Top Leaderboard, Site wide
August 23, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Help us grow by sharing
and liking Truthdig:
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Newsletter

sign up to get updates


Atlantic Depths May Hold Key to Heat Hiatus






Truthdig Bazaar more items

 
Ear to the Ground

Bush Official Warned About Torture in Secret Memo

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Apr 5, 2012
openDemocracy (CC-BY)

Months before al-Qaida operative Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is set to stand trial for his alleged role in the 9/11 attacks, a draft of a secret memo written in 2006 by a senior adviser to Condoleezza Rice warning that the “enhanced interrogation” techniques used by the Bush administration in the “war on terror” violated U.S. law has surfaced at the U.S. State Department.

Mohammed was subjected to waterboarding to obtain information during his interrogations by the U.S. military. —ARK

The Guardian:

[Philip] Zelikow, whose official position was counsellor to Rice, said he had her support on the issue. As the state department’s representative on the National Security Council committee considering legal issues around violent interrogations, he expressed his concerns at the time in a top secret 2006 memorandum.

The memo, to other members of the committee who represented the justice and defence departments and intelligence services, warned that the CIA’s use of waterboarding and other abuses were almost certainly in breach of US and international law. But the memo so alarmed the administration that it was immediately rejected and all copies were ordered destroyed.

A draft version of the memo, found at the state department, was released this week following a freedom of information request by the National Security Archive in Washington.

Read more

More Below the Ad

Advertisement

Square, Site wide

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By Marshall, April 17, 2012 at 10:51 pm Link to this comment

Hetero - The Parker conviction was very specifically for “conspiring to coerce confessions”.  They were not convicted for torture.  They were convicted for using force to obtain confessions, and they used various forms of force including kicking and beating.  This is a violation of the detainees civil rights specifically the 5th amendment right against compulsively induced self incrimination

With regard to unlawful alien combatants, they do not have 5th amendment rights thus there would be no violation of federal law in those cases, which is why no such cases against the CIA or the administration have been presented.  It’s pretty firm legal ground.

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 17, 2012 at 9:03 pm Link to this comment

Marshall——Parker was exactly about water torture….you’ve no way and that and
have done nothing to “deal” with it….if simple lying is all you’ve got, neither I nor
anyone else needs to bother with you.


don’t argue law till you learn some.

Report this

By Marshall, April 17, 2012 at 6:59 pm Link to this comment

Hetero

“as every case involving it ends the same way”

As soon as you can cite a single federal case that was actually about waterboarding (I’ve already addressed your previous attempts individually), you’re the one without an argument.  Perhaps that’s not a requirement for you though.

Report this

By Cliff Carson, April 17, 2012 at 5:16 pm Link to this comment

PatrickHenry, April 17 at 2:34 pm Link to this comment

Cliff,

“I guess the administration and it’s lackys will torture until it is them being tortured or until a victim is found innocent and sues for millions and the public outpouring demands resolution.”

PatricHenry, I have often mused that this is the reason for no public trials.  You might have read some past comments by me that in a Senate Hearing live on TV some 3 or 4 years ago that a review of the U S Military records revealed that 92% of those going thru Gitmo were there because they were sold to the U S forces for the bounty offered by the U S for bringing in Al-Qaeda and Taliban members.  In fact less than a dozen of the 571 incarcerated at Gitmo at the time of the review, had any proof that they were in any way a member of either of those two organizations.

When the U S Forces paid the bounty they didn’t require any proof that the person being delivered was in fact either. 

Seems that of that group of 571 detainees only one had been brought in from the battlefield by U S Soldiers.

Keeping those people for years should be a crime but I don’t think any court in the United States would ever find that any of them are due compensation for their unjust detention. It would show up our Government for what they are in this debacle.

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 17, 2012 at 4:49 pm Link to this comment

dog——actual humor from you !!!! I WILL be damned…..


bravo.

Report this
blogdog's avatar

By blogdog, April 17, 2012 at 4:35 pm Link to this comment

real terrorists use toilet paper - combs and chili sauce are for wannabes

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 17, 2012 at 4:17 pm Link to this comment

dog—- for kicks   google   Mamdouh Salim and Louis Pepe.

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 17, 2012 at 4:02 pm Link to this comment

PH——....“a victim is found innocent and sues for millions and the public
outpouring demands resolution.”


something such as that will be the resolution of it and the courts will re-affirm the
illegality of the torture practiced by the previous administration.

Report this
blogdog's avatar

By blogdog, April 17, 2012 at 3:55 pm Link to this comment

Well, when faced with the ...worst of the worst…

http://guantanamovoices.wordpress.com/category/speaking-event/

[...]

“Although people find this funny, this is true. You were trained to believe that
we as detainees were skilled at constructing impromptu stabbing devices,” says
Moazzam.

“Yep. That’s why we were trained at stabbing each other with knives for two
days. But the whole time we were in Cuba I never saw one of these illusive
killing machines,” says Chris.

Moazzam points out that crafty ability to construct deadly knives from toilet
paper is part of a whole American military view of detainees not as regular
humans, but some kind of insane, bloodthirsty savages.

“When we were transported on airplanes to Guantanamo, we were made to wear
facemasks in addition to blackened goggles and earmuffs. I never understood
why they did that, why they thought the facemasks were necessary, until I
heard Donald Rumsfeld explaining, “These people are so dangerous that they
will chew through the cables of an aircraft to try and bring it down.”

[...]

as ‘legends’ go, Rummy may outlive KSM

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, April 17, 2012 at 3:34 pm Link to this comment

Cliff,

I guess the administration and it’s lackys will torture until it is them being tortured or until a victim is found innocent and sues for millions and the public outpouring demands resolution.

Then decades will pass and we will have to reinvent the moral wheel once again.

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 17, 2012 at 6:27 am Link to this comment

Marshall——- as every case involving it ends the same way, that settled
enough…..you’ve no counter-example, merely some bullsppit.


setttle up and git.

Report this
blogdog's avatar

By blogdog, April 17, 2012 at 4:28 am Link to this comment

yeah - there are a lot of ‘characters’ in this theatre, and the authors need
convincing patsies to make it all play out - the presumed ‘KSM’ is the dream patsy
- hard to crack (183 torture sessions) but when he’s broken, he delivers… again,
lest one forget:

he claims he murdered over three-thousand
people… and also claims ”...that he was responsible for “planning, training,
surveying, and financing” a second wave of attacks against various skyscrapers
including the Plaza Bank in Washington state. The problem is that KSM was
detained in 2003 and the Plaza Bank was founded in 2006.”

http://prisonplanet.com/articles/march2007/160307afterarrest.htm

Report this

By Cliff Carson, April 17, 2012 at 3:48 am Link to this comment

I was thinking about how we drifted into the acceptance of torture as a moral activity, so I Googled around and found the following comment that I made on Truthdig last year about how Obama used circular logic to dismiss the possibility of charging our torturers with war crimes.  I print an except here:

“But Obama (this is the version from 50,000 feet) excused and refused to look into the torture using an excuse (I wrote an article “Circular Logic” about this a couple of years ago) as follows:

The Obama Administration said we couldn’t charge the torturers because they were just following orders and we couldn’t charge those giving the orders because they didn’t actually do the torturing!

That statement illustrates the character of our Government.”

Report this

By Marshall, April 16, 2012 at 10:09 pm Link to this comment

heterochromatic - you’ve provided a good example of what i’m talking about;
sticking a pitch fork in someone’s eye results unequivocally in injury or death, so
would be convicted as assault or murder.  Waterboarding does not, and since
there’s no legal ruling that it constitutes torture, it is therefore not what’s called
“settled law”.  This means that although there have been legal opinions drawn on
both sides of the issue (legal/illegal), it has not yet been adjudicated and is
therefore not clearly either.  But until such adjudication, it can easily be considered
legal and indeed our government has used it in the recent past without legal
consequence, which itself sets a precedent. 

Like many ideologs, you’re seeing it in black and white but as with many
controversial legal issues, it’s not settled till it’s settled.

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 16, 2012 at 5:59 am Link to this comment

Marshall—- such shit.  there are no federal ruling that make waterboarding illegal
in the same way that they’re no federal rulings that make sticking a pitchfork into
the eye of a lefthanded rightfielder illegal.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, April 16, 2012 at 3:26 am Link to this comment

The policy considerations which militate against the use of waterboarding are compelling, but they are not relevant to assessing the legality of the practice.  Regardless of its utility or lack of utility as a method of interrogation, waterboarding violates both the letter and the spirit of the Torture Act, the War Crimes Act, and the Prohibition against Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment.  Accordingly, waterboarding is illegal.

http://lawreview.wustl.edu/slip-opinions/waterboarding-is-illegal/

Report this

By Marshall, April 15, 2012 at 10:26 pm Link to this comment

By heterochromatic, April 15 at 6:35 pm Link to this comment

Except that - again - you’ve provided no examples of U.S. federal rulings against waterboarding because there are none.

Parker was convicted “for conspiring to force confessions”, not for water boarding.

The 1947 case against the Japanese civilian was for various forms of torture including beating, kicking, and pouring water up the nose and mouth of prisoners… none of which is how waterboarding is done.

The Japanese executions were by an international tribunal, not a U.S. court, and none was convicted solely on “water torture”.

And internationally, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the UDHR “does not of its own force impose obligations as a matter of international law”.  Neither does the U.S. subscribe to the international criminal court.

Again: There are no federal rulings that explicitly make waterboarding illegal, nor has anyone in the U.S. been prosecuted for waterboarding.  It’s not to say that a court couldn’t interpret the law that way if a case were to arise, but so far none has, which is in and of itself an indication of the likely difficulty in obtaining a prosecution for it.

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 15, 2012 at 7:35 pm Link to this comment

no Marshall, it’s not just Obama’s opinion, it’s the opinion of every US court that
has ever ruled on water torture, it’s a felony.

you have exactly ZERO support for calling it anything else.

Report this

By Cliff Carson, April 15, 2012 at 7:30 pm Link to this comment

Marshall

Those Japanese who were executed for water boarding American soldiers, why did the United States execute them if Water boarding is lawful.

Could it be that torture is illegal only if it is done to human beings who are Americans?

Marshall the focus should be the torture to death of non-combatants, Renditions, torture of children, assassination of those who don’t share American Hegemony, well you know what I’m writing about.

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 15, 2012 at 7:28 pm Link to this comment

Marshalll——bullshit….read the decision of the appellate court and stop your
garbage….... prisoners are prisoners are prisoners and calling them “illegal
combatants” is a puling ploy pulled out the ass of the Bush admin to obfuscate
because the US law, as well as the Geneva Accords, are clear as a beel about
torture.


there is no exemption because the guy in the cell isn’t a nice person, Marshall
and you gotta be an idiot not to understand that citizen or no, the point is clear
under our laws that waterboarding is a felony.

ater WWII we called it a war crime and prosecuted japanese for doing it .


++++“Republican presidential candidate John McCain reminded people
Thursday that some Japanese were tried and hanged for torturing American
prisoners during World War II with techniques that included waterboarding.

“There should be little doubt from American history that we consider that as
torture otherwise we wouldn’t have tried and convicted Japanese for doing that
same thing to Americans,” McCain said during a news conference.”+++++++

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/29/politics/main3554687.shtml

Report this

By Marshall, April 15, 2012 at 7:10 pm Link to this comment

heterochromatic - Humpy Parker is a weak argument given the lack of detail, multiple charges, and the fact that it involved local law-enforcement and U.S. citizens not unlawful combatants.  You’ll find no court declaration of the illegality of water boarding there.

PatrickHenry - You’ll need to go farther than wikipedia which is full of various people’s differing opinions about it’s legality, but absolutely no conclusions or declarative cases.  Which is why the DoD still hasn’t denied that it uses it in its SEERS program, the Bush administration in 2008 declared that it still reserves the right to use it, and while Obama “believes” it’s illegal, this is simply his opinion.

The bottom line is that no federal court has ruled the use of water boarding unlawful just as none has ruled that the CIA broke the law in using it.  Any President can order the CIA to resume its use under current law.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, April 14, 2012 at 8:50 am Link to this comment

You don’t have to go far to see that waterboarding is illegal.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterboarding

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 14, 2012 at 6:50 am Link to this comment

sorry for the mistake…. It was Humpy PARKER..

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 14, 2012 at 6:49 am Link to this comment

Marshall———look up Humpy Marshall.  He drew 10 years in a federal prison for
doing it.


http://2008election.procon.org//pdf/US_v_Lee.pdf

Report this
blogdog's avatar

By blogdog, April 14, 2012 at 12:42 am Link to this comment

...only pointing out that you’re willing to accept and reprint as truth things which are clearly false.

take it easy… what’s ‘clearly false’ should be put to rest…  all honest efforts considered - good work - just as one would expect in a fully transparent, adequately funded investigation which extends protections to whistle blowers, and makes an honest call to all with pertinent information to step forward and deliver it

what’s needed but will likely never happen - same with OK City, King, RFK, JFK and more - finally Gulf of Tonkin is on the public record as a ‘false flag’ - but didn’t hear it in the MSM - requires some digging -  http://www.fas.org/blog/secrecy/2008/01/nsa_releases_history_of_americ.html

Report this

By Marshall, April 13, 2012 at 11:51 pm Link to this comment

By blogdog, April 13 at 10:22 pm Link to this comment

“but then…”

I’m not attempting to refute all your points - only pointing out that you’re willing to accept and reprint as truth things which are clearly false.

Report this

By Marshall, April 13, 2012 at 11:45 pm Link to this comment

By heterochromatic, April 13 at 10:09 pm Link to this comment

“you want to tell us which court has ruled that the water torture was lawful? “

I never said a court ruled it was lawful.  I said that none had ruled that the law was broken.

“all previous cases in federal court were found to not be lawful.  it’s prohibited by federal law and again in the UCMJ”

You want to tell us which federal court has ruled that waterboarding is unlawful?  Just because Obama banned it doesn’t make it illegal.  Neither is it mentioned in UCMJ.

Report this
blogdog's avatar

By blogdog, April 13, 2012 at 11:22 pm Link to this comment

...it’s impossible to tell whether it was ever opened… from discussion
at link, if accurate,  indeed, impossible to tell

but then…

[...]

There are numerous oddities and contradictions about AA77’s black boxes.

The government claims that the voice data recorder was damaged during the
crash and that no usable data was retrieved from it. If true, this would be the
first time in aviation history that a solid-state data recorder was destroyed
during a crash.

While it was widely reported in the media that the FDR for AA77 was found at 4
am on September 14, 2001, the file containing the FDR data was dated over
four hours earlier. In other words, we are asked to believe that the data from
the FDR was downloaded prior to the FDR being found.

Researcher Aidan Monagahan has established that the NTSB does not have
either serial or part numbers for the FDRs from AA77. The NTSB’s own
handbook indicates that the part number and serial number of the FDR are
required for data readout of the FDR. The NTSB did not have this information,
giving us another reason to question how the FDR data was created.

Structural engineer Allyn Kilsheimer claimed that he personally found AA77’s
black box on 9/11. But in the Popular Mechanics book Debunking 9/11 Myths,
Kilsheimer is quoted as saying, “I stood on a pile of debris that we later found
contained the black box …”

Kilsheimer’s story changes again in August 2007 in a piece done by the History
Channel, “The 9/11 Conspiracies,” where he claims “I tripped over something; it
was the black box.”

In earlier work, Pilots for 9/11 Truth (P4T) has determined that the same data
set provided by the NTSB shows the plane too high to hit the Pentagon, based
on an altimeter that uses air pressure to calibrate altitude.

[...]

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 13, 2012 at 11:09 pm Link to this comment

Marshall—- you want to tell us which court has ruled that the water torture was
lawful?

I don’t recall seeing any such and all previous cases in federal court were found to
not be lawful

it’s prohibited by federal law and again in the UCMJ

Report this

By Marshall, April 13, 2012 at 10:58 pm Link to this comment

By blogdog, April 12 at 2:10 pm Link to this comment

<<Flight 77 Cockpit Door Never Opened During 9/11 “Hijack”
http://rockcreekfreepress.tumblr.com/post/285492999/flt77fdr By Sheila Casey / Rock Creek Free Press>>

This one’s easy to refute.  Flight 77 aircraft model didn’t support recording of the status of the cockpit door so it’s impossible to tell whether it was ever opened:

the911forum.freeforums.org/flight-77-fdr-shows-cockpit-door-closed-throughout-t262.html#p15409

(Note: you’ll have to copy/paste that URL to your browser since TD won’t show it as a clickable link)

Report this
blogdog's avatar

By blogdog, April 13, 2012 at 10:47 pm Link to this comment

9/11: A Conspiracy Theory
literally the wildest one of all, hands down - must see, 5 min.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuC_4mGTs98

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 13, 2012 at 10:00 pm Link to this comment

dia——you’re obviously too wrapped up in it to admit that the remarks from Stull
were tampered with….you’re so far over your eyeballs in conspiratorial nonsense
about 9/11 it’s best to forego any discussion as every refutation, and this one is
as clear as anything could be, can’t penetrate the crap you’re blindly embracing.

Report this

By Marshall, April 13, 2012 at 9:46 pm Link to this comment

By heterochromatic, April 9 at 7:04 am Link to this comment

“it was settled by an outright refusal to follow the law”

Except that there’s been no subsequent court ruling that the law was broken.  The law is defined not by your interpretation of it, but by the court’s.

Report this

By diamond, April 13, 2012 at 3:15 pm Link to this comment

“dia—- you posted that lying link to a guy who
doctored the guys remarks…..you don’t get to say
that his outrage at being fucked with by the liar
isn’t genuine.”

I didn’t post any link: I quoted what Ernie Stull said and he didn’t only say it once or only to the German interviewer. Nor was he the only one who said it. Nena Lensbouer, Wallace Miller, the Somerset Country coroner and the fire chief of Shanksville all said the same thing- that there was no plane at the site where the government claimed it crashed. You can still watch the interview with Chris Kinicki of Fox News where he says with no ambiguity whatsoever that there was no evidence a ‘plane had ever been there’ at Shanksville. A CNN journalist reporting from the lawn of the Pentagon said virtually the same thing, that you could see no evidence a plane had crashed into the Pentagon. Was he lying too or had he dropped acid? There are numerous eyewitness accounts of what went on that day and Ernie Stull was only one of thousands of eyewitnesses.

The day before 9/11, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld held a televised press conference, covered by CNN, (which you can also still watch) at which he acknowledged that $2.3 trillion was ‘missing’ from the Pentagon (some reports said $2.6 trillion). And what part of the Pentagon was attacked? The auditing department of course, where all those auditors were hard at work trying to ‘follow the money’. Many of them were killed and all the evidence of where that money had gone and who took it and for what purpose was destroyed. I find it impossible to believe that Osama bin Laden wanted those auditors dead but there were plenty of people in the Pentagon itself who did.

Another eyewitness was Mark Bernbach, also of Fox News, who watched the second plane fly over as he stood on a street in New York. He reported to the Fox News desk that the plane ‘had no windows, was not a commercial jetliner and didn’t look as if it belonged in this part of town.’ He didn’t say it in German, as far as I’m aware, so he doesn’t have the luxury of saying he was misquoted, especially since it was broadcast nationally.

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 12, 2012 at 3:11 pm Link to this comment

dia—- you posted that lying link to a guy who
doctored the guys remarks…..you don’t get to say
that his outrage at being fucked with by the liar
isn’t genuine.

look into the life led by Ernie and don’t call him a
coward until then…it’s grossly inappropriate for
you to do that.

accept the simple truth that Mr Stull was there, he
saw the wreckage and some shithead lied about him.

step up and act decently, dia.

Report this
blogdog's avatar

By blogdog, April 12, 2012 at 3:10 pm Link to this comment

Flight 77 Cockpit Door Never Opened During 9/11 “Hijack”
http://rockcreekfreepress.tumblr.com/post/285492999/flt77fdr
By Sheila Casey / Rock Creek Free Press

Pilots for 9/11 Truth has reported that the data stream from the flight data
recorder (FDR) for American Airlines flight 77, which allegedly struck the
Pentagon on 9/11, shows that the cockpit door never opened during the entire
90 minute flight. The data was provided by the National Transportation Safety
Board (NTSB), which has refused to comment.

The FDR is one of two “black boxes” in every commercial airliner, which are
used after accidents to help determine the cause of a crash. One black box
records flight data, the other records voice data (everything said in the cockpit
during the flight). With those two sets of data, NTSB investigators can usually
piece together the events that led to a crash. The status of the door to the
cockpit is checked every four seconds throughout a flight and relayed as a
simple 0 or 1, where 0=closed and 1=open, with approximately 1,300 door
status checks performed during AA77’s 90 minute flight. Every one of those
door status checks shows as a 0, indicating that the door to the cockpit never
opened during the entire flight.

[...]

There are numerous oddities and contradictions about AA77’s black boxes.

The government claims that the voice data recorder was damaged during the
crash and that no usable data was retrieved from it. If true, this would be the
first time in aviation history that a solid-state data recorder was destroyed
during a crash.

While it was widely reported in the media that the FDR for AA77 was found at 4
am on September 14, 2001, the file containing the FDR data was dated over
four hours earlier. In other words, we are asked to believe that the data from
the FDR was downloaded prior to the FDR being found.

Researcher Aidan Monagahan has established that the NTSB does not have
either serial or part numbers for the FDRs from AA77. The NTSB’s own
handbook indicates that the part number and serial number of the FDR are
required for data readout of the FDR. The NTSB did not have this information,
giving us another reason to question how the FDR data was created.

Structural engineer Allyn Kilsheimer claimed that he personally found AA77’s
black box on 9/11. But in the Popular Mechanics book Debunking 9/11 Myths,
Kilsheimer is quoted as saying, “I stood on a pile of debris that we later found
contained the black box …”

Kilsheimer’s story changes again in August 2007 in a piece done by the History
Channel, “The 9/11 Conspiracies,” where he claims “I tripped over something; it
was the black box.”

In earlier work, Pilots for 9/11 Truth (P4T) has determined that the same data
set provided by the NTSB shows the plane too high to hit the Pentagon, based
on an altimeter that uses air pressure to calibrate altitude.

[...]

Report this

By diamond, April 12, 2012 at 2:35 pm Link to this comment

“The problem is in how weak, at best, your alternative explanation of 9/11 is.  I’m sorry, Dia, we live in two different worlds.”

If you were a really intelligent person you would ask some intelligent questions (questions you don’t dare ask) such as ‘where was the plane if it wasn’t at Shanksville?’ and ‘Why did Donald Rumsfeld say it was shot down?’ Then you would inform yourself about the matter and you would find that Richard Clarke, former anti-terrorism Czar of the United States, testified to the 9/11 Commission that he had the shoot down order on flight 93 by 9.50am on the morning of 9/11. Of course the 9/11 Commission didn’t ask him to elaborate and they didn’t put his statement in their report.

Heterochromatic, it wasn’t only Ernie Stull who said the plane was not at Shanksville, even journalists from Fox News said it and poor old Ernie probably recanted in fear of his life once it became clear that the government was involved. Stull, the Somerset County Coroner and even the fire chief of Shanksville all said that they rushed out to what they thought was a plane crash and there was no plane and no bodies and no fire.

1. The Shanksville (Somerset County) coroner, Wallace Miller, made this heretical statement re the ‘crash’ site at Shanksville:
‘If you didn’t know, you would have thought no one was on the plane’, Mr. Miller said to a journalist. ‘You would have thought they dropped them off somewhere’.

2.The phone calls reportedly made from Flight 93 also deserve in-depth analysis, since so much of the legend of Flight 93 depended on their contents. It’s important to bear in mind that no cell phone calls could have been made at altitudes of five or six miles, as stated in the official story. Airlines were only introducing pico-cell technology’ to enable such calls to be made in 2006/7.

3. Paul Cellucci, Washington envoy to Canada, is quoted in an article dated February 23rd 2005, written by Colin Perkel and Beth Gorham, saying something quite shocking. Cellucci, in a discussion while in Canada, admitted, cool as can be – almost as an aside- that Flight 93 was shot down:

‘Cellucci compared (a situation under discussion) to one that occurred during the 9/11 ‘terrorist’ attacks on the U.S. He noted that it was a Canadian general at NORAD who scrambled military jets under orders from Bush to shoot down a hijacked commercial aircraft heading for Washington.’

You may call such evidence ‘weak’, Imax, but what is really weak is your ability to refute it.

Report this
IMax's avatar

By IMax, April 11, 2012 at 7:17 pm Link to this comment

diamond, - “In other words, don’t piss in my pocket and tell me it’s raining.’ - ‘if you believe the 9/11 fairytale you’re a fool.”

-

The problem is in how weak, at best, your alternative explanation of 9/11 is.  I’m sorry, Dia, we live in two different worlds.

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 11, 2012 at 2:38 pm Link to this comment

dia—- forced to choose between Donald Rumsfeld and Ernie of Shanksville…...
I suggest that you learn to go to the source…..instead of trusting bullshitters
and making an ass of yourself.

——-When Der Spiegel confronts Stull with the English translation of these
passages in the book and the film script, the man is speechless: “My statements
were taken completely out of context. Of course there was an airplane. It’s just
that there wasn’t much left of it after the explosion. That’s what I meant when I
said ‘no airplane’. I saw parts of the wreckage with my own eyes, even one of
the engines. It was lying in the bushes.”———-


http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,265160-5,00.html

Report this

By diamond, April 11, 2012 at 2:24 pm Link to this comment

“Yes, I have much to be ashamed of.  You still, like events of Sept. 11, 2001, missed the point entirely.”

Huh? What point have I missed?


Donald Rumsfeld - who can always be relied on to tell the truth when he shouldn’t- came up with this, quoted in an article by Anthony Lappè for GNN on 24th December 2004:

‘I think all of us have a sense if we imagine the kind of world we would face if people who bombed the mess hall in Mosul, or the people who did the bombing in Spain, or the people who attacked the US in New York, shot down the plane over Pennsylvania and attacked the Pentagon…’

Ernie Stull, Mayor of Shanksville, talked to German television in March 2003:

Ernie Stull: My sister and a good friend of mine were the first ones there (at Shanksville). They were standing on a street corner in Shanksville, talking. Their car was nearby so they were the first here and the fire department came. Everyone was puzzled, because the call had been that a plane had crashed. But there was no plane.

Reporter for German TV: They had been sent here because of a crash, but there was no plane?

Ernie Stull: No. Nothing. Only this hole.

Nena Lensbouer who had prepared lunch for the workers at the scrap yard overlooking the ‘crash site’ was the first person to go up to the smoking crater:

She told AFP that she saw no evidence of a plane then or at any time including during the excavation of the site, even though it was claimed that the excavation recovered 95% of the plane and 10% of human remains. Lensbouer also told AFP that the hole was 6 feet deep and smaller than the 24 foot trailer in her front yard.

Now, at the risk of missing the point again, I would say ‘WHERE IS THE GODDAM PLANE?‘in this fairytale. The Somerset County Coroner (Shanksville) is on the record as saying he never saw one body or one drop of blood. Where are the goddam bodies in this propaganda exercise? I hate to miss the point but I would say that IS the point.

And since you think ‘Fox is right’, why did Fox journalists say this in a breaking news interview on 9/11?

On September 11 2001, a Fox TV journalist is interviewing another Fox TV journalist (Chris Kinicki of Fox Philadelphia) about the scene at Shanksville where United flight 93 has allegedly crashed. Kinicki has been to inspect the site. Given hindsight, it’s a fascinating encounter, put to air on 9/11 and then never broadcast again.

“Fox Journalist: Chris, I’ve seen the pictures. It looks as if there’s nothing there but a hole in the ground.

Chris Kinicki: Yes, basically that’s right. The only thing you could see from where we were was a big gouge in the earth and some broken trees.

Fox Journalist: Any large pieces of debris at all?

Chris Kinicki:  No, there was nothing that you could distinguish that a plane had crashed there.

Fox Journalist: Smoke? Fire?

Chris Kinicki : Nothing. It was absolutely quiet. It was actually very quiet. Nothing going on down there. No smoke, no fire. Just a couple of people walking around…walking around looking at the pieces.
Fox Journalist: How big would you say that hole was?

Chris Kinicki:...about 20 to 15 feet (sic) long and 10 feet wide.

Fox Journalist: What could you see on the ground…other than dirt and ash?

Chris Kinicki: You couldn’t see anything…dirt and ash and people walking around…”

In other words, don’t piss in my pocket and tell me it’s raining. The point being, if you believe the 9/11 fairytale you’re a fool.

Report this
IMax's avatar

By IMax, April 11, 2012 at 9:41 am Link to this comment

diamond,

Yes, I have much to be ashamed of.  You still, like events of Sept. 11, 2001, missed the point entirely.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, April 11, 2012 at 3:11 am Link to this comment

I’m glad there’s someone out there interested in ‘the truth’.

Report this

By diamond, April 10, 2012 at 11:45 pm Link to this comment

“You’re a “Truther”.

And you’re a liar. One of us needs to be ashamed and it’s not me.

Report this
IMax's avatar

By IMax, April 10, 2012 at 3:56 am Link to this comment

diamond,

Of course FOX/Sky News was not right in hacking cell phones.  You missed the point entirely.

You’re a “Truther”.

Report this

By diamond, April 9, 2012 at 9:14 pm Link to this comment

“FOX is right.”

Fox is not right, never has been right and never will be right unless you’re referring to their Fascist political affiliation.

Report this

By diamond, April 9, 2012 at 9:10 pm Link to this comment

“dia—- good to see someone with some understanding of Hobbes.”

Hobbes was no saint either but at least he put forward the idea that the source of the state’s authority was man not God. This had the effect of divorcing religion and all its ghastly works from political power as well as removing any legitimacy for the divine right of kings. Hobbes has been described as ‘a radical in the service of reaction’ so he’s not my favorite philosopher but he wasn’t completely useless the way Thomas Friedman, for example, is useless. At least he understood that the state was answerable to those it governed. I don’t think anyone’s broken the news to Friedman yet. On economic matters I prefer John Maynard Keynes to Hobbes or anyone else. Keynes always understood that conservative philosophy and economics while ‘dazzling in its mathematics (is) short on insight as to how human beings actually work’. 

(from ‘The Return of the Strong’, Robert Harvey).

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 9, 2012 at 5:53 pm Link to this comment

dia—- good to see someone with some understanding of Hobbes.

Report this

By diamond, April 9, 2012 at 2:23 pm Link to this comment

“If you read the entire Guardian article, he
says he’s not sure anyone’s guilty of any crimes since they all acted on advice of
legal council (which has not been legally contradicted).  So what’s the story?”

Nice try, but there’s just so much more to it than that rather simplistic interpretation of what has happened here. At stake is the entire ‘contract’ between those who govern and those who are governed. The right of a state to govern is not absolute: it is conditional on the state offering protection to those it governs - protections they would not have if the state did not exist. The rights of the individual are the bedrock on which every state builds its right to govern, unless it’s a dictatorship which means all bets are off.

Thomas Hobbes - ‘The reason why state authority was necessary was because in the state of nature the selfishness of men would compete so fiercely that it was in the self-interest of all that order was imposed.’


Hobbes was the ‘forerunner of those who argued that the state only existed to serve the people. For if it failed in its task of keeping order and protecting their interests and above all THEIR LIVES, it forfeited the right to exist.’

Thomas Locke - ‘...his theory was by implication as agnostic as that of Hobbes…Both government and society exist to preserve the individual’s rights and the indefeasibility of such rights is a limitation upon the authority of both.’

John Stuart Mill - argued ‘that all individuals possess absolute rights which they partially submitted to the community in which they lived, and the object of the community was the pursuit of the greatest happiness of the greatest number’.

But towards the end of the eighteenth century that changed and a new form of economic thought emerged which was a ‘throwback to the Dark Ages, it its advocacy of the interests of the new ‘strong’ confidant capitalists’. The new, 21st century lawlessness, which involves acts of treason and the overthrow of Magna Carta, the Geneva Conventions and the presumption of innocence is only the logical outcome of a philosophy which has as its primary purpose, ‘to justify and legitimize the new inequalities of wealth and domination by owner and manager over worker under private enterprise and rigorously to resist ‘wasteful’ regulation and intervention by the state’(from ‘The Return of the Strong’, Robert Harvey).

Once the primacy of the rights of the individual is removed, the horrors of Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo and the torture of people like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who has never had the luxury for one second of the presumption of innocence, even though what he is accused of is ludicrous, are inevitable. The people who did 9/11 broke the contract with those they govern and in so doing burned their bridges. Now they have no choice but to move forward burning more bridges as they go. The end result, if they are not confronted and held accountable, will be a state that has no legitimacy and deserves to be overthrown. It is already happening in the Middle East but there’s no reason why it will end there.

For some reason, people just don’t take to feudalism and will always resist it, sooner or later.

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 9, 2012 at 8:04 am Link to this comment

Marshall——“the question of its legality had already
been settled within the administration.”

——


it was settled by an outright refusal to follow the law and a design to have memos
written that ignored the law for purpose of giving legal cover for criminal actions.


NO ONE would regard Yoo’s memo as other than laughable incorrect.

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 9, 2012 at 6:44 am Link to this comment

priss——what you scared of ?

Report this
IMax's avatar

By IMax, April 9, 2012 at 5:45 am Link to this comment

I believe when any individual claims that the U.S. has tortured hundreds of people to the point of death it’s imperative to demand the most diligent of evidence in support of the claim.

Report this
IMax's avatar

By IMax, April 9, 2012 at 5:35 am Link to this comment

I apologies for my last post.  The post was intended for another thread.

Report this
IMax's avatar

By IMax, April 9, 2012 at 5:31 am Link to this comment

I’ve heard that SkyNews (subsidiary of FOXNews) has defended the practice of hacking cell phones as a legitimate journalistic tool to be used when it’s in the best interest of the public. 

Obviously this is illegal, however, SkyNews makes a solid, valid, point.  If it’s in the interest of the public at large hacking individual cell communications can and should be considered legitimate and, the content can and should be made public.

FOX is right.

Report this

By Marshall, April 9, 2012 at 12:41 am Link to this comment

Talk about a non-story here.  The opinion of the legality of water-boarding was
offered by an advisor, not a lawyer, and the question of its legality had already
been settled within the administration.  If you read the entire Guardian article, he
says he’s not sure anyone’s guilty of any crimes since they all acted on advice of
legal council (which has not been legally contradicted).  So what’s the story?

Report this

By Maani, April 8, 2012 at 10:30 pm Link to this comment

hetero:

The Gulf of Tonkin incident (or rather, non-incident) would have been a grotesque conspiracy, had not Daniel Ellsberg and others blown the whistle on it. Watergate would have been a “grotesque conspiracy” had not that security guard noticed the tape on a door.  Iran-Contra would have been a “grotesque conspiracy” had not investigative journalists done their jobs in exposing it.

Our history is rife with “grotesque conspiracies” that have been proven as such.  Why should JFK and 9/11 be any different?

Report this
prisnersdilema's avatar

By prisnersdilema, April 8, 2012 at 10:23 pm Link to this comment

once again please ignore all posts by Heterochromatic, and IMAX they are trolls.

Report this

By diamond, April 8, 2012 at 9:00 pm Link to this comment

“I can’t help it if you’ve some need to
believe in grotesque conspiracies.”

‘...a Global hawk hit the Pentagon.  The Pentagon has an anti-aircraft missile system, that would shoot down any civilian or foreign aircraft that came within its vicinity.  The reason why the Pentagon’s defense systems didn’t shoot down the plane that was coming at it automatically, was because it had a military transponder—something that no commercial jets have, therefore it was invisible to the Pentagon’s systems because it was broadcasting “Hi, I’m a friendly U.S. military aircraft.”

This is from “9/11 research”.

The global hawk is an unmanned aircraft, a military aircraft. There are only two choices as to how and why the anti-aircraft missiles didn’t fire and they are:

1. Someone disarmed them which means they had foreknowledge of the attack on the Pentagon.

or

2. The aircraft that attacked the Pentagon was, as stated above, a global hawk, an unmanned military aircraft, with a military transponder on board.

Whichever one you choose, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed could not have been in control of either option.

April Gallop worked inside the Pentagon on 9/11, as an administrative specialist (with a Top Secret with SCI clearance) with the U.S. Army. It was her first day back from maternity leave, after delivering her son Elisha, then two and a half months old.

April is a very brave woman. She and her son suffered tremendous injuries and trauma on 9/11, but they both made it out alive to tell their story.

Interviewer: Do you have any theory about how a Boeing 757 could have hit such a secure building without any anti-aircraft defenses being activated or any warning alarms sounded?

April Gallop: I have thought about this very question numerous times. And then I realized I needed to rephrase the question. The real question is what is the probability or likelihood that no anti-aircraft defense, warning alarms or additional security mechanism functioned on that particular day?

And then we need to think how likely is it that there was a glitch in all the security mechanisms, anti-aircraft defense and warning alarms?

(from George Washington’s blog)

‘Grotesque conspiracy’ is a perfect description of what went on that day. You should also remember what Thomas Hobbes said: “All punishments of innocent subjects are against the law of nature”.

Report this

By Cliff Carson, April 8, 2012 at 5:24 pm Link to this comment

When we speak of torture, I have a serious concern that we fail to speak of the really lethal torture, instead we seem to dwell on Water boarding.

There is something that bothers me in all the discussions I read from all kinds of sources concerning torture of Detainees .  There is seldom a mention of torture other than by sleep deprivation, water boarding, or humiliation.

None of these assaults on the human body cause death, and yet there are over 100 documented cases of detainees being tortured to death.  And these are just the documented, i. e.  Eye witnessed.

My guess is that there are many hundreds of undocumented detainees tortured to death (also there are over a hundred detainees who once were in the record as a detainee who have just disappeared with no explanation why and cannot now be accounted for).  And also this doesn’t count the “Ghost” detainees who were never recorded.
 
Since the humiliation, sleep deprivation, and water boarding are inhuman treatment, but not fatal, why don’t I see many writers questioning what happened to those people who were tortured to death?  By what means were they killed?  And if they were giving up valuable sought for information, why were they tortured to death?

One case I have written about several times, trying to get the message to caring people, is the case of Manadel Al Jamadi.  He was tortured to death at Abu Gahrib on November 4, 2003 during a night of “questioning” by Navy Seals and members of one of the Mercenary outfits, possibly CACI.  Witnesses say that Manadel was subjected to “Palestinian Hanging” an Inquisition era torture so named because the method was adopted by Israel to use on Palestinians.

The arms are secured at the wrists behind the back, then a rope is tied to the wrist bindings and the body is lifted off the floor with the arms tied behind the back.  This places great stress on the shoulder sockets and ribs.

Witnesses say that after being subjected to this procedure for a period of time Al Jamidi’s weight was released allowing the pressure to his shoulders and ribs to be ended.  Those same witnesses say that at that moment blood gushed out of Manadel Al Jamadi’s mouth like a torrent of water.  He was dead; speculation was that he had drowned in his own blood.

Those same witnesses state that they never heard him utter a word during this torture. Manadel Al Jamadi, a Ghost detainee, was not the only detainee to be tortured to death at Abu Gahrib that November night by the same “Interrogators”.

Of the recorded documented deaths from torture, none have died from humiliation, sleep deprivation, or water boarding, but just as was Jamadi’s fate, they died from something lethal, cruel and inhuman; torture being applied to their body until they were no longer alive.

I know of no Officer that has been found guilty of torturing a detainee to death.

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 8, 2012 at 4:56 pm Link to this comment

Maani——- I can’t help it if you’ve some need to
believe in grotesque conspiracies.  the odds on the
success of such succeeding in staying uncovered for a
decade are far harder to ken than is what we’re
expected to believe happened.

peace of mind, pardner.

Report this
blogdog's avatar

By blogdog, April 8, 2012 at 4:02 pm Link to this comment

9/11 - FAA/NORAD
Full Audio Transcript

http://www.rutgerslawreview.com/2011/full-audio-transcript/

[...]

Herndon Center: Ah, do we wanna think about, ah, scrambling aircraft?

FAA Headquarters: Ah, (sighs) oh God, I don’t know.

Herndon Center: Uh, that’s a decision someone is gonna have to make probably
in the next 10 minutes.

FAA Headquarters: Uh, you know everybody just left the room.

[...]

Rutgers Law Review
Rutgers School of Law - Newark
Center for Law and Justice
123 Washington St.
Newark, NJ 07102

Report this

By Maani, April 8, 2012 at 2:48 pm Link to this comment

hetero:

Your response to Diamond is weak.  What Diamond notes about 9/11 (re the Air Force) is but one of a myriad of factors over which OBL/KSM/Al Qaeda had zero control.  It is like the JFK conspiracy: it could not have been Oswald (or even the mafia, the Cubans, or anyone other than the U.S. gov’t./military) because none of them could have (i) changed the motorcade route the day before the motorcade, (ii) arranged for the morning edition of the Dallas papers NOT to have that motorcade change, and (iii) arranged for the U.S. military to “stand down” re the motorcade.

Similarly, OBL/KSM could not have (i) arranged for the USAF snafus (assuming they WERE snafus), (ii) arranged for the U.S. military to be engaging in not one, not two, but three separate air-based “wargames” that day, including one that (coincidentally?) had to do with hijacked commercial airliners, and (iii) arranged for the collapse of WTC7.

Peace.

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 8, 2012 at 2:00 pm Link to this comment

dia—- the stuff about 9/11 had to be a US government action because it took
more than half an hour to get combat planes aloft is not really very intelligent or
demonstrative of any experience of the world.

Report this

By diamond, April 8, 2012 at 1:42 pm Link to this comment

“And nothing you write will detract from the fact that you had no idea before yesterday that Khalid Mohammad himself states that he had been water-boarded only five times -  as opposed to one-hundred and eighty-three times.”

Boring, Imax. Very boring. So according to your philosophy we should all just sit back and let you say a wall is not a wall, a crime is not a crime or any other thing that comes into your head. Why should others do that? When you’re wrong you’re wrong and you should be happy to be corrected, IF you’re so attached to freedom of speech and the truth as you try to pretend you are.

But here’s some truth you won’t like:

How did Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, while he was planning 9/11 from A-Z, arrange for the US Air Force to stay on the ground? Not one plane went up until they couldn’t prevent the attacks.

Incredibly, only after the second Tower was hit at 9.03 a.m. were pilots ordered to Manhattan for ‘combat air patrol’. They then did this patrol for the next four hours.

It took 38 minutes from the time Flight 11 was hijacked for two F-15s from the 102nd Fighter Wing of Otis National Guard Base in Falmouth, Massachusetts to get airborne. According to NORAD’s own timeline, at the time that the South Tower was hit these planes were still 71 miles away. They should have reached the WTC with time to spare but calculations have put their actual speeds at an average 24% of the top speeds they were capable of. Why would pilots fly at these ridiculous speeds when their country was allegedly under attack by crazed Islamic extremists? NORAD has never been able to give a reasonable answer to this.  The general tenor of NORAD’s response is exemplified by the fact that at around 9.03 am the Secret Service called Andrews Air Force Base (11 miles southeast of the Pentagon) and told them to get F-16s armed and ready for takeoff. According to 911 Research, these F-16s were still having missiles loaded when the Pentagon was hit over half an hour later.

This might all perhaps be moot, in any case, if it’s considered that the Pentagon is apparently surrounded by several anti-aircraft missile batteries programmed to shoot down any plane that invades Pentagon airspace unless it’s carrying a military transponder and the U.S. military has the best radar in the world. Understandably it’s difficult for some people to accept that a suspicious aircraft could fly for upwards of 40 minutes towards the Pentagon and not be shot down or intercepted. Why didn’t the missiles fire? Like to take a stab at that, Imax?  In the decade leading up to 9/11 there were 1,000 interceptions of suspicious aircraft in American airspace by NORAD: on 9/11 there were none. Or none that they admit to. Thomas H. Keans, former New Jersey Republican governor who led the 9/11 Commission, got nowhere, it seems, in his questioning about NORAD and why it had failed to respond, but he still smelled a rat: ‘We don’t know to this day why NORAD told us what they told us. It was just so far from the truth…It’s one of those loose ends that never got tied.’

The truth is that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed could not possibly have planned or executed any of this. Only people at the top of the government and the military could have. And when you have a case and genuine EVIDENCE you don’t torture someone to get a ‘confession’ so your bleating about how much he was tortured or how often makes me yawn.

Report this

By Cliff Carson, April 8, 2012 at 11:54 am Link to this comment

blogdog, April 8 at 9:09 am

“Global Finance Oligarchy”

Your mention of this International Financial Cabal reminded me that the Cabal has a Central Bank System in all but seven Countries of the World.  Well actually Libya was one of the seven (I have stated that IMO was the core basis behind the invasion of Libya) Qaddafi was making great progress in forming the United states of Africa which would have its own currency and would not allow the Central Banking System into the new African Union.  Here is a statement from a knowledgeable figure concerning the Global Finance Oligarchy: 

Dr. Carroll Quigley was Professor of History at Georgetown University, where he was President Bill Clinton’s mentor. He was also an insider, groomed by the powerful clique he called “the international bankers.”  Dr. Quigley wrote of this international banking network:

“The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole.  This system was to be controlled in a feudalistic fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences.  The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central banks which were themselves private corporations.”

From this group is the origin of most wars.  They care not how much killing or torture occurs as long as the bottom line profit moves in the right direction.

Report this
mrfreeze's avatar

By mrfreeze, April 8, 2012 at 10:49 am Link to this comment

Let’s cut to the chase shall we?

1) The “torture” our government engaged in resulted in virtually no tangible, positive results…...Unless someone has seen any reports to prove otherwise, then I’ll simply assume we engaged in this activity “because it was fun.”

2) The fact that our war efforts over the last decade have resulted in no tangible, positive results illustrates how good the Bush Administration was at propagandizing and how our national paranoia helped justify torture…something we should be ashamed of.

3)Surrounding this whole issue of torture, I’ve noticed a sort of “wink-wink” atmosphere, an “it’s alright”  philosophy. I have a sense that more Americans believe in torture than we would like to admit. I believe much of our culture is based on vengeance and “wild-west justice.” I don’t know if it’s learned from watching too many cowboy or spy fantasies, or that our cultural DNA is laced with paranoia, but IMO there are a lot of Americans out there who need to readjust (or find) their moral compass.

Report this
blogdog's avatar

By blogdog, April 8, 2012 at 10:09 am Link to this comment

RE: ...that KSM made confessions that are not true while being water boarded
is the epitome of this whole episode.

almost…  KSM is a ‘project’ - a legendary figure, (like OBL)  - one in a lengthy cast
of characters driving the narrative in the ongoing Global War OF Terror theatre,
essential to hegemonic designs of the Global Finance Oligarchy

the most telling aspect is how Al Qaeda is ‘hunted down’ as arch terrorists in Af-
Pak, Somalia and Yemen, whilst they are collaborated with as ‘freedom fighters’ in
the Balkans, Maghreb and Levant - the CIA’s Arab Foreign Legion

Report this
IMax's avatar

By IMax, April 8, 2012 at 7:16 am Link to this comment

prisnersdilema,

Free people who believe all are deserving of a free and open sharing of beliefs never, I repeat, never suggest that all points of view are not welcomed.

Fair-minded people who disagree with a point of view sit back respectfully and quietly and allow all to speak their mind.

Report this
IMax's avatar

By IMax, April 8, 2012 at 7:07 am Link to this comment

Scooter Carson,

Nothing you write will detract from a very successful endeavor to get more people, you in particular, to study more closely that which has been so widely reported (your own role in this endeavor has been invaluable).  And nothing you write will detract from the fact that you had no idea before yesterday that Khalid Mohammad himself states that he had been water-boarded only five times -  as opposed to one-hundred and eighty-three times.

Your own inability or lack of desire to look deeper than what you had been told does not, in and of itself, make you a moron.  It’s your subsequent posts attempting to divert from the fact that you have been clueless over the last decade to some very important aspects of these far-reaching issues.

Let us again look again at the incredibly obvious - a. Khalid Mohammad has said he was water-boarded five times and b. as it turns out you’re a moron for continuing to argue that he was water-boarded 183 times because you learned the latter from, your “credible source”, the New York Times.

There are two things which remain to be seen.  Will you now continue to spread the notion that KSM had been water-boarded 183 times and, will you be offering everyone here an apology for harking an idea which you had little real knowledge of before I began bringing these details to your attention?

I’ll accept your apology if it is sincere.

Report this

By Cliff Carson, April 8, 2012 at 6:17 am Link to this comment

blogdog, April 7 at 7:37 pm

Thank you for that link Blogdog.  The fact that the powers that be admit that KSM made confessions that are not true while being water boarded is the epitome of this whole episode.

In his confession he said he wasn’t water boarded period.

Which is a good place to segway to discuss why I say that IMAX is so predicable.  This is not ny first head butting session with IMAX.

IMAX’s MOD is to call for proof (Links) which she always claims is not verifiable or that the Link poster lied about what is in the Link knowing that almost none of the people on the thread will go see what is actually in the link.  This is the way she operates.

For example in this dust up, IMax, April 7 at 6:54 am, stated the following:  “Nowhere in these documents does it state that Khalid Sheik Mohammad was water-boarded 183 times.  Khalid Mohammad himself claims Cliff is lying.  I assume Khalid knows better.  He was actually in the room at those times.”

It is true that KSM in his confession stated he wasn’t water boarded, on the other hand the Government admits he was, and I posted where to find the language of 183 episodes in the 2005 memo.  And in the paragraph above, if she actually went to page 37 at the bottom of the page she would see those exact words in this 40 page part of the report.

So IMAX either lied about going and reading the report or she lied about whether or not that statement was in there.

Once again this is standard procedure for IMAX and others others of her ilk on just about any site in existence.  It is a common practice of Trolls.

I apologize that I participated in this drug out thread, I just wanted to expose good old IMAX for what she is.

I said I was through with Hectrocromatic some time ago and have not responded to a Hetercromatic comment since.  I now am through with IMAX.

For anyone in doubt about whether the 2005 Memo says that KSM was water boarded 183 times just go to the link I provided (Cliff Carson, April 7 at 10:22 am), click on that link and wait for the Part 2 of the report to download, scroll to the bottom of Page 37 go up about 5 lines and you will find the exact words that IMAX says is not in the report.  Once you have done that scroll on to page 40 and you will find where Bradbury signed the report.

Report this
prisnersdilema's avatar

By prisnersdilema, April 8, 2012 at 4:25 am Link to this comment

Please ignore posts by IMAX and Heterochromatic, don’t get sucked into responding to
them they are trolls.

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 7, 2012 at 9:18 pm Link to this comment

yes, gerard, the Bush admin KNEW that it’s a felony to have ANYONE in the employ
of the US government waterboard ANY prisoner at ANY time ...as they tried to get
ANY half-assed official opinion from a govt lawyer to find some sorta loophole
and kept the practice from happening on US soil in hope of keeping it quiet and
evading federal jurisdiction in soem slight way.


when they ordered iraqi prisoners tortured for info, they always tried to see that in
was not even CIA regulars doing the dirty work, and employed “contract
employees”.


it all stank and the stench will be lingering a long time.

Report this
blogdog's avatar

By blogdog, April 7, 2012 at 8:37 pm Link to this comment

RE: ...the fury fellow who claims he murdered over three-thousand
people…
also claims ...that he was responsible for “planning, training,
surveying, and financing” a second wave of attacks against various skyscrapers
including the Plaza Bank in Washington state. The problem is that KSM was
detained in 2003 and the Plaza Bank was founded in 2006.

http://prisonplanet.com/articles/march2007/160307afterarrest.htm

Report this

By gerard, April 7, 2012 at 8:30 pm Link to this comment

hetero:  Quoting you “...waterboarding is a
felony when done under color of law…”  Under color of law?  Wasn’t that what the “extraordinary” was supposed to be all about?  And the “unlawful” combatants?

Report this
IMax's avatar

By IMax, April 7, 2012 at 7:01 pm Link to this comment

Tangible, verifiable, and searchable documentation which is achievable regardless of the media.  Let everyone see for themselves, first hand, what everyone is thinking and talking about. 

Of course it mattered that millions of people believed that KSM was actually water-boarded 183 times.  There are thousands of comments on this very site attesting to the importance of the issue.  There have been several entire articles reprinted on this site covering this very issue.  The number 183 alone has molded a pivotal perception of a defining characteristic of the U.S. for millions of people around the world.  It’s literally inarguable.

Of course it’s equally important to understand that the actual number is closer to five.  Imposter or not the fury fellow who claims he murdered over three-thousand people openly says it was five.  My simply bringing this to people’s attention has REALLY pissed some others off.

-

Gerard,

One time was one too many.  That is not what this is about.  I believe you know this.  You’ve written on the implications of the type of government and what types of people would “water-board” another person 183 times. - I can’t quite get a grip on you.  You’re a constant dichotomy.

-

Scooter Carson,

I’ve decided.  The man we’re both discussing here says he was water-boarded five times.  I’ve decided you’re a moron.

Report this

By Maani, April 7, 2012 at 3:07 pm Link to this comment

I am only minimally surprised that IMax has been able to hijack this entire thread and turn it into a debate about how many times KSM was waterboarded.  It has been established that KSM was taken out of his cell at least three times to be waterboarded, and that during those three (or possibly more) instances water was poured over his clothed mouth ~183 times.  It is time that everyone ignore IMax on this specific point.

That said, Diamond, I am surprised you don’t go further in your comments about Zelikow vis-a-vis the 9/11 Commission whitewash.  As Executive Director of the Commission, Zelikow was supposedly “neutral.”  Yet has not only wrote a book with Condoleezza Rice, but also headed up the Bush-Cheney transition team.  He was also formerly a member of the Aspen Strategy Group, perhaps the most notorious neocon think tank ever, with Cheney, Rice, Perle, Wolfowitz and others.  Neutral?  I think not.  Yet Zelikow was the one who (i) chose which lines of inquiry to follow, and (ii) chose the people to depose - all with the approval of the Commissioners, of course, but he was the “point man”; in fact, even some Commissioners referred to it as the Zelikow Report.

And now we are to believe that this die-hard neocon warned that torture was illegal?  Please.  I would as quickly believe that GWB has an IQ above 130. LOL.

Report this

By Cliff Carson, April 7, 2012 at 2:13 pm Link to this comment

I agree with you gerard, this having to prove something to IMAX and Hetero would not be worthy of the time except these two try to put themselves off as those that know that nobody but them know the truth.  They stick their foot in their mouth by demanding proof of statements and when it is laid before them they don’t check it out.  I am guilty of lying to IMAX because I knew that if I said I hadn’t read the CIA Memo she would jump on it like a tumble bug on feces.  IMAX is so predictable.

Links given by the two are almost nonexistent and yet they will argue until their red faces embarrass them, because when they realize they are wrong, that’s when they turn to potty mouthing and name calling.

This all started by:

By IMax, April 6 at 6:42 am
“For various reasons I am opposed to water-boarding.  At the same time I have never seen a credible report documenting KSM being “water-boarded” 183 times.  Moreover, each time I ask those who make the claim to provide credible evidence of the claim, they have, without exception, come up wanting.”

IMax, April 6 at 10:20 am
“Can you display any credible evidence that Khalid Mohammad was subjecting to water-boarding nearly two-hundred times?”

I knew beyond doubt that IMAX would react this way.  So I just went with the flow.  Now IMAX can’t admit that the memo says what I said it said because she didn’t go read it and I do believe that Hectro did go read it and found out IMAX was wrong and then posted the Red Cross report to help IMAX get out of a situation.

The problem with all that is most politicians when they know they have stepped in it can find a covey of writers to “explain” what they said.

The Report is signed by the author who wrote it to help our Fearless Leaders - Bush and Cheney at the time - find some way to make torture legal and present a case for how wonderful it is to be able to get good information.

Thank you gerard for placing a focus light where it should be:  On the despicable practice of torture.  I had mentioned “Taxi to the Dark side”, I believe in that documentary one torture practice employed by the U S good guys was to torture the detainees children and make them watch.  And yes IMAX I will discuss it with you but only after you tell me you have watched the documentary.  I will give you a test before we begin the discussion.

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 7, 2012 at 2:12 pm Link to this comment

gerard——it’‘s not at all hard to understand that
this was torture….. Federal law as well as the UCMJ
is clear on the point.


That was why the Bush admin had John Yoo issue a
“covering” opinion denying that it was prohibited.
(The opinion of course would have not gotten a
passing grade if it was submitted by a law school
student.)


Anyone who requires proof that waterboarding is a
felony when done under color of law should search
the web for “Humpy Parker” formerly as Texas sheriff
and afterward a resident of the federal prison
system.

Report this
blogdog's avatar

By blogdog, April 7, 2012 at 2:09 pm Link to this comment

In this country we USED TO try people who were accused BEFORE they were
imprisoned and tortured.
- except for injuns,  niggas, nips, flips & spics

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 7, 2012 at 2:07 pm Link to this comment

hey, Carson…..you’re an idiot…. I linked to
Wheeler days before you did and would tell you that
she wrote reams on this syuff and nailed it down with
as much precision as was possible.


stop your inanity….. I’m not at all involved with
supporting IMax’s rather arch little ploy on this
thread.

I doubt that you even grasp what she’s getting out…
but I resent that you’ve not read or understood my
comments and yet have the lack of grace and wit to
obnoxiously mischaracterize them.

read through the thread and then offer the apology
that I will be rather happy to accept.

Report this

By gerard, April 7, 2012 at 1:03 pm Link to this comment

How come it’s so hard to make the simple point that torture is torture is torture? Is that because it isn’t happening to you?  Or your brother?
  Miles of comment spent trying to establish whether it was 1 time or 180 times or 200—and exactly how near drowning the victim was, is, would have been, if…\
  Sick, sicker, sickest.  People who torture—even once—are torturers no matter how many times or people or places, or for how long.  Torturing another human being is wrong, was wrong in the past and will be wrong in the future, no matter what the purpose, since almost any purpose can be justified by one who wants to justify it. And no matter whehter the justification was for the U.S., for China, for Afghanistan or the South Pole. Blatant forms of it have been outlawed in most “civilized” countries for years.  It is a mark of barbarism.
  In this country we USED TO try people who were accused BEFORE they were imprisoned and tortured.
Happy Easter!

Report this
IMax's avatar

By IMax, April 7, 2012 at 12:30 pm Link to this comment

LMAO…. I think we should take to calling Cliff - ‘Scooter’.  His ability to “cherry pick” one line from hundreds is extremely fine-tuned.  I do appreciate the focus on these documents and, in particular, Mr. Bradbury, however.  I hope to have more people read these documents and not simply allow others to outline small sections which they may find useful.

I’m trying to locate a CSPAN program wherein Mr. Bradbury explains his, now infamous, wording being used by critics of the U.S..  It’s fascinating that Scooter would highlight Mr. Bradbury, in light of all Bradbury has opined. For example:

“The method was not like the ‘water torture’ used during the Spanish Inquisition and by autocratic governments into the 20th century, but was subject to strict time limits, safeguards, restrictions.  The only thing in common is, I think, the use of water.”

Mr. Bradbury goes on to explain how the CIA’s use of water-boarding should not legally be construed as torture.

“Something can be quite distressing, uncomfortable, even frightening, but if it doesn’t involve severe physical pain, and it doesn’t last very long, it may not constitute severe physical suffering. That would be the analysis.”

Come to think of it, perhaps our Mr. Carson truly is Scooter Libby

Report this

By Cliff Carson, April 7, 2012 at 11:22 am Link to this comment

To IMAX and interested readers on this thread

If you would go to the provided link below,  and I invite all others on this thread to do so, you will find an Article that links the May 30 memo in two parts, click on part 2.

Part 2 of the May 30 Memo referenced by me and those I referenced and more importantly contains the hand written signature of Steven G. Bradbury, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General .

Part 2 Page 37 contains the statement by Bradbury that KSM was water boarded 183 times, Page 40 is the last page of the memo and contains Bradbury’s Signature.

I have extracted the statement pictorially but don’t know if I can place that in a Truthdig comment ( If Truthdig tells me I can, I will).  The main thing is that you readers can shut up the banality of IMAX and Hectrochromatic once and for all,  by going there or the link and reporting what you find, in that report on the 5.25 MB report page 37 near the bottom of the page.  You should find :

“1-2.  The CIA used the waterboard “at least 83 times during August 2002” in the interrogation of Zubaydah, IG Report al 90, and 183 times during March 2003 in the interrogation of KSM, see id at 91.”

Tell the world if that is not exactly what you read.  Look on page 40 and note whether Bradbury signed the report or not.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/pdf/OLCmemo_May30_Part2.pdf

Report this
blogdog's avatar

By blogdog, April 7, 2012 at 8:47 am Link to this comment

KSM: INTERNATIONAL MAN OF MYSTERY
http://www.pnar.org/ksm.htm

The mysterious Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM) has once again made headlines
after his confession to about 30 different terror plots was revealed at a recent
secret hearing at Gitmo. The man, who is a dead ringer for porn star Ron
Jeremy, claims to be the mastermind of so many well-publicized plots that Kurt
Nimmo has dubbed KSM the Forrest Gump of manufactured terrorism. But, it is
not only Nimmo who finds KSM’s superman-like terror activity to be
unbelievable.

Time Magazine has taken a skeptical look at the KSM confession and Robert
Baer, a former CIA field officer assigned to the Middle East, also finds the
confession less than compelling. “Until we hear more, the mystery of who KSM
is and what he was responsible for is still a mystery,” writes Baer.

One Associated Press article proclaims: 9/11 and Pearl beheading not doubted,
but earlier plots questionable. Perhaps AP doesn’t doubt KSM’s claim that he
beheaded Daniel Pearl, but according to an ABC News report, Pearl’s family
doubts it. KSM’s statement that “I was responsible for the 9/11 Operation, from
A to Z” contained in his confession is too broad to be factual.

[...]

We have been told for 14 years that Ramzi Yousef, KSM’s nephew, was the
mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center attack. Now we are told that KSM
has confessed to being responsible for this attack. Yet, Senators Levin and
Graham are convinced KSM is telling the truth - this time. Perhaps if the Warren
Commission documents are ever released, we will find out that KSM was Lee
Harvey Oswald’s cousin and that he was responsible for the assassination of
JFK.

KSM is indeed an international man of mystery. Robert Fisk has reported that
KSM was once an ISI asset. To avoid being called a coincidence theorist, I won’t
even bother to go into the links between the ISI (Pakistan’s intelligence agency)
and the Taliban or the CIA. Paul Thompson has also documented a number of
bizarre and confusing reports about KSM.

The mystery of who KSM is and what he was responsible for will remain a
mystery. Like all information about the events surrounding 9/11 and the
perpetual war on terror, the KSM story is classified top secret. It as is if the
anonymous government officials who make one erroneous statement after
another to the press are teasing the public. After all is said and done regarding
the KSM confession story, it may just be that the public has been made the
victim of more propaganda designed to prove that torture works, boost the
President’s popularity ratings, and/or divert attention from a growing number
of scandals and issues of real importance.


This article contributed by Tom Blanton of Richmond, Virginia.

Report this
IMax's avatar

By IMax, April 7, 2012 at 8:17 am Link to this comment

Will I now admit to being wrong?  Absolutely not.  I’m betting there are people present on this thread who know how read.

Good grief.

Report this

By Cliff Carson, April 7, 2012 at 7:55 am Link to this comment

Just for you Imax

The second link is where you can go to find the redacted memo verifying what I have said, the first link will take you to a comment by a person just like you or me who has read the redacted memo.  This poster tells where the statement is located so you find it easy and in this post is also a link to the redacted memo.  Go read it for yourself.

Will you now admit you are wrong?

And I do accept your apology.

http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/04/18/khalid-sheikh-mohammed-was-waterboarded-183-times-in-one-month/

http://www.aclu.org/accountability/olc.html

Report this
IMax's avatar

By IMax, April 7, 2012 at 7:54 am Link to this comment

Cliff - “Well actually I have read the supposedly redacted 2005 memo”

-

Oh come now.  You’ve never read these documents but, 30 minutes later you’ve suddenly read them?  You see now why you and I have never had a lengthy discussion of any kind.  You pull completely stupid stunts like this.  You’re dishonest to your core, Mr. Carson.  You clearly have not read these documents.

I invite everyone to read the documents being discussed here.  Nowhere in these documents does it state that Khalid Sheik Mohammad was water-boarded 183 times.  Khalid Mohammad himself claims Cliff is lying.  I assume Khalid knows better.  He was actually in the room at those times.

-

Good grief, Cliff.  Your tactics are just so unnecessary.

Report this
IMax's avatar

By IMax, April 7, 2012 at 7:41 am Link to this comment

Cliff
Re: heterochromatic

You see, Cliff?  It can be done.

Hetero is so much brighter than you come off.  Hetero can read.  He understands the fundamentals of “source material”.  He knows how to use the internet for the purpose of gaining an understanding of a given subject.  He actually reads the materials others report on.

O.K..  I’m over acting like you.

Report this

By Cliff Carson, April 7, 2012 at 7:29 am Link to this comment

Well actually I have read the supposedly redacted 2005 memo ( a tome of 4.66 MB of text with some redacted illustrations)so I decided to copy an extract from the Bradbury memo, but cannot copy (there seems to be a protection of sorts on those words) the statement where it actually does state that KSM was water boarded 183 times - so I told IMAX that I hadn’t read it ( because I had no way of proving it is a redacted copy of the original). 

The fact is that if you want to read it for yourself, get a cup of coffee, and go to it.  The statement is located toward the end of the Memo (I would say the last 10%).

Basically the memo is a discussion of how torture can be claimed to be legal.  It does plainly state that he was water boarded 183 times IMAX, but your proof requirement means that it is proven only if you say so, because it must overcome your irrational self.  I doubt your reading this memo will convince you, your mind is already made up.

The most classic ( to me ) is that a statement of the memo claims that it would be illegal if the person had previously been found guilty, but not if he had not been convicted - go figure.

Report this
IMax's avatar

By IMax, April 7, 2012 at 7:26 am Link to this comment

Cliff, - “I have not read the CIA Memo and neither have you.”

-

I understood some time ago that you had never read the CIA memo or the IG report.  Your statement above is the sole reason any discussion we have usually goes no more than three replies deep.  You end our discussions by throwing out statements you cannot possibly begin to justify.

Everything you need in order to follow-up on my previous post is there in the post itself.  Not only can I not do the required follow-up for you, I absolutely refuse to help you in any way.  Bottom line: You give me no reason to extend myself to you.

According to Khalid Mohammad he was water-boarded five times.  According to the IRC Khalid was water-boarded five times.  According to the CIA memo and the IG report, which you lean on (granted unwittingly), the man was water-boarded five times.  If you have any evidence to the contrary just simply offer it up for evaluation.

-

Now I’ll be petty as hell for a minute and place myself in your shoes and say, - ‘Now, Cliff Carson, from this day forward you can never again offer the completely unsubstantiated claim that anyone, that you are aware of, has ever been water-boarded 183 times.’

BTW:  You do not need to be an azz to make a point.  You certainly don’t need to be an azz on every thread.  Good grief!

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 7, 2012 at 7:05 am Link to this comment

here’s the International red Cross report…...

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/042809_redcross.pdf

se pg 10-11.


Imax is understanding that the number of occasions that he was strapped to a
board to be the determinant rather than the times when he was made to
breathe water instead of air.
————-


The number is a vast inflation, according to information from a U.S. official and
the testimony of the terrorists themselves.

A U.S. official with knowledge of the interrogation program told FOX News that
the much-cited figure represents the number of times water was poured onto
Mohammed’s face—not the number of times the CIA applied the simulated-
drowning technique on the terror suspect.  According to a 2007 Red Cross
report, he was subjected a total of “five sessions of ill-treatment.” 
“The water was poured 183 times—there were 183 pours,” the official
explained, adding that “each pour was a matter of seconds.”


http://tinyurl.com/d3e8ps


——

to which I would reply that it was “only” a few torture sessions and that KSM
was made to suffer repeatedly during these sessions.

Report this

By Cliff Carson, April 7, 2012 at 6:22 am Link to this comment

IMax, April 6 at 9:42 pm

“I can only prove that Khalid Sheik Mohammad was water-boarded five times.  Five times too many.  But five times in total.”

IMAX

Did I miss it?  Where is your proof?  The only thing I see in your post is that you don’t believe the NY Times post.

I have not read the CIA Memo and neither have you.  But your insistence that you can prove 5 times demands that you show that proof.  Now would be a good time.

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 7, 2012 at 6:21 am Link to this comment

dog—- KSM WASN’T killed in 2002.  Shahzad, the author to which you’ve linked, 
repudiated that story….as I’ve shown in the other thread where you posted the
same misinformation.

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 7, 2012 at 6:17 am Link to this comment

IMax——-perhaps you have a different understanding of the term.  I don’t
suggest that he was taken from cell and strapped into position 183 times in 31
days.


It was 183 times that he was not allowed to breathe.

Report this
blogdog's avatar

By blogdog, April 6, 2012 at 11:26 pm Link to this comment

since KSM died in 2002 -
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/DJ30Df01.html - it begs the
question: why the torture, confessions, trial?

clearly, the Global War OF Terror needs this theatre - needs it like it did the
killing of OBL, for which no DNA evidence has ever been presented for
objective, 3rd-party confirmation

massive duping of the entire free world is essential to keeping the psy-op
rolling - in the 3rd world, they know better - do not buy the globalists’ smoke and mirrors
... e.g.

Osama Raid A Fake
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWcDDSg9O7c&feature=related

Eyewitness To Bin Laden’s Death Raid Says “To Be Honest Its Not
True”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmlqiKtkhzk

Osama Bin Laden Dead Since 2001 (Benazir Bhutto Says Osama Bin Laden
Dead In 2007)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZiUjhsEAK4&feature=related

Report this
IMax's avatar

By IMax, April 6, 2012 at 10:42 pm Link to this comment

Thank you Cliff.  I’m really looking for something credible.  Not another regurgitation of the same information.  Information which, interestingly enough, I have never been able to substantiate.

Why am I asking for something concrete and credible?

Khalid Mohammed claims he was never water-boarding anywhere near that many times.  The International Red Cross reports he was not water-boarded that many times.  As far as I am aware no official report exists which claims the man was water-boarded anywhere near 183 times. - I know what you’re all thinking.  This new information cannot be even remotely possible. 

So here it is.  There are two documents which are always referred to in every news account regarding KSM being water-boarded 183 times.  But when one reads these two documents what is found are the in-depth details on how Khalid was water-boarded (ready for this?) a total of Five Times.  Yes five times in, I believe, a three month period.  Which is precisely what Khalid Sheik Mohammad told the IRC.  FIVE water-boardings total.  Abu Zubaydah and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri were water-boarded three times each over the course of a couple of months.  Not 88.

As far as I know nearly no one read the two documents we have all heard about.  And on such a monumental issue people are always shocked to learn it never happened the way millions of people have imagined.  It’s extraordinary.

-

You may have discussed this issue here in the past, Cliff.  But not with me.  You and I have never discussed this at any length.  I’m hoping everyone here checks my facts by reading the documents we’ve all heard contain evidence of 183 water-boardings.  There is a great deal of information in those documents.

I can only prove that Khalid Sheik Mohammad was water-boarded five times.  Five times too many.  But five times in total.

Report this

By Cliff Carson, April 6, 2012 at 5:22 pm Link to this comment

Here you go IMAX

The source is a CIA Memo, the report is from the N Y Times.

Now you can no longer say that you haven’t seen a credible source for 183 water boarding events on one person, the Sheik.  In my and your past we have argued several times about torturing, most specifically the torturing to death of detainees.  I have written quite a few published articles concerning torture.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/20/world/20detain.html

Report this

By diamond, April 6, 2012 at 4:45 pm Link to this comment

“The belief that KSM was subjected to the technique nearly 200 times, used as a major indictment against the U.S. (and its case against the defendant), is near 100%.  How and why is that even possible?”

Because it happened, that’s why. And not only to KSM. Moazzem Begg, for example, who was held without charge or trial for two years and then released due to pressure from the British government saw people die because of what had been done to them.

“After he was taken from his house in Pakistan, Begg said, the men took him to another house in Pakistan. It was large and opulent with chandeliers and fancy tiled flooring. There he was interrogated for months.

“I was naïve about it. I thought they would let me go if I just explained to them that this was wrong,” he said. “I am not as naïve anymore. That is one thing that has changed about me.”

Begg said he was sent to Bagram Air Force Base in Kandahar, Afghanistan, where he witnessed the deaths of other detainees, which he believes resulted from their mistreatment by guards and interrogators.

He said he is still haunted by the sounds of a woman screaming near his cell at Bagram. He was convinced at the time that it was his wife.

Begg was picked up in Pakistan in 2001, accused of aiding the Taliban and held as an enemy combatant.

He said he was working in Afghanistan in the late 1990s and living there in 2001 to establish a school for girls. He and his pregnant wife and two children—all living in Afghanistan doing aid work—had relocated to Pakistan for safety during the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, he said. The couple had planned to spend their lives doing aid work around the world.”

When the rule of law is overturned innocent people are arrested and tortured (that, in fact, is why both Magna Carta and the Geneva Conventions were put in place) and that is what you should be concerned about - but are not. Apparently you find it much more threatening that 100% of people believe KSM was waterboarded almost 200 times: because he was.

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 6, 2012 at 4:28 pm Link to this comment

Rice’ office did not determine the law for the admin. it offered an opinion. it’s not
slam dunk proof of guilty knowledge.


http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/04/secret-torture-memo/


it’s well worth reading, but the admin was still hiding behind the opinions coming
out of the Department of Justice.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, April 6, 2012 at 4:17 pm Link to this comment

If Condolezza Rice’s office issued a memo indicating that the torture being conducted at Gitmo was illegal and it continued then heads should roll and they know who they are.

Why hasn’t anyone been prosecuted?

It takes a special person to purposefully inflict physical pain upon another human being for money at the direction of others.

The lowest form of humanity.

Report this
IMax's avatar

By IMax, April 6, 2012 at 11:20 am Link to this comment

gerard,

Let me ask you this.  If you sincerely find no difference in water-boarding Khalid Mohammad 1 or 100 times, why then have you never spoken this way before now?  Why only after I challenge people’s perceptions do you find the distinction so objectionable?

Why have you never spoken this way after thousands of individual comments citing the idea that to subject Mr. Mohammad to the technique nearly 200 times is, in and of itself, an illustrative condemnation of the evil that pervades America?

Why is this the first time, after years of seeing people use the 183 figure to make several very specific and distinct arguments, we see you speaking out so passionately on how the number of times the technique may have been used is not at all the issue?

I am opposed to water-boarding even one time.  But my personal feelings on the matter is not the point.  I can solemnly swear that my convictions are consistent.  And that, my friend, is why I am challenging the misconception that is so prevalent amongst billions of people.

I also ask you this and hope for an answer.  Can you display any credible evidence that Khalid Mohammad was subjecting to water-boarding nearly two-hundred times?

Report this

Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 >

 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.