Anyone who thinks it's not torture needs to give it a try and found out.

So, tardmitter you're saying waterboarding is torture now? Unlike 6 months ago when you said it wasn't?

What he says or does not say about it is irrelevant. It's not his call.

FTA: "There will be no waterboarding on my watch. There will be no torture on my watch," Blair said, refusing to go further.

Even though he didn't explicitly say that waterboarding is torture, I think that his intent is pretty clear here.

TFA makes that call based entirely on this quote:

"There will be no waterboarding on my watch. There will be no torture on my watch,"

douchemitter fails reading comprehension

So, Obama has made it clear that he doesn't want to start charging CIA agents, but he's also not going to allow waterboarding anymore. Therefore, the guy explicitly says that there will be no more waterboarding or torture and explains that he didn't go further in his comments because he was working within the idea of protecting CIA agents (as Obama has stated in the past)?

And we are bashing him for that?

What dumbass is taking the stance of bashing Obama for this? Let me guess, 2 months ago...water boarding was enhanced interrogation used by Bush to keep America safe?

It sounds like he doesn't want to make a policy declaration that waterboarding is torture, as that would probably compel the Justice Department to prosecute those who did it.

bulldg4life: Let me guess, 2 months ago...water boarding was enhanced interrogation used by Bush to keep America safe?

Exactly.

The truly asinine part of this submission is that submitter seems to have unwittingly revealed that he thinks waterboarding has been torture all along.

But 6 months ago, only America Haters^TM were against waterboarding.

There will be no Metallica at the show. There will be no Madonna at the show.
There will be no Snoop Dog at the show. There will be no Tiesto at the show.
there will be No Music at the show.

There, now Metallica, Madonna, Snoop Dog and Tiesto aren't music.

Just torture him until he relents.

it's up to the justice department whether or not to prosecute people, not the director of national intelligence. and subby, he isn't the "CIA choice", that would be the CIA director, which leon panetta was chosen for. the director of national intelligence is the guy who oversees all the intelligence agencies to facilitate their working together.

what he said was more than enough, since his only real concern is what they do going forward, not what they did in the past. that's for the justice department to worry about.

imbrial: TFA makes that call based entirely on this quote:

"There will be no waterboarding on my watch. There will be no torture on my watch,"

douchemitter fails reading comprehension

apparently this isn't a sufficient answer for some

Waterboading isn't torture; it's "creative interactive persuasion".

/is so full of it tonight

I have yet to see a waterboarding thread which prominently features WHARGARBL dog. Then again, I'm not really a devout FARKer.

/con-jobs sure love their WHARGARBL

Uchiha_Cycliste: There, now Metallica, Madonna, Snoop Dog and Tiesto aren't music.

Well, Tiesto was already unmitigated crap instead of music, so you didn't really have to do anything there.

bulldg4life: So, Obama has made it clear that he doesn't want to start charging CIA agents, but he's also not going to allow waterboarding anymore. Therefore, the guy explicitly says that there will be no more waterboarding or torture and explains that he didn't go further in his comments because he was working within the idea of protecting CIA agents (as Obama has stated in the past)?

And we are bashing him for that?

Oh, quit being so damned nuanced and reasonable. This is America, we don't go for thought-out answers to complex situations.

GQueue: Uchiha_Cycliste: There, now Metallica, Madonna, Snoop Dog and Tiesto aren't music.

Well, Tiesto was already unmitigated crap instead of music, so you didn't really have to do anything there.

Clearly sir, you have no taste.

Rev.K: So, tardmitter you're saying waterboarding is torture now? Unlike 6 months ago when you said it wasn't?

I'm confused, how do you know what the submitter said 6 months ago?

Did I miss something?

There is nothing in the article to support the assertion made in the headline. We have one quote:

"There will be no waterboarding on my watch. There will be no torture on my watch,"

and we don't even have the question it was in reference to. If he was asked "will you allow waterboarding?" and gave this answer it would be incredibly dishonest to claim that by answering this was he was refusing to define waterboarding as torture. If he was directly asked, "Do you think waterboarding it torture?" and he gave this answer it would still be a stretch to conclude the answer equates to "no, waterboarding is not torture".

Obama is going to have to back out a lot of promises. We all know that. It's how elections are won. Remember Bush was a compassionate conservative? A lot of us realize that and are Obama supporters anyway. It's not kook-aid, it's that the alternative is so bad it's an easy decision.

btw, dnrtfa due to lack of caring

imbrial: TFA makes that call based entirely on this quote:

"There will be no waterboarding on my watch. There will be no torture on my watch,"

douchemitterArticle writer fails reading comprehension

FTFY

FTA:The CIA has acknowledged waterboarding three terrorism suspects and defended it as effective, but says it discontinued the technique in 2003.


So let me get this straight, three terror suspects were made highly uncomfortable and gave up information six years ago and you guys are still whining and biatching like it's an every day practice?

Jesus are you people freaks who really need to just get over it.

That being said, this guy is right to say what he said. First he's protecting CIA Agents who at the time were given the green light. Second, waterboarding isn't exactly taping electrodes to some one's nads.

/Oh yea, and everyone in charge now says they aren't bringing it back - so it seems the only Wharrgarbl is coming from those who think we're still waterboarding people and want "Somebody to do a perpwalk".

LiquidTester: btw, dnrtfa due to lack of caring

Obviously.

LiquidTester: btw, dnrtfa due to lack of caring

Hey! Thanks for posting!

PerfectlyCromulent: LiquidTester: btw, dnrtfa due to lack of caring

Obviously.

Don't be so negative.

Waterboarding has proven to be quite handy and effective when used on good folks like Khalid Sheikh Mohammad. The information obtained from him saved lives. We induced him to be a kind and thoughtful soul who provided information that prevented harm to others. Without waterboarding, Khalid might not have had the chance to make such a positive contribution had he not been availed of the waterboarding opportunity. He saved lives, and others were saved. Sounds like a win-win scenario.

It's not torture. It's just a temporary inconvenience. It doesn't cause any lasting damage.

If the terrorists would admit to their crimes and divulge the proper information the unpleasant tactics would be unnecessary.

CanisNoir: FTA:The CIA has acknowledged waterboarding three terrorism suspects and defended it as effective, but says it discontinued the technique in 2003.


So let me get this straight, three terror suspects were made highly uncomfortable and gave up information six years ago and you guys are still whining and biatching like it's an every day practice?

Jesus are you people freaks who really need to just get over it.
Those Nazi's haven't done anything bad for years I guess Germany should start allowing neo-Nazi's to meet publicly.


That being said, this guy is right to say what he said. First he's protecting CIA Agents who at the time were given the green light.

Fine, go after the green-lighters.


Second, waterboarding isn't exactly taping electrodes to some one's nads.

It's internationally recognized as torture, what does it matter if there are worse tortures?

/Oh yea, and everyone in charge now says they aren't bringing it back - so it seems the only Wharrgarbl is coming from those who think we're still waterboarding people and want "Somebody to do a perpwalk".

If we don't go after those responsible, other countries will, and we are obligated to help them investigate.

Uchiha_Cycliste: There, now Metallica, Madonna, Snoop Dog and Tiesto aren't music.

I think you might be onto something here...

Semi-Sane: It's not torture. It's just a temporary inconvenience. It doesn't cause any lasting damage.

Repeatedly raping you wouldn't cause lasting physical damage either if they used lube. I bet that would get people to talk, we should do that.


If the terrorists would admit to their crimes and divulge the proper information the unpleasant tactics would be unnecessary.

Ok, now I'm convinced you're just trolling/joking. But in case you're not: Admit to their crimes? and divulge the proper information? And if they are innocent and don't have any info, we just keep torturing them until they say otherwise.

Friction8r: Waterboarding has proven to be quite handy and effective when used on good folks like Khalid Sheikh Mohammad. The information obtained from him saved lives. We induced him to be a kind and thoughtful soul who provided information that prevented harm to others. Without waterboarding, Khalid might not have had the chance to make such a positive contribution had he not been availed of the waterboarding opportunity. He saved lives, and others were saved. Sounds like a win-win scenario.

hallelujah.

Friction8r: Waterboarding has proven to be quite handy and effective when used on good folks like Khalid Sheikh Mohammad. The information obtained from him saved lives. We induced him to be a kind and thoughtful soul who provided information that prevented harm to others. Without waterboarding, Khalid might not have had the chance to make such a positive contribution had he not been availed of the waterboarding opportunity. He saved lives, and others were saved. Sounds like a win-win scenario.

Bullshiat, that's just what the Bush administration and you can't believe anything they said. Please cite a source proving that it helped. And go fark yourself.

CanisNoir: FTA:The CIA has acknowledged waterboarding three terrorism suspects and defended it as effective, but says it discontinued the technique in 2003.


So let me get this straight, three terror suspects were made highly uncomfortable and gave up information six years ago and you guys are still whining and biatching like it's an every day practice?

Jesus are you people freaks who really need to just get over it.

That being said, this guy is right to say what he said. First he's protecting CIA Agents who at the time were given the green light. Second, waterboarding isn't exactly taping electrodes to some one's nads.

/Oh yea, and everyone in charge now says they aren't bringing it back - so it seems the only Wharrgarbl is coming from those who think we're still waterboarding people and want "Somebody to do a perpwalk".

I guess the Japanese were just making our POW's "uncomfortable" back during WW2. Why did we have to prosecute those poor soldiers? Our guys should have just walked it off.

CanisNoir: this guy is right to say what he said. First he's protecting CIA Agents who at the time were given the green light.

I think this is the first thing you've ever said that I 100% agreed with.

Uchiha_Cycliste: Fine, go after the green-lighters.

I also agree with this, for the record.

Rev.K: bulldg4life: Let me guess, 2 months ago...water boarding was enhanced interrogation used by Bush to keep America safe?

Exactly.

The truly asinine part of this submission is that submitter seems to have unwittingly revealed that he thinks waterboarding has been torture all along.

But 6 months ago, only America HatersTM were against waterboarding.

Uh, no. Pointing out someone being hypocritical doesn't mean that one agrees with a premise. Pointing out that the Obama administration was supposed to bring change, but they are continuing the definition of waterboarding as not being torture qualifies as hypocritical. I wouldn't have to agree it's not torture to point it out.

Of course, anyone reading the article would quickly realize that (A) part of the Obama administration has already defined it as torture, and (B) this particular guy never tried to claim it wasn't torture, he just didn't say it was. Therefore the headline fails the "hypocrisy" test. Still doesn't mean that someone would have to change their position to try and claim it was.

Poopspasm: Uchiha_Cycliste: There, now Metallica, Madonna, Snoop Dog and Tiesto aren't music.

I think you might be onto something here...

I stand by Tiesto and Snoop Dog being music.

He is the CIA head not a lawyer for the administration.

He said the CIA will NOT water board, that's all that matters. Him defining the legality of it or not is not his job and is not important.

Bhruic: Uh, no. Pointing out someone being hypocritical doesn't mean that one agrees with a premise. Pointing out that the Obama administration was supposed to bring change, but they are continuing the definition of waterboarding as not being torture qualifies as hypocritical. I wouldn't have to agree it's not torture to point it out.

What actual evidence do you have that the Obama administration is continuing the definition of waterboarding as not being torture? Was it perhaps his AG pick directly saying "Waterboarding is torture."?

Yes, it would be hypocritical, if it was true. Thankfully it is not.

Bhruic: Uh, no. Pointing out someone being hypocritical doesn't mean that one agrees with a premise. Pointing out that the Obama administration was supposed to bring change, but they are continuing the definition of waterboarding as not being torture qualifies as hypocritical.

They are not. His administration has defined water board as torture.

The head of the CIA does NOT define the legality of water board for the administration.

The person who DOES DID call it torture.

You are full of crap.

It is torture. Physical torture and the fact that the Bush administration allowed it will forever be a stain on this nations history. I don't know what Obama's approach will be towards such captives/inmates but I do hope that he will put a stop to this. There are other ways to get information out of detainees.

Let's force the Al Qaeda prisoners to watch "The Hills" instead.

CynicalLA And go fark yourself.

Now now, Cynical, that's a bit untoward and would seem to contradict your stance on waterboarding. You appear to be full of rage and contempt. These are the type of emotions often diplayed by cruel people who would torture. Yet you clearly have a moral highground where such practices are heinous. As a thoughtful and compassionate person, it will serve you well to not lash out at others with whom you may have a minor disagreement.

Thrag: What actual evidence do you have that the Obama administration is continuing the definition of waterboarding as not being torture? Was it perhaps his AG pick directly saying "Waterboarding is torture."?

What you mean the head of the CIA does isn't the Attorney General too?

But- but- what is the treasurer's view of the legality of water boarding!!!!!!1111oneoneoneone

Friction8r: CynicalLA And go fark yourself.

Now now, Cynical, that's a bit untoward and would seem to contradict your stance on waterboarding. You appear to be full of rage and contempt. These are the type of emotions often diplayed by cruel people who would torture. Yet you clearly have a moral highground where such practices are heinous. As a thoughtful and compassionate person, it will serve you well to not lash out at others with whom you may have a minor disagreement.

I'm not full of rage. I just know you are a piece of shiat and I don't like you.

There will be no waterboarding on my watch. There will be no torture on my watch," Blair said, refusing to go further.


Fark Politics tab's war on reality continues unabated.

Friction8r: Waterboarding has proven to be quite handy and effective when used on good folks like Khalid Sheikh Mohammad. The information obtained from him saved lives. We induced him to be a kind and thoughtful soul who provided information that prevented harm to others. Without waterboarding, Khalid might not have had the chance to make such a positive contribution had he not been availed of the waterboarding opportunity. He saved lives, and others were saved. Sounds like a win-win scenario.

I was just talking with my dad about this today. I think Khalid Sheikh Mohammad is a special case. The problem is when waterboarding becomes standard procedure. Khalid know a ton of stuff, and we knew how much information he had. When we start waterboarding and abusing Ali the Plumber, it gets out of hand. I think if we make another grab as big as Khalid there might be some exceptions made, but stopping all this abuse from happening on a regular basis is important.

Torturing only feeds into their propaganda. They think we are the bad guys. How are we ever going to convince them we aren't if we keep acting like the bad guys? al-Queda is going to have a much harder time finding people who will blow themselves up if people don't have much reason to hate us anymore.

Bhruic: Rev.K: bulldg4life: Let me guess, 2 months ago...water boarding was enhanced interrogation used by Bush to keep America safe?

Exactly.

The truly asinine part of this submission is that submitter seems to have unwittingly revealed that he thinks waterboarding has been torture all along.

But 6 months ago, only America HatersTM were against waterboarding.

Uh, no. Pointing out someone being hypocritical doesn't mean that one agrees with a premise. Pointing out that the Obama administration was supposed to bring change, but they are continuing the definition of waterboarding as not being torture qualifies as hypocritical. I wouldn't have to agree it's not torture to point it out.

Of course, anyone reading the article would quickly realize that (A) part of the Obama administration has already defined it as torture, and (B) this particular guy never tried to claim it wasn't torture, he just didn't say it was. Therefore the headline fails the "hypocrisy" test. Still doesn't mean that someone would have to change their position to try and claim it was.

Sorry I didn't read you 2nd paragraph got so pissed with the first one.

Uchiha_Cycliste: Those Nazi's haven't done anything bad for years I guess Germany should start allowing neo-Nazi's to meet publicly.

Not sure what the laws of Germany are, but in the US, sure, it's called Freedom.

I guess the Japanese were just making our POW's "uncomfortable" back during WW2. Why did we have to prosecute those poor soldiers? Our guys should have just walked it off.

Are you seriously trying to compare waterboarding to the Gassing of Jews and the Death Marches?


Billy Jack says you deserve a face kick for that.

CanisNoir: So let me get this straight, three terror suspects were made highly uncomfortable and gave up information six years ago and you guys are still whining and biatching like it's an every day practice?

Forgive us if we think that they're full of shiat.