It's only torture if you inhale?

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,559
4
0
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200...errorist_interrogation

McConnell weighs in on waterboarding

The nation's intelligence chief says waterboarding "would be torture" if used against him or if someone under interrogation actually was taking water into his lungs.

But Mike McConnell, in a magazine interview, declined for legal reasons to say whether the technique categorically should be considered torture.

"If it ever is determined to be torture, there will be a huge penalty to be paid for anyone engaging in it," McConnell told The New Yorker, which published a 16,000-word article Sunday on the director of national intelligence.

The comments come as the House Intelligence Committee investigates the CIA's destruction of videotaped interrogations of two al-Qaida suspects. The tapes were made in 2002 and destroyed three years later, over fears they would leak. They depicted the use of "enhanced" interrogation techniques against two of the three men known to have been waterboarded by the CIA.

As McConnell describes it, a prisoner is strapped down with a wash cloth over his face and water is dripped into his nose.

"If I had water draining into my nose, oh God, I just can't imagine how painful! Whether it's torture by anybody else's definition, for me it would be torture," McConnell told the magazine.

A spokesman for McConnell said he does not dispute the quotes attributed to him in the story by Lawrence Wright, who won the Pulitzer Prize in 2007 for "The Looming Towers", a book on al-Qaida and the Sept. 11 attacks.




This guy is way to stupid to in charge of a garbage truck, much less Director of National Intelligence.
This part needs to be cleared up NOW:
"If it ever is determined to be torture, there will be a huge penalty to be paid for anyone engaging in it," McConnell told The New Yorker,
Whether you are for or against waterboarding, you can't put our guys and gals in the position where they work can go to jail for doing their job. We MUST make some rules.
 

MadRat

Lifer
Oct 14, 1999
11,960
278
126
Waterboarding is torture, unequivocally. The CIA killed at least one suspect during an interogation, and this is the ghist of the coverup.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: MadRat
Waterboarding is torture, unequivocally. The CIA killed at least one suspect during an interogation, and this is the ghist of the coverup.
Where is that written?

the problem is in the lack of any specific rules or law to cover each specific method. The GC's are written in terms that can be interpreted differently by various parties.

So, while I agree with your statement that waterboarding is torture, it is certainly not "unequivocal" -- which seems to be the OP's point when he points out that there needs to be some rules. It needs to be written down, some place that is enforcible, that this specific method is legally torture. Otherwise, it will forever float in that gray area we've witnessed for years now... maybe not in your mind, or mine, but it is enough of a gray area to permit its use in the future, and for the lawyers to defend against its use if/when someone brings up charges of torture.

As the OP states, there needs to be a definitive living list of legal vs. illegal methods of interrogation.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
YAWBT

I suppose people think all activities our government does under the guise of Black Ops should be scrutinized by public too lol

I have a friend who served 8 years as a SEAL, and recently took a job with Blackwater and has shipped out to Afghanistan. His words to me regarding this type of thing? After a good laugh, he says "The public has no idea what our military does. It also has no idea how effective we are. They dont want, nor will they ever know, what we do".

Give it a rest.
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
71,367
30,961
136
Originally posted by: blackangst1
YAWBT

I suppose people think all activities our government does under the guise of Black Ops should be scrutinized by public too lol

I have a friend who served 8 years as a SEAL, and recently took a job with Blackwater and has shipped out to Afghanistan. His words to me regarding this type of thing? After a good laugh, he says "The public has no idea what our military does. It also has no idea how effective we are. They dont want, nor will they ever know, what we do".

Give it a rest.

They work us. We damn well better be able to find out what these folks are doing in our names. If what our government is doing in secret is so shameful or illegal then we need to drag the cockroaches into the the light day and start prosecuting.
 

Nebor

Lifer
Jun 24, 2003
29,582
12
76
Originally posted by: ironwing
Originally posted by: blackangst1
YAWBT

I suppose people think all activities our government does under the guise of Black Ops should be scrutinized by public too lol

I have a friend who served 8 years as a SEAL, and recently took a job with Blackwater and has shipped out to Afghanistan. His words to me regarding this type of thing? After a good laugh, he says "The public has no idea what our military does. It also has no idea how effective we are. They dont want, nor will they ever know, what we do".

Give it a rest.

They work us. We damn well better be able to find out what these folks are doing in our names. If what our government is doing in secret is so shameful or illegal then we need to drag the cockroaches into the the light day and start prosecuting.

They've got the guns, they've got the power. We just work here.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
Originally posted by: ironwing
Originally posted by: blackangst1
YAWBT

I suppose people think all activities our government does under the guise of Black Ops should be scrutinized by public too lol

I have a friend who served 8 years as a SEAL, and recently took a job with Blackwater and has shipped out to Afghanistan. His words to me regarding this type of thing? After a good laugh, he says "The public has no idea what our military does. It also has no idea how effective we are. They dont want, nor will they ever know, what we do".

Give it a rest.

They work us. We damn well better be able to find out what these folks are doing in our names. If what our government is doing in secret is so shameful or illegal then we need to drag the cockroaches into the the light day and start prosecuting.

Good luck with that. Rage all you want. It's all hot air.
 

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,559
4
0
The POINT of this thread is that US agents should NOT be put in a position where they can go to jail for doing their jobs.
 

MadRat

Lifer
Oct 14, 1999
11,960
278
126
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Where is that written?

the problem is in the lack of any specific rules or law to cover each specific method. The GC's are written in terms that can be interpreted differently by various parties.

So, while I agree with your statement that waterboarding is torture, it is certainly not "unequivocal" -- which seems to be the OP's point when he points out that there needs to be some rules. It needs to be written down, some place that is enforcible, that this specific method is legally torture. Otherwise, it will forever float in that gray area we've witnessed for years now... maybe not in your mind, or mine, but it is enough of a gray area to permit its use in the future, and for the lawyers to defend against its use if/when someone brings up charges of torture.

As the OP states, there needs to be a definitive living list of legal vs. illegal methods of interrogation.

No, its people like you and Mike McConnell that demand it be written in stone. And your frame of mind is how the War on Terror started. You cannot run around and claim that the definition was not in the law so the law must not be applicable in this case. Well, as they say, Ignorance is bliss.
 

MadRat

Lifer
Oct 14, 1999
11,960
278
126
Originally posted by: ironwing
They work us. We damn well better be able to find out what these folks are doing in our names. If what our government is doing in secret is so shameful or illegal then we need to drag the cockroaches into the the light day and start prosecuting.

While I believe in the spirit that they do work for us, in reality they are answering to scoundrels that really have no intention of acting on any information they obtain in such an interogation. The War on Terror is a windfall of money to power brokers in Washington, DC. Without the war they would have no justification to screw over the American people.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
Originally posted by: techs
The POINT of this thread is that US agents should NOT be put in a position where they can go to jail for doing their jobs.

:thumbsup:
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: MadRat
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Where is that written?

the problem is in the lack of any specific rules or law to cover each specific method. The GC's are written in terms that can be interpreted differently by various parties.

So, while I agree with your statement that waterboarding is torture, it is certainly not "unequivocal" -- which seems to be the OP's point when he points out that there needs to be some rules. It needs to be written down, some place that is enforcible, that this specific method is legally torture. Otherwise, it will forever float in that gray area we've witnessed for years now... maybe not in your mind, or mine, but it is enough of a gray area to permit its use in the future, and for the lawyers to defend against its use if/when someone brings up charges of torture.

As the OP states, there needs to be a definitive living list of legal vs. illegal methods of interrogation.

No, its people like you and Mike McConnell that demand it be written in stone. And your frame of mind is how the War on Terror started. You cannot run around and claim that the definition was not in the law so the law must not be applicable in this case. Well, as they say, Ignorance is bliss.
You obviously don't understand law.

Ever heard of "loopholes"? They often occur when laws and treaties are written in vague or ambiguous terms. Such is the case with the current laws and treaties governing the term "torture," and the remedy is to rewrite those laws using specific terms.

So, as I said before, while I do agree with you that waterboarding is "torture," by my own definition, you'd be very hardpressed to find any laws specifically defining it as such.

That is why the best approach to this issue is to create a list of clearly defined "authorized techniques," thus making anything not on the list illegal. The DoD handles the issue this way, and I personally believe that the rest of the intelligence community (IC) should follow suit.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
86,731
52,566
136
Originally posted by: palehorse74

Where is that written?

the problem is in the lack of any specific rules or law to cover each specific method. The GC's are written in terms that can be interpreted differently by various parties.

So, while I agree with your statement that waterboarding is torture, it is certainly not "unequivocal" -- which seems to be the OP's point when he points out that there needs to be some rules. It needs to be written down, some place that is enforcible, that this specific method is legally torture. Otherwise, it will forever float in that gray area we've witnessed for years now... maybe not in your mind, or mine, but it is enough of a gray area to permit its use in the future, and for the lawyers to defend against its use if/when someone brings up charges of torture.

As the OP states, there needs to be a definitive living list of legal vs. illegal methods of interrogation.

Why must this continue to be played out over and over again? It is written in established legal precedent of the United States. This is how we determine on a daily basis that tons and tons of things are illegal. This is how we know that we can't segregate in public schools. Most states don't have that 'written in stone'... legal precedent established it. (well, states might have that written now, but for a long time they didn't.)

If you want to say that the the legal standing of precedent is not unequivocal in US law then we are about to have a catastrophe on our hands, as probably half of all law in the US is now suddenly open for debate again. Everyone with a brain knows waterboarding is illegal, and the only people arguing otherwise have an agenda. They are trying to delay, delay, delay, until people forget about it because they are (justifiably) terrified that people are going to be sent to break rocks in military prison just like the last guy we convicted of waterboarding.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: palehorse74

Where is that written?

the problem is in the lack of any specific rules or law to cover each specific method. The GC's are written in terms that can be interpreted differently by various parties.

So, while I agree with your statement that waterboarding is torture, it is certainly not "unequivocal" -- which seems to be the OP's point when he points out that there needs to be some rules. It needs to be written down, some place that is enforcible, that this specific method is legally torture. Otherwise, it will forever float in that gray area we've witnessed for years now... maybe not in your mind, or mine, but it is enough of a gray area to permit its use in the future, and for the lawyers to defend against its use if/when someone brings up charges of torture.

As the OP states, there needs to be a definitive living list of legal vs. illegal methods of interrogation.

Why must this continue to be played out over and over again? It is written in established legal precedent of the United States. This is how we determine on a daily basis that tons and tons of things are illegal. This is how we know that we can't segregate in public schools. Most states don't have that 'written in stone'... legal precedent established it. (well, states might have that written now, but for a long time they didn't.)

If you want to say that the the legal standing of precedent is not unequivocal in US law then we are about to have a catastrophe on our hands, as probably half of all law in the US is now suddenly open for debate again. Everyone with a brain knows waterboarding is illegal, and the only people arguing otherwise have an agenda. They are trying to delay, delay, delay, until people forget about it because they are (justifiably) terrified that people are going to be sent to break rocks in military prison just like the last guy we convicted of waterboarding.
Please see my last post describing how the DoD handles this issue.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
86,731
52,566
136
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Please see my last post describing how the DoD handles this issue.

I completely agree. That is the way to remove ambiguity and to allow people to do their jobs to the best of their ability without having to worry about being thrown in jail later because their boss said *wink wink* it's okay.

My issue was with the idea that waterboarding is a legal grey area. I do not think that argument can be responsibly put forth. There's just no realistic chance that argument would win in court. So again, while there might not be a law establishing it specifically as torture, we have legal precedent establishing it as torture. That is every bit as binding.
 

WHAMPOM

Diamond Member
Feb 28, 2006
7,628
183
106
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: MadRat
Waterboarding is torture, unequivocally. The CIA killed at least one suspect during an interogation, and this is the ghist of the coverup.
Where is that written?

the problem is in the lack of any specific rules or law to cover each specific method. The GC's are written in terms that can be interpreted differently by various parties.

So, while I agree with your statement that waterboarding is torture, it is certainly not "unequivocal" -- which seems to be the OP's point when he points out that there needs to be some rules. It needs to be written down, some place that is enforcible, that this specific method is legally torture. Otherwise, it will forever float in that gray area we've witnessed for years now... maybe not in your mind, or mine, but it is enough of a gray area to permit its use in the future, and for the lawyers to defend against its use if/when someone brings up charges of torture.

As the OP states, there needs to be a definitive living list of legal vs. illegal methods of interrogation.

Geneva Convention and UN resolutions defining inhuman treatment? You ignore them all?
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,057
67
91
Originally posted by: techs

But Mike McConnell, in a magazine interview, declined for legal reasons to say whether the technique categorically should be considered torture.

Anyone who, "for legal reasons," is too chickenshit to say whether waterboarding should be considered torture is too ethically challenged to hold ANY job in law enforcement, intelligence or national security, let alone a leadership position, let alone one as powerful as Director of National Intelligence.

And they silence the voices arising,
From those who would show us the light,
With their guys with their spies in the skies watching you and your neighbor.

And Who's Watching Over Who's Watching Over You?
Tell me who's telling who's telling you what to do what to do?
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: WHAMPOM
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: MadRat
Waterboarding is torture, unequivocally. The CIA killed at least one suspect during an interogation, and this is the ghist of the coverup.
Where is that written?

the problem is in the lack of any specific rules or law to cover each specific method. The GC's are written in terms that can be interpreted differently by various parties.

So, while I agree with your statement that waterboarding is torture, it is certainly not "unequivocal" -- which seems to be the OP's point when he points out that there needs to be some rules. It needs to be written down, some place that is enforcible, that this specific method is legally torture. Otherwise, it will forever float in that gray area we've witnessed for years now... maybe not in your mind, or mine, but it is enough of a gray area to permit its use in the future, and for the lawyers to defend against its use if/when someone brings up charges of torture.

As the OP states, there needs to be a definitive living list of legal vs. illegal methods of interrogation.

Geneva Convention and UN resolutions defining inhuman treatment? You ignore them all?
I'm simply telling you how the lawyers see it: Those articles are not explicit or specific enough to enforce uniformly.

The DoD solved this problem by creating a list of very specific authorized methods, while prohibiting all others. IOW, if it's not specifically allowed, it's forbidden.

If the gray area I'm describing didnt exist, this issue wouldnt be so debatable. As it stands, we've been hearing debate on this single method for 5+ years, so there must be something to my whole "gray area" theory, eh?
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
Originally posted by: palehorse74
...
If the gray area I'm describing didnt exist, this issue wouldnt be so debatable. As it stands, we've been hearing debate on this single method for 5+ years, so there must be something to my whole "gray area" theory, eh?

Not really, people have just developed a good exploit for a flaw in human reasoning. It's really a lot like the evolution "debate", actually. It is not reasonable, intelligent people simply coming to different conclusions...one side of the discussion is being completely manufactured by people with an agenda. The human flaw that's being exploited is that most people come to the exact same conclusion you just did, that if there is disagreement on an issue, there MUST be honest cause for that disagreement. The problem is that this only works if everyone is playing by the same rules. It doesn't work when one side or the other is simply arguing for the sake of trying to confuse people.

And all political BS aside, that's exactly what's going on here..they're just trying to confuse everyone on the issue. Mike McConnell is a smart guy, yet he apparently turns into Professor Fumbles when discussing this issue. Listening to the higher-ups in government fall all over themselves trying to talk about torture without really talking about it makes me think these guys either missed their calling to be the people taking my order at Taco Bell, or they're doing something they know they shouldn't be.
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
Originally posted by: blackangst1
YAWBT

I suppose people think all activities our government does under the guise of Black Ops should be scrutinized by public too lol

I have a friend who served 8 years as a SEAL, and recently took a job with Blackwater and has shipped out to Afghanistan. His words to me regarding this type of thing? After a good laugh, he says "The public has no idea what our military does. It also has no idea how effective we are. They dont want, nor will they ever know, what we do".

Give it a rest.

It should be scrutinized by someone, I don't really feel like leaving it up to your buddy whether or not he follows the law.

And seriously, I'm tired of this bullshit argument that secrecy should rule all. Sure, governments need to keep secrets...that doesn't mean there should be no accountability. If people break the law, they should go to jail. I'm fine with the public not knowing everything, I don't think the system could work that way, but that doesn't mean those entrusted with the protection of this country should be given carte blanche to do whatever the fuck they feel like.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Originally posted by: blackangst1
YAWBT

I suppose people think all activities our government does under the guise of Black Ops should be scrutinized by public too lol

I have a friend who served 8 years as a SEAL, and recently took a job with Blackwater and has shipped out to Afghanistan. His words to me regarding this type of thing? After a good laugh, he says "The public has no idea what our military does. It also has no idea how effective we are. They dont want, nor will they ever know, what we do".

Give it a rest.

It should be scrutinized by someone, I don't really feel like leaving it up to your buddy whether or not he follows the law.

And seriously, I'm tired of this bullshit argument that secrecy should rule all. Sure, governments need to keep secrets...that doesn't mean there should be no accountability. If people break the law, they should go to jail. I'm fine with the public not knowing everything, I don't think the system could work that way, but that doesn't mean those entrusted with the protection of this country should be given carte blanche to do whatever the fuck they feel like.


eh, which buddy is that?

And who has argued secrecy should rule? You make it sound like someone is arguing for zero accountability in govt. You need to go read a few of my earlier posts. Im all for accountability, but am realistic enough to know not everything will reach the the public. Accountability != some op ed in <name your favorite news source here>. How the hell do you know these "black ops" (for lack of better term) arent overseen by a subcommitee? Because there's no info in teh google? Please.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
34,596
8,654
136
Originally posted by: techs
Whether you are for or against waterboarding, you can't put our guys and gals in the position where they work can go to jail for doing their job. We MUST make some rules.

Damn straight it needs to be defined. Now which Congress is going to have the balls to make such a small and simple move?