Brandon9000 wrote:FreeDuck wrote:Brandon9000 wrote:Brandon9000 wrote:Waterboarding is against written US policy.
As already discussed on this board, waterboarding is prohibited in the Army Field Manual called "Human Intelligence Collector Operations."
The CIA wipes their asses with the Army Field Manual.
Cite your source.
Get a sense of humor, then provide some evidence that you actually have one.
Brandon9000 wrote:FreeDuck wrote:Brandon9000 wrote:Brandon9000 wrote:Waterboarding is against written US policy.
As already discussed on this board, waterboarding is prohibited in the Army Field Manual called "Human Intelligence Collector Operations."
The CIA wipes their asses with the Army Field Manual.
Cite your source.
Get a sense of humor, then provide some evidence that you actually have one.
FreeDuck wrote:Brandon9000 wrote:FreeDuck wrote:Brandon9000 wrote:Brandon9000 wrote:Waterboarding is against written US policy.
As already discussed on this board, waterboarding is prohibited in the Army Field Manual called "Human Intelligence Collector Operations."
The CIA wipes their asses with the Army Field Manual.
Cite your source.
Are you saying that the CIA uses the Army Field Manual as a guideline for interrogations?
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0920/p01s02-uspo.html
Quote:The new Army Field Manual would protect detainees from several of the disputed techniques, such as waterboarding. But the manual does not pertain to CIA interrogators, who operate outside the military chain of command.
Just as the law doesn't apply to police who operate outside of the chain of command. However, it hardly means that the government can be blamed for an interrogation technique that's against policy.
snood wrote:Yay - I got a laugh!
A good idea when you're unable to prevail in a competition of ideas.
I guess I didn't notice it the first time around, but why the hell is there a shoeshine box on the table?
Where does that come into play?
If shining his shoes doesn't get him to talk, Igor, dump the water on his face.
Brandon9000 wrote:
Just as the law doesn't apply to police who operate outside of the chain of command. However, it hardly means that the government can be blamed for an interrogation technique that's against policy.
What?!? The law applies to all police. Waterboarding may be against military policy, but that doesn't mean it's against US policy. Clearly, if it's allowed for the CIA to do it then it's not against US policy.
FreeDuck wrote:Brandon9000 wrote:
Just as the law doesn't apply to police who operate outside of the chain of command. However, it hardly means that the government can be blamed for an interrogation technique that's against policy.
What?!? The law applies to all police. Waterboarding may be against military policy, but that doesn't mean it's against US policy.
Clearly, if it's allowed for the CIA to do it then it's not against US policy.
Is it allowed for the CIA to do?
They do it, and don't get in trouble for it, so yes, clearly it is allowed.
Cycloptichorn
Cycloptichorn wrote:They do it, and don't get in trouble for it, so yes, clearly it is allowed.
Cycloptichorn
When have they done it recently? I'd like to read about it a little.
Ask Kahlid Sheik Mohammed about it, he'd love to tell you, I'm sure.
It isn't hard to find evidence if you are willing to spend a single minute using google, yaknow
Cycloptichorn
What cyc said: the CIA is not prohibited from doing it, so I infer tha it is allowed. However, since what the CIA does is classified, I doubt we'll ever have documentable proof. There have been reports from prisoners, however...
