Giuliani: I'm Not Sure Waterboarding Is Torture

New York Times:

At a town hall meeting here last night, Rudolph W. Giuliani expanded upon his views of torture. Here is a transcript of the exchange.

Linda Gustitus, who is the president of a group called the National Religious Campaign Against Torture, began her question by saying that President Bush's nominee for attorney general, Michael B. Mukasey (who happens to be an old friend of Mr. Giuliani's) had "fudged" on the question of whether waterboarding is toture.

Read the whole story: New York Times

Comments

[KYJurisDoctor]

12:49 PM on 10/26/2007

Let's all agree to waterboard Rudy so he can tell us which ones he finds objectionable.

http://OsiSpeaks.com or http://OsiSpeaks.org

[desertdweller]

12:41 PM on 10/26/2007

Could Brownback's near-endorsement of Giuliani be a sign of the devil's bargain? Giuliani's choosing Brownback as a running mate would be the perfect sop to the evangelicals. Make a lot of sense...

[Perrier007]

12:16 PM on 10/26/2007

Whether waterboarding is torture in the true sense of the word, let's consider that it has been used to train U.S. special forces to resist interrogation.

Of course, it's not unreasonable to assume that some people would consider many aspects of military training "torture", like being called a lowlife or a maggot in basic training.

It's also quite telling to consider that some people even consider being forced to listen to music, "torture".

Personally, I always considered torture to include things like bamboo shoots being forced under the nails, or being burned, or being beaten, or having physical pain inflicted by some means. However, there's no doubt that psychological torture can result in permanent damage to an individual just as physical torture can. But I think what sets the two apart is the fact that physical torture permanently damages both the physical body as well as the mind of the individual experiencing it, whereas psychological torture obviously does not result in damage to the physical body.

Is it wrong to use psychological torture on enemy combatants? I would say yes, considering the Geneva Conventions concerning captives of a nation's armed forces with which we are at war. However, ragtag terrorists who are not the armed force of ANY country, and who have no conscience or compassion for anyone, deserve no acknowledgement of even being human, in my opinion, so I don't really give a flip HOW badly they are treated.

[Naithom]

01:31 PM on 10/26/2007

Not in the armed forces, no conscience - under this scenario you just gave permission for the other side to torture American citizens working for Blackwater...

When you start claiming the other people in a war aren't human, you are sliding down a very nasty slope.

[Perrier007]

08:16 PM on 10/26/2007

The American citizens working for Blackwater are mercenaries. Professional combat soldiers. As such, they are targets. They realize this. They accept it.

But why stop there? Why don't you speak to the reality of the situation, that this vermin DOES torture, TO THE DEATH, American CIVILIANS and the civilians of other nations who have not lifted a finger to fight against them. Do you forget Leo Klinghoffer who was brutally tortured and murdered? Well, then how about the 3,000 American civilians tortured (making the decision to jump out of a 58th-story window rather than burn to death would qualify as torture, would it not?) and murdered by these butchers? I suspect you don't want to bring up the reality of civilians being a regular target of the terrorists, perhaps because you want to humanize them for our benefit? Hell, they send their own 6 and 7 year-old children out to murder and be murdered and think they've done something great. That fact alone makes them inhuman.

[DineroDProfit]

01:52 PM on 10/26/2007

The good thing about waterboarding is that it leaves no scars, no evidence of torture.

Hence, the government can flat out deny that people were waterboarded, as in "the US does not torture."

[JerryWalden]

12:10 PM on 10/26/2007

If Giuliani becomes president, we will long for the good ole days of Geo. W. Bush. That is, if we're still around.

[alfrede]

11:20 AM on 10/26/2007

Hi,

Perhaps Rudy would like to volunteer to undergo it before deciding whether or not it is torture!

Are there any precedents in US history where the US has done this sort of thing as an officially sanctioned policy?? Has any US President prior to Bush 43 ever exempted CIA personnel from a ban on torture? Perhaps Rudy could find out?

What do U think?

[sebocd]

11:19 AM on 10/26/2007

The Denocrats should confirm Michael Mukasey water-boarding and all. They should leave undisturbed all the abusive initiatives of this administration to facilitate going after the gang who created them. Imagine Dick Cheny defibrillated ten time in he course of an interagation or Georgie, Condi, Gonzo, and Rumi forced to listen Kate Smith singing "God Bless America" on boom-boxes around the clock for weeks.

[VivaZapata]

11:13 AM on 10/26/2007

The real torture is when Guiliani continues down the same disastrous path as the Chaney counterpresidency-to-the-duly-elected-ALGore! I feel his pain. Ouch.

[THISTLE]

11:03 AM on 10/26/2007

Let's see tough guy, Rudy "isn't sure if
waterboarding is torture." Well, here's one
sure way to find out - let's do it on him,
then let's see what his answer will be.
And since he loves to "play the tough guy,"
he is a chance for him to show us all how
tough he really is.

[mongus]

11:40 AM on 10/26/2007

Isn't that what Hillary said about torture?

Come to think about it, she was FOR it before she was AGAINST it.

More 'doubletalk' from yet another politician.

Never mind.

[RogerTheShrubber]

10:51 AM on 10/26/2007

Wow, he is scarier than I originally thought. Gods forbid he gets the White House.

[gcallaghan]

10:10 AM on 10/26/2007

"I'm Not Sure Waterboarding Is Torture"

What are the deciding factors, Rudy? How it's done? Who does it? To whom it's done?

It's an all or nothing proposition. If you condone waterboarding detainees under any conditions then you're a fucking nazi, asswipe.

[Ping]

10:35 AM on 10/26/2007

Let's be fair....Rudy said

"I think the way it"s been defined in the media, it shouldn"t be done. The way in which they have described it, particularly in the liberal media. So I would say, if that"s the description of it, then I can agree, that it shouldn"t be done."

[kfdan]

05:08 AM on 10/26/2007

Giuliani could always be a test case and find out for sure! Let him undergo the treatment!

[Forest]

03:00 AM on 10/26/2007

The progeny of Marquis de Sade and Prince Machiavelli have spread a dark veil over the US.

[Ping]

02:28 AM on 10/26/2007

Let's be fair....Rudy said

"I think the way it’s been defined in the media, it shouldn’t be done. The way in which they have described it, particularly in the liberal media. So I would say, if that’s the description of it, then I can agree, that it shouldn’t be done."

[StillAmused]

09:55 PM on 10/25/2007

Reposted for the benefit of Doug, who seems to have spent most of the day on this thread, ardently picking nits and chewing around the edges in a sweaty attempt to rationalize torture:

All the enthusiastic defenders of waterboarding, in the face of repeated, devastating invalidation of its USEFULNESS as an INTELLIGENCE tool, inevitably exhibit common characteristics:

Uncontrolled rage, conflation of intelligence-gathering with punishment, revenge-oriented references to atrocities suffered by our own troops and citizens, and -- perhaps most significantly -- a sociopathic pleasure derived from the notion that, if we can't solve the complex problems we face in the world, at least we can inflict pain and suffering.

These are the same people who ruined it for all the other kids in the sandbox and on the playground... and were never weeded out for treatment.*

* That means YOU, dweeb.

[AntiFascistMajority]

11:30 PM on 10/25/2007

Hey, Doug's a cop. He's "just doing his job."

[leatherneck]

09:55 PM on 10/25/2007

The republicans are the Nazi party of modern day, the end justifies the means, too them torture is ok, mass murder via unprovoked war is ok, the republican party and any complicent democrats are guilty of war crimes in the deaths of over 600,000 Iraqi civilians, too them civilian casualties are just collateral damage, but no nations war criminals ever face justice on earth until that country is defeated, falls apart in revoltion, so for anyone too think Bush and his merry band of war criminals will ever face a earthly justice is living in fantasy, but one can bet these evil men/women who have blood on their hands in the hundreds of thousands, will face Jesus on judgment day and I can almost without a doubt see them saying too Jesus when did we do this unto you, and he responds I know you not when you did this to the least of these you did it unto me, and God will be so disgusted with their sins he will not even look upon them as he casts them into the lake of fire for eternity, now one can bet they will have all eternity too debate with the other mass murderers of history Stalin, Hitler, etc..., on how righteous their causes were, but I do not envy them one bit...their fate, there is a reason why they and their blind followers [29% die hard right wing republicans] are going too be referred too as bling biblical goats they see no wrong in their actions....that is why their fate is inevitable and cannot be escaped, only those with a concious can repent or regret they do not repent, nor do they regret their lifes lust for power, money, and the end always justifies their means..