There's no evidence that this is true. ABC cites only "current and former CIA officials". No actual names are provided, so it's entirely possible ABC simply made it up, much like CBS did by pretending Bush didn't fulfill his military obligations during Vietnam. How about some actual evidence, Kevin?

Even assuming it's true, Kevin Drum draws the equivalence between America's heroes and terrorists. If that's where we're at, I praise god that democrats aren't in charge of anything.

There's an easy question that provides some moral clarity here: If someone else did this to American prisoners, would you consider it torture?

No offense intended Kevin but that's a STUPID question. Bush is interrogating suspected Islamofasicsts who want to eviserate America and Israel. America is interrogating people who want to crush the nascent free and democratic state of iraq. Since they are suspected Islamofascists, interrogation techniques would have have to be far harsher than the ones you've listed in order for it to be torture. You are attempting a false moral equivalence between America and the Islamofascists terrorists.

If someone else did this to American prisoners, would you consider it torture? If you would, then it's torture when we do it too.

'they' already do far worse to American prisoners. and it gives the panty-wetting ninnies a reason why we should do it to 'them'.

We're at war here. The Geneva Convention says that we have to treat our enemy the same way we would want our boys to be treated.

Hmmm ... treat others the way you would want to be treated ... I'm sure someone has said that before, that guy with the beard ... hang on, it'll come to me ...

apparently AHawk is playing the role of Al, today.

But if it were done to an American, it would be WRONG!

You can not do anything wrong to a scary brown person!

Al, Hawk, and I need to be protected at any cost!

It would make for an interesting Military tribunal if some Gitmo detainee was accused of 'torturing' American prisoners with any of the above prescribed methods.

Al sez: Since they are suspected Islamofascists...

So... since they are suspected bad guys, we can really do whatever the hell we want to them. Upon such rationalizations are the basis of the domestic terror state built. Not the Islamo-terror-state. Our own American Big Brother terror state.

Al, offense intended: your moral relativism and acceptance of torture is the clearest sign of moral degeneracy in the "conservative" movement. There is no "false" moral equivalence: there is morality and torture is immoral.

Just as an aside, what are American military personnel expected to divulge if they are captured? Name rank and serial no.? Are they allowed to 'convert' to Islam?

Yes. This is torture. it is unacceptable and beneath any american to conduct themselves this way.

=

Let me spell it out, Kevin.

It is all well and good to talk of being "civilized," of "freedom" and "justice," of "morality," etc., when the evil we face is a blow job.

But if we are scared, all those naive, quaint ideas are to be forgotten! Brown people are MONSTERS, so we, too, MUST become monsters!

The comments show Americans are just like other people, no better, just as brutal.

The retired Major I sleep with every night says it's torture, and I will take his word for it. For the record, he said that if he were in the military now, and witnessed such abuse, that is what sidearms are for, and he would use it.

YES OF COURSE THIS IS TORTURE. Unfuckingbelievable. What has happened to the once great country of America? Is this what we have sunk to? For you dummies, the reason you should never torture anyone is so in the chance your soldiers get captured they won't get tortured. But if you do it, then they will also do it. Its disgraceful. I'm ashamed of this country right now. Torture should never be used. Never. We have officially sunk to the terrorists level if we did / do use these methods of interrogation. Bush is a complete ass, he lies and say we don't torture just like he said we didn't have any secret CIA prisons. He has absolutely zero credibility and he is a liar and an ass. Impeach him. Al should be impreached from this country too.

I would live to stick around for the firestorm, but I have a class to teach in 30 minutes and I need to be at least as prepared as the students...Back later.

They do far worse to American prisoners, and always have. Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, you name it. How were our prisoners treated then? Does it bother anyone that the U.S. is pretty much the only war fighting nation paying attention to the Geneva Conventions in the first place?

Incidentally, this list is old news, and no, this isn't "torture," unless you plan on developing a new word for things like amputation, mutilation, real electric shocks, acid baths, beheading and other things routinely used in Saddam's Iraq and by our current enemies.

If memory serves me right, Alec Guinness' character in The Bridge Over the River Kwai is slapped around, forced to stand at attention and confined in a space subjected to extremes of temperature (heat, not cold, but bear with me...) and I think the director expects his audience to consider the character to be tortured.

We prevailed in the existential conflict with the Soviet Union -- which actually did have nuclear weapons, and the means to deliver them, yet! -- without sacrificing the moral high ground as much as King George and his lackeys. Shame on them for besmirching this nation with tactics borne of incompetence and laziness.

Good for you, Kevin.

This is torture. Until we launched the war on terror, we would have been justified in condemning such treatment. Now the universal answer is, "Who you calling a torturer, Butch?" That was quick.

Remember how concerned we were back when Saddam Hussein's regime captured U.S. troops? Our press and government were hollering bloody murder because they were put before a camera, which showed treatment far superior to what our captives have experienced in secret and in public.

The list doesn't describe the worst of what we have been doing, but it already crosses the threshold of torture, with all the consequences you would expect: Endangerment of U.S. troops and civilians, brutalization of U.S. troops and their opponents, international condemnation, destruction of U.S. credibility, contamination of evidence, and undermining of the rule of law. That's just a start.

All this talk of Nazis and fascists is appropriate but misdirected. Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld (along with countless underlings) should all be in a Nuremburg style docket for war crimes. They are the fascists. Justice won't be served until they swing from a rope.

They do far worse to American prisoners, and always have. Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, you name it.

You convienently left our Germany, which was easy to pacify because we treated their POWs humanely, and the first Iraq war, where Iraqi soldiers threw down their guns at the drop of a hat because they knew we would treat them better than Saddam.

Just because we lable the current enemy "terrorists" doesn't mean we shed our principles to fight them. In fact, an ideological struggle such as this is the very reason why our principles are so important.

Others have done worse, so we must. No one should be allowed to be worse than the U.S.!

And some brown people killed ~3,000 Americans on 9/11. We can just ignore all the Americans killed in Iraq and in NOLA, or all the evil brown people we have killed. If something bad happened to the U.S., we can do anything!

If it's "torture" but saves thousands of American lives, who cares?

I care. First, your hypothesis is wrong -- did they ever get information that saved lives? Second, you act as if this were the only way to stop terrorism, when other methods are proven to work, including plain old treaty-respecting interrogation. Not pissing off the rest of the world, that might help, too. Third, it's immoral anyhow. Fourth, we tolerate the deaths of thousands of Americans every year from various other causes that we could control, yet choose not to. (My favorite hobby house, health care -- our crap medical system kills thousands of newborn babies every year, relative to about 20 other countries. It also chops years off our lives. If we can tolerate this, then I think we can stand firm on not torturing people, even those that actually are terrorists.)

Kevin,

Why are you linking to ABC's Note as if they are delivering "breaking news" on these techniques? Many blogs have exhaustively documented the numerous government reports that explain EXACTLY what the U.S. is doing to detainees in secret prisons. Heck, Andrew Sullivan has gone through the mix of media, Pentagon, and Congressional reports exhaustively documenting this stuff at least a dozen time. He reviewed some of it just this morning:

http://time.blogs.com/daily_dish/2006/09/liarinchief_i.html

By acting like stuff is not in the public domain, you become part of the problem. By acting like the Pentagon itself has not confirmed the use of these methods makes you part of the problem.

Here's the executive summary of the U.S. Army report on Abu Ghraib to help job your memory:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4894001/

Quote:There's an easy question that provides some moral clarity here: If someone else did this to American prisoners, would you consider it torture? If you would, then it's torture when we do it too.

Thank you. We are supposed to be the good guys. Not upholding a higher moral standard is just another step in the "Israelification" of the USA. i.e. The sense that we are in a perpetual war surrounded by enemies.

What is it about the right that they seem to think that everything can be acheived via the "smackdown" strategy? Historically since WWII we've had any number of diplomatic succeses and a few military clusterf--ks. One needs to be willing to provide a smackdown, but be very judicious in actual implementation of that strategy. The current adminstration is too seduced by it's military powers and half-baked ideology to excercise the sort of restraint that a judicious leader should and would.

That description of "waterboarding" (with the ingenious addition of cellophane) makes it clear that what is going on is deliberate asphyxiation. I don't see how anyone can deny that that is torture - or, indeed, that Bush's speech yesterday meant he has no intention of stopping it.

Yeah! What Thomas1 says, Dee! The U.S. has never killed or maimed an innocent!!

Does it bother anyone that the U.S. is pretty much the only war fighting nation paying attention to the Geneva Conventions in the first place?

Not so much, any more.

Shame on you, barryw, for holding the US to no higher standard than "not as bad as our enemies." Why do you hate America so?

"unless you plan on developing a new word for things like amputation, mutilation, real electric shocks, acid baths, beheading and other things routinely used in Saddam's Iraq and by our current enemies."

Oooh, I've got it! "Double-plus-ungood torture!"

Pentagon and Army state that "nothing good" has come from abusive practices authorized by the Bush administration specifically including waterboarding and that no useful intellegence has been gained over the past five years experience with such practices.

SEPTEMBER 6, 2006

SPEAKERS: CULLY STIMSON, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR DETAINEE AFFAIRS

LIEUTENANT GENERAL JOHN KIMMONS (USA), ARMY DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF FOR INTELLIGENCE

The field manual explicitly prohibits torture or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment. To make this more imaginable and understandable to our soldiers -- and I use that in a joint context -- we have included in the field manual specific prohibitions.

There's eight of them.

Interrogators may not force a detainee to be naked, perform sexual acts of pose in a sexual manner. They cannot use hoods or place sacks over a detainee's head or use duct tape over his eyes. They cannot beat or electrically shock or burn him or inflict other forms of physical pain, any form of physical pain. They may not use water boarding. They may not use hypothermia or treatment which will lead to heat injury. They will not perform mock executions. They may not deprive detainees of the necessary food, water and medical care. And they may not use dogs in any aspect of interrogations....
The field manual also defines the roles and functions which health care providers may perform within the context of interrogation, which is very limited and essentially limited to normal precautionary medical inspection and care, as well as emergency services.

KIMMONS: But they are not authorized to assist in -- directly assist interrogators.
.....
QUESTION: General and Mr. Stimson, some of the tactics that were used, in particular in Guantanamo Bay, that were considered by investigators to be abusive when used together are now prohibited, for example, the use of nudity, hooding, that sort of thing.

In looking at those particular tactics and now not being able to use them, does that limit the ability of interrogators to get information that could be very useful? In particular on one detainee in Guantanamo Bay, some of those tactics that are now prohibited were deemed to be very effective in getting to that information.

Also, are there going to be safeguards to prevent whether it be interrogators or commanders from interpreting the tactics that are approved in ways that could be abusive, as some of those tactics were derived from standard interrogation tactics?

KIMMONS: Let me answer the first question. That is a good question. I think -- I am absolutely convinced -- the answer to your first question is no. No good intelligence is going to come from abusive practices. I think history tells us that. I think the empirical evidence of the last five years, hard years, tell us that.

Moreover, any piece of intelligence which is obtained under duress, through the use of abusive techniques, would be of questionable credibility, and additionally it would do more harm than good when it inevitably became known that abusive practices were used. And we can't afford to go there.

Some of our most significant successes on the battlefield have been -- in fact, I would say all of them, almost categorically all of them, have accrued from expert interrogators using mixtures of authorized humane interrogation practices in clever ways, that you would hope Americans would use them, to push the envelope within the bookends of legal, moral and ethical, now as further refined by this field manual.

We don't need abusive practices in there. Nothing good will come from them.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/06/AR2006090601442.html

Too bad the terrorists don't believe in Mutual Assured Destruction, Gregory.

How do you know, Charlie? Do you have connections with the terrorists?

Kevin,

I agree wholeheartedly. Of course, it's torture.

But, between now and November, let's not ever discuss this without shouting from the rooftops that the timing and framing of this discussion was naked electioneering.

And note from the thread above how effective it is.

What we should be stressing is that this is more evidence that these clowns are not serious and care about nothing other than winning elections.

When we start beheading innocents, let me know.

40,000+ civilians killed in Iraq by US military activity.

true, not all of them were beheaded - some were crushed, burnt, dismembered, disembowled, suffocated, pierced, or shot.

you let me know when Iraq has killed 40,000 Americans.

Thomas1
If it saved thousands of American lives, another 9/11, or worse, I would torture Alan Dershowitz.

Isn't that what you meant to say?

There's no evidence that this is true. ABC cites only "current and former CIA officials". No actual names are provided

According to a classified report prepared by the CIA Inspector General John Helgerwon and issued in 2004, the techniques "appeared to constitute cruel, and degrading treatment under the (Geneva) convention," the New York Times reported on Nov. 9, 2005.

It is "bad interrogation. I mean you can get anyone to confess to anything if the torture's bad enough," said former CIA officer Bob Baer.

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Investigation/story?id=1322866

question to Al,

i am not an islamofacist. i am a republican. and i would like to eviserate America and Israel as well (not all, just bush cheney and most of the knesset, becuase they havent gone FAR ENOUGH in the GWOT. im more of a tim mcviegh type of guy)

would you use the same techniques on a right wing republican 7th generation american like myself?

or do i get a pass cause we think alike?

Somewhere between three and four would cause me to kill as many Americans as I could in retaliation. No wonder why we want to keep them locked up forever.

In other news, of course, we have the Army deputy chief of staff for intelligence emphasizing that torture is wrong and doesn't work.

Still, Bush wants to keep up with his "alternative procedures":
http://unspeak.net/questioned-by-experts/

If it saved thousands of American lives, another 9/11, or worse, I would torture Alan Dershowitz.

Hey, if there were even a 1% chance, it'd be irresponsible not to...

cleek:

There is a small moral difference between a bomb or bullet missing a target, and standing behind someone on video tape and sawing their head off. Ask someone to explain it to you.

Right, Thomas1 --- a braindead woman was horribly worse-than-tortured to death, but that was by UnAmerican LIEberals! Not the U.S.!

All those civilians blown up and maimed in Iraq aren't "innocent" -- they *chose* to be born suspected bad guys!!

Go, Torture! Save us all!

The case can be made that the first two items are not torture, unless they are done repeatedly. However, the rest of them definitely are torture.

There is a small moral difference between a bomb or bullet missing a target, and standing behind someone on video tape and sawing their head off.

you go explain that to the friends and relatives of the 40,000 dead. i'm sure your arguments will be very persuasive!

"There is a small moral difference between a bomb or bullet missing a target, and standing behind someone on video tape and sawing their head off. Ask someone to explain it to you."

Right, because there is *no way* that we could possibly know that civilians might die! And they aren't really as dead, or as maimed! Brown people can't suffer!

Kevin, get it through your head: No one in the U.S. can do anything wrong at all, except not feed a braindead woman or prevent the implantation of a fertilized egg!!

Wow, the trolls were out early and force today. I guess they earned their pay this time.

beat that strawman, mhr. beat it good!

Would anybody who thinks waterboarding is not torture be willing to volunteer for a session?

Is this torture? There's an easy question that provides some moral clarity here: If someone else did this to American prisoners, would you consider it torture?

How about this: if someone did this to your mother and father, or to your sons and daughters, would you consider it torture?

Good comment, Kevin. Of course, it's torture.

But between now and November, let's not EVER discuss this without emphasizing this is a discussion wholly fabricated for electoral advantage, not for its impact on the GWOT or whatever we're calling it this week.

And, sadly, the thread above suggests to me it's an effective strategy.

I think a big part of our response has to be that this transparent electioneering is yet more evidence that these clowns are not serious about fighting our enemies. Instead, they care only about stoking fear to win elections.

How very quaint that we are having this enlightened philosophical debate about whether waterboarding is torture and blah blah. Meanwhile, all the double-digit-IQ GIs out there must be pissing themselves laughing at the politeness of it all, as they continue doing stuff that's ten times worse. Wake up guys. Your bonehead goons are beating six shades of shit out of the prisoners at Gitmo, and worse at those non-existent secret prisons, all in the name of Uncel Sam and your beloved constitution.
I'm not a yank, so I don't give a damn about your "boys", and I can quite calmly say they are a bunch of fascist thugs.

Does it bother anyone that the U.S. is pretty much the only war fighting nation paying attention to the Geneva Conventions in the first place?

It might if that were true instead of a lie. Consider Canada, Germany, France, Britain, and the other countries fighting alongside us in Afghanistan -- they all seem able to obey the law even though we insist on breaking it.

Who would Jesus waterboard?

Keep fear alive! Keep fear alive!

If it's "torture" but saves thousands of American lives, who cares?

Charlie/Cheney is right, there are no moral absolutes. All morality is situational and utilitarian. Christianity is just something we conveniently profess to provide us with cover and the moral high ground.

If it's raping your mother but saves thousands of American lives, who cares?

If it's murdering your daughter but saves thousands of American lives, who cares?

If it's genocide that includes everyone you love but saves thousands of American lives, who cares?

*If it's aborting your fetus but saves thousands of American lives, who cares?*

There's no evidence that this is true.

Yes, the interrogations could have been much worse than described.

it's entirely possible ABC simply made it up...

Much like their "docudrama" "Path to 9/11 - A Wingnut's View"

There are none more cowardly then these degenerates who rationalize torture. Miserable fearful bullies who stand for nothing, who abandon all moral behavior whenever someone says boo! - These are where the brown shirts of the past have always come from, and these are the weakest link in any democracy.

Terrorists rely on these whimpering fools to respond by fearfully dismantling American principals. Bush relies on their weakness to maintain his political strength. Without these cowards, he has no base.

AmericanHawk, Al, BarryW, and all the other treasonous cowards spouting off here, please go hide in your basements and continue shake in fear, and leave the fight for freedom to be handled by those with the courage to stand up and fight for American principals.

FDR was right - the only thing to fear is fear itself - along with these freaks that come out of the woodwork.

Fighting terror is not for wimps. You guys are so un-American it is pathetic.

Does it bother anyone that the U.S. is pretty much the only war fighting nation paying attention to the Geneva Conventions in the first place?

From 1965 to 1969, North Vietnam did not observe the Geneva Conventions for American POWs. They were routinely tortured, tied up with ropes and hoisted to the ceiling by their arms, then dropped. Because of international public pressure, beginning in 1969, North Vietnam accorded US POWs Geneva Convention status. The result was that conditions for POWs from 1969 until their release in 1973 were largely bearable, with only isolated instances of torture. This is the account given by former US POWs themselves, including John McCain, Jim Stockdale, Pete Peterson and others, not by any apologists for North Vietnam.

There is no better demonstration of the effectiveness of the Geneva Conventions than the treatment of US POWs in the Vietnam conflict. The power of international public opinion shamed North Vietnam into treating US POWs decently.

Yes, 911 was terrible but so is war taken to Iraq,Gaza, Lebanon. War is terror. To have your child killed in front of you, your parents or children humiliated in front of you, bombs dropped on you, medical treatment denied because of check points, utter destruction of your home and fields, all that and more is torture. The abuse starts with the hoods and gogles and being put on planes not knowing where to and when to get back.

So much human suffering and we are outraged when our soldiers are photographed and yes their faces showed their terror too.

I will not feel safe until all brown-skilled people, all furriners, all non-Christians are incinerated. Only then can we get back to God's business of making money.

"Khalid Sheik Mohammed masterminded the 9/11 attack that killed 3,000 people and you are concerned about whether slapping him on the belly to extract information that could lead the US to his co-conspirators is torture?"

Slapping him on the belly? mhr, do you really think that is all it is?

You can't be serious. Go back to your basement and cry some more...

I praise god that democrats aren't in charge of anything. says American Hawk

And I say you are the scum of the earth.

May your worse nightmares come true and all your hope and dreams turn to ashes in your mouth. May everything you attempt fail. May all your false bravado turn to bile in your throat. Inhale and enjoy those sulfur fumes boy because you are going to spend eternity with that smell.

You are an uninformed punk and deserver to be treated in a manner according to those wishes you have for the treament of those you label enemy.

Curse you and everything you believe.

When three of the first five posts are trolls, all within the first five minutes, it is clear that someone is paying people to do this.

Really, no reason to bother responding to them.

you are concerned about whether slapping him on the belly to extract information that could lead the US to his co-conspirators is torture?

Let's put it this way, you fucking idiot. If it doesn't hurt, then WHY DOES IT SUPPOSEDLY WORK?

The comments of Al, Haek, Thomas and whoever else betray the moral decline of our nation.

It is not about who they are (Islamofascists or whatever), it is not about what they do (beheading of innocents. . .).

The way we treat people in our custody is about who WE are. Do terrorists deserve humane treatment? No. Do we treat them humanely anyway? Yes. Why? Because that is who we are, that is what makes us better than them.

Every time we loosen our moral standatrds in the name of fighting terrorism, it is a victory for the terrorists. Why the likes of Al and A.H. can't see this, I do not understand.

If the pro-torture people would like to have an honest debate, please don't use the following arguments:

1. What the terrorists do is much worse
[Is that really the argument? As long as we behave better than the most ruthless murderers on the planted, we're morally ok?]

2. Liberals would be nice to [insert bad person's name] rather than do what it takes to get information and defeat terrorists [no one ever said that, so don't argue against it].

Whether to torture for a greater cause (saving lives) is a complicated question, but most pro-torture commentators would rather make up less complicated questions and use those to rhetorically beat people who would dare suggest that it is beneath America to freak out and start torturing people because some religious nuts want to hi-jack airplanes.

David P wrote:
"It is not about who they are (Islamofascists or whatever), it is not about what they do (beheading of innocents. . .).

The way we treat people in our custody is about who WE are."

Huzzah! That is absolutely what this is about. Well put.

From the inside, we can argue about whether it's torture or not, whether it's the military doing it or not, but from the outside (the rest of the world), it's torture and it's the US (and certain cahoots regimes) that's doing it.

As the interrogator said to the interrogee, Want more? This is our not-so-private sector in action, bringing Hell up to the surface in our name.

It's ridiculous for a news organization to present this list of techniques as representative of American torture techniques. The belly slap? Sounds like something American Hawk and his ilk pay for on regular family trips to Vegas. Bullshit. Example of real torture: Interrorgators deprive guy shot three times, including in the groin, pain relief. But hey, they saved his life, so they are real heros, right? Look, torture is sick shit most people are more capable of and interested in than they can consciously imagine, and there might be cases most of us would authorize even if we'd like to say we wouldn't. But let's get real. American forces have been systematically and horrendously torturing people across the board. Beating, suffocating, torturing, killing, again and again and again. This isn't belly slap BS. Cold rooming and waterboarding are the sorts of things being fessed up to in the writeen directives, and it's no doubt that they fall under international defenitions of torture. The stuff we aren't admitting to, like letting people bleed out from gunshots to the groin and making medical attention contingent on confessions of the mortally wounded and insane, is the real deal. Al et al may well support that shit in addition to having, as some people have been heard to say, affections for little boys. But if you guys support torture, don't pretend we are talking about belly slaps. American's have and are torturing folks in a serious way. If you support torture, be clear about what you are supporting. Then, the civilized and morally serious thing to do is to realize that if you support torture of anyone you are legitimizing it for everyone. If you are willing to subject others to torture you should be willing to accept it as a legitimate tactic on yourself. If not, you are a moral coward and a hypocrit. Even if you see torture as a universally applicable tactic, self included, you are on tenuous ground, but at least you are not a coward, like I expect every torture supporting troll ho is.

Larger point being I'm not down with Kevin passing on the ABC list as is because it sugar coats the obvious reality. American forces have had more deaths in our custody in the current permawar than the North Vietnamese had US POW deaths during the whole Vietnam war. The list they show us is not representative of the reality of our torture practice. Let's not fall for this BS when discussing this issue. Get real about what torture is, if you support it or oppose it. I think the vast majority of Americans would oppose what has actually been happening, so let's not pretend that all interrorgators have been going by the book.

A willingness to embrace real torture exposes the bought and paid for christofascist hypocrictic shell trolls for the true evil, sicko, nazi fith columnists that they truly are. The enemy within, destroying the republic, the true allies of Saddam and Bin Laden and enemies of American Patirots all. Enemies of the Constitution, international law, Christianity, civilization, and evolution. And some people say Al, Hawk, Dr. Jay et al are necropheliac pedophiles.

Kevin, it is difficult to provide someone with moral clarity on an issue when his winning an election depends on not having moral clarity.

I think one thing we have to keep in mind here is that these tactics don't work. Whether they're 'torture' or not is irrelevant. If you extract information from someone by physical coercion, more often than not that information is useless -- made up on the spot, just to stop the coercion. It's been proven time and time again.

I have no doubt that the CIA found oodles and oodles of bomb plots and terror plans with these methods. I have no doubt that 99% of them are pure fiction. Their only purpose is to give Bush ammunition to scare the public even more, to ask for more power to torture, to make prisoners invent even wilder stories... (shakes head) What a nasty cycle we've fallen into.

Torture is eight years of that smirking moron and his asswipe legions.

If it saved thousands of American lives, another 9/11, or worse, I would torture. So would Alan Dershowitz.

If it saved thousands of lives, you may have a point. But it doesn't, at least according to John Kimmons, the Army Chief of Staff for Intelligence.

"No good intelligence is going to come from abusive practices. I think history tells us that. I think the empirical evidence of the last five years, hard years, tell us that.

Moreover, any piece of intelligence which is obtained under duress, through the use of abusive techniques, would be of questionable credibility, and additionally it would do more harm than good when it inevitably became known that abusive practices were used. And we can't afford to go there." -- John Kimmons, Sept 6, 2006

So if you want to argue against all the foremost intelligence experts in the United States, go ahead. But don't pretend it's just a choice between being nice and saving lives.

When torture methods are listed so cleanly, so factually, so matter-of-factly, like a recipe or an itinerary on a page, torture can be made to look rational or possibly justifiable. It is neither. It is the worst that humans are capable of. Period.

And don't think for a minute that these are the only methods being used by the US in its prisons.

What's really amazing is that the Armed Forces don't even want to torture anyone. The heads of the services just appeared before Congress to testify that the new Army Field Manual bans all this stuff, it's the law of the land, and abusive techniques of interrogation don't work anyway. The only people who want to torture are Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and the associated political leadership. And they don't want to torture people because it works. They just apparently like the idea of torturing people.

We've got to get some Democrats into power so we can stop these GOP goons from torturing people in the name of the United States of America.

I'm sitting here picking my nose. I know it's wrong, but what if it saves thousands of lives?

You know, I know it's illegal for two men to get married. But what if their marrying was the only way to defuse a ticking nuclear bomb? We need to get rid of these quaint old laws, which are not suited to a world where terrorists can punch a number into a cell phone and set of an anthrax bomb in a frozen embryo, burning countless flags.

If we are to remain the great country that we were, we have to make our own rules, not adopt the tactics of the weaklings trying to bring us down.

So what if they torture, or behead us? We make our own rules, and set our own standards. We know in our hearts what is right, and as long as we hold fast to that vision, and pursue it with all that is within us, we shall prevail.

Torture is both immoral and ineffective. It has no place in America, or with Americans. Of all the acts of the current Administration, this is the one I find the most offensive, and the one that shows the greatest weakness and the greatest lack of faith in America, American principles, and the American Way.

It must stop.

True torture is that you libs don't want to take the actions that make me feel safer. I'd wet my bed if you were in power. Thank God for George Bush. Thwack an Islamofascist. Thwack. Thwack.

It is bad enough that in the year 2006 we are engaged in a debate in this country about whether the United States should use torture against suspected terrorists.

What is worse is that so many people here are quick to defend the practice. There seems to be no limit to what these people would do.

That is a remarkable indictment -- not of this country's enemies, but of ourselves.

We have always been a country of ideals, above all else. If those ideals are so easily tossed aside, then whatever we are fighting for is a trivial matter indeed.

If it saved thousands of American lives, another 9/11, or worse, I would torture. So would Alan Dershowitz.

Hey, so would I ... but I also would expect to then have to take my chances in front of a jury once the emergency was over.

Yes Remus Shepherd. Key things about this issue:

1. US authorized tactics clearly meet the definitions of torture under international law sanctioned by the Constitution as the law of the land.

2. What has actually taken place is much worse than what is being admitted to.

3. Torture is designed to destroy and control, not get reliable information, ie it doesn't work, a la Remus.

4. Team Bush has pushed for torture as an excercise of executive/Repugnicon power. They support the use of torture not as a way to keep America safe but to as a political tactic to assert and perpetuate their power. They cynically support the right to torture, not because it helps the American people, because they think it will help them.

Then there are those who torture because they can, and they want to.

Then there are the wanabe torturers paid to harass us in a comments thread.

As I have said many times before and in many different ways - 19 men with boxcutters hijacking four airplanes is not sufficient reason to repeal the Bill of Rights or to lower ourselves to the barbaric levels that terrorists themselves inhabit. Period.

Anyone who doesn't get that, doesn't deserve to live in this great land.

"It might if that were true instead of a lie. Consider Canada, Germany, France, Britain, and the other countries fighting alongside us in Afghanistan -- they all seem able to obey the law even though we insist on breaking it."

Posted by: Arminius

Exactly how many prisoners are being held by Canada, Germany, France, and Britain?

When I was a kid I was told about how the barbaric Japanese tortured people during WWII by forcing them to stand for prolonged periods.

I have a windowless room in my basement. Every day, I kidnap two republicans from the local mall, take them down to the basement, blindfold them, and pour water over their mouths until they agree to vote Democratic. Torture? Sure, but, look, if it helps get the GOP out of power, it could save thousands of lives. So I figure it's justified. Anyway, the Geneva Conventions are so quaint.

How paranoid and under delusions of self-importance do you have to be to think that people are paid to counter this drivel?

'You know, I know it's illegal for two men to get married. But what if their marrying was the only way to defuse a ticking nuclear bomb? We need to get rid of these quaint old laws, which are not suited to a world where terrorists can punch a number into a cell phone and set of an anthrax bomb in a frozen embryo, burning countless flags.'
--brooksfoe

This might be the funniest post on this blog ever!
ROTFLMAO!

Thank God for George Bush. sayeth Jay

No need to thank me boy, he`s not mine. He belongs to that other deity in all this. The one with the sulfur smell that surrounds him.

On Washington Post, this what By Howard Kurtz wrote:

If memory serves -- actually, I looked it up -- it was The Washington Post's Dana Priest who disclosed nine months ago that terror suspects were being interrogated at secret CIA prisons in Eastern Europe.

This brought her lots of outrage, from the Bush administration and conservative critics. (Oh, and there was a Pulitzer, too.) Bill Frist and Dennis Hastert demanded an investigation, and a House committee launched one. Justice was notified as well, and the inevitable leak investigation was launched. The gist of the indictment: How dare a reporter and a newspaper undermine the war on terror by disclosing what the administration was doing with taxpayers' dollars?,/i.

But still the press is simply ignoring the most obvious issue - Bush denied that there were ANY secret CIA prisons but now Bush admits that he LIED about the existance of secert prisons.

Now Kevin says this all the type of torture that Bush used but already we know that that Mideast man from Canadian was starved and beaten for 6 months, and that he was kept in a cell (cage) that was only 6 ft long, low celling that was not tall enough for prison to stand up in.

If Bush lied about secert prisons then whatever evidence Bush uses as "this is only type of torture we used" can't be consider the truth.

Kevin wants to turn the questions into "is this really torture", thus avoiding the obvious fact in issue, that being that Bush lied and now the US and world has proof of it from Bush's own lips.

Admission of the existence of these secret prisons is enough evidence to impeach Bush, since Bush is admitted liar.

The last president who lied was being impeached for that lie.

Clinton was going to be impeached, not because he had sex with that woman but because he lie about the fact of it.

Where is the press on that obvious lie?

I really wish we could create a country within this country - maybe call it the United States of Dumbfuckastan. All the Al's, American Hawks, Thomas1's, etc. could have an ideal homeland.

Of course it's torture. And torture mostly elicits false information. There's not a single documented case of the methods described here saving a single U.S. life, let alone "thousands."

And worse than illegal immoral, it's stupid. Being--truly being--the good guys has historically been a huge strategic advantage for the U.S. Now that's been sacrificed for illusory tactical gains.

Yo Dean. Sad but true, nimrods are paid to posture in these insignificant backwaters of the net. Especially the regulars like Jay. That doesn't mean any particular alleged necropheliac pedophile on this site is paid, but it sure does happen, and is a sad yet ridiculous commentary on how much money Repugnicons are willing to throw around. But hey, with war and Katrina profiteers at the top of the food chain, easy come, easy go. What we have here are bottom feeders. True scum suckers. Those who are not paid simply get their jollies off pretending to be strong by yelling at people from their mama's basement. Usually driven by a desire to torture sublimated by general pudlessness.

" have a windowless room in my basement. Every day, I kidnap two republicans from the local mall, take them down to the basement, blindfold them, and pour water over their mouths until they agree to vote Democratic. Torture? Sure, but, look, if it helps get the GOP out of power, it could save thousands of lives. So I figure it's justified. Anyway, the Geneva Conventions are so quaint."

brooksfoe

Woohoo!

1-4 are blatantly not torture. College students do this to themselves. We laugh when the guys from Jackass film it.

5 seems more like torture, but to me not so much so that I would consider it inexcusable. At 50 degrees, even doused with water there's no risk of injury or death. I would imagine this is the sort of thing that our soldiers, if captured by a country like China, could expect. I'd be pissed off--simply because I don't like the idea of American servicemembers being badly treated--but the rational part of me wouldn't be talking about war crimes.

6 sounds the most like torture, and I would admit to being upset if US Servicemembers underwent it, though I would certainly prefer it to execution by beheading, as they would, I'd imagine. But again, I wouldn't be thinking war crimes.

But to me, whether or not these should count on torture aren't what the answer to the question "should we allow these techniques" should turn on. I'd like to know whether or not they are effective. I doubt that even 1-3 produce reliable, actionable intelligence. However, if it can be conclusively demonstrated (and by that I mean by evidence more objective than the words of the people performing the "interrogation") that these techniques are effective, I think there is an argument for their use. That argument needs to take into account the cost of prestige, and whether or not other techniques are better, but as these are all non-lethal, non-injurious techinques, I don't see that they rise to the level of morally inexcuseable actions (which some of the shit that went on at Abu Graib obviously did).

The whole "...saving American lives..." thing. Is that a sliding scale?

Let's say torture level 10 (squashing nuts with a blunted meat tenderizer) saves thousands of American lives. Can we ethically commit torture level 0.1 (light bitch-slap in front of your girlfriend) to increase the value of my real estate holdings?

How can I get my hands on some Iraqis?

American Hawk
Even assuming it's true, Kevin Drum draws the equivalence between America's heroes and terrorists. If that's where we're at, I praise god that democrats aren't in charge of anything.

If no-nothings like like American Hawk can look beyond their rectums, they would realize that it is not whether Kevin Drums draw that equivalence that matters, but that once you approve these things, the world would draw that equivalence.

If you are seen as an arrogant power that puts thinks its citizens' lives are somehow more valuable than others', they are just not going to care when your people die like flies.

A lot of anti-Americanism that exists in the world is not because they hate our freedoms. If that were so, democracies will not hate us. It is because they think Americans care only about themselves. They see you crying over 3,000 people killed in the WTC, but not utter a squeak about the 30,000 killed in Iraq. And they think, "well, you know, may be they should see some deaths on their side too, to know the pain."

I grew up in a non-Western democracy. A new friend and ally of the US, at that. Take it from me. But of course, bots don't learn.

Geezus Kryst you reactionary, over-emotional right-wing wackos! Kevin's trying to draw an equivalence between the acts, not the people. He's neither excusing terrorists nor demeaning American heros.

If you feel the terrorists deserve torture, then great. Go ahead and support it; they probably do deserve it. But it's still torture, regardless of who it is perpertrated against.

Either that, or it's not - also regardless of whom.

If torture succeeds for President Bush and his 'war on terror,' perhaps saving thousands of American lives, then torture should work for the Iraqi insurgents, too. If the insurgents in Iraq start targeting high ranking American officers and operatives for capture and torture in order to determine where the next strikes against civilians will be directed, it could save thousands of Iraqi lives.

Exactly how many prisoners are being held by Canada, Germany, France, and Britain?

Good question. Some, for sure. According to the articles below at least a hundred in Britain, probably more in France, which has anti-terrorism laws even more severe than our own.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17082-2004Nov1.html

http://prisonersoverseas.com/?page_id=163

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/06/AR2006060600722.html

There's an excellent article in Sept's Harper's, "American Gulag," which explores the valiant attempts of US lawyers to defend inmates at Guantanamo, many of whom are innocent of all charges and many of whom have traveled through and experienced the torture used in the large network of US and foreign prisons.

Abdulsalam is a prominent Yemeni buisnessmen who 'disappeared' in Egypt in 2002:

"Abdulsalam was imprisioned in Afghanistan for two years, first in a prison the detainees call the "dark prison," because prisoners there are held in total darkness. At the dark prison, Abdulsalam was hung from the wall by chains. As he would eventually explain to his lawyer, "In the prison of darkness, they made up stories, and I said I'll thumbprint anything, just let me sleep and give me clothes. I was naked." One hand was cuffed to the wall at all times, which made it hard to sleep or to use the toilet. "It sounds bizarre at first," his lawyer Marc Falkoff told me. "But look at the leaked interrogation logs. They do weird, surreal things designed to disorient and humiliate the men."

Meanwhile, Abdulsalam's family had no idea where he had gone. The Egyptian Embassy in Yemen said that he'd been sent "on a special plane" to Baku, Azerbaijan. Finally, they received a letter smuggled out of Afghanistan by another prisoner. Abdulsalam wrote that after almost two years in Afghanistan he was taken to the US base at Bagram. In 2002, two Afghan men were killed there after being chained to the ceiling and brutally beaten. According to a coroner's testimony, one of the deceased, a taxi driver named Dilawar, had his legs "pulpified." If he'd lived, both of them would have required amputation. Like many detainees, Abdulsalam prefers not to talk about his time at Bagram, Because, he says, the "wounds are too bad.""

Abdulsalam is currently being held at Guantanamo.

Beating, suffocating, torturing, killing, again and again and again. This isn't belly slap BS...The stuff we aren't admitting to, like letting people bleed out from gunshots to the groin and making medical attention contingent on confessions of the mortally wounded and insane, is the real deal.

This sort of stuff is obviously torture, immoral and needs to be stopped. And if in order to stop it, the practices Kevin outlined need to be banned as well, than so be it, whether or not they can be shown to work.

But I do think that we should make a distinction between real torture, as brooksfoe describes, and the items that Kevin outlined. I think that a vast majority of the American public is against real torture, but when it's conflated with bellyslapping, it's makes it easy to think that there's nothing more serious going on.

Khalid Sheik Mohammed masterminded the 9/11 attack that killed 3,000 people and you are concerned about whether slapping him on the belly to extract information that could lead the US to his co-conspirators is torture?

Not so much concerned about KSM as about the hundreds that were rounded up and had no particular grudge against us until they were introduduced to the glory that is Bush's America via this treatment. They go home, they become terrorists etc.; how many American lives will that save?

But to me, whether or not these should count on torture aren't what the answer to the question "should we allow these techniques" should turn on.

Of course it is -- absolutely it is. America doesn't torture, period.

At least, that used to be true, even when fighting WWII and the Cold War, until Bush/Cheney came along and pissed it all away.

I'd like to know whether or not they are effective.

So just to be clear here, torture is OK with you if it's effective?

It isn't effective, but that isn't why we don't -- didn't -- torture. Rather, it's because its cowardly, comtemptible and completely morally indefensible behavior. Are you really saying you'd sign on if it was "effective"?

as these are all non-lethal, non-injurious techinques

Being non-lethal and non-injurious does not mean it isn't torture, brainwave, as anyone subject to sleep deprivation, having their fingernails pulled out or electric shock applied to the genitals can tell you. Hell, I'd hazard a guess that most torture is non-lethal and non-injurious, at least insofar as serious injuries are concerned. Shame on the Bush Administration and its lackeys for defining torture down.

You know, I used to laugh at those people who always resort to the argument that "9/11 changed everything," but maybe they have a point. Maybe 9/11 really DID change everything. Notice, for instance, how 9/11 changed the formerly (mostly) strong, moral, courageous American people into a bunch of sniveling cowards and weaklings.

"True torture is that you libs don't want to take the actions that make me feel safer. I'd wet my bed if you were in power. Thank God for George Bush. Thwack an Islamofascist. Thwack. Thwack."

Get ready to start wetting... 60 days and counting... Bush needs to disappear... make you feel safer??? maybe its just that your a pussy, and I'm not as scared at you. You are a scared pussy... pussy... scared

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you, unless they are dark-skinned people from the Middle East who wear robes.

Uhh, that would include me, so scratch that.

My biggest problem with discussions like these is that you have to go to websites like Washington Monthly to see them.

In an ideal world, this entire thread could be reproduced word-for-word in the mass media, so every American could see it, preferably in late October.

What would make it perfect is if they included a link of a U.S. serviceman conducting a "belly slap", and show that right alongside the Nick Berg video.

The CIA sources say the sixth, and harshest, technique was called "water boarding," in which a prisoner's face was covered with cellophane, and water is poured over it (pictured above) — meant to trigger an unbearable gag reflex.

Unfortunately, it apparently only triggers a gag reflex in Democrats. Republicans, long used to being force-fed this kind of stuff, swallow it without a burp.

"ABC News reports ...."

ABC, ABC, that's a familiar name. Didn't they used to be a national network or something?

Can't remember exactly.

Certainly won't be watching them any more, tho.

"What would make it perfect is if they included a link of a U.S. serviceman conducting a "belly slap", and show that right alongside the Nick Berg video."

And then right next to that show a Iraqi child who was bombed to death. Your case is weak.

1-4 are blatantly not torture. College students do this to themselves. We laugh when the guys from Jackass film it. - TWandrews

How many times do we have to repeat this until it becomes clear? When you hit yourself in the face, that's slapstick. When I hit you in the face against your will, that's felony assault.

Understand the distinction?

On behalf of all torture-loving Republicans, including those from beyond the grave, let me just say that there are may of us serial killers that would gladly sign up to get medieval on some A-rabs. Especially the female ones.

There are some who say that terrorists should not be allowed to join fraternities because they couldn't withstand the initiation rites. I say that they are wrong.

And then right next to that show a Iraqi child who was bombed to death.

They already do that, at every opportunity. In fact, they stage it with doctored photos if necessary.

Please, keep trumpeting your position. Try to reach a broader audience if possible.

ABC = All Bullshit Corporation

There is no better demonstration of the effectiveness of the Geneva Conventions than the treatment of US POWs in the Vietnam conflict. The power of international public opinion shamed North Vietnam into treating US POWs decently.

The thousands of Vietnamese that were killed as a consequence of North Viet Nam treating US POW's decently was a huge mistake that President Bush is trying to prevent the US from commiting now. If more airmen like McCain would have been waterboarded to determine where the next air strikes might take place, perhaps tens of thousands of Vietnamese would have been spared having their heads blown off by American bombs.

Tortue advocates know this to be true in their heart of hearts, and they smirk at the bourgeois decadence of the North Vietnamese leadership, which was manipulated by mere public opinion. Capitalists refuse to be manipulated by the opinions of useless eaters and let the commodity torture markets decide what is the best way to obtain information. It may very well save thousands of American dollars.

1-4 are blatantly not torture. College students do this to themselves. We laugh when the guys from Jackass film it.

5 seems more like torture, but to me not so much so that I would consider it inexcusable. At 50 degrees, even doused with water there's no risk of injury or death. - TWandrews

False. You stay in 50 degree air constantly, you can wind up dying of hypothermia. More importantly, prolonged standing, sleep deprivation, and exposure to cold are pretty much what Stalin did to get the people at the Moscow Show Trials to sign their 'confessions' -- that, and the threat of getting their relatives (which has also been used by US interrogators). But maybe you don't feel that what Stalin did to zeks in the gulag qualifies as 'torture'.

And then right next to that show a Iraqi child who was bombed to death. Your case is weak.

In fact, you raised a compelling moral dilemma, Dee.

If the information gained from a "belly slap" could prevent the accidental death of an Iraqi child, would you support it then?

Bush's statement yesterday that "the U.S. does not torture" *seems* to be a flat out lie.

Most of the other "Bush lies" are either convoluted or rather minor. This one seems different. Is it?

If more airmen like McCain would have been waterboarded to determine where the next air strikes might take place, perhaps tens of thousands of Vietnamese would have been spared having their heads blown off by American bombs.

I realize this is satire, but obviously it's also false. US airmen possessed little knowledge that could be of use to Vietnamese captors. Under torture, they responded with dodges like naming the backfield of the Michigan State football team as their commanding officers -- things Vietnamese interrogators could not readily check. One assumes Islamist terrorists find it fairly easy to adopt the same tactics.

If the information gained from a "belly slap" could prevent the accidental death of an Iraqi child, would you support it then?

If the enjoyment of the belly-slapping officer was so intense as to outweigh the displeasure experienced by the detain