|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543 |
Quote:
i mean the people that want to TALK LIKE THEY KNOW WHATS GOING ON WHEN IN FACT THEY DON'T HAVE A CLUE BECAUSE U HAVE NOT PAID ONE BIT OF ATTENTION ... this has been going on since 2002 and the legal battle surronding this started pretty much then and is continioung today .. U all read a headline and read one article or watch one or two news stories and think U UNDERSTAND AND KNOW IT ALL .....
See, this is the point I always make about "U" and I mean YOU always do this.. Someone asks a question and before you give one bit of information, "U" meaning YOU have to get you digs in.. You might even be tolerable if you would just answer the question without being so damned condesending....
As for the rest of your post.,,, Thanks, that explains a lot... That was a hell of a good explaination.... again, thank you very much.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188 |
Quote:
Wow! someone woke up on the wrong side of the bed,,,lol
No such thing in MY WORLD ... as long as I wake up and can get out of bed .. the side i choose to exit from is of no relevance to me .... ITS ALL GOOD AND DOWNHILL FROM THERE ... Waking up is ALL THAT MATTERS ...... 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188 |
I'd vote for U .. if u need a campaign manager .... let me know .. who'd a ever thunk .. *L* ..
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188 |
For those wondering ...
we "rent" the land that Gitmo is on from Cuba .. we pay like 4,500 a year for it .. Castro has not cashed a check since the lat 50's or early 60's .. but we send them anyhow .. *L* ..
that is why it is "nebualas" land (no clue what that means but Lyk seems to think it fits so i borrowed it from him and ASSumed it fit into what i was saying also .. *L*) .. that is free from the american court system ..
Good points on what Barack did .. I was mainly talking about during the Bush era and when the waterboarding was actually happening ... GOOD CATCH .. unlike some i like to actually pass only good info on as opposed to talking out my ass about things i'm only 1/2 informed on ..... and what i said was not correct .. thanks for pointing it out ...
the only thing i would disagree with U on .. If i read it correctly U are saying we sent them to Gitmo so we could treat them how we wanted withiut our courts superceding while at the same time being able to prosecute them in our courts ..
its my understanding we sent them to Gitmo so we could avoid our courts at all costs ... we did not want to put the "burden of proof" and "expediant trials" on ourselves that the civilian courts would have demanded since these were not POW's ... so we sent them to gitmo witch was like Never Never Land and being in "limbo" ..
did i read you wrong .. or am i missing sumptin ...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,732
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,732 |
Quote:
You might even be tolerable if you would just answer the question without being so damned condesending....
LOL, geez you're getting hot amnd bothered of late. 
Diam talks that way to almost everybody. It's one of the things that makes him likeable, so don't be offended. 
![[Linked Image from i28.photobucket.com]](http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c201/shadedog/mcenroe2.jpg) gmstrong -----------------
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 12,061
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 12,061 |
Quote:
Waterboarding is not torture (or the UN treaty against torture would ban it)
Yet it has been referred to as torture by everyone in the media on top of certain politicians (not all are Democrats). The fact remains that was ruled on was that it wasn't considered torture but they call it enhanced interrogation. By now using the the Army Field manual we are treating these guys as POWs. I can't say with certainty what all is detailed in the Army field manual but it is very basic when it comes to what can be done.
What is making things even more difficult is that we are targeting CIA run prisons in other countries. These facilities are not actually US run but are pretty much fronts for our operatives. We oversee things but are not actually responsible even though everyone knows we are.
Another point of contention is the Military Tribunals. Liberals hate them. The problem is with many of these people picked up we can't meet US court requirements, not to mention all kinds of issues with making public certain intel that can give away some of the techniques we use to get intel.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,558
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,558 |
what you said is exactly right....i was probably unclear in saying that we still wanted to prosecute them at gitmo. What i meant was some combination of military tribunals and indefinite holding of detainees that allows us to keep them while continuing to avoid the legal system.
nebulous wasn't any technical term i was using. I meant that Gitmo is the "never never land" which you are talking about. The US controls it, so we can hold as many people as we want there indefinitely, but it is not US land, so the US does not have to grant any legal rights to people that are there. It's this crazy Catch-22 which the supreme court has repeatedly rejected
~Lyuokdea
"When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 19:33-34
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,558
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,558 |
Quote:
Quote:
Waterboarding is not torture (or the UN treaty against torture would ban it)
Yet it has been referred to as torture by everyone in the media on top of certain politicians (not all are Democrats). The fact remains that was ruled on was that it wasn't considered torture but they call it enhanced interrogation. By now using the the Army Field manual we are treating these guys as POWs. I can't say with certainty what all is detailed in the Army field manual but it is very basic when it comes to what can be done.
I'm guessing you didn't read the sentence immediately above the one you quoted. I said, "the three things the Bush regime had to prove in order to call waterboarding legal were": and then I listed those three arguments.
I didn't try to argue the legitimacy of any of them, I just said that these were the three things the Bush adminsitration had to say in order to legally justify waterboarding.
~Lyuokdea
"When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 19:33-34
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 12,061
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 12,061 |
I read what you wrote and don't disagree with it. I was talking about perception based on what has been reported. As far as the rest of my post I can't tell you what I was saying because I don't understand it at all.  I lost my train of thought and didn't proofread.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 658
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 658 |
Quote:
As far as the rest of my post I can't tell you what I was saying because I don't understand it at all.
Oooh - Here's the first quote for next year's wisdom of Dawgtalkers post.
Thomas - The Tank Engine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543 |
Quote:
Diam talks that way to almost everybody. It's one of the things that makes him likeable, so don't be offended.
Can't help it, it's offensive.... 
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109 |
Lamp, you're wrong. Diam talks that way to EVERYBODY. He even talks that way to me. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458 |
I think that if you approve of waterboarding---then you should be subjected to it.
I wish to wash my Irish wristwatch......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 12,061
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 12,061 |
Quote:
I think that if you approve of waterboarding---then you should be subjected to it.
Ok...Next time I conspire to kill hundreds or thousands of people have at it.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458 |
Its kind of a ridiculous thing anyways.........When you inflict pain on people, they will generally tell you anything to get you to stop---that means that they will tell you whatever you want to hear. They will admit to plotting to blow up the moon if thats what you want.
It doesn't work.......lead CIA interrogators have came out saying it doesn't work......and the torture-happy, vengeful, sheep in this country seem to think that its a great idea to degrade human beings(thats right--I referred to them as human beings.) They think that somehow, treating people like animals is going to make them act more humanely.....it has worked great in this countries prison system.
I wish to wash my Irish wristwatch......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 12,061
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 12,061 |
Nobody is asking them to admit to anything that they did. They are trying to gain intel. That is something we can verify if they give it up. I wouldn't say that the guy who orchestrated the mass murder of almost three thousand people human. Lucky for us that it could have been much worse.
Just so everyone realizes we only used water boarding on 3 disgusting pigs.
I think that since it looks like Obama doesn't want to do anything but talk nice to them we should release them back into the wild. Follow them for about 10 minutes with a predator then identify them as high value targets. We can do what we do to the rest of their kind...Bomb the crap out of them.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188 |
Quote:
Can't help it, it's offensive....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
I wouldn't say that the guy who orchestrated the mass murder of almost three thousand people human.
I would. Mainly because...well, because he's a human.
I've always disliked explaining away an atrocity as simply 'oh, he's evil', 'he's not human'...no he was human. Humans do really messed up things. It's as head in the sand as 'they hate us for our freedom'.
As for torture...man, what a diversionary tactic. If anyone wants to get out the violins and play, why don't you worry about the six year old whose arms we blew off...when that stops, maybe then we can revisit simulated drowning.
I'm against it...it's ineffective and against our ideals...but there's bigger fish to fry right now.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188 |
Quote:
I think that if you approve of waterboarding---then you should be subjected to it.
Funny U should mention that .. cause part of our SF's and inerrogation ops (guys that will specialize in interrogations in hostile places) training used to be that they were water boarded .... it more than likely still is but I can't verify that .... and with Obama changing everything that may not be happening anymore .... so EVEN THOUGH its against the Geneva Convention and is CRUEL .. we TRAIN OUR SF'S by doing it to them ..... I wonder why we would NEED TO MAKE THAT A PART OF THERE TRAINING??? .....
kinda ironic were not allowed to do it to others ... yet we do it to ourselves as part of our training ...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188 |
and u know its inaffective how?? .. oh .. thats right your liberal buddies told u so and lord only knows .. they were right there and have first hand knowledge and they surely wouldn't lie ...  REGARDLESS of weather it worked or not .. I'M ALL FOR IT .. and I too believe its INHUMANE AND DISGUISTING ... LAST RESORT ... and unfortunatley in that situation .. IT HAS TO BE DONE .... do u really think these people (and thats any combantant in a war) IS just going to give up info freely??? .. but if it COULD POSSIBLY save AMerican lives .. DO IT ... even if it was yours Phil ...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
REGARDLESS of weather it worked or not .. I'M ALL FOR IT ..
That makes sense.
Quote:
but if it COULD POSSIBLY save AMerican lives .. DO IT
How would you feel about paying these cats off? Instead of waterboarding them for info, we can offer them a couple million and a plane ticket to a remote island. Works with informants, right?
I mean, if it could save American lives, do it, right?
Or how about lopping off fingers one by one? Executing their kids? Where does 'if it might work, do it' end?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,449
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,449 |
Quote:
I agree stopping the LA plot was good, but how many terrorist did we rally to the extremist cause because we used torture, and how many more threats did we create that we will now have to deal with? Or how many allies decreased their support and distanced themselves away from the US because we used torture?
How many Americans were shocked into action by the beheading of innocents?
How many countries supported us in our response to 911? How many were sick of dealing with the zealots themselves?
How many Americans have quickly forgotten how much these zealots hate us? 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188 |
It makes all the sense in the world ... cause if u don't try. you'll never know ..
as for lopping off fingers one at a time .. thats actually not how it works ... if u must know .. they actually "saw" the finger off just above the knuckle (and the duller the knife, the better) ... .. if that don't work ... then they "saw" it off at the base ... then on to the next finger ..... no lopping as sawing is much slower and way more painful ...
as for family members .... most of the time the threat of torture does it ... if not then a minimal amount of torture ALMOST ALWAYS gets u what u want ... but if some sicko would not give up the info we needed ... and I thought killing one of there family members got me the info I wanted .. in THEORY I would ABSOLUTELY do it ... I do not know if i could personally do that to a kid .. but I would "approve" of it in certain situations .... and they would need to be EXTREMEMLY EXTREME ...
sorry man .. I am not possibly sacricifing the lives of the people i am responsible for cause soemone else does not feel the same sense of responsibility for the people there suppose to be taking care of ... if u want to take the chance that your family members die ... go right ahead .. luckily for both of us theres people out there that will TAKE CARE OF US ... weather U approve or not ..
Me .. I'll just Thank them as opposed to have them arrested ...
PEOPLE LIKE U MAKE THIS COUNTRY WEAKER AND HARDER TO DEFEND .. if your "higher moral ground" is more important to U than being alive .. well thats your choice ..
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
It makes all the sense in the world ... cause if u don't try. you'll never know
Yeah? Why don't you go buy yourself a lid of heroin and go hang with Derden for awhile...could be cool. If you don't try, you'll never know.
Quote:
but if some sicko would not give up the info we needed ... and I thought killing one of there family members got me the info I wanted .. in THEORY I would ABSOLUTELY do it ... I do not know if i could personally do that to a kid .. but I would "approve" of it in certain situations .... and they would need to be EXTREMEMLY EXTREME ...
At least you're honest. And this EXTREMELY EXTREME stuff...this Jack Bauer scenario...is Hollywood fantasy land...yet people are using it as a scenario palate for their argument. Nuts, bro.
Quote:
PEOPLE LIKE U MAKE THIS COUNTRY WEAKER AND HARDER TO DEFEND
Whatever, Col. Jessup.
Truth be told, we're the safest nation on the planet, by a landslide, and we face minimal danger. An amputee can count the times we've been attacked on our own soil in the last century. All of our conflicts since WWII have been against pithy opponents we're fairly confident we can roll and conducted under bunk rationale. We're protected by two oceans and we have the smartest and best trained military on the planet.
After carpet bombing the Middle East for over a decade, a fringe group infused with cash blew up two of our buildings. I think this is something we can handle without torture.
Our military, in what you would call it's teen years, destroyed the greatest empire since Alexander...and it's only grown in might, because after WWII the boys on the Hill figured out that war was big business.
...not torturing people doesn't weaken us.
Quote:
.. if your "higher moral ground" is more important to U than being alive .. well thats your choice ..
I consider that insinuation a compliment...I'm not quite there, bro...I'd like to be.
And I noticed you didn't touch my money hypothesis...and that's because money is the best way to get you to do something you want. It's morally repulsive, and I certainly would abhor it, but paying these cats to turn would, without a doubt, be the most effective method.
Realistically...throw them in gen pop. Dade County. New. York. City. See how long it takes until they're dead or singing.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543 |
Cute,,, and you are supposed to be a grown man... nice job
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,070
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,070 |
Quote:
here's how this thing has played out ...
1. Waterboarding is illegal under the Geneva Convention ...
2. The Geneva Convention is a document that refers to war time "rules" and PROTECTING POW'S ...
3. The US took the position that these "prisoners" were not POW's because they fought for NO COUNTRY .. they did not wear uniforms ..... they were DRESSED AS CIVILIANS AND WERE INTERWINED with the civilain population and they fought for NO COUNTRY ..
therefore they were NOT LABELED POW'S ... we did this so they would not be protected under the geneva convention ... and because of that we could INTEROGATE THEM without the handcuffs of the Geneva Convention hindering our info extracting methods ..
4. We brought them to Guantanamo because our gov't officials could then claim that no US COURTS had jurisdiction so that when the liberal groups in this country got involved they would have no where to bring there court cases ....
so at the end of the day ... as for the waterboarding stuff ... it is STILL "LEGAL" as far as these prisoners go .. it was NEVER ILLEGAL in the interpertation Bush placed on these "prisoners" .. it was basically all a PLAY ON WORDS so we could "legally" use what ever methods we wanted to when trying to extract info .
Diam...you failed to continue to searching beyond the point that suited your argument.
Read...
The Geneva Convention `catch'
By Rosa Brooks
June 30, 2006
THE SUPREME Court on Thursday dealt the Bush administration a stinging rebuke, declaring in Hamdan vs. Rumsfeld that military commissions for trying terrorist suspects violate both U.S. military law and the Geneva Convention.
But the real blockbuster in the Hamdan decision is the court's holding that Common Article 3 of the Geneva Convention applies to the conflict with Al Qaeda -- a holding that makes high-ranking Bush administration officials potentially subject to prosecution under the federal War Crimes Act.
The provisions of the Geneva Convention were intended to protect noncombatants -- including prisoners -- in times of armed conflict. But as the administration has repeatedly noted, most of these protections apply only to conflicts between states. Because Al Qaeda is not a state, the administration argued that the Geneva Convention didn't apply to the war on terror. These assertions gave the administration's arguments about the legal framework for fighting terrorism a through-the-looking-glass quality. On the one hand, the administration argued that the struggle against terrorism was a war, subject only to the law of war, not U.S. criminal or constitutional law. On the other hand, the administration said the Geneva Convention didn't apply to the war with Al Qaeda, which put the war on terror in an anything-goes legal limbo.
This novel theory served as the administration's legal cover for a wide range of questionable tactics, ranging from the Guantanamo military tribunals to administration efforts to hold even U.S. citizens indefinitely without counsel, charge or trial.
Perhaps most troubling, it allowed the administration to claim that detained terrorism suspects could be subjected to interrogation techniques that constitute torture or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment under international law, such as "waterboarding," placing prisoners in painful physical positions, sexual humiliation and extreme sleep deprivation.
Under Bush administration logic, these tactics were not illegal under U.S. law because U.S. law was trumped by the law of war, and they weren't illegal under the law of war either, because Geneva Convention prohibitions on torture and cruel treatment were not applicable to the conflict with Al Qaeda.
In 2005, Congress angered the administration by passing Sen. John McCain's amendment explicitly prohibiting the use of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment of detainees. But Congress did not attach criminal penalties to violations of the amendment, and the administration has repeatedly indicated its intent to ignore it.
The Hamdan decision may change a few minds within the administration. Although the decision's practical effect on the military tribunals is unclear -- the administration may be able to gain explicit congressional authorization for the tribunals, or it may be able to modify them to comply with the laws of war -- the court's declaration that Common Article 3 applies to the war on terror is of enormous significance. Ultimately, it could pave the way for war crimes prosecutions of those responsible for abusing detainees.
Common Article 3 forbids "cruel treatment and torture [and] outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment." The provision's language is sweeping enough to prohibit many of the interrogation techniques approved by the Bush administration. That's why the administration had argued that Common Article 3 did not apply to the war on terror, even though legal experts have long concluded that it was intended to provide minimum rights guarantees for all conflicts not otherwise covered by the Geneva Convention.
But here's where the rubber really hits the road. Under federal criminal law, anyone who "commits a war crime
Don't expect that to happen anytime soon, of course. For prosecutions to occur, some federal prosecutor would have to issue an indictment. And in the Justice Department of Atty. Gen. Alberto Gonzales -- who famously called the Geneva Convention "quaint" -- a genuine investigation into administration violations of the War Crimes Act just ain't gonna happen.
But as Yale law professor Jack Balkin concludes, it's starting to look as if the Geneva Convention "is not so quaint after all."
web page
GM strong...
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 658
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 658 |
Quote:
An amputee can count the times we've been attacked on our own soil in the last century.
Well, we had the first WTC bombing that didn't bring down the buildings, WTC 1 and 2 that did bring them down, the Pentagon, and the attack that ended in a crash in Pennsylvania. Those are five that were successful. We should also include some smaller attacks, successful or not (Brooklyn Bridge, Millenium Seattle bombing, etc). The drug cartels are attacking our southern cities on an almost daily basis. Pearl Harbor ring a bell? German U-boats dropped spies/saboteurs in New York during WWII.
It's a lot more attacks in the last 100 years than the busiest amputee can count. Let's not pretend this is not a real and ongoing threat.
Thomas - The Tank Engine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
Quote:
I only got one that said to ignore you..
Tell Kingo I said hello. 
For Phil, I gotta tell you, when you start defending terroristic or murderous type of people by being offended that people call them inhuman or monsters, I have to wonder what your motivation is. You do understand the rational behind what they are called, right?
Sorry, I don't see your line of thinking as taking the high road at all.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543 |
Quote:
Tell Kingo I said hello.
Who?
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
Quote:
They waterboarded one guy nearly two hundred times.
Despite Reports, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed Was Not Waterboarded 183 Times
The number of times Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was waterboarded was the focus of major media attention -- and highly misleading.
By Joseph Abrams
New York Times reported last week that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of the Sept. 11 terror attacks, was waterboarded 183 times in one month by CIA interrogators. The "183 times" was widely circulated by news outlets throughout the world.
It was shocking. And it was highly misleading. The number is a vast inflation, according to information from a U.S. official and the testimony of the terrorists themselves.
A U.S. official with knowledge of the interrogation program told FOX News that the much-cited figure represents the number of times water was poured onto Mohammed's face -- not the number of times the CIA applied the simulated-drowning technique on the terror suspect. According to a 2007 Red Cross report, he was subjected a total of "five sessions of ill-treatment."
"The water was poured 183 times -- there were 183 pours," the official explained, adding that "each pour was a matter of seconds."
The Times and dozens of other outlets wrote that the CIA also waterboarded senior Al Qaeda member Abu Zubaydah 83 times, but Zubayda himself, a close associate of Usama bin Laden, told the Red Cross he was waterboarded no more than 10 times.
The confusion stems from language in the Justice Department legal memos that President Obama released on April 16. They contain the numbers, but they fail to explain exactly what they represent.
The memos, spanning from 2002-2005, were a legal review by the Bush administration that approved the use of waterboarding and other "enhanced interrogation techniques." Obama banned the procedure on his second day in office, saying that waterboarding is torture.
Click here to see Memo 1 | Memo 2 | Memo 3 | Memo 4
The memos describe the controversial process: a detainee is strapped to a gurney with his head lowered and a cloth placed on his face. Interrogators pour water onto the cloth, which cuts off air flow to the mouth and nostrils, tripping his gag reflex, causing panic and giving him the sensation that he is drowning.
At that point the cloth would be removed, the gurney rotated upright and the detainee would be allowed to breathe. The technique could be repeated a few times during a waterboarding session; Zubaydah said it was generally used once or twice, but he said he was waterboarded three times during one session.
The Justice Department memos described the maximum allowed use of the waterboard on any detainee, based on tactical training given to U.S. troops to resist interrogations:
-- Five days of use in one month, with no more than two "sessions" in a day;
-- Up to six applications (something like a dunk) lasting more than 10 seconds but less than 40 seconds per session;
-- 12 minutes of total "water application" in a 24-hour period
Bloggers who read the memos last week noted that the CIA's math "doesn't add up" -- meaning that the 12 long pours allowed in a day couldn't add up to the 12 minutes mentioned in the memo, and they could barely even guess how the detainees could have been waterboarded an astounding 286 times in one month.
The memos did not note that the sessions would be made up of a number of short pours -- the ones the U.S. official said lasted "a matter of seconds" -- and that created the huge numbers quoted by the New York Times: 183 on Mohamed, 83 on Zubaydah.
Pours, not waterboards.
A close look at a Red Cross report on the interrogations makes the numbers even clearer.
As the Red Cross noted: "The suffocation procedure was applied [to Abu Zubaydah] during five sessions of ill-treatment ... in 2002. During each session, apart from one, the suffocation technique was applied once or twice; on one occasion it was applied three times."
The total number of applications: between eight and 10 -- not the 83 mentioned in the Times.
Mohammed similarly told the Red Cross that "I was also subjected to 'water-boarding' on five occasions, all of which occurred during the first month." Those were his five "sessions"; the precise number of applications is not known but is a fraction of the 183 figure.
All of those individual pours were scrupulously counted by the CIA, according to the memos, to abide by the procedures set up for the waterboardings.
"t is important that every application of the waterboard be thoroughly documented: how long each application (and the entire procedure) lasted, how much water was used in the process," read a memo from May 10, 2005.
Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, the only other detainee known to be waterboarded, was not discussed in the memos.
The Times wrote that until the release of the memos, "the precise number" of 286 total waterboardings was not known.
And the precise number of waterboarding sessions is still not known. What is known is that Mohammed was not waterboarded 183 times.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/...rboarded-times/
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109 |
You sure you haven't read Vince Flynn?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,930
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,930 |
Thanks Jules, that article sheds a bit more light on this "terrible torture" the u.s. supposedly used an unbelievably high number of times.......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
For Phil, I gotta tell you, when you start defending terroristic or murderous type of people by being offended that people call them inhuman or monsters, I have to wonder what your motivation is. You do understand the rational behind what they are called, right?
I think you and I have gone to bat on this issue before...
How is it 'defending' them to say that they are, in fact, humans, and not some evil, scaly monster?
They are human beings...they once possessed innocence, once had parents who likely had high hopes for them...is that defending them in any way shape or form to admit those glaringly obvious facts?
I'm not offended by those names...I just think it's an easy out. 'Oh, well, he's just an evil monster!'. No, he wasn't. He was a human being. Face facts.
Something happened along the way...but no one wants to admit that. They just want to dehumanize them, because it's easier than trying to reach an understanding.
I'm not trying to absolve them...I'm just saying that we'd be better off in the long-run if we examined things instead of saying 'oh, they're just evil' and moving on.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,070
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,070 |
McCain Reacts To KSM Being Waterboarded 183 Times: ‘One Is Too Much. Waterboarding Is Torture’
This morning on Fox News, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) responded to the startling information -- first noted by blogger Marcy Wheeler -- that detainee Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was waterboarded 183 times. "It's unacceptable," McCain said, adding: One is too much. Waterboarding is torture, period. I can ensure you that once enough physical pain is inflicted on someone, they will tell that interrogator whatever they think they want to hear. And most importantly, it serves as a great propaganda tool for those who recruit people to fight against us.
McCain later reiterated his point, "The image of the United States of America throughout the world is a recruiting tool for Islamic extremists." Watch it:
web page
GM strong...
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,930
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,930 |
He may be correct. He certainly is entitled to his opinion, as are you, me, and anyone else.
However, let's get the facts straight. The perp was NOT boarded 183 times.
Also, from the article: he said it was a "serious mistake" for the Obama administration to release the torture memos. "The release of these memos helps no one, doesn't help America's image, does not help us address the issue."
For a cynic, one might think "yeah, he's against torture - when he's asked in public about it" And that's fine. But, he did support a bill that allowed it, i.e. "McCain touted his sponsorship of the Detainee Treatment Act, which "prohibited torture." In fact, that legislation contained a loophole permitting CIA agents to continue engaging in torture."
Now, that leads me to conclude one of 2 things: 1, McCain is against torture period, and forgot to read the legislation he supported that allowed it, OR 2, McCain was cornered on his belief's and he did the politically correct thing - said he was against it even though he was for it.
I think he pulled a John Kerry on us.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,276
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,276 |
Quote:
Something happened along the way...but no one wants to admit that.
I dont think that anyone here is that dumb to think nothing happened in the live's of these ppl....are they messed up?...Yes, but to say we think nothing happened to make them that way is just a way to help you cope with it?
And if you do your research, you will find that most can not be helped. But back to the thread....you , we , all need to know that life is not faire!, and that bad thing's happen and, tho it may seem wrong...sometime's it has to happen to aid those in the world to feel safe. Am I for it? Heck yes!....Do I like it NO! but if it help's other's and save's live's.....Then YES.
JMHO......Not trying to be an azz or start a fight......God bless the USA 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543 |
Quote:
However, let's get the facts straight. The perp was NOT boarded 183 times.
I don't want to take the time to do it and cut and paste the articles, but remember this, it's FOX that is telling us that he was NOT waterboarded 183 times and they are completely bias..
If you go to google, type in: Waterboarding 183 times
You will get a host of different articles by equally bias (the other way) news organizations that say it was indeed 183 DIFFERENT times
Personally, I don't really know what to believe,, it is what it is.....
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,276
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,276 |
Did you read the article Jules posted?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 43,543 |
Yeah, that's the one by Fox news... What I'm saying is that there is alternate views... and I don't actually know which is true.... do you?
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,930
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,930 |
Quote:
Yeah, that's the one by Fox news... What I'm saying is that there is alternate views... and I don't actually know which is true.... do you?
So, the view that the "waterboarded" person himself isn't valid? I would find it odd, if not pathetic, that fox news would report what the person that had been water boarded had said to be inaccurate, wouldn't you?
Now, granted, I don't watch cnbc, cbs, nbc, abc, msnbc, etc, but my guess is, if this guy had been waterboarded 183 time, and fox said "no, he wasn't", well......I would guess all the other stations would be all over fox. Don't you think?
Or, is it possible all the other stations misrepresented the "truth". Whatever. The guy that got "tortured" had red cross members watching (oh, did you realize that the red cross witnesses agree with the guys statement that he had been boarded only a few times?)
Oh well, the OTHER stations must be telling the truth, right? Because Fox never does. Even if the guy himself says otherwise....even if members of the red cross say otherwise.....yup, fox is lying. 
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum CIA Waterboarding Uncovered 2nd
Wave Attack on L.A.
|
|
