Quote of the day
posted at 10:23 pm on November 3, 2007 by Bryan
“It appears that waterboarding, over which Andrew has exercised himself so much in recent years, and upon which he has staked his many, many, many, many claims to moral supremacy, actually stopped in 2003 — ironically, just as Andrew executed his pivot against Bush and the war — and was only used three times. This seems pretty consistent with my view of torture, which is that I’m against it, but that it’s not quite the issue Andrew wants it — perhaps I should say needs it — to be.”
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Glenn rules. Best blog on the web. Period.
MikeZero on November 3, 2007 at 10:42 PM
Torture????
Hmmmmm……
Imagine what having your head SAWED off or being forced to jump from 90+ stories must be like. Jet fuel burning your skin off is considered “natural causes”??? Definitely NOT torture though. EH?
Oh I forgot, those “little Eichmanns” deserved that.
Kiss my arse.
Talon on November 3, 2007 at 10:46 PM
Reading Sullivan is torture. I know that if US Troops were to read any of his articles to any prisoners they captured would force the terrorists to give up any secrets they knew just to get them to stop.
Ceroth on November 3, 2007 at 10:55 PM
I am surprised more people did not make a stink about the rumor of soldiers guarding Sadddam, putting a TV outside his cell and playing South Park the movie, more particular, the Saddam/Satan love scenes.
Actually Ceroth, according to Bill Oreilly, and a few other not so well known radio hosts, Harry Potter was the favorite to be read to prisoners at Club Gitmo.
El Guapo on November 3, 2007 at 11:17 PM
All you people do realize, half the stuff we put our troops thru (and what I went thru, and regularly go thru) at boot camp, and especially SERE school, is far worse than the stuff jihadi prisoners go thru. They are nothing but wife beater sissies that cry wolf worse than our beloved ACLU. But then again, that tactic is in their AQ “terror handbook” that everyone forgets British intel recovered in a raid in the UK.
El Guapo on November 3, 2007 at 11:22 PM
Guys, guys. Don’t confuse Sully, Moonbats & Co. with facts and logic. That destroys their talking points…
amerpundit on November 3, 2007 at 11:25 PM
Oops sorry. I forgot the first golden rule to Liberalism: Logic and facts do not count. All should be based on feelings and good intentions.
El Guapo on November 3, 2007 at 11:31 PM
Lets see tortue vrs. Muslim Islamofacists
Truck bomb attack on Twin Towers
911 attack on Twin Towers
Beriut barracks bombing
Kobar Tower attacks
African embassy attacks
Uss Stark attack
Uss Cole attack
shoe bomber
Irag car bombs
so many beheadings on Christians since it all began
attacks on Isreals around the world
Plane hijackings
suicide bombers
buses and cafe’s in Isreal blown to smitherns
I think with Islamofacists track record,ya I think
TORTURE should still be on the table!
canopfor on November 3, 2007 at 11:32 PM
Tee-hee.
You could never have posted that silly photo unless he posed that way.
On purpose.
Tee-hee.
Stephen M on November 3, 2007 at 11:34 PM
You forgot about the decapitated Iraqis (including women and children) that our Marines found during their house sweeps when they took back Fallajuah. A result of families’ resisting and not allowing terorrists to take over their homes.
And let’s also not forget about holding a family hostage and threatening to rape and kill them if the father and/or son refused do a suicide bomb mission. How brave and humane is that? They are forcing others to do their suicide missions. I guess 72 virgins aren’t enough now?
El Guapo on November 3, 2007 at 11:39 PM
Does it really surprise anyone that Sullivan lied? That’s what liberals do.
Capitalist Infidel on November 4, 2007 at 12:00 AM
I don’t believe in torture – anyone who doesn’t belong to a military unit and terrorizes should never be brought in alive.
Entelechy on November 4, 2007 at 12:06 AM
You forgot:
EL Guapo on November 3,2007 at 11:39PM
EL Guapo: I know,Micheal Yon’s report on that village massacre,and AQ serving up the family’s son,and the missing
United States airman,I think it was a F-15 Strike Eagle,
in the first Gulf War,I could behere all day, but how much room do you think Allahpundit is going to let me have.
canopfor on November 4, 2007 at 12:09 AM
Entelechy
More battles were won (or attacks successfully prevented/fended off) than not from info extracted from captives. Captives yield valuable intel, even when they do not talk.
El Guapo on November 4, 2007 at 12:12 AM
canopfor
It is just nice to see others who remember those things, and don’t make water-boarding out to be worse than what the the jihadis do.
El Guapo on November 4, 2007 at 12:17 AM
Heck, who needs water boarding when we have The Folsom Street Fair and its sponsors, like Dungeon Beds?
Buy Danish on November 4, 2007 at 12:24 AM
So, that’s not a picture of AP?
Kini on November 4, 2007 at 12:24 AM
Buy Danish I just had to click that link.
I remember a day when people would be arrested for indescent exposure if they tried to have a “Folsom Street Fair”.
That was torture, and embarrassment that a city in my country allowed that. Let alone alowing them to defile church services too.
El Guapo on November 4, 2007 at 12:32 AM
El Guapo on November 4, 2007 at 12:12 AM
Yes, El Guapo, we agree. It’s just too complicated in this nuanced and ‘progressive’ world of today.
Entelechy on November 4, 2007 at 12:37 AM
Milky Loads.
Jimmy the Dhimmi on November 4, 2007 at 12:59 AM
Heh.
Andrew is against so-called torture at any cost, but pro elective torture?
Topsecretk9 on November 4, 2007 at 1:01 AM
As Islamofascist Terrorists have NEVER signed the Geneva Convention, and continue to campaign as Illegal combatants in blatant VIOLATION of the Geneva Convention, HERE are the rules of what constitutes TORTURE for Terrorists:
Waterboarding does NOT constitute torture for Terrorists who are in violation of the Geneva Conventions.
HOT LEAD ENEMAS do NOT constitute torture for Terrorists who are in violation of the Geneva Conventions.
FLAYING does NOT constitute torture for Terrorists who are in violation of the Geneva Conventions.
Hopefully, this clears that ALL up. Thank you.
grtflmark on November 4, 2007 at 1:54 AM
I just thought of something. What about just reading something like a “Gay Manifesto”, or anything else the ACLU likes to defend to the terrorists. It would drive them nuts, and if the ACLU claimed it was torture, they would undercut any argument they made afterwards since they would be torturing the judges before whom they were arguing, right?
urbancenturion on November 4, 2007 at 2:34 AM
I’ve always wondered why the Gitmo guards haven’t stood/sat outside the cells reading the Bible.
/sarc (NOT)
leepro on November 4, 2007 at 2:40 AM
Sullivan made the top 100 list at #33. I thought it was oddly high, but what do I know?
SouthernGent on November 4, 2007 at 2:54 AM
This guy is creepy. Do not let your son date him.
pat on November 4, 2007 at 2:56 AM
Hunh?
leepro on November 4, 2007 at 3:23 AM
A little OT:
Meredith Whitney, the analyst who prompted a $369 billion (£177 billion) plunge in the value of US shares on Thursday by issuing a negative note on Citigroup, hit out at Wall Street’s culture of intimidation yesterday after receiving several death threats from investors in the bank.
Ms Whitney, a CIBC analyst who is married to the former World Wrestling Entertainment champion Death Mask, prompted a near 7 per cent drop in Citigroup’s shares on Thursday, after suggesting that the bank needed to raise more than $30 billion to restore its capital cushion.
She also downgraded her recommendation on Citigroup’s shares to “market underperform” in the note that set off America’s biggest stock market decline since August.
Ms Whitney, Forbes’s second-highest ranked stock picker for 2007, told The Times: “People are scared to be negative, especially when a company has such a wide holding. Clients are not pleased with my call and I have had several death threats.
“But it was the most straightforward call I’ve made in my career and I am surprised my peer analysts have been resistant. It’s so straightforward, it’s indisputable.”
MB4 on November 4, 2007 at 3:34 AM
None of what follows should be applied to domestic criminal investigations, but should be limited to enemy combattants and terrorists who are not obeying the “rules of war” as embodied in the Hague/Geneva conventions.
For terrorists and enemy combattants, I do not categorically rule out torture if (1) time is of the essence, and (2) American lives are at stake. I do not categorically condemn torture, in other words. It has its place when used against captured terrorists. Its reliability is suspect, especially when used “routinely.” The Geneva Conventions forbid torture if applied to PRISONERS OF WAR. But as terrorists do not honor the “rules of war,” I have no qualms about making terrorists ineligable for the protections afforded by the Conventions.
Hey, all they (Al Qaeda, Taliban, etc.) have to do is obey the rules of war and this becomes a moot issue.
I do not consider waterboarding to be torture, The physiological pressure is subordinated by the psychological. Hence, it is a valid interrogation technique that can be used when necessary.
I do not consider sleep deprivation to be torture except when used for routine domestic crime interrogation. It is a valid technique when used against captured enemy combatants and terrorists.
I do not consider manipulating room temperature to be torture (unlike Dick “Turban” Durbin). Neither frostbite nor heatstroke are the result of its use.
I do not consider the use of drugs to obtain information to be torture.
No doubt there are liberals reading this blog that are upset and peeing in their pants in righteous indignation. Too bad. The lives of Americans are more important that your sensibilities.
This entire fretting about “torture” by the left and the opposition to Gitmo is an attempt to sabotage the war. It is not a “civil rights” issue because captured ENEMY COMBATANTS not following the “rules of war” do NOT HAVE any rights, especially the one provided to POWs, because they have voluntarily surrendered any such rights.
georgej on November 4, 2007 at 6:19 AM
What’s clear is you’re a little off balance there sir. I like this place, when people post things that look like they came from a mental patient it makes me look bad. Please breathe deep and refrain from posting your lunacy at all let alone in bold.
Is waterboarding torture? Under this definition: “any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession” Yes I would say it’s certainly torture. It’s also not pulling fingernails out or various other nasty things, but I cant deny it falls in that description.
Now do I have a problem with it being used on Khalid Sheik Mohammad? Nope. So yes, I’m not afraid to say I support torture in that case.
Dash on November 4, 2007 at 8:47 AM
It isn’t torture if they have a “safe word”.
dedalus on November 4, 2007 at 9:27 AM
Who is Andrew Sullivan? He looks like thug who is about to cry.
Wade on November 4, 2007 at 11:10 AM
Some gay writer.
Dork B. on November 4, 2007 at 11:26 AM
He doesn’t look
gayjoyful to meWade on November 4, 2007 at 11:39 AM
He actually used to be quite good to read not too long ago! I dont know what happened to him post Iraq, he’s since gone quite mad. He is well known though regardless of what you think of him.
Dash on November 4, 2007 at 12:24 PM
Sullivan bailed post-9/11 after Bush wouldn’t support gay marriage. Basically. But never mind him.
I loved this guy’s letter to the Washington Post on Friday:
Attila (Pillage Idiot) on November 4, 2007 at 12:49 PM
Needs more Austrian Economics…
Tim Burton on November 4, 2007 at 12:13 PM
Well said.
4shoes on November 4, 2007 at 1:13 PM
Attila (Pillage Idiot) on November 4, 2007 at 12:49 PM
Thanks for the WaPo letter. Brilliant!
Buy Danish on November 4, 2007 at 2:05 PM
As a gay man myself, I once read Andrew with relish; he was my hero, back before he lost his head up his ass. I have no idea what happened to the boy, but he’s become an intellectual fraud. No morally serious person should pay him the slightest heed.
paul006 on November 4, 2007 at 3:15 PM
Never heard of him and have not missed a thing.
Wade on November 4, 2007 at 5:47 PM
Nice piece of satire
Wade on November 4, 2007 at 5:56 PM
When terrorists start obeying the Geneva Conventions, this silliness will start make sense.
A little historical question:
-which nation(s) that the US ever fought strictly obeyed the Geneva Conventions?
Answer:
NONE.
So, the mythical plea that “they will stop obeying them if we violate them” has always been meaningless.
The Imperial Japanese, Nazis, North Koreans/Chinese/Soviets, Viet Namese, etc., all violated the rules for POW’s.
Why is this slight detail ALWAYS overlooked?
profitsbeard on November 4, 2007 at 9:57 PM
Like many, I liked Sullivan’s blog when Sep 11 opened his eyes but I’ve become disenchanted as he has returned to a whiny liberalism. The turning point for me was when some GI guard at Gitmo took a leak in front of an air vent, his urine was sucked in, and some of it sprayed on an inmates Koran. Sullivan pouted that this could only have been done on purpose. That’s when I realized that for all his smarts, Sullivan doesn’t have the real world experience to interpret events outside his narrow publishing world. The Koran pee incident is the kind of thing that happens with young military guys all the time.
I still read Sullivan even though I don’t agree with much he has to say because it’s important to read what the smartest folks on the other side are saying and why. It also helps remind me that you can be very smart and yet very wrong.
And I do like that feature where readers submit the views out their windows.
Tantor on November 4, 2007 at 10:15 PM
Tanotr-
Why the hell were terrorist prisoners at Gitmo given their guidebook of terror -the Koran- in the first place?
Not many Mein Kampf’s were handed out to Nazi POW’s, if I recall correctly.
I think the grand total was ZERO.
profitsbeard on November 4, 2007 at 10:18 PM
Hopefully, this clears that ALL up. Thank you.
grtflmark on November 4, 2007 at 1:54 AM
What’s clear is you’re a little off balance there sir. I like this place, when people post things that look like they came from a mental patient it makes me look bad. Please breathe deep and refrain from posting your lunacy at all let alone in bold.
Is waterboarding torture? Under this definition: “any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession” Yes I would say it’s certainly torture. It’s also not pulling fingernails out or various other nasty things, but I cant deny it falls in that description.
Now do I have a problem with it being used on Khalid Sheik Mohammad? Nope. So yes, I’m not afraid to say I support torture in that case.
Dash on November 4, 2007 at 8:47 AM
No, sir – I’d say what’s clear is that your statements make no sense whatsoever, provided no substantiated basis for your claim – and your namecalling, like the namecalling techniques used by liberals, add no credibility to your arguments.
Let’s look at your precious definition:
“any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession”
So – how can an act such as waterboarding which is PROVEN to not create any actual physical harm to an individual, but which could cause an individual who ignores that fact to THINK that they may be harmed qualify as “severe”, or even “pain” or “suffering”. It does not harm or kill people – period. Ergo – your point does not make sense and your definition does NOT substantiate your claim. Secondly, this definition is based on a set of rules applied to LEGAL combatants who are OBEYING the Rules of the Geneva Conventions. This basis does NOT apply to The Terrorists. They did NOT sign the Geneva Conventions – and they DARN sure don’t follow them. Ergo – the use of your definition is, in itself, a falsehood and a lie. It does not apply. It is like solving a Math problem in Polar Coordinates using Cartesian Rules. They don’t match.
I ALSO like this place, and when people post things here that look like they came from a village idiot calling names, yelling at traffic and not displaying cogent thought – it makes ME look bad. Please think before you post and refrain from posting anyting like that. Thank you.
grtflmark on November 4, 2007 at 11:28 PM