The Boy Who Cried Waterboard

April 29, 2009 § 11 Comments

The claim in November 2007:

U.S. and Pakistani authorities captured KSM on March 1, 2003 in Rawalpindi, Pakistan. KSM stayed mum for months, often answering questions with Koranic chants. Interrogators eventually waterboarded him — for just 90 seconds.

KSM “didn’t resist,” one CIA veteran said in the August 13 issue of The New Yorker. “He sang right away. He cracked real quick.” Another CIA official told ABC News: “KSM lasted the longest under water-boarding, about a minute and a half, but once he broke, it never had to be used again.”

The claim in April 2009:

Today, Library Tower looms 73 stories above Los Angeles. But the Pacific Coast’s highest skyscraper might have become a smoldering pile of steel beams had CIA interrogators not waterboarded Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM) 183 times in March 2003, as recently released memoranda reveal.

My point is just that if we take the parameters “stayed mum for months” and “once for 90 seconds”, and measure how close that came to, you know, the truth – immediately and 183 times over a period of a month – that probably gives us a good idea how to properly calibrate the claim “… might have become a smoldering pile of steel beams …”.
(Cross-posted)

Tagged:

§ 11 Responses to The Boy Who Cried Waterboard

  • Mark P. Shea says:

    Not to mention, of course, that the whole claim that waterboarding foiled the plot is now documented horseshit. The Bushies got their timeline screwed up. The plot was foiled before KSM was captured.

    It would appear that people who lie once might lie twice or even three times.

  • Anonymous says:

    Zippy:
    The fight against torture, should focus the one being suffered by your tax dollars at work in…. my country slaughtering late term unborns.

    Please read my current post at the Jester:
    By Guillermo Bustamante on April 29, 2009 4:32 PM

    (From Bishop John M. D’Arcy): “Since the matter is now public, it is my duty as the bishop of this diocese to respond and correct. I take up this responsibility with some sadness, but also with the conviction that if I did not do so, I would be remiss in my pastoral responsibility…

    … the terrible breach, which has taken place between Notre Dame and the church. It cannot be allowed to continue… (this should) take place in a way that is substantial and true, and not illusory. Notre Dame and Father Jenkins must do their part if this healing is to take place. I will do my part. Sincerely yours in our Lord, Most Reverend John M. D’Arcy

    NOW! The Most Reverend does know the meaning of TAKING RESPONSIBILITY? Forgive me, but with all due respect, the essence of the hierarchical VOW OF OBEDIENCE to his local Bishop, from the priest Jenkins IS NOT BEING ENFORCED.

    Time to pray Psalm 74 1 O God, why dost thou cast us off for ever? Why does thy anger smoke against the sheep of thy pasture? 2 Remember thy congregation, which thou hast gotten of old, which thou hast redeemed to be the tribe of thy heritage! Remember Mount Zion, where thou hast dwelt. 3 Direct thy steps to the perpetual ruins; the enemy has destroyed everything in the sanctuary! 4 Thy foes have roared in the midst of thy holy place; they set up their own signs for signs. 5 At the upper entrance they hacked the wooden trellis with axes. 6 And then all its carved wood they broke down with hatchets and hammers. 8 They said to themselves, “We will utterly subdue them”; they burned all the meeting places of God in the land. 10 How long, O God, is the foe to scoff? Is the enemy to revile thy name for ever? 11 Why dost thou hold back thy hand, why dost thou keep thy right hand in thy bosom? 18 Remember this, O LORD, how the enemy scoffs, and an impious people reviles thy name. 19 Do not deliver the soul of thy dove to the wild beasts; do not forget the life of thy poor for ever. 20 Have regard for thy covenant; 21 Let not the downtrodden be put to shame; let the poor and needy praise thy name. 22 Arise, O God, plead thy cause; remember how the impious scoff at thee all the day! 23 Do not forget the clamour of thy foes, the uproar of thy adversaries which goes up continually!

    In Spanish the last verse is: “because their –uproar- pride (satan’s main blindness) is always increasing”. The prideful devil wants to crow: LOOK MY TRIUMPH! THE MAJOR PUSHER OF GENOCIDE IS RECEIVING A CATHOLIC HONOR IN NOTRE DAME!!!

    Let’s spare Our Blessed Mother to be soooo affronted in this university, precisely. She has to crush the serpent’s head. In 36 hours starts May, traditionally dedicated by our Church to her. Please join the powerful Rosaries prayed to enlighten those who SHOULD EXERT AUTHORITY, taking PART, not eluding, R-E-S-P-O-N-S-I-B-I-L-I-T-Y.

    God bless us all.

  • Mark P. Shea says:

    Zippy:

    Either you are with the abortionists or you are with the torturers.

    Choose!

  • c matt says:

    Both fights (against abortion and torture) are important. Maybe not equally so, I don’t know (I would place more importance on abortion if I had to choose, but I don’t see why I have to choose). But the torture fight has a disturbing aspect – we are fighting against some who should be aligned with us.

  • Teresa says:

    I am both against abortion and against torture and I am not convinced that these enhanced interrogation techniques are torture at all. These techniques were used in rare circumstances that required an immediate need to protect all the citizens’ of the USA. Did these techniques cause any permanent damage to the terrorists? Or was it just some temporary discomfort? The latter is what I believe to be true. We need these CIA officers to have every possible option at their disposal in order to protect the citizens’ of the United States. What if God forbid, another attack like 9/11 happens in the U.S. and it could have been prevented with the use of these interrogation techniques, what would you say then? Please check out my blog articles at http://teresamerica.blogtownhall.com/

  • zippy says:

    <>Did these techniques cause any permanent damage to the terrorists? Or was it just some temporary discomfort?<>I don’t think those are particularly helpful criteria. There are all sorts of things that could be done which I think everyone sane would agree is torture, but which would not cause permanent physical damage.

  • Anonymous says:

    Zippy,

    McCain opposed torture. A Catholic could not (without committing a mortal sin) vote for Obama.

    Whatever they pay you, it ain’t enough. Some evil Obama voters (I repeat myself) try to mainain their bona fides as as professional catholics by hurling feces around such as McCain voters are evil because we would defend torture – AGAIN McCain opposes torture.

    Is this Mark P. Shea the same former mental defective feverishly working on his post-doctoral degree in moral hypocrisy? Is he the presbyterian heretic that believes his opinions and speculations (distortions, omissions, exaggerations, outright lies) override the Pope’s? If not I apologize to your MPS.

    Any dishonest attempt to equate so-called torture (three or 153 acts which object was to save innocent, civilian lives) with abortion (46,000,000 murders; methinks they do this to rationalize voting for their dream: the sociocath welfare state that will take care of them; or they are purely evil and hateful) is not in accordance with the public stand (The Four Non-Negotiables) of the Holy Father.

    Add to whatever they pay you for this blog work, the huge volume of raw research of data for your doctoral in proctology, which is priceless.

    T. Shaw

  • zippy says:

    T. Shaw:

    I agree that McCain is good on torture.

    And as I’ve said before, there is no question that the <>gravity<> of the abortion holocaust is vastly greater than the <>gravity<> of a few acts of torture in the GWOT. That doesn’t make the latter anything less than despicable. One of the key problems with the latter, in addition, is that it is corrupting the pro-life movement from within: Moloch has fed the political Right a poison, which the political Right has ingested with gusto. It isn’t too late for that to stop. Yet.

    As for the rest of your comment, I have no idea what you are raving about.

  • JohnMcG says:

    <> the presbyterian heretic that believes his opinions and speculations (distortions, omissions, exaggerations, outright lies) override the Pope’s? <>You mean like this?

    <>A Catholic could not (without committing a mortal sin) vote for Obama.
    <>

  • e. says:

    “One of the key problems with the latter, in addition, is that it is corrupting the pro-life movement from within…”

    One of the key problems is the remarkably notorious conflation of protection of innocent life (babies, in the case of abortion) with the protection of insidious life (blood-thirsty, murdering terrorists seeking to annhilate innocent civilians) rather than advocating (and promoting) the rights of innocent civilian popoulations who deserve as much protection against these murderous thugs as those innocent babies do!

  • Rae says:

    <>Zippy said:
    “One of the key problems with the latter [i.e., torture], in addition, is that it is corrupting the pro-life movement from within: Moloch has fed the political Right a poison, which the political Right has ingested with gusto. It isn’t too late for that to stop. Yet.”<>Well said. I believe that if pro-life Catholics would repent their support of torture, then God would shower untold blessings on pro-life activities. I cannot get my own husband to agree with me that waterboarding is torture. But I am very grateful that a vocal group of Catholics continue to oppose these Orwellian-titled “enhanced interrogation techniques.” State-sponsored torture is state-sponsored torture, whether it is Russia or the U.S.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

What’s this?

You are currently reading The Boy Who Cried Waterboard at Zippy Catholic.

meta

%d bloggers like this: