Waterboarding

[Mr.FixIt]

That's a long answer! Do I do it injustice by summarising it as, the government knows that rounding up sleeper cells would prove unpopular, and in election year, it would be foolish to alienate voters?

Yes, through your summarization, you have definitely done injustice to my answer. The election year is only the cherry on top of the point that I have made. As I explained before, due to the atrocities and injustices incurred by numerous racial, tribal, and religious groups at the hand of the American people and the American government over the last couple-hundred years, we are now in apology mode--an era of political correctness, AKA PC, which has handicapped us from being able to deal appropriately with crimes that have been committed against us. Because of this PC handicap, we are afraid to arrest illegal immigrants unless they have committed a felony crime. And once they have committed a felony crime, we put them into our prison systems that are supported by our tax dollars, which consequently drains our national resources further, rather than deport them to the countries from which they came, which might appear to be paranoia to the media and consequently the public, and that just wouldn't be PC would it?! But isn't illegal immigration in itself a crime? And aren’t the members of these sleeper cells mostly illegal immigrants? Yes, they are! And, yes, they have committed a crime and should be "rounded up". Note: I didn't say torture them because they are illegal immigrants--ha ha, I headed you off at the pass on that one didn't I!

The USA has signed and ratified the UN Convention Against Torture, so it should not now cavil about it. No torture means no torture: there are no exceptions

The destruction of our buildings and death of 3,000 of our innocent U.S. citizens, (non-combatants) was a breach of contract, IMO. The contract is ,IMO, now null and void. Also, wasn't Saddam Hussein a WMD all by himself?

However, reading your post again, I feel we have achieved some kind of consensus. Torture is futile. You say, "no super secret intel was gathered from the captivity and torture of any Japs." I'm sure you are right, and conclude that all that was done was to cause unnecessary pain and humiliation...

...It hasn't though, has it (gained credible intel)? As for "credible intel", I seriously doubt the West is capable of gaining it: so let's not have more "WMD" scare stories.

Your feeling of mutual consensus is ill-founded. Please see the following:

By VOA News
11 December 2007

A former CIA officer said interrogators used a simulated drowning technique on a senior al-Qaida member, and that he believes the method is torture.

Former agent John Kiriakou said in interviews, first on ABC News Monday, the technique known as waterboarding helped break senior al-Qaida suspect Abu Zubaydah in less than 35 seconds.

In response, White House spokeswoman Dana Perino Tuesday said President Bush approved a lawful program to interrogate "hardened terrorists." She said the program, announced in 2006, is safe, effective and legal. The White House has never confirmed any specific interrogation technique.

Kiriakou said the day after the waterboarding, Zubaydah agreed to cooperate and provided key intelligence that disrupted a number of attacks. Kiriakou was part of the CIA team that interrogated Zubaydah, but said he did not witness the waterboarding being done.

But then you go on to say that your "well-intentioned" government has been ham-strung by people-who-engage-in-sexual-intercourse (you do that, don't you?) from waterboarding one or two of its unwilling guests - how else do you describe people who have been picked up at gunpoint, deported to a place that is (hopefully) subject only to military (do I mean summary?) justice, kept in cages like animals, subjected to mental torture and deprived of legal representation or POW rights, and then let go without charge or proof of guilt of any kind. Well-intentioned be buggered!

I’ve already responded to this point. I am only quoting you here to explain the following misinterpretation from across the pond:

Buggers=Fuckers=shit heads=assholes=terrorists=politicians

The term “fuckers”, in this context does not refer to “people-who-engage-in-sexual-intercourse”. I’ll assume for the sake of keeping this a clean debate, that this was an honest regional misinterpretation on your part, and that you are not intentionally mincing words here. But yes, in your interpretation of the word, I am a fucker, and I am quite good at it!

You say the public should be unaware of most of what your intel says. Why? Because it reveals illegal acts that, if the public knew were taking place, it just would not tolerate it? Or because it's based on a universty student's essay that draws upon information already in the public domain, and the public would be horrified at the government's ineptitude, and the money and lives it was costing?

"Loose Lips Sink Ships," EyeWitness to History, www.eyewitnesstohistory.com

Millions volunteered or were drafted for military duty during World War II. The majority of these citizen-soldiers had no idea how to conduct themselves to prevent inadvertent disclosure of important information to the enemy. To remedy this, the government established rules of conduct. The following is excerpted from a document given to each soldier as he entered the battle area.

WRITING HOME
THINK! Where does the enemy get his information -- information that can put you, and has put your comrades, adrift on an open sea: information that has lost battles and can lose more, unless you personally, vigilantly, perform your duty in SAFEGUARDING MILITARY INFORMATION?

THERE ARE TEN PROHIBITED SUBJECTS

1. Don't write military information of Army units -- their location, strength,, materiel, or equipment.

2. Don't write of military installations.

3. Don't write of transportation facilities.

4. Don't write of convoys, their routes, ports (including ports of embarkation and disembarkation), time en route, naval protection, or war incidents occurring en route.

5. Don't disclose movements of ships, naval or merchant, troops, or aircraft.

6. Don't mention plans and forecasts or orders for future operations, whether known or just your guess.

7. Don't write about the effect of enemy operations.

8. Don't tell of any casualty until released by proper authority (The Adjutant General) and then only by using the full name of the casualty.

9. Don't attempt to formulate or use a code system, cipher, or shorthand, or any other means to conceal the true meaning of your letter. Violations of this regulation will result in severe punishment.

10. Don't give your location in any way except as authorized by proper authority. Be sure nothing you write about discloses a more specific location than the one authorized.

TALK
SILENCE MEANS SECURITY -- If violation of protective measures is serious within written communications it is disastrous in conversations. Protect your conversation as you do your letters, and be even more careful. A harmful letter can be nullified by censorship; loose talk is direct delivery to the enemy.

If you come home during war your lips must remain sealed and your written hand must be guided by self-imposed censorship. This takes guts. Have you got them or do you want your buddies and your country to pay the price for your showing off. You've faced the battle front; its little enough to ask you to face this 'home front.'

CAPTURE
Most enemy intelligence comes from prisoners. If captured, you are required to give only three facts: YOUR NAME, YOUR GRADE, YOUR ARMY SERIAL NUMBER. Don't talk, don't try to fake stories and use every effort to destroy all papers. When you are going into an area where capture is possible, carry only essential papers and plan to destroy them prior to capture if possible. Do not carry personal letters on your person; they tell much about you, and the envelope has on it your unit and organization.