Mukasey Refuses To Call Waterboarding ‘Torture’
Mukasey Refuses To Call Waterboarding ‘Torture’
Throughout his nomination hearings, Attorney General nominee Mike Mukasey has consistently denounced the use of torture. Torture is “antithetical to what this country stands for,” he said yesterday. “I would be uncomfortable with any evidence used in trial that is coerced,” he added.
But under questioning from Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) today, Mukasey refused to classify the practice of waterboarding — in which a suspect has water poured over his face to simulate drowning — as unconstitutional, repeatedly claiming it depends on how one defines “torture”:
MUKASEY: If waterboarding is torture, torture is not constitutional. […]
WHITEHOUSE: If it’s torture. That’s a massive hedge. I mean, it either is or it isn’t. Do you have an opinion on whether waterboarding…is constitutional?
MUKASEY: If it amounts to torture, it is not constitutional.
WHITEHOUSE: I’m very disappointed in that answer. I think it is purely semantic.
MUKASEY: I’m sorry.
Watch it:
Mukasey claimed that he doesn’t “know what’s involved in the technique” of waterboarding. But as Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) has pointed out, there’s no question that waterboarding is torture: “[T]o make someone believe that you are killing him by drowning is no different than holding a pistol to his head and firing a blank. I believe that it is torture.”
Mukasey’s position also puts him at odds with CIA director Michael Hayden, who has reportedly banned waterboarding from CIA terror interrogations.
UPDATE: Marty Lederman at Balkinization comments, “It’s really remarkable how far we have fallen when a jurist of Judge Mukasey’s caliber cannot answer such questions without hesitation.”
UPDATE II: Human Rights First observes that Mukasey’s statements imply “that forms of coercive interrogation which violate Common Article 3 may be practiced by government agencies, including the C.I.A. ”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
81 Responses to “Mukasey Refuses To Call Waterboarding ‘Torture’”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Think ProgressContact Us
Donate
MUKASEY: I’m sorry.
At least he got that right. He’s a sorry excuse for a potential Attorney General.
On the bright side, he loves belgian waffles!
October 18th, 2007 at 1:17 pmWell then, he should get a unanimous thumbs up for the job by the Democrats then.
October 18th, 2007 at 1:17 pmOT, but the House failed to override the SCHIP veto: 273-156
October 18th, 2007 at 1:18 pmRemember, kids, waterboarding was the preferred method of torture utilized by the Khymer Rouge.
Marvelous company we’re keeping…
October 18th, 2007 at 1:20 pmWouldn’t it be refreshing if we could get an appointee with actual principles he’s/she’s proud to display instead of these guys who act like they’re in a dodge-ball game?
October 18th, 2007 at 1:21 pmIf Mike doesn’t understand let’s let him try it and then see what he thinks. Mike knows he will do as he’s told and now he’s playing dumb. Once this brilliant Judge who had one of the biggest cases in History now doesn’t know any. Sounds alot like Gonzales to me.
October 18th, 2007 at 1:22 pmAccording to Wikipedia:
“Waterboarding is a form of torture which is used to obtain information, coerce confessions, and for punishment and intimidation. …”
Sounds pretty cut and dry to me.
October 18th, 2007 at 1:23 pmAnd the beat goes on. What a sad state of affairs this is.
October 18th, 2007 at 1:23 pmSo, no trolls willing to step up and try to claim waterboarding is not torture?
How disappointing.
October 18th, 2007 at 1:29 pm“if it amounts to torture”…sounds like the war on terror will be a little more wetter under his watch…
October 18th, 2007 at 1:29 pmWhy don’t we waterboard him until he does?
Comment by BARTLEBEE
I like it Bartlebee! If he is introcuded to the activity, maybe he can render an opinion on how it feels. Well, Mukasey does it FEEL like torture to you?
October 18th, 2007 at 1:29 pmWe can surmise Mukasey is owned by the Bush administration from the little pin on his lapel.
October 18th, 2007 at 1:30 pmI wouldn’t be surprised if it’s actually a “bug”…
The next question should have been, “what is your definition of torture?”
October 18th, 2007 at 1:30 pmAccording to Wikipedia:
Comment by A Patriot Acting — October 18, 2007 @ 1:23 pm
But, more importantly, what does conservapedia say?
October 18th, 2007 at 1:30 pmBut, more importantly, what does conservapedia say?
Comment by dim wit — October 18, 2007 @ 1:30 pm
If it was good enough for the NAZIs, it’s good enough for the GOP!
October 18th, 2007 at 1:32 pmWhat the fluck do you *expect* from a Bushtoady reicher??
October 18th, 2007 at 1:33 pmBeing subject to ridiculous questioning from Democrat committee members that have already made up their minds should be classified as torture. Comment by TCDon — October 18, 2007 @ 1:32 pm
It was considered torture when we tried the Nazis for using it. Guess your true colors are showing, fräulein!
BTW OT: See the silly comments from Nobel Prize-winning geneticist James Watson? Looks like the “I’m a nobel prize winner and therefore I’m right†argument has been Gored. Comment by TCDon — October 18, 2007 @ 1:32 pm
You’re saying because he’s a racist, his work in DNA wasn’t right? BAHAHA, just when you thought the GOP lemmings couldn’t say anything MORE STUPID!
October 18th, 2007 at 1:34 pmDon’t forget, “Mmmmmmm…boxers or briefs, big boy?”
October 18th, 2007 at 1:36 pmBeing subject to ridiculous comments from TCDon should be classified as torture.
Fixed it for you, fascist.
October 18th, 2007 at 1:37 pmBut, more importantly, what does conservapedia say?
They say:
In 1901, Major Edwin Glenn was court-martialed and sentenced to 10 years hard labour for waterboarding an insurgent in the Philippines during the Spanish-American War. In 1947, Yukio Asano - a Japanese officer - was charged with war crimes and received 15 years hard labour for waterboarding a US civilian. It was declared illegal by US generals in Vietnam and a US soldier was court-martialed after The Washington Post (21.1.1968) published a front page photograph of him supervising the waterboarding of a captured North Vietnamese soldier. According to Chapter 18, section 2340 of the United States Legal Code, torture is defined as “an act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering.”
October 18th, 2007 at 1:37 pmTCDon sez:
I have no doubt that you and your ilk would consider it such, TCD. Your kind hates questions like slugs hate salt.
Regarding the Dems having ‘made up their minds’, the question wasn’t asked to clarify the issue, the question was asked to clarify Mukasey’s stand on the issue (which he refused to do). Big difference.
Don’t you think the committee deserved a straight answer to the question?
October 18th, 2007 at 1:38 pmThey must all admire President Bill. They have all adopted his infamous “It all depends on what your definition of ‘is’ is.
The Repukes impeached Bill for it. Do you suppose we could return the favor?
October 18th, 2007 at 1:38 pmTCDon has a good point; Republicans are such pansies that trying to get them to answer honestly seems like torture to them.
October 18th, 2007 at 1:40 pmBeing subject to ridiculous questioning from Democrat committee members that have already made up their minds should be classified as torture.
Comment by TCDon
Yep, having those lousy traitor congresscritters asking silly questions about your king and his court really are awful, huh? What say we torture your loved ones and see if you think oversight is a bad thing. Why are you so scared of the Constitution? Do you get the weird feeling “down there” when you see Dumbya in his flight suit? In your view, what exactly can’t the monarch do in America? Anything he wants? To anybody he wants? It truly amazes me that the right side is so frightened, they would gladly pitch our way of life overboard to support a delusional administration’s claim that they will protect you.
TC listen up: W doesn’t like you, he doesn’t know you and he doesn’t care who you are and what you are. he only needs you cheerleading for him. Once you are done doing that, you are expendable. I am sad you won’t have a king to worship here in the next 15 months or so. maybe you could follow him to Paraguay? You’d like it there. Lots of young boys to “play with”.
October 18th, 2007 at 1:40 pmTCDon once again misses the fact that Nazis were expert in “framing” their message, and chose Socialist as a term precisely to fool morons just exactly like him: Good Germans, otherwise known these days as repuke Koolaid drinkers.
October 18th, 2007 at 1:41 pmTCDon,
How is the question concerning waterboarding ridiculous?
October 18th, 2007 at 1:44 pmthe truest sign of a fascist oligarchy…..
the people can no longer make their leaders accountable to the law
October 18th, 2007 at 1:46 pmTCDon,
Can you address my question?
October 18th, 2007 at 1:50 pm~~Note in #25 that torture is defined as an act committed by a person, and is not measured by who receives the pain or suffering. The infraction can be judged simply as a matter of conduct.
DOJ’s interpretation is that (regardless of authority or purpose) the performance of these actions with specific intent to create physical and mental anguish to coerce the subject is in violation of (18)(2340).
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/18usc23402340a2.htm
And what Mukasey is basically saying, knowing this, is that he can’t be sure if waterboarding creates anguish.
Disingenuous, at the least.
October 18th, 2007 at 1:50 pmSo perhaps you should be saying, “if it was good enough for the NAZIs, it’s good enough for the MoveOnocrats.â€
Comment by TCDon — October 18, 2007 @ 1:39 pm
Though your point here isn’t clear, you seem to be implying that since the Nazis were a socialist movement (a point I will return to) then left-leaning organizations more closely resemble the Nazis than someone who advocates torture.
First, the Nazis were socialist in name only. Pick up any history book to learn that the Nazis actually rose to power by scapegoating the growing socialist threat. See the Burning of the Reichstag.
Second, I guess I don’t really need a “second” but I’ll point out for good measure that advocating torture seems far more “Nazi-esque” than opposing it to me. I’m sure I could muster some support for that stance if need be.
October 18th, 2007 at 1:51 pmAnd Leahy “likes” a man who will continue to torture in America’s name.
What have we become as a nation when our leaders despoil the Constitution they’ve sworn to protect? When they abrogate human rights? When treaties and Conventions and Agreements are ignored as “quaint”?
There is no Rule of Law when the Senate can confirm the lawless toadies and liars to govern the legal agencies. By confirming the Whim of Bush, they enable his continuing dictatorship.
;pfffft!:
October 18th, 2007 at 1:54 pmTCDon-
October 18th, 2007 at 1:56 pmAlthough I’m quite sure your “kool-aid haze” is keeping you from realizing (or maybe it’s just your blind worship) that your Dear Leader, his “man of mystery” VP Cheney, their private army, complicite followers in the House and practically every other branch of government that is carefully staffed not with qualified personell but even more inexperienced fanatical bootlickers, their penchance for torture, secrecy and sovereign occupations, their control over the media and their obstruction to passing ANYTHING that might actually benefit the working class of this nation strike FAR more comparisons to the Nazi Party than you might ever care to see much less admit. Remember that the German population was also in a state of denial about the extent of their leaders crimes.
Well said, well said and very true. I guess we need to say good-bye to our country, as I don’t see enough of the people standing up and demanding or making a change.
October 18th, 2007 at 1:59 pmWell then, he should get a unanimous thumbs up for the job by the Democrats then.
October 18th, 2007 at 2:00 pmComment by Spudge Boy — October 18, 2007 @ 1:17 pm
————————
No sh*t. My thoughts exactly. This Dem congress is no less a rubber stamp than the Repugs were.
We’re all still waiting for an answer, TCDon.
Don’t tell us you’ve already lost your stomach for this topic…
October 18th, 2007 at 2:00 pmCitizen_of_Earth sez:
Your farewell is belated. This country stopped existing as we used to know it in 2000.
October 18th, 2007 at 2:02 pmAnyone that does not believe waterboarding is torture should have to endure the POW part of the SERE (Survival, Escape, Resistance, and Evasion) course. Then they will phucking know for sure.
October 18th, 2007 at 2:03 pmWhat forms of interrogation techniques do you find acceptable if American lives are in imminent risk?
Comment by TCDon — October 18, 2007 @ 2:02 pm
Sign up, join Special Forces and do SERE training and see if you change your tune.
But you chickenhawkers don’t have the guts, do you?
October 18th, 2007 at 2:07 pmRemember, kids, waterboarding was the preferred method of torture utilized by the Khymer Rouge.
Comment by TripMaster Monkey — October 18, 2007 @ 1:20 pm
Don’t forget… the Nazis and Japanese both used it during WW II, and after the war, we tried them as war criminals for doing it.
Oh yeah… Democracy on the march!
October 18th, 2007 at 2:09 pmTCDon sez:
Nice attempt at a dodge, but no dice. Torture has never been a reliable means of extracting intelligence. It is, however, a wonderfully effective means of extracting confessions, real or fictitious. When this fact is taken into consideration, your little “dirty bomb” hypothetical is shown to be the irrelevant, emotionally charged claptrap it is.
YOUR turn. Didn’t you think the committee deserved a straight answer from Mukasey regarding whether or not waterboarding was torture? If not, why not?
October 18th, 2007 at 2:11 pmYou avoided the question, Bartlebee. What forms of interrogation techniques do you find aceptable if American lives are in imminent risk? Anything more than asking nicely and saying “please?â€
Comment by TCDon — October 18, 2007 @ 2:06 pm
That’s the same excuse the Germans used, we told them the same thing we told you - there is no excuse for torture in a civilized society! When you act like a dictator/terrorist (torture is a clear sign of this), you become one!
As for your strawman, you do realize that torture doesn’t work, so you’re advocating GUARANTEED FAILURE!!! What fools this GOP breeds!
October 18th, 2007 at 2:16 pm.
Is torture EVER an American Principle?
October 18th, 2007 at 2:16 pmNOBODY IS IN IMMINENT THREAT, YOU PU$$Y BED WETTER.
October 18th, 2007 at 2:16 pmStill waiting for an answer, TCdon…
October 18th, 2007 at 2:17 pmDon’t forget… the Nazis and Japanese both used it during WW II, and after the war, we tried them as war criminals for doing it.
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — October 18, 2007 @ 2:09 pm
Tried, convicted and executed.
October 18th, 2007 at 2:20 pmExactly why there is a GOOD COP in the good cop/bad cop scenario.
It is NEVER the bad cop that gets the info.
October 18th, 2007 at 2:22 pmWhat forms of interrogation techniques do you find aceptable if American lives are in imminent risk? Anything more than asking nicely and saying “please?â€
Comment by TCDon — October 18, 2007 @ 2:06 pm
Howzabout using whatever interrogation techniques you want, but if the information wasn’t useful or necessary, the interrogators and their superior officers receive exactly the same “techniques”? After all, it’s not as if they’re gonna _die_, right? And they would take it for the Country, right?
October 18th, 2007 at 2:30 pmbut if the information wasn’t useful or necessary, the interrogators and their superior officers receive exactly the same “techniques� After all, it’s not as if they’re gonna _die_, right? And they would take it for the Country, right?
Comment by Luis M — October 18, 2007 @ 2:30 pm
We’re sure that TCDon is so committed and so sure that the technique works, he’ll volunteer that he and all of his fellow GOP ProTorturists will submit to the same techniques that each Gitmo prisoner that has been released (because they were innocent) were exposed to. Doesn’t that sound like a reasonable measure of his trust in torture?
October 18th, 2007 at 2:36 pmGosh, how hard can it be to define torture. We know that traditionally water boarding has been prosecuted as a crime against US military personnel in the two world wars, Viet Nam and as one post notes - the occupation of the Philipines. Water boarding was considered torture when practiced in Cambodia. Water boarding was considered torture when used to prosecute Japanese and German war criminals after WWII.
We have never seen this taken up as questioning. Should the individual be asked, in seriatim, about each example and whether the US had been mistaken in treating water boarding as torture.
History, custom and shared legal definition all go towards the definition of torture. We need to teach that lesson publicly and loundly each chance during the confirmation process. The public needs to know. We need to stop these people from hiding behind the “It depends upon the definition” dodge.
October 18th, 2007 at 2:44 pmIs torture EVER an American Principle?
Comment by Max-1 — October 18, 2007 @ 2:16 pm
Apparently, it has become so now. America doesn’t exist, as an idea, outside of what we do. So a “preventative” invasion of a country, extreme rendition, utilization of depleted uranium in weapons systems, total survellience within the U.S., torture that we are aware of…and you can bet there is SO MUCH MORE that we aren’t aware of yet…this IS America now.
October 18th, 2007 at 2:47 pmIs torture EVER an American Principle?
Comment by Max-1 — October 18, 2007 @ 2:16 pm
Never.
Comment by BARTLEBEE — October 18, 2007 @ 2:20 pm
It is not an American Principle but it is now a Rdepug Principle. Just one more black mark on this country that will have to scrubbed off in ‘09.
And DCDon, you watch too much 24. I have seen first hand in Vietnam that it doesn’t work. They would tell us ANYTHING they thought we wanted to hear, and 99.99% of it was either false or useless. But you sound just like a typical Chickenhawk BushCo butt-sucker, getting your rocks off from that safe haven of your M-79 Kommando Keyboard.
October 18th, 2007 at 2:52 pm“And DCDon, you watch too much 24. I have seen first hand in Vietnam that it doesn’t work. They would tell us ANYTHING they thought we wanted to hear, and 99.99% of it was either false or useless.”
Comment by upside99 — October 18, 2007 @ 2:52 pm
Apparently you aren’t the only one. John McCain says when he was a Vietnam POW, he was tortured for the names of the men in his unit, his superiors, or some such information. He gave his captors the names of the Green Bay Packers front line (yeah– good luck rounding THOSE guys up).
I don’t agree with McCain on everything — or even most things. But he’s got it right on torture. It’s not useful.
October 18th, 2007 at 2:58 pmBartlebee —- heartfelt “HEAR, HEAR’s” to you!!! Wonderful and eloquent posts today.
*APPLAUSE*
- A
October 18th, 2007 at 3:02 pmAn America that endorses torture - IN ANY FORM - is no longer America.
Period. I’d rather be dead than be morally equivalent to the terrorists we fear by using the same tactics they do.
October 18th, 2007 at 3:05 pmI can already feel my stomach beginning to churn when I think of the Dems caving in on this nominee and giving Bush another lawyer who will back him.
October 18th, 2007 at 3:18 pmComment by TCDon — October 18, 2007 @ 3:31 pm
How much time in the military or law enforcement have you spent? From your posts I will say Nada. If you had, and had gone through any of the basic training programs on interrogation, espcape and evasion, we wouldn’t be having these conversations.
Look at all the military combat veterans in Congress; they ALL vote against this crap, it is the Chickenhawks who support it.
October 18th, 2007 at 3:40 pmTCDon’s American spirit is running down his leg.
These Repugnicunts are willing to throw away everything America stands for in worship of their God Bush.
“Holy Father George, please keep me safe from these evil brown terrorists who might, maybe, someday blow up something somewhere. You know, like you did with Sadam when he wanted to destroy the world with his WMD’s. If you will keep me safe, I promise to worship your every utterance (except for that stupid thing about keeping food on your family, what the fck was that about Lord?), and to vote for your Party. In Jenna’s name I thee beseech”
Silly Repugnicunts. Grow a spine, clean up that mess on the floor, get your tongue out of George’s ass and think for yourselves.
October 18th, 2007 at 4:02 pmMethinks waterboarding and other forms of authorized torture should be demonstrated in the hallowed halls of congress, this televised for all to see. Good candidates (volunteers) would be selected from both parties, at random and including both sexes.Let’s see who flinches first.
October 18th, 2007 at 4:04 pmHow low the Bush administration has fallen.
And to think that they’re still in free-fall!
October 18th, 2007 at 4:06 pmWaterbaording was torture when the Nazis did it. That’s good enough for me.
October 18th, 2007 at 4:59 pmI have seen the tweedster and others of his ilk argue that US lives are at stake. It is always a 24 scenario in which a nuclear bomb is about to go off to justify torture. It is a tale told by by an idiot, full of sound and fury and signifying nothing.
I may know a little about this topic. I have been a judge advocate and taught the laws of war to those going into combat. I have been both a military and civilian prosecutor and been involved in a number of interrogations with police and other agencies. So what have I learned about the ticking bomb and torture?
1. When has there ever been a ticking bomb scenario? Not in this war against terrorism. How many have been subjected to torture? Apparently many. How many real plots have been stopped because of these enhanced interrogation tactics? None that have been actually documented.
2. How reliable is information gained by torture? Not very in the view of those who have extensive interrogation experience. Sen. McCain has first hand experience and knew how to respond as a POW.
3. I certainly saw criminal defendants who were facing severe punishment for their own crimes more than willing to rat out any number of innocent people to save their own necks. Why would we expect a terrorist who believes martyrdom to be the highest expression of faith to be weaker?
4. Even enhanced interrogation techniques take time to work. Indeed, you can always get someone to lie immediately by water boarding. However, you only turn the subject into a source by confronting that individual with your superior knowledge and establishing that resistance is futile. Any person trained in resisting interrogation knows to reveal little of the truth as possible. Feedback from the interrogator establishes how much must be given up. One of the big time Al Qaeda operatives succeeded in providing lots of false leads after his interrogation.
5. The Judge Advocate General of each service disagreed with the “enhanced” interrogation standard as being ineffective and placing our troops in danger in future conflicts. The JAG is not an appointment filled by a bleeding heart liberal. This should tell you something.
October 18th, 2007 at 5:03 pmComment by JMOHR — October 18, 2007 @ 5:03 pm
Great post, JMOHR! Thank you for taking the time to lay that out.
TCDon has been severely bloodied on this one and has slunk back to his basement, to watch his reruns of “24″ and get Cheeto stains all over his keyboard.
October 18th, 2007 at 5:17 pmThere is something we are forgetting here. We have none other to than Sen. Chuck Schumer to thank for Mukasey. I called his office today and the aide I spoke with confirmed that yes indeed, the good Senator recommended Mukasey to the White House. So when your frustration with Mukasey boils over as much as mine has, don’t forget to send Chuck some love too.
October 18th, 2007 at 5:33 pmSure Tweedseter, as long as you answer mine first. What forms of interrogation techniques do you find acceptable if American lives are in imminent risk? Let’s say for example, if the subject knows where a dirty-bomb is hidden in your home town but won’t talk?
Comment by TCDon — October 18, 2007 @ 2:02 pm
Oh, I dunno. How about:
“An act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering.â€
That means nothing that breaks the skin, involves stimulating nerves through various means, threats of killing, maiming or injuring friends and family, and so on. If playing chess yielded massive results in WWII, if TALKING to PEOPLE (these are human beings, remember; their actions have real world motivations, not scary “I’m evil, muahahahaha” mustache-twirling fiction) yielded more real-world results than torturing, that is how it should be played.
Point blank, physical harm, and mental THREATS do not work. They yield false results. A tortured individual will admit to anything, say ANYTHING to get out of their situation. Why the hell do you think SO MANY false confessions have been yielded via such means over the centuries. The Inquisition, anyone?
“24″ is NOT THE REAL WORLD, buddy! Real trained militants do not yield valuable information under torture. Untrained men might, or they might be lying through their teeth. You have no way of knowing until you follow-up, and if they were lying, it is not only too late to correct, you’ve gone through with an action that might very well dig you DEEPER in to a hole, what with the whole possibility of going after completely innocent individuals and torturing THEM to follow up on potential false-leads.
Torture is banned for a REASON. It doesn’t work, and you sacrifice the moral high ground the moment you conduct torture.
October 18th, 2007 at 5:36 pmHowever, Bush can simply state that the techniques do NOT violate Common Article 3, because Congress gave Him the authority to reinterpretate the Geneva Convections.
I would dearly like to see the heirarchy of this Administration defend their actions in an International War Crimes Tribunal.
October 18th, 2007 at 5:47 pmThe solution is simple. Put Bush and Cheney in a Gitmo style facility with waterboarding for a weekend. If they haven’t renounced their methods used in the WH, then Waterboarding isn’t torture.
October 18th, 2007 at 5:51 pmUpdate from Prof. Lederman’s post on the Balkinization blog:
“Watching his early colloquy with Leahy just now, I see that Mukasey cites the Prize Cases as authority for the President disregarding a statute — but under the Prize Cases, not only wasn’t Lincoln acting contrary to statute; his conduct was authorized by statute.”
Yeah, but who wants an Attorney General that actually knows the law, anyway?
Cheers,
October 18th, 2007 at 5:56 pmWow, Moderation, it took that many hours for someone to post an intelligent answer to my thought provoking question rather than juvenile, ad hominem attacks. Comment by TCDon — October 18, 2007 @ 5:59 pm
From the same schizy loon that said liberals post too often!!! What a loser!
It’s funny how most liberals hate being asked the tough questions. Comment by TCDon — October 18, 2007 @ 5:59 pm
It’s funny how most conservatives project their own inadequacies on others!
At least you gave a good answer to a tough question. Now, you wanna know something? Comment by TCDon — October 18, 2007 @ 5:59 pm
You’re an idiot? We already know that.
(drumroll please ………………………………………)I think I actually agree with you on this one. But then again, so did the nominee. Before today, I didn’t know what the congressman meant by the term “waterboarding,†but I agree with the nominee that if something constitutes torture, it is unconstitutional. Comment by TCDon — October 18, 2007 @ 5:59 pm
If you didn’t know that before today, then thanks for confirming the IDIOT description! And yes WATERBOARDING IS TORTURE unless you’re saying we shouldn’t have tried all of those Nazis for using it?
Torture is something the Stalinists and Socialist dictators of the world practice. It is not for Americans.
Comment by TCDon — October 18, 2007 @ 5:59 pm
Thanks for confirming that you GOP EXTREMISTS are NOT AMERICANS!
October 18th, 2007 at 6:13 pmWell, according to this administration, nothing short of organ failure or death is considered torture. So I could break your fingers, one by one, and punch you in the face repeatedly and none of that would be considered torture.
October 18th, 2007 at 6:15 pmIf this turkey gets approved, we should all engage in a little reverse immigration . . . move to Mexico and invite him down for a little waterboarding fun.
I understand real estate prices, while reasonable, are appreciating there.
October 18th, 2007 at 6:35 pmOn second thought,
When his disasterous adm ends, Bush plans to move to Paraguay . . . a little to close . . . but big fences make good neighbors . . . we can get together and build a fence that makes the Great Wall of China look like a curb.
October 18th, 2007 at 6:37 pmMay be pricey . . . apparently, he’s bought about a million acres . . . the point of the giant fence wouldn’t be to keep others out, but to fence Bush in . . . give him a little lingering taste of Iraq.
October 18th, 2007 at 6:41 pm#102 TCdon:
Torture is something the Stalinists and Socialist dictators of the world practice. It is not for Americans….
… by definition.
I’d note that the Soviets thought that “stress positions”, “waterboarding” and such were just hunky-dory….
And the European Court of Human RIghts has ruled that “stress positions”, “hooding”, sleep deprivation, etc. are “inhuman treatment” (which happens to be barred by the Geneva Conventions Common Article 3, which bars “CID” [cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment]).
One Japanese officer was charged with war crimes (and convicted) for “waterboarding”.
Cheers,
October 18th, 2007 at 6:52 pm#30 TCdon
Excuse me RHF, but the term “Nazi†was short-form slang for the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei a/k/a “National-Socialist Freedom Movement.†So perhaps you should be saying, “if it was good enough for the NAZIs, it’s good enough for the MoveOnocrats.â€
Oh, that ol’ “Nazis are socialists! It says so in their name!!!” crapola, eh? Don’t you guys hire any new joke-writers every once in a while?
I suppose you’ll also claim that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea is a democratic country too. That would be about your level of ‘intellectual sophistication’……
Cheers,
October 18th, 2007 at 6:59 pm#30 TCdon:
Excuse me RHF, but the term “Nazi†was short-form slang for the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei a/k/a “National-Socialist Freedom Movement. 
Not to mention your German sucks big rocks. “Deutsche Arbeiterpartei” is “German Worker’s Party”.
But just keep trotting out your ignerrence; it does wonders for your “cause” here.
Cheers,
October 18th, 2007 at 7:01 pm#51 TCdon:
What forms of interrogation techniques do you find acceptable if American lives are in imminent risk? Let’s say for example, if the subject knows where a dirty-bomb is hidden in your home town but won’t talk?
“Asked and answered” a long time ago.
You really need new material. As it is, you’re just boring….
Cheers,
October 18th, 2007 at 7:06 pmI would like to know:
When, in the entire history of mankind, has torture prevented a ticking-time bomb attack?
October 18th, 2007 at 9:20 pmComment by Briseadh na Faire — October 18, 2007 @ 9:20 pm
Never has, and probably never will.
But that won’t stop the Bush cultists from bringing up that hypothetical scenario to support the torture of detainees, just in case it might, perhaps, probably, potentially, maybe, one day, prevent a ticking-time bomb attack.
In other words, they lie because they have to. There is no basis for their support of torture in the real world.
October 19th, 2007 at 12:01 am>What forms of interrogation techniques do you find acceptable if American
>lives are in imminent risk?
What jury of americans do you think is going to convict an american torturer who actually saves american lives you twit? How about this, we make all torture illegal, and in the RARE, UNLIKELY instance where torture actually prevents an attack, the torturers lawyer can claim the defense of “necessity” and he’ll get off. Yes, necessity is a valid legal defense in most jurisdictions for any crime that doesnt involve intentional killing.
Torture is illegal so that we cant torture people willy nilly looking for weapons that dont exist, like saddams WMD. Its so pyschopaths like your heroes will go to jail if they start torturing everyone they dont like without any justification and any real proof. When those people go in front of a jury, their going to go to jail. When people who save american lives go in front of a jury, its going to be a different story.
Tell me, where in america would you find a jury of 12 people (it requires all 12 members of a jury to convict of a criminal offense) who would find a cia agent guity if his actions foiled the sept 11th attacks? Heck, TP readers are probably more against torture than anyone else in america, and i’ll bet if you picked 12 of us randomly you wouldn’t get all 12 in agreement that a torturer who saved thousands of lives should actually be punished.
Heck, for that matter, where would you even find a prosecutor to prosecute?
Life is almost never, ever, like a episode of 24. Thats what deluded hysterics like yourself dont understand.
October 19th, 2007 at 3:07 am>When, in the entire history of mankind, has torture prevented
> a ticking-time bomb attack?
If this scenario ever actually occured, the defense could claim “necessity”, which applies in most cases. In the unlikely event that that defense was unavailble, the jury would likely nullify the verdict anyway.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification
Wailing chicken littles like TamponDon screaam and scream that we need to make acts legal before anyone can undertake them, but making something illegal and finding 12 people to punish them for that act are two totally different things, and you need both before someone receives punishment…
as others have stated very eloquently, no need to turn centuries of legal jurisprudence on its head to deal with every possibile scenario, jury nullification as it exists in the american legal system works VERY nicely to deal with such improbable events as TamponDon presents us with..
October 19th, 2007 at 3:16 amoh.. AND.. i forgot.. the “justified” torturer would almost surely get a pardon from the president even IF a jury convicted him. what president is going to pass up an opportunity to pardon a national hero? so there you go tampon don, there is yet ANOTHER obsctacle to a “justified” torturer ever serving any jail time…. not only would torture have to be illegal, but:
1) youd have to find a prosecutor to prosecute
2) a jury of 12 random people who would all convict him
3) a president who wouldnt pardon him.
now if the scenario you put forward, as ridiculously unlikely as it is, would actually happen, where would you find a prosectuor, 12 random people, and a president who all beleived this guy should be in jail?
October 19th, 2007 at 3:43 am