did NOT use waterboarding or worse, I would be shocked. I am equally sure it is not a policy. This lack of a policy is a Bad Thing.
It is not a policy of the Metro Toronto Police Force to beat suspects either, but the legendary Cherry Beach Express is not an urban legend, and guys have been known to “fall down the stairs” in single story buildings. While this is not good, it is also not news.
Shoot, shovel and shut up is the rule of the game as currently played in Canada. Because the leaders of Politically Correct Fantasyland need to have this kind of thing done, but they can’t allow themselves to know about it. So they stick their fingers in their ears, shut their eyes and go “la la la la!!!!” while the guys with dirt under their fingernails get on with it.
I’d sooner see a proper policy, myself. Less chance of people getting over excited in the pursuit of their duties, know what I mean? The Airborne in Somalia springs to mind in this regard. Classic case of Private First Class Jimmy Dickslap indulging his secret hobby because his officers are busy whistling and looking the other way. When they finally stop the whistling its too late, Private Jimmy has pulled a stunt that would make the Marquis De Sade stand up and applaud. Oops.
Bottom line, rough treatment of prisoners happens in war because it HAS to. The honest man plans for it and limits it. Who does it, what they do, where, to whom and why is all laid on in advance. Sucks, but war generally does.
What we have with Nancy Pelosi is something altogether different. The Bush Administration did what I just said, took responsibility for the need to forcefully extract info from enemies and set limits to it. Nancy got told the plan, Nancy was good with it for probably the same reasons I said. Better it be known and limited than hidden and… creative.
Nancy then turned right around and denounced the whole thing as evil and bad while saying she never knew nuttin’ about nuttin’, and continues to do so to this day. This makes Nancy Pelosi lying scum. A common enough problem among the Left.
Worse than that, she is trying to destroy a policy she approved of and knows is in the best interests of the USA and its prisoners of war. That makes her lying, traitorous scum. Again, common among the Left.
Finally, if given sufficient power she will implement the same exact policy or maybe one that’s got even fewer limitations. This is because she knows such things absolutely must be done, and they absolutely have to be controlled, and SHE wants to be the one doing the controlling.
Making her a Democrat.
Which like I said is why I vote Conservative.
Stephen said: “Waterboarding simulates drowning and the panic associated with it. If it didnt why do it?
Thats the defintition under which it becomes torture. I get less concerned about the “discomfort” or sleep deprivation, depending on the extremes to which they are being taken.”
Of course its torture. No kidding. But, it has the advantage -to the prisoner- of not creating permanent physical damage. It is also unlikely to drive the prisoner into catatonia or other permanent mental malfunction.
The same cannot be said of sleep deprivation. Sometimes guys go nuts and stick that way. Look it up, but be prepared for having your stomach turned. Just one more thing from my expensive education I’d like to un-see.
Stephen. Hate to burst your Sunday bubble,but no where under the Geneva Convention are terrorists considered legal combatants,ergo,the rules do not apply to them,same as they do not use any rules.As the old saying goes,sometimes you fight fire with fire.
So what “torture” are we using on KHS,that he keeps flip-flopping his testimony like the best of Lieberals?
Bush/Cheney lied, and continue to lie, about Iran, Iraq and everything in between. I guess lying is a sin only if you are something other than a rightwingnut.
The Phantom: “This is THE reason I vote Conservative. If a Conservative says he’s for something, most likely he will make policy that matches what he said.”
President Bush (17 Oct 2006): “We don’t torture…we won’t torture.”
The Phantom: “Of course [waterboarding is] torture. No kidding.”
Good thing you slipped in that “most likely” qualifier in your first quotation.
*****
Baird (March 2007): There are no plans to withdraw from Kyoto. That’s pure fear-mongering.
Harper (November 2007): Kyoto is a flawed document. It’ll never work.
*****
Conservatives (during election): We will not tax income trusts.
Conservatives (after election): We will tax income trusts.
*****
No doubt there are plenty of flip-flop examples from the political left too. The point is, politicians are politicians, whether they’re conservatives or liberals.
It appears that whether or not waterboarding is torture is purely subjective. One man’s torture could be another’s survival technique. If it puts the fear of god into a terrorist then its all ok with me. I fully agree with justthin. Here you have people who absolutely do not play by the “rules” and we should? They are not soldier of an enemy state. They are scum that use the very tool some seem to think waterboarding is – terror – to destroy the lives of thousands. Time to take off the kid gloves. If waterboarding is considered torture, tough!
No bubble to burst…
It is a moral choice to make, and I am not that squeamish.
Re the need for policy, yes! Only fair to those further down the chain of command. If the policy is no torture and torture is enagged in, then the guy who did it was either breaking rules or his CO was. Allows you to assign responsibility up the chain. IF it is allowed then those carrying it out can be free from worrying they will carry the can.
My only point is don’t redefine it as something it is not.
Reasonable people can have a reasonable debate on when you may or may not torture. My objection largely comes down to not believeing it is an effective tactic for the extraction of intelligence, and I am not saying that rough treatment constitutes torture…there is a difference between a wartime interrogation and police interrogation…at least I would hope there is.
I am open to the argument that it is more effective than studies and articles I have seen.
Once again, 1st year rhtics class question. Is it right to lie….well generally the answer is no…but the more sophisticated answer is it depends on the circumstances. For example, you have let Anne Frank hide in your attic. The Nazi’s knock at the door and ask you if you have seen any Jews in the area. You lie and say no. You have lied, it is nothing other than that, but it is easily justified.
As for the argument on the Geneva convention. I agree with you, these are not enemy combatants, they are irregular militia, more the equivalent of spies. The purely legal argument is that the Geneva convention does not apply. But I dont know if this is just a legal argument.
I come back to the effectiveness argument, leaving the moral arguiment alone for a moment. You may be under no obligation to treat them under Geneva, the question is why would you unless it is to gather intelligence effectively. I havent seen any evidence that torture is an effective intelligence gathering technique. The only argument for me is maybe time….but once again I think those who engage in torture must be willing to face the consequences of the actions with justifications of what they were able to gather and the situation at the time.
I just dont think we as a society or as a member of Western civilization want to enagage in what is generally considered immoral and illegal behaviour. Once again, I buy the argument if you are in an “existential” battle, where every tactic and every action has the possibility of being penultimate (the next to last thing you would do) I dont believe we are in that situation, but I could be wrong.
As for my back sliding on sleep deprivation etc. Yes if taken to extreme is can most defintiely cause the effects you are talking about. I guess what I am saying is that there are forms of discomfort that I dont believe cross the line. However, it is a dangerous area you enter as soon as you enagage in any of these practices.
The fact that waterboarding might be a “humane” version of torture doesnt change the fact that it is. I guess I want to believe that we can defeat these guys in a way that we dont “sell out soul” to do so. Torture dgrades both the tortured and the torturer. I like to think maybe we are better than that. Perhaps I am naive.
Original point is though, all of those who were part of the decision should stand up for it. ANd if Ms. Pelosi sanctioned it through her silence she shoudl account for it now and explain her change of position. There is an argumen to be made for her journey. The hypocrisy of those who use it to score political points when they were part of the decision is what gets to me.
It is a difficult issue, and I respect those who advocate the other position, there are legitimate sides to the argument. Largely because they call it what it is and argue for the tactic based on their belief in necessity and effectiveness.
I fully expect to be the minority on this issue on this board, but I think it is an appropriate debate amongst and between conservative minded people.
Stephen – “but I think it is an appropriate debate amongst and between conservative minded people.”
Agreed!
Stephen, the day our intelligence finds a dirty bomb cell at work here in the States with the device good to go, but, being warehoused in the interim with other unknown co-conspirators, they can pull off fingernails or hack off toes to get the names and address from any of those apprehended for all that I care.
We aren’t going to survive the WOT, especially as it morphs into nuclear devices as it will, if applying “sleep deprivation” and physical “discomfort” past some arbitrarily fixed “extreme” like you want makes us capitulate under some sense of false virtue. It’s suicidal.
You points about are all well and good if this was a symmetrical war of opposing forces that were in agreement on military conduct like WWI and WWII. We are dealing with animals that choose civilians as their target of choice, for God’s sake.
Ric Locke’s point is valid.
Mr./Ms. ALL said: “The point is, politicians are politicians, whether they’re conservatives or liberals.”
Untrue, ALL. “Everybody does it” is not a defense against Pelosi-esque behaviour. Policies change. The question is, are the policy makers changing it to benefit themselves, or to benefit the country? Nancy benefits herself at the country’s expense.
Did they change their minds because they discovered what they said before wouldn’t work, or did the situation change, or is everything the same and they were they lying before? Nancy was lying before, and continues to lie.
You catch Mr. Harper pulling something as disloyal, damaging and just plain disgusting as this stunt of Nancy’s, then I’ll re-assess my support for the CPC.
Unless they give me a big (like 50% big) tax cut, kill the gun registry and buy the Army some friggin’ helicopters of course. Then they can lie all they want.
I do have my price. ~:D
What is the “Virtual Tour”. Did these people actually see what they were doing, “at where the prisoners were held and watched it being done” or were they given the “TV graphic tour”.
Did this or any interrogation give them results.
If they are treated to the usual criminal investigation, they have more rights than the victims or to the ordinary citizen.
They are considered terrorists. “how should a country treat a person, organization”, that has made claims that it would kill or maim the ordinary citizen.
These people who were arrested are not scared of dying by being killed in gun battles, bombs or knifes. But they are being tortured with water and sleep deprivation, pumping in nice cool christian, rock and roll, country and western, punk rock, jazz, swing, classic music to there cells.
Just what is the ordinary citizen to believe. Merle Underwood.
A terrorist deserves no better treatment than the terrorist would give you.
We all know the CIA, cops, prison toryue prisoners routinely…Pelosi is another limp pistol intersted only in attracting attention, leftoid votes and media fawning with the gushy rhetoric and basic non interest to go after this issue for real….don’t wanna rock the boat Nan..just make it APPEAR as if it’s being rocked.
Meanwhile the security agency culture injures and kills anyone they’ve a mind to..who the fig are we kidding? Like the feds are boy scouts…get back on the planet people…..feds only apologize for getting caught, not for the incivility they deal out on a daily basis…getting caught is the sin.
We have a single party federal system in Washington which is disinterested in catching anything but the perks of the job.
The EU has been publicly condemning the US and their “torture” practices while at the same time letting the CIA refuel their planes and operate information gathering posts in their countries.
Behind the scenes the Germans, Spainards, Brits, & Parisiennes have co-operated with the US because of the amount of info they have been also getting about those EU countries and threats to them as well. Pretty good deal on their end eh. Plausible deniability.
Even the snobby Europeans realize the means justify the end here. And don’t give me that line about if we do it to them they will do it to our people/soldiers if captured. They don’t need any tips or advice on the administration of torture techniques.
joey (your name reminds me of a pouched criter that like to jump)
“””””Bush/Cheney lied, and continue to lie, about Iran, Iraq and everything in between. I guess lying is a sin only if you are something other than a rightwingnut.””””
so when NO other country stood up in the UN tpo state that Saddamn had no WMD, they lied also????
so lets see here, after the 93 war SH (saddamn) was forced by international pressure to rid hisself of about 1/4 of his WMD, then the french convinced him to get rid of another 1/4, and just before the 03 invation, the USSR (russia) , under severe pressure convinced him to delete another 1/4. So that left the last 1/4, his nuclear ambitions, in a chamber under the euphratus river, which vacated after the fall of bagdad. Now the question is , how true is my story?????Well the pundit that wrote it was once an intell analyst who has contacts in the CIA, brit intell and mossad, so you be the judge!!!
now my point is……that, France, USSR, china, N Korea, germany, all knew about Saddamn’s WMD, and none stood up in the UN, so who lied??????
Nobody fed joey jerkoff, wonderfull.
I never understood the point of these sort of posts. SO one time CLinton supported regime change. Does that means he supported the war, or started it? It’s like if a bunch of guys were sitting around a local gas station, talking about buying some used car that looked hot. All of them were saying they thought that car was great. Then one guy, hearing this, goes out and buys that car. But the car is totally roached out, a lemon. Does that mean teh other guys were responsible for his mistake? Or if hopefully there is a good end in sight for the war, does that mean Clinton gets credit? Sorry, the war is Bush’s baby all the way. Ditto for the waterboarding. Maybe she did support it in 2002, who cares? People, not just politicians, switch views based on new data. So what? I never understood why people waste so much time in these petty little things. Maybe they listen to too much AM talk radio, cuase this is a Rush like cheap remark.