« Don't Worry About the Hispanic Vote | Main | Finally Spring Arrives in the Northwoods »

Mancow Waterboarding Was A Hoax

It turns out that Erich "Mancow" Muller faked the whole water boarding incident last week. Why am I not surprised that a radio DJ perpetrated some stunt to pump the ratings of his show? What is infinitely more interesting is to look back at the unctuous, self serving, self satisfied reaction of the Left as they first learned about this theatre.

Andrew Sullivan couldn't wait to weigh in with the condemnation as he breathlessly looped Sean Hannity into the discussion:

Another would-be Hannity gets waterboarded for a few seconds. And he sees what it is, and what this country did.

Talking Points Memo couldn't resist a dig at Hannity either as they swallowed the hoax hook, line and sinker:

If you haven't seen the Mancow waterboarding, you can see the full video here. It's powerful on a number of different levels.

The upshot is that the guy goes into it in cocky Hannity mode and then after maybe 5 or 6 seconds he struggles up and he's converted, claiming it's "absolutely torture", that he never realized it was that bad, etc.

The left so badly wants the waterboarding/torture meme to be true that they fell for a hoax delivered by a radio DJ. This is but further evidence of how poorly informed and blinded the minions of the fever swamp have become.


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/35839.

Comments (97)

"waterboarding/torture meme... (Below threshold)
Adrian Browne:

"waterboarding/torture meme"

That "meme" has been around for centuries.

OK, so it was a hoax. Does... (Below threshold)
CDR M:

OK, so it was a hoax. Does that mean we can discount Mancow's statements on what it felt like??? Or will we get the typical left response of "false but true"?

Conservative Talk Sh... (Below threshold)
Adrian Browne:


Conservative Talk Show Host Lies

Shocking!

If Mancow is a "conservativ... (Below threshold)
JB:

If Mancow is a "conservative talk show host", Perez Hilton is a "liberal judge."

The true "torture" is liste... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

The true "torture" is listening to the left going on and on and on about it.

GarandFan +1... (Below threshold)
Sheik Yur Bouty:

GarandFan

+1

Personally, I start struggl... (Below threshold)
bobdog:

Personally, I start struggling against my restraints after about five seconds of Barack Obama. Unfortunately, this happens every single time there's a newscast, since he's the focus of every other news story.

I don't know how much more of this I can take...the humanity...

Looks like it would be very... (Below threshold)
914:

Looks like it would be very refreshing on a hot summers day.

Conservative Talk Show H... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

Conservative Talk Show Host Lies

Shocking!

Wait, last week, you were the one who cited this as some sort "evidence" (at least in your mind) that even a diehard conservative believed it was torture.

Here's the link:

http://wizbangblog.com/content/2009/05/22/the-san-fransico-creep-stands-by-her-statements.php#comments

See post .20.

So you believed Mancow then, but not now. Whatever most conveniently fits your loopyass world view at the moment, eh, Mr. Browne?

Well I finally watched the ... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

Well I finally watched the ManCow waterboarding video and what the guy did to ManCow was not waterboarding as defined by the CIA, but closer to the water cure the Japanese used in WW2 with the guy holding ManCow's nose shut and poring water down his throat. ManCow was smart to quite when he did as the water cure is real torture as it produces involuntary water ingestion, something the CIA's waterboarding technique is carefully designed to avoid. Without water ingestion drowning is simulated, only the panic is real. Is inducing panic torture? If so then locking someone who's claustrophobic in a small cell is torture, and yes, the United States tortures prisoners to this day.

It might have been intended as a hoax, but the guy administrating it didn't know what he was doing.

Spot on observation there, ... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

Spot on observation there, MacL.

"Is inducing panic torture?... (Below threshold)
914:

"Is inducing panic torture?"

If it is? Obamas guilty of torture.. Look at the panic He caused on Wallsteet.

re:10: That seems to fit t... (Below threshold)
epador:

re:10: That seems to fit the general way of doing things in the Obama Administration.

re:12:

Wall Street, Corporate Boardrooms, even on the Lower West Side (lets not forget the Air Farce One scandal).

re: 3

"Shock-Jock" of the Springer crowd, lying, how shocking indeed! Politics has nothing to do with it. Ratings and money did.

Peter F:<a href="h... (Below threshold)
Adrian Browne:
U losers, false but true li... (Below threshold)
ulosers:

U losers, false but true like:

Iraq had WMD
Abu G was the result of a few bad apples
waterboarding helped keep us safe

ur just a bunch o "morans"

Then read #22.... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

Then read #22.

What about it? You never answered my origianl question other than offering the huge copout of "Draw your own conclusions". The only thing this proves is that you can't or are incapable of defending your positions and quippy but usually pointless posts.

What else is new.

BTW, Adrian, if you want to... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

BTW, Adrian, if you want to be pointedly cryptic, take note and try to emulate mantis. They are MUCH better at it than you.

I have to laugh here. The l... (Below threshold)
Stan25:

I have to laugh here. The left being so stupid as to fall for this stunt. They seem to think that it was hilarious to mock George Bush, Dick Cheney and Sarah Palin at every turn on SNL, Cobert and the liberal cable and network news stations. This time the joke is on them and they are spitting nails.

Uh-oh. Looks like the farri... (Below threshold)
jmc:

Uh-oh. Looks like the farright is throwing man cow under the bus. Now that Petraus is calling for the closing of Gitmo, howlong before it is his turn?

Shafran responded to Gawker... (Below threshold)
jmc:

Shafran responded to Gawker via email last night with this comment:

It was NOT a hoax. Early on when we were looking for someone to waterboard, an email was sent out looking for someone to do it and I mistakenly said it would be staged. That was my mistake and a misunderstanding. But that was early and NOT TRUE AT ALL. It was not staged. NOT AT ALL. When it happened several days later, it was real, honest, actual, not staged. Any info you have was my mistake. THE WATERBOARDING OF MANCOW WAS REAL!!!!!!

#15 posted by | Im such a ... (Below threshold)
914:

#15 posted by | Im such a loser

You forgot the biggest false but true.

Hope and change

Of course the best way to r... (Below threshold)
jmc:

Of course the best way to resolve this would be for Hugh to be waterboarded. I think that would settle it once and for all. What do you say Hugh?

Actually, just looked throu... (Below threshold)
jmc:

Actually, just looked through the link. It doesn't seem there really is any evidence of a hoax. Except some crap from a guy who calls himself cajun boy. Are there any reputable news sources that have picked this up?

So Mancow lied but believin... (Below threshold)
Jake:

So Mancow lied but believing his lie is somehow a failing of "those on the left" to do research?

WTF?

Also, you can count me as o... (Below threshold)
Jake:

Also, you can count me as one who doesn't consider Gawker.com as a true "news" source. About the farthest thing from it, actually.

Nice try though.

But for the record, the first time I watched it, I wondered WTF was up... he grabbed for the microphone a bit too fast. It seemed a bit too scripted.

Eric "Mancow" Muller... (Below threshold)
Adrian Browne:


Eric "Mancow" Muller aka Eric "Ashley Todd" Muller

On separate, yet related no... (Below threshold)
Jake:

On separate, yet related note: Funny to see that nothing about General Petraeus' belief that US torture violated Geneva or Adm. Mullen's criticism of Guantanamo or Sec. Gates' desire to close Guantanamo.

Of course, what do those hacks know.... liberal windbags and all.

Jake, they aren't but you c... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

Jake, they aren't but you certainly are.

I am now ready for the Hitler reference. ww

Willie, so are you saying t... (Below threshold)
Jake:

Willie, so are you saying the top military officials in our country AREN'T saying those things?

Are you ready to admit being wrong on your near total support of all things torture?

On separate, yet r... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:
On separate, yet related note: Funny to see that nothing about General Petraeus' belief that US torture violated Geneva

Just in case you don't know the Geneva Conventions are not a set of laws, but a set of treaties. Only states that ratify the treaties are bound by and benefit from them. The U.S. law that extended the Geneva Conventions to non-state enemy combatants wasn't passed until 2006. Obviously, the EIT's performed prior to 2006 didn't violate the Geneva Conventions as they didn't apply to non-state enemy combatants. BTW, it was a Republican controlled congress that passed that bill and Bush who signed it into law.

or Adm. Mullen's criticism of Guantanamo or Sec. Gates' desire to close Guantanamo.

Both Bush and McCain want to close Guantanamo, but as Obama is finding out, it's not that easy. Nobody cares if military brass or Gates also want to close it as they add nothing to the debate. Nobody in a position of authority is saying just release the prisoners, just move them to some other place. If the Gitmo prisoners knew what it was like in a Federal super max prison they would all be wearing Club Gitmo tee shirts and begging to stay.

JakeIf we close GI... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Jake

If we close GITMO than where do the prisoners go? Please enlighten us as to the brilliant idea that Obama and the rest of the democrats havent thought of yet.

Also military officers tow the line regarding the President. Period. In case you dont remember a 2 star general got relieved because he criticized Clinton.

And personally I could give a wit what anyone else thinks about the subject. I dont need someone to validate my thoughts for me. I personally believe that the waterboarding as I understand it to have taken place at GITMO was not torture.

Opps, Mancow just debunked ... (Below threshold)

Opps, Mancow just debunked your entire "hoax" premise on Olberman tonight Hugh S. It must be devestating to your ego to be shot down in such a dramatic way, better luck next time.

[email protected] How about th... (Below threshold)

[email protected]
How about the next time you post, it be
something of value instead of you wasting
Wizbang bandwidth.

[email protected]?... (Below threshold)

[email protected]?

Olberman is your source of truth and light in the universe? Must be pretty damn dark on your planet.

The key point in [email protected]'s p... (Below threshold)
groucho:

The key point in [email protected]'s post is that Mancow himself gave a sound debunking live and in person to the hoax rumor. Mancow. Not Olberman. Get it? Maybe if you had actually seen it, you'd find it harder to dismiss. Then again, maybe not.

It's a little surprising that Wizbang would attempt to give further credence to this third-rate, unsubstantiated piece of internet crap. What's not surprising is the mindless lemming-like rush to support it on the part of the WizFaithful.

Mancow is kind of a tool, a... (Below threshold)
LaMedusa:

Mancow is kind of a tool, anyway. Before E.D. Hill got married again a while back, he would come in and chat a little bit on fox and friends. He would talk about local news and on national t.v., he mentioned that she divorced because her husband had an affair. Nice of him to broadcast that for her, and well, Obie's hairdo is just so stellar. What better show to debunk a useless prank and insult the viewers' intelligence?

Why not just give them a "S... (Below threshold)
Glenn Cassel AMH1(AW) USN Retired:

Why not just give them a "Shellback Initiation" from the pre-coed days? Like the one I got on Ranger in December of 1980. Make sure to bring plenty of liberal pantywaists for my own personal wogs.

If we close GITMO... (Below threshold)
jmc:
If we close GITMO than where do the prisoners go? Please enlighten us as to the brilliant idea that Obama and the rest of the democrats havent thought of yet.

How about prison? Seriously. We put Charles Manson there. The Uni-Bomber, Timothy McVeigh, John Gotti, Al capone, Jeffrey Dahmer, Sirhan Sirhan (killed RFK) The Son of Sam. and more people than any other country on earth. We can

Waterboard a mass murderer ... (Below threshold)
Jeff Blogworthy:

Waterboard a mass murderer to get valuable information to save American lives. What a tough choice. The same "moralists" who decry the temporary discomfort of mass murderers have no problem with innocent babies literally being torn to pieces in the womb or burned with acid by the thousands. Go figure. Moreover, congress signed off on this, Democrats included.

I don't know what mancow is trying to pull. He's not doing anyone any favors.

groucho, Since you c... (Below threshold)

groucho,
Since you comment at Wizbang, which means
you associate with the lemmings who
commment here, that means through association
you're a mindless lemming as well.
Welcome to lemming land groucho.

I almost forgot Ramzi Youse... (Below threshold)
jmc:

I almost forgot Ramzi Yousef, the mastermind of the 93 world trade center bombing. He is in prison. went to trial and everything.

Here is the video of Mancow... (Below threshold)
LaMedusa:

Here is the video of Mancow being waterboarded: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9TzGGsVt60

He has his nose plugged completely and water is poured onto his mouth. The way he sits up and emotes for everyone is way too obvious. This guy is a showman and wants ratings, regardless of the "thing" going on between Olbie and Hannity. This is phony baloney drama that's not even newsworthy.

jmc, How do you sugg... (Below threshold)

jmc,
How do you suggest the prison personnel
be protected, as well as their families?
Because the ones on the outside will be looking
for any and every weakness to attack in order
to get these men freed. You suppose the guards
will be given new identities so the foreigners
won't know who they really are? And what about
the families and friends of the prison
personnel, will they have the same safe guards
as well? Or do you assume these guys will be
just like the domestic criminals.
Incarcerating these guys here is a whole new
ball game.

No, the lemming population ... (Below threshold)
groucho:

No, the lemming population would be the ones that follow, herdlike, apparently mindless and incapable of accepting a reality that is inconsistent with the hive-mind. Better look up, though, I think that cliff is coming up soon...

Here is the heart of... (Below threshold)
Dr. Carlo Lombardi:


Here is the heart of Mueller's statement:

"Would I waterboard to save my daughters (or any American children)? Yes!
The three terrorists that were waterboarded at Guantanamo were done so by military professionals. And it was done to save lives with America's best interests at heart. Mine was a silly radio time filler in comparison. It's apples & hand grenades!"

groucho, Apparently ... (Below threshold)

groucho,
Apparently you're familiar with that
oncoming cliff, as it were, you must have
already traveled over it.

How do you sugges... (Below threshold)
jmc:
How do you suggest the prison personnel be protected, as well as their families? Because the ones on the outside will be looking for any and every weakness to attack in order to get these men freed

Well, I would assume, that whatever we are doing with Ramzi Yousef, Mahmud Abouhalima, Mohammad Salameh, Nidal Ayyad, and Ahmad Ajaj.
Would be fine.

Ramzi is the nephew of Khaled Shaikh Mohammed, all are members of Al Quaeda and they are doing just fine in prison without to my knowledge any guards being harmed or any of their families being harmed without any special protection.

Also, wouldn't the familes of guards have been in danger from the manson family when Charles was convicted? Wouldn't you think guards would be in danger from fellow crips (who live in the U.S. and have more access to striking back back at guards)when other crips are convicted.

I really don't buy the idea that guards or there families are in any extra danger. i think they are in far more danger going to work surrounded by sociopaths and killers than they would be from a terror network hiding out in the mountains of pakistan.

"Well, I would assume" ... (Below threshold)
914:

"Well, I would assume"

Assumption is the mother of all f ups!

I love the meme that Republ... (Below threshold)
Jake:

I love the meme that Republicans are so very pro-military, that they listen to everything the military says, that if anyone critizes the military (besides themselves) they're anti-American, yet Republicans then turn around and say things like:

"Nobody cares if military brass or Gates also want to close it as they add nothing to the debate. "

"Also military officers tow the line regarding the President. Period."

"And personally I could give a wit what anyone else thinks about the subject."

The military is above reproach until they say something you disagree with then they're not worthy of listening to, adding nothing to the debate. If you disagree, I'd point you to the (foolish and ill advised) MoveOn.org General Betray Us add.

Or do you assume ... (Below threshold)
jmc:
Or do you assume these guys will be just like the domestic criminals Incarcerating these guys here is a whole new ball game.

I really don't see why. again we already are doing it with the Al Quaeda members we have convicted from 93. None of them have done any super villian stuff. Since being incarcerated. I know some of these guys are very dangerous, but how about the guy in a califnoria prison that ate a man's brain? I mean surely he is just as dangerous, and he is doing fine in a super max.

@maggie said: "How do you s... (Below threshold)
Jake:

@maggie said: "How do you suggest the prison personnel
be protected, as well as their families?
Because the ones on the outside will be looking
for any and every weakness to attack in order
to get these men freed."

Maggie, can you give even one example, link, source, or shred of evidence that this would actually be true? This is a baseless conspiracy theory trumped up by the Right to scare people. Nothing more.

Well, I would ass... (Below threshold)
jmc:
Well, I would assume"

Assumption is the mother of all f ups!

I hope you can come up with a better reason than that. We are doing it now and we are doing it succesfully. That is a fact. Like it not it is true and verifiable. So, if you see some reason why you think it is going to fail, please say so. because attacking "I assume" (which was followed by succesful demonstrations is not all that convicing.

@retired military said: " I... (Below threshold)
Jake:

@retired military said: " I personally believe that the waterboarding as I understand it to have taken place at GITMO was not torture. "

Fine. Let's take waterboarding completely off the table. Do you believe beatings, ramming into walls, cutting, chaining to walls and floors for hours on end, psychological trauma, and hanging people from ceilings by their arms for hours is torture?

Because that's what this is about. It's not about waterboarding alone, it's about the fact that the US created a state sanctioned program where these techniques were not only legal, encouraged, and regularly practiced, in many cases they were performed by contractors - people hired specifically to implement such tactics.

Forget waterboarding. I assume you believe that hanging someone by their arms for most of the day or keeping them awake (i.e. without anything approaching a normal sleep cycle) for 10+ days, or ramming people's heads into walls aren't torture. I'd further assume you believe that any combination of those tactics couldn't be considered torture.

International law and treaties, even excluding Geneva, would disagree with you.

@914..."Well, I... (Below threshold)
Jake:

@914...

"Well, I would assume"

Assumption is the mother of all f ups!

You mean like when you *assume* that Dick Cheney is correct when he says there are more documents the White House hasn't declassified that are important the discussion.

Or when you *assume* that only three people were actually waterboarded?

Or when you *assume* that when Cheney says torture netted fantastic, actionable results?

Yeah, I agree, assumption is problematic.

@Mac Lorry said: "Nobody ca... (Below threshold)
Jake:

@Mac Lorry said: "Nobody cares if military brass or Gates also want to close it as they add nothing to the debate"

That is perhaps the most idiotic and ill-informed thing I've read on this or any other site in quite a while.

Here's a few random reasons why the military leadership ABSOLUTELY has a role in this debate:

* We are talking about military detainment where the military is currently RUNNING Guantanamo Bay

* We are talking about the effect of our behavior on the safety of our troops in the field (as you may recall by the non-release of torture photos)

* The military leadership is supposed to be, according the right's meme about listening to the troops first and foremost, a valuable source of information about what they're up against and how to fight them

The military has to run the prison, deal with the prisoners, and respond to the reaction that the prison generates for their troops. I can't think of anyone I want to hear MORE from in this debate. Personally, I respect the military brass and their opinions here. Apparently that's something we, surprisingly, disagree on.

Jake,I dont assume... (Below threshold)
914:

Jake,

I dont assume anything a politician says is correct/factual at face value.

I would ask You Jake, why hasnt the White House released or declassified the info that bolsters thier case for release of tortured detainees? Check that. Flip flop warning in effect,.. former wishes to release tortured detainees?

Oh I know...Because Obama says it hurts our "image" around the World even though it may have saved millions at home.

Whats next jake? "Ma... (Below threshold)
914:

Whats next jake? "Mancow lied, terrorists cryed?"

And this whole argument is ... (Below threshold)
Oyster:

And this whole argument is centered around a sensationalist who calls himself "Mancow"?

This first time I heard this being reported I knew it was a load of horseshit the left would seize on by first making the base assumption that "Mancow" = "the right" and second by using that basis to ridicule anyone who dared to disagree.

Anyone hosting the "Mancow" "waterboarding" video and using it to berate the right is displaying abject ignorance of the true nature of the issue. Anyone using the video at all as a basis for their argument is an idiot.

That's all I have to say about it because it doesn't deserve more.

Jake,That... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

Jake,

That is perhaps the most idiotic and ill-informed thing I've read on this or any other site in quite a while.

Just like a monkey I see you throw turds when someone rattles your cage.

Bush, McCain, and Obama all want to close Gitmo. A bunch of underlings agreeing with Bush, McCain and Obama don't add anything to the debate that the past and current president and the Republican presidential candidate haven't already stated. Do you get it now?

Go ahead and close Gismo, just don't bring the prisoners to the U.S. The issue is that no U.S. prison is designed to repel an armed attack from the outside such as we have seen in other nations where a truck bomb takes out the parameter defenses and where the families of guards and the warden are being held hostage. These are not common criminals.

Also, if the U.S. has to get involved on the ground in Pakistan we could see a large inflow of detainees just as we did in the early days in Afghanistan and Iraq. We simply don't have enough room in our Federal super max prisons to hold such numbers in isolation, which means they have to be mixed in with the prison's general population. In that case we could have a bigger propaganda mess on our hands than Gitmo.

Ultimately, it's not where we hold the enemy combatants that creates the propaganda, it's that we are holding enemy combatants that creates the propaganda. The only question is how many millions of dollars are we going to have to spend to prove that to a bunch of turd throwing liberals?

@retired military: You don'... (Below threshold)
Jake:

@retired military: You don't think that anything the US did was torture simply because the US did it, but I'm curious if you'd agree that these images, if not showing people in US uniforms would bring your outrage:

http://tinyurl.com/ox4lle

And this wasn't just a "few bad apples", as the uber-patriot Cheney has claimed. As the SSCI report clearly stated, this was policy not a few bad apples.

So? Do you consider the acts in these photos "torture"?

@Mac Lorry - did you just c... (Below threshold)
Jake:

@Mac Lorry - did you just call the top American military commanders "just a bunch of underlings"???? WTF? So much for that "we respect and support the military", eh? The hypocrisy makes me sick.

"Ultimately, it's not where we hold the enemy combatants that creates the propaganda,"

Do you understand ANYTHING about propaganda? Clearly not. Propaganda of all sorts is based on things that resonate with the people you're trying to brainwash. Like it or not, agree with Gitmo or not, the fact is, as those "underlings" have said, it's a symbol of things that we don't want symbols for.

As far as repelling attacks, this isn't the Wild West and we're not talking about building a fort to keep out the Indians. Do you (or Maggie) have ANY information that makes you believe that a Terrorist SWAT team will attack a SuperMax prison? Anything?

As far as your ill-informed point that these prisoners will be mixed in with general prison population.... yeah. I'm SURE that's what people are considering. Heck, let's just turn it into a foreign exchange student like program where we send them to stay with host families and go to the local prom. Ewwww scary scary!

Jake, you are an embarrassi... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

Jake, you are an embarrassing example of someone hanging on while all the rest know you are finished.

Anyone that served in the military knows you can never publicly speak out agaist a superior. Ever. Wait until some of these guys you love retire then hear what they have to say.

If 9/11 is the terrorists greatest story, then they will do everything they can to take him out of our custody. Since he is now on an island and well protected, no problem. You put him in our system, then it is possible to bribe, threaten families of guards, use violence, etc. to get him out and back to the middle East. To think different is naive.

They succeeded in 9/11 because they exploited our weaknesses which one is, "they won't do that". You my friend are a putz. You move the goal posts to try to prove a point. Shoo! Go away. ww

The media's heart throb tol... (Below threshold)
twolaneflash:

The media's heart throb told them waterboarding was "torture". They weren't ocnvinced. Mancow's stunt, now that was the proof-of-the-pudding. "See, Obama was right!", the media shouted, with self-satisfied assurance. Now, with chocolate pudding on their faces, the media has undermined and lampooned their adored One. Buying Obama's torture lie made the media easy suckers for Mancow's faux-waterboarding lie. Mancow should have charged admission; Obama has.

did you just call ... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:
did you just call the top American military commanders "just a bunch of underlings"???? WTF? So much for that "we respect and support the military", eh? The hypocrisy makes me sick.

Compared to the past and current President, yes the military brass are underlings, which is the same as saying they are subordinates. Is throwing turds all you can do?

Do you understand ANYTHING about propaganda? Clearly not. Propaganda of all sorts is based on things that resonate with the people you're trying to brainwash. Like it or not, agree with Gitmo or not, the fact is, as those "underlings" have said, it's a symbol of things that we don't want symbols for.

Here's something you apparently don't understand about propaganda, it's easily changed. Move the prisoners to the ADX Federal Supermax Prison in Florence Colorado and before they settle in the propaganda will change to ADX is worse than Gitmo. Nothing will have been accomplished.

Do you (or Maggie) have ANY information that makes you believe that a Terrorist SWAT team will attack a SuperMax prison? Anything?

How about history. The Taliban in Afghanistan and other terrorists groups in other parts of the world have attacked prisons. Do you have ANY information that makes you believe that a Terrorist SWAT team won't attack a SuperMax prison? Anything? Do you think the government should ignore that possibility?

As far as your ill-informed point that these prisoners will be mixed in with general prison population.... yeah. I'm SURE that's what people are considering.

Maybe not the current Gitmo population, but if you had read my comment you would have known that I was talking about what would happen if Obama has to order ground operations in Pakistan. We could end up with another thousand detainees and there simply is not that many open cells in the Federal supermax prisons. What are you going to do with them, rebuild Gitmo inside the Untied States and pretend it won't become a propaganda tool?

Terrorists depend on propaganda to recruit more fighters, among other things. It doesn't matter how well the detainees are treated or where they are held, the terrorists will use anything and everything as propaganda. They'll even turn the move from Gitmo into propaganda that furthers their cause.

Jake:"Do you (o... (Below threshold)
JLawson:

Jake:

"Do you (or Maggie) have ANY information that makes you believe that a Terrorist SWAT team will attack a SuperMax prison? Anything?"

Pre 9/11, the only info we had was that Al Quaeda wanted to attack within the US. Details were sparse. The idea that hijackers would fly planes into buildings was conceivable, but considered very low-risk.

But it's a funny thing about low-risk threats - they can become actuality a bit easier than the high-risk stuff that contingency plans have been thought up and made for. The plans for dealing with a hijacker pre 9/11 were exactly the wrong ones for dealing with what actually occurred.

WildWillie said - "You put him in our system, then it is possible to bribe, threaten families of guards, use violence, etc. to get him out and back to the middle East. To think different is naive."

The prison walls are already porous to cell phones. Information gets in and out - layouts, schedules, guard names and the like.

And as Mac said - they've already attacked prisons to free prisoners. Do you really think they wouldn't do that here, or are you just arguing from contrarian motives?

Jake, </... (Below threshold)

Jake,

Fine. Let's take waterboarding completely off the table.
Do you believe beatings, ramming into walls, cutting, chaining to walls and floors for hours on end, psychological trauma, and
hanging people from ceilings by
their arms for hours is torture?

Could you post some links to your above quoted
allegations?

Jake, Unless you've ... (Below threshold)

Jake,
Unless you've got links to share, your post
listing others assumptions are just that too.

Jake, </... (Below threshold)

Jake,

As far as repelling attacks, this isn't the Wild West and we're not talking
about building a fort to keep out the Indians. Do you (or Maggie) have ANY
information that makes you believe that a Terrorist SWAT team will attack a
SuperMax prison? Anything?

Do you have ANY information that makes you believe that Terrorist SWAT team
will not attack a SuperMax prison? Anything?
Or are the readers supposed to assume that you,
Jake, can guarantee your assertions.

JMC"How about pris... (Below threshold)
retired military:

JMC

"How about prison? Seriously. We put Charles Manson there. The Uni-Bomber, Timothy McVeigh, John Gotti, Al capone, Jeffrey Dahmer, Sirhan Sirhan (killed RFK) The Son of Sam. and more people than any other country on earth. We can "

Great idea. WHy didnt the dems think of it? OH wait they did. Then that politically unpopular thing came up and they became pragmatic politicians like Obama and Hillary did on gay marriage.

One of the major reasons is that they would then be afforded constitutional rights of every other prisoner on American soil and Obama cant hold them indefinitely which he has said he plans to do on some. THey would have to go to trials, which means calling witnesses which may be dead at this time, or whom have families which may be put in danger by their testifying. You make somewhat of a point about the current prison riff raff but terrorists will go after families and dont have any compunction about killing themselves to do it, most prison riff raff have at least some semblance of self preservation.

As for assumptions, you are assuming that the families wont be going after. Dont be beating up someone else for assuming something when you are doing the exact same thing.


----------

Jake

"The military is above reproach until they say something you disagree with then they're not worthy of listening to, adding nothing to the debate. If you disagree, I'd point you to the (foolish and ill advised) MoveOn.org General Betray Us add. "

A. Noone has said that hte military is above reproach. find the quote and link it.

b. Just because their opinions are different that mine doesnt mean squat.

c. Noone said they didnt add anything to the debate. Find the quote and link it.

d. Military officers, especially generals, are politicians just as much as congressmen. They didnt get to that level without being one. They have to play political games the same as Obama and Hillary play political games just as JMC intones about gay marriage.

Your post is worthless and shows that your common sense is in the negative numbers.


"Maggie, can you give even one example, link, source, or shred of evidence that this would actually be true? This is a baseless conspiracy theory trumped up by the Right to scare people. Nothing more.

"

Can you give one example, link or shred of evidence this wont happen?


"Fine. Let's take waterboarding completely off the table. Do you believe beatings, ramming into walls, cutting, chaining to walls and floors for hours on end, psychological trauma, and hanging people from ceilings by their arms for hours is torture?"

Okay Jake. I answered this in another thread but I will repeat it.

First you can take the stuff at Abu Graib off the table as that was an isolated incident in which the people who were involved were punished. They were out of line and IMO didnt get near enough punishment. Noone in the chain of command above those punished condoned, ordered, or approved of the things that took place.

Beatings? Depends. A punch in the gut is not torture. Beating someone unconcious may be. Do you see people convicted for torute for the viscous beatings that take place in American cities. How about spouse abuse? They dont call that torture. Again depends on the severity of the "beating"

ramming into walls,

Gee now we will have high school kids who pick on other kids going to jail for torture. NOT TORTURE

cutting,

Havent heard of this one? Are you making it up or what. It could be.

chaining to walls and floors for hours on end,

Nope. As long as it doesnt cause long term physical injury IE pulling arms out of sockets etc. Cramped muscles are not.

psychological trauma,

oooh playing lound music, scaring someone. As I have stated before. Heavy metal bands are not accused of torture, thrill ride operators are not accused of torture.

and hanging people from ceilings by their arms for hours is torture?"

Yes this is torture. Didnt happen at GITMO.

"Because that's what this is about. It's not about waterboarding alone, it's about the fact that the US created a state sanctioned program where these techniques were not only legal, encouraged, and regularly practiced, in many cases they were performed by contractors - people hired specifically to implement such
tactics"

No it didnt. Hanging people by the arms didnt happen at Gitmo. Neither did beatings, or cutting anyone. You are talking about Abu Graib and that was not state sanctioned. You are not paying attention to facts and are mixing apples and oranges.

"Forget waterboarding. I assume you believe that hanging someone by their arms for most of the day or keeping them awake (i.e. without anything approaching a normal sleep cycle) for 10+ days, or ramming people's heads into walls aren't torture. I'd further assume you believe that any combination of those tactics couldn't be considered torture.

International law and treaties, even excluding Geneva, would disagree with you
"

Hanging people by the arms didnt happen at GITMO. Abu Graib yes. ANd I have answered this

Sleep deprivation is not torture. It just messes with the head and keeps people from thinking straight.

Ramming heads into walls.

I dont think this happened at Gitmo but as I said are you going to start prosecuting 5th graders for torture if they do that their schoolmates. Not torture.

And the Geneva convention didnt apply to these guys until 2006. They are not uniformed combatants. TRY READING THE GENEVA CONVENTION BEFORE YOU COMMENT ON IT.


REF post 55.

THe military brass wants to close GITMO because it has been used as a weapon by the left against the military for going on 7 years now. ANything Obama opens or does will then be on him. THe military brass are politicians and they are not dumb. They know that anything Obama does with GITMO prisoners IS ON HIM and not Bush. Therefore they are stating PUT UP OR SHUT UP to the democrats. Gee you didnt think of that did you? IDIOT.

MacLorry said it right
"Ultimately, it's not where we hold the enemy combatants that creates the propaganda, it's that we are holding enemy combatants that creates the propaganda. The only question is how many millions of dollars are we going to have to spend to prove that to a bunch of turd throwing liberals?"

They could close GITMO and where will they put the prisoners. SOmething that JMC brilliant said to put in the US prisons. Except for all the drawbacks and if they are broken out by AQ cells (which can happen) then Obama has egg all over his face. ANy AMericans die because of the terrorists in the US then Obama has egg all over his face. Why do you think that GITMO has stayed open so long? ANd I bet that it will be still be open 2 years from now.

jmc, A good rule of ... (Below threshold)

jmc,
A good rule of thumb is to never assume
anything, it can be fatal.
And because there's been no real news from
behind the scenes of how our domestic terrorists
are behaving and or contacting outside sources
does not mean there's not been attempted
assaults on personnel, family, and friends.
Remember the blind sheik talked his lawyer into
complicit behaviour which resulted her going to
prison as well.

Jake, I'm going to d... (Below threshold)

Jake,
I'm going to do role reversal, and challenge
you for sources to prove what I've posted isn't
true, valid, probable, and/or reasonable.

Do you believe be... (Below threshold)
jmc:
Do you believe beatings, ramming into walls, cutting, chaining to walls and floors for hours on end, psychological trauma, and hanging people from ceilings by their arms for hours is torture?

Could you post some links to your above quoted

No allegateion was made maggie. You were asked a question. Do you think the above things are torture? Whether or not they have happend is a different debate. And one that is pointless to have with you if we don't whether you consider it torture or not. So answer the question please.


.

Wow, just wow, jmc.<p... (Below threshold)

Wow, just wow, jmc.

You did not ask me a question. You posted the
above and I ask you for sources.
Your post in that regards is torture.

Now do you have sources or not?
How would you like a little taste of torture,
like having your comments gutted like a nailed
catfish.

jmc,A good rule ... (Below threshold)
jmc:
jmc, A good rule of thumb is to never assume anything, it can be fatal.

Well, you are assuming that we are safer if the terrorist are in Guantanamo. So it is pretty apparent you have no problem making assumptions. The questions are whether the assumptions yours, or mine, are logical.

My assumptions are based on The fact that we have convicted Al Quaeda in our prisons. They were locked in prison during Bush's entire presidency and yet no news, or evidence of attempted escape, or breakout, or assualt on the guards of the family has ever been reported.

And because there's been no real news frombehind the scenes of how our domestic terrorists are behaving and or contacting outside sources does not mean there's not been attempted assaults on personnel, family, and friends.

Think about that statment maggie. if I said. because there has been no news from behind the scenes about Alliens from the planet Klingon it doesn't mean they haven't attempted to beam up Al Quaeda in an intergalactiv plot to blow up the earth. If I said that Your response would be "that's crazy." Yet you can't prove it didn't happen.

The argument you are making is in essence, that just because no one has heard of such a thing, or because there is no reported evidence of such a thing, doesn't mean it hasn't happend.

You could say the same thing about any scenario no matter how off the wall.

That is why I beleive in making policy decsions based on evidence. So if you have evidence of any extra danger to prison guards than they face daily, by locking up the guy who kills people and eats there brains, I'd like the hear it.


Remember the blind sheik talked his lawyer into
complicit behaviour which resulted her going to
prison as well.

I am missing this reference.

jmc:<a href="http:... (Below threshold)

jmc:

http://www.soundpolitics.com/archives/003739.html

Still making assumptions, which can be a honeypot, or a brickwall.

Wow, just wo... (Below threshold)
jmc:

Wow, just wow, jmc.
You did not ask me a question. You posted the
above and I ask you for sources.
Your post in that regards is torture.

Wow is right Maggie. First Off jake posted the above, not me. Here is what he wrote:

Do you believe beatings, ramming into walls, cutting, chaining to walls and floors for hours on end, psychological trauma, and hanging people from ceilings by their arms for hours is torture?

Now I can see the confusion, but this is a question. Here is how you can tell. At the end of what Jake wrote there is a little symbol: "?". It is called a question mark. And it indicates a question. Now here is what you wrote in reply to Jake's question:

Could you post some links to your above quoted allegations?

You are asking for links to the above quoted allegations. They are not allegations they are questions. He is trying to determine what you think not prove something to you. Not yet anyway. Why won't you say whether you think they are torture? Why are you afraid to say what you think is and isn't torture?

Now do you have sources or not? How would you like a little taste of torture, like having your comments gutted like a nailed catfish.

Do not threaten me again.

Still making assu... (Below threshold)
jmc:
Still making assumptions, which can be a honeypot, or a brickwall.

so are you.

jmc, I apologize for... (Below threshold)

jmc,
I apologize for addressing my last post to you
that should have been addressed to Jake.
As to you threatening me to never threaten you
again, that was no threat.
And you are in NO position to threaten me.

jmc, I ap... (Below threshold)
jmc:

jmc,

I apologize for addressing my last post to you that should have been addressed to Jake.

Apology accepted. And I apologize for my own snippy comments. It's Interesting how emails and blogs lend themselves to communication being taken more personally and much easier it is to get riled up.

One of the major ... (Below threshold)
jmc:
One of the major reasons is that they would then be afforded constitutional rights of every other prisoner on American soil and Obama cant hold them indefinitely which he has said he plans to do on some.

So? Seriously so what? the 4 al Quaeda convicted in 93 have those same rights. They are in american prisons.

THey would have to go to trials, which means calling witnesses which may be dead at this time, or whom have families which may be put in danger by their testifying.

Didn't stop us in 93. Didn't stop us with domestic terrorist Tim McVeigh. Our way of life is a beleif in human rights. Even if it means people have to go to trial. as for danger it is minimal. No more so that testifying against an armed robber.

You make somewhat of a point about the current prison riff raff but terrorists will go after families and dont have any compunction about killing themselves to do it, most prison riff raff have at least some semblance of self preservation.

So you think that Al Quaeda can get into this country. Get information on the guards, find their familes and do them harm?

If that is the case why can't they find out who is stationed at gitmo, fly to the U.S. and kill their families? Why aren't they doing that? If Husband Soldier John Doe, is at Gitmo, who is protecting his wife in Alabama?

Why is it they can get to the mom or dad of the guard who at leaves lives in the same town but can't get to say the mom or dad of the soldier serving at gitmo when they are probably not in cuba with him? Why can they get into the U.S. and Kill a guard's wife while he is at work, but can't get into Cuba and kill the wife of the sodier while he at the base?

jmc, Yep.... (Below threshold)

jmc,
Yep.

Jake"@retired mili... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Jake

"@retired military: You don't think that anything the US did was torture simply because the US did it, but I'm curious if you'd agree that these images, if not showing people in US uniforms would bring your outrage:"

Asswipe, you wont find anyone here who condones or wants the crap that happened at ABU Graib. We are talking about GITMO which was sanctioned by the govt VS Abu Graib which was not. That is why the Abu Graib folks are in jail. WHICH THEY SHOULD BE. Get a clue.


"And this wasn't just a "few bad apples", as the uber-patriot Cheney has claimed. As the SSCI report clearly stated, this was policy not a few bad apples.
So? Do you consider the acts in these photos "torture"? "

I consider the acts in those pictures as works of IDIOTS (not unlike yourself) who didnt get nearly enough jail time. In addition, the highest person who got disciplined was a one star who claimed she didnt know what was going on. They were not acts condoned by the govt, Bush, Cheney, or anyone else outside the folks who worked at Abu Graib (who were idiots).

"of all sorts is based on things that resonate with the people you're trying to brainwash"

You mean like the kids in public schools right.


JMC

Post 72

"No allegateion was made maggie. You were asked a question. Do you think the above things are torture? Whether or not they have happend is a different debate. And one that is pointless to have with you if we don't whether you consider it torture or not. So answer the question please"

I believe I was asked the question, not maggie. And I answered the question. Of course I answered the same question a few "torture" threads ago but reading comprehension may not be one of Jake's strong suits.

Post 74.

"Well, you are assuming that we are safer if the terrorist are in Guantanamo. "

Umm lets see

a. Gitmo is a military prison with military guards around it.

B. Gitmo is on an island that is also inhabited by people that dont look like middle eastern terrorists and being as it is a communist dictatorship most likely the terrorists would stand out like a sore thumb.

C. ANy extraction of terrorists from GITMO would have to be done by Sea or Air. Both avenues of which are extremely well covered.

In short, an attack on GITMO would require a very large force to even have a small chance of success.

So that assumption above is a pretty safe bet.


"They were locked in prison during Bush's entire presidency and yet no news, or evidence of attempted escape, or breakout, or assualt on the guards of the family has ever been reported"

And just because it wasnt reported doesnt mean that it hasnt happened. WHy just ask Nancy Pelosi about Waterboarding in 2001.

Post 76

"Now I can see the confusion, but this is a question. Here is how you can tell. At the end of what Jake wrote there is a little symbol: "?". It is called a question mark. And it indicates a question. Now here is what you wrote in reply to Jake's question:"

Maybe Maggie decided to pick her toes or catch a movie or maybe she doesnt feel like answering questions. Sorta like you.

Also as stated above. I WAS ASKED THE QUESTION. I ANSWERED THE QUESTION. unlike you.


Post 80

"So you think that Al Quaeda can get into this country. Get information on the guards, find their familes and do them harm?

If that is the case why can't they find out who is stationed at gitmo, fly to the U.S. and kill their families? Why aren't they doing that? If Husband Soldier John Doe, is at Gitmo, who is protecting his wife in Alabama?
"

Actually they can and I am sure they have that information. However, there are those other few mitigating circumstances which causes problems that I mentioned above. Location, location, location.

Another thing is this JMC. Going after soldiers families is a bad idea. Let me ask you this.

We know that AQ has cells in the US. WHy havent you seen car bombs going off in front of schools a few minutes after school is let out? Why not have hand grenades going off in parks and killing kids?

Because when things like that happen Newtons law go into effect. That law being for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

Let a car bomb go off at school at dismall time. If a liberal reporter starts talking about how we are being mean to the terrorists they will get lynched from the nearest lightpole.

Obama will have his hands tied and the gloves will come off. You wouldnt hear a peep about waterboarding, Abu Graib or dropping bombs on villages. The Democrats would get run out of town on rails. Code pink wouldnt be able to show their face on the street. The military will have to turn people away from recruitment stations.

If it happened to prison guard families there would be a hue over it but not much of a one. If it happened to soldiers families they would have to put every base in Iraq and Afghanistan on lockdown.

Retired military: thanks fo... (Below threshold)
groucho:

Retired military: thanks for your service, whatever it may have been. Glad you're retired, though, as angry as you seem to be.

What happened at Gitmo, Abu Ghraib and who knows where else were all fruits of the WH policies regarding "enhanced interrogation" that originated with Cheney and his Star Chamber of legal miscreants in an attempt to coerce whatever info they could to hopefully support what the administration knew to be bogus rationale for invading Iraq.

"They were not acts condoned by the govt, Bush, Cheney, or anyone else outside the folks who worked at Abu Graib (who were idiots)." They certainly didn't condone them publicly, but do you think they were surprised or shocked by them? I would refer you to your earlier statement about the military brass being politicians who are not dumb. Don't be so naive. Everyone's hands are dirty on this one. Are you familiar with the concept of plausible deniability?

"Because when things like that happen Newtons law go into effect. That law being for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction."

And never, never confuse physics with politics.

Groucho"And never,... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Groucho

"And never, never confuse physics with politics"

Never confuse politics with a people's desire to protect their children. I realize that most liberals dont see it this way since they feel that abortion is just dandy but most people do feel this way as far as school children. As for the military families, everyone in a fox hole realizes that if you mess with one soldier's family it could be yours and they wont stand for that.

As for Abu Graib, if it had gone higher than the one star you can bet she would have screamed long and loud as she made enough noise as it was.

As for your claim of bogus rationale. THey used the same intelligence that Bill and Hillary Clinton used, that Kerry, Edwards, Albright and Gore used when all of them stated that Saddam had WMD.

As for me being angry. I dont know where you got that impression. I am as happy as a clam.

It is folks like Jake and JMC who are angry. I just believe in giving as good as I get. Too bad most liberals think they can just say whatever they want and then get shocked that someone has the audacity to challenge them and give as good as they got.

jmc,At comment 76:... (Below threshold)
LaMedusa:

jmc,

At comment 76: I can't believe you dedicated a whole paragraph to a punctuation symbol. Well, yes I can, never mind.

Do not threaten me again.

Uh, excuse me? Which movie has your brain found itself in again where you're the mafia thug that barks orders? I would be completely happy not to read any of your idiot nonsense again:

"So you think that Al Quaeda can get into this country. Get information on the guards, find their familes and do them harm?"

Namely the parts where you suggest that America has never been occupied by Al Quaeda. The World Trade Center was never bombed and then leveled, uh huh. And then you come off with all these theoretical questions in comment 80 that lead to no point of your own.
You want the terrorists to go to prison, yet you have no real definition of what they are, or how they have affected Americans.

Anybody remember Mancow?</p... (Below threshold)
groucho:

Anybody remember Mancow?

Not until someone brings up... (Below threshold)
LaMedusa:

Not until someone brings up his name again. He's actually quite forgettable.

So you think that ... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:
So you think that Al Quaeda can get into this country. Get information on the guards, find their familes and do them harm?

Being an open society it's not hard for al Quaede to get people into this country even now. In the planning stage they follow people home from work at the prison to find out where they live. They then observe the house and follow the spouse and see how many kids are in the home. They go though the target family's garbage, they pose as city or utility workers to maybe gain entry into the home to check it out. It's not so hard to do.

If that is the case why can't they find out who is stationed at gitmo, fly to the U.S. and kill their families? Why aren't they doing that? If Husband Soldier John Doe, is at Gitmo, who is protecting his wife in Alabama?

First it's much harder to find out who the guards at gitmo are. Second, there's no point in killing a guard's family back in the states if the purpose is to gain the guard's cooperation in a break out. The guard won't know his family has been killed without the authorities knowing it before, and as soon as that happened the guard would be relived of duty.

Why is it they can get to the mom or dad of the guard who at leaves lives in the same town but can't get to say the mom or dad of the soldier serving at gitmo when they are probably not in cuba with him?

Because killing of family is pointless as part of a breakout plan. Let me explain how it works. A domestic prison guard goes home at night and some time during the night the home is invaded. The terrorists hold the guard's family hostage and threaten to kill them unless the guard cooperates with a breakout plan. The guard shows up for work with no one being the wiser that he's now part of an escape plot. Likely several guards will have been corrupted in the same way. Then a truck bomb takes out the prison's main gate and armed terrorists invade it while the corrupted guards release the prisoners. Several IED's along the roads leading to the prison stop reinforcements from getting to the prison.

Why can they get into the U.S. and Kill a guard's wife while he is at work, but can't get into Cuba and kill the wife of the sodier while he at the base?

First Cuba is not an open society and I doubt the communist government is sympathetic to Islamic terrorists. Second, unlike a city, a military base is much harder to get into and move around in without being challenged. That's particularly true of Gitmo. Third, even if prisoners do escape from Gitmo there's no place to go unless the Cuban government is cooperating with the terrorists.

The real problems is that al Quaede can modify their propaganda faster then we can move prisoners from one facility to another. It's not where we are holding enemy combatants that generates recruitment propaganda it's that we are holding them at all that generates recruitment propaganda. Short of providing each terrorist with 70 virgins the recruitment propaganda is going to continue.

Namely the parts w... (Below threshold)
jmc:
Namely the parts where you suggest that America has never been occupied by Al Quaeda. The World Trade Center was never bombed and then leveled, uh huh. And then you come off with all these theoretical questions in comment 80 that lead to no point of your own. You want the terrorists to go to prison, yet you have no real definition of what they are, or how they have affected Americans.

You know the main reason you are an idiot LaMed? You always respond to things in ways that show you didn't understand what you read. When I asked RM if he thinks Al Quaeda has the resources to attack the families of prison guards (Which he claims they will do if close Gitmo) I asked that question to setup the next part of the argument. Which is if they have the resources to attack the families of prison guards and they have the will to attack the families of prison guards, why are they not attacking the prison guard families at gitmo?

So, now that you have jumped in the argument take three deep breaths(Your brain needs the oxygen) and endeavor (beyond you I'm sure) to understand what you are replying to.


RM: The gist of your response seems to be that Al Quaeda is afraid to attack the families of our troops who are completly unguarded and would not be afraid to attack the families of prison guards who are also equally unguarded.

Yet, that is contradicted by your earlier asserion that terrorist have no sense of self-preservation.

So which is is it? Are they afraid of our troops taking the gloves off? or are are they monsters with no sense of self-preservation?

Also, your assertion that the families are in any extra danger is pure imagination. Noone has demonstrated anything that shows this. And I don't think monsters without a sense of self-preservation are afraid to attack the families of troops. It's just too difficult for them to pull this off. Just like they have not attacked the families of prison guards for the Al Quaeda in american prison. And don't give me any junk that we don't know. We don't know they weren't attacked by flying leperachauns either. Until I see evidence I ain't buying it. You it seems don't require evidence.


Because killing of... (Below threshold)
jmc:
Because killing of family is pointless as part of a breakout plan. Let me explain how it works. A domestic prison guard goes home at night and some time during the night the home is invaded. The terrorists hold the guard's family hostage and threaten to kill them unless the guard cooperates with a breakout plan. The guard shows up for work with no one being the wiser that he's now part of an escape plot. Likely several guards will have been corrupted in the same way. Then a truck bomb takes out the prison's main gate and armed terrorists invade it while the corrupted guards release the prisoners. Several IED's along the roads leading to the prison stop reinforcements from getting to the prison.

Sounds like a fun episode of 24. A work of pure imagination. If they can do this why haven't they done it in the 15 years we have held the 93 bombers? Shit why don't the crips or bloods do this? Why doesn't the aryan brotherhood do this? Why didn't the manson family do this? The latin Kings? I guess they are not just the magical super-villians Al Quaeda are.

jmc-You're dumb as... (Below threshold)
LaMedusa:

jmc-

You're dumb as a post. Not only do most of your recent comments consist mainly of questions, you never follow up with a consistent point.

You said:

"Which is if they have the resources to attack the families of prison guards and they have the will to attack the families of prison guards, why are they not attacking the prison guard families at gitmo?"

Oh yeah, that was a setup alright. Where the hell did that come from and where are your sources to back up such a pronouncement? You are oh, such an eagle eye about the situation at Guantanamo, you are even privy to what they have actually done over there as well as their strategies. I really think we should send you over there to straighten things out, so the guards will pity you and throw you a bone. Tell them all about how schooled you are. They'll be so impressed. Goofball.

"So which is is it? Are the... (Below threshold)
LaMedusa:

"So which is is it? Are they afraid of our troops taking the gloves off? or are are they monsters with no sense of self-preservation?"

This question here shows how really stupid you are, or how you want to bicker about the true nature of Al Quaeda. We have more prisons in the U.S. than any other country, who do you think they are for?

"Sounds like a fun episode ... (Below threshold)
LaMedusa:

"Sounds like a fun episode of 24. A work of pure imagination. If they can do this why haven't they done it in the 15 years we have held the 93 bombers? Shit why don't the crips or bloods do this?"

Man, are you stupid. A fun episode of 24? Tell all those Americans being hauled into detention camps because of civil unrest just how fun their episode is going to be and what a brilliant work of pure imagination it all is. I'm with maggie on this one, "yep, jmc".

Jmc"Yet, that is c... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Jmc

"Yet, that is contradicted by your earlier asserion that terrorist have no sense of self-preservation.

So which is is it? Are they afraid of our troops taking the gloves off? or are are they monsters with no sense of self-preservation?"

I answer your questions but yet you go and pick your toenails when I ask mine.

As I stated above. It would do no good to attack the guards families at GITMO. What would they gain? Other than pissing off the military and most likely half of America.
Nothing. I listed the difficulties above (as others have) of breaking someone out or using hostages to get prisoners out of GITMO.

I dont think "afraid" of the troops taking the gloves off may be the right word. I think they are more wary of losing any sympathy when they go out and take out kids. If you do it to Israel then the world is shocked and expresses dismay but the jackals at the UN laugh and shake their heads in the privacy of their own little rooms. Do it in the US and then the President is forced to act. Money and aid gets cut off to countries, liberal journalists shut the hell up about the "freedom fighters" and start calling them terrorists, and other undesireable actions start happening.

The same cannot be said of terrorists held on US soil. I dont know why they have not tried to rescue the terrorists from the 93 bombing. Maybe they have and we dont know about it. Maybe the ones who perpetrated it arent high value enough. Maybe they dont want to take the possibility of exposing cells for a jailbreak. Maybe they arent organized enough to do it with any degree of success. It could be a dozen reasons and anyone of the above are as perfectly valid as the next. Risk vs reward. A suicide bomber on a bus gets more front page coverage than someone who kills a prison guard and his family.

Why dont the Crips and the Bloods do the same? Well for one they cant control retaliation against the ones left behind by the guards. For two they are on US soil and it is very unprofitable to have the FBI and a lot of other agencies out gunning for you because you chose to mass murder guards and their families. Please note that Terrorists dont seem to have this problem as they are usually from a foreign country and probably have a plan to get back there. WHat happens when a cop gets killed ? All bets are off until the cop killer is found.

" You it seems don't require evidence"

No but I require common sense enough to at least admit such a threat exists. Why put people in danger if you dont have to? Again your democratic collegaues in Congress just dont seem to eager to put them in prison in their districts. Why not?

So JMC why dont you think that the terrorists have started using car bombs on school kids in the US? They dont have any compuction about doing it in Israel. They proclaim their hatred against the US and assuredly have cells in the country and can get more in with the porous borders that we have.

Sounds like a fun ... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:
Sounds like a fun episode of 24. A work of pure imagination.

Terrorists have done each one of the elements I used in my scenario. It would be really stupid to ignore the possibility given the history of terrorists attacking prisons and breaking out fellow terrorists.

If they can do this why haven't they done it in the 15 years we have held the 93 bombers?

Because the important and the bulk of terrorists are in Gitmo where the terrorists can't get at them.

Shit why don't the crips or bloods do this? Why doesn't the aryan brotherhood do this? Why didn't the manson family do this? The latin Kings? I guess they are not just the magical super-villians Al Quaeda are.

Same reason why none of the above crashed aircraft into the twin trade towers. Because there're just common criminals, not part of an organization that's at war with the United States. Seems like you are having a hard time wrapping your brain around that difference.

"I answer your questions bu... (Below threshold)
LaMedusa:

"I answer your questions but yet you go and pick your toenails when I ask mine."

And that is exactly what children do when they don't want to think, or don't have the capacity to answer you. If he even bothers to return, I'm sure he'll come up with some clever-sounding bullsh*t speak interspersed with huge blockquotes of everyone else's comments he responds to. It provides the illusion that he's posted a long, thought-out response. *yawn, whatever. He's Captain Toenails...

It was obvious to me, a cas... (Below threshold)

It was obvious to me, a casual observer that had done no special research on waterboarding, just from what I had heard on the radio, that he was doing it wrong. The cloth was supposed to cover his mouth as well as his face, and it should have taken at least ten seconds to get the effect.

Mancow fail.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy