Cheney endorses simulated drowning
ledvedderman
Posts: 7,761
Calls use of water boarding a ‘no-brainer’ to get intelligence on terrorists
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15431835/
WASHINGTON - Dick Cheney, US vice-president, has endorsed the use of "water boarding" for terror suspects and confirmed that the controversial interrogation technique was used on Khaled Sheikh Mohammed, the senior al-Qaeda operative now being held at Guantánamo Bay.
Cheney was responding to a radio interviewer from North Dakota's WDAY who asked whether water boarding, which involves simulated drowning, was a "no-brainer" if the information it yielded would save American lives. "It's a no-brainer for me," Cheney replied.
The comments by the vice-president, who has been one of the leading advocates of reducing limitations on what interrogation techniques can be used in the war on terror, are the first public confirmation that water boarding has been used on suspects held in US custody.
"For a while there, I was criticized as being the 'vice-president for torture'," Cheney added. "We don't torture ... We live up to our obligations in international treaties that we're party to and so forth.
"But the fact is, you can have a fairly robust interrogation program without torture and we need to be able to do that."
Cheney said recent legislation passed by Congress allowed the White House to continue its aggressive interrogation program.
But his remarks appear to stand at odds with the views of three key Republican senators who helped draft the recently passed Military Commission Act, and who argue that water boarding is not permitted according to that law.
"[It's] a direct affront to the primary authors of the Military Commission Act in the Senate — John McCain, Lindsey Graham and John Warner — all of whom have publicly stated that the legislation signed by the president last week makes water boarding a war crime," said Jennifer Daskal, advocacy director at Human Rights Watch. "This is Cheney ignoring the consensus of his own Pentagon," she said, referring to comments by senior officials that harsh interrogation techniques do not produce reliable intelligence.
John Bellinger, the State Department legal adviser, last week declined to answer specific questions on water boarding, saying Congress would have to determine whether specific interrogation techniques were permissible under the Geneva conventions.
The Bush administration was forced to work with Congress to pass the Military Commissions Act after the Supreme Court ruled that al-Qaeda suspects were entitled to some protections under the Geneva convention. "Any procedures going forward would have to comply with the standards of Common Article 3 [of the Geneva conventions], including the prohibition on cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment," Bellinger said. "Congress would have to agree that they are permitted under the law."
Asked in the radio interview whether he would agree that the debate over terrorist interrogations and water boarding was "a little silly", Cheney responded: "I do agree".
"I think the terrorist threat, for example, with respect to our ability to interrogate high-value detainees like Khaled Sheikh Mohammed, that's been a very important tool that we've had to be able to secure the nation," he said.
Copyright The Financial Times Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15431835/
WASHINGTON - Dick Cheney, US vice-president, has endorsed the use of "water boarding" for terror suspects and confirmed that the controversial interrogation technique was used on Khaled Sheikh Mohammed, the senior al-Qaeda operative now being held at Guantánamo Bay.
Cheney was responding to a radio interviewer from North Dakota's WDAY who asked whether water boarding, which involves simulated drowning, was a "no-brainer" if the information it yielded would save American lives. "It's a no-brainer for me," Cheney replied.
The comments by the vice-president, who has been one of the leading advocates of reducing limitations on what interrogation techniques can be used in the war on terror, are the first public confirmation that water boarding has been used on suspects held in US custody.
"For a while there, I was criticized as being the 'vice-president for torture'," Cheney added. "We don't torture ... We live up to our obligations in international treaties that we're party to and so forth.
"But the fact is, you can have a fairly robust interrogation program without torture and we need to be able to do that."
Cheney said recent legislation passed by Congress allowed the White House to continue its aggressive interrogation program.
But his remarks appear to stand at odds with the views of three key Republican senators who helped draft the recently passed Military Commission Act, and who argue that water boarding is not permitted according to that law.
"[It's] a direct affront to the primary authors of the Military Commission Act in the Senate — John McCain, Lindsey Graham and John Warner — all of whom have publicly stated that the legislation signed by the president last week makes water boarding a war crime," said Jennifer Daskal, advocacy director at Human Rights Watch. "This is Cheney ignoring the consensus of his own Pentagon," she said, referring to comments by senior officials that harsh interrogation techniques do not produce reliable intelligence.
John Bellinger, the State Department legal adviser, last week declined to answer specific questions on water boarding, saying Congress would have to determine whether specific interrogation techniques were permissible under the Geneva conventions.
The Bush administration was forced to work with Congress to pass the Military Commissions Act after the Supreme Court ruled that al-Qaeda suspects were entitled to some protections under the Geneva convention. "Any procedures going forward would have to comply with the standards of Common Article 3 [of the Geneva conventions], including the prohibition on cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment," Bellinger said. "Congress would have to agree that they are permitted under the law."
Asked in the radio interview whether he would agree that the debate over terrorist interrogations and water boarding was "a little silly", Cheney responded: "I do agree".
"I think the terrorist threat, for example, with respect to our ability to interrogate high-value detainees like Khaled Sheikh Mohammed, that's been a very important tool that we've had to be able to secure the nation," he said.
Copyright The Financial Times Ltd. All rights reserved.
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Lifeguard: "My God, are you OK?"
Me: "Yep, no worries. I was just pretending to drown ... Simulation!"
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
the flip side to water boarding, is it does not do any permant physical damage. it make you think you will drown. its a mind fuck. we arent cutting off fingers.
I do think it puts our captured soliders at risk of far worse toture. even though they would be and are totured anyway, we shouldnt stoop to that level.
when it comes to getting information on an immintant dirty bomb going off, then I think the people holding him should break the law and do whatever necessecary to get that info.
captured terrorists are not entitled to geneva convention rights
in the REAL free world we call it innocent until proven guilty. but then again, america has been using this makeshift prison as an excuse to abuse human rights for years, so whats new?
Exactly, and the Veep was talking about terror suspects.
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
www.myspace.com/jensvad
I'm sorry but khalid sheikh mohammad is more then a suspect. he's innocent until proven guilty, right.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_Shaikh_Mohammed
read up on your buddy that you feel so sorry for. fuck him
www.amnesty.org.uk
What is torture?
Well that's easy. Torture is anything done to anyone during a Republican administration.
"What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."
Camden 5-28-06
Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
You should join the military and get a job as an interrogator. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed wouldn't last a minute.
doesn't feel that way right now. That's the hopeful
idea . . . Hope didn't get much applause . . .
Hope! Hope is the underdog!"
-- EV, Live at the Showbox
(couldn't resist.)
There is no torture according to these Chickenhawks. It is called "pressure" now, not torture.
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength
Now I know why people go to Arizona Sate as a last resort.
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength
That is just pathetic of you. You can't debate issues and you resolve to statements like, "read up on your buddy that you feel so sorry for". Who feels sorry for him? This is the United States of America. You know. Land of the free, home of the brave. We're the only remaining superpower and we resort to torture. Yes terrorists are bad, and they should be dealt with.
We have a moral duty as, what the world (used to at least) views, as the greatest nation on Earth to treat enemy combatants in a moral way. If we torture than what message does that send to other nations. What if Palestinians were torturing members of Israels military? Would we stand for that? Not a chance.
Finally, most of the reason I am against this is because it gives them a reason to torture our soldiers. I have friends serving in that area and do I want them to be tortured based on the policies of this administration? No. But guess what? That's what's going to happen. If we can torture, they will torture our guys.
This is America. It's time we act like it.
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
what the hell is that suppose to mean
I agree with you 100%. my reply probably shouldnt have been geared towards you.
I'm guessing he thinks because you have asu in your name that you went to Arizona State...or Alabama, Alaska, or Arkansas. Am I missing any?
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
well yea I got that. but dont know why my response would yield such a comment. then again, people like him resort to useless personal attacks when they have nothing intelligent to say.
I'm glad I don't have ot draw that line...if you had a suspect in custody, and you were in charge of getting info out of him/her, what would you do? What if you didn;t get any info and 2000 people died in an attack? And then you find out the suspect knew all about it? How do you feel then? Would you change your tactics? How far would you go to protect 2000 lives? But what if he/she really doesn't know anything? How would you feel if you 'tortured' them and still didn;t get any info because he/she didn;t have any info?
Tough place to be.
Yea man. Get what you're saying. It's a tough decision to make. ON the one hand, you could get all the information you needed to stop another 9/11. On the other, if you toture anyone long enough they'll admit that they themselves curcified christ.
I personally don;t think there is 1 line that can be drawn. It's not black and white. it's a grey area that depends on a lot fo factors.
That's a fallacious argument. Its an ad hominem. It doesn't prove your point.
Learn how to debate.
You know, that's why we're debating. To get ideas from one another, and avoid stuff like "you don't live here, you don't get it, you have no idea" like I've read here many times.
We people debate with the mean we have, but it SHOULD be the politic "we" vote for, that should bring up ideas. That's why we vote. Because those people present themselves as ruler, so once elected, they should get to work.
My problem with politic nowadays, it's that getting elected is the end. The campaign is hard work, getting elected is the prize. And once in charge, they are all doing just as bad as anyone of us would make in that situation.
(follow link for more links and for a slideshow documenting historical uses of waterboarding as torture)
U.S.: Vice President Endorses Torture
Cheney Expresses Approval of the CIA’s Use of Waterboarding
(Washington, DC, October 26, 2006) – U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney has issued the Bush administration’s first clear endorsement of a form of torture known as waterboarding, or mock drowning, said Human Rights Watch today.
If Iran or Syria detained an American, Cheney is saying that it would be perfectly fine for them to hold that American’s head under water until he nearly drowns, if that’s what they think they need to do to save Iranian or Syrian live.
In a radio interview yesterday, Cheney agreed that subjecting prisoners to “a dunk in water” is a “no-brainer” if it could save lives. After being asked about this technique, he said that such interrogations have been a “very important tool” used against high-level al Qaeda detainees such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and that they do not, in his view, constitute torture.
Cheney’s comments on the legality of waterboarding contradict the views of the U.S. Congress and the U.S. Defense Department, as well as fundamental principles of international law, and could come back to haunt the United States if not corrected by the Bush administration, Human Rights Watch warned.
“If Iran or Syria detained an American, Cheney is saying that it would be perfectly fine for them to hold that American’s head under water until he nearly drowns, if that’s what they think they need to do to save Iranian or Syrian lives,” said Tom Malinowski, Washington advocacy director for Human Rights Watch.
Waterboarding dates at least to the Spanish Inquisition, when it was known as the tormenta de toca. It has been used by some of the most cruel dictatorships in modern times, including the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia. In some versions of the technique, prisoners are strapped to a board, their faces covered with cloth or cellophane, and water is poured over their mouths to stimulate drowning; in others, they are dunked head-first into water.
The United States has long considered waterboarding to be torture and a war crime. As early as 1901, a U.S. court martial sentenced Major Edwin Glenn to 10 years of hard labor for subjecting a suspected insurgent in the Philippines to the “water cure.” After World War II, U.S. military commissions successfully prosecuted as war criminals several Japanese soldiers who subjected American prisoners to waterboarding. A U.S. army officer was court-martialed in February 1968 for helping to waterboard a prisoner in Vietnam.
The U.S. Congress recently adopted the Military Commissions Act, which criminalized under all circumstances treatment of prisoners that causes serious physical or mental pain or suffering. The legislation explicitly states that such suffering need not be “prolonged” for the treatment to constitute a war crime, a rebuke to past Bush administration legal opinions that reportedly permitted waterboarding on the questionable grounds that the terror it induces does not have a prolonged impact on its victims. Two of the chief sponsors of the legislation, Senators John McCain and John Warner, have said that it criminalizes waterboarding.
In April 2006, in a letter to Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez, more than 100 U.S. law professors stated unequivocally that waterboarding is torture, and is a criminal felony punishable under the U.S. federal criminal code.
“Vice President Cheney needs to get a better lawyer, someone who will tell him not to endorse criminal activities over the airwaves,” said Malinowski.
On September 6, the Pentagon issued a new Field Manual on Intelligence Interrogation that explicitly forbids the use of waterboarding in any interrogation. General Jeff Kimmons, the Senior Intelligence officer in the U.S. Army, explained when these new rules were released: “No good intelligence is going to come from abusive practices. I think history tells us that. I think the empirical evidence of the last five years, hard years, tell us that.” The U.S. Army’s new counterinsurgency manual states that “torture and cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment is never a morally permissible option, even in situations where lives depend on gaining information.” It concludes that those who “lose moral legitimacy” by employing such methods “lose the war.”
www.amnesty.org.uk
Maybe. My question was an honest one. I don't know what constitutes torture. Waterboarding is probably on the "torture" side of the line even though nobody will really drown, so no physical harm will come to the person. Is extreme emotional distress torture?
What about being locked in a cold cell and made to listen to Bon Jovi 24 hours a day?
What about wiping my ass with the Koran while the detainees are praying?
I'm all for making them extremely uncomfortable. I'm all for breaking their will. I'm all for exerting the strongest "pressure" possible. I'm against torture as a method of extracting info - if for no other reason than the questionable quality of data extracted during torture. I'm just trying to figure out in my own mind where that line is.