Conservative Radio Host Has Himself Waterboard to Prove It’s Not Torture, Realizes He Was Wrong
Via John Chait, it seems that conservative talk radio host Eric “Mancow” Muller decided it would be a fun stunt to have himself waterboarded in order to prove that it’s not really torture. Didn’t work so well:
“It is way worse than I thought it would be, and that’s no joke,”Mancow said, likening it to a time when he nearly drowned as a child. “It is such an odd feeling to have water poured down your nose with your head back…It was instantaneous…and I don’t want to say this: absolutely torture.”
“I wanted to prove it wasn’t torture,” Mancow said. “They cut off our heads, we put water on their face…I got voted to do this but I really thought ‘I’m going to laugh this off.’”
I’m not sure I understand why Mancow wasn’t willing to take Christopher Hitchens’ word for it when he undertook an identical experiment for the same reason and concluded “if waterboarding does not constitute torture, then there is no such thing as torture.” But as Chait says “I think the torture debate would be mighty different if more of the conservatives who scoff at waterboarding would try the same thing.”
The one guy who I want to see at the front of the line for this is Michael Goldfarb from the Weekly Standard who, I think, has really gone above and beyond the call of duty in terms of minimizing torture by referring to it as “dunking”.
139 Responses to “Conservative Radio Host Has Himself Waterboard to Prove It’s Not Torture, Realizes He Was Wrong”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
May 22nd, 2009 at 3:18 pm
And, remember, a waterboarding like this isn’t really “torture” because the recipient knows it will all be over in a bit and he can get on with his life. It’s sort of like a reporter spending some time in jail before writing an article on jail life.
So, if this guy believes it’s torture, imagine what the experience is like to a captive who doesn’t know what his captors will do next, whether he’ll ever see home and family again, whether he’ll live or die.
May 22nd, 2009 at 3:18 pm
I guess all there is to say is that this guy deserves at least a few particles of respect for admitting he was wrong.
May 22nd, 2009 at 3:20 pm
To be fair, I wouldn’t really take Christopher Hitchens’ word for anything either.
May 22nd, 2009 at 3:23 pm
I read about some guy that holed up in a hotel with two Russian call girls and a bottle of Viagra. He wanted to prove he could screw all weekend and get it up every time one of the Russian babes demanded it. Guy died of a heart attack. Now, if you’re going to prove you can withstand something I say prove you can do that and NOT die of the heart attack. Geez, pick a challenge that makes a little sense. Ya know? There’s a nice Hilton downtown, hmmmm…….
May 22nd, 2009 at 3:29 pm
K in Va gets at the point i wanted to make: for this to really be a useful test, the person would have to be seized, blindfolded, and brought somewhere, then questioned about something, and then, at some stage, is then waterboarded, and then continued to be questioned, and then waterboarded a second time, and then blindfolded and taken and dropped back off somewhere.
i vote we start with cheney, who really might have some useful information about scooter libby….
PS. i want to second lafollette progressive in noting that some credit to this guy for admitting he was wrong. of course, rush’ll be denouncing him for not really being a right-winger any hour now.
May 22nd, 2009 at 3:29 pm
There are many stories like this, a lot of them from military guys who have been through SERE training and say, yes, this is torture. Has anyone ever read/heard anything from someone who was waterboarded and says it *isn’t* torture?
It seems like the people with firsthand knowledge (and this is imperfect knowledge, as comment #1 points out, because it’s not “real” waterboarding if you know it’s just for training/journalism) are unanimous that waterboarding is torture. Says something, doesn’t it?
May 22nd, 2009 at 3:31 pm
In general, I always dislike it when people of any political persuasion explicitly wish violence to be done to disliked pundits and politicians. Michael Goldfarb, however, is perhaps the one person I would make an exception for. That pr**k needs to be strapped down to a bored and drowned to within an inch of his life. It’d almost be patriotic.
May 22nd, 2009 at 3:32 pm
howard, Hitchens had a very “authentic” experience — he was grabbed in the middle of the night, blindfolded, the whole deal. And still, he admitted that the real thing would be much worse, because he always knew deep down that he’d be OK.
May 22nd, 2009 at 3:34 pm
“dunking” used to include strapping a woman to a stool and dunking her in water to see if she drowned.
If she did, she was innocent. If she didn’t, they either hanged her or burned her at the stake.
So about that minimizing. . .”dunking” seems to rise to the level of murder.
May 22nd, 2009 at 3:39 pm
I give this guy credit for trying it and being honest about the results. Now, will he help us make the case against torture? He lasted 7 seconds. KSM was waterboarded 183 times in one month!
May 22nd, 2009 at 3:41 pm
One curious aspect of the extreme position that it’s just “putting water on their faces,” or “just” anything, is that it insults the intelligence and sincerity of operatives who use these techniques. Even before thinking about international law or the reality of the method itself, commentators should pause and ponder the fact that this method is used by experts to extract information from extremely well-prepared criminals. If it’s not torture (or, at least, harsh treatment), then why did it become so important to use the method?
May 22nd, 2009 at 3:42 pm
He dropped his little toy cow!
So sad.
May 22nd, 2009 at 3:43 pm
i think there has to be a special rule for former torture-denialists:
you don’t get to do it only once. five times, minimum.
i want fat cowards like goldfarb dunked once.
and then i want them to face it a second time. and a third, fourth, and fifth.
and long before the fifth one, they’ll be admitting anything, selling their mothers, crapping their pants.
it will be a very good way for them to build some character.
May 22nd, 2009 at 3:45 pm
howard, Hitchens had a very “authentic” experience — he was grabbed in the middle of the night, blindfolded, the whole deal. And still, he admitted that the real thing would be much worse, because he always knew deep down that he’d be OK.
Yes Hitchens was out in front of this debate with his article. He’s smart like that. One wonders if Obama had read it.
But Matt is right, Michael Goldfarb should “dunk” himself first before deciding on whether or not it’s torture. I doubt he has the courage.
Mancow was on the radio for years in Chicago and is obnoxiously conservative. He is younger than most radio personalities, so maybe it’s partly a generational thing.
Coincidently I was masochistically listening to Mancow that morning on 9-11 while driving by the Sears Tower. He and his “crew” were freaking out and I thought it must be a joke.
May 22nd, 2009 at 3:46 pm
I was trying to work out an apt rebuttal to the whole “How can waterboarding be torture when we do it to our own troops?” line of reasoning. Is that argument the same as saying:
How can rape be a crime, when millions of people choose to engage in sex every day?
Both arguments rely, I believe, on the (ludicrous) assumption that context, intent, etc don’t matter.
May 22nd, 2009 at 3:53 pm
“they” cut off “our” heads.
What a flippin’ moron. I used to hear this idiot in Chicago. He got busted for a sick ‘comedy’ routine about the special olympics and went into a tantrum about how the left was out to get him because he supported Clinton’s impeachment. I see he hasn’t made much progress.
May 22nd, 2009 at 3:55 pm
Also we should bear in mind that conservatives, particularly loudmouth radio hosts, are millions of times tougher than any liberal ever could be, and we know that because they tell us all the time. So if it affects these superhumans, imagine what effect it has on us lesser mortals.
May 22nd, 2009 at 3:57 pm
too many steves, i hadn’t realized that about the hitchens exercise; thanks for pointing out.
May 22nd, 2009 at 4:03 pm
I like “They beat people in SERE school, too. Does that mean beatings aren’t torture? They hang people by their arms, like the Vietnamese did to John McCain. Does that mean John McCain wasn’t tortured? They expose people to tear gas during military training. Does that mean corrosive chemicals in the eyes are not torture?”
Then there’s the really obvious one: “Yes, they do this to our troops. They do this TO PREPARE THEM FOR TORTURE.”
May 22nd, 2009 at 4:17 pm
“prepare them for torture” is a strange phrase to turn over in your mind. I suppose there are a very few people that can enter some ZEN state of being whereby they remove themselves from the pain and panic at hand. But severe pain is pretty damned difficult to ignore. And knowing it is coming and the form it may take hardly seems to be of much use once you’re found fully in its grasp. Tell me you’re going to shoot me in the leg. I’ll prepare all day to deal with it when it finally happens. It’s still going to fricking hurt like hell despite all my homework. Using SERE to justify letting torturers off the hook is absurd.
May 22nd, 2009 at 4:25 pm
I never listened to him very often, but I would reflexively avoid his station (was it 103.5?) after hearing him compare Cardinal Bernadin’s recently-deceased body to rotting ground hamburger meat. It probably wasn’t the most offensive thing he ever said, and I wasn’t even Catholic, but I was horrified enough to not want to waste any more of my life listening to the words coming out of his mouth.
Glad to see he’s at least honest enough to admit it’s torture.
May 22nd, 2009 at 4:27 pm
Then there’s the really obvious one: “Yes, they do this to our troops. They do this TO PREPARE THEM FOR TORTURE.”
No, they do this to prepare them for some bad things that don’t constitute torture. If it was torture, the military wouldn’t do it to the troops. After all, the military doesn’t shoot our troops to prepare them for getting shot. It doesn’t rape our troops to prepare them for getting raped. There are lines the military won’t cross with respect to its own troops. Including torture.
May 22nd, 2009 at 4:27 pm
If SERE training involves strapping someone down to an inclined board and then drowning them then the SERE program and its instructors are committing acts of torture, whether the trainee is a volunteer of not.
May 22nd, 2009 at 4:28 pm
For the same reason Mancow and Hitchens’ waterboarders won’t be going to jail: it’s voluntary.
People voluntarily have violent sex all the time. Doesn’t make it rape.
May 22nd, 2009 at 4:30 pm
Boxers don’t go to jail either. Yet assault and battery is still a crime.
Conservatives can play dumb all they want to. Doesn’t change a thing.
May 22nd, 2009 at 4:30 pm
Obviously any convention against torture can be invalidated the moment some particular nation’s military forces decide to allow candidates for voluntary advancement into special corps to under go a particular method of imposing physical pain.
If anyone can voluntarily undergo some treatment as part of their military training in a particular nation, by definition it cannot be torture, because definitions of torture are entirely determined based on what members of military organizations in particular nations are willing to undergo.
Therefore if the Russian military begins offering advancement into an elite military organization and volunteers may have to undergo rape, disembowelment, amputation, impaling, etc., none of those acts can any longer be illegal for anyone under international laws, because by definition what the Russian military does cannot be torture.
May 22nd, 2009 at 4:32 pm
They’re pretty good at it, so I agree that, yes, if you agree with that charitable interpretation, you could be correct.
May 22nd, 2009 at 4:33 pm
I repeat myself: they beat people in SERE school, yet beatings are torture. They hang people by their arms in SERE school, yet hanging people by their arms is torture.
I suppose you can say that they use less-harsh versions of these things than the enemy used against our troops, so AS PRACTICED IN SERE SCHOOL – certain techniques aren’t torture, but that just proves that point that those techniques, when used as one actually uses them against a detainee from the enemy, are torture, since you have to ease off them when using them against your own troops in order to avoid torturing them.
May 22nd, 2009 at 4:35 pm
There are many stories like this, a lot of them from military guys who have been through SERE training and say, yes, this is torture.
Including Jesse Ventura, who said it on Larry King just a couple weeks ago. Too bad Mancow didn’t notice. (Or maybe he felt compelled to prove that he was tougher than a former Navy SEAL?)
May 22nd, 2009 at 4:38 pm
I read about some guy that holed up in a hotel with two Russian call girls and a bottle of Viagra. He wanted to prove he could screw all weekend and get it up every time one of the Russian babes demanded it. Guy died of a heart attack.
Actually, no, rumors of my death were greatly exaggerated. I’m fine.
May 22nd, 2009 at 4:38 pm
There were five criminal cases (including two courts martial) that the US (and one state court) brought against waterboarders in the 20th century.
This is why the conservatives have to play dumb on the matter.
May 22nd, 2009 at 4:40 pm
Actually, no, rumors of my death were greatly exaggerated. I’m fine.
And we have a thread-winner!
May 22nd, 2009 at 4:41 pm
To make it really authentic, they should be waterboarded by someone they distrust and despise. For example, Al Franken maybe, or maybe Michael Moore. Someone who will waterboard them right to the verge of blacking out.
May 22nd, 2009 at 4:42 pm
Still an asshole, I see. I despise Mancow. I’m not saying Q101 was perfect before he became the morning host, but I truly believe you can pretty much point to that hiring as the start of the decline of that station. I know it was never the same for me.
Of course, it might have been because I turned 18 about then. Who knows.
May 22nd, 2009 at 4:42 pm
People voluntarily have violent sex all the time. Doesn’t make it rape.
Please show me in the torture statute where lack of consent is an element of the crime.
May 22nd, 2009 at 4:44 pm
Boxers don’t go to jail either. Yet assault and battery is still a crime.
Again, the crime of battery specifically requires a lack of consent. Please show me where the torture statute has the same.
May 22nd, 2009 at 4:45 pm
I suppose you can say that they use less-harsh versions of these things than the enemy used against our troops, so AS PRACTICED IN SERE SCHOOL – certain techniques aren’t torture
No, it wasn’t “less harsh” in SERE School. In fact, they took the limits for what can be done from the SERE limits.
May 22nd, 2009 at 4:46 pm
I was trying to work out an apt rebuttal to the whole “How can waterboarding be torture when we do it to our own troops?” line of reasoning.
BDSM practitioners also pay good money to go to professional dungeons to be tied up and whipped — doesn’t mean that tying up and whipping prisoners isn’t a crime either.
May 22nd, 2009 at 4:47 pm
Please show me in the torture statute where lack of consent is an element of the crime.
The Torture Act defines torture as being performed “upon another person within his custody or physical control.”
SERE enrollees are not in the custody or physical control of their instructors. They are free to say “fuck this” and be unstrapped from the waterboard. Indeed, they must consent to be strapped down in the first place. That is not going to strike any court as “physical control.”
… Not that Al is interested in an honest answer, of course.
May 22nd, 2009 at 4:51 pm
SERE enrollees are not in the custody or physical control of their instructors.
Of course they are under “physical control” – they are strapped down!
They are free to say “fuck this” and be unstrapped from the waterboard.
And KSM was free to honestly tell everything he knows and be unstrapped from the waterboard.
May 22nd, 2009 at 4:51 pm
The waterboard people an average of 9 times a day for a month in SERE School? You sure about that, Al?
People in SERE School are given the water torture by people they know to be the enemy, who might kill them? You sure about THAT, Al?
I’m going to have to see a cite for those, Al, because I think you’re wrong.
May 22nd, 2009 at 4:52 pm
They can quit.
Yes, as soon as he said there were no Al Qaeda/Saddam links, they unstrapped him. Not.
May 22nd, 2009 at 4:54 pm
And here’s the video.
Somehow, I don’t think Hannity would have lasted as long as Mancow.
May 22nd, 2009 at 4:55 pm
Attention, everyone: “Water torture is incredibly effective. People tell the truth right away, like flipping on a switch” is no longer an operative talking point. Please forget the torture-defenders every claimed such a thing, as Al has just stated that a person can undergo it hundreds of times and still not tell the truth.
Thank you.
May 22nd, 2009 at 4:55 pm
Of course they are under “physical control” – they are strapped down!
Al runs away from the point. Wuss.
… or he’d be tortured, which makes it a crime. Idiot.
May 22nd, 2009 at 4:59 pm
So SERE training doesn’t teach soldiers to resist torture.
Maybe we OUGHT to prepare our soldiers for torture, then.
If we DID train them, maybe they wouldn’t squeal like pigs under the first duress like that pussy McCain did.
May 22nd, 2009 at 5:00 pm
i think cheney should be next.
May 22nd, 2009 at 5:00 pm
Does someone have to explain what “custody” means to Al?
I’d really like to see where Al will hide next.
May 22nd, 2009 at 5:01 pm
Al, Al, Al…you’re missing the point:
“I think the torture debate would be mighty different if more of the conservatives who scoff at waterboarding would try the same thing.”
Step up or shut up, son.
May 22nd, 2009 at 5:01 pm
Now imagine how Mancow would feel if he were being waterboarded by enemies, as a real prisoner of war, instead of by fellow Americans in a friendly setting.
May 22nd, 2009 at 5:04 pm
Is it me, or has the quality of Al’s trolls been going down?
May 22nd, 2009 at 5:06 pm
Look Al, when you’re talking about whether a psychologically stressful situation constitutes “torture”, things like context, intent, extent, and consent mean everything. Sleep and sensory deprivation are prime examples. Both can be used as a terrible form of torture, especially in conjunction with other methods. But both are also used in clinical trials with willing volunteers, who understand they can opt out at any time and are in complete control of their situation. Is it proper to call those trials torture? Well, if words are to have any commonly understood meaning, then no.
The same applies to waterboarding. Leaving aside whether SERE currently “tortures” its soldiers through its current application of waterboarding to its own troops, what if SERE were to waterboard a given soldier, say, 180 times? Without telling the soldier when they would stop, or, whether the trainers actually wanted to kill that soldier? Then would you say SERE might be torturing?
This is not difficult to understand, as others have pointed it out repeatedly.
May 22nd, 2009 at 5:06 pm
Al used to just be a driveby. Then things started really going downhill for the Republicans, so he started sticking around to be humiliated.
Or maybe he just has nowhere else to go anymore.
May 22nd, 2009 at 5:07 pm
UN Convention Against Torture, 1994
Generally “coercion” is thought of as involving, or rather lacking, consent.
May 22nd, 2009 at 5:10 pm
Unless you’re Al, in which case the answer is “me no compweehend.”
May 22nd, 2009 at 5:11 pm
Of course, Christopher Hitchens’ experience was especially disorienting and terrifying, as they drowned him in a substance with which he was completely unfamiliar.
May 22nd, 2009 at 5:13 pm
Yesterday, he spent a couple posts arguing that the Republicans never made any attempt to expand the powers of the White House under George Bush, just the federal bureaucracy, but he gave up after like two comments.
A seriously sub-par performance.
May 22nd, 2009 at 5:28 pm
as they drowned him in a substance with which he was completely unfamiliar.
Johnnie Walker Black would’ve violated KSM’s religion.
Which I’m sure he interprets as strictly forbidding alcohol, while permitting the murder of children.
May 22nd, 2009 at 5:44 pm
And KSM was free to honestly tell everything he knows and be unstrapped from the waterboard.
Al will be kidnapped, will be free to honestly admit to fucking his sister, then can be unstrapped from the waterboard. Al is, of course, a sister-fucking monster.
May 22nd, 2009 at 5:44 pm
First people stop wasting your time debating Al.
Jesse Ventura has been doing yeoman’s work going on any show that will have him and shooting odwn the conservative BS on this.
Has Hannity ever offered an explanation for why he keeps not following through on his offer to be waterboarded for charity?
May 22nd, 2009 at 5:48 pm
Of course, Christopher Hitchens’ experience was especially disorienting and terrifying, as they drowned him in a substance with which he was completely unfamiliar.
I love that.
May 22nd, 2009 at 5:50 pm
The longer and louder the torture is groovy crowd crow, the more the petard will hoist. Personally, I think Cheney must understand that he is a candidate for crimes against humanity, and he is digging himself in. But unlike the banality of evil prez he served under, Cheney is going after a particularly Shakespearean end. My bunker, my bunker, a kingdom for a bunker.
May 22nd, 2009 at 5:57 pm
I’m seconding the nomination of Joe from Lowell’s post #56 as the weekly winner.
May 22nd, 2009 at 5:57 pm
Of course, Christopher Hitchens’ experience was especially disorienting and terrifying, as they drowned him in a substance with which he was completely unfamiliar.
No, he’s quite used to water, but it’s usually diluted with Scotch.
May 22nd, 2009 at 6:01 pm
Actually I think there are some conservatives who are craven enough that they would submit themselves to waterboarding knowing that it is torture. Then after having it done to them claim that it really is no big deal.
May 22nd, 2009 at 6:04 pm
Of course, Christopher Hitchens’ experience was especially disorienting and terrifying, as they drowned him in a substance with which he was completely unfamiliar.
If they had called it ‘Forced Water Chaser’ instead of Water Boarding, Hitch might have felt even more put upon.
May 22nd, 2009 at 6:10 pm
[...] Matt Yglesias nominates Michael Goldfarb of the Weekly Standard to be next in line for personal education, but I think most of the rest of us would agree the most worthy “volunteer” is Sean Hannity of Faux News. [...]
May 22nd, 2009 at 7:27 pm
If it was torture, the military wouldn’t do it to the troops
Well, no. You’re trying to win a substantive argument with a definitional finesse. Water boarding is torture and SERE uses water boarding. If the GI doesn’t want to undergo the training, he can opt out of the program.
May 22nd, 2009 at 7:46 pm
Why would anyone take Hitchens word for anything along these lines? He is as unreliable a narrator for being such an aggressive egomaniac that I would not trust his view of waterboarding in the slightest. It’s a good thing to have some bona fide conservative talk shows have this experience and call it what it is.
May 22nd, 2009 at 8:05 pm
If it was torture, the military wouldn’t do it to the troops.
So why did the SERE instructors tell the people at Guantanamo that their techniques would be illegal if applied to detainees?
Not that you’re actually arguing in good faith, of course.
May 22nd, 2009 at 9:10 pm
I think he knows there is a real chance the federales will be coming for him, and he is trying to cast the whole things as partisan politics. The purpose of his public appearances is to draw liberal fire. Republicans, being mindless automatons, will then reflexively and inevitably line up in favor of whatever the liberals are against. Then we can have a big red vs. blue fight about torture, and when Dick’s turn comes, maybe someone flinches because they don’t want a political fight, maybe he gets a GOPer judge, maybe he gets a hung jury because the Republican jurors aren’t going to give the damn Defeatocrats the satisfaction, damn the law and damn the facts.
May 22nd, 2009 at 9:16 pm
The whole game here is to try to keep this out of court, since if these issues were ever decided in court, the ludicrous legal arguments of partisan hacks like Al would go down in flames.
Oh, and the backup plan if they do get into court is jury nullification.
May 22nd, 2009 at 11:28 pm
If anybody watched Mankow’s “waterboarding” they would know this is bogus. When the CIA did it they put the cloth over nose and mouth, they didn’t put the cloth over Mankow mouth, they poured it down his throat.
May 22nd, 2009 at 11:39 pm
When the CIA did it they put the cloth over nose and mouth
You were there when they did it, huh?
May 23rd, 2009 at 12:29 am
That would suck so bad. I’ve nearly drowned once; every animal instinct kicks in, awful.
May 23rd, 2009 at 2:39 am
Hello, I want to say hi everyone.
test
May 23rd, 2009 at 2:46 am
The one guy who I want to see at the front of the line for this is Michael Goldfarb from the Weekly Standard
This is a good choice but first I want Sean Hannity to keep his promise to be waterboarded for charity.
May 23rd, 2009 at 3:43 am
Al, stop pin dancing around torture? not torture? and think man, think. Most people being waterboarded don’t have little cows they can drop to get it to stop. The only way they can make it stop is to talk. Truth is optional, and in fact based on everything we know about what this kind of treatment compels, lying is common. So regardless of what you’re willing to do or have done on your behalf to other human beings, what you get in return is unreliable information. I don’t know about you, but I think basing policy and action on what we know has a high probability of being a flat out lie is stupidly dangerous.
That’s a key point that people like Ventura are trying to make folks realize. Not just that waterboarding must be torture because it will make you admit to the Sharon Tate murder, it’s that the admission is a lie.
May 23rd, 2009 at 7:30 am
The Freedom Questioners?
Hard to imagine these conservative superhero storytellers to be adults.
May 23rd, 2009 at 8:21 am
WHile I disapprove of waterboarding for purposes of interrogation, I would not take the word of the God-hater Hitchens for a damn thing.
May 23rd, 2009 at 9:47 am
Hector Says:
May 23rd, 2009 at 8:21 am
WHile I disapprove of waterboarding for purposes of interrogation, I would not take the word of the God-hater Hitchens for a damn thing.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hitch doesn’t hate God. That is a nonsensical statement. He hates what religion has done to the human species. Hitch denies a “god” even exists. His prescience on the issue is spot on. There is no tooth fairy. Therefore you can’t hate the tooth fairy, only the fact kids are trained to think quarters magically appear beneath their pillows because humans shed an initial growth of teeth. Kinda the same misguided beliefs that have people furrowing their brow, clasping their hands and muttering sincere incantations in the fervid belief it will cause Aunt Mary’s horrifically mestastized brain tumor to melt away in the night. Hector, possibly being one of the self professed “Christian” beings, seems a tad hostile for someone having a benevolent disposition. Maybe he’s more of a Crusading Christian.
May 23rd, 2009 at 9:50 am
What makes anyone believe the information obtained through torture, pardon me “Harsh interrogation techniques”, can be deemed reliable?
It seems to me the victim will either:
a) be sufficiently determined as to choose to die before revealing any useful information.
or:
b) tell the interrogator whatever he or she wishes to hear in order to stop the pain.
The interrogation will not stop until the interrogator hears what he or she believes to be the truth. It does not matter if it actually is the truth. There is no reason to believe the information obtained through torture is accurate because the interrogators are the final arbiters of what is “truth”.
May 23rd, 2009 at 9:56 am
Who cares if we torture terrorists? I’m sure it was torture standing on an upper floor of the WTC and deciding whether to jump or burn. I think torture is having your head hacked off with a dull knife. I think torture is being beaten to death by a mob and then having your body dragged through the streets.
These foul excuses for people deserve the worst kind of treatment imaginable, especially if they KNOW about plans to do serious damage to our country and our people. If Obama and his clique of pantywaist cross-dressers were honest, they would release the documents showing the EFFECTIVENESS of waterboarding…which has to be among the weakest of “torture” methods available. But they won’t do that…it would prove them WRONG.
We are dealing with barbarians…they respect only barbarism, and must be met with it in the extreme if we are to defeat them. When did we become such a pussified nation of weak, miserable shoegazers who care more about making people like us than SURVIVING?? The lesson of this preening farce? Don’t take prisoners.
PS: Bet those teenaged Somali pirates would have preferred waterboarding over a bullet in the brain (without due process, I might add…thanks Obie!)
May 23rd, 2009 at 10:12 am
There’s a legal definition of torture, and the waterboarding done by the US does not rise to that level, per Eric Holder’s testimony, regardless of jughead’s assertions. If we believe that a terrorist has information of a nature that would save lives, then I cannot imagine ANY action we should not take to get that information from the terrorist. We are only limited by how strong of a stomach the interrogator has. The Constitution is not a death warrant. We cannot allow a city to be incinerated just so liberals can sit back and feel noble about themselves. Thethe terrorists attacked us when Clinton was in office (remember WTC 1992, the first attack?), this cannot all be blamed on Bush. Jughead is in office now, and he needs to get his head together before the terr’s cut it off.
May 23rd, 2009 at 10:21 am
Torture works. It worked in WWII, it worked in Viet Nam, and John (RHINO) McCain in his own book admitted the enemy broke him. Sure he gave bad info, but unlike libs who have NO military experience, those with experience in any interrogations (police included) know you don’t take the word of anyone without checking it out with other sources. Libs aren’t used to verifying anything; as evidenced by all of the spittle ridden nonsense spewed by Keith Olbermann. Libs either no clue or are lying about how intelligence is used. Wait a minute…liberals, intelligence…OMG how can those two words be used in the same sentance? oh yeah, liberals have no intelligence….. The world’s too dangerous to let these libs, who have the smarts and emotional stability of a 13 year old valley girl, dictate policy and strategy or to allow them to continue to support the terrorists by attacking those trying to fight them.
May 23rd, 2009 at 10:36 am
Drowning is a horrible way to go. First off, your autonomic responses completely take over — your body tries to eliminate the possibility of water getting into your lungs. It doesn’t want to go quietly. And so you don’t. Your body prefers pain to death, so you experience agonizing pain. Your body decides that the cerebral cortex is fucking up and so it goes haywire: anywhere else is better than here. People recovered from drowning in shallow waters often have mud in their lungs after the body has decided that it would prefer to go down rather than up and has buried itself headfirst in the bottom. In short, water on the face and up the nose causes the body to panic and crap out. I think it was in Le Petit Soldat where the young hero had been waterboarded and he said, in pride, that he held his shit together. Which he meant literally.
I’m not surprised that the squalous-brained Al (et al) has been apologizing for torture, but I’m pleased that at least one young right-winger has spoken the truth about it. Torture doesn’t require exotica: water boarding uses the body against itself.
May 23rd, 2009 at 10:50 am
Libs have no military experience?
John Kerry had military experience. Jimmy Carter had military experience. Al Bore actually went to Vietnam.
Dick Cheney on the other hand, took every military deferment he could get, and then when those were up, his wife got preggers. George W. Bush ditched Vietnam to hang out in a National Guard champagne squadron. John McCain had military experience, if you count jumping the lines into a position he wasn’t qualified for based on family connections and crashing every plane he ever flew.
It seems to me, Mr. Schmudlap that most modern conservatives have voted with their feet. It seems that they’re all for war and military prowess as long as its someone else. Mostly, they’re chickenhawks. Cowards, knaves, big and brave when it comes to torturing captives held down. But not terribly useful otherwise.
As to whether torture works, well, it depends on what you want it for. Basically, when you torture someone, they’ll pretty much tell you everything and anything you want to hear, whether its true or not.
This was the KSG problem, he started talking and he wouldnt stop. He didn’t know anything, but that didn’t stop us from torturing him. The only thing that stopped the torture was telling us what he thought we wanted to hear. The result was an endless stream of hysterical stories and false leads… all of which turned out to be nonsense but which consumed tens of thousands of man hours trying to verify.
That’s basically your problem, Schmudlap. The information produced from torture is inherently unreliable and produces way more wheat than chaff. You talk verification, but a lot of this information can’t be effectively verified one way or another until its potentially too late, and what can be verified or disproved consumes vast resouces.
Torture has been around thousands of years. Why do you think its discredited now?
But hell, what am I doing trying to talk sense to you. You’re just here to bash your imaginary liberals, cause it makes you feel all hot and manly.
May 23rd, 2009 at 10:57 am
There was an interesting article once, on torture. What this guy did was he started going around to torture victims in South America and Asia and started asking them about it. They told him all sorts of stuff, including stuff they hadn’t told the torturers.
So, he’s amazed, he says “Why didn’t you tell the torturers this?” He was figuring maybe they were holding out for some reason.
You know what the answer was? Over and over again, “They didn’t ask.”
It seems that at some point, the torture becomes an end in itself. Torture becomes the whole point of torture, and you stop caring about asking questions. Information actually starts to get inconvenient, because it gets in the way of torture.
Let’s face it, do you think they were asking any questions of KSG on the 82nd waterboarding? Were they asking questions on the 69th waterboarding? Were they different questions from the 14th waterboarding? Were the answers different from the 50th waterboarding? Nonsense.
Over in Afghanistan, we have the case of a cab driver named Daliwar. Basically, some shmuck in the wrong place at the wrong time. Taken by Americans, held in American custody. They started torturing him. But he didn’t have anything to tell. After a while, it just got to be fun. He was a funny little man who would scream out “Allah” when you hit is legs. Eventually he died. Autopsy found that his legs had been hit so hard and so repeatedly that the muscle had literally liquefied into pulp. So there you go, tortured to death for no good reason but that it was fun.
This is what Torture is really about.
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:12 am
Now I have a better clue as why my nephew, a US Navy SEAL (as was Jesse Ventura)said that after all his training he could hardly look at water for all he had to go through in it. I haven’t asked him about waterboarding yet but Jesse’s statements mirrored what he had said in his voice.
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:13 am
Who cares if we torture terrorists?
You’re so sure everyone we’ve got in custody is, in fact, a “terrorrist”?
We are dealing with barbarians…they respect only barbarism, and must be met with it in the extreme if we are to defeat them.
I see. We should chuck all of Western Civilization out the window and institute the Law of the Jungle. Thanks, I’ll pass.
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:17 am
I love how the people who are against torture and the “torture” known as waterboarding, and therefore are defending terrorist who want to kill us then talk so tough about wanting to waterboard those who believe in it to keep the country safe…real classy.
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:21 am
I’ve been in law and law enforcement for quite a few years. And over the years, I’ve had occasion to interview a great many people – criminals and people who commit criminal acts. And the thing about crimes, is that no matter what it is, no matter how awful or morally reprehensible or inexcusable, when you dig down…
There was a good reason to do it. Maybe that baby just wouldn’t shut up unless you gave it a good shake. Maybe you just really needed the money. Maybe she was dressing like a slut and she embarrassed you in front of your friends… but right there, in the moment that the crime was committed, there was a good reason, a reason it could be done, should be done, had to be done.
There’s always a good reason to do the wrong thing.
That doesn’t make it right.
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:21 am
[...] Chait, by way of Matthew Yglesias and Ezra Klien, comes word of conservative radio host Eric “Mancow” Muller’s [...]
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:35 am
I hate to burst the sadistic, self-aggrandizing bubbles of all the tough-talking liberals here who want Cheney et al. waterboarded; but if you really believe that is appropriate treatment for them, then you have all the social pathologies that you’re projecting on to them. Live with that, if you can.
Is it torture? I guess that’s debatable, but I saw fraternity hazings at Brown University in the 90’s that were far worse.
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:36 am
Generally “coercion” is thought of as involving, or rather lacking, consent.
Meanwhile, I’d be surprised if Al was right about the other end of this, too. Why would an assault statute mention the issue of consent? Does Al think that theft statutes also discuss consent?
One wonders if modern conservatives really are as dumb and dishonest as Al, or if they are consciously play-acting.
My working theory is that they believe that by insisting on something, they can make it so. Iraq really had WMD, right? Whatever the reality-based community thinks, Iraq certainly had enough WMD to cause a war with the US.
And that how it’s possible for them to believe that white Christian Americans can be tortured, but it’s not possible for them to torture.
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:36 am
I have more patriotism in the head of my c–k then Joe #85 has in his entire rotten body, all mouth, same old republican b.s. Dumbasses like him do not realize they can do the same thing to our guys and gals. Oh wait a minute the super repulicans say they can’t do that I suppose
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:41 am
Is it torture? I guess that’s debatable, but I saw fraternity hazings at Brown University in the 90’s that were far worse.
Jack Phillips, while I appreciate that this was a powerful and formative experience for you, no one wants to hear about your homosexual experimentation at Brown University in the 90’s. And for god’s sake, stop telling that story about you and the sheep.
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:42 am
Great post Den Valdron. Absolutely correct. I believe that with the extreme conservatives or otherwise those who rationalize the conduct, it really is not about whether or not the acts constitute “torture.” They know it’s torture but they don’t care because they believe we are morally justified.
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:45 am
Sure it’s torture, but we likely learned much more about these terrorist’s methods and plans than we might have otherwise. These terrorists tried to wipe out the United States, and will try again once the Obama liberals release them. The Gitmo terrorists are not like the amateurs who threatened the New York City and Newburgh, New York area recently.
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:47 am
Yuck. All libtard comments. No fun at all.
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:48 am
Who CARES? The question nobody wants to answer is this, “if your families lives depended on answers from one or two terrorists, and you had less than a day to get it, would you say, “do what it takes”! Just like K in VA said, this is not a “real-life” question for most, so you DON’T care. This is just another way for you to cry about Bush and Chaney.
At the time, lives of the terrorist were NEVER in danger. There were restrictions and doctors on hand. But they didn’t know that, but the DO NOW.. Thank you Mr. Obamanation. And I bet most of you still believe Nancy knew nothing… Ha, now get back to believing everything the mainstream media tells you…
May 23rd, 2009 at 12:01 pm
re:101
May 23rd, 2009 at 12:05 pm
re:101
It has always been that way. That’s why they’re called “enemies.” Islamic terrorists aren’t a different kind of enemy. Cold War commies. Nazis. The Hun in WW1. Etc. People have always had blood enemies. The injunction against torture doesn’t exist because the enemies of the past weren’t serious in their efforts to kill us.
May 23rd, 2009 at 12:25 pm
I’m tired of reading about KSM being waterboarded 180+ times. That did not happen! If you believe that, you did not read the interrogation memo’s. The memos are very clear. That number refers to the number of times water was pored, not the number of separate waterboarding events…just wanted to clarify that point.
Waterboarding induces panic. Mancow panicked and told the truth; he thought it was torture. Good, it works! Mancow is absolutely fine today. Call it torture if you want, but Obama should release the memo’s so that we can see if it saved lives. There is no longer any national security reason not to declassify them, so why doesn’t he do it?
Also, please explain why Obama reserved the right to use enhanced interrogation, (only if specifically authorized by The President) in an emergency. I believe he did it because he knows that if we are in a “ticking time bomb” situation he wants to be able to use any means necessary to save innocent lives. Which means he realizes that waterboarding works. Just as it did on Mancow. Obama said waterboarding doesn’t work and it’s torture, he then added that the U.S. doesn’t torture. Yet, HE reserved the right to order it done in an emergency. Explain that.
Please keep red herrings to a minimum.
May 23rd, 2009 at 12:53 pm
[...] And this one is new to today in the post-Mancow-gets-waterboarded world: the idea that if waterboarding were torture, then people wouldn’t be volunteering to [...]
May 23rd, 2009 at 12:59 pm
Well, cowards and fools will always support torture, I suppose. It’s a nice diversion for them from child porn or whatever they enjoy doing.
One interesting thing however, is that torture, had it been available as a policy, would not have stopped 9/11. Here’s the thing, it appears that the level of evidence available to the authorities prior to 9/11 was not at the level to justify arrests or even search warrants. So obviously, it would not have justified torture.
Unless of course, one is so criminally insane, so morally bankrupt, that they are prepared to endorse torturing people on a basis of suspicion so low that it would not justify an arrest or a warrant.
May 23rd, 2009 at 1:12 pm
“Well, cowards and fools will always support torture, I suppose”
The debate really comes down to whether it’s effective or not. If it’s not, then it’s stupid to use it. If it is effective, then it’s foolish and immoral not to use it when it could prevent deaths and injuries. The memos that Obama doesn’t seem to want to release might answer that question, or at least give the American people more insight into the effectiveness of EI. I wish he would release them as it would help us resolve that part of the debate.
May 23rd, 2009 at 1:31 pm
Here’s an idea:
Liberals get to waterboard any conservative talk-show host or blogger.
In exchange, conservatives get a liberal pundit or blogger and “torture” them by dousing them with jet-fuel, lighting them on fire, throw them through a plate-glass window near the top of the Empire State Building and hopefully, the fall is broken by landing on a bagel cart. Or something.
Then we can let the American people decide which one is really, REALLY “torture”.
I’ll even throw in five bucks….any takers?
Bueller?
May 23rd, 2009 at 1:45 pm
Ken, I’m so glad that you could take time from licking your dog’s anus, and campaigning for NAMBLA to participate in this discussion.
The debate really comes down to whether it’s effective or not.
Well, I’d say that’s part of the debate, but not the whole of it.
But still, let’s confine it to the question of whether or not it is effective. The first question that comes out of that is ‘effective at what?’ What is torture supposed to accomplish.
We know from history that torture is very effective at producing confessions. The middle ages are full of confessions to witchery, sexual congress with the devil, casting spells of barrenness, making crops fail, spoiling milk, etc. The consensus of course is that all of these confessions were nonsense.
But there you have it: Torture produces confessions, without regard to the truth of those confessions. If that is the objective of torture that you support, then you have me there.
Historically, a great many societies or ruling classes were rather indifferent to the concept of truth or falsity, and much more interested in laying people they disliked on bonfires.
That’s why torture fell out of favour when the rule of law comes in.
On the other hand, if your argument is that there’s some other purpose to torture – beyond sexual satisfaction, various forms of sadism, extracting false confessions, terrorising helpless populations… well, that can be tested.
Supposing that your argument is that torture ‘works’ in that it reliably produces useful information. How do we test that proposition, how do we determine whether torture works?
It seems to me that there are two ways to assess the matter.
1) We must assume that torture produces information both true and false – ie, confessions. The trick is to determine what information is false and what is true. Verification is required. However, investigative resources are not infinite. Following up on every false lead or junk data contains a cost. So the effectiveness of torture must be measured on a cost/benefit ratio, the actual useful results balanced against the mass of junk data and the costs of filtering out that junk data.
2) Torture as a means of gathering information also has to be compared to other forms of information extraction. During WWII, American interrogators found that civil interrogations worked much better than torture at extracting information. Torture was often counterproductive and disruptive.
As I understand it, there’s no shortage of history and records of torture. And it seems that as an effective intelligence tool, torture just doesn’t work very well.
If it is effective, then it’s foolish and immoral not to use it when it could prevent deaths and injuries.
Ah, but how do you know in advance that it will prevent deaths and injuries? Are you psychic?
Or will you simply authorize torture based on the possibility that it might do some good. What happens if you’re wrong? Do you go oops? Cold comfort to the cab driver in Afghanistan.
The memos that Obama doesn’t seem to want to release might answer that question, or at least give the American people more insight into the effectiveness of EI. I wish he would release them as it would help us resolve that part of the debate.
Oh, I imagine he’s keeping them locked down in the same bunker that he keeps his Indonesian Birth certificate and the secret locations of UN Troops in underground abandoned salt mines in Minnesota.
Tut tut now. We have records of torture going back thousands of years, we have detailed records of the spanish inquisition, the nazis, the japanese, latin american torture regimes, etc. etc. We could fill rows of warehouses with the records of torture and torturers. Amnesty international has endless databases filled with torturers, tortures and the tortured.
But somehow, the real answer is hidden in some tiny filing cabinet next to the Roswell aliens that Dick Cheney claims is proof that he was right all along but somehow forgot to declassify before he left?
I guess he was so busy declassifying anything else he thought would help him, and leaking secret information like Plame’s identity, that he just plumb overlooked it???
Come on Ken. If you’re not going to be serious about this discussion, I don’t know why I should bother showing you even the bit of respect I’ve accorded you.
Try and have a shred of dignity.
May 23rd, 2009 at 1:47 pm
In exchange, conservatives get a liberal pundit or blogger and “torture” them by dousing them with jet-fuel, lighting them on fire, throw them through a plate-glass window near the top of the Empire State Building and hopefully, the fall is broken by landing on a bagel cart. Or something.
John, don’t masturbate in public. It exposes how very little you bring to the party. And It’s icky.
May 23rd, 2009 at 2:08 pm
I assume that Mancow still has his fingernails and private parts. He has not been racked or starved. He still has his head. Now that he has undergone the process can he now better resist another attempt?
With regard to other enhanced techniques. Does making you feel uncomfortable constitute torture.
If we use the Army Field Manual as a guide, the interrogation techniques of local police departments would be illegal. Heaven forbid we lie to a prisoner, or use good cop/bad cop techniques. No more giving them lots of coffee or coke and not letting them pee.
The amazing thing is that this was used with three prisoners and resulted in getting very useful intelligence (if only Obama would declassify the appropriate memos). It helped to prevent more attacks.
I think that these techniques are valuable and should be used under tightly controlled conditions only when authorized directly by the Sectretary of Defense or the President. Unfortunately, our President may learn the value of enhanced interrogation the hard way… when an attack can’t be prevented because we lack intelligence.
gh
May 23rd, 2009 at 2:41 pm
The debate really comes down to whether it’s effective or not. If it’s not, then it’s stupid to use it. If it is effective, then it’s foolish and immoral not to use it when it could prevent deaths and injuries.
I really don’t know whether torture is “effective” or not. Certainly it can be used to get anyone to say anything. What we do know is that conventional methods of interrogation are extremely effective, as the example of interrogators from WWII demonstration.
Kidnapping and executing family members in front of prisoners, impaling rebels as an example to others, etc. are effective in their own way (certainly didn’t hurt the Ottoman empire), and hanging, drawing, and quartering worked out well for the british empire.
May 23rd, 2009 at 2:42 pm
and as I was saying, those methods would be considered criminal. Likewise for torture.
I assume that Mancow still has his fingernails and private parts. He has not been racked or starved. He still has his head.
I could say the same for those soldiers coming back from Iraq claiming to have PTSD. What the hell are they and their families whining about, anyway?
May 23rd, 2009 at 2:58 pm
I love it whenever one of Matt’s posts gets linked to at some wingnut blog, bringing in an army of drive-by trolls. It’s like going to the circus and watching all the clowns get out of the tiny car.
May 23rd, 2009 at 3:11 pm
I love the way the pro-torture contingent doesn’t find anything wrong with writing, “It was not torture, and also, torture is totally appropriate,” like this:
Oh, well. If guess if they were capable of rational thought, they wouldn’t be conservatives.
May 23rd, 2009 at 3:24 pm
If we believe that a terrorist has information of a nature that would save lives, then I cannot imagine ANY action we should not take to get that information from the terrorist. We are only limited by how strong of a stomach the interrogator has.
As I keep explaining, the interrogator can tell it to the jury. Maybe they’ll grant him an acquittal after he gets tried for war crimes.
May 23rd, 2009 at 3:45 pm
Everybody knows that you will get bad information any time you interrogate a prisoner. In the case of the Brooklyn Bridge, we knew (through wiretapping) that there was some plan, but we didn’t know what or when. The interrogators knew enough about the plan to sift through the lies and understand what the truth was. It’s not that difficult to differentiate between lies and truth when you know the basics of what you are after. The IE of KSM led us to a detailed documents in the hands of terrorists that described what it would take to blow up the bridge, among other things. Just release the memo’s, what’s to fear?
Nobody has explained why Obama reserved the right to use I.E.
in case of emergency. Why wouldn’t he ban them completely? He left himself a window, and there can only be one reason for that. He knows they work, and he knows that in a dire situation he would rather save lives than worry about the morality of scaring the crap out of murdering thugs.
Den Val, why don’t you answer that one? I realize you’ll feel the need write something derogatory about me first, but that’s okay, if you’ll just honestly explain the reason Obama reserved the right to authorize “torture”. I would welcome an explanation from anybody else as well.
May 23rd, 2009 at 4:08 pm
The debate comes down to whether it’s effective?
Dead and in Hell Or Not? You Be the Judge!
May 23rd, 2009 at 4:17 pm
Dead and in Hell Or Not? You Be the Judge!
A friend of mine claims that we’re actually living in the dystopian alternate universe of the “real” earth.
May 23rd, 2009 at 4:19 pm
you’ll just honestly explain the reason Obama reserved the right to authorize “torture”
Sure. Obama’s biggest flaw is that he’s a cautious centrist and doesn’t have the will to make sweeping, definitive changes. He thinks that by refraining from making a legal outright ban that he’ll placate republican reservations. He’s kind of a pain in the ass like that.
May 23rd, 2009 at 4:36 pm
The words and deeds of the terrorists make it extremely clear that they want to kill all of us. It doesn’t matter how nice we are to them; we don’t believe as they do, so we are infidels and we must be killed by any means.
I wrote, “The debate comes down to whether it’s effective”. What I mean is, in MY opinion, it’s okay to waterboard some people IF it’s effective and will keep us alive. If the alternative is innocent people being blown to pieces, burned to death, decapitated and so on, then I support EI. Most on here believe that IE isn’t effective. I disagree, and maybe the interrogation memos will shed some light on that. Again, there is no reason not to release the memos. It would be great for all of you if they prove me wrong. So, release them and let’s see what they reveal.
May 23rd, 2009 at 4:48 pm
Hey Tyro, thanks for responding. I agree he is trying to placate the conservatives to a certain degree. Look at what he’s doing in Pakistan, plus keeping the troops in Iraq, the troop increases in Afghanistan etc. But when it comes to health care and the economy he is definitely making definitive sweeping changes.
But he is not placating the conservatives by keeping the option to use IE. He said unequiviocally and definitively that IE is torture, and we do not torture. He also said definitively that IE doesn’t work. He tried to keep it quiet that he left the option open to use IE, so I don’t believe the reason he did it is to placate conservatives.
I probably should go enjoy the weekend now. But I’ll check back to see if you all want to waterboard me.
May 23rd, 2009 at 4:49 pm
It doesn’t matter how nice we are to them; we don’t believe as they do, so we are infidels and we must be killed by any means.
The Nazis thought the same thing. So did the Japanese, who hardly had much respect for their own soldiers’ lives, much less those of civilians. What’s your point, exactly?
May 23rd, 2009 at 8:58 pm
Oh what Memo would this be Ken? Is it the super duper double secret memo that proves torture works and its all right? Why would Obama be sitting on that Memo. He should just toddle on down there, and release it, it’s probably sitting right under the Ark of the Covenant from Indiana Jones, probably in the folder right next to Richard Nixon’s secret plan to end the Vietnam war and the proof that Bill Clinton killed Vince Foster.
I’m sorry, you have some idea I should treat your fruit loop conspiracy theories with respect? I don’t think so.
I think I should hand out all the contempt that you and your theories richly deserve.
You see Ken, when it comes right down to it, its simple. Sometimes there’s just good and evil, and you pick a side. You’ve picked evil. You’ve chosen to get down on your knees and suck on the devil’s tool.
And I’m supposed to pretend to be civil? To pretend that torture is something that reasonable people can reasonably disagree on?
The hell with that.
The words and deeds of the terrorists make it extremely clear that they want to kill all of us. It doesn’t matter how nice we are to them; we don’t believe as they do, so we are infidels and we must be killed by any means.
Ah, its the ‘pissing your pants’ excuse. Translation: Our enemies are superhuman, diabolical and unique. They have no morals and will stop at nothing. Never have we faced such a dire and imposing threat, yadda yadda.
The argument being that the superhuman, implacable and utterly unprecedented threat justifies throwing all reason and morality out the window.
Yeah right. That’s just jerking off. Seriously, Ken, did you have some idea that the USSR were nice guys? Stalin played by the rules? Is that it, the communists were great respectors of propriety and international diplomacy? The Nazi’s, Mussolini’s Fascists, Japanese, Napoleon, the French Revolution, the Civil War… all kids stuff compared to what we face now?
What utter, craven, despicable crap. Seriously, this deserves applause. Enjoy the back of my hand.
I wrote, “The debate comes down to whether it’s effective”. What I mean is, in MY opinion, it’s okay to waterboard some people IF it’s effective and will keep us alive.
Yeah, well your opinion tells us more about you than about the subject.
You haven’t bothered to inform yourself at all, have you. What do you know about torture apart from having watched a few seasons of 24 and listened to right wing douches spout?
You don’t know a goddammed thing, but you still swan around with your opinion, cranking out demented conspiracy theory and right wing nutjob points, as if we should take your cowardly ass seriously.
Forget it. I’ve long since lost all patience with this debate and patience with ignorant little girls like you.
You want in on the discussion? Earn your place. There’s a hell of a lot of documentation on torture, and on every aspect of it, ranging from how its done to who does it and why, and there’s a hell of a lot of research – anthropological, philosophical, legal, sociological, criminological, intelligence and covert ops.
But you couldn’t be bothered. Jack Bauer sticking electrodes in his boyfriends testicles is good enough for you.
None of this stuff, of course matters because according to the douchebag bible, there’s a secret memo that Obama is sitting on that proves torture is allllll right. Oh, and another douchebag article of faith is that Obama’s a secret fan of torture after all.
Seriously Ken, I admire the fact that you are sitting there pretending to be rational and pretending that there’s valid grounds for discussion, even as you martial your bull.
But frankly, I can’t be bothered.
Now grow up.
May 23rd, 2009 at 9:25 pm
Den Valdron, You are a shining example of rationality and common sense. You got me. Good job.
May 23rd, 2009 at 9:28 pm
Grow up, Ken. You’re like a child piddling on the rug in a family gathering and proud of your infantilism.
Why should anyone respect that?
May 23rd, 2009 at 10:33 pm
Grow up, Ken. You’re like a child piddling on the rug in a family gathering and proud of your infantilism.
Why should anyone respect that?
Another excellent ad hominem.
May 23rd, 2009 at 10:55 pm
Oh come on Ken, with your crackpot talking point and your conspiracy theory memo, do you actually believe you deserve anything more.
Torture was employed by the French as a means of interrogation in the Algerian uprising. It was used by the SVA in Vietnam. And it was used by British military in Ulster.
Have you bothered to spend five minutes examining those cases?
No.
Torture was extensively used in Latin America, in particular in Argentina and Chile, in Paraguay, in Columbia, and in Ron Reagan’s dirty wars in El Salvador, Nicaragua, Honduras.
Did you bother to study up on them?
No.
Torture was the subject of war crimes trials at Nuremberg. And in fact, interrogation of captured enemy soldiers and civilians was a major priority for both sides. There was a lot of discussion and analysis as to what worked and didn’t work.
Read up on that?
Didn’t think so.
Why can’t you be bothered? Will the super secret ultra conspiracy memo that Obama is hiding trump it all? Do you figure that there’s something special about American torture, that we’ve discovered a way to waterboard better than anyone else ever has? Give me a break. You are lazy and ignorant and you wear it proudly.
What exactly do you bring to the discussion? What do you actually know? Near as I can tell, f*** all. Your contribution doesn’t go beyond your own ignorance and laziness.
A child piddling on the rug describes you, and it describes Al, and the rest of your ilk.
You have the opportunity and ability to be something better than that, but you’re perfectly happy grinning away in a puddle of your own urine.
I hope you’re happy.
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:35 pm
I hope you’re happy.
Thank you for your kind wishes.
May 24th, 2009 at 1:19 am
Ken, I think you’re really stretching it if you think that Obama would order the use of actual torture as advocated by Yoo, Cheney, and Bush. Though, hey, it could turn out that Obama, in his desire not to seem like a wimp in front of republicans, orders the use of waterboarding and other techniques that, again, result in the death of various captives in US custody. That would prove me wrong. But I’m pretty sure that it won’t happen. The problem is that by leaving the door open in order to placate the Sen. McConnell’s of the world, sooner or later a Republican is going to get elected president (probably around 2020 or so), and we’ll start this mess all over again because “the door was kept open.”
May 24th, 2009 at 2:57 am
Обхватив одной рукой девушку за талию он приподнял ее, а другой рукой резким движением, которое он, видимо, делал по несколько раз в день, поднял подол ее юбки до самого вверха. Инга охнула. Врач не обратил на это внимание. Уверенным и четким движением, взявшись за резинку трусиков, он приспустил их….
May 24th, 2009 at 12:35 pm
This describes perhaps 5000 people on the planet. What about the 700 million Muslims who are “in the middle?” Is our security enhanced by engaging in acts that will shift even 1% of them towards the terrorists, and 1% of the friendliest among them away from us?
May 25th, 2009 at 4:52 am
a
May 25th, 2009 at 8:53 am
[...] What a way to have Mancow reverse his political stance on waterboarding. An on-the air simulated drowning. [...]
May 26th, 2009 at 5:44 am
profiles only
May 26th, 2009 at 9:00 am
When did we become such a pussified nation of weak, miserable shoegazers who care more about making people like us than SURVIVING??
When we crawled out of the ooze, Scott.
It’s not about making people “like” us, unless you mean showing people that they, too, can BE like (the best of) us and use our bravery and brains to do something truly worthwhile, like create a decent country.
“Pussified”. What an idiotic, fear-based characterization of basic morality.
May 29th, 2009 at 8:41 am
[...] Matthew Yglesias » Conservative Radio Host Has Himself Waterboard to Prove It’s Not Torture, Real…: This is what you get for questioning Jesse ‘The Body’ Ventura. [...]
May 29th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
[...] Matthew Yglesias wet his pants. He featured Mancow’s photo and the blaring headline: “Conservative Radio Host Has Himself Waterboard to Prove It’s Not Torture, Realizes He Was Wrong.” MSNBC and HuffPo embraced him. Ezra Klein at the Washington Post piled on. So did Jonathan Chait: “I think the torture debate would be mighty different if more of the conservatives who scoff at waterboarding would try the same thing.” [...]
May 29th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
Did any of you think that KSM didn’t get anything close to what he deserves? He wants to kill you for not worshiping the right God, his God. It isn’t just because you are citizens of the great Satan, but because you are unbelievers. These are the people who cut the heads off hostages on videos, and strap suicide vests to the retarded. Why don’t you pull your heads out of your fourth points of contact and grow up? These people can not be reasoned with, and anyone who thinks they can be is an idealistic moron. Go visit Iraq or Afghanistan and see what they are capable of, and see who really are the good guys. I realize that the military is beneath all of you, and it is much “cooler” to slam us but try showing some pride in your country. Besides the socialist you elected that is.