Bush: Water-boarding "just fine".

Link to story here

George W. Bush admits in his new book re. waterboarding.... it was "damn right", and admits to having authorized such torture/procedure. Waterboarding has been carried out in US rendition facilities on many people who had never been charged with any crime, never been indicted or tried in a court of law, and against some who have been subsequently freed due to a complete and total absence of evidence of any criminal or terrorist activity.

In 1946, the International Miilitary Tribunal for the Far East (aka the Tokyo Trial) was held. A number of the Japanese soldiers convicted by American judges were hanged, while others received lengthy prison sentences or time in labor camps, for inflicting exactly the same torture/procedure that was authorized by George W. Bush, and carried out by CIA in various locations.

Did those Japanese soldiers get too harsh a punishment for their crimes? Or should Bush (the decider) and a bunch of thugs in the US intelligence services and military (the perps) get charged with war crimes, and if found guilty, receive a suitable sentence that befits war crimes and carrying out acts of torture?

What is the difference between Japanese waterboarding prisoners, and the US waterboading prisoners? The nationality? The era in which the crimes were committed? What's the deal with, one one hand, people paying with their lives for heinous crimes, and on the other hand, a privileged brat from a wealthy family getting off scot-free and earning probably $millions from a book in which even the author even admits to the same crime?

Or, are we going soft on war crime?

Charges of war crimes before a *real* court of law is the appropriate action. Amnesty International is in agreement.

Take note... a *real* court of law is the place for a real trial, as opposed to "military tribunals", a sickly euphemism for the type of kangaroo justice that Idi Amin or Saddam Hussein would be proud.

The U.S. convened court in which the Tokyo trials were held most certainly acknowledged that waterboarding IS torture, to the extent that some of the verdicts in those trials, for war crimes amongst which was *torture*, specifically by waterboarding prisoners, resulted in capital sentences for a number of the perps.

I would hazard a guess, that if a liberal, or democratic president had authorized waterboarding, conservatives would be down on him like the proverbial ton of bricks.


Yes, I agree that the circumstances were extraordinary, but obviously not in the same way that you do.

Even a former weasel-in-chief from Fox News, Geraldo Rivera, now has his doubts about the veracity of the official story concerning that day, and is coming around to acknowledge something closer to common sense, as seen in this video of which was aired yesterday (Saturday, November 13).

If you dare to watch, the right-wing conservative host now admits that he is "much more open-minded about this issue than he was" and the group in question (1,350+ architects and engineers) who are examining the evidence obviously "know a lot more than I do".. (Geraldo's words).


Ummmm, SDW, have *you* been waterboarded? Do you have the experience upon which to base that rather lonesome and unrealistic opinion? Did you see the video, a few years ago, of the marine who volunteered to be waterboarded, who lasted all of 5 seconds before frantically signalling his mock captors to stop? His relatively ersatz, mild, easy-street "experience" of waterboarding.... in which he could stop the procedure at any time, where a qualified medical doctor was present, in which nobody present was an enemy, and in which there was no anger and desire for vengeance on the part of the person administering the waterboarding..... is a far cry from the real thing. The volunteer, when asked f that was torture, said YES, it WAS. The type of waterboarding carried out in Gitmo and other rendition facilities is way more severe than what that volunteer experienced, and for much longer periods of time.

SDW, not many people agree with you on this one. Cheney and company will not be be favorably remembered in history, especially in about year or so.

The other posters in this thread have settled this argument, grand slam fashion.


You are assuming that "our troops" are going to treat their buddies in the same fashion that they treat "the assigned enemy" according to their superiors' orders? Get real, SDW.

And another point. If we torture people by waterboarding them, then if they do the same to our POWs, would you accept that as OK?


According to your preconceived beliefs, yes. According to the consensus of all qualified people, and those who have experienced it, no.


Of course not. That event is how all the current neo-fascist effluent, down which the world has gone too many times in the past, got yet another kick-start.

I place infinitely more significance in the inviolability of the laws of nature, the execution of the scientific method and the importance of hard evidence, rather than blind belief in baseless propaganda, weasel-talk and politically-motivated dry-labbed studies from a bunch of psychopaths who benefitted vastly from that event. If that's "conspiracy theory" then I stand up for it, loud and proud, until I take my last fvcking breath.


Here's a volunteer who previously thought waterboarding wasn't torture, until he experienced it. he also lasted barely 5 seconds. And this is also a MILD VERSION of what they do in Gitmo and elsewhere.


yadda, yadda, yadda. Keep on drinking that Neocon Koolaid™

And there is why people in the intelligence agencies say that torture is useless when it comes to gathering meaningful data. When a prisoner is placed under such extreme stress or pain, they will say anything, especially what the interrogator has been briefed to extract, rather than factually accurate/useful material.

Since the huge majority of political prisoners in US custody who have been subjected to torture HAVE BEEN EITHER SINCE BEEN LET GO AFTER UP TO 9 YEARS FALSE IMPRISONMENT, AND/OR WITHOUT EVEN BEING THE SUBJECT OF TRUMPED-UP CHARGES, the chances that they had anything about terrorism is very, very slim indeed. They probably told all kinds of baseless improvised gibberish to their torture-administering captors/thugs, just to get them to stop... and maybe even wasted a lot of taxpayer money and time going after false leads, and clogging computers with garbage data.


Wow.. thats >3 times longer than what that other "tough guy" managed. And you can bet that the variety of water-boarding he got was a mild, medically supervised version of the real hardcore thing.