waterboarding

wrote in message
...
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 08:38:45 -0500, Dave LaCourse
wrote:

On Fri, 28 Dec 2007 19:24:29 -0800, rw
wrote:

It's torture. Plain and simple.

I am so disgusted with our government.

Put it this way:

If waterboarding would save the life of your wife, children, and
boyfriend, would you be in favor of it? Yeah, me too.

Torture is pain.

Have you even been "tortured?" (and no, reading posts on ROFF doesn't
count...)

There is no pain in waterboarding.

Have you ever been waterboarded?

And it lasts only 25 seconds.

Not necessarily. It depends on the person being boarded and the
technique(s) used.

If it saves lives, waterboard away.

On that, we agree.

Nice troll, btw. d;o)

Hmmm...much like the definition of "torture," the definition of "nice"
seems to be a rather hard-to-pin-down target...

Sorta like trying to pin down a dicklet stance on any subject in the world,
huh?

Wolfgang
who can see no reason in the world why there might not be circumstances in
which slowly twisting the heads off a dozen or so small children could save
a few lives.

"Dave LaCourse" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 16:42:32 -0500, "Opus--Mark H. Bowen"
wrote:

I can only suppose that you wouldn't have problem with the so-called
enemies
of the US torturing our troops at will as well. I mean it could save the
lives of our enemies troops.

What are you talking about, nitwit. They ARE torturing our troops,
and not for info, but just for the pleasure of it. Where the hell
have you been for the past few years? I know you live in a backward
town in backward section of a great state, but surely they have tv,
radio, newspapers.

My neice's son was killed there last year. He was killed outright
while taking down a couple of al qaeda. His two friends were not so
lucky. They were captured and tortured to death.

Waterboarding causes NO pain, leaves NO mark, draws NO blood. OTOH,
cutting off the genitals and heads of our GI's DOES.

You're a fool, Mark. You can get all the formal education you desire,
but you will remain a fool and a looser until the day you die.

The point, you indescribable idiot, is not that it happens.....no one has
contested that.....but that YOU! not only condone but RECOMMEND the torture
of American terrorists along with all the rest. And you may rest assured
that the whole world is listening to you.

Wolfgang
who, after several days off, is hardly surprised to note (once again) that
stupidity knows no holidays.

wrote in message
...
On Sat, 29 Dec 2007 06:53:59 -0800, rw
wrote:

Dave LaCourse wrote:

There is no double standard. They practice REAL torture. Ask John
McCain.

Ask John McCain how he feels about waterboarding. He's the only one of
the pathetic bunch of Republican candidates who has the guts to call it
for what it is.

If waterboarding isn't torture why did the US prosecute and convict a
Japanese officer of war crimes for doing it?

The US didn't prosecute him (solely, if at all) for "waterboarding,"
they prosecuted him for a number of types of torture, including "water
torture" (that probably _included_ but was not limited to
waterboarding), burning, beating, etc. of POWs and civilians, including
children (done solely for amusement) as well as stealing Red Cross
packages intended for POWs. And they didn't hang him, he was sentenced
to 10-20 years at hard labor.

Now we know who in ROFF is in favor of torture and who is against it. No
surprises.

I seriously any group of "we" that includes "you" knows much about much
in the real world outside of a sheltered academic environ...

Fortunately, we have you to explain the real world to us.

And there "we" are,

Yeah.

Wolfgang

"Fishin Technician" wrote in
message ...

Somewhere I think waterboarding fits into this somewhere in what is
written below....

\-"-A-r-e- -w-e- -f-i-g-h-t-i-n-g- -a- -w-a-r- -o-n- -t-e-r-r-o-r-
-o-r- -a-r-e-n-'-t- -w-e-?- -W-a-s- -i-t- -o-r- -w-a-s- -i-t- -n-o-t-
-s-t-a-r-t-e-d- -b-y- -I-s-l-a-m-i-c- -p-e-o-p-l-e- -w-h-o-
-b-r-o-u-g-h-t- -i-t- -t-o- -o-u-r- -s-h-o-r-e-s- -o-n-
-[-F-O-N-T-=-V-e-r-d-a-n-a-]-[-C-O-L-O-R-=-r-e-d-]-[-F-O-N-T-=-V-e-r-d-a-n-a-]-S-e-p-t-e-m-b-e-r-
-1-1-,- -2-0-0-1-[-/-F-O-N-T-]-[-/-C-O-L-O-R-]-[-/-F-O-N-T-]- ?

Were people from all over the world, mostly Americans, not brutally
murdered that day, in downtown ?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-comffice:smarttags" /st1:City
w:st="on"Manhattan/st1:City , across the Potomac from our nation's
capitol and in a field in st1:State w:st="on"st1lace
w:st="on"Pennsylvania/st1lace/st1:State?

Did nearly three thousand men, women and children die a horrible,
burning or crushing death that day, or didn't they?

And I'm supposed to care that a copy of the Koran was "desecrated" when
an overworked American soldier kicked it or got it wet?... Well, I
don't. I don't care at all .

I'll start caring when Osama bin Laden turns himself in and repents for
incinerating all those innocent people on 9/11.

I'll care about the Koran when the fanatics in the Middle East start
caring about the Holy Bible, the mere possession of which is a crime in
Saudi Arabia

I'll care when these thugs tell the world they are sorry for hacking
off Nick Berg's head while Berg screamed through his gurgling slashed
throat.

I'll care when the cowardly so-called "insurgents" in
st1:country-region w:st="on"st1lace
w:st="on"Iraq/st1lace/st1:country-region come out and fight like
men instead of disrespecting their own religion by hiding in mosques.

I'll care when the mindless zealots who blow themselves up in search of
nirvana care about the innocent children within range of their suicide
bombs.
I'll care when the American media stops pretending that their First
Amendment liberties are somehow derived from international law instead
of the United States Constitution's Bill of Rights.

In the meantime, when I hear a story about a brave marine roughing up
an Iraqi terrorist to obtain information, know this: I don't care .

When I see a fuzzy photo of a pile of naked Iraqi prisoners who have
been humiliated in what amounts to a college-hazing incident, rest
assured: I don't care .

When I see a wounded terrorist get shot in the head when he is told not
to move because he might be booby-trapped, you can take it to the bank:
I don't care.

When I hear that a prisoner, who was issued a Koran and a prayer mat,
and fed "special" food that is paid for by my tax dollars, is
complaining that his holy book is being "mishandled," you can absolutely
believe in your heart of hearts: I don't care .

And oh, by the way, I've noticed that sometimes it's spelled "Koran"
and other times "Quran." Well, Jimmy Crack Corn and-you guessed it I
don't care!!

If you agree with this viewpoint, pass this on to all your E-mail
friends. Sooner or later, it'll get to the pe ople responsible for this
ridiculous behavior!

If you don't agree, then by all means hit the delete button. Should you
choose the latter, then please don't complain when more atrocities
committed by radical Muslims happen here in our great Country! And may I
add:

"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a
difference in the world. But, the Marines don't have that problem." --
Ronald Reagan

I have another quote that I would like to add AND.......I hope you
forward all this.

"If we ever forget that we're One Nation Under God, then we will be a
nation gone under." Also by.. Ronald Reagan

One last thought for the day:

In case we find ourselves Starting to believe all the Anti-American
sentiment and negativity, we should remember st1:country-region
w:st="on"st1lace w:st="on"England/st1lace/st1:country-region
's Prime Minister Tony Blair's words during a recent interview. When
asked by on e of his Parliament members why he believes so much in
st1:country-region w:st="on"st1lace
w:st="on"America/st1lace/st1:country-region, he said: "A simple
way to take measure of a country is to look at how many want in... And
how many want out."

Only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you:
1. Jesus Christ
2. The American G. I.

One died for your soul, the other for your freedom.

YOU MIGHT WANT TO PASS THIS ON, AS MANY SEEM TO FORGET BOTH OF THEM.
AMEN?xml:namespace prefix = o ns =
\"urn:schemas-microsoft-comfficeffice\" /o/o

F/T AND I APPROVE OF THIS MESSAGE!!


--
Fishin Technician

Moron.

Wolfgang

wrote in message
...
On 31 Dec 2007 20:44:53 GMT, Scott Seidman
wrote:

wrote in news:g8kin3hqq7cdb1rbdh6kqr6g26gsd7q5sa@
4ax.com:

, absent a bilateral agreement to not use such techniques,


Isn't that what the Geneva Convention is??

Another overly broad question, but IAC, when did al-Q'ueda and the like
become signatories to the Geneva Convention? And also IAC, that brings
a whole 'nuther aspect into the discussion - the legal aspects of
(conventional) warfare. If that's the matter under discussion, it's
simple: US personnel are under no legal prohibition from waterboarding
al-Q'ueda operatives who aren't activated, regular members, and captured
in the uniform, of certain countries or forces. And if they are such,
depending on what they were doing when captured, they are subject to
summary execution.

DAMN! you are funny.

Wolfgang

wrote in message
...
On 31 Dec 2007 14:55:17 GMT, Scott Seidman
wrote:

wrote in news:t68fn3lev2rqn8gtb2e18kpi0b77gp1icr@
4ax.com:

Take, for example, the
recent coverage of the ex-CIA agent's information - he states plainly
that it is effective, but he considers it "torture" and is opposed to it
being done. But many or most of those (but importantly, not all)
opposed to "torture" claim that "torture" isn't effective or reliable as
a method of gaining information.


Fine-- if an agent believes that a "24"-like scenario is occurring, where
thousands could be saved if nastiness is performed, let him proceed
knowing
that he could go to jail for a long time.

He or she would be doing just that if they are proceeding under their
own authority.

Let him know he needs to look
his citizens in the eye and say "I tortured someone to save you,"

Er...no...

and wonder if they'll understand.

What they might or might not "understand" is not an issue.

Let him wonder if he'll be pardoned or not.

No.

Let him wonder if he'll be tried in an international court.

Absolutely, positively no way, no how.

Perhaps with all this in mind, that agent (or possibly "contractor", which
is even more disgusting) would be in the proper frame of mind to make the
decision about whether to torture a fellow human being.

No, if anyone faced with using extreme methods of interrogation isn't
personally and internally conflicted about doing it, regardless of
external repercussions or lack thereof, they aren't suited to be using
such methods because they are not capable of fully understanding the
gravity of what they are doing. If I were put in the position of being
a "sign-off" to give authorization to waterboard someone, I would not
allow anyone who I wasn't personally convinced was uneasy with even the
request and who would proceed with internal conflict and extreme
trepidation to so much as be in the room while the technique was used.
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.

Well, you need not concern yourself overmuch with any of the amateurs here
****ing around with any of this stuff. We are all content to leave it to
our own one and only obvious professional. For that matter, we amateurs
won't be ****ing around with much of anything so long as you are here to
explain it all to us in your typically clear and unequivocal manner.


Imbecile.

Wolfgang

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

"daytripper" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 31 Dec 2007 21:19:16 -0500, JR wrote:

wrote:

.....

Happy Holidays,

Same to you.

...and on a more serious note - do you doubt that it is effective?

Yes.

Here's an interesting thing: The debate, seemingly and for most, is
not over its effectiveness in making people disclose information, but
rather, whether or not it is or isn't "torture."

I don't think that's true. No one doubts that it is highly
effective at making people disclose *information," only that it
is effective at making people disclose the *truth.*

- JR

That's true.

For instance, if *I* was being waterboarded, the very first double-naught
spy
I'd give up would be Richard.

The solution to all of this mess (and I am truly appalled that none of you
has figured it out yet) is for everyone who has a question to offer it to
dicklet who, as we all know, is in possession of the whole truth (yes, about
ALL of it) and will willingly (nay, GLADLY).....and at great length.....give
it up sans coercion of any sort to anyone who is interested. Granted, this
will necessarily be a vanishingly small audience, but this is more than made
up for by the vast numbers who couldn't possibly care less about nothing
much in particular.

/daytripper (and then I'd name the rest of you scurvy dogs ;-)

I beat you to it. I named names before anybody bothered to ask.....and will
continue to do so as long as the possibility of discomfort looms.

Wolfgang
who loves ya?

"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

O.k.

Wolfgang
who has long made it a matter of policy never to disagree about the
disagreeability of something disagreeable with someone who has been
subjected to it.

"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.

Of such assurances is certainty born. Congratulations, you are the first
person in the history of this newsgroup to convince everyone of the validity
and truth of a proposition which they had hitherto flatly rejected.

Wolfgang
who suspects there is more than one person on this planet confused about
whether he was waterboarded or beheaded.