More Doublespeak from the torture apologists

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Mannahnin**

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/30/mukasey.waterboarding/index.html

Apropos of our earlier discussion.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Attorney General Michael Mukasey told the powerful Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday that it would be inappropriate to discuss whether the "waterboarding" interrogation method amounts to torture.

Attorney General Michael Mukasey testifies Wednesday on Capitol Hill.

During his first testimony since his November confirmation, Mukasey testified that it wouldn't "be appropriate for me to pass definitive judgment on the technique's legality."

Waterboarding is at the center of a Justice Department criminal probe about the CIA's acknowledged destruction in 2005 of videotapes showing agents using waterboarding and other "alternative" interrogation techniques on suspected al Qaeda operatives in 2002.

Although he acknowledged that the waterboarding issue has generated "intense public interest and debate," the attorney general said commenting publicly would give "our adversaries the limits and contours of generally worded laws that define the limits of a highly classified interrogation program."

Waterboarding, currently banned by the CIA, involves strapping an interrogation subject to a surface, covering the person's face with cloth and pouring water on the face to imitate the sensation of drowning.

Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Massachusetts, pointed out that -- because Mukasey has acknowledged his opposition to torture -- his refusal to pass judgment on waterboarding is "like saying you're opposed to stealing but not quite sure that bank robbery qualifies."
Mukasey assured the senators that he has followed their instructions and "carefully reviewed the limited set of methods that are currently authorized for use in the CIA program and I've concluded that they are lawful."

The committee quizzed the attorney general a day after he sent a letter to panel chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, indicating that he wouldn't openly declare that waterboarding constitutes torture. The letter responded to questions from senators asking Mukasey whether the United States should ban waterboarding.

During his confirmation hearing last year, Mukasey's refusal to declare that waterboarding is torture prompted most Democrats to oppose his nomination. However, two Democrats, Sens. Charles Schumer of New York and Dianne Feinstein of California, broke with their party colleagues who control the committee and rescued the nomination in the Senate Judiciary Committee. Mukasey was narrowly approved by the full Senate.

He is expected to face a similar confrontation with House Democrats when he appears before their committee next week.

Waterboarding was used during the Spanish Inquisition and by Cambodia's brutal Khmer Rouge regime and the World War II Japanese military, according to advocacy group Human Rights Watch.

Sixty-nine percent of respondents to a November CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll said waterboarding was torture and 29 percent said it is not. The poll of 1,024 American adults had a sampling error of plus or minus 4.5 percentage points

"the attorney general said commenting publicly would give "our adversaries the limits and contours of generally worded laws that define the limits of a highly classified interrogation program."

He is trying to convince us that it’s a security risk to discuss whether it would be illegal for us to torture people?

WTF?

And it wouldn't "be appropriate for me to pass definitive judgment on the technique's legality."?

He doesn't think that's his job? WTF does he think his job is? Apparently it's to protect torturers and the practice of torture by our government. Fan-tastic.

**snorkle**

After just reading the first sentence I had to think about how stupid the attorney general must think we are.
But after reading on at least he did say that he feels waterboard would feel like torture to him.

**Frazzled**

I'm ok with torturing terrorists. Put it on TV.

Edit: I was wrong to say it should be on TV. It should be on Pay Per View. Use the proceeds to help with the deficit. Then its a Win Win situation.

Its so ironic I'm Mcainiac...

**Asmodai**

jfrazell wrote:I'm ok with torturing terrorists. Put it on TV.

But 24 is already on TV....

I'm happy that with McCain about to win the Republican nod, either way November turns out these policies will be behind us.

**Ahtman**

We are at war with forces too terrible to comprehend. We cannot afford mercy for any of its victims too weak to take the correct course. Mercy destroys us; it weakens us and saps our resolve. Put aside all such thoughts. They are not worthy of Inquisitors in the service of Our Emperor. Praise his name for in our resolve we only reflect his purpose of will.

- Book of Exorcisms, The verses of Inquisitor Enoch

Prayer may cleanse the soul, but pain cleanses the body. Both are necessary for the survival of humanity.

- Confessor Ganinimus

**Lorek**

Are you supporting torture with quotes from Warhammer books?!

Fail.

Torture is not to be condoned for a panoply of reasons. Well, three main ones:

1. It's ineffective. Victims will say whatever they think the torturer wants to hear to make it stop, or won't say anything at all.

2. It's immoral. At least by the social mores of our society today.

3. It undermines our credibility. "Hey, China, screw you and your human rights violations! But, uh, ignore ours."

The root of the problem here is that the people that should be in power are very very rarely the people who want to be in power.

**snorkle**

Those are three very good points Iorek and seriously Ahtmann never liken 40k quotes especially from Inquisitors to our modern events. The inquisition are based on an evil organisation that burned people and tortured them, because they were different and because other people didn't like them.

**Mannahnin**

And who justified their evil acts, including torture and murder, with the rationale that they were serving a higher good.

**Frazzled**

Torture is not to be condoned for a panoply of reasons. Well, three main ones:

1. It's ineffective. Victims will say whatever they think the torturer wants to hear to make it stop, or won't say anything at all.
****Interesting that Tenet wrote that waterboarding was the single best method of procuring real information that helped thwart attacks.

2. It's immoral. At least by the social mores of our society today.
****It is? Inbuing in someone bent on killing lots of women and children that they may drown to get informaiton to save those women and children? Nah. This ain't ctriminal law. Its war.

3. It undermines our credibility. "Hey, China, screw you and your human rights violations! But, uh, ignore ours."
****Same country that beats Falun Gong members to death and rolled over students with tanks?

The root of the problem here is that the people that should be in power are very very rarely the people who want to be in power.
****Now thats a true statement if I ever heard one.

**snorkle**

All of your points are valid. Except for the second one. Waterboarding is sinking to their level. Sure we're not killing anyone, but we're still causing them unnecessary pain. You're basically arguing that because we're America and not Al-Quaeda we're allowed to torture terrorists. That's probably exactly what Al-Quaeda says about Americans.

**malfred**

Oh, I thought Ahtman was being ironic. I imagined a smiley
after his post.

**dietrich**

To paraphrase Batman, we have to separate ourselves from the bad guys. We can't act the same towards them as they do to us.

**Ahtman**

malfred wrote:Oh, I thought Ahtman was being ironic. I imagined a smiley
after his post.

**Lorek**

Like rape, torture is never funny.

**Frazzled**

dietrich wrote:To paraphrase Batman, we have to separate ourselves from the bad guys. We can't act the same towards them as they do to us.

And to paraphrase the homicide group lead investigator in HOMICIDE,
"there's no justice. There's just us."

We have an absolute right to survival. They would end that by killing every man, woman, and child in this country. They will do that whether or not we are good or bad, nice or not, just because we exist. Hook up the wires.

**Frazzled**

Iorek wrote:Like rape, torture is never funny.

It is if it involves sock puppets

**Lorek**

jfrazell, en garde!

jfrazell the Texan wrote:1. It's ineffective. Victims will say whatever they think the torturer wants to hear to make it stop, or won't say anything at all.
****Interesting that Tenet wrote that waterboarding was the single best method of procuring real information that helped thwart attacks.

2. It's immoral. At least by the social mores of our society today.
****It is? Imbuing in someone bent on killing lots of women and children that they may drown to get informaiton to save those women and children? Nah. This ain't ctriminal law. Its war.

3. It undermines our credibility. "Hey, China, screw you and your human rights violations! But, uh, ignore ours."
****Same country that beats Falun Gong members to death and rolled over students with tanks?

1. George Tenet? Who had reliable information such as the presence of WMDs in Iraq? His credibility is suspect.

2. Well, in general, I've heard a great deal of rhetoric about how torture is immoral. Have you heard anyone say that torture is morally OK? Even the current debate is whether or not waterboarding is torture, not whether or not torture is acceptable. You may feel differently, but the official ethical code of the USA condemns torture.

3. Yes, that country. I'm not saying that they're innocent, I'm saying that we can't decry them for violating human rights when we do the same thing.

Riposte!

**Lorek**

jfrazell wrote: We have an absolute right to survival. They would end that by killing every man, woman, and child in this country. They will do that whether or not we are good or bad, nice or not, just because we exist. Hook up the wires.

My point here is that if we resort to a technique that we decry as immoral or distasteful to defeat this enemy, then they have injured us. Difficult as it may be, if we are to truly win this fight, we need to do it without compromising ourselves.

**FearPeteySodes**

Iorek wrote:Like rape, torture is never funny.

Against my better judgment i clicked that while at work. Luckily it turned out ok.

**Frazzled**

double post

**Frazzled**

jfrazell wrote:1. George Tenet? Who had reliable information such as the presence of WMDs in Iraq? His credibility is suspect.
****You have a point there. That has been corroborated by other sources though.

2. Well, in general, I've heard a great deal of rhetoric about how torture is immoral. Have you heard anyone say that torture is morally OK? Even the current debate is whether or not waterboarding is torture, not whether or not torture is acceptable. You may feel differently, but the official ethical code of the USA condemns torture.
****The US has an official ethical code? That’s news to me…
****Torturing terrorists to save the lives of US citizens immoral? No. As I said plug in the wires. Then shoot them. Then waste their families to their children and their children’s children (always wanted to say that). If that doesn’t work nuke every square inch of real estate hiding a terrorist. If that doesn't work, export millions of trial lawyers to their country (or better, export them then drop the nukes I keed I keed).

3. Yes, that country. I'm not saying that they're innocent, I'm saying that we can't decry them for violating human rights when we do the same thing.
****That’s social relativism. Utilizing that argument we’re evil no matter what we do.

****And you still haven’t addressed the awesomeness of sock puppets…

**Frazzled**

Iorek wrote:
jfrazell wrote: We have an absolute right to survival. They would end that by killing every man, woman, and child in this country. They will do that whether or not we are good or bad, nice or not, just because we exist. Hook up the wires.

My point here is that if we resort to a technique that we decry as immoral or distasteful to defeat this enemy, then they have injured us. Difficult as it may be, if we are to truly win this fight, we need to do it without compromising ourselves.

So what? If it saves the lives of my kids I'm not afraid to get dirty. This ivory tower nonsense is just that, nonsense.

I'm not advocating prisoners of war under the Geneva Convention. I'm not advocating torturing people caught here. I'm advocating torturing terrorists. If a man can't sit in his barco lounger in a sweat stained T shirt, eat popcorn and drink beer, and watch a good terrorist beatdown or sockpuppet kickboxing match, then thats an America I don't want to live in

**snorkle**

Ok, to save my kids lives I would rip the terrorists apart with my own two hands and I would have absolutely no regrets about it. I doubt anyone would. But water-boarding is not saving the lives of our kids. It's giving more people in the Middle-East a reason to rebel against America and Western Culture as a whole.

**Frazzled**

snorkle wrote:Ok, to save my kids lives I would rip the terrorists apart with my own two hands and I would have absolutely no regrets about it. I doubt anyone would. But water-boarding is not saving the lives of our kids. It's giving more people in the Middle-East a reason to rebel against America and Western Culture as a whole.

What if it saves the life of an American soldier? Thats somebody's kid, probably in a jam a lot worse off than us.

What if it doesn't save the life of an American but could save the lives of Iraqi citizens? Are they unworthy because they're not US citizens, and are in the wrong place at the wrong time?

**Ahtman**

snorkle wrote:Ok, to save my kids lives I would rip the terrorists apart with my own two hands and I would have absolutely no regrets about it. I doubt anyone would. But water-boarding is not saving the lives of our kids. It's giving more people in the Middle-East a reason to rebel against America and Western Culture as a whole.

You make it sound like waterboarding is the reason for fundamantalist whack-jobs. You, know, there is more to why they don't care for us (and you and your kids) then just the torture issue. If we stopped doing it and it was known we stopped doing it, they would still continue doing what they are doing.

Give me a moment to find some more Rogue Trader qoutes to justify my position that everyone will take seriously and makes me laugh when I see their reaction.

**snorkle**

Now you're turning it around.
It will most likely not save a soldier or an Iraqi citizen and I did not in the slightest imply that Iraqis are less worthy of life. My point was the use of torture by the US only drives more middle easterners into the Al-Quaeda camp. Through not using waterboarding we can keep those same people neutral if not even friendly to America and that soldier will not be needed in Iraq and that Iraqi will live in a peaceful country.

**snorkle**

Though of course just not using waterboarding won't bring all these changes. This is just an example.

**Frazzled**

snorkle wrote:Now you're turning it around.
It will most likely not save a soldier or an Iraqi citizen and I did not in the slightest imply that Iraqis are less worthy of life. My point was the use of torture by the US only drives more middle easterners into the Al-Quaeda camp. Through not using waterboarding we can keep those same people neutral if not even friendly to America and that soldier will not be needed in Iraq and that Iraqi will live in a peaceful country.

Why?
You're assuming it won't save a life.
As to the messiness issue-waterboard them, cap them. Problem solved. They're terrorists. They're a waste of skin.

**snorkle**

That s always your answer to everything concerning Terrorists. If the army worked how you want them to , then we'd have a shortage in bullets.

**Frazzled**

Its ok Snorkle, we can make more bullets.