Bush's fresh-water-policy illustrated

[Skybird]

Warning: this is just a distant shadow of the real thing, but some people already may find it worrysome. But if UK movies show it in public next month, it can be shown here, too.

And aren't you all playing war occasionally?



http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...lm-813325.html

"You have a purpose-built table with straps in a pattern so that people can be strapped and unstrapped quickly. The head is strapped down in such a way so they cannot resist the water. The head is elevated so the water goes down the oesophagus. The water is poured very carefully over the nose – you keep a constant pour. You are drowning in water but you don't have the ability to hold your breath. You feel the water going in, you understand that water is filling your lungs.
(...)
Malcolm Nance, who trained hundreds of US servicemen and women to resist interrogation by putting them through "waterboarding" exercises, demanded an immediate end to the practice by all US personnel.
He said: "They seem to think it is worth throwing the honour of 220 years of American decency in war out of the window. Waterboarding is out-and-out torture, and I'm deeply ashamed President Bush has authorised its use and dragged the US's reputation into the mud." "

If America wants to regain at least some part of it'S moral credibility, it has to stop and ban full-scale torture: and nothing else waterboarding is. It is enforced drowning and stopping it at the last moment. In movies on WWII, you can soemtimes see the past interpretation of waterboarding: holding the subjects and pushing it'S head into a bathtube full of water.

What's the difference to today's more economic use of water? the answer is simple: none.

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion...cy-793662.html

If such techniques are so useful, why did he consent to a previous bill in 2005 that outlawed their use by military, as opposed to CIA, personnel?
Moreover, Mr Bush provides no evidence to support his argument that such techniques have yielded results. In fact, all the evidence points the other way. The CIA publicly admitted last month that it water-boarded three terror suspects between 2002 and 2003 and recorded the sessions. But now those tapes have mysteriously been destroyed. If the information gleaned from these interrogations was so manifestly "critical", is it conceivable that they would have been destroyed?
The President shows no signs of understanding the damage done by giving free rein to interrogators. It is a sure-fire way to produce gross prisoner abuses of the sort we saw at Abu Ghraib in Baghdad. Mr Bush may claim until he is blue in the face that "we do not torture", but torture is exactly what his administration has facilitated with its disgracefully relaxed attitude to constraining interrogators.

[SUBMAN1]

If America wants to regain at least some part of it'S moral credibility, it has to stop and ban full-scale torture: and nothing else waterboarding is. It is enforced drowning and stopping it at the last moment. In movies on WWII, you can soemtimes see the past interpretation of waterboarding: holding the subjects and pushing it'S head into a bathtube full of water.

What's the difference to today's more economic use of water? the answer is simple: none.

Yadda yadda yadda. I bet Germany wants us to give up our nukes too. After we do that, they will say, to live in peace, you must now give up your weapons too. Then they will say, to get rid of all crime, you must have you rresidents give up their guns now.

2 Weeks after all this happens, news headlines read - Germany conquers America virtually unchallenged!

Caption would read - Germany says, "We did it for the American peoples own good".

Then if you aren't blond and blue eyed.....

-S

[antikristuseke]

Have you gone completely insane?

[caspofungin]

wow

[kurtz]

Well, so long as they only do it to the baddies

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by kurtz

Well, so long as they only do it to the baddies

Well, that is the crossroads here. some month ago there was a poll on torture and wether it is accepted or not. there I said in principle the same like you: that I could imagine it to be used on the baddies. Well, actually, I put it much more strictly and said: in some very special, extremely tightly defined cases, if there is a public awareness for it, and a consensus of society, and any trustworthy countercontrol to monitor the use and report any abuse of it. For eventually, for some exceptionel reason, you may want such "baddies" telling what they klnow in order to save an innocent's life, but their "badnes" and the rules by which torture would be accepted being defined as tight and precsie as possible, and you do not want tax fraud falling under this definition, or bank robbery, etc. . This is my main argument against torture: it is almost impossible in today's societies and states to make sure that such strict situational contexts in which it eventually may be used - read it: eventually - are obeyed. In case of the bush adminsitration, there is no trustworthiness and credibility left, and like guantanamo imprisonment, the legal rules and civil countercontrol of proceedings are bypassed. It is beyond control, and people are left to believe and what they hope. That simply is not good enough.

You say it is okay if it only the baddies getting it. the point is you do not lknow if it really is only baddies getting it whose badness jusrtifies the means - and not suspects as well. and there have been quite a prominent number of suspects being detained in Guantanamo now - who later has been released for after two years or so if came out they got the wrong one. You do not want the wrong suspect become exposed to torture - and this is a very big problem. Thus I insist on using torture only extremely rarely, if the context is beyond any doubt, and better: don't use it at all.

I doubt that such self-restraint exists in a government as stupid and lying and criminal as the bush adminstration. I doubt there is any government in the West being that reasonable, and in control. therefore: don't touch torture at all.

the second problem I have is that the bush administration is so shamelessly and hypocritically lying about torture, legitimizing torture and by just exchanging a single label tries to tell people that they are not torturing at all. Obviously they consider the people to be braindead and completely dumb and idiotic. At the same time these lying hypocrites keep on babbling about morals and ethical values and how morally superior they are, while when mikes are switched off they all kick their claims with boots and throw the seriousness of their claims into the garbage bin. and that is not what America wants to stand for by it's once valid ideals of the past. It should hold itself in higher self-respect.

The minimizing and downplaying of drowning torture, as being practiced by some, is just this: sick, showing a deeply disturbed mind. If it really were so harmless, I wonder why subjects exposed to this torture are said to be so desparately willing to cooperate and tell everything the interrogators want to hear.

I once have been shown a film on the French resistance drowning a german during interogation. That was no acting, that was real. If you think the amnesty video is hard, you better wake up. the reality is much more brutal and grim. I also was engaged in therapeutical treatment of torture victims from the Balkan wars, only some months, but that was enough to teach me what torture does, especially if it is not used for interrogation, but for individual destruction and collective intimidation. People taking questions of torture lightly and minimizing it and dealing with it only by stupid catch-phrases and easy jokes, earn only one thing from me: fullheartly given my utmost contempt. Amnesty made this film, and what you see is play-acting only. I just wish they would show footage from a real session - to open people's eyes what they allow to be done in the name of their people. Becasue if only they knew, their is a higher chance that they would not allow these things to be continued.

[SUBMAN1]

Nope, just sick of hearing about all this waterboarding BS. Reporters do it to try it - so what? Gee - must be terrible then. There is no reason to be harping on it unless their is an ulterior motive, and I suspect there is.

-S

[August]

I don't believe we should be waterboarding prisoners, but to see yet another attempt by Skybird to equal that with real torture methods like tearing out fingernails, drilling through knee caps, chopping off limbs, acid showers and the like is just as disgusting.

[Konovalov]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

Yadda yadda yadda. I bet Germany wants us to give up our nukes too. After we do that, they will say, to live in peace, you must now give up your weapons too. Then they will say, to get rid of all crime, you must have you rresidents give up their guns now.

2 Weeks after all this happens, news headlines read - Germany conquers America virtually unchallenged!

Caption would read - Germany says, "We did it for the American peoples own good".

Then if you aren't blond and blue eyed.....

-S

Care to offer a counter argument to Skybird's post rather than your melodramatic claptrap above?

[trekchu]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

Yadda yadda yadda. I bet Germany wants us to give up our nukes too. After we do that, they will say, to live in peace, you must now give up your weapons too. Then they will say, to get rid of all crime, you must have you rresidents give up their guns now.

2 Weeks after all this happens, news headlines read - Germany conquers America virtually unchallenged!

Caption would read - Germany says, "We did it for the American peoples own good".

Then if you aren't blond and blue eyed.....

-S

I am offended, really. That is SO not funny.

[Iceman]

Have ya got a head start on Hillary,Obama and McCain Skybird?...

One of them will be your next target of finger pointing and I just wonder if you already have a good amount of dirt on each of them....

let the stone tossing commence Skybird and let ole GWB off the hook now...I Love You MAN!

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by trekchu

I am offended, really. That is SO not funny.

It wasn't meant to be funny. If you're offended, don't read it. Can't please everybody. It's the only logical conclusion I can come up with against Skybirds constant anti-US bashing that seems to be every day. What else can he be after?

-S

[Wolfehunter]

Nothing is going to change what government bodies will do to local and foreign captive in there secret prisons. It doesn't matter whos flag flies ontop of the prison. All contries in some form or way do it weither they say it openly or not.

This is what happens to citizen who don't follow state rule or spies getting caught and more.

Anyhow were all animals and we will treat each other like animal till one day we will evolve.

I don't see that day comming anytime soon.:hmm:

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Wolfehunter

Nothing is going to change what government bodies will do to local and foreign captive in there secret prisons. It doesn't matter whos flag flies ontop of the prison. All contries in some form or way do it weither they say it openly or not.

This is what happens to citizen who don't follow state rule or spies getting caught and more.

Anyhow were all animals and we will treat each other like animal till one day we will evolve.

I don't see that day comming anytime soon.:hmm:

I don't think this thread is about that, though I do value your opinions and think they are correct. It is more about not bending to Germany's will. Anyone that doesn't bend to their will is bad in their book and given this type of treatment. Here is another example:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...548749,00.html

This German mag doesn't like this guy for the same reason they don't like the US. That is why I am tired of it. Anti US bashing is the norm from 90% of SB's posts.

-S

PS. Sorry if I offended anyone. Its in the name of ending this anti-US bashing by some members here. It is not meant to offend anyone here.

[mrbeast]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

It wasn't meant to be funny. If you're offended, don't read it. Can't please everybody. It's the only logical conclusion I can come up with against Skybirds constant anti-US bashing that seems to be every day. What else can he be after?

-S

How is he going to know he will be offended by it if he doesn't read it in the first place?