Conservative Radio Host Is Waterboarded, Says it's TORTURE!

Im with her 'War doesn't determine who is right--only who is left." Betrand Russell

Good point, jerzgirl. I thought we lefties were the ones who have no morals or principles and don't care about what's right or wrong! Whomever made the decisions in the previous Administration just made up the rules as they went along. Their stories are changing at this very moment, I'm sure. Didn't it start out with "We don't torture"? Then it changed to "Waterboarding isn't torture", then it was, "Well, it's torture but it was still legal"; finally it became, "It may not have been legal but it WORKED"! Annie

The only thing is, they have YET to show where torture (aka "enhanced terrogation") has given us ANY valid information. Some claim that we were able to stop an attack in California, LA specifically - an attack that even the mayor of LA was never told about. They never made any arrests or anything, so how do they know it was stopped? If it existed at all, it could still be in the planning stages, right? It's all a bunch of hogwash - not that we will never or could never be attacked again, but that torturing someone will give good info. Trust me - I promised my now-ex a lot of things as he was pounding on me and kicking me just to make him stop. I didn't mean a word of it!!!

"Conservatives" learn...are you kidding...lol? "I'd love to see if Keith Olbermann could man up and do the same, but I highly doubt he would." Why should he? He hasn't been saying it's not torture and that it's no big deal! I'll readily admit I'm not woman enough to do it. Annie

I'd love to see if Keith Olbermann could man up and do the same, but I highly doubt he would.

Keith Oldbermann is so full of hot air, frankly I cant even watch the network anymore

That chicken hawk? He'd run off to his "undisclosed location" quicker than you can even imagine! Annie

You're right cool, please excuse my misspelling.

Don't you mean, "Deny, deny, deny"?

"Anyhow do you seriously think they did all that and have nothing to show for it?" Possibly, yes. They didn't get the one thing Cheney most wanted to get and that was the link between Iraq and 9/11. I guess the real question is did they get anything useful and could they have gotten it in other ways. "As somebody else already stated, those of our people who may find themselves in those situations are well trained in order to not give away any secret information. They know the techniques, have felt most of them. Do you think the enemy doesn't train their people the same way?" You just said it yourself! Of course the enemy trains their people the same way. Believe me when I say I don't mean this as praise but the terrorists have to have a great deal of courage and determination to do what they do. They don't really CARE if they're ultimately killed but they sure won't have a problem with giving false information to stop the pain and suffring. Annie

If the information hasn't been released how do you know we "did" get useful information to prevent further attacks on US soil? Also, even those who have said it's worked have said it took over 100 times to get any info so that's certainly not fast. Annie

Lol, do you think those terrorists just did the 9/11 attacks and called it a day? There have been loud calls for release of more documents from those who were privy to the information and know the results. Obama only released what suited him. Just enough to proof it had been done. (Also just enough to get Pelosi into hot water, but that's better suited for another discussion). Anyhow do you seriously think they did all that and have nothing to show for it? Sure, waterboarding doesn't give immediate results. You just dunk the head under water once until they think they can't hold their breath any longer and voila they spill the beans. It does get done numerous times in one session. You reach 100 fairly quickly. It's a matter of maybe a couple of days. The chit-chat method, if you finally gain their trust, may yield results several months down the road, often it takes over a year, if you get any useful information, and that's usually on those who have very little information to share to begin with. How timely do you think that information will be? As somebody else already stated, those of our people who may find themselves in those situations are well trained in order to not give away any secret information. They know the techniques, have felt most of them. Do you think the enemy doesn't train their people the same way? You have to be tough to get the info. Keeping a nation safe sometimes requires to get your hands dirty. I can only hope that if push comes to fall Obama is willing to get the info the fastest way possible. I rather have a terrorist tortured than thousands of innocent lives taken. Do you think any of those terrorists cared that children were killed in those attacks? Do you think they would squabble as much about how best treat prisoners?

If it's NOT torture why have we prosecuted people for it as far back as World War II? I'm afraid I don't believe anybody who was really waterboarded as they showed this radio host being if they say it was "no big deal". I also don't believe "thousands of American lives" were saved by this. Khalid Sheik Mohammed gave the most information BEFORE being waterboarded. Annie

Did you happen to see "Mancow" getting waterboarded, Taskr? It wasn't quite as you described. It may not have been quite as horrid as what you described the Japanese to have done but it was far from harmless. Is our new standard that if there's something that could be worse it's fine for us to do it? Annie

"If it's NOT torture why have we prosecuted people for it as far back as World War II?" Because what the Japanese did during WWII was completely different. They would pour water into a person's mouth until their stomach was bloated and then jump on their stomachs forcing them to vomit. It was a far cry from pouring water over a wet towel and it did serious physical harm.

It seems like most of you who have responded to this discussion are making the assumption that this technique was tremendously successful and that we got all the information we wanted by doing this and no other method would have worked as well. There is a lot of evidence that this is not a reliable method of interrogation and that it was used not to learn of impending attacks but to find a link between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda to justify the Iraq war. The implication is they didn't really care that the information was likely false because when someone is being waterboarded he will likely say what the interrogators want to hear whether it's the truth or not. Does anyone here think that was acceptable? Annie

From the clip I saw of him doing this I wouldn't call him a "pusss"! Of course I AM a girl and this girl isn't about to volunteer to do that any time soon...lol! Annie

I give Mancow a lot of credit for doing it and for admitting he'd been wrong. I have a suspicion that neither Rush nor Hannity, IF there ever could be any way to convince them to do it, would never EVER admit the truth no matter what happened. It would be covered up or faked somehow. Annie

There is no evidence that it kept this country safe. It was used to collect false information to justify the Iraq War not to save lives. Sure, waterboarding and other forms of torture may get someone to talk but that doesn't mean they're going to tell the truth. They'll tell you what you want to hear in order to make the torture stop. Annie

I agree. With this guy he knew he wasn't going to actually be drowned but that didn't stop him from feeling the terror. Someone who is being interrogated by waterboarding doesn't know if they're going to be killed or not, they have no "panic button" to push or something to throw when they've had enough. Waterboarding may not cause "pain" in the literal sense as having a bone broken or your fingernails pulled off but it's still a form of pain and it definitely causes suffering I would consider inhumane. Annie