feed icon

Ford, Jr. Would Have Voted For Torture

By Kleinheider Posted on May 11, 2009 at 8:20 pm

The former Congressman and current DLC Chairman on Hardball:

You have to remember when this was occurring. This is 2002, 2003. The country was in a different place, in a different space. And if you were to say to me, as an American, put aside my partisanship, that we have an opportunity to gain information that would prevent the destruction of an American city, to prevent killings in American cities, and we have to use certain techniques, I’m one of those Americans that would have voted a certain way, Chris. And that polling said it might have been torture, but I’m not as outraged.

(FT: Theory)

permalink

Comments

87 Responses to “Ford, Jr. Would Have Voted For Torture”

  1. autoegocrat writes
    May 11th, 2009 9:35 pm

    We really dodged a bullet in 2006. Bob Corker may be a filthy evil despicable God-awful puppy-kicking Republican, but at least he’s got enough sense to keep himself from going on national television and embarrassing himself and the state of Tennessee like this.

  2. Andy Axel writes
    May 11th, 2009 10:50 pm

    You mean HFJ is a “go-along-to-get-along” Democrat?

    Get out! Really? What a shock!

  3. jen writes
    May 12th, 2009 6:58 am

    This reminds me of when Obama was defending Kerry and said he might’ve voted for AUMF if he’d been there. So who is Jr. trying to save? Congressional knowledge isn’t the same as complicity despite the attempts to spread the culpability around.

  4. Hogarth writes
    May 12th, 2009 7:35 am

    My, my. Look at the holier-than-thou Death Before Dishonor commenters! There they were, first in line on 9/12 wondering why “someone didn’t DO something! Anything!” First in line to Blame Bush for not “connecting the dots.”

    Now here they are, the pain and shock forgotten, riding their high horses and judging those that DID do something. They deliberately disregard the thought, legal analysis, and effort that went into drawing a line that we wouldn’t cross, and the self-discipline to adhere to those limits. They side with those that killed 3,000 people without a second thought over those that had to make the difficult decisions as to just how far we were willing to go to avoid a recurrence of that awful day. Even when that “how far” was far more humane than those murderers deserved.

    You people sicken me with your sanctimonious faux outrage.

  5. spaz writes
    May 12th, 2009 7:42 am

    All this tells me is that Harold Ford - just like the Republicans - is a bedwetter who stays up at night worrying about rejected plot ideas from “24″ instead of paying attention to the real-world evidence and facts that intelligence and military officials give him.

    And Hogarth, trying to make the case that liberals are hypocrites for holding Bush accountable for REAL warnings he received and ignored before 9/11 vs. this AFTER THE FACT ass-covering and legal jujitsu to try and justify torture is just… Well, some people would call it wrong, some would call it stupid, some would call it political hackery - I would call it bullshit. Some others here might too.

  6. Tim writes
    May 12th, 2009 7:42 am

    Actually, this just reinforces my opinion of Harold Ford as a Democrat I sometimes disagree with, but always listen to, because he will tell you what he really thinks, even if it is not what you want to hear.

    Wish he would reconsider and run for Governor.

  7. Dave writes
    May 12th, 2009 7:51 am

    Hogarth is dead on target. This whole issue of after the crisis hand wringing over how to classify water boarding in the manner it was used is inane and little more than playing partisan politics with national security.

    I agree very little Harold Ford, but he is miles better than the extreme left that has it’s hands around this nations throat.

  8. Matt writes
    May 12th, 2009 7:52 am

    Jen, it is not about spreading culpability. It is about being honest and in this instance the Democratic leadership has been completely dishonest. They knew about the interrogation techniques because there were briefed as the law requires but they failed to raise any concerns (and by several reports wanted harsher techniques used) until there was political points to be scored… and then they were faux outraged. And you not only support their lies but actively help them by accusing everyone else of being ‘evil’. You’re being used (again) and you’re too smug to even realize it.

  9. Matt writes
    May 12th, 2009 7:58 am

    Spaz, 20/20 hindsight must be a blessing. I’ll bet you knew exactly what was going to happen on 9/10. And I guess anyone who plans and defends against future attacks must be a “bed-wetter” simply because you can’t conceive of another danger. Grow up.

  10. Tom writes
    May 12th, 2009 7:59 am

    If Chris Matthews and some of the commenters would get their respective heads out of their —, maybe they’d understand where Ford is coming from.

    We did not know what the threat was in 2002 and 2003. The fears and worries that necessitated the willingness to do whatever it took to protect Americans was most important. The “intelligence” we got in 2002 and 2003 was often wrong in both directions.

    In the all consuming hatred of the former administration too many people look at 2002 and 2003 with 2006 eyes. So obsessed with calling the other side liars because of what we know now, they reinvent what we knew then and presume that anything that doesn’t fit with their narrative must be because the “truth” was hidden.

    I’m amazed how some still refuse to have a rational discussion on this topic. They’d rather screw America than concede that Bush and Chaney weren’t as bad as they want to paint them… it’s all about their egos.

  11. Dan writes
    May 12th, 2009 8:45 am

    The same jerks hysterically ranting against torture were the same one demanding our government do SOMETHING to stop the next attack.

    In fact, remember like it was yesterday that president bush and the pubs were against creating a Department of Homeland Security or federalizing the inspectors at aiports.

    The Democrats shamed them in the media into accepting these changes in order to show the public that the government was doing something.

    The Democratic phony outrage against the interrogation techniques would hilarious if it wasn’t so pathetic.

  12. Hot Air » Blog Archive » Video: Harold Ford says, “I would have voted for torture” writes
    May 12th, 2009 9:28 am

    [...] of course, Chris Matthews goes apoplectic, while Chris Cillizza wisely stays on the sidelines — and, one presumes, jots down notes [...]

  13. Ford, Jr. Would Have Voted For Torture « ACT Northern Virginia/Richmond/DC Metro Chapter. writes
    May 12th, 2009 9:45 am

    [...] in In the News at 10:45 AM by waltjr Source: Nashville Post By Kleinheider Posted on May 11, 2009 at 8:20 [...]

  14. The Ace writes
    May 12th, 2009 9:46 am

    “for holding Bush accountable for REAL warnings he received and ignored before 9/11″

    ——-

    No such thing happened. There were no REAL warnings, but even if there were, you nor any of your leftist comrades could name A SINGLE thing Bush could have done to stop 9/11 THAT YOU WOULD HAVE SUPPORTED.

    You’re a hypocrite on top of typing these silly assertions here.

  15. Steve Steffens (LeftWingCracker) writes
    May 12th, 2009 9:52 am

    All of you morons defending torture spend too much time in the bathroom with Jack Bauer pictures.

  16. terri writes
    May 12th, 2009 9:54 am

    Spaz, how much are you geting paid for your troll remarks? Typical BDS remarks without the FACTS that Bush ignored warnings–Clinton had a chance to kill Osama and he refused! I know I should feel sorry that you are “blinded by the Light”–referring to The One, but I just can’t get over the gag reflex.

    War is war, and as you seem to have such intimate knowledge of “bedwetting”, you wouldn’t understand what is necessary to protect our nation in a time of war. Go join your consciencious objecters while we fight your battles for you, so you won’t get your pinky hurt. Or better yet, join the ghosts of the Jewish leaders who refused to believe tha Hitler really wished to exterminate them.

    You really need to go back on your medication…

  17. terri writes
    May 12th, 2009 9:56 am

    Hmm, Spatz, Steve same remarks about “24″–methinks you were up early geting your talking points from Axelhead…

  18. DrZin writes
    May 12th, 2009 10:06 am

    If we don’t have evidence of a threat, then we can’t use techniques to gather evidence of a threat. Matthews, you are a truly dispicable S.O.B.

    And WHEN did Bush and Cheney say that Iraq “had” a nuclear weapon and a delivery system? I don’t remember that at all. Probably because it’s pure bull****. Bush specifically said that it was foolish to wait until a threat was imminent.

    Good for Harold Ford for rejecting the stupid, craven, opportunistic moral self-indulgence of these seditious DemoKKKrats.

  19. CoverBothSides writes
    May 12th, 2009 10:10 am

    Glad to see HFJ is actually admitting what any reasonable person would admit…those who disavow torture in all circumstances are either heartless or stupid, or have never lost a loved one.

    On another note, I just finished a book about George Washington (”His Excellency”), and it amazes me that what we consider “torture” today is better than how Washington treated deserters in his own militia then (spoiler: he had them hanged…even if they came back of their own volition in a contrite manner).

  20. Dash writes
    May 12th, 2009 10:11 am

    What? How can anyone support pouring water on Khalid Sheik Mohammad’s head? Outrageous! I bet he was damp for hours. Cads. Scoundrels. Cranium hydrolyzers.

    Everyone knows that right after 9/11 we were fully confident nothing like that would happen again ever. So what information could be so important that you have to be mean to the man who planned 9/11? Not in my name. No sir.

  21. DrZin writes
    May 12th, 2009 10:12 am

    Furthermore, Leftist traitors wouldn’t support measures to prevent attacks AFTER 9/11! If Bush had been monitoring phone calls from Pakistan to suspected terrorists BEFORE 9/11, there would have been a nationwide apoplectic orgy of disingenuous leftist indignation.

    None of this matters anyway; Obama is going to destroy the United States way more thoroughly than Osama could have dreamed.

  22. StewartIII writes
    May 12th, 2009 10:13 am

    Video: Harold Ford says, “I would have voted for torture”
    http://hotair.com/archives/2009/05/12/video-harold-ford-says-i-would-have-voted-for-torture/
    Harold Ford: I would have voted for torture too
    http://hotair.com/headlines/?p=39718

  23. Joe writes
    May 12th, 2009 10:29 am

    No one’s saying you have to be nice to these people. Just stay true to America’s values and don’t use torture.

  24. SteveGW writes
    May 12th, 2009 10:33 am

    Dash: ‘Cads. Scoundrels. Cranium hydrolyzers.’

    Also, ectoplasms! coelacanths! Bashi Bazouks!

  25. DG writes
    May 12th, 2009 10:33 am

    How many of you armchair torturers felt the slightest actual threat on 9/11? I lived in NYC and worked in Lower Manhattan, took the subway to Chambers (right near the WTC), and on that day heard the planes, heard Tower 1 come down, saw Tower 2 come down, walked over the Brooklyn Bridge with papers and dust blowing around, lived with color alert codes for years and walked past soldiers with automatic weapons for months. And I am furious that this tragedy was used a pretext for torture.

    Torture people, fine, but have the guts to recognize that it’s illegal and present yourself for a trial confident that you can prove your actions justified your crime.

  26. terri writes
    May 12th, 2009 10:34 am

    I am so bothered by water being poured on a poor sweet man who wants nothing more than to go home to his 2000 virgins. I also shudder at the horror same sweet man must have felt when placed in a cell with a catterpillar.

    I’m sure this can’t even COMPARE with the “torture” of deciding whether to stay in a burning office 100 stories up, or jump out of a window. How vile of mean old Bush/Cheney to put him through such torture! I’m sure it was such a hard decision to choose the “rights” of a “freedom from religion” fighter, over the “right to live” of our citizens in California….My God, you would think this was a human fetus we were talking about…

    I’m as horrified at the treatment of this dear man, as I imagine the hundreds of people, there on the sidewalks on 9-1-1, were horrified to hear, and see, the splat, as human bodies hit the pavement…

  27. Steve Steffens (LeftWingCracker) writes
    May 12th, 2009 10:35 am

    DG, they’re all gutless punks, every last one of them, they would fill their drawers if they ever met a “terrorist” face-to-face.

  28. CoverBothSides writes
    May 12th, 2009 10:42 am

    Joe, when putting someone in a cold room or depriving them of sleep are considered torture, the line between that and “being nice to them” is not far. When I think of torture I think of pulling out finger nails, poisoning someone to within an inch of their life, bamboo shoots up the finger nails, and probably waterboarding (can’t say as I still don’t really understand why simulated drowning is so traumatic if you KNOW it’s simulated and there is no threat to your life). Cold rooms aren’t it.

  29. Joe writes
    May 12th, 2009 10:42 am

    I guess if terri can’t use logic and intelligent reasoning, she’ll use emotion as her debate tool.

  30. Sigh writes
    May 12th, 2009 10:46 am

    Hey now, Democrats are happy to save the civil rights of terrorists, but an unborn child? Kill that unborn child! It’s their RIGHT! God forbid the torture produced the information that they were planning a flight to take out a skyscraper in LA. Oh wait, we did foil that plot. Nevermind. Back to scraping the unborn!

  31. autoegocrat writes
    May 12th, 2009 10:54 am

    “Should any American soldier be so base and infamous as to injure any [prisoner]. . . I do most earnestly enjoin you to bring him to such severe and exemplary punishment as the enormity of the crime may require. Should it extend to death itself, it will not be disproportional to its guilt at such a time and in such a cause… for by such conduct they bring shame, disgrace and ruin to themselves and their country.”
    – George Washington, charge to the Northern Expeditionary Force, Sept. 14, 1775

  32. terri writes
    May 12th, 2009 10:56 am

    Joe–you’ve had way too much Kool-aide, and didn’t your mom tell you your face would stay that way? (Referring to your tongue, stuck out of your mouth!)

  33. Tom writes
    May 12th, 2009 10:59 am

    Pouring water on someone is not torture. They did it to three people, one of them the mastermind of 9/11. The fact that they got information out of him after he described how he sawed the head off Daniel Perl with a dull knife before switching to a sharper knife, then said “You will soon know” when asked about upcoming attacks is lost on the pathetic saps who are now opposing what was done to protect our country.

  34. terri writes
    May 12th, 2009 11:01 am

    autoegocrat, I would think you would know by now, beings it has been a little over 100 days, that what a leader says to the public, and what he does in a real-time situation, are two different things. You are REALLY not so naive as to think that Washington would not beat a man senseless if he had knowledge about the Redcoats movements, or potential attack upon a colonial town?

  35. autoegocrat writes
    May 12th, 2009 11:02 am

    Democrats just want to kill babies and worship the Devil for president and make us all drink lattes and do yoga exercises, OH NOOOOOOOO!!!11! They’re going to bring back Communism and Fasism and give my car keys to the brown people from terrorist countries! Won’t someone stop it!? Please, I’m so scared, where’s my blankie!?

    I have to thank the Lord above that you cretins don’t realize how ridiculous you conservatives sound, because you’re delightfully entertaining.

  36. Anthony Fotia writes
    May 12th, 2009 11:07 am

    Chris Matthews is a complete idiot, jerk, partisan liberal hack. If his children (that is if he isn’t gay) were in a building that was targeted by terrorists, and the CIA let that building be blown up because they couldn’t get intel from terrorists in captivity…. maybe he would change his tune…. but I doubt that even the lives of his children would change his liberal pathetic mind.

  37. terri writes
    May 12th, 2009 11:14 am

    autoegocrat, isn’t your kindergarten teacher missing you? Your bathroom break is over. *psst, don’t anyone tell him about the toliet paper…

  38. DG writes
    May 12th, 2009 11:21 am

    Torture is illegal.

    Our country is a country of laws.

    We also allow trial by jury.

    If you knew that there was a pending terrorist attack that would be prevented by torturing a prisoner in your custody to elicit that information, then make the decision to break the law, and let a jury determine whether you are culpable.

    There isn’t evidence that torturing prisoners stopped a pending terrorist attack.

    We all should be asking for the actual grounds by which torture was authorized. The prisoners were waterboarded for MONTHS, put in stress positions and freezing rooms for days, and were kept awake for weeks. Hardly a ticking time bomb/Jack Bauer scenario.

    Finding moral equivalance to abortion or whatever pet issue you have makes no sense. Democrats who acceeded to this, or worse, authorized it, are also criminals.

    Wake up. This goes to the core of who we are as a country.

  39. autoegocrat writes
    May 12th, 2009 11:27 am

    Oh snap, Terri. You sure told me. I guess I’ll go cry now.

  40. Hogarth writes
    May 12th, 2009 11:41 am

    “Torture is illegal.”

    True. That said, it was determined very carefully and with Congressional approval that waterboarding is NOT torture. Nor is keeping a prisoner awake or in a cold room. And there are not even any allegations that anything more than that was done.

    Try to get that through your head.

  41. spaz writes
    May 12th, 2009 11:47 am

    Boy, I’ve never seen so many stupid people in one place on the internet outside of Red State.

    FACT: Your side ignored intelligence briefings that Bin Laden was going to attack the U.S. with airplanes. The blood is on Bush, Cheney, and Rice’s hands. Period.

    FACT: Republicans in the Senate killed the Gore Commission report in 1997 which recommended strengthening airport security in the U.S., doing random bag searches, and some 50 other recommendations that could have - and likely would have - stopped the hijackers on 9/11. Again, the blood should be on Republican hands.

    FACT: The Department of Homeland Security was a program proposed by DEMOCRATS in 1999. Just like with the Gore Commission report, Republicans scoffed at it, saying it was just more “liberal big government”.

    FACT: None of the people who were accessories to the 9/11 attacks have been charged with a crime.

    FACT: The waterboarding torture of Khalid Sheik Mohammed happened over 120 times until they got any meaningful information out of him. We have yet to even find out if what he “confessed” to was true or helpful in the war on terror. If torture is so successful, why did it take over 100 times to work?

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. If you Conservatives want to live in a country with no taxes on the rich, an unregulated free market, no rights for people to form unions, no “special rights” for minorities, absolutely no limits on gun ownership, or where torture is a common (and unsuccessful) policy to extract information, I have the perfect place for you… Somalia. Otherwise, this is America - love it or leave it!

  42. Slartibartfast writes
    May 12th, 2009 11:52 am

    “Boy, I’ve never seen so many stupid people in one place on the internet outside of Red State.”

    If you consider it your mission here to win others over to your side, I fail to see how this is helpful.

    If you’re just here to be a jackass, carry on.

  43. Mark Rogers writes
    May 12th, 2009 11:58 am

    Spaz,

    Both political parties bear some of thefault for 9/11.

    You seem to forget that our intelligence problems in the Muslim world and other areas are a direct result of President Carter’s decision to eliminate much of our human intelligence capability in favor of electronic signals intelligence.

    You also seem to forget that it was the Clinton Administration that imposed the wall between the FBI and CIA on intelligence sharing.

    But why let facts get in the way of your rant.

    For once, stop playing politics and admit that both sides bear responsibility and that we need to put partisanship aside on some issues.

    As for America-Love it or Leave it, where were the Republicans who talked about leaving if President Obama won? Names?

    Now back in 2004 there were lots of lying liberals who talked about leaving but stayed. So don’t dare play that card because it was members of the Left who made that claim.

  44. jamby writes
    May 12th, 2009 12:09 pm

    The entire waterboarding outrage is becoming a big failure for the Bush haters. Time for you all to shut up now. Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats are doing a big “nevermind” now that they have been exposed as total hypocrites on the issue. A lot of people have been throwing the word torture around very, very loosely and irresponsibly. We can’t draw a precise line and say, at least for some things, whether they fall on the side of torture or not. In fact, many of the things everyone, well maybe accept for your average peacenick, would agree is acceptable could still be called torture. Things like sleep deprevation, hours of questioning, loud music, a rap on the hand with a wooden ruler. I am so glad to see much of this baseless name calling and accusations coming back to bite some people on the butt.

  45. DG writes
    May 12th, 2009 12:20 pm

    “Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats are doing a big “nevermind” now that they have been exposed as total hypocrites on the issue”

    I don’t give a damn about Nancy Pelosi or anyone else who may have heard about this and not done anything. This isn’t about parties or people. Those who ordered torture should face criminal charges. Those who didn’t object to torture as illegal policy should be exposed and removed from office.

    “That said, it was determined very carefully and with Congressional approval that waterboarding is NOT torture”

    We prosecuted Japanese officers for torture for doing to our soldiers exactly what we did to Al Qaeda prisoners.

  46. submandave writes
    May 12th, 2009 12:31 pm

    “Torture is illegal.
    Our country is a country of laws.    ”

    True. In that case, please offer a convincing argument that the interrogation techniques detailed in the released memos qualify as “torture” under 18 USC 2340. Because, although IANAL, I did try and research the matter and read the applicable laws and offered a reasoned, logical argument that even waterboarding is not, as defined in US code, torture. As I conceded, this is not an argument that these techniques are not “wrong” or are not illegal in other ways, but I honestly don’t see them meeting the bar for “torture” as set forth in the law.

    “There isn’t evidence that torturing prisoners stopped a pending terrorist attack.”

    That’s because the whole “torture” thing is being used as political theater and the release of any and all documents and information relating to EIT and results is controlled by the President of the party that gains from releasing one side and not the other. Please don’t be so naiive.

  47. laura writes
    May 12th, 2009 12:37 pm

    The left just want to find any reason to go after Bush. To say that waterboarding and cold rooms equates torture is asinine. I would vote FOR shoving bamboo under their nails or pulling a Princess Bride on them. They were deserving of nothing better. They murdered hundreds of people and wanted to murder more.

    Oh, and to the guy, above, who quoted Washington- who said that those who injure a prisoner should be punished equally. Please tell me what injuries the terrorists recieved. They may have aspirated some water and trembled from cold. I guess we could have Bush take the polar bear plundge this coming winter. Then, all you liberals can stop your complaining.

  48. laura writes
    May 12th, 2009 12:39 pm

    DG- we shouldn’t have

  49. terri writes
    May 12th, 2009 12:39 pm

    Spaz, your superior intellect is supersceded by the thought you put into your name. I bow to your ability to pull facts from, hmm, where did you pull your facts from? Need citations please, or else you are just like those Somali pirates–dead in the water–and I am referring to their boat…

    Fact: Republicans in the Senate killed the Gore Commission report
    In August 1996, President Clinton signed Executive Order 13015, which established the “White House Commission on Aviation Safety and Security”, often called the Gore Commission in recognition that Gore was the chairman. That commission operated for six months, from August 1996 until February of 1997, when it issued its final report. Gore’s commission were mandated to provide to the President “a strategy designed to improve aviation safety and security”. As was expected, the Gore Commission addressed the issue of terrorism and commercial aviation.
    According to the 911 Commission Report (page 344):
    “The Gore Commission’s Report, having thoroughly canvassed available expertise in and outside of government, did not mention suicide hijackings or the use of aircraft as weapons.”
    CAPPS (Computer Assisted Passenger Presecreening System)
    From page 84 of the 911 Commission Report:
    “Primarily because of concern regarding potential discrimination and the impact on passenger throughput, “selectees”[by CAPPS] were no longer required to undergo extraordinary screening of their carry-on baggage…. This policy reflected the perception that non-suicidal sabotage was the primary threat to civil aviation” [emphasis added]

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/10/gores_inconvenient_911_truth.html

  50. terri writes
    May 12th, 2009 12:53 pm

    You really should clean the windows on your glass house…
    Fact: “Your side ignored intelligence briefings that Bin Laden was going to attack the U.S. with airplanes.”

    As a little background, prior to the August 1998 U.S. embassy bombings in Africa, there is hardly any mention of bin Laden by President Clinton in American news transcripts. For the most part, the first real discussion of the terrorist leader by the former president — or by any U.S. politicians or pundits for that matter — began after these bombings, and escalated after the American retaliation in Afghanistan a few weeks later
    Furthermore, twelve months later, even though he spoke for almost an hour and a half during his final State of the Union address on January 27, 2000, according to a LexisNexis search, the name Osama bin Laden was never mentioned. This appears almost impossible to believe given revelations that very morning about a connection between the individual apprehended trying to cross the Canadian border with explosives in December and bin Laden.
    http://www.americanthinker.com/2006/09/bill_clinton_bin_laden_and_hys.html

    Ex-CIA man: Clinton could have got bin Laden
    Al-Qaida chief ‘alive today’ because ex-president missed 8 chances
    http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52256

  51. Mark Rogers writes
    May 12th, 2009 12:53 pm

    DG,

    There is a difference between torturing for information and torturing for fun.
    What the Japanese did was not for any purpose like saving lives. They did it to amuse themselves. Show me instances of our agents torturing enemy soldiers for a few laughs and I will strongly agree with you about that being wrong.

    Also the terrorists are not prisoners of war who represent legitimate governments. The rules, both legal and customary, that exist to preserve order between states cannot apply.

  52. terri writes
    May 12th, 2009 12:57 pm

    “The Department of Homeland Security”, sorry I can’t answer that as I am cleaning my keyboard off. You ARE referring to the department that classified me as a terrorist because I am against abortion and attended a tea party, right? BTW–how’s that Swine Flu thing going…

  53. Hogarth writes
    May 12th, 2009 12:59 pm

    “We prosecuted Japanese officers for torture for doing to our soldiers exactly what we did to Al Qaeda prisoners.”

    BS. While they may have done things similar to waterboarding, that is NOT where they drew the line. Your comparison would be the same as saying Charles Manson got life in prison for littering if he dropped a gum wrapper on the sidewalk after murdering Sharon Tate.

  54. Hogarth writes
    May 12th, 2009 1:01 pm

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_crimes#Torture_of_POWs

    Waterboarding, beheading. All the same, right?

  55. terri writes
    May 12th, 2009 1:06 pm

    FACT: None of the people who were accessories to the 9/11 attacks have been charged with a crime.
    Not yet, we are still at war….but you are welcome to have them in your hometown…

  56. The Ace writes
    May 12th, 2009 1:06 pm

    “FACT: Your side ignored intelligence briefings that Bin Laden was going to attack the U.S. with airplanes”

    I love these “facts”

    You mean this, right?

    “The PDB shows that the intelligence community and the White House had been aware of al Qaeda’s interest in hijacking U.S. airliners long before the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001. On the day the PDB was prepared, then-CIA Director George J. Tenet said in a memo to the intelligence community that “we are at war” and that no resources should be spared to defeat the terrorists.
    …
    The 1998 PDB is titled: “Bin Laden preparing to hijack U.S. aircraft and other attacks.” It was declassified, with redactions, by the White House last Monday at the Sept. 11 panel’s request. The text of the 1998 PDB was read to a reporter by an administration official who had access to the declassified document. ”

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A58615-2004Jul17?language=printer

    Of course since you’re ignorant & easily misled, you have no idea what actuallly happend regarding the topics on which you’re typing silly comments.

  57. The Ace writes
    May 12th, 2009 1:09 pm

    FACT: Republicans in the Senate killed the Gore Commission report in 1997 which recommended strengthening airport security in the U.S., doing random bag searches, and some 50 other recommendations that could have - and likely would have - stopped the hijackers on 9/11.

    Laugh out loud funny.

    I’d love for you to explain how “random searches” would have stopped 9/11.

    Good grief are your postings incoherent.

  58. Brad writes
    May 12th, 2009 1:09 pm

    I’ve been a Soldier all my adult life. I know plenty of soldiers that have been waterboarded. Almost everything they did to those terrorists (the ones who planned 9-11 mind you) were DIRECTLY from the military’s SERE course. Knowing how risk adverse the Army is in training… I doubt they would do anything to us that would cause permanent harm. I’m sick of those that compare us to Japan or Vietnam or Nazi Germany. McCain lost the full use of his arms, can’t type on a keyboard, probably should have died. he probably wished he was waterboarded, forced to listen to loud music, had his nap time taken away and kept in Gitmo with 3 square meals a day. Despite the liberal hysteria (showing their underlying fear/loathing of those that serve keeping this nation safe), they were not permanently harmed. We just scared the crap out of them by making them think we would (lotsa luck on that now)… that is the difference between us and them. if you ever need a visual… just picture S.K.M. all fat and healthy in his clean gitmo jumpsuit and john mccain trying to wave to a crowd. You are fools who prefer to wish the world was one way rather than deal with how it really is. You have that luxury because you never have to live with the consequences of your libral fantasies.

  59. The Ace writes
    May 12th, 2009 1:10 pm

    None of the people who were accessories to the 9/11 attacks have been charged with a crime.

    Huh?
    What is your proof of this and what does it have to do with anything?

    Why don’t you call up Eric Holder and tell him to obtain some arrest warrants then?

  60. The Ace writes
    May 12th, 2009 1:13 pm

    FACT: The Department of Homeland Security was a program proposed by DEMOCRATS in 1999.

    FACT:

    The Democrats began cutting the CIA’s budget in 1993.
    Clinton made cuts throughout the 1990’s in the Agency’s budget. How well did that work out for you?

  61. DG writes
    May 12th, 2009 1:13 pm

    Hogarth, individual Japanese soldiers were prosecuted and found guilty of the specific charge of waterboarding.

    Producing all materials related to interrogation methods and outcomes of Al Qaeda prisoners is the way to determine where we drew the line.

  62. DG writes
    May 12th, 2009 1:20 pm

    “Almost everything they did to those terrorists (the ones who planned 9-11 mind you) were DIRECTLY from the military’s SERE course”

    SERE was developed to demonstrate what specific torture methods were employed by enemy governments against captured American soldiers. It was based largely on Chinese torture methods in the Korean War era.

    The US government reverse-engineered a torture method from SERE training. Then officials framed narrow legal interpretations to allow torture, and authorized their use on a scale that exceeded SERE training by orders of magnitude.

    One of the typical approaches torturers take is to torture prisoners in ways that are not manifest to someone looking after the fact– which “don’t show bruises.”

    Get past the party politics of this issue. This is a tremendous shame for our country, and is against what we say we stand for. The people responsible for ordering torture should be put on trial. The people who were complicit with torture– Democrats too– should be exposed.

    There may be a exculpatory case for why we tortured, but in our system we ask a jury to determine its merits.

  63. terri writes
    May 12th, 2009 1:37 pm

    “This is a tremendous shame for our country, and is against what we say we stand for…”

    I respect your feelings on this, but I do not agree. Shame is when the president of your country bows to a Saudi prince, shame is when your president sits through a diatribe spouted by a demigod against your (his) country, shame is when your president voted against a act to protect late-term babies from being murdered in the womb.

    I can live with the “shame” of waterboarding a terrorist.

    And I don’t give a rats a** what the “world” thinks of us for “torturing” those criminals. T

  64. terri writes
    May 12th, 2009 1:39 pm

    opps–finger slipped–I was going to say that the “world” isn’t helping us in the fight…why are we always so worried about this “image” thing???

  65. DG writes
    May 12th, 2009 1:56 pm

    “why are we always so worried about this ‘image’ thing???”

    Because going back to the Revolution we have purported to be a beacon of freedom for the world.

  66. Brad writes
    May 12th, 2009 1:56 pm

    “There may be a exculpatory case for why we tortured, but in our system we ask a jury to determine its merits.”

    I believe killing is wrong. But I would not hesitate to kill someone who was threatening me or innocent people. That is the difference between us and them. I believe in the Marine Corps motto of :”No better friend, no worse enemy” not some fairytale fantasy. I do not believe in violence… but am fine with responding to violence with enough violence to stop their violence. Bad people exist, will always exist, and do not respond to kissess, hugs, or apologies.

    I think that we should be allowed to “torture”… but only under limited circumstances. A jury for our government would be impractical. What I want is this:
    - Transparency: not immediately for the ‘public’ but to our elected officials, and, after they are declassified, to everyone why we did it and to whom.
    - Accountability: it should be ordered by the President and authorized, in writing, to be used on a specific individual for a specific reason and re-authorized each time they are used.

    Random torture for tortures sake does not work… but when you need specific info from someone who know knows something and you can correlate/corroborate info with other sources it can work. Always? No, nothing does. I have stepped away from the partisan outlook. Republicans need to stop arguing waterboarding is not torture… it is. Democrats need to stop arguing it does not work… it does. So, lets concentrate on how we use it to prevent terrorist attacks in a manner that a. not get abused and b. continues to be proportional to the “threat”.

  67. DG writes
    May 12th, 2009 2:35 pm

    Brad, thanks for being honest. I could easily imagine a true ticking time bomb scenario, and would agree that there is justification for torture in those circumstances. How that justification is addressed is something that we as a society should determine.

    But with regard to this particular debate: I would like to know if a ticking time bomb is why we tortured. The secrecy has to stop.

  68. terri writes
    May 12th, 2009 2:37 pm

    “why are we always so worried about this ‘image’ thing???”

    “Because going back to the Revolution we have purported to be a beacon of freedom for the world.”

    So your premise is that the world will think less of us because we use harsh interrogation tactics to save our citizens? And that is why we have to persecute and attempt to prosecute lawyers, CIA agents, the former President and his vice-president in a world trial? And this will show the world we stand for freedom?

    If the blood of millions of our soldiers, shed on foreign lands, doesn’t show the world we stand for freedom, then I don’t know what more this country can do to make the world “respect” us…

  69. terri writes
    May 12th, 2009 2:44 pm

    This has been fun, kept me away from the dishes! Thanks for a good debate. Guess it all comes down to what my old pol sci prof used to say–it’s all about “where do you draw the line?”…

    Gotta go get the grandkids from school, thanks for a stimulating day!

  70. spaz writes
    May 12th, 2009 2:56 pm

    Terri, how about this…

    SHAME is when your President orders U.S. troops out of a country because a terrorist demands it.

    Know who I’m talking about? Bush. Who ordered U.S. troops to leave Saudi Arabia after 9/11. You’ll remember that that was one of Bin Laden’s “demands” of the U.S.

    After Bush gave the Bin Laden family a military escort out of the country on 9/12, he then complied with the terrorists’ demands.

    But don’t take my word for it. Look it up.

  71. The Ace writes
    May 12th, 2009 3:28 pm

    Hogarth, individual Japanese soldiers were prosecuted and found guilty of the specific charge of waterboarding.

    You sir, are a liar.

  72. The Ace writes
    May 12th, 2009 3:31 pm

    After Bush gave the Bin Laden family a military escort out of the country on 9/12,

    You are an out & out liar.

    Bush did no such thing. Clinton appointee Richard Clark made this call (no “military escort” was involved) which is an undisputed fact.

    Do you ever stop to ask yourself if your worldview is indeed correct, why your silly statements are all false?

  73. Tennwriter writes
    May 12th, 2009 3:32 pm

    Well good for him. I am a Republican, but if a good Democrat comes along, I’m willing to consider voting for him. I think I may have voted for Ford once, and I know I voted for Bredesen twice (and quite gladly). I, of course, voted AGAINST the No Debt Too Big Current Circus.

  74. The Ace writes
    May 12th, 2009 3:35 pm

    After Bush gave the Bin Laden family a military escort out of the country on 9/12,

    You are an out & out liar.

    Bush did not such thing. No “military escort” was involved, and the incident you’re talking about ocurred on September 20, 2001 and was approved by Clinton appointee Richard Clark. These are undisputed facts.

    Have you ever asked yourself, if your worldview is correct, why so many of your beliefs are formulated by lies?

  75. The Ace writes
    May 12th, 2009 3:37 pm

    Because going back to the Revolution we have purported to be a beacon of freedom for the world.

    Um, we - The United States - are.

    And the fact that you’re pretending dunking someone’s head in water is the exact same thing as cutting out tongue’s, burning genitals, throwing people off buildings, and jailing people for their political belifs - all of which happen in left wing dictatorships - is disgusting.

    Yet revealing.

  76. DG writes
    May 12th, 2009 3:42 pm

    “You sir, are a liar”

    The Ace, I won’t duel you, if that’s what you’re after.

    I will however point you to the article “Drop by Drop:
    Forgetting the History of Water Torture in US Courts” by Evan Wallach from Vol. 45, No 2. of The Columbia Journal of Transnational Law.

    Draft version available at http://www.pegc.us/archive/Articles/wallach_drop_by_drop_draft_20061016.pdf

    An essay on the topic by Judge Wallach is at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/02/AR2007110201170.html

  77. The Ace writes
    May 12th, 2009 3:47 pm

    I love this.

    First,
    The people responsible for ordering torture should be put on trial. The people who were complicit with torture– Democrats too– should be exposed.

    Then,
    could easily imagine a true ticking time bomb scenario, and would agree that there is justification for torture in those circumstances.

    Coherence much?

  78. DG writes
    May 12th, 2009 4:01 pm

    Yes, I think they should be put on trial.

    If the justification were a true ticking time bomb scenario, then they should have the courage and faith that they will be exonerated.

    When Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus, which was illegal (only Congress has the constitutional emergency power to suspend habeas corpus), he did so publicly and invited a trial.

    There’s no incoherence in what I’m saying. If you break the law out of a higher principle, have the courage that Lincoln had to acknowledge it and present yourself for trial.

  79. DG writes
    May 12th, 2009 4:20 pm

    The Ace, I responded to your challenge of my honesty, but my post has two links and is awaiting ACK’s approval.

  80. DG writes
    May 12th, 2009 4:22 pm

    In the meantime, you can research it: “Drop by Drop:
    Forgetting the History of Water Torture in US Courts” by Evan Wallach from Vol. 45, No 2. of The Columbia Journal of Transnational Law.

  81. jamby writes
    May 12th, 2009 5:23 pm

    “Hogarth, individual Japanese soldiers were prosecuted and found guilty of the specific charge of waterboarding.”

    Wrong again. No Japanese soldier was prosecuted for just waterboarding. In fact it was actually called water torture and included things like dunking soldiers heads in water and tying soldiers to a ladder and while upside down pouring water directly into their nostrils. The Japanese soldiers in question were also guilty of using much more severe methods of torture on American Soldiers.

    I invite you to come up with some specific examples of torture by the U.S. in this war and we can discuss it. But using the fact that we waterboarded a few prisoners to paint Gitmo and other prison sites as torture chambers is lazy. I for one consider waterboarding as used by the U.S. in this war as a legal form of interrogation. You can all it torture but to denigrate the country and our soldiers because of it and to wag your finger at Bush because of it is just poltical posturing.

  82. autoegocrat writes
    May 12th, 2009 6:28 pm

    Quotable:

    “You are REALLY not so naive as to think that Washington would not beat a man senseless if he had knowledge about the Redcoats movements, or potential attack upon a colonial town?”

    The fail is strong with this one.

  83. DG writes
    May 12th, 2009 8:01 pm

    Please read the trial documents quoted in Wallach’s article. Treatments of prisoners in essence identical to our waterboarding was prosecuted by us as torture.

  84. Stan writes
    May 13th, 2009 12:06 am

    Mathews goes ballistic when a Republican say “the Democrat party”, but he can’t bring himself to properly pronounce Cheney’s name?

  85. Hugh Akston writes
    May 13th, 2009 10:40 am

    Nice Title Kleinheider

    I guess the “Torture” debate is over, pouring water on the faces of three Al-Quaeda leaders actively involved in a West Coast 9-11 style plot is deff. torture. No room for debate. Hope and Change!

  86. Hugh Akston writes
    May 13th, 2009 10:43 am

    DG - the Japanese soldiers you referenced….

    Where they waterboarding under the guidance of physicians, lawyers and psychologists in accordance to a strict set of legal guidelines?

    Did they limit the waterboarding to 3 individuals, each of whom actively involved in terrorist plots that would result in the murder of thousands of Japanese civilians?

    Just curious.

  87. DG writes
    May 13th, 2009 2:01 pm

    “in accordance to a strict set of legal guidelines”

    I don’t know what pseudo-justification the Japanese soldiers followed. What they did was identical to the waterboarding we employed.

    Let me also say that the operatives who were ordered to torture under those guidelines, which did not correspond to the spirit of the many domestic and international laws against torture, are not culpable parties. Those who fabricated justifications and ordered the torture are the parties who should be tried.

    The torture of the three prisoners exceeded even those guidelines, by the way, and their application over extended periods of time was outside of a “ticking time bomb” scenario.

    And “enhanced interrogation techniques” outside of waterboarding, which include practices defined by us and internationally as torture, such as lengthy sleep deprivation, stress positions for extreme periods of time, exposure to extreme cold, etc., were applied to dozens of prisoners.

    Additionally, we sent other prisoners to “third party” countries for the express purpose of outsourcing torture. That complicity is also culpable.

    I am waiting for The Ace to retract his accusation that I am a liar, now that his previous ignorance of the situation (which he mistook as knowledge) has been addressed.

Leave a Reply




Partly Cloudy

Recent Comments

The Collective

The Latest from NashvillePost.com

Archives