Ok, here is a fact. When the CIA waterboarded Zubaydah et al back in 2002-2003 they were not acting outside of US law. What they did was perfectly legal. Choke on that one you young punk.
Ok, here is a fact. When the CIA waterboarded Zubaydah et al back in 2002-2003 they were not acting outside of US law. What they did was perfectly legal. Choke on that one you young punk.
As I said, you got proof? And really, "punk"? Stop watching Dirty Harry movies and go outside for a change.
An illegal act that isn't prosecuted is still an illegal act. So just because no one has the guts to prosecute doesn't mean it's illegal.
And yes, it's illegal. From wiki:
You can look up the case if you want, but those soldiers were court-martialed and convicted for waterboarding. Sounds illegal to me.
Some local cops decided to go outside the law:
So they tried to torture prisoners to get confessions (hmm, sound familar?) and they ended up in jail themselves. Again, feel free to look up the case law.
If waterboarding is OK, how did these people get convicted?
So again, you got any proof? I didn't think so. I am sure you will come back with another insult, or perhaps the " why do you love terrorists", or maybe some other strawman to deflect the fact that you don't know what you are talking about. But feel free to try.
Wiki eh? Those soldiers were not authorized to waterboard anyone. They acted outside of the law.
Exactly, they acted outside of the law. They did not have the authority to waterboard anyone. The CIA interrogators, on the other hand, acted within the law. What they did was perfectly legal.
Those people acted outside of the law. The CIA interrogators did not. Hence no convictions, or indictments for that matter. It's really quite simple.
The lack of indictments alone are enough. However, since it is you that is claiming that the waterboarding of Zubaydah et al was illegal, the onus of proof is on you.
Hayabusa Rider
Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
- Jan 26, 2000
- 50,879
- 4,268
- 126
That I'm afraid will never happen. A huge problem I have with the current administration and Congress is that they have no interest, and further, many policies have been expanded by Obama.
George and Dick have a "get out of jail free" card.
Hayabusa Rider
Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
- Jan 26, 2000
- 50,879
- 4,268
- 126
Actually he's a libertarian. It's interesting that after all this time no one can find a good reason for having gone and killed or caused to be killed those in Iraq.
BTW, did you ever use that seafoam?
You're right. I was in a hurry to get out of the house. That should have read, "your mercifully EX-VICE-Traitor In Chief.
Thanks for catching that.
Did you know that, following WW II, the U.S. hanged Japanese military personnel convicted of torture, including waterboarding? But don't take my word for it. Ask John McCain:
Congratulations. You're of like mind with the ethically challenged moral monsters of human history, from the Spanish Inquisition, to Joseph Stalin, to the nazi and Japanese military in WW II, to infamous mass torturer/murdere, Pol Pat. Your mother must be so proud of her ethically challenged, subhuman POS child.
Is that so? Then maybe you can explain why, Ronald Reagan's Department Of Justice prosecuted and convicted a Texas sheriff and four deputies for waterboarding prisoners.
If I do, will you admit you're wrong? Here ya go:
ORLY??? Here's some info on the legality of waterboarding:
If you still don't believe waterboarding is illegal as torture, YOU should volunteer as a crash test dummy to prove it. If you can't do that, you're just an immoral, subhuman, loud mouthed, know-nothing, two bit chickenshit chickenhawk. :thumbsdown:
Last edited:
Hayabusa Rider
Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
- Jan 26, 2000
- 50,879
- 4,268
- 126
Second thing first. Why should stupidity be mitigated by partisanship? I don't really care what nonsense was spouted or who said it.
Now that NIE. Curious thing. It was based largely on information which was gathered some time ago.
Note that "25,000" centrifuges? Where did they miraculously come from?
Ahh, maybe was due to the aluminum tubes that Sandia (you've heard of them?) told the WH weren't suitable for centrifugation of nuclear products. Oh yeah, that was before Bush gave the speech saying the opposite. Oops.
Looking over that little list, it seems wildly out of context with reality. Then again you may recall that early on there was a purge at the CIA where senior analysts who disagreed with the desired report suddenly left.
Then we have the famous speech where we knew where the WMDs are. Remember? Didn't suppose. Didn't estimate. Nope KNEW.
Ahh yes the mobile chemical factories... ahh the good old days.
I realize that you are uneducated with reality and your purpose is to get people upset because that's fairly obvious.
The only thing that matters is what was vs. what was said. So the choices you have to choose for the attack on the people of Iraq (you never make war on one person) is that either Bush and his kin were either criminal, criminally stupid or both.
BTW, I don't know where you were before the war, but I called bullshit on it before the fact. Evidently you haven't gotten the message.
Ever hear of that raving leftist George Will? Well he once remarked that the principle of preemption carries the moral imperative of correctness. One cannot craft a reason or not use current intel to engage in war. You must use due diligence before engaging in the act. Will's about as conservative as it gets yet he understood the moral bankruptcy of the Neocons, whom he disapproved of.
Now the war was easily won, which everyone pretty much knew would happen, but guess what? There was no contingency for victory. It was as if it first occurred to Bush that a power vacuum would happen once the old government was crushed when the riots started happening.
Clueless from beginning to end.
It was as if the White House was doing it's best imitation of a clown car, bits and pieces of random misinformation and witless policy tumbling out the open doors.
It was poorly done.
Nope! Still wrong.
Firstly, I won't take yours or McCain's word on it. What I will do is point out that the US did not hang any Japanese military personnel convicted of waterboarding alone. Secondly, I'll point out that the Japanese version of waterboarding was considerably different. That is , it was much more harsh. In fact, it was brutal. It was done in a manner that caused the stomach to fill until it was very distended. Then the victims stomach was stomped on.
Can't you read? The Sheriff and four deputies acted outside of the law. They did not have the authority to waterboard anyone. The CIA interrogators, on the other hand, acted within the law. What they did was perfectly legal.
ABC News has been told by former and current intelligence officers and supervisors.
And just what were the names of those former and current intelligence officers and supervisors???...Oh, wait a minute:
All gave their accounts on the condition that their names and identities not be revealed.
:hmm:
:hmm:
1. The Attention Grab: The interrogator forcefully grabs the shirt front of the prisoner and shakes him.
2. Attention Slap: An open-handed slap aimed at causing pain and triggering fear.
3. The Belly Slap: A hard open-handed slap to the stomach. The aim is to cause pain, but not internal injury. Doctors consulted advised against using a punch, which could cause lasting internal damage.
4. Long Time Standing: This technique is described as among the most effective. Prisoners are forced to stand, handcuffed and with their feet shackled to an eye bolt in the floor for more than 40 hours. Exhaustion and sleep deprivation are effective in yielding confessions.
5. The Cold Cell: The prisoner is left to stand naked in a cell kept near 50 degrees. Throughout the time in the cell the prisoner is doused with cold water.
Gasp! Oh the horror!2. Attention Slap: An open-handed slap aimed at causing pain and triggering fear.
3. The Belly Slap: A hard open-handed slap to the stomach. The aim is to cause pain, but not internal injury. Doctors consulted advised against using a punch, which could cause lasting internal damage.
4. Long Time Standing: This technique is described as among the most effective. Prisoners are forced to stand, handcuffed and with their feet shackled to an eye bolt in the floor for more than 40 hours. Exhaustion and sleep deprivation are effective in yielding confessions.
5. The Cold Cell: The prisoner is left to stand naked in a cell kept near 50 degrees. Throughout the time in the cell the prisoner is doused with cold water.
Wiki again? No thanks! I'll pass this time. There nothing of value in there anyway.
Actually, I haven't claimed that waterboarding is legal. It no longer is. However, when it was used on the three terrorists it was legal. That is, the use of it by the CIA on those three was not illegal.
Uh....what???
If you can't do that, you're just an immoral, subhuman, loud mouthed, know-nothing, two bit chickenshit chickenhawk. :thumbsdown:
It seems to me that your gripe is with the Intelligence community, not the Bush Administration.
CallMeJoe
Diamond Member
- Jul 30, 2004
- 6,938
- 5
- 81
The Bush administration was not as clueless as you imply. They were bringing Freedom to Iraq and, as Secretary Rumsfeld said, "Freedom's untidy, and free people are free to make mistakes and commit crimes and do bad things. Stuff happens"
Not only No, but HELL, NO! That NIE was long ago discredited as part of the infinite web of LIES constructed by your mercifully EX-Traitor In Chief and his criminal cabal of traitors, murderers, torturers and war criminals to mislead Congress and the American people to gain backing for their illegal war of LIES in Iraq. It's no more real than any illusion you may have that you're anything but a chickenshit armchair chickenhawk with a big mouth and no reality to back up your bullshit.
You mean those quotes from Democrats who were taken in by the LIES the Bushwhackos fed to Congress to convince them to authorize their war of LIES:
- "Iraq is busy enhancing its capabilities in the field of chemical and biological agents, and they continue to pursue an aggressive nuclear weapons program. These are offensive weapons for the purpose of inflicting death on a massive scale, developed so that Saddam Hussein can hold the threat over the head of any one he chooses. What we must not do in the face of this mortal threat is to give in to wishful thinking or to willful blindness."
Vice President Dick Cheney, 8/29/02
- "Some have argued that the nuclear threat from Iraq is not imminent - that Saddam is at least 5-7 years away from having nuclear weapons. I would not be so certain. And we should be just as concerned about the immediate threat from biological weapons. Iraq has these weapons."
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 9/18/02
- "No terrorist state poses a greater or more immediate threat to the security of our people and the stability of the world than the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq."
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 9/19/02
- "This man poses a much graver threat than anybody could have possibly imagined."
George W. Bush, 9/26/02
- "The Iraqi regime is a threat of unique urgency."
George W. Bush, 10/2/02
- "There's a grave threat in Iraq. There just is."
George W. Bush, 10/2/02
- "There are many dangers in the world, the threat from Iraq stands alone because it gathers the most serious dangers of our age in one place. Iraq could decide on any given day to provide a biological or chemical weapon to a terrorist group or individual terrorists."
George W. Bush, 10/7/02
- "The Iraqi regime is a serious and growing threat to peace."
George W. Bush, 10/16/02
- "There is real threat, in my judgment, a real and dangerous threat to American in Iraq in the form of Saddam Hussein."
George W. Bush, 10/28/02
- "I see a significant threat to the security of the United States in Iraq."
George W. Bush, 11/1/02
- "I would look you in the eye and I would say, go back before September 11 and ask yourself this question: Was the attack that took place on September 11 an imminent threat the month before or two months before or three months before or six months before? When did the attack on September 11 become an imminent threat? Now, transport yourself forward a year, two years or a week or a month...So the question is, when is it such an immediate threat that you must do something?"
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 11/14/02
- "Saddam Hussein is a threat to America."
George W. Bush, 11/3/02
- "The world is also uniting to answer the unique and urgent threat posed by Iraq whose dictator has already used weapons of mass destruction to kill thousands."
George W. Bush, 11/23/02
- "The Iraqi regime is a threat to any American. They not only have weapons of mass destruction, they used weapons of mass destruction...That's why I say Iraq is a threat, a real threat."
George W. Bush, 1/3/03
- "Saddam Hussein possesses chemical and biological weapons. Iraq poses a threat to the security of our people and to the stability of the world that is distinct from any other. It's a danger to its neighbors, to the United States, to the Middle East and to the international peace and stability. It's a danger we cannot ignore. Iraq and North Korea are both repressive dictatorships to be sure and both pose threats. But Iraq is unique. In both word and deed, Iraq has demonstrated that it is seeking the means to strike the United States and our friends and allies with weapons of mass destruction."
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 1/20/03
- "Iraq poses a serious and mounting threat to our country. His regime has the design for a nuclear weapon, was working on several different methods of enriching uranium, and recently was discovered seeking significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 1/29/03
- "Well, of course he is.”
White House Communications Director Dan Bartlett responding to the question “is Saddam an imminent threat to U.S. interests, either in that part of the world or to Americans right here at home?”, 1/26/03
- "Our intelligence sources tell us that he (Saddam) has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production."
George W. Bush, 1/28/2003 State of the Union Address
- "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
George W. Bush, 1/28/2003 State of the Union Address
- Iraq poses "terrible threats to the civilized world."
Dick Cheney, 1/30/03
- Iraq "threatens the United States of America."
Dick Cheney, 1/30/03
- Iraq is "a serious threat to our country, to our friends and to our allies."
Dick Cheney, 1/31/03
- "This is about imminent threat."
White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 2/10/03
- "The dictator of Iraq and his weapons of mass destruction are a threat to the security of free nations."
George W. Bush, 3/16/03
- "We know he's been absolutely devoted to trying to acquire nuclear weapons, and we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons."
Dick Cheney, 3/16/2003 on “Meet the Press”
- "The people of the United States and our friends and allies will not live at the mercy of an outlaw regime that threatens the peace with weapons of mass murder."
George W. Bush, 3/19/03
- "It is only a matter of time before the Iraqi regime is destroyed and its threat to the region and the world is ended."
Pentagon spokeswoman Victoria Clarke, 3/22/03
- "The threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction will be removed."
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 3/25/03
- "We gave our word that the threat from Iraq would be ended."
George W. Bush 4/24/03
- "Absolutely."
White House spokesman Ari Fleischer answering whether Iraq was an "imminent threat," 5/7/03
- "Saddam Hussein is no longer a threat to the United States because we removed him, but he was a threat...He was a threat. He's not a threat now."
George W. Bush, 7/2/03
- Iraq was "the most dangerous threat of our time."
White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 7/17/03
- "We ended the threat from Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction."
George W. Bush, 7/17/03
- "There's no question that Iraq was a threat to the people of the United States."
White House spokeswoman Claire Buchanan, 8/26/03
- We learned more and more that there was a relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda that stretched back through most of the decade of the ’90s, that it involved training, for example, on BW and CW, that al-Qaeda sent personnel to Baghdad to get trained on the systems that are involved. The Iraqis providing bomb-making expertise and advice to the al-Qaeda organization.
Dick Cheney, 9/14/03 on “Meet the Press”
- We know, for example, in connection with the original World Trade Center bombing in ’93 that one of the bombers was Iraqi, returned to Iraq after the attack of ’93. And we’ve learned subsequent to that, since we went into Baghdad and got into the intelligence files, that this individual probably also received financing from the Iraqi government as well as safe haven.
Dick Cheney, 9/14/2003 on "Meet The Press"
If that's not enough for you, we can move on to admin quotes about the mysteriously disappearing communications between the Whitehouse and Gonzo the Clown and his lackeys at the Department of Justice and their lies about a host of their other lies, failures and deceptions.
Want more? No problem.
- Rumsfeld set his own parallel "intelligence" operation within DOD when the CIA and FBI couldn't tell him what he wanted to hear.
- There was no yellow cake uranium in Niger.
- There were no aluminum tubes capable of being used in centrifuges to process nuclear material
Note the date -- September 19, 2002, BEFORE they launched their war of LIES.
- There were no facilities for making nerve gas or biological weapons.
- There were no long range rockets.
- There were no WMD's.
- There was no Al Qaeda in Iraq.
- They ignored all warnings about the possiblity of an attack like 9/11, despite explicit warnings from people like Richard Clarke, former terrorisim advisor to Presidents Reagan, Bush Sr. and Clinton. Richard Clarke also warned Bush that Saddam probably was not tied to 9/11.
The Bushwhackos didn't want to hear that so they did what any good exec would do -- They fired him.
- They claimed their pre-war planning included plenty of troops to handle foreseeable problems in the aftermath of their invasion, despite warnings from Army Chief of Staff, Eric Shinseki that they would need around 400,000 troops to do the job.
The Bushwhackos administration didn't want to hear that so they did what any good exec would do -- They fired him.
- Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction
Dick Cheney, speech to VFW National Convention, Aug. 26, 2002
- Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons.
George W. Bush, speech to UN General Assembly, Sept. 12, 2002
- No terrorist state poses a greater or more immediate threat to the security of our people and the stability of the world than the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq.
Donald Rumsfeld, testimony to Congress, Sept. 19, 2002
- If he declares he has none, then we will know that Saddam Hussein is once again misleading the world.
Ari Fleischer, press briefing, Dec. 2, 2002
- We know for a fact that there are weapons there.
Ari Fleischer, press briefing, Jan. 9, 2003
- Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard, and VX nerve agent…. The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.
George W. Bush, State of the Union Address, Jan. 28, 2003
- We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons - the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have.
George W. Bush, radio address, Feb. 8, 2003
- Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised.
George W. Bush, address to the U.S., March 17, 2003
- The people of the United States and our friends and allies will not live at the mercy of an outlaw regime that threatens the peace with weapons of mass murder.
George W. Bush, address to U.S., March 19, 2003
- Well, there is no question that we have evidence and information that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical particularly…..All this will be made clear in the course of the operation, for whatever duration it takes.
Ari Fleisher, press briefing, March 21, 2003
- We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north somewhat.
Donald Rumsfeld, ABC interview, March 30, 2003
- But make no mistake - as I said earlier - we have high confidence that they have weapons of mass destruction. That is what this war was about and it is about. And we have high confidence it will be found.
Ari Fleischer, press briefing, April 10, 2003
- We are learning more as we interrogate or have discussions with Iraqi scientists and people within the Iraqi structure, that perhaps he destroyed some, perhaps he dispersed some. And so we will find them.
George W. Bush, NBC interview, April 24, 2003
- There are people who in large measure have information that we need….so that we can track down the weapons of mass destruction in that country.
Donald Rumsfeld, press briefing, April 25, 2003
- We'll find them. It'll be a matter of time to do so.
George W. Bush, remarks to reporters, May 3, 2003
- I'm absolutely sure that there are weapons of mass destruction there and the evidence will be forthcoming. We're just getting it just now.
Colin Powell, remarks to reporters, May 4, 2003
- I'm not surprised if we begin to uncover the weapons program of Saddam Hussein – because he had a weapons program.
George W. Bush, remarks to reporters, May 6, 2003
- We said what we said because we meant it…..We continue to have confidence that WMD will be found.
Ari Fleischer, press briefing, May 7, 2003
- You remember when Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons....They're illegal. They're against the United Nations resolutions, and we've so far discovered two. And we'll find more weapons as time goes on, but for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong. We found them.
George W. Bush, remarks to reporters, May 31, 2003
- U.S. officials never expected that "we were going to open garages and find" weapons of mass destruction.
Condoleeza Rice, Reuters interview, May 12, 2003
- We never believed that we'd just tumble over weapons of mass destruction in that country.
Donald Rumsfeld, Fox News interview, May 4, 2003
- I don't believe anyone that I know in the administration ever said that Iraq had nuclear weapons [SEE NEXT QUOTE].
Donald Rumsfeld, Senate appropriations subcommittee on defense hearing, May 14, 2003
- We believe [Hussein] has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons.
Dick Cheney, NBC's Meet the Press, March 16, 2003
- They may have had time to destroy them, and I don't know the answer.
Donald Rumsfeld, remarks to the Council on Foreign Relations, May 27, 2003
- "I think some in the media have chosen to use the word 'imminent.’ Those were not words we used. We used 'grave and gathering' threat." [SEE NEXT QUOTES].
Scott McClellan, press briefing, Jan. 31, 2004
- This is about an imminent threat.
Scott McClellan, press briefing, Feb. 10, 2003
- After being asked whether Hussein was an "imminent" threat: "Well, of course he is."
Dan Bartlett, CNN interview, Jan. 26, 2003
- After being asked whether the U.S. went to war because officials said Hussein’s alleged weapons were a direct, imminent threat to the U.S.: "Absolutely."
Ari Fleischer, press briefing, May 7, 2003
Colin Powell has since said he strongly questioned the "evidence" the Bushwhackos were pimping to Congress and the American people before he gave his infamous dog and pony show at the U.N.
You can pick and choose from the examples in the article, but remember George Tenet's "slam dunk?" Remember the infamously unreliable testimony from "Curveball? :roll;
Powell also told columnist, Robert Scheer that he and his department’s top experts never believed that Iraq posed an imminent nuclear threat, but that the president followed the misleading advice of Vice President Dick Cheney and the CIA in making the claim.
Last edited:
PJABBER
Diamond Member
- Feb 8, 2001
- 4,822
- 0
- 0
If you still don't believe waterboarding is illegal as torture, YOU should volunteer as a crash test dummy to prove it. If you can't do that, you're just an immoral, subhuman, loud mouthed, know-nothing chickenshit chickenhawk. :thumbsdown:
Thanks for the post with all the references. Your posts are getting as long as mine!
Re. waterboarding. Did not know that as of 2006 the U.S. military, though not CIA and other intel agencies, no longer waterboard.
Waterboarding for the longest time was a component of SERE Level-C training which is intended for military personnel with a high risk of capture. Typically this includes pilots, AF Combat Search and Rescue and assorted snake eaters like SF, Rangers and Marine Force Recon.
While the training itself is considered classified as too much foreknowledge somewhat cushions the experience, it is not uncommon to read some personal experiences on this form of "torture" at the hands of skilled interrogators.
I can't say what is in the training cycle nowadays, but waterboarding was used in U.S. Army Ranger training in the past in the Florida Phase, part of which has Ranger trainees captured and held in a POW camp. I heard it happened in the Mountain Phase as well in some cycles, but if it did it was more limited. Not everyone going through Ranger training was subjected to this "torture," but I would say roughly a quarter to a third were.
Waterboarding was/is also very common in the S.E.R.E. schools of services other than the Army, as the following reference indicates. By my calculation, thousands of U.S. military personnel have experienced waterboarding and violent physical abuse.
There have been casualties. In the SERE and combatives training classes I attended (70's and 80's) I can specifically recall two broken backs, more than a few broken bones and noses, lots and lots of contusions and some major dislocations. Also it is majorly important not to fall asleep in your harness when you are parachuting into trees, even if it is a calm and starry night and you haven't slept in the past three days. Hehehe.
Anyway, waterboarding, sleep and food deprivation, long periods of standing or constant motion, stress postures and physical striking have been very common experiences in Army Ranger School and the Special Forces Q course as well at the various SERE schools I am familiar with.
Going to a good SERE school is sometimes an obligation and sometimes a privilege. One of my neighbor's kids is going to a SERE class at Fort Bragg as a "Reenlistment Gift" from his 1st Sergeant. For his next reenlistment he'll probably receive a kick in the balls or a transfer to one of the Ranger battalions.
Frankly, while extremely effective, waterboarding is a most uncomfortable experience and if we intend to officially coddle our enemies we need to consider alternatives for at least five minutes, should time permit.
Waterboarding: A SERE-ing Experience for Tens of Thousands of US Military Personnel by Cdr. Frank 'Spig' Wead (more by this author)
Posted 11/05/2007 ET
Updated 05/10/2010 ET
[Editor’s Note: Because of Sens. Schumer and Feinstein’s decision to vote for him. the nomination of Judge Michael Mukasey to the post of Attorney General is no longer in danger. Judge Mukasey’s nomination was threatened because of his refusal to describe the harsh interrogation technique of water-boarding as torture. Still, Democrats and some Republicans continue to demand that water-boarding should be statutorily defined to be torture and thus outlawed. We believe this would be a terrible mistake.
Water-boarding, like many other interrogation techniques, could be torture in the hands of a sadist. But -- as the following article demonstrates -- it can be an effective interrogation technique and an essential tool of training, as it has been for US Navy and Air Force pilots.
“Spig” Wead is the pseudonym of a retired Naval aviator who served in the post-Vietnam era.]
“Train like you Fight, Fight like you Train” is the motto of the world’s most elite pilots, the US Navy’s. Based on lessons learned from survivors of the brutal North Korean and North Vietnam torture of US military prisoners of war, the Department of Defense ordered all branches of the services to implement comprehensive Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape (S.E.R.E.) training programs. Every member of Congress should be extremely well versed on the military S.E.R.E. programs since they have had direct oversight and funding of these programs for over 40 years. Viewing the most recent Congressional hearing, one must assume that they are ignorant of or intentionally misrepresent the very programs that they fund and support.
My personal experience with S.E.R.E. training came as a junior pilot flying the F-14A “Tomcat” at NAS Miramar, California. The US Navy S.E.R.E. program requires all Aircrew Members and members of Special Operation Teams (SOF) to undergo both classroom and field experience in these vital techniques. Classroom and field training was accomplished by a cadre of highly trained and disciplined personnel, many of whom had been held as POW’s and tortured by the North Vietnamese.
What actually happens in S.E.R.E. in the field? Classes of 40 or more “students” are put through beach and water (swimming) survival techniques, similar to the TV show “Survivor” but without the rewards challenges. The class is then moved to a remote location to survive and evade prior to entering the US Navy run POW camp. The operation of the evasion complex is based on the trainee being briefed on the enemy position and the location of friendly forces. The object, “to make like a bush”, be patient and deliberate and use all your new taught skills to evade a large contingent of simulated enemy combatants in uniform. They speak like the enemy, act like the enemy, and most importantly train you on how to react to the enemy. While they fire AK-47’s over your head, and search for the ugly “American War Criminals” (thanks Jane), you spend agonizing hours crawling and hiding in an attempt to reach safety. As in real life, few if any make it to safety when behind enemy lines.
When captured you are brought to an initial holding facility. Hands and feet bound and hooded you are thrown into a barbed wire holding cell. As a former football player and wrestler I felt confident that I had that “John Wayne” attitude, Name, Rank and Serial Number….nothing more. Life and the Navy were about to teach this million dollar trained, blond headed, college, Fly Boy a new and most important lesson.
When brought into the first “interrogation”, hooded and hands bound, I was asked the basic questions, no problems...then I was asked a question -- the first among many not permitted under the Geneva Convention. Congress, the media and some of the public have forgotten a very basic and important tenant of the Geneva Convention. Terrorists, insurgents, IED Specialists, Suicide Bombers and all those not wearing a uniform in war are not in any form protected by the Geneva Convention. I did not answer the interrogators’ questions: then the fun and games began.
Carefully using a technique of grabbing your shirt at the pockets and wrapping his fists so that his knuckles pressed into the muscles of my breast plate, the instructor flung me across the room karate style and into a corrugated wall. No more questions; around and around the room I flew, a dance which while blind folded and hooded made me feel like “Raggedy Andy” in a tug of war with two bullying kids. Following the first interrogation we were loaded into trucks, bound and hooded, head to who knows were...for the first time real fear starts to set in and you look for inner strength in your heart, training and comrades.
Arriving at the POW Camp I was kept hooded and placed in a small box, 2 feet wide, 3 feet long and maybe 3 feet high. I was left the fetal position, sitting on my butt, stripped nearly naked (just week old BVD’s) and left sealed with your defecation can inside your box. Heat, cold, isolation, no communications, and constant noise, music, propaganda, coupled with verbal abuse by your captors is the norm, 24/7. Every twenty minutes or so the guards come by your box and rattle it, sneaking up and demanding to hear your War Criminal Number (thanks again, Jane, for the classification). No more name, rank or serial number, they want some real answers to real security questions. You agonize in your isolation as your hear other members of your group being pulled out for more “personal one on one interrogation”. Then it’s your turn. Pulled from your box you are again brought in for questioning. If unhappy with your answers or no answers, the “Raggedy Andy” dance began again with vigor in the cold night air.
Then it was time for the dreaded waterboard. What I didn’t know then, but I do now, is that as in all interrogations, both for real world hostile terrorists (non-uniformed combatants) and in S.E.R.E. a highly trained group of doctors, psychologists, interrogators, and strap-in and strap-out rescue teams are always present. My first experience on the “waterboard” was to be laying on my back, on a board with my body at a 30 degree slope, feet in the air, head down, face-up. The straps are all-confining, with the only movement of your body that of the ability to move your head. Slowly water is poured in your face, up your nose, and some in your mouth. The questions from interrogators and amounts of water increase with each unsuccessful response. Soon they have your complete attention as you begin to believe you are going to drown.
Scared, alone, cold and in total lack of control, you learn to “cooperate” to the best of your ability to protect your life. For each person that level of cooperation or resistance is different. You must be tested and trained to know how to respond in the real combat world. Escape was the key to freedom and reward.
Those students escaping would be rewarded with a meal (apple, and PB&J sandwich) was what we had been told by our instructors. On my next journey to interrogation I saw an opportunity to escape. I fled into the woods, naked and cold, and hid. My captors came searching with AK-47’s blazing, and calls to “kill the American War Criminal” in broken English. After an hour of successfully evading, the voices called out in perfect English. “O.K., problem’s over…you escaped, come in for your sandwich.” When I stood up and revealed my position I was met by a crowd of angry enemy guards, “stupid American Criminal”! Back to the Waterboard I went.
This time we went right to the water hose in the face, and a wet towel held tightly on my forehead so that I could not move my head. I had embarrassed my captors and they would now show me that they had total control. The most agonizing and frightful moments are when the wet towel is placed over your nose and mouth and the water hose is placed directly over your mouth. Holding your breath, bucking at the straps, straining to remain conscious, you believe with all your heart that, that, you are going to die.
S.E.R.E. training is not pleasant, but it is critical to properly prepare our most endangered combat forces for the reality of enemy capture. Was I “tortured” by the US military? No. Was I trained in an effort to protect my life and the lives of other American fighting men? Yes! Freedom is not Free, nor does it come without sacrifice. Every good American understands this basic principle of our country and prays for the young men and women who have sacrificed and are out on the front lines protecting us today.
Now, let’s see Congress: Maybe forty or so students per week, let’s say 100 minimum per month, 1,200 per year for over twenty or thirty years? It could be as many as 40,000 students trained in S.E.R.E. and “tortured” at the direction of, and under the watchful eye of the Congressional Majorities on both sides of the aisle. Be careful that the 40,000 of us who you have “tortured” don’t come after you today with tort claims. I heard it pays about $3 million per claim.
Congress, you need to get the politics out of the war zone and focus on your job. Gaining information in non-lethal interrogations against non-uniformed terrorists is what is protecting our country today. If you had done your job the past twenty years perhaps one of my favorite wingmen in the F-14A would be alive today.
Lt Tom “Stout” McGuinness of the VF-21 “Freelancers” went through S.E.R.E. training during my tenure. But when it came down to the crisis moment, his “interrogators” did not give him the waterboard. They merely went into the cockpit of American Airlines Flight 11, slashed Tom’s throat, and flew the first aircraft into the North Tower of World Trade Center on 9/11.
Congress, let me ask you a very simple question about your leadership and your sworn responsibility. It is a yes or no question, and you have a personal choice to make.
Would you endorse the use of a waterboard interrogation technique against a terrorist like Mohamed Atta al Sayed, the leader of the highjacking of American Airlines Flight 11 or not. The answer for me is simple: “turn on the hose.” If you answer anything else, then God help America because Tom died in vain.
The original Frank "Spig" Wead graduated from the US Naval Academy in 1917 and was a founder of Naval aviation. "Cdr. "Spig" Wead is the pseudonym of a retired naval aviator who served in the post-Vietnam era.
Last edited:
The Bushwhacos weren't clueless. They intentionally misled Congress and the American people into a war based entirely on lies they concocted because they wanted to go to war against Saddam.
That's NOT what they told us. They SAID they took us into their war because Saddam had WMD's, and every statement they made to that effect was a lie.
Before invading Iraq, the Bushwhacko criminals never offered "bringing Freedom to Iraq" as a reason to start their war of LIES. That ONLY became one of their lame ass excuses AFTER they were busted for their lies that Saddam had WMD's. Congress would never have approved the invasion based only on "bringing Freedom to Iraq."
Saddam was nobody's good guy, but he was contained within the middle third of Iraq. He posed NO threat to the U.S. or any other country.
If you truly believe that, it's you who is clueless.
CallMeJoe
Diamond Member
- Jul 30, 2004
- 6,938
- 5
- 81
I guess your sarcasm meter is out for calibration...If you truly believe that, it's you who is clueless.
Thanks for brining up the S.E.R.E. program. S.E.R.E. is the U.S. Airforce's Survival, Evasion, Resistance, Escape program.
Their mission statement:
Per their name, the purpose of S.E.R.E. is to train our troops who may be captured to survive possible torture by, and to resist giving any helpful information to, our enemies. Their mission is specifically NOT to describe or define methods to be used by our own intelligence agencies to interrogate possible enemies captured by U.S. forces.
S.E.R.E is the specific military group tasked to understand and teach our troops to resist torture.
S.E.R.E is NOT tasked to develop means and methods of torturing those we capture.
In 2002, Donald Rumsfeld's attorney, William Haynes, requested info from S.E.R.E. regarding administration's intended use of "enhanced interrogation" techniques. S.E.R.E's report to Haynes explicitly:
- labels "enhanced interrogation" techniques TORTURE.
- says "enhanced interrogation" techniques DO NOT WORK.
- says "enhanced interrogation" techniques could have "potential impact on the safety of U.S. personnel captured by current and future adversaries."
Here's the complete report from S.E.R.E. to Haynes:
Key sentences and phrases:
- The question that should immediately come to mind is whether the application of physical and/or psychological duress will enhance the interrogator's ability to achieve this objective.
- The error inherent in this line of thinking is the assumption that, through torture, the interrogator can extract reliable and accurate intelligence. History and a consideration of human behavior would appear to refute this assumption.
- The application of physical and or psychological duress will likely result in physical compliance. Additionally, prisoners may answer and/or comply as a result of threats of torture. However, the reliability and accuracy information must be questioned.
- Once any means of duress has been purposefully applied to the prisoner, the formerly cooperative relationship can not be reestablished. In addition, the prisoner's level of resolve to resist cooperating with the interrogator will likely be increased as a result of harsh or brutal treatment.
- For skilled interrogators, the observation of subtle nonverbal behaviors provides an invaluable assessment of the prisoner's psychological and emotional state. This offers important insights into how the prisoner can be most effectively leveraged into compliance. Further, it often enables the interrogator to form a reasonably accurate assessment of the prisoner's veracity in answering pertinent questions. The prisoner's physical response to the pain inflicted by an interrogator would obliterate such nuance and deprive the interrogator of these key tools.
- ... a subject in extreme pain may provide an answer, any answer, or many answers in order to get the pain to stop.
- The unintended consequence of a U.S. policy that provides for the torture of prisoners is that it could be used by our adversaries as justification for the torture of captured U.S. personnel.
Anyone who commits, supports, condones or attempts excuses torture is an unethical, immoral sub-human piece of shit!
Sorry if that's what you meant. I didn't see any <sarcasm> </sarcasm> tags, and clearly, Loyalist wasn't kidding. :\
Last edited:
Uh... names please! Give the names of those in the Intelligence community whose "lies" made it into the 2002 NIE.
Are you blind, or just stupid?
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.
"Together we must also confront the new hazards of chemical and biological weapons, and the outlaw states, terrorists and organized criminals seeking to acquire them. Saddam Hussein has spent the better part of this decade, and much of his nation's wealth, not on providing for the Iraqi people, but on developing nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them."
President Clinton, Jan. 27, 1998.
"Fateful decisions will be made in the days and weeks ahead. At issue is nothing less than the fundamental question of whether or not we can keep the most lethal weapons known to mankind out of the hands of an unreconstructed tyrant and aggressor who is in the same league as the most brutal dictators of this century."
Sen. Joe Biden (D, DE), Feb. 12, 1998
"It is essential that a dictator like Saddam not be allowed to evade international strictures and wield frightening weapons of mass destruction. As long as UNSCOM is prevented from carrying out its mission, the effort to monitor Iraqi compliance with Resolution 687 becomes a dangerous shell game. Neither the United States nor the global community can afford to allow Saddam Hussein to continue on this path."
Sen. Tom Daschle (D, SD), Feb. 12, 1998
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeleine Albright, Feb. 18, 1998.
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb. 18, 1998.
"We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.
"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeleine Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.
"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL) and others, Dec, 5, 2001.
My goodness, those Bush people were crafty.President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.
"Together we must also confront the new hazards of chemical and biological weapons, and the outlaw states, terrorists and organized criminals seeking to acquire them. Saddam Hussein has spent the better part of this decade, and much of his nation's wealth, not on providing for the Iraqi people, but on developing nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them."
President Clinton, Jan. 27, 1998.
"Fateful decisions will be made in the days and weeks ahead. At issue is nothing less than the fundamental question of whether or not we can keep the most lethal weapons known to mankind out of the hands of an unreconstructed tyrant and aggressor who is in the same league as the most brutal dictators of this century."
Sen. Joe Biden (D, DE), Feb. 12, 1998
"It is essential that a dictator like Saddam not be allowed to evade international strictures and wield frightening weapons of mass destruction. As long as UNSCOM is prevented from carrying out its mission, the effort to monitor Iraqi compliance with Resolution 687 becomes a dangerous shell game. Neither the United States nor the global community can afford to allow Saddam Hussein to continue on this path."
Sen. Tom Daschle (D, SD), Feb. 12, 1998
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeleine Albright, Feb. 18, 1998.
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb. 18, 1998.
"We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.
"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeleine Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.
"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL) and others, Dec, 5, 2001.
Al Qaeda-Hussein Link Is Dismissed
I've gone through the Key Judgments [from October 2002 NIE ] and can't seem to find the part where it states the existence of an Al Qaeda-Hussein link. Would you be so kind as to highlight it for me?
Irrelevant. Unless you have proof that he convinced others to lie about what ended up in the 2002 NIE.
The 2002 NIE never showed any different. It noted that Iraq was trying to get 25,000 centrifuges. It never said that Iraq already had them.
Yet he still gave his "infamous dog and pony show at the U.N."
Yes I do. He said it.
Remind me again just what info that Curveball gave that ended up in the 2002 NIE.
Prove it!
Where is your evidence that those responsible for putting together the 2002 NIE were pressured to lie?
So what? What's your point?
Evidence and names please!
I can't speak for "most every American military man" but it wouldn't surprise me, since 58 percent of the American public wanted the federal government to waterboard terror suspect Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.
I already did in a previous post, including names, dates, times and places. If you're too reading challenged to comprehend the list, or you're too incompetent to search for those quotes and confirm them, it's you're problem, not ours.
You really are a couple of fries short of a Happy Meal. I posted two of those names AND the circumstances under which they were canned. If you're not also mouse challenged, search another of my posts for Richard Clarke and Eric Shinseki.
You're damned right you can't speak for "most every American military man" so don't pretend that you can.
EVERY American citizen is responsible for obeying the laws of the United States of America. However, 58 percent of the American public are not responsible for upholding those laws. That's the responsibility of our elected officials and our law enforcement agencies.
Neither are 58 percent of American troops responsible for upholding those laws. That's the responsibility of their command structure all the way up to their Commander In Chief.
At the time, the most senior elected official of our civilian government and the Commander In Chief of our armed forces was the EX-Traitor In Chief, George W. Bush who should be tried and convicted for his crimes. :thumbsdown:
Are you even an American citizen? If you are, you are a disgrace to our nation and to every American citizen and every value and every ideal Americans have fought and died to establish and defend for 234 years. :'(
If you're not an American citizen, please shut the fuck up and go shit in your own back yard, and I'll feel sorry for whatever UN-American country is stuck with you.
Last edited:
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter