Bachmann: ‘Absurd’ to waterboard me to prove it’s not torture - Polidicks

[url]http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/11/18/bachmann-absurd-to-waterboard-me-to-prove-its-not-torture/[/url] [quote] Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann is pretty sure waterboarding isn’t torture — but she says it would be “absurd” to find out for herself. During a [URL="http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/11/12/gop-debate-audience-cheers-waterboarding/"]recent CBS/[I]National Journal[/I] debate[/URL], the candidate enthusiastically said she supported the interrogation technique. “It was very effective,” she claimed. “It gained information for our country.” Speaking to Fox News several days later, Bachmann [URL="http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/11/14/bachmann-waterboarding-is-justified-like-nuking-japan/"]defended herself[/URL] by comparing waterboarding to President Harry Truman’s decision to drop an atomic bomb on Japan during World War II. Both then-Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama and Republican presidential nominee John McCain agreed during the 2008 campaign that waterboarding was torture. In an interview this week, the [I]Des Moines Register[/I] editorial board [URL="http://gawker.com/5860530/bachmann-it-would-be-absurd-to-get-waterboarded-to-prove-its-not-torture?tag=2012"]asked Bachmann[/URL] about the matter again. “Is it uncomfortable?” Bachmann asked. “Yes, it’s uncomfortable, but I am more concerned that we would prevent aircraft from going into the Twin Towers, taking them down, and taking out 3,000 innocent American lives, than I am about the comfort level of a terrorist, and what that means for them.” “Because again, this is done under monitored conditions, where – is it uncomfortable? Yes, I don’t deny that it’s uncomfortable. But a person is not going to lose their life, nor will they be permanently injured or permanently impaired by this. And it’s done on very unique, strict circumstances.” “You say it’s being done on terrorists, but actually it’s being done as an interrogation technique to determine who are terrorists,” one editorial board member noted. “These people have not been tried. … If you think it’s not that bad, would you ever willingly submit to it just to see what it’s like?” “Well, I think it would be absurd to have the president of the United States submit themselves to waterboarding,” Bachmann declared, ignoring that she’s not yet president. “There are those that have submitted themselves to it so that they can talk about it and speak about it afterwards.” In fact, two members of the media who supported the Iraq war — journalist [URL="http://rawstory.com/news/2008/War_cheerleading_jouro_waterboarded_0702.html"]Christopher Hitchens[/URL] and Chicago radio host [URL="http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2009/05/mancow-tells-olbermann-waterboarding-is-torture/"]Erich “Mancow” Muller[/URL] — submitted to the technique and came away convinced that it was torture. “[I]f waterboarding does not constitute torture, then there is no such thing as torture,” [URL="http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/08/hitchens200808?printable=true&currentPage=all"]Hitchens wrote[/URL] following the ordeal. “I still wish that my experience were the only way in which the words ‘waterboard’ and ‘American’ could be mentioned in the same (gasping and sobbing) breath.”[/quote]

Chicken.

Maybe we can prove or disprove her theories about the afterlife instead

Waterboarding is pretty much the same as dropping the bombs on japan I don't even

There is a reason that Sarah Palin is no longer mentioned in Republican circles and only in Democratic circles when they are making a joke. Let us hope that Bachman soon joins hands with Palin, Pelosi and Mrs. Clinton in the annals of failed, idiotic women politicians.

Oh yeah? It's effective in providing information for our government to use? Just like the information from our intelligence agencies stating that Iraq was in possession of weapons of mass destruction? Gee, that does sound useful and effective.

Dear god it's like she's drowning in stupidity

[quote]“Because again, this is done under monitored conditions, where – is it uncomfortable? Yes, I don’t deny that it’s uncomfortable. But a person is not going to lose their life, nor will they be [b]permanently injured or permanently impaired by this.[/b] And it’s done on very unique, strict circumstances.”[/quote] Bullshit. [quote]Waterboarding can cause extreme pain, dry drowning, damage to lungs, brain damage from oxygen deprivation, other physical injuries including broken bones due to struggling against restraints, lasting psychological damage and death. Adverse physical consequences can manifest themselves months after the event, while psychological effects can last for years[/quote] [quote] “You say it’s being done on terrorists, but [b]actually it’s being done as an interrogation technique to determine who are terrorists,”[/b] one editorial board member noted. “These people have not been tried. … If you think it’s not that bad, would you ever willingly submit to it just to see what it’s like?” “Well, I think it would be absurd to have the president of the United States submit themselves to waterboarding,” Bachmann declared, ignoring that she’s not yet president. “There are those that have submitted themselves to it so that they can talk about it and speak about it afterwards.” [/quote] She brushes it off like it is nothing. Witch trials ring a bell?

[QUOTE=Ogopogo;33338648] [quote]actually it’s being done as an interrogation technique to determine who are terrorists,”[/quote] She brushes it off like it is nothing. Witch trials ring a bell?[/QUOTE] oh yeah it's totally cool because we're doing it to people who might not even be terrorists in the first place

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9TzGGsVt60[/media] [editline]19th November 2011[/editline] So what Bachmann is saying is that the President should have no idea what they're arguing for (or against)?

'Uncomfortable'? Way to make a fucking understatement

It's not about whether it counts as torture, it's about the fact that Republicans are completely and totally okay with illegally detaining and torturing people.

I'd vote for Palin before Bachmann.

The part of this that is actually funny is that this crazy fucktard idiot has gained international recognition and legitimacy for being unable to take her frog pills on time, and is considered a [i]legitimate[/i] political candidate for the office of [i]President of the United States.[/i] jesus wept.

OK, if you won't be waterboarded to see whether it's torture or not, then how about a waterboarding to stop you from being so fucking stupid?

[QUOTE=ketchup v2;33338843]I'd vote for Palin before Bachmann.[/QUOTE] I'd not vote if those were my options, holy shit.

[quote]Because again, this is done under monitored conditions, where – is it uncomfortable? Yes, I don’t deny that it’s uncomfortable. But a person is not going to lose their life, nor will they be permanently injured or permanently impaired by this. And it’s done on very unique, strict circumstances.[/quote] Considering the point of waterboarding is to "safely" simulate the feeling of drowning on the victim, I would say waterboarding is a whole lot more than "uncomfortable".

Fuck even Wikipedia says it's torture.

Personally if I was president or ruler I would submit myself to whatever interrogation techniques I was proposing before I allowed them to be used on another person.

[QUOTE=27X;33338892]The part of this that is actually funny is that this crazy fucktard idiot has gained international recognition and legitimacy for being unable to take her frog pills on time, and is considered a [i]legitimate[/i] political candidate for the office of [i]President of the United States.[/i] jesus wept.[/QUOTE] Not really, she gets like 2% of the republican vote now

How about we don't torture anybody at all considering the United Nations Convention Against Torture agreement the US signed? [quote]Article 2 of the convention prohibits torture, and requires parties to take effective measures to prevent it in any territory under its jurisdiction. [b]This prohibition is absolute and non-derogable. "No exceptional circumstances whatsoever"[/b] may be invoked to justify torture, including war, threat of war, internal political instability, public emergency, [b]terrorist acts[/b], violent crime, or any form of armed conflict. [b]Torture cannot be justified as a means to protect public safety or prevent emergencies.[/b][/quote] [quote]It's a clear-cut case: [b]Waterboarding can without any reservation be labeled as torture. It fulfils all of the four central criteria that according to the United Nations Convention Against Torture (UNCAT) defines an act of torture.[/b] First, when water is forced into your lungs in this fashion, in addition to the pain you are likely to experience an immediate and extreme fear of death. You may even suffer a heart attack from the stress or damage to the lungs and brain from inhalation of water and oxygen deprivation. In other words there is no doubt that waterboarding causes severe physical and/or mental suffering– one central element in the UNCAT's definition of torture. [b]In addition the CIA's waterboarding clearly fulfills the three additional definition criteria stated in the Convention for a deed to be labeled torture, since it is 1) done intentionally, 2) for a specific purpose and 3) by a representative of a state– in this case the US.[/b][/quote]

[QUOTE=Jookia;33338976]How about we don't torture anybody at all considering the United Nations Convention Against Torture agreement the US signed?[/QUOTE] The whole point of the waterboard argument is that they don't consider it torture, where have you been?

[QUOTE=ketchup v2;33338990]The whole point of the waterboard argument is that they don't consider it torture, where have you been?[/QUOTE] It's "enhanced interrogation".

[QUOTE=Jookia;33338976]How about we don't torture anybody at all considering the United Nations Convention Against Torture agreement the US signed?[/QUOTE] I'm pretty sure that they're trying to argue that waterboarding isn't torture, but rather an "[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enhanced_interrogation_techniques"]enhanced interrogation technique[/URL]."

Waterboarding [b]is[/b] torture according to the agreement that they signed.

[QUOTE=valkery;33338559]There is a reason that Sarah Palin is no longer mentioned in Republican circles and only in Democratic circles when they are making a joke. Let us hope that Bachman soon joins hands with Palin, Pelosi and Mrs. Clinton in the annals of failed, idiotic women politicians.[/QUOTE] Did you just say that Clinton is as bad as Palin?

Speaking to Fox News several days later, Bachmann defended herself by comparing waterboarding to President Harry Truman’s decision to drop an atomic bomb on Japan during World War II. um

[QUOTE=DOG-GY;33339126]Speaking to Fox News several days later, Bachmann defended herself by comparing waterboarding to President Harry Truman’s decision to drop an atomic bomb on Japan during World War II. um[/QUOTE] Why would you test something that could hurt you on yourself to prove it doesn't hurt people?

I remember reading somewhere that a conservative radio host volunteered to be water boarded because he said it wasn't torture, and after he said that he was just tortured.

I actually like idea of waterboarding for terrorist scum.