waterboarding

wrote in message
news
On 31 Dec 2007 19:49:08 GMT, Scott Seidman
wrote:

wrote in news:6tdin3lcg0mtp82eu20lg5djhs6qikk85u@
4ax.com:

This isn't something for amateurs to be ****ing around with, a subject
for cavalier attitudes or certainty of position (for or against), and
it
damned sure is not something for sadists to use to get their jollies.


No, just mercenary contractors. Keep in mind that we've been talking
about what US forces and employess are allowed to do. Nobody's been
asking what the contractors are allowed to do, and they seem exempt from
most laws.

FWIW, I knew a guy about 15 years ago in Cleveland, and I have zero ways
to confirm his story, but he claimed he was an interrogator in Vietnam.
He was trained specifically in this business, and there was something
much like an apprenticeship program in place. This guy was kept on some
pretty heavy duty medications, and was at the time semi functional in an
allied health position in the VA.

Once, he described some of the things (hey says) he's done. He said he
was flown from place to place to question prisoners, and that before he
ever got to a site, the prisoners were often placed out in public, seated
and bound, with a bucket over their heads and a wrench hanging around
their necks. Everyone who passed by would hit the bucket with the
wrench-- and this could have gone on for days. The stuff he said would
go on after he got there was absolutely bone chilling.

I have no way of knowing if he was telling the truth or not, but after a
bit of googling around, I just found an account that was eerily like what
he said 15 years ago. http://homepage.ntlworld.com/jksonc/docs/vietnam-
nviuswcv-19701201.html, and look for "They used one as a scare
mechanism...". It's so close, it could have been him testifying. He was
certainly screwed up enough for this to be true

Um, OK...I wasn't an interrogator in Vietnam and I'm pretty sure I don't
and didn't know this guy, in Cleveland 15 years ago or otherwise, so I
really have no basis of commenting upon his story.

O.k......no reason to comment.....no comment.....got it.

But if you simply want comments, here's mine:

Um.........

You seem to be hinting around that this
guy's stories amounted to him having committed what could arguably be
"war crimes." I would offer that unless you knew this guy REALLY well
and had some commonality of experience with him,

Hm.....

How well is "REALLY" well? Would that have to be as well as you know
everybody who does, says, or thinks anything? Or would a mere lifetime
acquaintance and an actaul familiarity with some sort of comment, thought,
or action performed somewhere by someone for one reason or another at some
time be sufficient?

and while it is
possible that someone who had done such would sit around bragging,
chatting, or talking about it, I'd be dubious of someone discussing such
with a mere social friend or acquaintance.

Correct. One should only take seriously those few who really KNOW about such
matters and offer their comments in Usenet.

Happy Holidays,

Dumbass.

Wolfgang