Urgent: Letter from Intelligence, Military, Diplomatic, and Law Enforcement Professionals
By Larry Johnson on November 5, 2007 at 11:37 AM in Attorney General, Intelligence, Torture
PREFACE:
A group of distinguished intelligence and military officers, diplomats, and law enforcement professionals delivered an urgent message this morning to the chairman and the ranking minority member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, calling on them to hold the nomination of Judge Michael Mukasey until he takes a clear position on the legality of waterboarding.
Their message strongly endorses the view of former judge advocates general that waterboarding “is inhumane, is torture, is illegal.” The intelligence veterans added it is also a notoriously unreliable way to acquire accurate information.
They noted that the factors cited by the president and Mukasey as obstacles to his giving an opinion on waterboarding can be easily solved by briefing Mukasey on waterboarding and on C.I.A. interrogation methods.
The intelligence veterans noted that during their careers they frequently had to walk a thin line between morality and expediency, all the while doing their best to abide by the values the majority of Americans have held in common over the years. They appealed to Senators Pat Leahy and Arlen Specter to rise to the occasion and discharge their responsibility to defend those same values.
THE MEMORANDUM FOLLOWS. OF NOTE: YOU MAY REPRINT THIS MEMORANDUM AT ANY BLOG OR SITE, IN FULL, AND WITH PROPER ATTRIBUTION AND A LINK BACK TO No Quarter.
MEMORANDUM FOR: Chairman and Ranking Member Senate Committee on the Judiciary
FROM: Former U.S. Intelligence Officers
SUBJECT: Nomination of Michael Mukasey for Attorney General
Dear Senators Leahy and Specter,
Values that are extremely important to us as former intelligence officers are at stake in your committee’s confirmation deliberations on Judge Michael Mukasey. With hundreds of years of service in sensitive national security activities behind us, we are deeply concerned that your committee may move his nomination to the full Senate without insisting that Mukasey declare himself on whether he believes the practice of waterboarding is legal.
We feel this more acutely than most others, for in our careers we have frequently had to navigate the delicate balance between morality and expediency, all the while doing our best to abide by the values the vast majority of Americans hold in common. We therefore believe we have a particular moral obligation to speak out. We can say it no better than four retired judge advocates general (two admirals and two generals) who wrote you over the weekend, saying: “Waterboarding is inhumane, it is torture, and it is illegal.”
Judge Mukasey’s refusal to comment on waterboarding, on grounds that it
would be “irresponsible” to provide “an uninformed legal opinion based on
hypothetical facts and circumstances,” raises serious questions. There is
nothing hypothetical or secret about the fact that waterboarding was used by U.S. intelligence officers as an interrogation technique before the Justice Department publicly declared torture “abhorrent” in a legal opinion in December 2004. But after Alberto Gonzales became attorney general in
February 2005, Justice reportedly issued a secret memo authorizing harsh
physical and psychological tactics, including waterboarding, which were
approved for use in combination. A presidential executive order of July 20,
2007 authorized “enhanced interrogation techniques” that had been banned for use by the U.S. Army. Although the White House announced that the order provides “clear rules” to govern treatment of detainees, the rules are classified, so defense attorneys, judges, juries — and even nominee Mukasey — can be prevented from viewing them.
Those are some of the “facts and circumstances.” They are not hypothetical; and there are simple ways for Judge Mukasey to become informed, which we propose below.
Last Thursday, President George W. Bush told reporters it was unfair to ask Mukasey about interrogation techniques about which he had not been briefed.
“He doesn’t know whether we use that technique [waterboarding] or not,” the president said. Judge Mukasey wrote much the same in his October 30 letter, explaining that he was unable to give an opinion on the legality of
waterboarding because he doesn’t know whether it is being used: “I have not been made aware of the details of any interrogation program to the extent that any such program may be classified and thus do not know what techniques may be involved in any such program.” Whether or not the practice is currently in use by U.S. intelligence, it should in fact be easy for him to respond. All he need do is find out what waterboarding is and then decide whether he considers it legal.
The conundrum created to justify the nominee’s silence on this key issue is a synthetic one. It is within your power to resolve it readily. If Mukasey
continues to drag his feet, you need only to facilitate a classified briefing for him on waterboarding and the C.I.A. interrogation program. He will then be able to render an informed legal opinion. We strongly suggest that you sit in on any such briefing and that you invite the chairman and the ranking member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence to take part as well. Receiving the same briefing at the same time (and, ideally, having it taped) should enhance the likelihood of candor and make it possible for all to be—and to stay—on the same page on this delicate issue.
If the White House refuses to allow such a briefing, your committee must, in our opinion, put a hold on Mukasey’s nomination. We are aware that the
president warned last week that it will be either Mukasey as our attorney
general or no one. So be it. It is time to stand up for what is right and require from the Executive the information necessary for the Senate to function responsibly and effectively. It would seem essential not to approve a nominee who has already made clear he is reluctant to ask questions of the White House. How can a person with that attitude even be proposed to be our chief law enforcement officer?
We strongly urge that you not send Mukasey’s nomination to the full Senate before he makes clear his view on waterboarding. Otherwise, there is considerable risk of continued use of the officially sanctioned torture techniques that have corrupted our intelligence services, knocked our military off the high moral ground, severely damaged our country’s standing in the world, and exposed U.S. military and intelligence people to similar treatment when captured or kidnapped. One would think that Judge Mukasey would want to be briefed on these secret interrogation techniques and to clarify where he stands.
The most likely explanation for Mukasey’s reticence is his concern that, should his conscience require him to condemn waterboarding, this could cause extreme embarrassment and even legal jeopardy for senior officials this time not just for the so-called “bad apples” at the bottom of the barrel. We believe it very important that the Senate not acquiesce in his silence—and certainly not if, as seems the case, he is more concerned about protecting senior officials than he is in enforcing the law and the Constitution.
It is important to get beyond shadowboxing on this key issue. In our view,
condoning Mukasey’s evasiveness would mean ignoring fundamental American values and the Senate’s constitutional prerogative of advice and consent.
At stake in your committee and this nomination are questions of legality,
morality, and our country’s values. And these are our primary concerns as well. As professional intelligence officers, however, we must point to a supreme irony—namely, that waterboarding and other harsh interrogation practices are ineffective tools for eliciting reliable information. Our own experience dovetails well with that of U.S. Army intelligence chief, Maj. Gen. John Kimmons, who told a Pentagon press conference on September 6, 2006: “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, tells us that.”
Speaking out so precisely and unequivocally took uncommon courage, because Kimmons knew that just across the Potomac President Bush would be taking quite a different line at a press conference scheduled to begin as soon as Kimmons finished his. At the White House press conference focusing on interrogation techniques, the president touted the success that the C.I.A. was having in extracting information from detainees by using an “alternative set of procedures.” He said these procedures had to be “tough,” in order to deal with particularly recalcitrant detainees who “had received training on how to resist interrogation” and had “stopped talking.”
The Undersigned
(Official duties refer to former government work.)
Brent Cavan
Intelligence Analyst, Directorate of Intelligence, CIA
Ray Close
Directorate of Operations, CIA for 26 years—22 of them overseas; former Chief of Station, Saudi Arabia
Ed Costello
Counter-espionage, FBI
Michael Dennehy
Supervisory Special Agent for 32 years, FBI; U.S. Marine Corps for three years
Rosemary Dew
Supervisory Special Agent, Counterterrorism, FBI
Philip Giraldi
Operations officer and counter-terrorist specialist, Directorate of Operations, CIA
Michael Grimaldi
Intelligence Analyst, Directorate of Intelligence, CIA; Federal law enforcement officer
Mel Goodman
Division Chief, Directorate of Intelligence, CIA; Professor, National Defense University; Senior Fellow, Center for International Policy
Larry Johnson
Intelligence analysis and operations officer, CIA; Deputy Director, Office of Counter Terrorism, Department of State
Richard Kovar
Executive Assistant to the Deputy Director for Intelligence, CIA: Editor, Studies In Intelligence
Charlotte Lang
Supervisory Special Agent, FBI
W. Patrick Lang
U.S. Army Colonel, Special Forces, Vietnam; Professor, U.S. Military Academy, West Point; Defense Intelligence Officer for Middle East, Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA); founding director, Defense HUMINT Service
Lynne Larkin
Operations Officer, Directorate of Operations, CIA; counterintelligence; coordination among intelligence and crime prevention agencies; CIA policy coordination staff ensuring adherence to law in operations
Steve Lee
Intelligence Analyst for terrorism, Directorate of Intelligence, CIA
Jon S. Lipsky
Supervisory Special Agent, FBI
David MacMichael
Senior Estimates Officer, National Intelligence Council, CIA; History professor; Veteran, U.S. Marines (Korea)
Tom Maertens
Foreign Service Officer and Intelligence Analyst, Department of State; Deputy Coordinator for Counter-terrorism, Department of State; National Security Council (NSC) Director for Non-Proliferation
James Marcinkowski
Operations Officer, Directorate of Operations, CIA by way of U.S. Navy
Mary McCarthy
National Intelligence Officer for Warning; Senior Director for Intelligence Programs, National Security Council
Ray McGovern
Intelligence Analyst, Directorate of Intelligence, CIA; morning briefer, The President’s Daily Brief; chair of National Intelligence Estimates; Co-founder, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)
Sam Provance
U.S. Army Intelligence Analyst, Germany and Iraq (Abu Ghraib); Whistleblower
Coleen Rowley
Special Agent and attorney, FBI; Whistleblower on the negligence that facilitated the attacks of 9/11.
Joseph Wilson
Foreign Service Officer, U.S. Ambassador and Director of Africa, National Security Council.
Valerie Plame Wilson
Operations Officer, Directorate of Operations
My next question is, will the specific ppl that this is addressed to listen to these very well qualified ppl?
I seriously doubt this since they do now listen to we the ppl who put them there in their job title. This is a shame that we even have to do such a letter writing to get them to understand this very well known fact!
Addressed forlorn and embittered to congress’ working……
Next is why this one man who wants the AG title is not more inquisitive than he is..is he just prolonging the inevitable? Maybe someone ought to have him undergo waterboarding to let him completely understand what it is really all about!!!!
BTW, Mr. Johnson, I wish to thank you for all that you are doing to help secure our country and what we stand for. I applaud you……
Here is the letter that Florida Veterans for Commons Sense sent to Senators Feinstein and Schumer.
Florida Veterans for Common Sense, a non-partisan veterans’ group with members who have served in every conflict from WWII to the Iraq, ask you to reconsider your decision to vote to confirm Judge Michael Muskasey as Attorney General.
Judge Mukasey is disingenuous when he says that he doesn’t know if waterboarding is torture. We know. It is an humiliating and demeaning coercive interrogation technique violative of Common Article 3 of The Geneva Conventions, a war crime. After WWII, America prosecuted Japanese soldiers for war crimes who used waterboarding to terrorize American soldiers. Domestic Courts have described “the water cure” and “water torture” as a human rights violations and a means to coerce confessions. The Pentagon’s new interrogation manual prohibits coercive techniques like waterboarding. American law and precedent confirms waterboarding amounts to torture.
Torture is a terror technique and those who employ, condone, or authorize it are terrorists. They should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. President Bush should not be reluctant to appoint an Attorney General who will prosecute such crimes unless President Bush himself is complicit in authorizing torture.
In the opinion of Florida Veterans for Common Sense, you shame yourself and America by voting to confirm as Attorney General a person who claims not to know if waterboarding is torture. Former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales wrote legal memoranda condoning torture. Congress nevertheless confirmed him as Attorney General, a tragic mistake. Please don’t make a similar mistake by voting to confirm Judge Muskasey.
Sincerely,
Gene Jones, President Florida Veterans for Common Sense
Terrific letter. Thank you so much for sharing this important contribution to the dialogue.
INCOMING>>>>>
As of a few moments ago the Senate Judiciary Committee approved the nomination of Michael Mukasey by a vote of 11 to 8,(all 9 Republicans voting in favor, joined by Feinstein and Schumer of AIPAC)and sent it to the Senate for a floor vote.
The Above letter from the “Intelligence veterans” is certainly a positive step in the correct direction, and they certainly represent a vast wealth of knowledge and experience in the IC. I, for one, would appreciate hearing their voices more often, especially when it comes to speaking out before corruption and criminal behavior has been publicly disclosed and condemned by most thinking citizens. At the risk of appearing cynical, this appears to be more of an opportunistic public relations ploy designed to repair perceived image problems and garner public favor, than it does some courageous act of patriotism.
Everyone who has played an active role in the IC in the past 50+ years knows the many ways that the blind trust and ignorance of the American people has been both used and abused to do both good and bad acts in the name of our country. It is time for the shroud of secrecy to be lifted from all of the bad actors, without exception! Hiding behind secret oaths and the pretense of national security to protect those who have promulgated corrupt policies and criminal activities is not the courageous behavior of patriots, it is the behavior of petty facilitators, who have lost their moral compass; and who would rather continue to use their knowledge and skills to perpetuate the lies and obfuscations championed by those who are bent on undermining our existence as a democratic republic. Just as torture is known to be antithetical to reliable intelligence, so is deceit and historical revisionism counterproductive in a functional democracy, predicated on an informed public.
Brenda:
Do you support abortion? Maybe someone ought to have YOU undergo an abortion to let you completely understand what it is really all about!!!!
What are you talking about? Is this intended as an attack on Brenda? And your reason is?
Jake,
Per a vote of the powers that be, you’re banned from commenting at NQ.
It’s unacceptable to argue that the US has a right to torture, which is ultimately what you’re saying. We’re supposed to be a civilized nation, which upholds the rule of law and human rights. Civilized nations don’t torture.
O.K., bye then.
Goodbye, trivializer, whitewasher and apologist for GROSS, ILLEGAL, BU$HIST, UN-AMERICAN ACTS.
I was simply using Brenda’s own faulty logic back at her — no actual attack intended — my “reason” was to simply point out that good people from both sides of this debate can agree to disagree, that’s all.
No. Good people can’t disagree on this!! Examine your conscience!
Are you saying that Professor Alan Dershowitz is NOT a good person of conscience?!
I doubt that 10 seconds under cellophane, with no water entering the nose or mouth, qualifies as “torture”.
You know this for a fact because you’ve experienced water boarding?
No, I know this for a fact because I’ve held my breath for longer than 10 seconds before.
Of course, that would make you an expert.
You CAN’T hold your breath for 10 seconds?
You’re an idiot.
LOL! And you think that voluntarily holding your breath, knowing you could breathe at any time is the same thing as being strapped to a board and immobilized by people who wish you harm, having a rag forced into your mouth (or “celophane over it - which by the way rather seriously impedes breathing), and then having water poured over your face for a period of time you cannot control and cannot anticipate, and having this done over and over and over again without your knowing when it will end.
Good! Then you won’t mind being demonstrating that in front of Mukasey and others who are not sure whether or not it is torture, will you?
PS Jake D., perhaps you are unaware that it is not unusual for those who are subjected to waterboarding to pass out several times. And perhaps you are also unaware that people have died while being waterboarded.
Oh, but you are our resident waterboarding expert, so I am sure you do know that.
As a self-appointed water boarding expert, who held his breath for 10 seconds, please explain why Mukasey won’t say definitively if water boarding is legal?
Did you read his letter to thw 500 written questions? Mukasey gave at least three separate answers to why he won’t say definitively if water boarding is legal.
Jake, were you a student of Pol Pot????!! That is in fact how he murdered many in Cambodia! He wrapped plastic bags over ppl’s heads and suffocated them to death. I just bet you were a student of his! NO Sir, I will not change the subject here. I will continue to talk oranges to oranges. All I can say to you is stuffit!!!! Yet maybe we can waterboard you and see if you can hold your breath….wanna bet you can’t??!! What I will bet is that you deficate in your pants and claw while your extremities are shackled down. I just bet just a little panic will set in making it much worse for yourself….should I take the bet? Jake you are such a fool. I wold be ashamed if I were you to even open your mouth around ppl. They might think you insane…
I am not a student of Pol Pot (are you saying that people die from 10 seconds wrapped in plastic bags?) And I am talking oranges. YOU were the one who asked: “. . . why this one man who wants the AG title is not more inquisitive than he is..is he just prolonging the inevitable? Maybe someone ought to have him undergo waterboarding to let him completely understand what it is really all about!!!!” My question about abortion is not changing subjects – I’m just using the same, exact “orange” logic you (and Shirin and ybnormal and hoosierhoops and Jim E. who all seem to think that no one should be allowed to support torture unless they undergo torture themselves) used herein. Keep in mind that all I expressed above was a doubt that TEN SECONDS is “torture” – obviously, anything more than 10 seconds, i.e. repeated 10 second sessions, or water in the mouth (actual, you know, “controlled drowning”), or crushed testicles, could indeed be considered torture. Let me know if you still have any questions.
RE: “all seem to think that no one should be allowed to support torture unless they undergo torture themselves”
Speaking for myself, I don’t think AG should be allowed to support torture, period. It’s ineffective, increases risk to our own, and just plain wrong, exclamation point!
Undergoing waterboarding is merely a suggestion for Mukasey who claims not to know what should be obvious. As for Waterboarding/torture/Controlled drowning;[read the intelligence professionals description in the post]
That’s quite a group of folks.
Good for you Larry and thanks for posting this.
I really have to go, though, because lunch is over. See you tomorrow.
To all those who have signed the letter: Thank you!
Maybe the letter should also be sent to the two bubble heads (Feinstein and Schumer) that will confirrm Mukasey as AG
Absolutely, Mukasey’s nomination should be held until he can give a definite clear opinion.
Bush claims Mukasey can’t have a clear opinion because Mukasey hasn’t been briefed on the existence of the program. What does that have to do with having an opinion on whether or not the technique is torture?
Sheldon Whitehouse asked Mukasey if waterboarding was torture, NOT whether he knew if it was being practiced.
The intelligence professionals suggest that Mukasey be briefed. I suggest a quicker more direct way.
If Mukasey can’t tell if waterboarding - a process of gradual controlled drowning - amounts to torture, why doesn’t he just submit himself to a waterboarding session to find out. That would clear it up right away.
After all, if he believes in Bush’s honesty, he has nothing to be afraid of, right?
See Brenda’s comment above — I’m not afraid either — but, let me ask you, is waterboarding where NO WATER gets into the mouth or nose “controlled drowning”?
Drowning is suffocation Jake. You don’t need to get wet for that.
It sounds like you’re throwing these terms around without thinking about their meaning: “Controlled drowning” means simulated drowning. In other words, the victim is made to believe they’re drowning.
There’s a little more involved than holding your breath for a few seconds. You’re held down and made to feel as if you’re drowning. Get it?
I really like everything I’ve seen of Sheldon Whitehouse. What a thoughtful, intellectual, knowledgeable addition he is to the U.S. Senate.
Maybe he would make a GREAT attorney General
Jake, I agree to disagree with your
“10 seconds under cellophane, with no water entering the nose or mouth”
…as if you know for a fact that is the application of the technique. How do YOU know this? Have YOU been briefed?
I think I’d rather agree to agree with Brenda.
Drowning is death as caused by suffocation (no debate there) when a LIQUID causes interruption of the body’s absorption of oxygen from the air leading to asphyxia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drowning
The waterboarding technique was characterized in 2005 by former CIA director Porter J. Goss as a “professional interrogation technique.” According to press accounts, a cloth or plastic wrap is placed over or in the person’s mouth, and water is poured on to the person’s head. As far as the details of this technique, press accounts differ — one article describes “dripping water into a wet cloth over a suspect’s face”, another states that “CELLOPHANE is wrapped over the prisoner’s face and water is poured over him.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterboarding#Technique
None of which has anything to do with the question of your briefing on the matter. But since you brought it up, it’s like saying it’s OK to have a car accident as long as you have air bags.
Some video clips have been circulating on TV showing a demonstration of the ‘cloth in mouth’ variation. In the demo, application of water continued until the cloth was saturated enough to allow entry into the throat, inducing a gag reflex, along with the subjects opinion that it produced anxiety over the potential for drowning. This is in spite of the fact that the demo subject knows going into it that it’s a demo and therefore will not be allowed to drown.
What do you suppose goes through the mind of a detainee in a real session, where there’s no knowledge of if or when it will stop.
More to the point, since it’s generally acknowledged that a confidence building relationship with a subject is the most effective path to reliable information, and torture is unreliable, why are we all here splitting hairs over how much anxiety equals torture. It’s kind of like futilely trying to train my dog, by beating hime with a rope instead of a chain.
I have never been briefed on classified information pertaining to waterboarding and have only posted knowledge already in the public domain. I simply expressed my doubt about ONE lower-level technique of waterboarding (10 seconds with no water in the mouth or nose). And, I never said “it’s OK” to be waterboarded even in that regard, any more than it’s enjoyable to be interrogated in a non-waterboarding fashion by the regular police. So, I’m not sure where you think I am speaking about any “cloth saturated enough to allow water into the throat” or “beating dogs” with chains or ropes or anything else. If you still have any questions, please let me know.
Why is this guy still allowed to post? He keeps prattling on about “10 seconds” and “no water in the mouth”. That’s not waterboarding. Waterboarding is pouring water through a cloth over the victim’s face so that is begins to fill the nasal cavity and sinuses, eventually rising to the level where is begins to trigger the gag reflex, stopping breathing. There’s no 10-second rule. They do it until the victim surrenders or loses consciousness. Sometimes until he dies. After WW2 we prosecuted Japanese soldiers who used waterboarding on our troops. If it was criminal then, it’s criminal now.
Jake is just trying to justify the behavior of the war criminals upon whose bandwagon he foolishly climbed.
Gee, Jake, have you ever tried wrapping cellophane over your face? Or more accurately, have you ever tried being strapped to a board and immobilized, and having someone wrap cellophane over your face? You might find that suffocation is a real possibility with - you know - cellophane wrapped over your face.
And it’s kinda different both physically and psychologically from holding your breath for ten seconds.
No, I have never tried wrapping cellophane over my face, strapped or unstrapped to a board (see my question to Brenda above). For the last time, hopefully, no one has ever died from cellophane wrapped over their face for only 10 seconds.
More on cellophane; haven’t you noticed the warnings on plastic bags used for packaging? ‘Don’t put over your head, don’t give to kids or pets’. Those warnings did not come from benevolent company executives. They came from the company’s legal department, in response to lawsuits after people and animals died.
For Crikey’s sake! The US prosecuted the Japanese after WW2 for waterboarding.
US Generals declared water boarding illegal during Vietnam. The Italian Inquisition liked to use it, however. Guess if it was good enough for the Inquisition, it’s good enough for Bush.
I am a retired army intelligence officer. Torture, which includes waterboarding, in illegal per international law. It is also immoral and ineffective.
I suggest you read the letters condemning torture prepared by military JAGs and senior intelligence officers, in other words, by members of the uniformed services most likely to be subject to torture if captured.
If you doubt water boarding is torture, I suggest you undergo it, as did assistant attorney general Daniel Levin. I guarantee that within a few minutes you would be willing to tell your interrogators whatever they wanted you to say to stop the water boarding.
What about a few seconds? Also, see my comment re: Brenda.
Larry-
Haven’t you said you have CIA friends that did very dangerous things to Pablo Escobar?
How is that ok, but waterboarding isn’t?
Never said such a thing and b) cia never had escobar in its custody. he was shot by colombian police on the roof next to his condo in medellin.
Crikey, Jake, you sure are lame. Did you even read the first para for the wiki ref? Do you understand the difference between you holding your own breath, and having someone else control your ability to breathe?
Why do I even ask.
Making someone believe they are about to die is torture. Possible side effects - brain damage, lung damage, lasting psychological trauma? Mere piffle, right tough guy Jake? You make me sick, Jake. You are reprehensible. You eagerly put the Black Hat on Lady Liberty, because you are so afraid. WATB.
Please note how I respond to you post without resorting to ad hominem attacks. I did read the entire first paragraph on waterboarding, and I understand the difference between holding your own breath, and having someone else control your ability to breathe (even for 10 seconds). I’m not sure why YOU ask, but I know why I am asking the following question: are you SURE making someone believe they are about to die, even if it is for just a split second, is the legal definition of “torture” that you want to go with? Close down all those high-speed roller coasters then : )
Yes, making someone believe they are about to die is torture. I would call that extreme emotional distress.
Great letter Larry! Frances Townsend is on C-Span right now explaining how our Democratic values are the best tool to fight terrorism. Talk about irony! Democratic values such as torture?
Jake, when you’re in a hole…
Jake: I’m willing to bet if I got the weekend to waterboard you as often as i wished..mmmmm. I’m pretty sure you’d think it was torture..Imagine if you gave me 6 months to do it..
What exact rules do the torturers have to follow?
where is the line drawn? how often can i submit you to it? once an hour? once a minute? constantly allowing only a brief period to gasp for air?
Or do they follow the Wikki rules manual that you quote..I’m so sure they do..Well when they aren’t waterboarding them or stacking them naked and putting leashes on them…hey why not bring back the Iron maiden? I understand that worked pretty good.
Just don’t waterboard and no lines need be crossed.
Gawd.. I thought this was a moral nation..a beacon on a hill..a thousand points of light..
Bush & friends have changed the beacon to the headlight of a fast approaching train…
Thank you Larry, for doing this. I had just read it on After Downing Street, and was so happy to hear that you, and many of your friends will not remain silent. I pray they will listen to the common sense of your words.
Jake— I am going to try to give you the benefit of the doubt for a minute here, although your words show much more of your true character than you might really like. I know that I don’t like it very much. I am guessing you might be all of 14 or so, judging by your writing and research skills. I pray you will get better if you want to argue with people who are truly in the ‘know’. Your comments are so inanely stupid, that they do not really deserve the attention they have recieved. You remind me of a young bushie boy, who thinks it is exciting to cause pain and suffering to others. And we know how that fool grew up. Read the article below, and weep, for unless you change quickly, you just might get to join these madmen when their crimes against humanity will be paid for in full… Grow Up~~~
http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/analysis/227
Thank you, Marlene, for “trying” to give me the benefit of the doubt for a minute at least. I read your linked article, AND the comments that followed said article, which gave me quite a hoot actually – especially from those of you who were so upset about Terry Schiavo’s diagnosis via videotape – not only is Bush a psychopath, he is now from “another blood line” (as in, what, a vampire”?)?!. You guys are too funny.
As someone named Fiore correctly pointed out, “Sociopath” and “Psychopath” are exactly the same thing – the current version of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, DSM IV, renames the condition Antisocial Personality Disorder which REQUIRES a pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation of the rights of others occurring since age 15 (with clinical evidence of conduct disorder before age 15 years AND the occurrence of antisocial behavior cannot exclusively be during the course of schizophrenia or a manic episodes), as indicated by at least three (or more) of the following:
1. Failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors as indicated by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest (regardless of whether you think his acts are lawful, a sitting President cannot be indicted or arrested);
2. Deceitfulness, as indicated by repeated lying, use of aliases, or conning others for personal profit or pleasure (there’s no proof that any alleged “Bush lie” is for profit or pleasure);
3. Impulsivity or failure to plan ahead (O.K., that’s one);
4. Irritability and aggressiveness, as indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults (has President Bush ever personally been in a physical fight, repeatedly?);
5. Reckless disregard for safety of self or others (by “others” you mean “Iraqis”? No more so than Truman’s reckless disregard for Japanese civilians in Hiroshima or Nagasaki);
6. Consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain steady work or honor financial obligations (taking out loans, as long as we pay them back, is fine); and / or
7. Lack of remorse, as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another.
Can you at least give President Bush the same benefit of the doubt?
Geez, the way Jake puts it, it’s like throwing a baseball at a target and dunking someone at the county fair. Just good hearted, clean entertainment for the family.
Now back when this country had a real Republican president…
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1007/6647.html
(I posted this on another thread but I believe it merits re - linking.)
Please see my responses above and let me know if you still have any questions — I will check in tomorrow.
Hmmm…anybody else getting the strong stench of freepers around here?
BTW - They love the idea of torture. it’s in their DNA.
You are right again, Taters… I read this op ed late last night, and it is on the issue of torture. It isn’t long, but has a lot of good things to say, and ponder upon. Let’s keep working to defeat this regime who would condone torture upon any other person, even if they might be our enemies…
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/10828
Kucinich is inroducing Impeachment on the House Floor tomorrow. If you have not already done so, I hope everyone here will take a few moments to call and write their reps and request their support. It is most important that they vote NO on any efforts to table the bill. Let’s help put Impeachment back on the table. Damn all the politicians, let’s do it NOW…
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/28411
Astounding! This is what this country has become! The acceptability of waterboarding!
Bush and Cheney have destroyed this country and everything it has stood for.
not this country… this administration.
This morning on Democracy Now there is an interview with a French journalist who actually underwent waterboarding repeatedly during the Algerian revolution against the French.
I know that Jake, who can hold is breath for ten seconds, is our resident waterboarding expert, and therefore has the final word on it, but it might still be a good idea to listen to that interview.
Tell ya what, jake d. and friends, how about I put your nuts in a vice, just short of pulping them, we’ll call it “simulated testicle implosion” and because I’m a nice guy I’ll give you a minute before it starts again.
Just read that Olberman is doing a special comment on his show tonight on bush and his torture policy… should be good, as Keith has no questions in his mind about the criminality of this group.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/11/05/special-comment-on-countdown-tonight/
and again, Larry, Susan, Leslie… thanks for this forum. somedays I think that it is one of the few things that keep me sain… I do so appreciate the comments and support I feel here, even when we ‘disagree’ on some of the finer points, the care and concern of this boards posters is evident.
I pray I live long enough to see this house of cards built by these neocons tumble into the abyss.. How dare they even do one of these horrors in my name, or in the name of this once great nation? It is against the very moral fiber of humanity. They must be stopped, before the damage is not repairable…
I continue to ask HOW, where am I to fit into this bigger picture? As I fast and pray for Peace, and the return to sanity, I am greatful for those who risk so much to tell the truth. May God richly bless you for your efforts.. Marlene
Oh, thanks for the heads-up Marlene!
Is it the same people in this country who think torturing/waterboarding is reasonable aka not illegal but abortion should be?
Yeah, try to figure that one out?
If there were no
1. photos of the toture and abusive inhuman degradation in Abu Ghraib
2. evidence that the techniques employed in Abu Ghraib matched techniques employed in Gitmo
3. evidence the techniques were championed by a senior military officer who visited both prisons
4. same techniques used in two places in the world and canot be explained as a few rogue enlistees
5. evidence senior military officer acted under orders
6. criminal complaint filed against Rumsfeld in France
7. presidential signing statement on anti-toture legislation excusing the president and administration from violating the law.
then I wouldn’t be concerned about Mukasey’s view on waterboarding and other torture techniques. But Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld have no morals and if we don’t fight back, we lose our souls too.
[…] to “not send [Attorney General nominee Michael] Mukasey’s nomination to the full Senate before he makes clear his view on waterboarding.” From the letter: If Mukasey continues to drag his feet, you need only to facilitate a […]
Larry,
waterboarding was also a ‘favorite’ manner of interrogation/torture by the gestapo and nazi ss during world war ii. it is sad that mukasey, feinstein, and schumer would condone continuing Nazi gestapo - ss interrogation/torture techniques into the 21st century. the reason the gestapo and ss considered waterboarding as one of their favorites was because it left no physical markings on the body.
Please, good folks, ignore Jake D. He is a problem/troll on several sites. It is his goal to disrupt–nothing more/nothing less. Ignore him as you would a toddler in time-out.
I prefer to think of Jake as the toddler rolling around on the floor in the grocery store, having a tantrum because his mom won’t buy him a candy bar.
Just the same, ignore him: he’s the one rolling around in the dirt.
I’m glad to announce that the great Leslie took care of Jake. He’s a goner. I never mind dissenting views, but he’s one sick person … his remark to Brenda was beyond all decency.
Thank you Larry, and Pat, and Joe and Valerie, and all of the others for this letter of both principle and conscience!
May our Senators have the wisdom to do what is right.
Lastly, this new poll over at The Poll Vault is timely:
Should the Senate Democrats vote to confirm Mukasey as Attorney General?
Will the victims of another 9/11 be thankful for the opportunity to die for political correctness?
And as for 9/11, it was allowed to happen due to the incompetence of the agencies most mentioned as affiliations of the signers.
These individuals may, or may not, have had any connection to the gross malfeasance that led to 9/11, but I wonder about the judgement of people who advertise their association with such inept and bungling organizations.
Larry, thank you! Many of us are heading toward despair and