Call it "Enhanced Hydration" - it saves lives.

I'd prefer to call it "routine treatment for captured terrorists."

how about ONE word: "Survival"

it's THEM or US...I choose US!

But if the deniers ignore the facts and repeat the lie that enhanced interrogation doesn't work. It will be "perceived" to be true. To them, perception is reality and therefore it is the truth not realizing that it is only perceived truth. Actual reality means little to them since many don't have to deal with it.

tor·ture
   /ˈtɔrtʃər/ Show Spelled [tawr-cher] Show IPA noun, verb,-tured, -tur·ing.
-noun
1.
the act of inflicting excruciating pain, as punishment or revenge, as a means of getting a confession or information, or forsheer cruelty.
2.
a method of inflicting such pain.
3.
Often, tortures. the pain or suffering caused or undergone.
4.
extreme anguish of body or mind; agony.
5.
a cause of severe pain or anguish.
-verb (used with object)
6.
to subject to torture.
7.
to afflict with severe pain of body or mind: My back is torturing me.
8.
to force or extort by torture: We'll torture the truth from his lips!
9.
to twist, force, or bring into some unnatural position or form: trees tortured by storms.
10.
to distort or pervert (language, meaning, etc.).

So what's your point brianD?

Where does it say we have to play by Marquis of Doonesbury rules when lives and perhaps our very survival are at stake?

Middle eastern countries are nowhere near as squeamish when it comes to western prisoners and even their own citizens. Remember the Fabulous Hussein Boys? Remember those contractors tortured, hung and burned from a bridge in Fallujah? Saddam Hussein's rape rooms? Every pencil-necked lefty in the country knows how to spell abu Ghraib, but they can't even pronounce Radwaniya Prison or remember the gentle ministrations of Uday Hussein's eager staff. Ask their Olympic teams from that era, or the handful of survivors. And that's just pre-war Iraq. The Taliban goons are no better than Pol Pot, who think that teaching a little girl how to read is a capital offense.

When it comes to national security and an imminent threat of an attack on our country in time of war, it's time to send the ladies out to the kitchen for tea and do what needs to be done. Not for the ghoulish pleasure of watching somebody suffer, as is the case in too many torture rooms around the world, but to extract information - without amputations, third degree burns, cattle prods and ball peen hammers.

If my city - or yours - is threatened by an imminent terrorist attack, just get the information you need to stop it and don't tell me about it. Don't leak it to the fucking New York Times, don't speechify about it in Senate hearings, don't interview Eric Holder about it on CBS and don't talk about how awful it is on BBC. Just get it done. If that offends your delicate sensibilities, go join the ladies in the kitchen.

We've had a sissified national security program for way too long. The AP reported yesterday that a major battle taking place right now was behind schedule and reported "heavy losses" of six soldiers, with civilian casualties and, oh yeah, 120 enemy combatants killed. It's time to man up about what war is all about, and it's time to stop worrying about what countries who already hate us will think. They're not about to invite us over for dinner anyway.

And Steve Green, screw you in advance. I don't give a shit what you think about anything.

Reading Bryand's twisted, probably-drug induced, incoherent anti-semitic rambles is torture.

Case closed.

Drago

You beat me to it.

Also

Note that most of the definitions listed have to deal with pain. Waterboarding as was done in GITMO had no pain involved.

One can even argue that the "mental anguish" was minimal as the THREE WHOLE PEOPLE who underwent waterboarding knew they wouldnt be killed so it was basically a mind game. If one wants to say that the "mental anguish" associated with the waterboarding at GITMO was torture then I can easily say that I am undergoing mental anguish from the democrats push for health care or reading bryand's screed as well as Steve Green's diatribes.

Funny, burning to death in a high rise or jumping to your death isn't mentioned.............

Ooooops, almost forgot being decapitated while being videotaped.

bryanD, once again, it's settled, he has his head planted firmly up his ass.

I always like the lib scream that you can't 'trust' such intelligence. Actually, it's their intelligence you can't trust.

You don't accept anything someone under duress tells you without a little fact checking and corroboration. And the FIRST thing you do is ask questions where you already know the answers.

One thing you can ALWAYS trust a lib to do; have someone else save their asses.

Bryan D

Saddam Hussein's rape rooms?"---bobdog

Exactly!

Aren't the father, mother, sisters and brothers of a person being systematically raped over a period of days or hours not being tortured, too?

That was a purpose of Saddaam's "rape rooms", after all.

--------

Nice way to put your foot square in your liberal piehole.

Funny how that being torture didnt matter to you when you,Obama, Kerry, Biden, Pelosi, Reid, Murtha, Steve Green, SAUD, etc etc were complaining the rape rooms being torture when you were moaning and gnashing your teeth when Bush went into Iraq.

Funny how you never hear about the rape rooms in the same breath as "Bush lied people died".

Funny how the Women lIbbers are too concerned about killing unborn children to bother mentioning the rape rooms.

Funny how you dont mention the thousands of Kurds killed under Saddam or by the terrorists using suicide bombs now but you will bitch all day long about the unjust American invasion.

Why not stick your head back in the sand. You will be in a better position to stick it back in your ass when you come up to speak your liberal garbage.

BryanD

As usual the crap coming from your mouth is just that crap.

"But per the issue: methinks you avoided a direct question."

really? What question did I avoid.

here let me make it simple for even you.

Was the waterboarding practised at GITMO, as I understand it to have taken place - that being described by what was reported in what passes for reliable news sources these days (notice I said the actions they reported not using their word torture) considered IMO to be torture?

The answer is no.

You obviously feel different. Ooh we have a difference of opinion. You are entitled to your opinion but you are not entitled to the facts.

A blithering idiot asks:

Aren't the father, mother, sisters and brothers of a person being systematically raped over a period of days or hours being tortured, too?

No.

They are under duress in that a loved one is being tortured.

QED

You still doing that male pole dance, Brian?

You probably just have your Comment Score Threshold set too high. You're filtering yourself out. Set it below -200 and most of your comments will reappear.

Happy to help.

More like -99999.

A much revered president of the United States used to say "Trust, but verify".

I guess we will all have to trust Marc Thiessen's claims that "I have spoken to the people who -- unlike Kirakou -- were in the room for the interrogations of Zubaydah, KSM and other terrorists held by the CIA."

One, he can't reveal who his source are since they are CIA interrogators and their identities are a matter of national security.

Two, even if he is certain that the people he spoke to are in the CIA, he can't verify that any of them were party to the said interrogations and that they are giving him a true account of what happened. That also is an matter of national security.

The documents that he cites certainly aren't going to include that information.

Or you could read his book, which includes a lot of previously TS documents...

"Or you could read his book, which includes a lot of previously TS documents..."

Or obamna could release ALL the related documents that are purported to show the techniques not only worked but gave info the prevented attacks.

The problem with misrepresenting the aggressive interrogation that was used on the Gitmo detainees as "torture" is that the fact is that legally, per our treaties and our laws, what we did was not "torture."

First, the international treaties we are signatory to only define torture as causing extreme mental or physical pain. So, what actually constitutes legal torture is left up to the signatory state. This means there is no single internationally accepted list of actions that are defined as torture or not torture.

Second, because there was no legal definition of what constituted torture and what was allowable, the CIA asked the Bush DoJ, and the "infamous" legal memos were written, to legally define the maximum aggressive interrogation techniques that fell short of torture. This means that the techniques detailed in those memos were, in fact, what made what we did LEGAL, per US law and per international law.

The law and the facts are on the side that quite clearly shows that we did not commit any torture, either under US or international law.

As for torture or enhanced interrogation not working, that's complete BS. The Gestapo quite effectively got a lot of info from the French Resistance members it captured. That's why they needed to operate in cells that were unknown to each other.

Also, the French used torture to great effect to win the Battle of Algiers against the jihadist insurgents. They were able to get info on the leaders and were thus able to round them all up.

Facts is facts, despite the whinings of the uninformed.

Bryan

No I dont think they are.

But as I stated earlier, you and other libs didnt really care about them before GITMO interrogations techniques came up. it was only then that you see screeds like yours. When Bush decided to go into Iraq you and your ilk was all "Bush lied people died".

As usual you and other liberals try to have your cake and eat it too. THough you dont believe in the Global warming look at the arguments there.

It snows too much, too little, it is too hot, too cold, too rainy, not enough rain, etc is all a result of global warming.

WIthout Bush deciding to go into iraq Saddam's rape rooms would probably still be in full swing with the families of victims still being under duress. Of course that wouldnt have mattered to you since we wouldnt have gone into Iraq and all would have been right with the world (except Bush would have been in office for at least 4 of his 8 years) and you and other liberals could have hammered him for not being strong enough on terrorism.

bryand you are a wimp and a pussy. have you ever been waterboarded or even witnessed a waterboarding? how can you declare it torture? i have been waterboarded, and for a lot longer than the seconds KSM and his cronies were. they're pussies like you, they gave it up after a few seconds. i didn't consider it torture, just enhanced interrogation, and i experienced techniques much harsher than waterboarding, some of which i would consider torture.
why is that so many of you leftists are wimps and effeminate ? john edwards, algore, billyboy clinton, harry reid, barry soetero, barney frank, david obey, waxman, olbermann, chrissy matthews, kos, the girlie-men of hollywood, anderson cooper, cougar-mellencamp, alfranken, that walking cadaver who used to be on with hannity. i could go on for hours listing your fellow travelers

Wow, BryanD never fails to amaze with his alternate interpretations of the past both long and recent.

Frankly, I think Bush sleeps quite well at night, comfortable in his decisions. And as I've said many times, even while he was still president, history will be kind to him.

Bryand

Thanks for proving my point.

So much for the families of the rape room victims.

BDS all the way baby and nothing else matters.

bobdog said it all in #8

BTW check the satellite photos of the bunkers where the WMD were supposed to be and tell us what all the trucks and apparent russian advisors were moving to Syria.

Words mean exactly what BryanD means; no less, no more.