Sean Hannity offers to be waterboarded for charity

[I Ratant]

Don'ts you haf zat backvards?

.
I don't see any reason why the "lawyers" that composed the memos that authorized torture should have -any- out from being prosecuted.
I'd like to see all of those involved, from the memo writers to their bosses who approved the methods to the monsters in the torture chambers that did the dirty deeds be housed in the Slobodan Milosevic Memorial Cell Block at the Hague, awaiting trial for those and all the other human rights abuses W has disgraced this country with!

 

[Cicero]

I

It still stands as an example of a group of interrogators who were up against a much worse enemy that were successful without resorting to torture.

I'm not sure what the 2006 Fort Hunt article represents as far as WWII interrogations, never mind what their significance is to the CIA interrogations at GITMO. Henry Kolm, the now 93 year-old former interrogator at Fort Hunt, was questioning Rudolph Hess when his country had already unconditionally surrendered.

Ret. Maj. Arnold Kohn's remembrances of his time at Fort Hunt ( the recollections not deemed important for The Washington Post to include in their article) are not so benign as Mr. Kolm's.

This article was not about the goings-on at Fort Hunt during WWII as much as it was about providing these three or four guys a political platform to rail against the three detainees waterboarded by the CIA.

 

[Upchurch]

I'm not sure what the 2006 Fort Hunt article represents as far as WWII interrogations

So, are you withdrawing your earlier claim, as you lack any evidence to support it?

 

[Cicero]

So, are you withdrawing your earlier claim, as you lack any evidence to support it?

Actually, I figured you and SezMe would withdraw the "Post's" Fort Hunt article as evidence of anything.

 

[Bob Klase]

I'm still trying to figure out why you associated medical operations with making waterboarding illegal regardless of consent.

Strange that you can't see the connection between consent being given for medical procedures (things that would often be illegal if done without consent) and consent being given for other things that could be illegal if done without consent.

However, since you are incredulous that surgeons sticking "knives" in patients never constitutes a felony

Since I'm not "incredulous" and I didn't say "never", I'm not sure which strawman you're addressing.

you might want to add this to your vacuous reservoir of information. This transplant surgeon's rush to use his scalpel to harvest organs resulted in deliberate over medication to hasten his patient's death

http://www.thehealthcareblog.com/the_health_care_blog/2008/03/criminal-charge.html

Even stranger than not seeing a connection between two things done consent, you now try to make a connection between surgeons "sticking knives" in patients by linking to story about a surgeon who's in trouble for prescribing excessive amounts of medication.

Strawman, meet non sequitur.

 

[SezMe]

Actually, I figured you and SezMe would withdraw the "Post's" Fort Hunt article as evidence of anything.

Having trouble with your reading comprehension again? Read the ENTIRE post - after all it consists of a total of four, count, 'em, four words. It suggests that BAC take some action. It was not offered as evidence of anything.

 

[Cicero]

Having trouble with your reading comprehension again? Read the ENTIRE post - after all it consists of a total of four, count, 'em, four words. It suggests that BAC take some action. It was not offered as evidence of anything.

Then why did you substitute the word "integrity" for the link to The Washington Post Fort Hunt article in your original reference to this?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=4657525#post4657525

And then you asked for comment on the article:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=4659549#post4659549

So your editorializing of the link was not provided as evidence to support your position? You sure were eager to insure a response to this article. Now that the article has been fleshed out, do you still regard it as the Holy Grail of benign American interrogation methods of POW's during WWII?

 

[Upchurch]

Now that the article has been fleshed out, do you still regard it as the Holy Grail of benign American interrogation methods of POW's during WWII?

Do you have evidence to the contrary? How about something to back your claim that the OSS was torturing Germans?

Look, you either learned that fact from somewhere or you conjured it from thin air. Which was it?

 

[Cicero]

Strange that you can't see the connection between consent being given for medical procedures (things that would often be illegal if done without consent) and consent being given for other things that could be illegal if done without consent.

1) If a doctor at the scene of a car crash performs a Trachiotomy on an accident victim without the consent of the victim is that illegal? I already provided examples of nefarious medical procedures being done even though the patient gave their consent.

2) Since waterboarding is supposed to be a dangerous activity, why should it be legal whether there is consent or not? Many states and colleges have outlawed hazing regardless if the subject consents to it or not. Why would waterboarding not come under this heading?

 

[Dr Adequate]

The fact remains that performing a (necessary) tracheotomy on an unconscious accident victim is legal and so is waterboarding someone with their consent.

We don't make the rules, we just explain them to you.

 

[Cicero]

The fact remains that performing a (necessary) tracheotomy on an unconscious accident victim is legal and so is waterboarding someone with their consent.

We don't make the rules, we just explain them to you.

Since I never claimed waterboarding is illegal when consent is given, perhaps you should refrain from providing inane explanations.Hazing was once legal as well. It is not out of the realm of possibility that Waterboarding may not be legal much longer regardless of consent. I can't imagine why those who consider waterboarding dangerous, as well as barbaric, would change their tune should this practice be illegal if consent were given or not.

 

[Dr Adequate]

I'm not sure that consensual waterboarding is all that much of a social problem. So far, the consequences of its legality have been:

(a) Christopher Hitchens has admitted that it's torture.

(b) We get to laugh at Sean Hannity.

I can live with that. But if you can't, it's no good complaining to us --- write to your Congressman.

 

[Cicero]

I'm not sure that consensual waterboarding is all that much of a social problem. So far, the consequences of its legality have been:

(a) Christopher Hitchens has admitted that it's torture.

(b) We get to laugh at Sean Hannity.

I can live with that. But if you can't, it's no good complaining to us --- write to your Congressman.

Three detainees waterboarded by the CIA at GITMO is evidence of an out of control government that abandoned all accepted civilized norms, but consensual waterboarding would be considered a "social problem?"

You couldn't live when you heard about the fate of KSM?

 

[Dr Adequate]

Three detainees waterboarded by the CIA at GITMO is evidence of an out of control government that abandoned all accepted civilized norms, but consensual waterboarding would be considered a "social problem?"

Consensual waterboarding is not considered a social problem. Not by me.

If you want it banned, it's a free country. Start a campaign, write to your representatives. Make a bumper sticker.

You couldn't live when you heard about the fate of KSM?

But I miraculously retained the ability to type.

 

[Cicero]

Consensual waterboarding is not considered a social problem. Not by me.

If you want it banned, it's a free country. Start a campaign, write to your representatives. Make a bumper sticker.

But I miraculously retained the ability to type.

Did you take any of these measures during the Bush Administration regarding waterboarding?

And your type is all too familiar.

 

[Dr Adequate]

Did you take any of these measures during the Bush Administration regarding waterboarding?

While the UK is also a free country, I'm not sure that writing to my MP would have had that much effect on US policy.

Americans can be so mean that way. Do you know they won't even let me vote?

 

[Cicero]

While the UK is also a free country, I'm not sure that writing to my MP would have had that much effect on US policy.

Americans can be so mean that way. Do you know they won't even let me vote?

Well, it might have effect on U.K. policy.

"Last night it emerged that an MI5 officer told the High Court an official policy existed over the questioning of suspects by Pakistani authorities. It was agreed by MI5 lawyers and government figures, he said."


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...e-of-british-suspects-says-agent-1623987.html

Perhaps you should farm your own land before advising those in the Colonies how to farm theirs.

 

[Whiplash]

Why? Are you in the mindset that water-boarding is ok as long as it's someone you really don't like? I'm for the death penalty, but torturing people only satisfies a blood-lust, revenge. You draw the line at 3 "exceptional" cases, buy why? How did you come up with this arbritrary line? Why not torture drug traffickers as well?

ONLY? That is all it's ever used for? It's never been applied to someone who actually did know something important, and actually achieved results? Ever? It's always just sick masochists who get off on it? All throughout history?

 

[MattusMaximus]

Ok. I was mistaken. Hannity seems to have backed out, or at least failed to respond to having his bluff called. I confess to being surprised. At least I have the stones to admit that I was wrong.

Good on you. I just wish a weenie like Hannity had similar stones.

 

[Cicero]

As long as it was done for Queen and Country.

"Police launch investigation of MI5 over torture claims"

"They took the scalpel to my right chest. It was only a small cut. Then they cut my left chest. One of them took my penis in his hand and began to make cuts. He did it once, and they stood still for maybe a minute, watching my reaction."

"I was trying desperately to suppress myself, but I was screaming. Marwan seemed to smoke half a cigarette and start another. They must have done this 20 to 30 times in maybe two hours. There was blood all over. They cut all over my private parts. One of them said it would be better just to cut it off, as I would only breed terrorists."

"Even after this treatment, papers disclosed to him for a US court case show that MI5 was colluding with his torturers. In late September 2002, one document reveals: "The Service received a report from the US of an interview of Mr Mohamed." On 30 September 2002, MI5 held a case conference about him with their US colleagues in London."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...onths-of-hell-in-a-moroccan-jail-1655352.html