Waterboarding Rocks!

[Brainster]

Torture's great, isn't it? It makes people say what you want to hear.

And what you want to hear is high value information.

“High value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided a deeper understanding of the al Qa’ida organization that was attacking this country,”Adm. Dennis C. Blair, the intelligence director, wrote in a memo to his staff last Thursday.

You are dancing madly to avoid acknowledging the obvious; that the argument enhanced interrogation techniques don't work has been proven to be fraudulent.

 

[Peephole]

Raychill Maddow said Japanese soldiers convicted of waterboarding were hanged. False

The man who authorized those techniques at the Singapore YMCA, Lt. Col. Sumida, was sentenced to hang.

http://robinrowland.com/garret/2005/11/waterboarding-is-war-crime.html

Peephole's examples of Texans being waterboarded by police departments is fine, but what does that have to do with the CIA interrogating terrorist detainees in GITMO? They are not protected by the Bill of Rights.

Then they're protected by the Geneva conventions which also outlaw torture.

Additionally, the UN convention on torture doesn't make any distinctions between persons.

Torture is always illegal.

 

[Praktik]

that the argument enhanced interrogation techniques don't work has been proven to be fraudulent.

Well I think proven is a problematic term: I am aware that the techniques have been asserted to have provided important/useful information by various high-level individuals but I am unaware of any proof that this is so.

For that we'd need more declassifications along the lines of what Cheney has been advocating for.

 

[Cicero]

Maddow's error doesn't have anything to do with whether the US treated waterboarding as a war crime back then or not.



So what? Waterboarding was part of the litany of charges against him; that there were also other charges is irrelevant.

Rape isn't any less of a felony if someone is also charged with murder at the same time.



You are aware that commutation/reduction of sentence is not a pardon or exoneration of the convicted person on the original charge, right?

But hey, I'll tell you what. Let's do to every member of the CIA who waterboarded prisoners what was done to the Japanese convicted by the US of waterboarding in your little quoted paragraph there - sentence them after conviction to 15 years of hard labor, then three years into their sentences cut those sentences to ten years of hard labor.

I'm fine with that. How about you?



Except we don't know that. Or do you only trust Admiral Blair when he agrees with your preconcieved notions?

Yet you skipped over the "beating using hands, fists, club; kicking; burning using cigarettes" to highlight the waterboarding. If we subtract all these from the charge, would waterboarding alone have constituted a war crime? The OSS used the same technique in WWII. Is waterboarding now the equivalent of rape?

Actually, regarding WWII Nuremberg and Tokyo Trials, commutation/reduction of sentence, or even acquittals have nothing to do with exonerations, but it does have everything to do with the changing political climate.

 

[A'isha]

Yukio Asano Hideji Nakamura, Seitara Hata and Takeo Kita served 15-25 years at hard labor for waterboarding. False

They were charged with waterboarding as a war crime. True.

They were convicted of the charge of waterboarding as a war crime. Also true.

They were sentenced to 15 to 15 years of hard labor as a result of being convicted of waterboarding as a war crime. Hmm...true again.

They were later exonerated of the charge of waterboarding as a war crime. False.

And all of your pointless hairsplitting doesn't change any of that.

Peephole's examples of Texans being waterboarded by police departments is fine, but what does that have to do with the CIA interrogating terrorist detainees in GITMO? They are not protected by the Bill of Rights.

Perhaps you'd be so kind as to point out where the Bill of Rights limits itself to citizens only. Because all I see is verbiage like "no person", "any person", "the accused", "all criminal prosecutions", and even flat out bans with no exceptions like "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."

 

[Peephole]

If we subtract all these from the charge, would waterboarding alone have constituted a war crime?

Since waterboarding is torture and torture is considered a war crime, yes.

 

[A'isha]

Yet you skipped over the "beating using hands, fists, club; kicking; burning using cigarettes" to highlight the waterboarding. If we subtract all these from the charge, would waterboarding alone have constituted a war crime?

Yes, otherwise it wouldn't have been listed as one of the charges of torture in his trial for war crimes.

Let me break it down nice and simple for you.

What was he charged with? Torture. Is torture a violation of the laws and customs of war (ie, a war crime) according to those charges? Yes.

What did he do? He beat prisoners using hands, fists, and/or clubs. Was this considered torture? Yes. How do we know? It's part of the specifications listed for the charge of torture. Is torture a violation of the laws and customs of war (ie, a war crime) per the above? Yes.

What else did he do? He kicked prisoners. Was this considered torture? Yes. How do we know? It's part of the specifications listed for the charge of torture. Is torture a violation of the laws and customs of war (ie, a war crime) per the above? Yes.

What else did he do? He burned prisoners using cigarettes. Was this considered torture? Yes. How do we know? It's part of the specifications listed for the charge of torture. Is torture a violation of the laws and customs of war (ie, a war crime) per the above? Yes.

What else did he do? He performed water torture on prisoners. Was this considered torture? Yes. How do we know? It's part of the specifications listed for the charge of torture. Plus, y'know, it's in the name. Is torture a violation of the laws and customs of war (ie, a war crime) per the above? Yes.

Do you get it now?

Is waterboarding now the equivalent of rape?

I see the concept of "analogy" escapes you.

Actually, regarding WWII Nuremberg and Tokyo Trials, commutation/reduction of sentence, or even acquittals have nothing to do with exonerations

Thou hast said it, Caiaphas.

but it does have everything to do with the changing political climate.

Can you provide evidence that this changing political climate at the time included an acknowledgement that "water torture" was no longer considered a war crime?

 

[Cicero]

The man who authorized those techniques at the Singapore YMCA, Lt. Col. Sumida, was sentenced to hang.

http://robinrowland.com/garret/2005/11/waterboarding-is-war-crime.html



Then they're protected by the Geneva conventions which also outlaw torture.

Additionally, the UN convention on torture doesn't make any distinctions between persons.

Torture is always illegal.

Major Haruzo Sumida/Lieutenant Colonel Sumida Haruzo was convicted and hanged because of his orders regarding the death of pow's.

"The war crime of contriving to arrest in particular 57 civilians who had been interned at Changi Gaol around 10 October 1943; and thereafter ill-treating them resulting in the death of 15. "

"One man was executed. A second after horrific torture, attempted suicide was refused medical treatment and died. Another man died in his cell, the others were returned to the Changi Camp hospital where 13 died as a result of starvation, beating and torture. "

No Japanese solider was hanged for waterboarding.

 

[A'isha]

No Japanese solider was hanged for waterboarding.

Why are you hung up on that (no pun intended)? A conviction of committing a war crime for waterboarding is still a conviction of committing a war crime for waterboarding, regardless of the sentence passed. And it's an undeniable fact that Japanese soldiers were convicted of committing a war crime for waterboarding.

If I get 20 years in prison for murder, I'm no less a convicted killer and murder is no less a prosecutable felony just because I didn't get the Chair.

 

[Nogbad]

I translate that as "We're the US of A and there is not a bloody thing anyone can do if we decide to go rogue on your butts."

I would actually like to live in a civilized country. This used to be one, and could be again, but the role that critters like Rummy, Gonzo and Yoo play in shaping it needs to be sharply curtailed, like made small enough to flush down the toilet.

(I'll be there willing to tip the lever, BTW.)

Or "might is right" -might not be right but obviously those with enough muscle can do as they please. For example, Russia in Georgia.

Since when was torture "advanced"? FFS! if that is the case Torquemada was a ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ genius.

 

[Dr Adequate]

And what you want to hear is high value information.

Unfortunately, what people want to hear is what they already believed. This is how the witch-finders obtained so many millions of confessions to a crime that we both know is not even possible.

You are dancing madly to avoid acknowledging the obvious; that the argument enhanced interrogation techniques don't work has been proven to be fraudulent.

I shall not claim that you are "dancing madly". I shall just point out that the source on which the OP is based, the very person on whose word you stake your claim that "advanced interrogation techniques" (euphemism much?) are effective, has in fact stated that he doesn't know whether they they are effective.

If you wish to argue that torture, oh, sorry, "advanced interrogation techniques" is effective, then perhaps you should try citing someone who says that torture "advanced interrogation techniques" is effective. Rather than someone who says that he has no idea whether torture "advanced interrogation techniques" is effective.

 

[ZirconBlue]

Absolutely. They are no worse than the ones that gave legal cover for Obama to send drones into Pakistan to actually kill "alleged" terrorists and anyone else in range of the missiles including cases of children.

You can get children by the case? We had to get ours individually. Is there a case discount?

Suppose Obama's Justice Department told the CIA that it would be fine to assassinate ... oh, let's say Rush Limbaugh ... and they did. Yeah, I know it's not likely, but imagine it.

Would it be a good precedent that no-one whosoever could be prosecuted for it?

What, after the celebrations?



That's sarcasm. I'm not advocating murder.

 

[Cicero]

Why are you hung up on that (no pun intended)? A conviction of committing a war crime for waterboarding is still a conviction of committing a war crime for waterboarding, regardless of the sentence passed. And it's an undeniable fact that Japanese soldiers were convicted of committing a war crime for waterboarding.

If I get 20 years in prison for murder, I'm no less a convicted killer and murder is no less a prosecutable felony just because I didn't get the Chair.

Why then pretend that Japanese soldiers were executed for ordering or performing waterboarding on POW's? If a 15 year sentence is supposed to be indicative of the severity of this "crime," why make up **** about the convicted being hanged?

But there is not one account of Japanese soldier use iof waterboardings where much harsher treatment was also part and parcel of the offense.

So we do not know if a Japanese soldier employed waterboarding alone would they be prosecuted for a war crime.

 

[Peephole]

No Japanese solider was hanged for waterboarding.

Yes, they were. One of the charges against these soldiers was torture, including waterboarding.

 

[A'isha]

Why then pretend that Japanese soldiers were executed for ordering or performing waterboarding on POW's? If a 15 year sentence is supposed to be indicative of the severity of this "crime," why make up **** about the convicted being hanged?

Don't ask me, as Maddow. She's the one saying that, not me.

So kindly stop your repeated attempts to address her claim, since she's not posting this thread, and start addressing my arguments, since I am.

But there is not one account of Japanese soldier use iof waterboardings where much harsher treatment was also part and parcel of the offense.

You just proved that the American war crimes prosecutors considered waterboarding to be just as bad as the other forms of torture the Japanese defendants were charged with.

Good job.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Saying that torture can elicit useful information is like saying that human infants are an excellent source of meat.

Thank you!

I've been trying to make that point over and over again in a less eloquent way. Whether or not torture gives you useful information is irrelevant. It is illegal and immoral. Whether I choose to spend the money I got from committing armed robbery on a worthy cause is irrelevant to whether or not armed robbery is legal or moral.

 

[A'isha]

Actually, you know what? Let me expand on my flip answer to Cicero regarding his muddled sentence there.

Let's look at what sort of sentences were handed down for those charged with waterboarding vs. those not charged with waterboarding.

Kenichi Kondo: Beat prisoners, refused them medical treatment, forced them to work. No waterboarding, 12 years hard labor.

Seitaro Hata: Beat prisoners, refused them medical treatment, forced them to work, waterboarded them. 25 years hard labor.

Hideji Nakamura: "Violation of the Laws and Customs of War: 1. Did willfully and unlawfully brutally mistreat, assault and torture PWs Specifications: beating using hands, fists, clubs; water torture; kicking" - I quoted that in its entirety to show that unlike the two listed above, Nakamura only beat and waterboarded prisoners, and didn't work them to death or refuse them medical treatment. 20 years hard labor.

Yoshio Ogimoto: Like Nakamura, he only physically beat prisoners, and didn't didn't work them to death or refuse them medical treatment. However, unlike Nakamura, he didn't waterboard prisoners. 5 years hard labor.

Sure seems to me like those who committed waterboarding in addition to their other crimes were sentenced more harshly than those who committed the same crimes but didn't waterboard prisoners.

 

[Cicero]

Yes, they were. One of the charges against these soldiers was torture, including waterboarding.

Your misinformation is on par with Maddow's. None of them were hanged for waterboarding. Repeating the lie in 48 font doesn't make it any less of a lie. None of the Japanese soldiers listed below were hanged for waterboarding.



Accussed
Prisoner 1 : Lt-Col. Sumida Haruzo, death sentence
Prisoner 2 : W. O. Monai Tadamori, death sentence
Prisoner 5 : Sgt-Maj. Makizono Masuo, death sentence
Prisoner 6 : Sgt-Maj. Terada Tako, death sentence
Prisoner 7 : Sgt. Nozawa Toichiro, death sentence
Prisoner 8 : Sgt-Maj Tsujio Shiger, death sentence
Prisoner 10 : Sgt-Maj Morita Shozo, death sentence
Prisoner 19 : Interpreter Toh Swee Koon, death sentence


If they were, then Yukio Asano Hideji Nakamura, Seitara Hata and Takeo Kita would have met the same fate.

 

[Cicero]

Thank you!

I've been trying to make that point over and over again in a less eloquent way. Whether or not torture gives you useful information is irrelevant. It is illegal and immoral. Whether I choose to spend the money I got from committing armed robbery on a worthy cause is irrelevant to whether or not armed robbery is legal or moral.

So now you have indicted Robin Hood as well. Good show!

 

[Praktik]

Robin Hood was a terrorist.