Waterboarding is not torture.
Posted by lordtyranus2 at March 8, 2008 01:55 PMWell of course Waterboarding is not torture... King bu$h tells us so!
What Waterboarding Is:Posted by Seven of Six at March 8, 2008 02:16 PMWaterboarding induces panic and suffering by forcing a person to inhale water into the sinuses, pharynx, larynx, trachea, and lungs.
The head is tilted back and water is poured into the upturned mouth or nose. Eventually the subject cannot exhale more air or cough out more water, the lungs are collapsed, and the sinuses and trachea are filled with water. The subject is drowned from the inside, filling with water from the head down. The chest and lungs are kept higher than the head so that coughing draws water up and into the lungs while avoiding total suffocation. "His sufferings must be that of a man who is drowning, but cannot drown."
Waterboarding Is Not:
Upright or face-down dunking: People dunked face-first in water can keep water out for as long as they can hold their breath. When one is inclined with the head back, holding one's breath will not prevent the upper respiratory tract from filling with water.
asphyxiation: Survivors of near-drowning experiences report that the sensation of water flooding down the larynx and trachea as they struggle to breathe is the most terrifying aspect of the experience. In waterboarding, this begins quickly, long before the onset of oxygen starvation.
submersion: Waterboarding does not require immersion in standing water. Someone can be waterboarded with as little as a canteen or two of water.
slowly dripping water on the forehead: Several types of water-based tortures have been used in Asia, but the famous "Chinese Water Torture" demonstrated in Mythbusters Episode 25 is very different than waterboarding.
a simulation: Waterboarding is actually forcing large quantities of water into the pharynx, trachea, and lungs, inducing choking and gagging in the subject.
I think anybody who thinks waterboarding isn't torture ought to get waterboarded, which by the way, is far from the only documented torture the United States has performed in our "War OF Terror," as old Borat put it.
Posted by Brian Bell at March 8, 2008 03:20 PMIt is indeed a sad day for America. Torture is antithetical to everything for which this nation once stood. I, for one, will attempt to temper my sadness by contemplating the enormity of our comrade Obama's fabulous victory in the GREAT STATE OF WYOMING!
Posted by nerdoff at March 8, 2008 04:07 PMAmerica's president is a war criminal. Incredible, isn't it.
Posted by gay veteran at March 8, 2008 04:11 PMSome missionary folk came to the door today to ask for canned goods for the poor and when they were leaving they asked if there was something they could say a prayer for me...I paused and said, "Pray for our country, in a time when the President thinks it's ok to torture human beings in the name of national security." They hesitated and then said, "We will."
Posted by Roy Batty at March 8, 2008 06:09 PMYeah, well, I think anyone who thinks the 'rich' need to pay higher taxes should be paying twice that tax rate themselves.
Posted by lordtyranus2 at March 8, 2008 06:31 PMlordtyranus2 (or pants pissing peter), how's life in the bunker? ROFLOL
Posted by gay veteran at March 8, 2008 06:52 PMThe only difference now is that the United States OPENLY AND OFFICIALLY sanctions its own use of torture, specifically waterboarding:
"Many Americans were puzzled by the news, in 1902, that United States soldiers were torturing Filipinos with water. The United States, throughout its emergence as a world power, had spoken the language of liberation, rescue, and freedom. This was the language that, when coupled with expanding military and commercial ambitions, had helped launch two very different wars."
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/02/25/080225fa_fact_kramer
Posted by Shirin at March 9, 2008 03:35 AMFOCUS | The Water Cure
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/030808Y.shtml
For The New Yorker, Paul Kramer explores the history of "the water cure," or waterboarding, in US foreign affairs and the American psyche during the early 20th century. He writes: "Many Americans were puzzled by the news, in 1902, that United States soldiers were torturing Filipinos with water. The United States, throughout its emergence as a world power, had spoken the language of liberation, rescue, and freedom."
Shirin, I posted prior to reading the comments. We both have the same article. The article was sent to me by a Hindu Swami yesterday who wanted me to know that I was naive to think Americans don't torture and have always tortured.
Posted by Judith at March 9, 2008 06:11 AMThose who embrace torture are souless.
Posted by Judith at March 9, 2008 06:13 AMActually, all sitting US JAGs and the recently retired ones unambiguously testified to Congress that waterboarding is torture under the Geneva Convention and hence illegal under US law. Scott Horton, "The JAGs Set the Record Straight", Harpers.
Only Muckasey refuses to acknowledge legal reality.
So lordanus is ignorant, as well as being vicious delusional wingnut scum. Par for the course.
Posted by euzoius at March 9, 2008 08:42 AMIt is torture and people like can Lordass can say it isn't, but that doesn't change facts. As I said before, we shouldn't even be discussing whether or not waterboarding is torture. Of course it is torture. Read the article I and Shirin linked above.
If Lordass thinks it is not torture, then I would be interested in knowing what he/she classifies as torture.
Posted by Judith at March 9, 2008 10:53 AMActually, all sitting US JAGs and the recently retired ones unambiguously testified to Congress that waterboarding is torture under the Geneva Convention and hence illegal under US law. Scott Horton, "The JAGs Set the Record Straight", Harpers.
Only Muckasey refuses to acknowledge legal reality.
Mukasey is the attorney general and thus his view IS legal reality.
Newsflash, idiot, even if you agree with the opinion a couple JAGs, the CIA is a non military institution, and isn't bound by anything of the sort.
It's ALL the current service JAGS, lardanus, not "a couple", it's their area of practice specialty, and we've never had such a situation of a "disageement" on such a point. And we don't know what the CIA attorneys thought about the issue.
And the fact that the CIA isn't "bound" by the JAG chiefs' opinion is irrelevant to the question of whether it is considered torture under US law. You're very stupid.
And Muckasey is basically saying he "can't conclude" that it's torture, you crazed wingnut scum.
Posted by euzoius at March 9, 2008 06:14 PMAnd the fact that the CIA isn't "bound" by the JAG chiefs' opinion is irrelevant to the question of whether it is considered torture under US law
Then why the hell did you bring them up?
You are right about 1 thing, though. No binding authority from any of the 3 brances of government has stated that waterboarding is torture under US law.
Posted by lordtyranus2 at March 9, 2008 08:44 PMYeah, well, I think anyone who thinks the 'rich' need to pay higher taxes should be paying twice that tax rate themselves. -- lordtyranus2
Lord...Anus,
On Social Security/FICA taxes, anyone earning less than $102k this year will pay a rate, not just twice, but INFINITELY more than a millionaire. 6.2% v. 0% (on the 102,001st dollar)
Posted by bartcopfan at March 10, 2008 09:32 AMActually, I came here to post my standard commentary about how our acceptance and use of torture puts OUR side at risk.
When some captured US soldier or airman is tortured, what will we be able to say in opposition? It's OK when WE do it? Opposing torture helps support our troops!
Posted by bartcopfan at March 10, 2008 09:36 AMWhere is the evidence that not waterboarding detainees in Guantanemo will somehow prevent the 'righteous and moral' arabs from flying planes into buildings and beheading our troops?
Posted by lordtyranus2 at March 10, 2008 01:55 PMGet your troops out of where they have no right to be, and get them to stop beheading and de-legging and de-arming people there with their bombs and missiles and machine guns, and no one will harm them.
This is how it works, see? When you send your troops into other peoples' countries to do harm, the people there tend to act in self defense and that sometimes necessitates harming your troops to keep them from - you know - killing the people whose country you have invaded. Funny how that works, but that's what happens every single time.
Posted by Shirin at March 11, 2008 11:28 PM