[QUOTE=El Cid Viscoso]
Induction Fallacy. By your (il)logic the entire US Criminal Justice System should be thrown out because a detective whacked a suspected sneak-thief with a phone book in order to extract a list of accomplices.
[/quote]
Bad analogy. If it were known that all police in the U.S. condone and systematically employ torture, then yes the entire justice system would be suspect.
[QUOTE=El Cid Viscoso]
I invite you to re-read the post(s) to which you appear to be responding. I have not denied Khalid was mistreated by the CIA. In fact, there is credible evidence he was prepared for and quite good at receiving many forms of true torture, such that a reasonably mild technique known as “waterboarding”* was inefficient in his case.
[/QUOTE]
You’re kidding, right? “Reasonably mild”? Were you aware that CIA officers themselves only lasted an average of 14 seconds of being subjected to waterboarding? And THAT’S presumably when they knew they were safe. Sorry, but you’re quite wrong about this.
I asked the same question. See post 33, although I think “mild” is a poor choice of words for a tactic that makes people think they’re drowning.
Right, so it was an elective procedure. Let me ask you: if you knew national security weren’t on the line and this were only a drill where you could “tap out” without penalty, wouldn’t you?
Sorry, but you haven’t proved anything. And while we’re spitballing here, if I had the choice between waterboarding and the strappado or waterboarding and sustained extreme cold, I’d take waterboarding. Speedy results are anticipated so it’s a perfect time to drop a honey pot; most combatants who’ve been through SERE or SERE-like training program themselves with at least one.
[QUOTE=lowbrass]
If it were known that all police in the U.S. condone and systematically employ torture, then yes the entire justice system would be suspect.
[/quote]
Do all Americans condone and systematically employ torture? I’d like to see a cite for that. Regardless, read up on the Exclusionary Rule and my extrapolation stands.
You just can’t lend any credence to confessions extracted by torture and considering our behaviour (specifically this adminsitration’s behaviour), we have to presume torture.
You may think you do not, but look at it from another angle.
Bush was elected, and then reinstalled, to those who oppose the US (lets not get into a debate about wether its the US or world peace being opposed here) they have a slim grasp of what democracy is about and how it works, their view is that the US president was elected by the US population.
As far as they are concerned, then yes, all Americans do condone and employ torture, otherwise they would be so outraged at this violation of all civilised standards that they would rise up and remove the torturers and their leaders.
This is the size of the task that the US now faces to win over populations, and no amount of bombs, and bullets is ever going to convince them otherwise, it’ll only serve to confirm their worst suspicions.
As each day draws on, the propagandists hardly have to break sweat, because this adminstration is doing a much better job than they ever could, worse still, much of it isn’t even propaganda, its actually the truth.
[QUOTE=El Cid Viscoso]
Right, so it was an elective procedure. Let me ask you: if you knew national security weren’t on the line and this were only a drill where you could “tap out” without penalty, wouldn’t you?
[/quote]
Now you’re just making absurd excuses. If the procedure were truly “mild”, then no, I would not end the experiment prematurely. If you want to stick your head in the sand and continue to contend that a procedure under which trained CIA people could only last 14 seconds is “mild”, then I have nothing further to say to you on this.
Speaking of proving anything, exactly what is that supposed to prove? I’d rather have a car battery hooked up to my nutsack than have needles shoved in my eyes; that doesn’t mean either is mild.
And that proves waterboarding is “mild” how, exactly?
Strawman.
The Bush administration condones torture, and explicit memos exist to document this fact. It has been systematically employed by the U.S. military on detainees. The fact that neocons want to re-define “torture” as whatever they say it is does not change that fact.
[QUOTE=casdave]
As far as they are concerned, then yes, all Americans do condone and employ torture, otherwise they would be so outraged at this violation of all civilised standards that they would rise up and remove the torturers and their leaders.
[/QUOTE]
Then they are ignorant of our system, for that action is called Revolution. American citizens will never come close to Revolution until the majority are directly and adversely affected by the US’s trespasses. None of which, by the way, changes the fact that under the custody of the US, Khalid’s neck is remarkably unstretched, and as an Enemy Combatant (3 hots and a cot, much more than some peeps got) it may well stay that way indefinitely. Meanwhile, respectfully, a violent murderer has made a good man his propagandist.
To someone hardened like Khalid, a well-known tactic that causes neither permanent physical nor psychological effects hardly rises to the category of mistreatment, let alone torture. So yes, it’s mild. And none of this washes away the fact that he was only waterboarded to make him “name names.” He wasn’t in an Iron Maiden at his hearing. No one hooked his nutsack to a car battery to compel him to saw off a man’s head before a video camera.
[QUOTE=El Cid Viscoso]
Right, so it was an elective procedure. Let me ask you: if you knew national security weren’t on the line and this were only a drill where you could “tap out” without penalty, wouldn’t you?
[/QUOTE]
I would think there would be a penalty. I would think that participants in the exercise would be required to act as if national security was on the line. Otherwise, what would be the point of the training?
Plus, I did not follow the links, so I don’t know if the participants were subjected to just the act of waterboarding, or if it was part of a full-interrogation exercise. If the former, then 14 seconds could have been their “tapping out.” Or did you mean “tapping out” as declining to participate in the exercise? Which, as I said, would probably not be an option.
[QUOTE=El Cid Viscoso]
a well-known tactic that causes neither permanent physical nor psychological effects
[/QUOTE]
Cite please
We only have the US word that the only pressure he underwent was waterboarding.
We do not know if there was more, three years seems to be a long time to administer a course of waterboarding.
Anyhow, reality is that waterbaording is torture, like it or not, and you seem to portray it as acceptable.
You limits may rest at waterboarding, but if you felt you could get just a little bit more information, with just a little bit more pressure, how tempted would you be ?
Would you be inclined to believe the denials of the victim, after all, your operatives tell you he is a bad 'un.
To all:
This administration has failed so abysmally that a scumsucker like Khalid’s confession raises doubt in the mind of even the most non-partisan of Americans. It used to be that we held the moral high ground. Now even known terrorists can elicit doubt of our country in the mind of many average citizens.
[QUOTE=Frostillicus]
Was that the plot that involved destroying the Brooklyn Bridge with blowtorches? Thank God we dodged that bullet!
[/QUOTE]
Yup!
I heard a rumor that he was trying to buy a giant hacksaw to take down the Gateway Arch too!
God help us if they ever get a hold of this catalog!
CMC fnord!