Ventura on The View: If waterboarding is fine, why don't cops do it?

Well first of all we run into the whole issue about how often we use interrogation methods like waterboarding, and who gets this treatment. As for me, I am willing to bet that waterboarding is not used on anyone but a select few who are known to have information. Some people seriously believe that we go around waterboarding everyone that is detained.

According to what I believe there would be a huge difference between the people we are waterboarding and the people who commit crimes in the US. So there is a good question to who could be waterboarded and who couldn't. Often times if they catch somebody who has done things on the level that the people I believe were waterboarded then they are going to have enough evidence to lock them up forever anyways. Along with that, we live in a semi controlled environment where police can collect evidence so there are other was of gathering information.

Also technically being American an citizen we agree upon living by a certain set of rules. If you break those rules then you are punished in a certain manner that has been in a way agreed upon. Then when you get done with your punishment you my re-enter society and live by the rules once again. These insurgents don't live by our rules and there is no reason for them to, they have not made an agreement. However, with that being said why should they get the benefits of our rules when it just so happens to work out best for them?

Originally posted by Styki
Well first of all we run into the whole issue about how often we use interrogation methods like waterboarding, and who gets this treatment. As for me, I am willing to bet that waterboarding is not used on anyone but a select few who are known to have information.

In other words, you trust the government that has used waterboarding, and any future government who will use it.

How nice to permanently subscribe to the slogan, "In Government we trust."

How do you feel about the fact that torture doesn't even work?

reply to post by Kailassa


What he is saying is that we haven't tortured near as many that has been claimed.

Which is likely. It would be a very powerful weapon to use.

This question is similiar to a question I asked a week ago in a thread about torturing innocent people.

We seem to be able to establish guilt with murderers, so why not use the same crime techniques for terrorists?
We don't torture people who may have committed a murder to find the truth, so why do we need to do it to terrorists???

www.abovetopsecret.com...

The police did use sometimes sadistic tactics to make crims confess decades ago but it was outlawed. They now have to use their brain and not their brawn to get evidence to convict someone.

The same rules should apply to people accused of Terrorism.
It never worked for getting murderers convicted, so why should it work with Terrorists?
All you'll end up with is innocent people admitting to anything to get the torture to stop.
Totally ineffective.

Torture: existence of a specific purpose plus intentional infliction of severe suffering or pain. The purpose is usually to extract (i) confirmation - a specific statement from the victim to confirm existing knowledge or (ii) confession - to elicit new information that can be cross-checked for veracity. The victim's knowledge that the torture will *not* kill or permanently disfigure the victim has no impact on the effect of the torture - they will talk.

The real question is, can the veracity of the statements that a torture victim makes be assured? In most cases, a victim has to be led to extract specific items of information, the concept of "tell us everything" just doesn't work, it has to be focussed which falls under the category of (i) above. This represents "confirmation", however, it often provides false positives in that the victim will reach a state whereby they will confirm clear falsehoods.

As an example, during the witch trials of the 16th and 17th centuries in Europe, confirmation was almost unanimous, nobody could deny the effect of torture in the end and would agree with the statements presented to them no matter what. Men and women would confirm that they had "shape shifted" and even flown through the air on broomsticks. In the face of such fantastical confessions, admitting that they were a witch was the least of confirmation. Interestingly, most would also retract their statements before they were executed.

In terms of new information, confession, this has to be cross-checked which makes the process laborious. However, it also creates a situation whereby confirmation creeps back in. As information is investigated and new data comes to light it needs to be cross-checked with the victim. This means that an illusion of fact is created supported by complicity by the torturer and the tortured, but it isn't necessarily reality.

The only thing that dictates the information that flows from the victim is "what will cause the least suffering?" This can mean a clear confirmation whether true or not, also, the construction of a confession that "fits" together to ultimately create a confirmation. Again, not necessarily true.

In the majority of cases where the victim has a clear ethos and belief to protect, torture just doesn't work. Yes, it works in some cases, but surely we should be more interested in techniques that work all of the time?
Quite apart from the ethical issues at hand, torture is largely a waste of time, people will confirm and confess to anything in the end.

Originally posted by jd140
reply to post by Kailassa

 

What he is saying is that we haven't tortured near as many that has been claimed.

Yes, that's what he is saying, but he is producing no evidence.
Wishful thinking and faith don't add much to a discussion.

Which is likely. It would be a very powerful weapon to use.

No, torture is not a powerful weapon at all.

I endured hours of a terrible torturer when I was 25. - The worst pain that can be inflicted on a woman. Yet I was never once even tempted to do what the torturer wanted, scream, because I was so angry and so disgusted with the person who was doing that too me.

I know that sounds hard to believe, but I expect there are others on this board who know what it's like to suddenly find yourself pushed way past what you thought were your limits, like that. You find yourself in an ocean of agony, but righteous anger can give you the strength to accept the pain, become one with it, and then surf its waves until ...

Well in my case it was until the attacker was exhausted.


The only powers torture has are the powers to extract false confessions and the power to create hate and breed real terrorists.

And the power to turn the torturers into sadistic brutes.

Opens up a good point. If you ave kids, water board them and see if the shild support agency think its torture or not, lol. You would not see that child again, as they whisk the child away into a foster home.

Of course it is torture.

reply to post by David9176


Didn't Hannity say he was going to undgo the waterboarding technique to prove it wasn't torture? What ever happened with that. I heard he was called out and never kept his word.

And for people who say its fair and would react out of anger because of al-jezerra tapes, do you really want to stoop to their level? Can you really let innocent, peaceful, Muslim-Americans be taken from their family's for years, flown to third world countries and be treated less than human (that has happened)?

Once America looses its morals, we would be much more vulnerable to an attack.

Originally posted by Kailassa

In other words, you trust the government that has used waterboarding, and any future government who will use it.

How nice to permanently subscribe to the slogan, "In Government we trust."

How do you feel about the fact that torture doesn't even work?

Not exactly, but like I have said before there is no need to waterboard somebody who does not know anything important. It's a waste of time and manpower. Then we have to remember that this is an extreme method of interrogation and most likely reserved for special situations.

With all of this being said there is really no way to know exactly how often waterboarding is being used and upon whom. There are so many unknowns that we can only assume (you all know where that gets us) which could come back to haunt us, nothing is for certain.

I also don't agree with the whole concept that people are saying that torture does not work, who did that study? Are they sure they got all the variables right? (I realize no study was conducted) Throughout history people have been torturing others in wars or for other reasons and then we have someone come along and say it doesn't work so everybody just jumps on board with that. It could possibly be that the people who find that it doesn't work just weren't good enough at it. Maybe it's this watered down version of "torture" that we do today. Take that guy that was reportedly waterboarded +100 times; at some point I think he realized that they were not going to drown him.

Finally, just because the government says something does not mean we have to automatically believe the opposite. I happened to believe that sometimes the government is telling the truth, not because they want to but because they just didn't have to lie about everything.

"If killing bad guys is okay, why don't we just kill all criminals here in the U.S?"

What a weak argument this guy has.

You want to know why water boarding is okay?

Because there is a very good portion of America that does not care.

Now, taken into account the recent bailouts, it would probably have to be about 99% of the population saying something for our politicians to actually listen.

One thing I always found ironic are the rules of war.

Cops can tazer bad guys, which I am sure is not that good feeling. Should we consider that torture?

Regarding the actually topic though, can you argue a wrong inside an even larger wrong (torture to war)?

"I always tell it like it is, McMahon."

Elizabeth hasselbeck eating it again...what a stooge. She's gotta be a character or something.
Why do they put such a horrible representation of the right on a show called the view?
She actually calls it enhanced interrogation, like it's not the same thing as torture.
I think if a dude that has had it done to him says it's torture I'd prolly shut up right there.

Your logic is flawed. Waterboarding was performed upon enemy combatants whom we are at war with, citizens of another country. Cops tend to interrogate citizens of the USA. I am surprised no one noticed that so far...

And if you think the freakin view is some kind of valid source for talking points, discussion or news of any kind - ???????

The news that Mr Ventura was on the view and said this inane thing ONLY means that you may as well ignore anything Mr Ventura says since he stooped so low as to appear on this insignificant ladies coffee clatch show.

Originally posted by kettlebellysmith
I agree with Jesse. Waterboarding is torture. I disagree that we shouldn't use it on suspected terrorist. SWaterboarding is mild, compared to what I can think of to do to those who are suspected of attacking our country. Call me a patriot, o a super patriot, or a nut job, if you choose. I really don't care. These freaks cut the heads off of people and post it on the internet, and broadcast it on Al-jeezera TV.
What's the freaking difference?

WE ARE THE DIFFERENCE!





Kill your enemies on the field of battle. Take no prisoners. Torture no one.

Originally posted by groingrinder

Originally posted by kettlebellysmith
I agree with Jesse. Waterboarding is torture. I disagree that we shouldn't use it on suspected terrorist. SWaterboarding is mild, compared to what I can think of to do to those who are suspected of attacking our country. Call me a patriot, o a super patriot, or a nut job, if you choose. I really don't care. These freaks cut the heads off of people and post it on the internet, and broadcast it on Al-jeezera TV.
What's the freaking difference?

WE ARE THE DIFFERENCE!


We have been tortured people in every war since America as country has existed. We have tortured in every war we have fought in since we signed the Geneva Convention.

We get a President that is universally hated and all of a sudden we start saying that we are better then that.

I don't buy that arguement.


Kill your enemies on the field of battle. Take no prisoners. Torture no one.

We're talking 99% of the time about waterboarding... why don't we talk about the real stalinist torture used? Sleep depravation, beatings, physical threats with dogs, rape of inmates, ect... The HARDCORE STUFF?

Medias are playing it soft, like ALWAYS.

And like always, TORTURE IS STILL GOING ON.

[edit on 19-5-2009 by Vitchilo]

reply to post by Dudewtf


Well, since we live in a country that has stated time and time again that "We do not torture..", YOUR argument is flawed.

Even torturing enemy combatants... is still torture.

Water boarding is on the same plane as shoving bamboo sticks under the fingernails to get information.

I like Ventura and I'd vote for him for any political office. However, his ideas are fallible just like those of Ron Paul. He's not perfect nor is everything he says. I agree with him on waterboarding. But if we are a country that is run by laws ask him what his view is on Mexico and illegal immigration. He believes in open borders. To me that's UNAMERICAN! He might even be disinfo.

reply to post by TwiTcHomatic


How is waterboarding the same thing as shoving bamboo sticks under someone's fingernails???? These two things are not even in the same ballpark.

The only common factor is that they are both used to get information. The similarities end there my friend.

You can not put all interogation techiniques on the same level, some are more severe than others and you can't just label them all torture. If I really wanted to torture someone I could think of some worse ways to torture someone than waterboarding.

When will people understand that we are dealing with a sane enemy in Afghanistan and Iraq. In order to defeat your enemy you must become your enemy to trully understand how they think.

Zosynspiracy said it best. Truthfully I am more concerned about paying for people living in this country illegaly than I am of some terrorism suspects being "tortured".

reply to post by Cool Breeze


Im sure if you experienced waterboarding you would change your mind. Have you seen it done? Have you ever been held underwater and thought you weren't coming up? Imagine that feeling for a few hours a day for a year. There have been innocent people that were kept in solitary and waterboearded everyday for a year. You could not imagine what that does to a person or their family.

And if you want to generalize an entire country of people by calling them insane to justify torture, even though you spelled it sane im guessing that's what you were going for, I am sorry for you my friend. Open up your mind a little and realize that they are people just like you and me. Your comment was one of fear and not love and i wish you more love in the future.

Peace

reply to post by bringthelight


Yes I have seen it done and it is no where near as painful as getting bamboo sticks shoved under my finger nails.