waterboarding

"rb608" wrote in message
news:%xsdj.6464$oh5.2546@trndny08...
"Dave LaCourse" wrote in message
If waterboarding would save the life of your wife, children, and
boyfriend, would you be in favor of it? Yeah, me too.

Turn that around. Suppose your wife or child was mistakenly taken captive
by a foreign government who thought they had valuable information. Would
it be okay if they were waterboarded? Hell no; and that's the same
outrage you should have when our country does it.

With all due respect, the false choice you posit is bull****. It assumes
that you *know* you have the right person, you *know* they possess the
information you seek, you *know* that information is valid and timely, and
you *know* they will give you the correct information under torture. But,
the fact is, you can know none of that with certainty before you begin the
torture. Further, even with information you glean in that manner, you
can't be certain it is truth or made up to stop the torture. IOW, you're
going on an inhuman fishing expedition (OBROFF).

Torture is one of those crimes that simply cannot be excused. There can
be no double standard. If we can do it to them, they can do it to us. If
we can do it to save our children, they can do it to our children with the
same moral authority. I cannot excuse or condone that.

Joe F.

sure beats beheading

"Ray or Bobbi Adams" wrote in message
...

"rb608" wrote in message
news:%xsdj.6464$oh5.2546@trndny08...
"Dave LaCourse" wrote in message
If waterboarding would save the life of your wife, children, and
boyfriend, would you be in favor of it? Yeah, me too.

Turn that around. Suppose your wife or child was mistakenly taken
captive by a foreign government who thought they had valuable
information. Would it be okay if they were waterboarded? Hell no; and
that's the same outrage you should have when our country does it.

With all due respect, the false choice you posit is bull****. It assumes
that you *know* you have the right person, you *know* they possess the
information you seek, you *know* that information is valid and timely,
and you *know* they will give you the correct information under torture.
But, the fact is, you can know none of that with certainty before you
begin the torture. Further, even with information you glean in that
manner, you can't be certain it is truth or made up to stop the torture.
IOW, you're going on an inhuman fishing expedition (OBROFF).

Torture is one of those crimes that simply cannot be excused. There can
be no double standard. If we can do it to them, they can do it to us.
If we can do it to save our children, they can do it to our children with
the same moral authority. I cannot excuse or condone that.

Joe F.

sure beats beheading

Not necessarily.

Op

On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 16:34:05 -0500, "Opus--Mark H. Bowen"
wrote:

Not necessarily.

You would rather have your head chopped off than be waterboarded?
Hahahahahaha. You are a nitwit.

Davie

"Dave LaCourse" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 16:34:05 -0500, "Opus--Mark H. Bowen"
wrote:

Not necessarily.

You would rather have your head chopped off than be waterboarded?
Hahahahahaha. You are a nitwit.

Davie

Poor little Davie. You can't seem to think beyond your hatred.

You seen not everyone who is waterboarded survives the ordeal. I believe
that I would much rather my head severed from my body and die instantly,
rather than die a slow and torturous death, akin to slowly drowning. You,
OTOH, will undoubtedly know exactly what it feels like to have your head cut
from your shoulders and tell me that it is much more painful to lose ones
head in that manner than it is to slowly die from drowing, which I am sure
you have done at least once in your miserable life, as you are obviously
brain-dead!

HTH

Op

On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 19:23:02 -0500, "Opus--Mark H. Bowen"
wrote:

You seen not everyone who is waterboarded survives the ordeal.

What are you trying to say, nitwit?

Waterboarding does not kill. Leaves no mark. Draws no blood. There
isn't even pain. If you would take waterboarding over decapitation,
you really are a nitwit.

Davie

"Dave LaCourse" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 19:23:02 -0500, "Opus--Mark H. Bowen"
wrote:

You seen not everyone who is waterboarded survives the ordeal.

What are you trying to say, nitwit?

That you pick out a typo ("seen" should have, obviously, read "see"), and
pretend that you didn't understand what I had written, says volumes about
your intellectual aptitude and your character.

It's not what I am saying, it's what you are saying that is so disturbing.

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Investigat...ory?id=1322866

Waterboarding does not kill. Leaves no mark. Draws no blood. There
isn't even pain. If you would take waterboarding over decapitation,
you really are a nitwit.

So you claim that no one has ever died as a result of waterboarding and that
it causes no pain, right.

Algerian War
"The technique was also used during the Algerian War (1954-1962). The French
journalist Henri Alleg, who was subjected to waterboarding by French
paratroopers in Algeria in 1957, is one of only a few people to have
described in writing the first-hand experience of being waterboarded. His
book The Question, published in 1958 with a preface by Jean-Paul Sartre (and
subsequently banned in France until the end of the Algerian War in 1962)
discusses the experience of being strapped to a plank, having his head
wrapped in cloth and positioned beneath a running tap:

The rag was soaked rapidly. Water flowed everywhe in my mouth, in my
nose, all over my face. But for a while I could still breathe in some small
gulps of air. I tried, by contracting my throat, to take in as little water
as possible and to resist suffocation by keeping air in my lungs for as long
as I could. But I couldn't hold on for more than a few moments. I had the
impression of drowning, and a terrible agony, that of death itself, took
possession of me. In spite of myself, all the muscles of my body struggled
uselessly to save me from suffocation. In spite of myself, the fingers of
both my hands shook uncontrollably. "That's it! He's going to talk," said a
voice.

The water stopped running and they took away the rag. I was able to
breathe. In the gloom, I saw the lieutenants and the captain, who, with a
cigarette between his lips, was hitting my stomach with his fist to make me
throw out the water I had swallowed.[29]

Alleg has stated that the incidence of "accidental" death of prisoners being
subjected to waterboarding in Algeria was "very frequent.""
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterboarding

Hey, think of it like this. You're in very despicable company: "The Khmer
Rouge at the Tuol Sleng prison in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, used waterboarding
as a method of torture between 1975 and 1979."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterboarding

Op


Davie

In article ,
"Opus--Mark H. Bowen" wrote:

"Ray or Bobbi Adams" wrote in message
...

"rb608" wrote in message
news:%xsdj.6464$oh5.2546@trndny08...
"Dave LaCourse" wrote in message
If waterboarding would save the life of your wife, children, and
boyfriend, would you be in favor of it? Yeah, me too.

Turn that around. Suppose your wife or child was mistakenly taken
captive by a foreign government who thought they had valuable
information. Would it be okay if they were waterboarded? Hell no; and
that's the same outrage you should have when our country does it.

With all due respect, the false choice you posit is bull****. It assumes
that you *know* you have the right person, you *know* they possess the
information you seek, you *know* that information is valid and timely,
and you *know* they will give you the correct information under torture.
But, the fact is, you can know none of that with certainty before you
begin the torture. Further, even with information you glean in that
manner, you can't be certain it is truth or made up to stop the torture.
IOW, you're going on an inhuman fishing expedition (OBROFF).

Torture is one of those crimes that simply cannot be excused. There can
be no double standard. If we can do it to them, they can do it to us.
If we can do it to save our children, they can do it to our children with
the same moral authority. I cannot excuse or condone that.

Joe F.

sure beats beheading

Not necessarily.

Op

As a guy who got waterboarded at SERE let me assure you that beheading
(which I admit to not having endured) is likely worse.

"Allen" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Opus--Mark H. Bowen" wrote:

"Ray or Bobbi Adams" wrote in message
...

"rb608" wrote in message
news:%xsdj.6464$oh5.2546@trndny08...
"Dave LaCourse" wrote in message
If waterboarding would save the life of your wife, children, and
boyfriend, would you be in favor of it? Yeah, me too.

Turn that around. Suppose your wife or child was mistakenly taken
captive by a foreign government who thought they had valuable
information. Would it be okay if they were waterboarded? Hell no;
and
that's the same outrage you should have when our country does it.

With all due respect, the false choice you posit is bull****. It
assumes
that you *know* you have the right person, you *know* they possess the
information you seek, you *know* that information is valid and timely,
and you *know* they will give you the correct information under
torture.
But, the fact is, you can know none of that with certainty before you
begin the torture. Further, even with information you glean in that
manner, you can't be certain it is truth or made up to stop the
torture.
IOW, you're going on an inhuman fishing expedition (OBROFF).

Torture is one of those crimes that simply cannot be excused. There
can
be no double standard. If we can do it to them, they can do it to us.
If we can do it to save our children, they can do it to our children
with
the same moral authority. I cannot excuse or condone that.

Joe F.

sure beats beheading

Not necessarily.

Op

As a guy who got waterboarded at SERE let me assure you that beheading
(which I admit to not having endured) is likely worse.

Are we assuming that everyone who is waterboarded survives?

If you were to know that you would not survive the torture, would you still
choose waterboarding?

Op

On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 19:28:34 -0500, "Opus--Mark H. Bowen"
wrote:

Are we assuming that everyone who is waterboarded survives?

If you were to know that you would not survive the torture, would you still
choose waterboarding?

There is no record of anyone dying from waterboarding. And, pray
tell, how the hell are you going to know whether you are going to live
or die during *real* torture. No one in the hell holes of Viet Nam
knew wether they were going to die, and they fought to survive.

Davie

"Dave LaCourse" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 19:28:34 -0500, "Opus--Mark H. Bowen"
wrote:

Are we assuming that everyone who is waterboarded survives?

If you were to know that you would not survive the torture, would you
still
choose waterboarding?

There is no record of anyone dying from waterboarding.

Wrong again! You really should learn to do some basic research before you
make outrageous claims.

And, pray
tell, how the hell are you going to know whether you are going to live
or die during *real* torture.

What does knowing whether one is or is not going to survive torture have to
do with the question I asked Allen?

It was a very direct and specific question pertaining to the *real* torture
known as waterboarding and survivability was not assumed?

I know it's really more than anyone should ask of you, but attempt a
coherent thought once in a while.

The question to Allen was whether he'd rather die by waterboarding, or by
having his head severed from his shoulders, not whether he knew if he would
survive being tortured. People have actually died during waterboarding,
whether you want to believe it is irrelavant.

No one in the hell holes of Viet Nam
knew wether they were going to die, and they fought to survive.

And?

Davie