Talk:Waterboarding

RobS, did you read the citation? It says "Mr Cheney implied that the technique - a form of simulated drowning - was used on the alleged September 11 mastermind, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who is being held at Guantánamo Bay."-AmesG_yo! 14:27, 13 April 2007 (EDT)

Yes, but this isn't Wikipedia. Under WP:Verifiability, you can add that kinda garbage despite the fact that the actual radio transcript PROVES it is a false citation from the Guardian, as well as the other link that was removed. RobS 14:35, 13 April 2007 (EDT)

Show me the transcript.-AmesG_yo! 14:39, 13 April 2007 (EDT)

Here. [1] RobS 14:42, 13 April 2007 (EDT)

I read it. He says, "And I think the terrorist threat, for example, with respect to our ability to interrogate high value detainees like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, that's been a very important tool that we've had to be able to secure the nation." I'm putting the line back, but with the quote. You'll like it.-AmesG_yo! 15:06, 13 April 2007 (EDT)

I added this - "In a recent interview, Vice President Dick Cheney described waterboarding as a "very important tool" in the interrogation of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, but said that he did not consider it torture.." No doubt it's factual, it's straight from the interview. Cut out the middle man. Take that, BBC!-AmesG_yo! 15:09, 13 April 2007 (EDT)

It reads,

...our ability to interrogate..."; says nothing about waterboarding and continues with,

"The Congress recently voted on this question of military commissions and our authority to continue the interrogation program. It passed both Houses, fortunately. The President signed it into law, but the fact is 177 Democrats in the House -- or excuse me, 162 Democrats in the House voted against it, and 32 out of 44 senators -- Democratic senators voted against it.

and as he concludes in the next sequence,

" We don't torture. That's not what we're involved in. We live up to our obligations in international treaties that we're party to and so forth. But the fact is, you can have a fairly robust interrogation program without torture, and we need to be able to do that.

So even as the Guardian stated, "implied" is clearly false. And the Christain Sciance Monitor article is pure defamatory, disinformation, wholey without a shred of credible merit, and patently false. Any claim on any subject from any of these organizations, or the authors involved, is henceforth suspect RobS 15:17, 13 April 2007 (EDT)