We use cookies to give you the best possible experience on our site. Click here to find out more. Allow cookies
x
LOG IN HERE
Username
Password

arrow Register here

Forgotten password?

THE CHATTER BOX

 
  
  
  The Chatter Box : Blathering On
  
  
  
 
Waterboarding by bIG bLOGGER on 27 April 2009 3:21pm
 
Waterboarding should never be confused with waterskiing,waterfowling,or The Water Board.

But can the method of Chinese torture known as waterboarding and adopted by the CIA be justified under any circumstances?? The Obama administration now seems to be questioning the methods of torture employed by the Bush administration. Or,you could ask--can Torture (period..) ever be justified if carried out by any government agency??
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
On his late-night chat-show,David Letterman said:
"Classified documents were recently released that show that Dick Cheney,who a couple of years ago went nuts and shot a guy,ordered Khalid Shaikh Mohammed (the alleged mastermind of the 9/11 atrocities) waterboarded 183 times. When do you suppose Mohammed caught on and said,'I know this is just horse play,isn't it?' But anyway,they waterboarded the guy 183 times,and (..here comes the satire/sarcasm) thanks to the information they got from him from these procedures via waterboarding,we were able to capture bin Laden."
 
Re: Waterboarding by mrsteabag on 27 April 2009 4:52pm
 
No. Any country that does that only lowers the bar while destroying human rights. And Condeleeza Rice may have authorized it as well. It just makes me ill to think about the delibrate infliction of pain on another living being for coersion or intimidation.
 
Re: Waterboarding by sighthound on 27 April 2009 6:59pm
 
I am incredibly appalled, outraged and embarrassed that my country has used torture (which is almost always counter-productive anyway) in the name of "National Security". It is so absolutely counter to what this country, born in Enlightenment thought, is about.

At the same time, I am conflicted about whether the people who promoted these programs should be prosecuted. As much as I'd really, really relish seeing Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rumsfield and Wolfowich behind bars, having one administration prosecute a previous one could set up a precedent that would, eventually, undermine our Republic.

I think that this is where our wonderful free press should be given free rein to all documents about the situation and the evil-doers should be prosecuted in the court of public opinion. We need to expose all their acts and perverted thinking to the world and let public opinion turn them all into pariahs so that they will go down in history as a lesson about what ego-driven, chauvinistic thinking leads to. I am sure that Bush will be better punished by the approbation of history than a term in jail which might turn him into a martyr. (Although I must confess I would be absolutely joyous to see Carl Rove in the dock.)
 
Re: Waterboarding by canaveralgumby on 27 April 2009 8:31pm
 
You see, for the last decade I nearly went insane because about 50% of my voting countrymen could not SEE that this was the caliber of people, this was the administration they were voting for. They hid behind their bibles, took the moral high ground and inferred that MY 50% was amoral or immoral. Many many dents in my walls where I banged my head.
 
Re: Waterboarding by kazzzz on 27 April 2009 11:23pm
 
Well Geraldine I would have to agree. We, the western population , have been subjected to torture at the hands of the USA for years now, methods including How I Met Your Mother, That 70s show, My Wife and kids, and of course anything containing Paris Hilton.

I'm not making light of this subject, it's serious. But you know me, can't be serious to save my life. My brain always takes a comedy angle!

*weeps*
 
Re: Waterboarding by tucsonmike on 28 April 2009 1:45pm
 
Agreed, the U.S. should be able to interrogate without torture. I also agree that by placing folks from previous administrations on trial we create a dangerous precedent.
 
Re: Waterboarding by mrsthing on 28 April 2009 11:35pm
 
No, Cori, they didn't take the moral high ground. They let themselves be duped into thinking they were taking the moral high ground.

I agree with you in principle, Mike, and I'd hate to see the trouble I foresee if we put Bush & Co. in the dock, but he's guilty as sin. Maybe the precedent we'd set would be that no president in the future would be able to do the terrible things he did, or allowed to have done, or was so friggin' clueless he didn't even know were going on.
 



  Reply to this post:
 
 
  Username 
 
 
  Password 
 
 
 
 
  Register here
 

INSTRUCTIONS

Select a discussion theme.
Register (or log in if you have not yet done so).

To start a new discussion topic:

Write the name of the topic in the 'Subject' box.
Type your message in the larger box to contribute.
Click 'Submit'.

To join a discussion topic:

Click on the discussion topic of your choice.
Type your message in the larger box to contribute.
Click 'Submit'.

To edit your message:

You can edit a message at any time after posting it as long as you're signed in.
Click on the 'Edit your message' link above the message.
Make your desired changes.
Click 'Submit'.

If you find you don't want to change the message after all, click on 'Return without changes'.

To set a chatmark:

Register (or log in if you have not yet done so).
Click on the "Set chatmark" link on the Chatter Box pages. This will set the time at which you have logged in.
Click on the "Go to chatmark" link to see all messages posted since you set your chatmark.

You can set your chatmark at any time and as often as you like.