Jesse Ventura on Larry King Live 5/11/09
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/jesse-ventura-you-give-me-water-board-dick
VENTURA: ... he's the worst president in my lifetime. So Barack Obama, President Obama inherited something I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy. You know? Two wars, an economy that's borderline depression. So it's far too early to judge him 100 days in. I think if you have me back about two years from now, I can give you a much better of how he's doing.
VENTURA: (on waterboarding) It's drowning. It gives you the complete sensation that you are drowning. It is no good, because you -- I'll put it to you this way, you give me a water board, Dick Cheney and one hour, and I'll have him confess to the Sharon Tate murders.
KING: Even though you know it's not going to happen -- even though before it, you know you're not going to drown.
VENTURA: You don't know it. If it's -- if it's done wrong, you certainly could drown. You could swallow your tongue. You could do a whole bunch of stuff. If it's it done wrong or -- it's torture, Larry. It's torture.
VENTURA: I don't have a lot of respect for Dick Cheney. Here's a guy who got five deferments from the Vietnam War. Clearly, he's a coward. He wouldn't go when it was his time to go. And now he is a chicken hawk. Now he is this big tough guy who wants this hardcore policy. And he's the guy that sanctioned all this torture by calling it enhanced interrogation.
I addressed this as a reply here (http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=13441.msg130798#msg130798)
But yeah, I'd listen to him over Cheney or other non-military types. Especially since he went through the SERE training and knows what it feels like.
and...AND...
Who's got time to bleed? He ain't got time to bleed.
(http://www.dvdtimes.co.uk/images/KevinGilvear/predator3.jpg)
So, this guy is the new foreign policy whiz?
(http://www.insidesocal.com/tv/jesse-ventura1.jpg)
I'm not inclined to mock a former Navy SEAL. Those guys could kill you with an eyebrow.
Quote from: Conan71 on May 13, 2009, 02:59:05 PM
So, this guy is the new foreign policy whiz?
(http://www.insidesocal.com/tv/jesse-ventura1.jpg)
awesome pic.
I wonder what these folks' take on torture would be had we had someone in custody that had information about the impending 9/11 attacks:
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_GwDYFxb8piY/RuVv2YIHNaI/AAAAAAAAAxo/XUO_PSVhEv8/s400/9_11_jumpers.jpg)
Or how about a little closer to home:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8e/Murrah_Building_-_Aerial.jpg)
Tell me again about how horrible waterboarding and caterpillering someone is?
Quote from: rwarn17588 on May 13, 2009, 03:05:01 PM
I'm not inclined to mock a former Navy SEAL. Those guys could kill you with an eyebrow.
I don't have to mock him, he does that well enough himself. Actually he was a UDT, not a SEAL.
Quote from: Conan71 on May 13, 2009, 03:32:06 PM
I don't have to mock him, he does that well enough himself. Actually he was a UDT, not a SEAL.
True, but UDT's are allowed to use SEAL as a title by Navy edict because of the fact that the UDT's were actually a historical precursor to the SEALs but there was some overlap. UDTs were discontinued in 1983 but started in WWII. SEAL teams started in 1962.
Ventura's point, which he specifically stated during that Larry King interview, was that waterboarding and torture doesn't work because people will say anything to make the torture stop.
If you are being tortured, you will say what you think they want to hear in order to make them stop. Hence, his claim he could make Cheney confess to some murder he obviously had nothing to do with.
Guido, do you presume to know the opinions of 9/11 or Murrah building victims?
Can we get him to move to Oklahoma?
Maybe get him to run against Inhofe?
I know that would be like replacing Odie the dog with T.R., but hey, I can dream, can't I?
Troofer+Professional Wrestler= No Credibility....
Quote from: Breadburner on May 14, 2009, 07:16:52 AM
Troofer+Professional Wrestler= No Credibility....
I'd give him a helluva lot more credibility than 'Dick' Cheney....when has 'Dick' ever submitted to the SERE?
Never?
You neocons never cease to amaze me.
Intent is the key. Whether or not the prisoners are uniformed members of a signatory to the GC is also key.
Quote from: YoungTulsan on May 13, 2009, 11:06:22 PM
Guido, do you presume to know the opinions of 9/11 or Murrah building victims?
I have to presume...they are freakin dead. FAIL.
Quote from: Hoss on May 14, 2009, 08:13:53 AM
I'd give him a helluva lot more credibility than 'Dick' Cheney....when has 'Dick' ever submitted to the SERE?
Never?
You neocons never cease to amaze me.
I wouldn't put that much weight on the opinions of someone who A) mis-stated or over-stated his SEALs career according to others who were in the service with him. (Oh no! Conan is Swift-boating "The Body") B) Has never participated in a national security briefing. I'm quite well aware of the UDT lineage. It sounds better for him to say he was a SEAL than a frog. I'm not disparaging his service to the country, I appreciate he served, but saying someone who served in the SEALs or other special ops 40 years ago gives them more credibility than a VP who has been out of office for 3 months is total moronic BS.
I suspect we've gained quite a bit of information from "torture" that has kept us safe than we will ever be allowed to know. Playing political football with interrogation methods that protect our national security interests is bed-wetting at it's absolute worst.
We've got far bigger problems in the country right now than worrying about a few hundred asshat renegades being water-boarded. Why are we taking a limp-wristed approach to national security interests?
Quote from: Conan71 on May 14, 2009, 09:22:21 AM
I'm not disparaging his service to the country, I appreciate he served, but saying someone who served in the SEALs or other special ops 40 years ago gives them more credibility than a VP who has been out of office for 3 months is total moronic BS.
I suspect we've gained quite a bit of information from "torture" that has kept us safe than we will ever be allowed to know. Playing political football with interrogation methods that protect our national security interests is bed-wetting at it's absolute worst.
For all the complaining about a "political football" and torture, I find it fascinating that Cheney can't stop flapping his gums about it. Some real serious charges about him are starting to dribble out. If I were his attorney, I'd tell him to shut the hell up, before he incriminates himself (if he hasn't already done so). At the very least, Cheney's backing himself into a corner, big time.
Quote from: Conan71 on May 14, 2009, 09:22:21 AM
I suspect we've gained quite a bit of information from "torture" that has kept us safe than we will ever be allowed to know. Playing political football with interrogation methods that protect our national security interests is bed-wetting at it's absolute worst.
We've got far bigger problems in the country right now than worrying about a few hundred asshat renegades being water-boarded. Why are we taking a limp-wristed approach to national security interests?
I suspect you're wrong... I suspect we are not taking "a limp-wristed approach" but the lies will continue from so-called patriotic dipwads who don't understand there is an honest argument here... and it is not some sort of made for media spectacle between neocon warmongers and liberal surrender monkeys...
Nice pic of the Murrah Building, Guido...
Should we have waterboarded the right-wing anti-government extremists to find John Doe #2 and others who helped bomb the Murrah Building?
If we had waterboarded some of the muslim students in Norman a few hours/days/weeks after the time of the OKC bombing, what would they have told us? Would they have confessed? If they didn't confess, what kind of information would they have given us? Would it have been reliable?
Quote from: USRufnex on May 14, 2009, 11:36:16 AM
If we had waterboarded some of the muslim students in Norman a few hours/days/weeks after the time of the OKC bombing, what would they have told us? Would they have confessed? If they didn't confess, what kind of information would they have given us? Would it have been reliable?
Not to mention if it were a coerced confession, it would have compromised the entire integrity of the case. Torture in Chicago police interrogation rooms was the reason a bunch of death-row cases in Illinois was commuted.
You'd be pretty stupid to use torture on a suspect if you've already got the goods on him. There's no sense in risking taint in the investigation, nor planting doubt in a judge's or jury's ear about the evidence. You don't want to screw it up so bad that he goes free.
That's one big thing about torture -- if it gets out, your whole investigation or chances of a successful prosecution is screwed.
Quote from: USRufnex on May 14, 2009, 11:36:16 AM
I suspect you're wrong... I suspect we are not taking "a limp-wristed approach" but the lies will continue from so-called patriotic dipwads who don't understand there is an honest argument here... and it is not some sort of made for media spectacle between neocon warmongers and liberal surrender monkeys...
Nice pic of the Murrah Building, Guido...
Should we have waterboarded the right-wing anti-government extremists to find John Doe #2 and others who helped bomb the Murrah Building?
If we had waterboarded some of the muslim students in Norman a few hours/days/weeks after the time of the OKC bombing, what would they have told us? Would they have confessed? If they didn't confess, what kind of information would they have given us? Would it have been reliable?
Nice strawman...
You make it sound as if the military or CIA is gratuitously waterboarding anyone of arabic descent they feel like.
Quote from: Conan71 on May 14, 2009, 09:22:21 AM
I suspect we've gained quite a bit of information from "torture" that has kept us safe than we will ever be allowed to know.
Ill have to find the citation, but the record states that all useful intelligence obtained from detainees was acquired during normal questioning, and that the later torture produced no additional credible information.
Those deadheads......
Say what you may, he's the real deal.
Y'know, if torture is so damned great and effective, why aren't any the proponents advocating a U.S. withdrawal from the rules of the Geneva Convention?
Quote from: rwarn17588 on May 14, 2009, 11:47:30 AM
Not to mention if it were a coerced confession, it would have compromised the entire integrity of the case. Torture in Chicago police interrogation rooms was the reason a bunch of death-row cases in Illinois was commuted.
You'd be pretty stupid to use torture on a suspect if you've already got the goods on him. There's no sense in risking taint in the investigation, nor planting doubt in a judge's or jury's ear about the evidence. You don't want to screw it up so bad that he goes free.
That's one big thing about torture -- if it gets out, your whole investigation or chances of a successful prosecution is screwed.
Who cares about getting a conviction. Your treating terrorism like its a run-of-the-mill criminal investigation like fraud rather than an act of war. I was talking about waterboarding and caterpillering people that had knowledge of an impending attack and that obtaining that knowledge would save lives. The lengths that you and others go to change the subject from EITing AQ terrorists (whom have CONFESSED and take great joy in the killing of thousands of Americans) to essentially EITing the average American just minding their own business is mind boggling. Whose side are you on?
Quote from: patric on May 14, 2009, 12:13:25 PM
Ill have to find the citation, but the record states that all useful intelligence obtained from detainees was acquired during normal questioning, and that the later torture produced no additional credible information.
And that would be non-classified records. There's quite a bit we will never know, and for good reason.
Quote from: guido911 on May 14, 2009, 12:34:41 PM
Whose side are you on?
Well, the law's, for one thing. As a person who claims to be an attorney, I'd think you'd understand that.
Quote from: rwarn17588 on May 14, 2009, 12:56:33 PM
Well, the law's, for one thing. As a person who claims to be an attorney, I'd think you'd understand that.
If the laws (or interpretation thereof) were absolute, we wouldn't need attornies. ;)
Quote from: rwarn17588 on May 14, 2009, 12:56:33 PM
Well, the law's, for one thing. As a person who claims to be an attorney, I'd think you'd understand that.
The law's side? Well tell that to those in the photo I provided. And by the way, I do not "claim" to be a lawyer, I am one. But I'm an American first who could give a sh*t about AQ terrorist's alleged "rights", which plainly you do more than the lives of your countrymen. Oh, and spare me your sophistry and high brow "the law is more important the lawlessnes by government" screed. Placing an insect in the cell of a terrorist is not illegal or making him listen to the Barney theme song is not "torture". Shoot, Jesse "the Body" was apparently waterboarded as part of military training. I was placed in a gas chamber and gassed with real chemicals in basic training. Isn't that a war crime? Meh, what would you know about military training.
Quote from: guido911 on May 14, 2009, 01:14:03 PM
The law's side? Well tell that to those in the photo I provided. And by the way, I do not "claim" to be a lawyer, I am one. But I'm an American first who could give a sh*t about AQ terrorist's alleged "rights", which plainly you do more than the lives of your countrymen. Oh, and spare me your sophistry and high brow "the law is more important the lawlessnes by government" screed. Placing an insect in the cell of a terrorist is not illegal or making him listen to the Barney theme song is not "torture". Shoot, Jesse "the Body" was apparently waterboarded as part of military training. I was placed in a gas chamber and gassed with real chemicals in basic training. Isn't that a war crime? Meh, what would you know about military training.
THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED! YOU'VE BEEN DISABLED!
Quote from: guido911 on May 14, 2009, 12:34:41 PM
Who cares about getting a conviction. Your treating terrorism like its a run-of-the-mill criminal investigation like fraud rather than an act of war. I was talking about waterboarding and caterpillering people that had knowledge of an impending attack and that obtaining that knowledge would save lives. The lengths that you and others go to change the subject from EITing AQ terrorists (whom have CONFESSED and take great joy in the killing of thousands of Americans) to essentially EITing the average American just minding their own business is mind boggling. Whose side are you on?
Actually, you're dead wrong. Our country pioneered the "legalization" of warfare in the modern era, ie. the application of international law to warfare. The creation of the UN, the Geneva Conventions, etc . . . all of them were at our behest. The structure that we created helped make it possible for so many Nazis to be tried and found guilty of crimes against humanity of which they were certainly guilty. Without our support -- and our explicit embrace of the use of law to try and convict the ideological leaders of the movement -- Nuremburg might never have happened.
I'm not sure why I have to tell a lawyer this, but war and terrorism both have huge legal dimensions, and by using internationally recognized forms of torture, we've completely destroyed the ability to try these people. You can rant and rage and foam at the mouth all you want, but doing what I suspect you'd like -- a public execution perhaps? -- would be the final nail in the coffin of our moral standing with the world.
Essentially, you're saying we can do whatever we want to do with our prisoners because we know they're guilty, and because we're at war. But you're wrong. Even when we're at war, we're bound by laws. Laws which we ourselves created.
Quote from: FOTD on May 14, 2009, 01:18:39 PM
THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED! YOU'VE BEEN DISABLED!
I guess an elephant wouldn't notice a hamster, now would it?
Quote from: we vs us on May 14, 2009, 01:20:52 PM
Essentially, you're saying we can do whatever we want to do with our prisoners because we know they're guilty, and because we're at war. But you're wrong. Even when we're at war, we're bound by laws. Laws which we ourselves created.
Bullcrap that's not what I'm saying at all. I was ONLY talking about high level AQ terrorists that have knowledge of an impending attack that would jeopardize American lives. Don't change the damn subject. Also, are you honestly trying to compare waterboarding and caterpillering the people responsible for killing 3000 plus Americans to Nazis gassing and killing 6 million Jews and putting their bodies in ovens? Do me a favor Mr. Moral Equivalence, watch/rewatch Shindler's List to get some freakin perspective. THREE "MEN" WERE WATERBOARDED AND ONE WAS CATERPILLERED.
You, RW, and others that want to treat these bastards like criminal suspects rather that terrorists captured on the field of battle (which is war by the way, ask any soldier) are in a pre-9/11 mindset. More interested in protecting their rights than the lives of Americans.
Quote from: guido911 on May 14, 2009, 01:45:05 PM
Bullcrap that's not what I'm saying at all. I was ONLY talking about high level AQ terrorists that have knowledge of an impending attack that would jeopardize American lives. Don't change the damn subject. Also, are you honestly trying to compare waterboarding and caterpillering the people responsible for killing 3000 plus Americans to Nazis gassing and killing 6 million Jews and putting their bodies in ovens? Do me a favor Mr. Moral Equivalence, watch/rewatch Shindler's List to get some freakin perspective. THREE "MEN" WERE WATERBOARDED AND ONE WAS CATERPILLERED.
You, RW, and others that want to treat these bastards like criminal suspects rather that terrorists captured on the field of battle (which is war by the way, ask any soldier) are in a pre-9/11 mindset. More interested in protecting their rights than the lives of Americans.
You are forgetting all the people who got glowsticks up their asses.
Quote from: guido911 on May 14, 2009, 01:45:05 PM
You, RW, and others that want to treat these bastards like criminal suspects rather that terrorists captured on the field of battle (which is war by the way, ask any soldier) are in a pre-9/11 mindset.
What freaks me out is that you seem to be in a post-US mindset.
What I don't understand is why you want to throw out the system we've spent 250 hard years perfecting because of 9-11. If we capture a soldier on a field of battle, there are rules of engagement that we have to follow that guarantee him his rights vis a vis the Geneva Conventions. You were a soldier, you should remember that part. What you seem to be arguing, though, is that this isn't war, either. You seem to be arguing that this is a special kind of conflict where because we were attacked we get to decide when torture is right and when it isn't.
But you know what? We don't get to. High value detainee or not, we're bound by laws that we've explicitely fought for for decades. This isn't changing the subject, this IS the heart of the subject.
Quote from: Trogdor on May 14, 2009, 01:52:01 PM
You are forgetting all the people who got glowsticks up their asses.
Wow, can't win the argument, change the subject. Your talking about the prisoner abuses at Abu Ghraib, for which soldiers were prosecuted and jailedand rightfully so. This discussion was about obtaining information to thwart a mass casualty attack.
Answer this question (from Schumer): If someone had information that a member of your family was in a location near where a dirty bomb/nuke was stashed, would you dump water on that person's face or if appropriate put a caterpiller in his room or even shove a glowstick up his donkey to get that information that would save that member of your family?
Quote from: guido911 on May 14, 2009, 01:14:03 PM
And by the way, I do not "claim" to be a lawyer, I am one.
You've offered no proof that you're a lawyer. Until you do so, I will say that you claim to be a lawyer until it is so verified.
If if you were indeed a lawyer, you'd know that we're bound by the laws stemming from the Geneva Conventions. Your impotent rages don't change that. If you don't like the laws, then advocate for the U.S.'s withdrawal from the Geneva Conventions.
Quote from: guido911 on May 14, 2009, 02:23:59 PM
Wow, can't win the argument, change the subject. Your talking about the prisoner abuses at Abu Ghraib, for which soldiers were prosecuted and jailedand rightfully so. This discussion was about obtaining information to thwart a mass casualty attack.
Answer this question (from Schumer): If someone had information that a member of your family was in a location near where a dirty bomb/nuke was stashed, would you dump water on that person's face or if appropriate put a caterpiller in his room or even shove a glowstick up his donkey to get that information that would save that member of your family?
How many angels can you fit on the head of a pin?
There is no such thing as the ticking time bomb scenario, except on
24. You will never have perfect enough information -- in the moment you need to decide to do the deed -- to know that you will need to torture the info out of the person. That perfect knowledge exists only in hindsight and on TV. And you know what? What kind of gutless wonders are we? If we know -- we absolutely know for sure in our gut -- that it's necessary, do you think fear of prosecution would stop us? Fear of an assault and battery charge? I can tell you this, if I was in that situation and I was going to save thousands of lives, I'd go straight for the waterboard, and devil take the hindmost. No American jury would convict me.
Quote from: guido911 on May 14, 2009, 01:45:05 PM
Bullcrap that's not what I'm saying at all. I was ONLY talking about high level AQ terrorists that have knowledge of an impending attack that would jeopardize American lives. Don't change the damn subject. Also, are you honestly trying to compare waterboarding and caterpillering the people responsible for killing 3000 plus Americans to Nazis gassing and killing 6 million Jews and putting their bodies in ovens? Do me a favor Mr. Moral Equivalence, watch/rewatch Shindler's List to get some freakin perspective. THREE "MEN" WERE WATERBOARDED AND ONE WAS CATERPILLERED.
You, RW, and others that want to treat these bastards like criminal suspects rather that terrorists captured on the field of battle (which is war by the way, ask any soldier) are in a pre-9/11 mindset. More interested in protecting their rights than the lives of Americans.
NO.
Per usual, you're playing your little "conservatives are real Americans" bull mularkey.
Don't talk to me about pre-9/11 mindset.... after 9/11, our allies were solidly behind us.... after 9/11, George W. Bush had a golden opportunity to unite this country.... after the invasion of Afghanistan, instead of going after the terrorists and Bin Laden and the biggest exporter of 9/11 terrorists (Saudi Arabia), we gave the Saudis a pass and invaded Iraq.... he blew it, royally.
In the grand scheme of history, the waterboarding of a few terrorists is not going to be looked upon as much more than a mistake... and not as unjust as FDR's internment of Japanese Americans after Pearl Harbor...
The interesting part in all of this is Cheney, and why he's come out of the woodwork so forcefully to defend the torture regime. Especially when the sitting president (from the opposition party no less!) seems very very reluctant to pursue the issue any further and would really rather it just fade away.
Why won't Cheney let this die? I thought this was the guy who didn't give two smiles about his legacy.
Quote from: we vs us on May 14, 2009, 02:43:59 PM
How many angels can you fit on the head of a pin?
There is no such thing as the ticking time bomb scenario, except on 24. You will never have perfect enough information -- in the moment you need to decide to do the deed -- to know that you will need to torture the info out of the person. That perfect knowledge exists only in hindsight and on TV. And you know what? What kind of gutless wonders are we? If we know -- we absolutely know for sure in our gut -- that it's necessary, do you think fear of prosecution would stop us? Fear of an assault and battery charge? I can tell you this, if I was in that situation and I was going to save thousands of lives, I'd go straight for the waterboard, and devil take the hindmost. No American jury would convict me.
There's a great few mins of "The Fog of War" in which Robert McNamera claims that Curtis LeMay tells him if the United States had lost WWII, that he and many others would have been prosecuted for war crimes....
McNamara: Okay. Any military commander who is honest with himself, or with those he's speaking to, will admit that he has made mistakes in the application of military power. He's killed people unnecessarily — his own troops or other troops — through mistakes, through errors of judgment. A hundred, or thousands, or tens of thousands, maybe even a hundred thousand. But, he hasn't destroyed nations.
And the conventional wisdom is don't make the same mistake twice, learn from your mistakes. And we all do. Maybe we make the same mistake three times, but hopefully not four or five. They'll be no learning period with nuclear weapons. You make one mistake and you're going to destroy nations.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
McNamara: I think the issue is not so much incendiary bombs. I think the issue is: in order to win a war should you kill 100,000 people in one night, by firebombing or any other way? LeMay's answer would be clearly "Yes."
"McNamara, do you mean to say that instead of killing 100,000, burning to death 100,000 Japanese civilians in that one night, we should have burned to death a lesser number or none? And then had our soldiers cross the beaches in Tokyo and been slaughtered in the tens of thousands? Is that what you're proposing? Is that moral? Is that wise?"
Why was it necessary to drop the nuclear bomb if LeMay was burning up Japan? And he went on from Tokyo to firebomb other cities. 58% of Yokohama. Yokohama is roughly the size of Cleveland. 58% of Cleveland destroyed. Tokyo is roughly the size of New York. 51% percent of New York destroyed. 99% of the equivalent of Chattanooga, which was Toyama. 40% of the equivalent of Los Angeles, which was Nagoya. This was all done before the dropping of the nuclear bomb, which by the way was dropped by LeMay's command.
Proportionality should be a guideline in war. Killing 50% to 90% of the people of 67 Japanese cities and then bombing them with two nuclear bombs is not proportional, in the minds of some people, to the objectives we were trying to achieve.
I don't fault Truman for dropping the nuclear bomb. The U.S.—Japanese War was one of the most brutal wars in all of human history ? kamikaze pilots, suicide, unbelievable. What one can criticize is that the human race prior to that time ? and today ? has not really grappled with what are, I'll call it, "the rules of war." Was there a rule then that said you shouldn't bomb, shouldn't kill, shouldn't burn to death 100,000 civilians in one night?
LeMay said, "If we'd lost the war, we'd all have been prosecuted as war criminals." And I think he's right. He, and I'd say I, were behaving as war criminals. LeMay recognized that what he was doing would be thought immoral if his side had lost. But what makes it immoral if you lose and not immoral if you win?
Quote from: USRufnex on May 14, 2009, 02:57:24 PM
In the grand scheme of history, the waterboarding of a few terrorists is not going to be looked upon as much more than a mistake... and not as unjust as FDR's internment of Japanese Americans after Pearl Harbor...
Thank you Ruf, finally someone who gets it.
Quote from: we vs us on May 14, 2009, 03:07:44 PM
The interesting part in all of this is Cheney, and why he's come out of the woodwork so forcefully to defend the torture regime. Especially when the sitting president (from the opposition party no less!) seems very very reluctant to pursue the issue any further and would really rather it just fade away.
Why won't Cheney let this die? I thought this was the guy who didn't give two smiles about his legacy.
Because Obama released the memos and his minions were pushing the truth commission. Hell, even today Pelosi is arguing that Bush tortured folks. Cheney is out there trying to set the record as he sees it and defending himself.
Is Pelosi running for cover or is Panetta cooking the books of history at the CIA?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090514/ap_on_go_co/us_pelosi_torture
Quote from: Conan71 on May 14, 2009, 04:20:30 PM
Is Pelosi running for cover or is Panetta cooking the books of history at the CIA?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090514/ap_on_go_co/us_pelosi_torture
Crowder destroys Pelosi:
My avatar is laughing at the video.
Have your avatar watch Cheeney's treasonous remarks AGAIN today.
Most folks don't get it.
Enhanced interrogation has always happened and will continue to happen.
Blame Bush for bringing it out in the open and making it part of public debate. At least he had the wayvoes to admit the U.S. actually does this, but bad policy to release.
Blame Obama for trying to hide behind an order that says it will no longer happen, when he knows darn well it will happen during his watch, too.
Tip of the hat goes to Erich "Mancow" Muller, who was one of the waterboarding apologists. Instead of floundering about, he sacked up and volunteered to be waterboarded to determine for himself whether or not it's torture (at least his opinion). Watch:
In reaction to this, Keith Olbermann put his money where his mouth was (albeit not for the same person) and donated $10,000 to Veterans of Valor on Mancow's behalf. Not only that, he had Muller on his show Tuesday night to discuss the experience.
Hannity?
Crickets....
Quote from: Hoss on May 27, 2009, 06:42:30 AM
Tip of the hat goes to Erich "Mancow" Muller, who was one of the waterboarding apologists. Instead of floundering about, he sacked up and volunteered to be waterboarded to determine for himself whether or not it's torture (at least his opinion). Watch:
In reaction to this, Keith Olbermann put his money where his mouth was (albeit not for the same person) and donated $10,000 to Veterans of Valor on Mancow's behalf. Not only that, he had Muller on his show Tuesday night to discuss the experience.
Hannity?
Crickets....
It makes me laugh when someone volunteers to get waterboarded to prove it is/isn't torture. If you're willing to freely volunteer for it then it's not torture.
Quote from: MH2010 on May 27, 2009, 07:58:41 AM
It makes me laugh when someone volunteers to get waterboarded to prove it is/isn't torture. If you're willing to freely volunteer for it then it's not torture.
Huh?
Mancow was
testing to see whether the
method was torture, based on his observations. His conclusion was an emphatic "yes."
Well then myself and other officers "Crossfit" sometimes. Go ahead and mark that as torture also.
www.crossfit.com
Quote from: MH2010 on May 27, 2009, 07:58:41 AM
It makes me laugh when someone volunteers to get waterboarded to prove it is/isn't torture. If you're willing to freely volunteer for it then it's not torture.
Is that like saying if I freely submit to having someone shoot me with the stun bags, that it won't hurt?
That's ridiculous. There are already several from both sides of the aisle stating that this IS torture. Didn't Bush once tell the world that the US did not torture (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-11-07-bush-terror-suspects_x.htm)?
...and I think we already knew this was torture. What is this foobared up obsession with waterboarding. Fine, quit waterboarding terrorist douches and go back to simply beating the smile out of them.
Quote from: Conan71 on May 27, 2009, 01:34:07 PM
...and I think we already knew this was torture. What is this foobared up obsession with waterboarding. Fine, quit waterboarding terrorist douches and go back to simply beating the smile out of them.
This whole thing is not about waterboarding. This is about the left seeking revenge against evil Bush and Cheney. If the left was truly concerned about torture and abusive detainee practices, you would hear them crying loudly about the carrying out of rendition and the continuation of military tribunals. Crickets because it's okay when Obama does it.
Here's my point, Obama's own director of national intelligence has stated that EIT resulted in obtaining high level information and a deeper understanding of al Qa'ida.
http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/2009-04-16-dni-memo-to-workforce-sl_004151.pdf
Those folks so faux outraged over EIT would rather have innocent Americans die than rough up a few (remember, only 3 were waterboarded and one caterpillered) mass murdering terrorists.
Quote from: guido911 on May 27, 2009, 02:06:10 PM
This whole thing is not about waterboarding. This is about the left seeking revenge against evil Bush and Cheney. If the left was truly concerned about torture and abusive detainee practices, you would hear them crying loudly about the carrying out of rendition and the continuation of military tribunals.
It's about truth, justice and the American way. Us dems don't want revenge. We want our decency and our honor restored. We would prefer this all just go away so we can fix the demise of our world status. Ain't gonna happen if repiglican wing nuts have their way and continue to push the issue on us with Darth Cheenie leading their disruption. How much further are they going to get to continue to ruin this country to gain attention for their potty?
You have no integrity.....
E.J. Dionne: Obama's 'establishment' offers promise, if it stays realistichttp://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1889024.html
"For the left, Cheney's outlandish explosion was a reminder of how much better Obama is than the guys who came before.....The far right is being isolated, and Republicans are simply lost. Obama's political and substantive gifts are undeniable."
Quote from: FOTD on May 27, 2009, 02:23:28 PM
It's about truth, justice and the American way. Us dems don't want revenge. We want our decency and our honor restored. We would prefer this all just go away so we can fix the demise of our world status. Ain't gonna happen if repiglican wing nuts have their way and continue to push the issue on us with Darth Cheenie leading their disruption. How much further are they going to get to continue to ruin this country to gain attention for their potty?
You have no integrity.....
E.J. Dionne: Obama's 'establishment' offers promise, if it stays realistic
http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1889024.html
"For the left, Cheney's outlandish explosion was a reminder of how much better Obama is than the guys who came before.....The far right is being isolated, and Republicans are simply lost. Obama's political and substantive gifts are undeniable."
We want a perception of decency and honor from people who cut off heads of American journalists, smash gun butts into the heads of Jewish children, put captured U.S. servicemen through unspeakable horrors? They don't give two sh!ts about our sense of decency and they place zero honor on us and that's not due to our treatment of their combatants. The reason we have no respect from Muslim terrorists is our relationship with Israel and our attempt to control the Middle East. I could care less if horse piss-drinking Frenchmen are upset about our methods of interrogating asshats.
Quote from: Conan71 on May 27, 2009, 04:48:02 PM
We want a perception of decency and honor from people who cut off heads of American journalists, smash gun butts into the heads of Jewish children, put captured U.S. servicemen through unspeakable horrors? They don't give two sh!ts about our sense of decency and they place zero honor on us and that's not due to our treatment of their combatants. The reason we have no respect from Muslim terrorists is our relationship with Israel and our attempt to control the Middle East. I could care less if horse piss-drinking Frenchmen are upset about our methods of interrogating asshats.
Shocking how totally out of perspective you see things.
Quote from: FOTD on May 27, 2009, 05:29:50 PM
Shocking how totally out of perspective you see things.
Translation: Conan, you are making too much sense and I have no rebuttal.
Quote from: FOTD on May 27, 2009, 05:29:50 PM
Shocking how totally out of perspective you see things.
Forget former VP Cheney if you are worried about our world image. He's been out of office for over four months now. You need to start worrying about President Obama capitulating while telling half-truths to placate the bed-wetting peaceniks.
Mancow faked it for the pub?
http://gawker.com/5271813/did-erich-mancow-muller-fake-his-waterboarding-for-publicity
Quote from: Conan71 on May 27, 2009, 04:48:02 PM
We want a perception of decency and honor from people who cut off heads of American journalists, smash gun butts into the heads of Jewish children, put captured U.S. servicemen through unspeakable horrors? They don't give two sh!ts about our sense of decency and they place zero honor on us and that's not due to our treatment of their combatants. The reason we have no respect from Muslim terrorists is our relationship with Israel and our attempt to control the Middle East. I could care less if horse piss-drinking Frenchmen are upset about our methods of interrogating asshats.
How do you justify a wrong with another one? Especially since we prosecuted Japanese war criminals for doing this (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/02/AR2007110201170.html). Should we prosecute our own if we know about it?
It smacks of double-standard, doesn't it? When a top general says stopping the 'EIT' and closing Gitmo will help the US (http://my.auburnjournal.com/detail/115256.html), how do you resolve what people like Hannity and Jabba the Rush are saying?
Quote from: Conan71 on May 27, 2009, 01:34:07 PM
...and I think we already knew this was torture. What is this foobared up obsession with waterboarding. Fine, quit waterboarding terrorist douches and go back to simply beating the smile out of them.
Does this mean you are against being waterboarded with Marshall's Beer?
Mancow faked the waterboarding:
http://gawker.com/5272691/confirmed-mancows-waterboarding-was-completely-fake
Quote from: guido911 on May 29, 2009, 11:55:39 AM
Mancow faked the waterboarding:
http://gawker.com/5272691/confirmed-mancows-waterboarding-was-completely-fake
"If I wanted to fake it, it would have lasted for six minutes—I lasted six seconds."
"UPDATE: Mancow called us back to say that even though his waterboarder didn't know what he was doing, and his publicist called the whole thing a "hoax," it wasn't supposed to be a REALLY real waterboarding to begin with. Just the radio stunt kind! "Of course I wasn't a radical terrorist," he said. "Of course it was simulated. To compare what I went through to what Khalid Sheikh Mohammed went through—of course it was not the same. I'm sure it was worse for them."
Undoubtedly it was. But isn't the whole point of these exercises to let people know exactly what we talk about when we talk about waterboarding? We've learned that Mancow can't take six seconds of having water poured on his face—we guess he doesn't take showers?"
Its too bad conservatives won't man up to absolutely NOT be tortured to get donations for the troops.
Quote from: rwarn17588 on May 27, 2009, 11:29:11 AM
Huh?
Mancow was testing to see whether the method was torture, based on his observations. His conclusion was an emphatic "yes."
Mancow- now there's a expert! Kind of strikes me as a cross between a failed Howard Stern wannabe and a caricature of Sean Hannity/Rush Limbaugh (who seem like caricatures of themselves on occasion).
I never figured him out: I'd see him on
Fox and Friends on occasion to sound off on this and that, and I can't quite get his schtick: it's "am I a Radio Shock Jock (gee, he must not be a household name if I don't see or hear much from him beyond Fox News)? Am I a conservative pundit (could not hold a candle to William F. Buckley)? Am I a stand-up comic with a lame act (Adam Sandler seems cerebral in comparison)? Am I a relative nobody who wants to be somebody (like Kato Kaelin or Divine Brown)? Do I have something concrete to add to the discourse here (like say, William Kristol), or am I just copping an attitude (like Laura Ingraham)?" And it's hard for me to take him seriously.
Quote from: guido911 on May 29, 2009, 11:55:39 AM
Mancow faked the waterboarding:
http://gawker.com/5272691/confirmed-mancows-waterboarding-was-completely-fake
What reason would he have to fake it and then say it's torture? Was he planning to pretend he was having water poured on him, then change his mind on waterboarding, then tell everybody it was a radio stunt just so he could meet Keith Olbermann? What does he gain? And how would he avoid having his
Man Card taken away for being a total wimp?
(http://blogs.radiotown.com/breezy/files/2008/11/man-card.jpg)
Mancow in the Morning is one of those largely innocuous radio shows with a guy who likes to revel in his
male chauvinistic pig-ness.... that's always been his schtick.
So, Mancow changed his mind on waterboarding?.... I think I need a second opinion....
Can someone waterboard Danny Bonaduce for me?
I wonder what Ventura's take on getting his donkey knocked down is?
So, as a relatively new member of TNF I didn't know this thread existed until just now. After having looked it over I have determined a few things.
1) no one seems to have done a comparative study of war law model vs criminal law model
2) Guido is such a damned utilitarian I could not trust him to represent me for anything. Lawyers are not consequetialists, guido. They adhear to the law.
3) No one has said the important thing: saying we tortured bad guys PRESUMES THEIR GUILT!!!! or is that ok because jack bauer does it and TV is like real cool man...?
4) How should we have gone about finding the people responsable for 9/11 or the OKC bombing? "there is a wierd arab guy here who is real weird"" (that happened) or Their is a wierd skinheaded white guy trying to rent a ryder van who is real wierd" Up to the bicept cavity searches? Beatings? maybe a castration?maybe cut out one of their eyes? Maybe gang rape their grandmothers to death (and even then not stop) in front of them? Once you make results all that is really important, you have kissed a real system of ethics goodby.
Anywho, what an awful night. I'm going to take a half a botle of niquile and hope to wake up in the morning.
Quote from: YoungTulsan on May 13, 2009, 11:06:22 PM
Ventura's point, which he specifically stated during that Larry King interview, was that waterboarding and torture doesn't work because people will say anything to make the torture stop.
If you are being tortured, you will say what you think they want to hear in order to make them stop. Hence, his claim he could make Cheney confess to some murder he obviously had nothing to do with.
Guido, do you presume to know the opinions of 9/11 or Murrah building victims?
Dispute this post. What on earth justifies torture? How are we not above the fray? How is Guido's (in 2009) posting pictures of 9/11 victims jumping to their deaths a justification of a tactic which should be reserved for barbarians, not the limited governance of a free society.
Quote from: jacobi on January 06, 2012, 02:10:03 AM
So, as a relatively new member of TNF I didn't know this thread existed until just now. After having looked it over I have determined a few things.
1) no one seems to have done a comparative study of war law model vs criminal law model
2) Guido is such a damned utilitarian I could not trust him to represent me for anything. Lawyers are not consequetialists, guido. They adhear to the law.
3) No one has said the important thing: saying we tortured bad guys PRESUMES THEIR GUILT!!!! or is that ok because jack bauer does it and TV is like real cool man...?
4) How should we have gone about finding the people responsable for 9/11 or the OKC bombing? "there is a wierd arab guy here who is real weird"" (that happened) or Their is a wierd skinheaded white guy trying to rent a ryder van who is real wierd" Up to the bicept cavity searches? Beatings? maybe a castration?maybe cut out one of their eyes? Maybe gang rape their grandmothers to death (and even then not stop) in front of them? Once you make results all that is really important, you have kissed a real system of ethics goodby.
Anywho, what an awful night. I'm going to take a half a botle of niquile and hope to wake up in the morning.
Sheesh, spell check problem or PWI? And whoever said I would represent you anyway? I help real people with real problems and have little time for stupid Bentham Mill nonsense.
As for water boarding being torture, I have already been clear that in my opinion it is not torture and those in high places have said it resulted in reliable intel. Good enough for me, but not so good for KSM fans. But good to know Jacobi and others are judges and juries and can by fiat or their own awesomeness declare it unlawful or torture.
OBL did not approve of water-boarding...... ;D
Quote from: Breadburner on January 06, 2012, 07:31:35 AM
OBL did not approve of water-boarding...... ;D
You mean ol' Double-Tap Osama?
Quote from: jacobi on January 06, 2012, 02:10:03 AM
4) How should we have gone about finding the people responsable for 9/11 or the OKC bombing?
The Feds didnt get anything from McVeigh by torture, and his capture was just dumb luck by an OHP trooper on a fishing expedition.
Kenneth Trentadue (the man mistaken for John Doe 2) however, was tortured,
to death.
What did anyone benefit from that?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Michael_Trentadue
(http://www.blackhelicopters.biz/blackhelicopter21.jpg)
Hey, I'm glad we don't torture any more. We've killed over a hundred suspected terrorists and anyone they happened to be standing by or sharing a cab with since President Obama took office. More than we were ever able to rendition and interrogate!
Torture for information was inefficient, and wrong! The new program requires no warning, no Miranda, no fingerprints, no rendition, and an acceptable amount of collateral damage. We deal swift death from above with a drone's targeted missiles. So silent that the terrorists don't even know their dead until they hear the nagging whines of 72 virgins (also known as the Devil's pitch-fork). ;)
That's a lot of suicides by hanging over there in OKC. Must be one dismal place.
The most successful interrogation of an Al-Qaeda operative by U.S. officials required no sleep deprivation, no slapping or "walling" and no waterboarding. All it took to soften up Abu Jandal, who had been closer to Osama bin Laden than any other terrorist ever captured, was a handful of sugar-free cookies.
Abu Jandal had been in a Yemeni prison for nearly a year when Ali Soufan of the FBI and Robert McFadden of the Naval Criminal Investigative Service arrived to interrogate him in the week after 9/11. Although there was already evidence that al-Qaeda was behind the attacks, American authorities needed conclusive proof, not least to satisfy skeptics like Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, whose support was essential for any action against the terrorist organization.
Abu Jandal's guards were so intimidated by him, they wore masks to hide their identities and begged visitors not to refer to them by name in his presence. He had no intention of cooperating with the Americans; at their first meetings, he refused even to look at them and ranted about the evils of the West. Far from confirming al-Qaeda's involvement in 9/11, he insisted the attacks had been orchestrated by Israel's Mossad. While Abu Jandal was venting his spleen, Soufan noticed that he didn't touch any of the cookies that had been served with tea: "He was a diabetic and couldn't eat anything with sugar in it." At their next meeting, the Americans brought him some sugar-free cookies, a gesture that took the edge off Abu Jandal's angry demeanor. "We had showed him respect, and we had done this nice thing for him," Soufan recalls. "So he started talking to us instead of giving us lectures."
It took more questioning, and some interrogators' sleight of hand, before the Yemeni gave up a wealth of information about al-Qaeda — including the identities of seven of the 9/11 bombers — but the cookies were the turning point. "After that, he could no longer think of us as evil Americans," Soufan says. "Now he was thinking of us as human beings."
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1901491,00.html
Cookie monster?
(http://www.blogcdn.com/www.aoltv.com/media/2008/06/gitjon.jpg)
Quote from: patric on January 06, 2012, 11:50:20 AM
The most successful interrogation of an Al-Qaeda operative by U.S. officials required no sleep deprivation, no slapping or "walling" and no waterboarding. All it took to soften up Abu Jandal, who had been closer to Osama bin Laden than any other terrorist ever captured, was a handful of sugar-free cookies.
Abu Jandal had been in a Yemeni prison for nearly a year when Ali Soufan of the FBI and Robert McFadden of the Naval Criminal Investigative Service arrived to interrogate him in the week after 9/11. Although there was already evidence that al-Qaeda was behind the attacks, American authorities needed conclusive proof, not least to satisfy skeptics like Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, whose support was essential for any action against the terrorist organization.
Abu Jandal's guards were so intimidated by him, they wore masks to hide their identities and begged visitors not to refer to them by name in his presence. He had no intention of cooperating with the Americans; at their first meetings, he refused even to look at them and ranted about the evils of the West. Far from confirming al-Qaeda's involvement in 9/11, he insisted the attacks had been orchestrated by Israel's Mossad. While Abu Jandal was venting his spleen, Soufan noticed that he didn't touch any of the cookies that had been served with tea: "He was a diabetic and couldn't eat anything with sugar in it." At their next meeting, the Americans brought him some sugar-free cookies, a gesture that took the edge off Abu Jandal's angry demeanor. "We had showed him respect, and we had done this nice thing for him," Soufan recalls. "So he started talking to us instead of giving us lectures."
It took more questioning, and some interrogators' sleight of hand, before the Yemeni gave up a wealth of information about al-Qaeda — including the identities of seven of the 9/11 bombers — but the cookies were the turning point. "After that, he could no longer think of us as evil Americans," Soufan says. "Now he was thinking of us as human beings."
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1901491,00.html
Yeah, but even though the military has decades if not centuries of evidence to show that torture doesn't provide the desire results, notice how we still have the adherents who, being Disciples of "The Script" just can't tear themselves away from it long enough to realize or recognize even that one tiny little bit of reality?
And what a magnificent example of Navy Seal - cold cock one of his own, then run like a girl 'cause there are cops around!
What a man!!!!!
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on January 09, 2012, 05:18:53 AM
And what a magnificent example of Navy Seal - cold cock one of his own, then run like a girl 'cause there are cops around!
What a man!!!!!
You calling out THIS guy as a girl? How many times have you been shot or in an IED attack? Oh, and how many confirmed kills do you have in combat tough guy?
Quote from: guido911 on January 09, 2012, 01:11:56 PM
You calling out THIS guy as a girl? How many times have you been shot or in an IED attack? Oh, and how many confirmed kills do you have in combat tough guy?
Oh boy, here we go...
::)
Quote from: guido911 on January 09, 2012, 01:11:56 PM
You calling out THIS guy as a girl? How many times have you been shot or in an IED attack? Oh, and how many confirmed kills do you have in combat tough guy?
Sucker punch and run like a girl. Says it all.
Granted, Jesse Ventura ain't much, but sucker punch!!?? And this kind of guy is what you look up to? The bottom line is he is bragging on national TV to one of his 'kindred' spirits (Bill) that he committed assault and then fled the scene. Wonder if that type of assault would be considered a felony? Wonder if a lawyer could (would?) tell us?
Lot more to being a man than his macho stuff and that kind of high school crap....let me think - how about a WWJD right about now??
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on January 09, 2012, 02:26:40 PM
Sucker punch and run like a girl. Says it all.
Granted, Jesse Ventura ain't much, but sucker punch!!?? And this kind of guy is what you look up to? The bottom line is he is bragging on national TV to one of his 'kindred' spirits (Bill) that he committed assault and then fled the scene. Wonder if that type of assault would be considered a felony? Wonder if a lawyer could (would?) tell us?
Lot more to being a man than his macho stuff and that kind of high school crap....let me think - how about a WWJD right about now??
What do you mean "sucker punch". That doosh Ventura, at a wake of a MOH winner who threw himself on a grenade to save others, injects himself into the wake and makes a comment that more SEALs should have been lost. Jesse got what was coming. And if I had done the same thing, why hang around afterwards to get arrested?
I have to admit Ventura is a bigger doosh than Teblow.....
Quote from: Breadburner on January 10, 2012, 07:18:45 AM
I have to admit Ventura is a bigger doosh than Teblow.....
I wonder if Ron Paul will choose him as his running mate?
Quote from: Gaspar on January 10, 2012, 07:27:10 AM
I wonder if Ron Paul will choose him as his running mate?
He would go well with Newt and a nice Chianti...
As I said, he ain't much. But then between him and the other guy...not much to either.