Posted on 12/18/2007 9:26:48 AM PST by ConorMacNessa
“If the questionee makes this threat up in his mind, that’s not our problem.”
Except for the fact that the procedure is specifically intended to “make up that threat” in the subject’s mind, and, more importantly, in the subject’s body. The procedure is not merely designed to make the person uncomfortable, it is designed to make the person (and the person’s body) believe that they are about to die. It creates the exact same physical response in the subject’s body as if the subject was actually drowning.
Good. Can we also have a hearing on the FBI files Hillary absconded with?
They are not going to kill him. There is no threat. Valarie Plame was not a covert agent. The facts are the facts. The police are allowed to lie to people during an interrogation, that's all this is, a lie, not a threat. The whole thing is still nothing more than a few minutes of discomfort for the questionee.
One simple question:
If waterboarding (as practiced by the CIA) is “torture” and therefore “illegal, already; then why is Congress moving to BAN the CIA from doing it?
-
Seems to me that this is a clear admission by Congress that as far as the CIA and their version of waterboarding go:
A. It’s not torture, by definition.
B. It is legal ... (as far as the CIA is concerned)
-
As for this Judge?
I’d ask him read the court order out loud and then I’dvask him where the Administration violated it.
The hearing should take about 10 minutes. [shrug]
There’s no way the judge has a case based on his words about Gitmo. When there is an obvious politicization of law, who can stop it dead in its tracks...The Scotus?
I don't care what the interrogators tell the subject. The procedure that is performed is performed in such a way that it provokes a violent physical reaction from the subject, an identical reaction to drowning. Calling it mere "discomfort" is a gross mischaracterization of what the procedure is, and how it works.
You should note that I've never once said I don't think our guys should be using the procedure. Sometimes, what is right conflicts with what is legal, and I think this may be one of those situations.
Among other things, CIA didn’t want us to see all the crazy stuff that Zubaydah confessed to, including plots of every variety — against shopping malls, banks, supermarkets, water systems, nuclear plants, apartment buildings, the Brooklyn Bridge, the Statue of Liberty.
This might give some people the impression that torture doesn’t get reliable information.
There is a considerable amount of military training, such as SERE and BUD/s that fall under those perameters. Having actually witnessed water boarding being performed I wouldn’t call it torture any more than I would call a 20 klick hike with 80 pounds of gear in 100 degree heat torture.
........
........
U.S. District Judge Henry Kennedy ruled that a private group, the Electronic Privacy Information Center, will suffer irreparable harm if the documents it has been seeking since December are not processed promptly under the Freedom of Information Act. He gave the Justice Department 20 days to respond to the group’s request.
(I guess the judge is on the board of EPIC as a ghost partner, and the company will fold if they can’t produce dirt to shill to the public)
EPIC. huh?
What is it about the words PRIVACY and INFORMATION that just don’t go together.
Privacy Information Center forcing the government to make public PRIVATE INFORMATION.
COMPLETELY off topic question: ever wonder why we measure distances in klicks (kilometers), but weight in pounds and temperature in degrees F?
You would think so, but hell hath no fury like a federal judge who is pissed because he now realizes he wrote his original ruling too narrowly.
Does this mean then that such “US persons” cannot
order the procedure to be performed by “non-US persons”?
It would seem that under rendition the US persons are
not actually conducting the waterparty.
I have no idea why that is. Interesting question though.
''severe mental pain or suffering'' means the prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting from
So we are supposed to believe that 35 seconds of water boarding caused prolonged mental harm in someone who helped plan the murder of thousands of people?
I'm sure that it might have shook them up and put them in imminent fear for their lives. However, suggesting that their actions are going to directly result in prolonged mental harm to such an individual isn't credible.
Answer: Because most of our wars have been fought in lands where the metric system was used on signs, ie., "Saigon 80 Kilometers". It was easier for grunts to adapt to the vague distance of a "klick" as oh, a little less than a mile, (based on approx. 110 paces per 100 meters) than it was to do actual mental conversions to miles.
Oh, they understand all too well, which is why they try to undermine these things at every opportunity. It is intentional evil not misguided zealotry.
Thank you! That makes perfect sense...
I figured it was just to screw with the minds of the rest of the NATO forces...:)
Not in the Navy. We still use yards and miles.
Only in America
Yeah, the final ruling will include some legal mumbo jumbo that says, “You should have known what I meant to say in my order.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.