Setting The Record Straight
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2jKe5zAS9E
Today, President Obama announced that he would not rule out prosecution of Bush Administration officials who authorized water boarding. Yes, I called it water boarding. As a person with a spine who wishes for our Country to remain free, I will not join the chorus of bleeding heart leftists who wish to call it torture. But before we get into that aspect of the issue, let us first take a look at the legalities. The fact of this matter is clear. Even if the act were to be deemed torture, was it illegal? According to the Geneva Convention, the answer is no. Why? Because the Geneva Convention is very specific as to whom it applies. I quote here.
[p.36] (1) That the Party in revolt against the de jure Government possesses an
organized military force, an authority responsible for its acts,
acting within a determinate territory and having the means of
respecting and ensuring respect for the Convention.
(2) That the legal Government is obliged to have recourse to the regular
military forces against insurgents organized as military and in
possession of a part of the national territory.
(3) (a) That the de jure Government has recognized the insurgents as
belligerents; or
(b) That it has claimed for itself the rights of a belligerent; or
(c) That it has accorded the insurgents recognition as belligerents
for the purposes only of the present Convention; or
(d) That the dispute has been admitted to the agenda of the Security
Council or the General Assembly of the United Nations as being a
threat to international peace, a breach of the peace, or an act
of aggression.
(4) (a) That the insurgents have an organization purporting to have the
characteristics of a State.
(b) That the insurgent civil authority exercises de facto authority
over the population within a determinate portion of the national
territory.
(c) That the armed forces act under the direction of an organized
authority and are prepared to observe the ordinary laws of war.
(d) That the insurgent civil authority agrees to be bound by the
provisions of the Convention.
Here we see that Al Qaeda in no way falls into a category to be protected by this convention. Now I know lefties won't like this argument, but it is factual. Assuming the act would have been illegal in any other case, it would not have been in this case. Remember, there is a vast difference between legalities and moralities. So let's go on to look at the morality.
Here is the water boarding technique explained in one of the top secret memos.
In this procedure, the individual is bound securely to an inclined bench, which is approximately four feet by seven feet. The individual's feet are generally elevated. A cloth is placed over the forehead and eyes. Water is then applied to the cloth in a controlled manner. As this is done, the cloth is lowered until it covers both the nose and mouth. Once the cloth is saturated and completely covers the mouth and nose, air flow is slightly restricted for 20 to 40 seconds due to the presence of the cloth… During those 20 to 40 seconds, water is continuously applied from a height of twelve to twenty-four inches. After this period, the cloth is lifted, and the individual is allowed to breathe unimpeded for three or four full breaths… The procedure may then be repeated. The water is usually applied from a canteen cup or small watering can with a spout… You have… informed us that it is likely that this procedure would not last more than twenty minutes in any one application."
Notice the reporter saying that it would break you quickly, but you would feel fine in minutes? This is no doubt the reason for the repeated use on a couple of suspects. Furthermore, notice that the reporter is alive, well, and unharmed in a suit and tie shortly after the experience?
To those who say it is torture, consider this. The people this method was used on are members of Al Qaeda. Other members of this same group got into airplanes and stayed in them as they slammed into buildings, vaporizing themselves and the passengers. They were not "standing there feeling fine" minutes later. They are not "alive and healthy" today as are the Al Qaeda members who were subjected to water boarding.
To the Obama Administration and the extreme left who stands by this man, I would ask you this. Why is it that it is the water boarding that you are so opposed to? Why isn't it the terrorism that you find offensive? And how in the hell is a man who lacks the fortitude to use an interrogation technique that leaves a recipient standing there healthy and unharmed moments later supposed to be a leader in a dangerous world full of threats?
