Conservative Radio Host Gets Waterboarded: Admits It's Torture.

How do you assess them as ineffective when we have had 0 terrorist attacks on US soil since 9-11?

 

C'mon now, that's a little bit extreme. Conservatives aren't that bad these days. Because of their antics lately a lotta up & coming screenwriters, comedians, as well as myself have a truckload of new material. If we got rid of all conservatives, then who would be the constant butt of our jokes? Who would we have left to poke fun at?

Sometimes it's like having an argument with someone who claims the earth is flat when you have documented proof as well as photos that the earth is indeed round. Quiet as it's kept, many of the far-right neocons live in their own delusional little world where they act as if the election and the inauguration never happened.

While many others within the party are too busy clinging to guns & religion.:smt003

 

How can you prove it's a result of their effectiveness? You neocons always try to hang your arguments on something that fortunately for you, cannot be proved beyond a doubt.

 

We'd be in the United Federation of Planets right now if not for conservatives.

 

How can you prove it isn't? Can't get any better than 0. The fact that you can't give credit where it is OBVIOUSLY due hurts the credibility of your arguments.

If we had been attacked again even once you'd best believe you would be blaming it on Bush. So give him his props. Whether you like his policies vs terrorism or not--they worked.

 

:smt042:smt043

 

He did something that Sean Hannity did not do-man up and experience for the troops. KeithO will say something about it either tomorrow or Tuesday.

 

Guys, let the conservatives be.

 

Round and round they go, where they stop, nobody knows. And I thought black women had the franchise on circular logic.

 

:twisted::twisted::twisted::twisted:

 

Yes. Thank you!

 

This whole EIM/torture meme is one that puzzles me to this date. On the one hand, I believe that we should never undermine our efforts to secure our security by taking any options off the table; on the other hand, torture for the most part often runs counter to its purpose. Most people, when faced with the imminent threat of extreme physical violence or even death, will tell you pretty much anything regardless of its veracity. More importantly, we cease to occupy the higher ground if we employ the same practices of the very people we deem to be inhumane and undemocratic.

Personally, I feel that waterboarding can be used, but only in the most exceptional cases. If a guy won't give up crucial info and we clearly has it, and has been prodded through conventional means, i'm going in. But as we've now come to learn, guys like Abu Zubaydah and others were giving up info without any of these "enhanced interrogation techniques." KSM confessed to commiting the atrocities of 9/11 way before he was captured apparently. So it seems to me that waterboarding in this context was unnecessary.

I personally believe waterboarding is torture nonetheless. I know this because I've almost drowned personally. It's not a very comfortable feeling to say the least. I couldn't even open my eyes properly, let alone breathe. If not for the lifeguards who were at the scene, I won't be able to finish this post. My brother who is in the United States Air Force and is a special operations officer agrees. He's actually been to SERE school and has been waterboarded many times. So I take his word for it.

We shouldnt be doing it anyhow.

 

In the judgement of the CIA officials, at the time, it was the right thing to do in the national interest for cases which they considered exceptional.

20-20 hindsight (politically motivated) is what we are dealing with now.

 

yeah, but 183 times on one guy?

 

Apparently they felt it was important enough to attempt to get more out of him. He was after all, the guy who planned 9-11.

"The 2005 memo also says that the C.I.A. used waterboarding 183 times in March 2003 against Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the self-described planner of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/20/us/politics/20CIA.html?_r=1&ref=world

In an opinion column in Friday’s Wall Street Journal, Gen. Hayden and former U.S. Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey wrote that “fully half” of the government’s information about Al Qaeda’s structures and activities came from interrogation when “coercive interrogation” was used.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/20/us/politics/20CIA.html?_r=1&ref=world


I don't think they continued much (or at all?) after that.