Some people would describe torture as 'Anything that make the suspect uncomfortable' but then I suppose that would include standard police interrogation techniques.

Personally, I don't think that something like 'waterboarding' is torture, since it was used on thousands of our own service people as a 'training' exercise.

I would consider torture to be anything that is likely to cause permanent physical or psychological harm.

roy

If water boarding is not torture. Then why did we hang japanese soldiers for doing it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterboarding

New mothers are sleep deprived. Parents of teenagers are baraged with the cacophony of what is now termed "music". College initiations and hazing is much worse than getting wet. The 3 people that were water boarded knew exactly how far our intelligence was willing to go. But of course, it's obviously worse than the killing, desecration and dismemberment of our servicemen, and civilians.

Some people would describe torture as...

Waterboarding IS torture, the USA has described it as such for a long time (until we lost our moral compass after 9/11).

Personally, I don't think that something like 'waterboarding' is torture, since it was used on thousands of our own service people as a 'training' exercise.

yes, for a few seconds, under constant medical supervision, and as an exercise to show our service members WHAT IT MIGHT BE LIKE TO BE TORTURED BY AN AUTHORITARIAN REGIME.

College initiations and hazing is much worse than getting wet.

see, and here's why our country has such a disconnect. Those cheerleading for torture think waterboarding is simply getting wet when in reality it's not even simulated drowning, it's ACTUAL drowning that they can repeatedly revive one from (well, in most cases, as people can easily die from waterboarding if it's not done properly).

I'm having a hard time typing I'm laughing so God blessed hard. Are you kidding me?

"Well, Alice. This weekend, I decided I wanted to take a vacation so I went down to Disney. The kids and I all got onto our favorite amusement ride, the Waterboard. It's really cool. Basically, we get strapped down to a board on our back. We're stretched out and have a cloth bag put over our heads. Then someone comes along and pours water over the cloth bag. Basically, it gives you the feeling of drowning. Man, it's a flippin gas! You ought to try it sometime."

Since we're apparently so mentally defective here in the US, let's take a look at international law (which, we sometimes follow, sometimes don't):

All nations that are signatory to the United Nations Convention Against Torture have agreed they are subject to the explicit prohibition on torture under any condition. This was affirmed by Saadi v. Italy in which the European Court of Human Rights, on 28 February 2008, upheld the absolute nature of the torture ban by ruling that international law permits no exceptions to it.^[183][184] The treaty states "No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture".^[185] Additionally, signatories of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are bound to Article 5, which states, "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment".^[186] Many signatories of the convention have made specific declarations and reservations regarding the interpretation of the term "torture" and restricted the jurisdiction of its enforcement.^[187] However, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Louise Arbour, stated on the subject "I would have no problems with describing this practice as falling under the prohibition of torture", and that violators of the UN Convention Against Torture should be prosecuted under the principle of universal jurisdiction.^[188]

Bent Sørensen, Senior Medical Consultant to the International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims and former member of the United Nations Committee Against Torture has said:

It's a clear-cut case: Waterboarding can without any reservation be labeled as torture. It fulfils all of the four central criteria that according to the United Nations Convention Against Torture (UNCAT) defines an act of torture. First, when water is forced into your lungs in this fashion, in addition to the pain you are likely to experience an immediate and extreme fear of death. You may even suffer a heart attack from the stress or damage to the lungs and brain from inhalation of water and oxygen deprivation. In other words there is no doubt that waterboarding causes severe physical and/or mental suffering– one central element in the UNCAT's definition of torture. In addition the CIA's waterboarding clearly fulfills the three additional definition criteria stated in the Convention for a deed to be labeled torture, since it is 1) done intentionally, 2) for a specific purpose and 3) by a representative of a state– in this case the US.^[189]

Heck... you even have John McCain saying it's torture... and if there's a man alive who should know what the he77 torture is, it's him:

Republican Senator John McCain, in a Washington Post opinion piece,^[69] disputed Mukasey's account, saying:

I asked CIA Director Leon Panetta for the facts, and he told me the following: The trail to bin Laden did not begin with a disclosure from Khalid Sheik Mohammed, who was waterboarded 183 times. The first mention of Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti — the nickname of the al-Qaeda courier who ultimately led us to bin Laden — as well as a description of him as an important member of al-Qaeda, came from a detainee held in another country, who we believe was not tortured. None of the three detainees who were waterboarded provided Abu Ahmed's real name, his whereabouts or an accurate description of his role in al-Qaeda. In fact, the use of 'enhanced interrogation techniques' on Khalid Sheik Mohammed produced false and misleading information. He specifically told his interrogators that Abu Ahmed had moved to Peshawar, got married and ceased his role as an al-Qaeda facilitator — none of which was true. According to the staff of the Senate intelligence committee, the best intelligence gained from a CIA detainee — information describing Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti's real role in al-Qaeda and his true relationship to bin Laden — was obtained through standard, noncoercive means.

And as for the following argument:

“This is not that,” he said. “Our waterboarding program is based on the U.S. military training program … tens of thousands of U.S. servicemen were waterboarded pursuant to this program to prepare them for the possibility of being captured someday so that they would know what it felt like.”

Excuses like that never flew in college. "This is not hazing," he said. "Our hazing program is based on standard fraternity indoctrination techniques... tens of thousands of <insert fraternity name here> men have been subjected to this program to prepare them for the possibility of someday being a brother. We wanted them to know what it was like."

C'mon, people. Wake up. Waterboarding isn't torture because we've dehumanized the people that we're waterboarding. I know these are our enemies. My friends... it's a slippery slope once you start ignoring laws because it's "convenient"... or "we're at war". These people don't have rights or access to our laws - nor should they. But if they were... at the very least, we'd say that what was being done was "cruel and unusual". As another poster said - we were absolutely horror struck by the images that have come to us out of WWII. Let's face facts. It all started because you had a man who dehumanized Jews and people that were "not us". When you're no longer dealing with a human being, it's a lot easier to justify a lot of wrongs.

Personally? This man needs to be handed over - right along with George Bush and Dick Cheney - to face charges by the international community for what he's allowed to happen on his watch.

I'm truly ashamed to say I'm an American, today. We're better than this. The "image" of America that we try and peddle to the rest of the world says we're better than this. This is one of those "the ends certainly don't justify the means" situations. :(

Torture during the Bush administration? Waterboarding and tax cuts that screwed our economy. Torture now? Republicans obstructing and filiblustering everything during Obama's administration to keep the tax cuts for the rich, keep our economy stagnant and keep job growth to a minimum!

When was the last time you saw water run UPHILL?

when it's aspirated trying to breath?

I think that we should alert all criminal agencies in the world to watch out for Bush, Cheney, Rodriquez, and the rest and let them be on the look out for these criminals and let them judge what torture is, we obviously are ok with out troops being tortured from here on out and what are we to say to them?

This claim about waterboarding being used on tens of thousands of military troops is a damned lie. This makes it sound like everyone who joins the military is waterboarded. I served for 26 years and was never waterboarded. Yes, people going to SERE training are waterboarded, but they are told about it going in, and they volunteer for the school.

Really? Making someone believe they are going to die IS torture. it is the same as the simulated executions that the North Vietnamese did.

Really?-1739510 ^{- Not the method used by the US at all......}

^{Actually the specific method is completely irrelevant under both US and international law. All that matters is that you intend to create severe pain or suffering beyond what ordinary law enforcement would use, for the purpose of extracting information or to punish. Also, it requires someone acting on behalf of the government.}

^{Let's put it this way - the Red Cross and the UN Committee on Torture both say that waterboarding as the US applied it is torture, and the US has been formally found to be in violation of the Convention Against Torture.}

1pov, Mothers with newborns are not sleep deprived. Sure they get less sleep, but sleep deprivation is keeping someone up for days at a time.

Water boarding is torture, assassination of bin laden was murder, he was convicted of no crime in any united states court of law. Presidents bush and obama are guilty of war crimes.

"Torture is not effective at getting any credible information. Enhanced interrogation techniques do and have."

I see what you did there.

It doesn't work unless your definition of "Enhanced interrogation techniques" is different than the one we are talking about here. The "Enhanced interrogation techniques" we're talking about included "Water boarding". and "water boarding" is torture, as defined by law and international treaty, and there for "Enhanced interrogation techniques" = Torture. So obviously at least one of those statements is FALSE. I'm going with the 2nd statement since nearly everyone agrees that torture doesn't lead to good intelligence . .

Id love to know what ""Enhanced interrogation techniques" means to you?

And to whoever said we should use Water Boarding because "Its not that bad anyway"

I say, What next?

Hey maybe we can break a thumb, It's not that bad or much worse than water boarding.

Besides I'm not sure a thumb is a bone and it doesn't bleed if you just bend it way back! <sarcasm off>

Or maybe if they covered up the walls in the interrogation room (say with some nice curtains) we could claim it wasn't torture if we beat a person to a pulp because, after all, no blood actually splattered on the walls!

You have to draw the line somewhere and this line was drawn long ago.

The only discussion here should be is: Do we have the right to ignore laws and International Treaties and our Moral Compass "When Ever?"

Deprivation of oxygen isn't any different than deprivation of food or water.

Justify it however you like, Really. Legally, your argument is a no go.

And by the way...

^{Not the method used by the US at all......}

^{Nice try though.}

^{Pouring water onto the face for 10 - 15 seconds is not "forcing water into the lungs." It is uncomfortable, but the 3 men we waterboarded suffered no physical harm. They were made to think they were being harmed. Big difference.}

That's not even close to the type of waterboarding that was used to "interrogate" our prisoners.

Nice try though.

In December 2007, The Washington Post reported that there were some discrepancies regarding reports about the number of times Zubaida was waterboarded. According to a previous account by former CIA officer John Kiriakou, Abu Zubaida broke after just 35 seconds of waterboarding, which involved stretching cellophane over his mouth and nose and pouring water on his face to create the sensation of drowning.^[167] Kiriakou later admitted that he had no first hand knowledge of the interrogation and accused the CIA of using him to spread disinformation.

And then there's this:

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was waterboarded 183 times while being interrogated by the CIA.

Yeah. You're right. I guess they were just taking him on a Disney ride.

And by the way. No one ever said that an action has to cause "physical" harm (taken directly from your last paragraph) to be considered torture. I would think that pretty much any mental health professional out there would tell you that mental "torture" can be much more severe than torture of a physical type.

It's fun to "say it isn't so" - but it's even more fun to use facts in your argument.

really

Our waterboarding of three (3) terrorists has been blown out of proportion by knee jerk reactionaries who would never, EVER, consider wearing the uniform and serving the country.

I served over 20 years in the air force (Msgt. Ret.). John McCain also served. I don't believe you served a day and say what you have said.

McCain told reporters leaving an intelligence briefing for senators by CIA director Leon Panetta that he has seen no information so far to indicate that techniques like waterboarding factored significantly in the information gathering that led to bin Laden's death.

watch and read what he said:

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/05/mccain-denounces-torture-the-very-idea-of-america-is-at-stake-here-video.php

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0511/54301.html

assassination of bin laden was murder, he was convicted of no crime in any united states court of law.

He was an enemy combatant that was neutralized. There is a difference. Please don't defend the murderer of 3000+ innocent civilians by inferring that those who brought justice to his doorstep were even remotely similar. If you want to be a petulant contrarian by calling his death a murder, well, 1st amendment, be my guest-- but don't expect very many people to agree with you. The man convicted himself-- he confessed, publicly and repeatedly, for the atrocities of 9/11 and broadcast them, along with further calls to violence, all over the Arab world and beyond.. When US personnel came to bring him to justice, he was shot down while resisting capture. That isn't murder and only a complete twit would confuse the two.

Hm wmg, armed was he? You are just splitting hairs. Our constitution says that the government can administer nothing without due process of law.

Really? -

Have you ever drowned? Ever sucked water into your lungs? Ever been held under water? Ever been tossed into a pool, then disoriented until you didn't know which way was up? Or, in my experience, ever get pushed over by a wave, sucked in by the undertow, disoriented by the riptide and further waves, and have no clue as to how you were going to get out?

Waterboarding is not "simulated drowning," it's really dangerous. As soon as water enters your nasal cavity (and it will if you're tilted back at a 45 degree angle, as you claim it happened), you're going to feel severe discomfort as the nasal cavity directly exposes the brain (the only part of the brain that is exposed to open air). At first, you can breathe the water out, but once your breath is gone, you have to inhale to expel it again. This is unfortunate, because inhalation WILL force the water into your lungs (it's physics, man). As for the 10-15 second duration, I highly doubt they were that consistent in their dealings.

Now, as the sessions went on, I doubt that they were put in true danger of death. Even had their hearts stopped, which is somewhat unlikely, it would be a cinch to restart. If their hearts did stop repeatedly, then there would be permanent and lasting damage. Most likely, when they did inhale water, the torturers would probably stop to pump the water out of the lungs and allow a recovery period before resuming. I don't know for certain the effect of constantly inhaling water and then drying the lungs only to do it again, but it sounds like a great way to cause damage to the lungs either through infection or another mechanism that interferes with the aspiration cycles. At the least, it would be like saying you put somebody in a chamber with no oxygen for 15 seconds at a time, many times over, and expected there to be no lasting damage. Right. Go ahead and try it yourself. I'll wait...

Meanwhile, sleep deprivation is known to produce psychosis. The fact that many college students do it (willingly for fraternity stunts or whatever or unwillingly for finals) does not make it any better. Besides, those students always have the option (and frequently take the option) to have a nap here and there, or to give it up as a bad job and go to bed. Also, whenever whatever event they are performing for is over, they can go back to their room and go to bed and sleep for days straight, only getting out of bed to urinate, eat, and perhaps smoke a cigarette. So, I ask, was there a nice, comfortable bed waiting for these guys after days without sleep? Were they given plenty of good food and the potential for exercise? Did they have people willing to hear their story and commiserate with them and offer support like family and friends?

I'm still waiting to hear about that lack of oxygen. I understand that removal of oxygen will cause the Krebs' Cycle to malfunction, and I'm interested in a firsthand account...

Comparing the treatment of soldiers, willingly in battle and armed, able to fight the enemy and willing to die to do so, to those of captured POWs (if we are in a War on Terror, then they are POWs; if we're not, then what the @!$%# are we doing bombing 5 or 10 countries?) that are already detained and removed from the fight. Not only that, but any decent investigator (and there are many around decrying this bull@!$%#) will tell you that torture most often leads to incorrect information. Whether the detainee is lying to protect his interests (he may feel that as soon as his usefulness is gone, so is his life, or just may lie to protect his friends), or whether they don't know and just make @!$%# up to end the torture, the result is more often a lack of truthful, useful information, than not. This is one reason that most investigators do not use torture. They may use intimidation, they may use fear, they may use reason, they may use separate references to authenticate, they may trap the detainees in questioning techniques. There are a multitude of techniques that actually gain useful information that do not use torture. There is no need for it.

Frankly, the use of torture is a blight. It encourages our enemies to do the same to those of us they capture. It is purely revenge-driven nonsense. So please, go ahead and step into the chamber.

Still waiting...

Hm wmg, armed was he? You are just splitting hairs. Our constitution says that the government can administer nothing without due process of law

Warfare. Do you really think that every Nazi, every Viet Cong, every Japanese Banzai-rushing soldier, was read out a list of crimes in a court of law, provided a defense, and then (and only then) shot on the battlefield? What the hell is wrong with your mind that that scenario would make any sense at all? Combatants on a battlefield are not processed through the legal system-- only a fool would try to argue that fallacy. Prisoners of War, certainly, but not combatants. And do you really think that Osama would have surrendered? His whole life surrounded martyrdom. He was cut down resisting capture, as pretty much anyone with a brain would have expected. You seem to be confusing the Rules of Engagement in a live combat zone with Legal Proceedings for compliant, captured prisoners. You would do well to actually utilize some critical thinking skills occasionally. The exercise will help you to differentiate between two or more disparate concepts without muddling them together like a child mixes crayons in a box.

Since we have violated the Geneva Convention we can no longer claim the high ground punishing others for "Crimes against humanity." We have lost our way on this one and there is not turning back. We as a nation have crossed a line of no return and have tried, convicted and put to death others for doing what we have done. No matter how the former administration tries to spin it it was torture. If it wasn't then why are they trying so hard to convince the public it was not? I believe this is your answer to the question of "was it torture or wasn't."

Personally, I think we have been exceedingly kind throughout the entire "War on Terror". Obviously, the enemy has no problem slowly sawing anyones head off, combatant or non combatant. And any measure we needed to use to get to bin Laden is warranted. Waterboarding sounds like a great time in comparison to reading the foolishness I read daily in comments by people that would never join the military or do anything truly patriotic to serve their country. I applaud you cowards for your "moral compass". You do your country and freedom in general a disservice by simply opening your mouths.

Myself? I gladly watched the hanging of Saddam Hussein with great joy, and danced when I heard Bin Laden was dead. True justice in my opinion. Couldn't have happened to better scumbags. And I would totally have supported putting the "poor, tortured, terrorists" that suffered waterboardings blood on the walls. Meaning, I would have cut on em if it had gotten Bin Laden even 1 hour quicker.

Remember the Twin Towers and the thousands of peace loving people that lost their lives because of those cowards that "suffered" from waterboarding.

Right on target, Jeremy; couldn't have said it better. All you poor whiners out there who are shocked about us making a bunch of terrorist murderers feel a bit uncomfortable or scared neeed to get a ____ing life. We're defending our country and people against those who'd MURDER us WITHOUT A SECOND THOUGHT, and we need to do whatever we need to in protecting this great country.

I like to test out all these various 'torture' techniques repeatedly on those phucks that fly our skies and spray unknown and untold chemicals in our air every single day....what's referred to 'chem-trails'. We as a population were never consulted on this if we wanted to be poisoned every day, we are never told what they are actually spraying and when asked politicians deny they know about it or have even seen/heard about it. If this is also not torture or the population as a whole I don't know what is. All the air-crews, ground-crews and anyone else involved in this poisoning should have WB and other 'enhanced interrogation' tactics used on them repeatedly over many years.

This former President, his entire cabinet and attorney generals condoned and legalized any form of torture including the breaking of bones and blood on the walls when they came out and bragged that they were above the laws and anything goes. Every country now has the very same rights to draw their own lines as to what they themselves perceive torture to be and the geneva laws are null and void as the hague let these criminals go scott free even after the criminal idiots bragged about what they were doing and condoned and ordered other persons to do.

Then what would our forces be fighting to protect? We'd have become what he claim is abominable. Setting aside the false information gathered through torture, we can't sit on our high horses and preach about defending freedom and the American Way, if our defense mechanisms are tortureous.

We don't get to have it both ways. If we want to hold ourselves up as a shining example of human rights and freedoms, amen, but then we don't torture people. Human rights apply to HUMANS, as in ALL humans, not just those you deem worthy of them.

Sarah-3043284 "Then what would our forces be fighting to protect?"

Our way of life. Would you consider 'sleep deprivation' to be torture?

The European Court of Human Rights reviewed it and determined that it was NOT torture, but some still insist that it IS torture.

As for the three terrorists that were Waterboarded, considering what they did to thousands of innocent civilians, I don't feel sorry for them, since we also used it as a 'training' exercise on thousands of our own service people - apparently without serious side effects.

Obviously, people have a difference of opinion on what constitutes 'torture' - You have yours, and others have theirs. It's only 'right' or 'wrong' in the eyes of the beholder.

Our way of life

Really? Wouldn't that encompass the 8th Amendment?

Would you consider 'sleep deprivation' to be torture?

Yes.

The European Court of Human Rights reviewed it and determined that it was NOT torture, but some still insist that is IS torture.

Then why have we prosecuted numerous cases of waterboarding as torture? Why do we subject our soldiers to it, so they can understand how torture feels?

As for the three terrorists that were Waterboarded, considering what they did to thousands of innocent civilians, I don't feel sorry for them, since we also used it as a 'training' exercise on thousands of our own service people - apparently without serious side effects

Well I do. Because that is what separates us from the terrorists. Our ability to follow the rule of law, even in the face of atrocities. Our ability to protect the humanity of those who would not do the same in return.

And again, we subject our soldiers to minimal amounts so THEY UNDERSTAND HOW TORTURE FEELS AND WHAT TO EXPECT IF CAUGHT.

Obviously, people have a difference of opintion on what constitutes 'torture' - You have yours, and others have theirs. It's only 'right' or 'wrong' in the eyes of the beholder.

Really? Does that go JUST for torture, or for all crimes? And, once we say something is wrong (i.e. prosecuting people for waterboarding in the past), the least we can expect when we change our standpoint, is to be called hypocritical.

And that's what this is. Hypocritical.

Do Not,

Re "If we want to hold ourselves up as a shining example...": You can hold yourself up as a shining example of a flaming liberal if you wish, but the example I want to set with these subhuman dogs is one of REVENGE, the likes of which would make Vlad the Impaler blush. But you're right, we shouldn't waterboard them. We should waterboard their mothers and sisters while they are forced to watch.

You'd fit right in in Pakistan. And Texas.

I hope you can at least OWN the fact that we would then have no place telling any other nation, or terrorist group, or anyone anywhere, what to do or how to do it.

The "beholder" being the US government in this case, where it was wrong every time people did it to us. Japan did it to us in WW2, someone else showed it was done to people in Texas. Each time, the US government tried and convicted these cases as cases of torture. Make it clear - by stating this isn't torture, you're stating we executed people who were innocent of torture. Let's hope your outcry of that is equally severe and not just a double standard.

but the only example I want to set with these subhuman dogs is one of REVENGE,

well, at least you own up to your own barbarism. That's more than can be said of most torture apologists...

This guy and others like him are responsible for all enemies of the United States being justified in torturing Americans in all future wars. It is a sad and pathetic legacy. Americans have always believed in the freedom and dignity of all peoples. Justifying behaviors by saying we're not doing anything worse than our enemies only makes one no different than that enemy. You win over your enemy not by believing in your enemy but by having your enemy believe in you. Americans have always taken the high, moral road...until now...this guy is a disgusting creep...not a patriot!

Really,

Then 99% of newborns are guilty of torture

I can not believe that you seriously think there is an equivalence. I'm going with you're being willfully obtuse.

I could break down the various methods of waterboarding (I taught enhanced interrogation techniques for 20 years) but doing so would only be a waste of my time.

Regardless of what you claim to have taught, that doesn't change history. We've prosecuted waterboarding as torture and executed people for it. What's all of a sudden changed, that it's no longer considered torture? And remind us again, WHY we put our service members through this??? Oh yes, so THEY KNOW WHAT TO EXPECT IF CAUGHT AND TORTURED.

We used these techniques on three (3) men only, but the sensitive set would have the world believe it was thousands

So, breaking the law is okay, as long as it's done minimally?

There are many forms of waterboarding. Ours is nothing more than pouring water onto the cloth covered face. We could have used the hose and funnel method, which I assure you....is torture.

Ahhh, "Torture-Lite".

Sleep deprivation is sleep deprivation. It is nothing more than disrupting the normal sleep patterns.

Well, except that infants wake up naturally, they aren't KEPT up against the desires of their bodies, and they aren't up for DAYS, they're up for at most, about an hour and then go back to sleep.

We taught waterboarding as an INTERROGATION TECHNIQUE, not as a form of torture.

Yes, and in SERE training they teach it as a form of torture, so the men know what to expect.

There are different types of waterboarding just as there are different types of cars. Interrogation waterboarding is to a VW as the "hose and funnel" method is to a Cadillac.

A VW and a Cadillac may both be cars, but there is no way you can mistake a VW for a Cadillac.

If you were to take our class, you would know the difference.

There is only a difference if you're trying to excuse the behavior. And you didn't answer my question...

We've prosecuted waterboarding as torture and executed people for it. What's all of a sudden changed, that it's no longer considered torture?

ROY WILSON-336103 - Would you consider 'sleep deprivation' to be torture?

The European Court of Human Rights reviewed it and determined that it was NOT torture, but some still insist that it IS torture.

Ummmm.......so what? The UN Committee on Torture says that sleep deprivation as practiced by the US is indeed torture. As a legal matter regarding the treaties we've signed, only that matters.

Just an FYI, the European Court of Human Rights concerns EU states, not the US.

Really? Japanese soldiers did not force a hose down their subjects throats and then used a funnel. They put a cloth over their mouth and poured water onto the cloth, and would hit the victim if they refused to answer, causing them to swallow water. They were hung for waterboarding, not for killing prisoners. Stop spreading lies.

Chase Nielson testified about being waterboarded by Japenese soldiers, saying.

"Well, I was put on my back on the floor with my arms and legs stretched out, one guard holding each limb. The towel was wrapped around my face and put across my face and water poured on. They poured water on this towel until I was almost unconscious from strangulation, then they would let up until I'd get my breath, then they'd start over again... I felt more or less like I was drowning, just gasping between life and death."

Then provide some source stating that. Because that is not waterboarding. I already know what torture is, and waterboarding and sleep deprivation meets the definition of torture. Maybe you need to do some research on what is torture.

You want to know what torture is? Go and ask the cartels just south of here. They know all about torture.

As far as water boarding goes, I wouldn't consider it torture anymore than I would consider locking drunks in "the tank" without a bathroom for 6+ hours at a DUI checkpoint torture. They're both uncomfortable experiences, but neither are, in and of themselves, life threatening.

And I hate to break this to you... but water boarding isn't even close to what our truly clandestine, no-accountability, "black" operators do to encourage their prisoners to divulge information. There are branches of service that officially do not exist, men whose service is unrecorded, whose sacrifices and atrocities remain cloaked. If ever uncovered, they would be denied by every government agency and official that exists, they would find no support from the government that bore them, and would be doomed to whatever fate their captors imagined for them. These are the grim men of the underbelly: criminals, thieves and villains paid from black budgets and issued orders from unknown hands. These operators know what torture is. And worse, they employ their knowledge with impunity.

Who was it that said we only waterboarded 3 men? Of all the people captured & taken to different countries for interrogation they never waterboarded any of those? I don't believe that.

>>Really? Japanese soldiers did not force a hose down their subjects throats and then used a funnel.<<

Oh, they did worse than that. Way worse:

- Electrocution of testicles and other body parts until dead

- cutting of the penis and applying salt then cutting it off

- red hot needles inserted under fingernails, in the urethra, the eyeballs, in the testicles

- Crushing teeth, drilling teeth without nova-cane

- Breaking bones and hitting the broken areas, letting them fester without medical help, then hitting those areas over and over and over. . .

- cutting the body open and removing organs while the victim is watching\experiencing, until dead

- clamping and plugging the excretory organs until the victim is dead days later

- etc, etc, etc. . . .

The thin skinned of the US who still complain about the mild measures we employed should put into perspective what other countries do and have done. We do not do the above things or even things like them. Make someone "uncomfortable", yup. Make them wear panties on their head in contravention of their religion, yup. But we won't actually hurt them.

ALL the prisoners at Guantanamo gained weight and had the best medical care they have ever had in their lives, and could freely worship the god of their choice. Poor guys, they were so abused.

Waterboarded with no hope of reprieve? Waterboarded continously for days? Waterboarded by their enemies? Waterboarded with no end in sight? Waterboarded in utter isolation from friends, family, country? etc.

Ringo15 - Anyone saying it is torture simply ignores the fact that THOUSANDS of US soldiers were waterboarded as TRAINING.

Anyone who says something like that is apparently clueless as to why SERE trainees are exposed to a few seconds of waterboarding, and ignorant about how that program was developed. Here's a hint - we do it to provide an example of the kind of torture a POW might expect. And SERE used a Chinese torture manual to develop its program.

Here's what a SERE commander says:

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/i-waterboarding-torture-i-article-1.227670

As a former master instructor and chief of training at the U.S. Navy Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape School (SERE) in San Diego, I know the waterboard personally and intimately. Our staff was required to undergo the waterboard at its fullest. I was no exception.

I have personally led, witnessed and supervised waterboarding of hundreds of people. It has been reported that both the Army and Navy SERE school's interrogation manuals were used to form the interrogation techniques employed by the Army and the CIA for its terror suspects. What is less frequently reported is that our training was designed to show how an evil totalitarian enemy would use torture at the slightest whim.

Having been subjected to this technique, I can say: It is risky but not entirely dangerous when applied in training for a very short period. However, when performed on an unsuspecting prisoner, waterboarding is a torture technique - without a doubt. There is no way to sugarcoat it.

In the media, waterboarding is called "simulated drowning," but that's a misnomer. It does not simulate drowning, as the lungs are actually filling with water. There is no way to simulate that. The victim is drowning.

As training to resist torture.

We hung Japanese for doing the same thing to our troops in WW2, do we now owe the families of those hung an apology? If it's not torture we murdered those Japanese. We didn't torture Manson, we didn't torture Ted Bundy, we didn't torture Tim McVeigh, all monsters who deserve far worse. Should we torture drug dealers to give up their contacts? The America I grew up loving doesn't torture people, it fights against those that would torture. Heck the America I love also doesn't start wars and invade countries just because, that's one reason we fought Germany in WW2, aggression without cause. Germany got it's people all riled up about Poland, next thing you know Blitzkrieg. GWB, gets us all riled up against Iraq, next thing you know shock and awe. I find it disconcerting that Americans would ever defend torture or defend being an invading aggressor against a country that is not a threat, heck Poland shares a border with Germany, Iraq is halfway around the world! I don't even recognize this New Amerika that OBL and GWB built.

Osama and Satan are having a really big laugh right now.

Anyone saying it is torture simply ignores the fact that THOUSANDS of US soldiers were waterboarded as TRAINING.

Anyone that says waterboarding IS NOT torture ignores 100's of years of history, United States Law (up until Cheney got his hands on it), the Geneva Conventions, and basic human decency and morality.

Waterboarding IS torture, period, end of discussion. There is no debate here.

What are they training for? Is it part of the training for how to fire a gun or fly a plane or is it training for being captured and an example of the type TORTURE they can expect?

Drowning Grover,

I agree with you!

Drowning Grover,

I agree with you!

so does any right minded individual. The torture apologists shaming our country these days aren't out for information or to protect national security, they only desire VENGEANCE and REVENGE. At least one (post #2.3 above) readily admits it...

I've seen a video of either waterboarding or simulated waterboarding, and I don't see how it could NOT be considered torture. Furthermore, I have read more than one memoir by US POW's in Vietnam who gave false info under torture so that they could survive-i.e., they said their commanders were Donald Duck or Mickey Mouse or whatever. One person apparently gave the names of the starting lineup of the Dallas Cowboys as the others in their platoon. There is no way we can know for sure at the time if info gained under duress is legitimate or not-therefore, how do we know if dehumanizing ourselves by using torture even gains us anything? I can see how it would be easy to justify the use of waterboarding; however, I agree with others who have questioned whether we should "become the monster to defeat the monster." In other words, do we become just like our enemies to defeat them? If so, what have we gained? I have to wonder if the TV show 24 contributed to the atmosphere where the use of "enhanced interrogation" techniques were accepted and used considering how often the main characters in the show used them and they were effective in the show. Perhaps those who are unsure if waterboarding is torture should experience it for a few seconds just to be certain.

they only desire VENGEANCE and REVENGE.

But don't discount the fact that there are many sociopaths and psychopaths in positions of authority in and out of government who relish in torture of all sorts in order to satisfy their sadism and other fetishes of control.

Then you have a very sick sense of humor...which, thinking about it, explains a lot about your other posts.

Really,

I'm curious, where exactly do you draw the line?

Rodriquez's answer, "broken bones, blood on the walls..." is nothing but a non-objective nonsensical response just to avoid the question. Obviously, you can torture someone without breaking bones or splattering blood.

What is your answer?

If done properly electrocution leaves absolutely no physical damage.

Clearly electrocution is torture.

There are a multitude of drugs that can cause severe pain and leave absolutely no physical damage.

Would that not be torture?

Care to revise your definition?

Really, you did not teach it for 20 years. Torture does not have to cause physical pain, psychological effects is also considered torture. You make someone believe they are going to drown, they you are torturing them. Also, you pour water on a cloth, it gets wet, that person breathes, then they get water into their lungs.

Really???

Hello?

You were saying that only physical damage is torture.

Low voltage electrocution causes no physical damage, just extreme and unbearable pain at the flick of a switch.

Would you not consider that torture?

Apparently you have not seen enough.

Never said I was there. I only said I read memoirs. I DID experience abuse as a child, however, that left no physical marks and was most definitely torture. My abusers were pretty adept. I have also felt low volt electrical impulses when demonstrating a low volt unit for physical therapy, and they are quite uncomfortable even at low intensity. They don't leave marks. Besides, isn't depriving someone of sleep considered torture? I was once deprived of sleep for several days, and after a while reality sort of began to blur. This is a known psychological effect of lack of sleep. I'm not sure you are quite qualified to judge what constitutes torture, Really.

Larry,
Waterboarding Used 266 Times on a TOTAL of 2 Suspects.
Thank you Director Rodriguez for your service to our country and saving countless American lives.

They declined because everyone that said it wasn't torture and tried it, quickly changed their tune to IT IS TORTURE.

Thank you Director Rodriguez for your service to our country and saving countless American lives.

and for violating everything the United States stands for and holds dear...

They had options, they could have volunteered the info, so as far as I am concerned it was self inflicted. besides lives were at stake and time was crucial, what if it was your life on the line should we do nothing? what you are suggesting is tolerance and patience while someone is having their head sawed off, is it politically correct to allow the terrorist to go on killing? what is the lesser of two evils?

D Buck-2239568,

Can you say hyperbolic fear?

Seriously D Buck, you should change your avie to a chihuahua, because that is how sniveling you sound.

This isn't 24, it's real life. Never has there been a case of the "ticking clock" where a suspect has info that could presumable save hundreds, nay MILLIONS of lives, if only we could get him to talk!

Keep living in your fantasy world where bad guys are captured minutes before some event of which we need actionable intelligence now. There are many "advanced" interrogation techniques that do not involve torture, the most basic you might know from TV is good cop, bad cop or split people up and tell each of them the other talked and fingered you. The FBI and the CIA have been getting good intel out of people without resorting to torture for years. The ends do not justify the means.

First off, we had no way of knowing if these people had information trhat could save lives. For all we knew, the people we torture, were innocent of any wrong doing. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq did nothing to protect our freedoms, because unless they have mode of transportation unknown to all of us, or long range missiles, there is and was no way in hell to harm anyone in America.

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and for that matter, neither did Afghanistan. The fact is that the perpetrators of 9/11 had inside help and the help of a foreign country. Bldg 7, which was not even hit by a plane, fell to the ground in a controlled demolition, as did the Twin Towers. The Pentagon was hit over 2 hours later and NORAD was no where to be found. Strange, isn't it?

Watch Bldg 7 fall on this video. Can you say "controlled demolition"?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=972ETepp4GI&feature=fvwrel

Read about why we really went to Afghanistan. Hint: It had nothing to do with 9/11, except to use 9/11 as an excuse.

www.rense.com/general15/game.htm

Here's the thing, Tim...

Masochist: Beat me!

Sadist: No!

.

Get it?

That would make you a terrorist yourself...ready to get tortured?

Just keep in mind that by "the f****** terrorist" you mean "a person who the government thinks might be a terrorist." But I'm sure as a good American you know that the government never makes a mistake.

Yeah I'm ready, come torture me.

HMSNBC,
Waterboarding was used 266 times on a TOTAL of 2 suspects, both of which are still alive.
Thank you Director Rodriguez for your service to our country and saving countless American lives.

Countless as in uncountable because there is not one life saved because of torture.

hmmm, someone else said 3 suspects. I suspect the number is more than that

shrekk,
Waterboarding was used 266 times on a TOTAL of 2 suspects, both of which are still alive.
Obama just invades soverign countries and kills them with drones.
Thank you Director Rodriguez for your service to our country and saving countless American lives.

Smith,

We get it. It's really obnoxious to continue to post the same thing over and over. Either argue Skrekk's specific points, or move along. You've expressed your sentiment, if you have nothing else to add, you're just being a troll.

Skrekk, I completely agree.

And, SSMITH, since you're here, could you explain to us the difference between the waterboarding we prosecuted as torture, and this waterboarding? Are you claiming that because it was used minimally (according to you) it's no longer torture? Or that torture, if used minimally is okay?

In that case, can we minimally violate EVERY international law and have it be okay?

I guess the question we can ask is, is killing OBL torture then? Maybe we could have waterboarded him and got more information and he would still be able to stand trial. I would rather see him dead and call it fair. Anything you do against someone that they do not like is torture. Look at taxes. Now that is torture.

Anything you do against someone that they do not like is torture

Um, no. You have to meet the legal elements of torture. Which the U.S. has claimed, numerous times in the past, waterboarding does, and prosecuted it accordingly.

Until we all of a sudden changed our minds. Well, what all of a sudden, made it not be torture, anymore?

Well, what all of a sudden, made it not be torture, anymore?

The say so of lawyers doing the bidding of incompetent and sadistic elected officials during the Bush administration. Torture like rape is all about control via violence.

ssmithlg - Waterboarding was used 266 times on a TOTAL of 2 suspects, both of which are still alive.

Right......183 times in one month just on KSM. That should tell you just how ineffective it is.

In fact, KSM "confessed" to over 30 false plots. FBI director Mueller testified under oath to Congress that they wasted thousands of man hours chasing down bogus plots, and that no useful information was discovered.

I say we start with Herman Cain. Who's with me???

They did in Texas in 1983, foolishly waterboarding an undercover FBI agent.

Back then the DoJ considered waterboarding to be torture and fully prosecuted the offenders, gaining convictions for all involved....including 10 years for the sheriff.

http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a1983texaswaterboard

No surprise when John Yoo gave his legal opinion authorizing waterboarding that he ignored the numerous times the US had prosecuted waterboarding as illegal torture, especially amusing since the DoJ had just recently defended the conviction of the Texas sheriff.

If the right wing thought they could get away with it, they would be doing it already.

No surprise when John Yoo gave his legal opinion authorizing waterboarding that he ignored the numerous times the US had prosecuted waterboarding as illegal torture, especially amusing since the DoJ had just recently defended the conviction of the Texas sheriff.

"Do as I say; not as I do."

That FBI agent better count his lucky stars it was a US LEA and not a cartel or another country that had him. He wouldn't have survived.

If you have a few weeks, you could read the Patriot Act. That gives the Government and the military the right to do just about anything. You can thank George Bush for ramming that through Congress without giving anyone a chance to read it. Who can we thank for continuing to renew it? Just about the entire Congress. It removes our integrity and our Constitutional rights and makes us no better than the people we invade. Actually, we are no better than the people we invade. Our government is corrupt, our elected officials continually take bribes and sell their votes, we torture our military prisoners, military personnel are dishonorably discharged for criticizing the administration. We invade other countries for false purposes and on made up information , and later no one is punished.

Doesn't show, doesn't count.

Ummm......the SERE program uses a brief exposure to waterboarding precisely because it's an example of the type of torture a POW might expect.

It's also a threat of death by repeated drowning. FYI, any death threat is considered torture.

ssmithlg,

Waterboarding was used 266 times on a TOTAL of 2 suspects, both of which are still alive.

Who told you that and how do you know it is true?

Next you'll be telling us Abu Gharib was just a couple of bad apples going a bit overboard with their enthusiasm.

Wake up...you're becoming an apologist for an American nightmare.

ssmithlg - Waterboarding was used 266 times on a TOTAL of 2 suspects, both of which are still alive.

183 times in one month just on KSM. That should tell you just how ineffective it is.

In fact, KSM "confessed" to over 30 false plots. FBI director Mueller testified under oath to Congress that they wasted thousands of man hours chasing down bogus plots, and that no useful information was discovered.

REALLY?

Electric shock

Electric batons are among the most commonly used torture instruments employed by police officers and jail guards in persecuting Falun Gong practitioners.

They use electric batons that carry voltages as high as 300,000 volts to shock practitioners' sensitive areas, including the mouth, center of the palms, center of the bottom of the feet, genitals, chest, neck, and breasts. Sometimes they use several electric batons simultaneously to shock practitioners.

The labour camp authorities often pour water on the practitioners to intensify the electric shocks. Some police also use a homemade electric shocking device; it resembles a masonry brick in size and shape, and it carries a much higher voltage than regular electric batons.

The skin will break open and bleed in every place that receives a shock from this device.

REALLY?

Burning

Numerous reports have emerged from China of police and labour camp authorities burning Falun Gong practitioners with cigarettes, car lighters, irons, and hot metal rods as a way to force them to give up their belief. Sometimes, hot irons are heated to be red-hot, then used to burn practitioners' flesh or pierce their nipples. Many have reported being burned repeatedly with cigarettes, including on their faces, necks, and genitals.

REALLY?

Sexual Abuse

Well-known Chinese lawyer Gao Zhisheng wrote in his third open letter to Chinese Chairman Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao on Dec. 12, 2005 that, "…… the immoral acts that shocked my soul the most were the lewd yet routine practice of attacking women's genitals by 6-10 Office staff and the police. Almost every woman's genitals and breasts or every man's genitals have been sexually assaulted during the persecution in a most vulgar fashion. Almost all who have been persecuted, be they male or female, were first stripped naked before any torture.

ssmaith,

You seem very interested in and even seem to relish your descriptions of torture.

Why is that I wonder?

>>You seem very interested in and even seem to relish your descriptions of torture.Why is that I wonder<<

Because you need to know it so you may more effectively judge what constitutes torture. Also, see my previous post #2.21 for more on what real torture is.