Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Tuesday, May 26, 2009 | 2:04 a.m.
The moralizing about waterboarding displayed in William F. Brennan’s Sunday letter to the editor is an example of one of the more distressing arguments regarding the debate on torture being forwarded by conservatives. Brennan argues that waterboarding, harsh as it may be, does not involve “extreme physical pain” and/or “intense suffering.” Therefore, waterboarding cannot be defined as torture.
This would be a reasonable argument if waterboarding did indeed not involve extreme pain or suffering for the person being waterboarded, and if after waterboarding, the victim remained whole and unharmed, but that isn’t entirely true.
In an April 30 commentary in the Los Angeles Times, detainee Abu Zubaydah’s co-counsel, Joseph Margulies, writes about how Zubaydah’s preexisting mental and memory problems were exacerbated by waterboarding. Zubaydah now suffers from seizures, headaches and permanent brain damage.
In Sept. 25, 2007, testimony before the Senate, Dr. Allen Keller, director of the Bellevue/New York University Program for Survivors of Torture, described the short-term and long-term effects of waterboarding: drowning, heart attack, and later depression, panic attacks and post-traumatic stress disorder, all of which could easily qualify as “intense suffering.”
The debate over waterboarding is ultimately one of semantics, though. I am tired of the childish self-justification I see in defenses of “enhanced interrogation,” the finger-pointing and the whining arguments of “At least we’re not as bad as the bad guys — the real torturers — are.”
We should not let the injustices of others color our own actions and morals. Instead, we should look in the mirror and ask ourselves whether we can use waterboarding as well as other techniques including genital mutilation (see the case of Binyam Mohamed) and still maintain our moral standing as a free and just country.
This is more of the same liberal whining crap that constantly infests this editorial page. To quote the defense attorneys for these brutal murdering criminals as an argument against water boarding THE WAY WE USE IT is an example of the logic of the kool aid drinking liberal loons that write letters to the SUN on this subject.
HEY DAN > Instead of spending all your time on worrying about are moral standing, Spend some of your time on trying to help us stay alive to continue to still enjoy living in a free and just country. YEA IT'S CALLED FIGHTING BACK MAYBE IF YOU WERE NOT SO DRUNK ON THE KOOL-AID YOU MIGHT SEE THAT.
They, cut off the head of a reporter and filmed it. We, dripped some water in a terrorist's mouth and took some pictures with a dog collar and leash. Dan, whether you like it or not, polls show most Americans favor enhanced interragations for terrorists so you are in the minority here, ask yourself why? It's because you are a wimp and should move to France.
POWERPLAY quit your whining.
Again, the kool-aid libs want to use stuff about water torture and then extend it to water boarding.
They are not the same thing.
Water boarding session last than one minute. Water is not allowed to enter the lungs because of the physics. Our troops get water boarded during training. Reporters get water boarded.
"described the short-term and long-term effects of waterboarding: drowning, heart attack, and later depression, panic attacks and post-traumatic stress disorder, all of which could easily qualify as "intense suffering."
Oh really, can they point out one terrorists that drown during the approved and offical water boarding sessions?
It is hard to drown in less than one minute with no water getting into your lungs.
People who are water torture may drown.
It is impossible to drown in water boarding if one is following the exact procedures that are sanctioned by the US government.
The rest of the writers letter is garbage, too.
I am sure that the main source of the terrorist's depression is that they got caught and did not get a chance to kill thousands of terrorists.
As for the case of Abu Zubaydah's medical problems, that is just plain stupid. I am sure he has a long history of insanity. It is not the fault of the USA that person with mental problems decided to become a terrorist.
I am sure that person with mental problems would have those problems expanding by just sitting in a jail cell. Should we just let them go free?
To demostrated on deceitful the letter of the writer is then you can take at look at him listing the genital mutilation of Binyam Mohamed. That was done by British intelligence services and not by the USA.
If you want to believe this deceitful writer then that is your business. Be sure to flush down his crap with the other kool-aid that you get from the DailyKos.
To be fair to the British....it was not the British who did the genital mutilation of Binyam Mohamed.
They only reported that the terrorist is claiming to have genital mutilation during his time when being held by the Moroccan government.
The terrorist is not claiming that the US government did the genital mutilation which is the core deceit by the writer of the letter.
twinsdad,
We didn't just drip water in someone's face, we used far better torture techniques than that! Give us some credit. There was the dreaded "attention grasp," (which every mother does to their child), we also inflicted horrendous torture by forcing the terrorists to listen repeatedly to bad music, (namely the Meow Mix commercial, Christina Aguilara's Genie in a Bottle, Neil Diamond's America, the Barney theme song, etc.) and as if that's not horrific enough, we saved the "caterpillar" for the most hardened detainees. This consisted of placing a caterpillar (which any snail can outrun) in the detainees area and letting them think it was a stinging insect. I know that doesn't exactly put us in the "Daniel Pearl" category of torture, but have you ever heard the barney theme song? Our form of "enhanced interrogation" is the laughing stock of the terrorist community.
Why are the only items in the Sun that do NOT allow comments the ones from Brian Greenspan? Today he comments on the President's visit but wants no comments on how the rest of us fee. He seems to have plenty of far left opinions but will tolerate no dissent from the readers.
Who did Senate, Dr. Allen Keller, director of the Bellevue/New York University Program for Survivors of Torture,talk to?
Not the thousands of Seals and AF perrsonnel who received this as part of their military training.
On 5-21-2009 Obama tried to explain his Guantanamo and torture policies, but spend a large part of his speech with contrived indignation and phony moralization on 28 specific statements just attacking Bush again.
The actual Obama changes are marginal from the positions that Bush had the day he left office.
As an example Bush had already changed the EIT protocols and had stated the intention to close GITMO (over 300 Terrorist have been released -- 17% of which returned to the fight),
In Obama's EO he reserved the right to define EITs. Bush had banned the use of waterboarding.
Campaigner Obama rejected the "Military Tribunals" calling them "legal black holes", yet, will now use them as Congress authorized in the Military Commissions Act. Dismissing his call for tossing out the lack of Miranda warning
The biggest no change the keep of the "prolonged detention" detainees the so called "category 5" guys.
Where Obama said "We must have a thorough process of periodic review, so that any prolonged detention is carefully evaluated and justified."
Obama opined "Finally, there remains the question of detainees at Guantanamo who cannot be prosecuted yet who pose a clear danger to the American people.
"I want to be honest: this is the toughest issue we will face. We are going to exhaust every avenue that we have to prosecute those at Guantanamo who pose a danger to our country.
But even when this process is complete, there may be a number of people who cannot be prosecuted for past crimes, but who nonetheless pose a threat to the security of the United States. These are people who, in effect, remain at war with the United States."
Obama expressed his irritation with having to deal with the war on terror and wasting his administration's resources.
Whining Obama opined "We're cleaning up something that is quite simply, a mess". .
Obama opined ""the decisions that were made over the last eight years established an ad hoc legal approach for fighting terrorism that was neither effective nor sustainable - a [Bush]framework that failed""
""the problem of what to do with Guantanamo detainees was not caused by my decision to close the facility; the problem exists because of the [Bush] decision to open Guantanamo in the first place."
""I say that we need to focus on the future.
"The Congress can review abuses of our values, and there are ongoing inquiries by the Congress into matters like enhanced interrogation techniques. The Department of Justice and our courts can work through and punish any violations of our laws."
Obama can whine all he wants, but Obama is just "Bush Lite" on the issue yet he is still looking back to blame Bush for processes that Obama will use.
"Water boarding session last than one minute. "
No according to the Red Cross report on detainee abuse. That's how long is SHOULD last, not how long it DID.
"It is impossible to drown in water boarding if one is following the exact procedures that are sanctioned by the US government."
Impossible to drown, but yet the Bush administration had to keep medical personnel present capable of performing LIFE-SAVING techniques... just-in-case. Furthermore, the panic induced by waterboarding can cause heart attacks.
But all that is for naught. Something tells me James F. Nance Jr. wouldn't last any longer than that "MANCOW" radio announcer when he was waterboarded. And we all know what that coward declared: "It's torture!"
You will NEVER get the aforementioned "Jr."
to admit waterboarding is torture.
He WILL, however, mislead you into arguing ad-nauseum about abortion as birth control, whether FDR was really a bad man but liberals can't admit it, and so forth. He will continue to make sophomoric arguments about torturers deserving medals, lefty's being kool-aid drinkers, (how lame has that gotten?) and generally make waterboarding sound like locker room high-jinks.
As soon as the conservatives came up with the euphemism "advanced interrogation techniques", you knew the government was up to trouble.
Slapping lipstick on a pig, Jr., doesn't change the fact that you still have a pig.
?Lipstick on a pig? That's not even a freshman comment. Third grade.....
Na na na na na.
What harsh interrogration techniques are you guys for?
Any?
nance and his "enhanced explanation techniques."
I just heard Six Flags is adding waterboarding as a new aqua experience ride. First in line nance?
Isn't it PATHETIC that many of same bleeding-heart LIBERALS that condemn "waterboarding" as "torture", do not have any objections to the Barack Obama-supported practice of "live-birth" abortions? The inhuman procedure of aborting (i.e. killing) a newborn infant that is viable of life outside of the mother's womb. Thus, any arguments made by LIBERALS against enhanced interrogation techniques (e.g. waterboarding) must be discounted as duplicitous and deceitful.
On another matter - some of the most brilliant minds in our nation's history have sat on the US Supreme Court (John Marshall, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. Benjamin Cardozo, Louis Brandeis, to name only a few). Now, we're given SONIA SOTOMAYOR! DISGRACEFUL! But, what could you expect from a President that packed his government with liars and tax-cheats?
And there you have it. ANOTHER MORON arguing about abortion in the context of waterboarding.
"yes, um, isn't robbing a bank kinda like going waterskiing?" HA?
AND WHAT, PRAY TELL, in the ULTRA RIGHT-WING WORLD of News1950, is "DISGRACEFUL!" about Ms. Sonia Sotomayor? Intelligent, well spoken, experienced, OHHHHH! SHE IS A HISPANIC FEMALE!
OH NO! NOT THAT! She'll let all them Mexicans into our country, right? Steal our jobs, get fat on welfare, and clog up the hospitals! We're SCREWED!
America's abortion laws weren't written by President Obama so why pin things on him. You're either pro choice or pro life. I respect a persons stand on either side in such a complex issue.
On the other hand, waterboarding is not so complex and international law prohibits it from being practiced. If you do it you're a war criminal. There isn't a gray area.
Additionally, I would tell you anything you wanted to hear for fear of being waterboarded. I'll bet Cheney was banking on just that while trying to invent a link between Iraq and 9/11.
I've always been amazed how LIBERALS have preconceived notions about the prejudices of others, but ignore their own discriminatory mental processes. The previous left-wing NUT, gmag39, read into my post all sorts of prejudicial comments, but those are HIS own as I did not have a single one of those biases on my mind. Only that this nomination - Sonia Sotomayor has a HISTORY of legislating from the bench based on her OWN Hispanic life experience, NOT the law or Constitution. She is in the truest sense of term, an "activist jurist", something that the Founding Fathers sought to prevent.
Yes, news1950, you are such a voice of reason in a mixed up world. I apologize. You are right about everything. Waterboarding: Good. I'm all for it. Abortion? Bad ALWAYS . Unequivocally. conservatives SHOULD tell the rest of us what to do. And there is a definitive link between waterboarding and abortion; I've been wrong about that, too. And finally, Yes, Sonia Sotomayor is a disgraceful nominee to the United States Supreme Court. What WERE those Lying, Liberal tax-cheats thinking.
Damn those lying liberals.
Whack everything any democrat ever touched.
Spit on the grave of FDR.
Waterboard Obama.
By God, we'll show 'em what America is all about!
airweare; RIGHT ON, brother!