America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Bush on waterboarding: 'Damn right'
November 5, 2010 7:13 p.m. EDT



George W. Bush
Washington (CNN) -- Former President George W. Bush has stayed out of politics since he left the White House and, except for his own, he largely keeps the subject at arm's length in his new memoir, "Turning Points."
In an interview with Oprah Winfrey to air on Tuesday when the book is to be released, Bush said he is "through with politics" and refused to offer an opinion on the 2012 presidential election.
"I am not a political pundit. I'm really not," Bush said. "A lot is gonna happen between now and the nominating process."
He also passes on commenting on President Obama, saying he wants to treat his successor the way, "I'd like to have been treated."
"I don't think it's good for a former president to be out there opining on every darned issue," Bush told Winfrey. "He's got a plenty tough job. Trust me. And there's gonna be plenty of critics and he doesn't need me criticizing him."
In the 481-page book Bush compliments Obama's political skills during a meeting before the 2008 election as the financial crisis was coming to a head. He also criticizes the performance of his party's nominee, John McCain, in the same meeting.
He criticizes Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid for the failure of his efforts to reform immigration laws in 2006.
Bush takes responsibility for giving the go-ahead for waterboarding terror suspects, which has touched off a new round of criticism of Bush and calls for his prosecution. He says that he did decide not to use two more extreme interrogation methods, but did not disclose what those were.
Here are excerpts from the book, which CNN obtained on Friday:
'The choice between security and values was real'
Bush reveals the decision points that led him to choose waterboarding as an interrogation technique.
"CIA experts drew up a list of interrogation techniques. ... At my direction, Department of Justice and CIA lawyers conducted a careful legal review. The enhanced interrogation program complied with the Constitution and all applicable laws, including those that ban torture.
"There were two that I felt went too far, even if they were legal. I directed the CIA not to use them. Another technique was waterboarding, a process of simulated drowning. No doubt the procedure was tough, but medical experts assured the CIA that it did no lasting harm."
Though Bush confirms that he knew the use of waterboarding would one day become public, and acknowledges that it is "sensitive and controversial," he asserts that "the choice between security and values was real," and expresses firm confidence in his decision. "Had I not authorized waterboarding on senior al Qaeda leaders, I would have had to accept a greater risk that the country would be attacked. In the wake of 9/11, that was a risk I was unwilling to take," he writes.
Bush further declares that the new techniques proved effective, yielding information on al Qaeda's structure and operations, and leading to the capture of Ramzi bin al Shibh, the logistical planner of the 9/11 attacks who was captured on the first anniversary of 9/11.
And if there were any lingering doubts or conflict about the use of waterboarding, Bush discloses that he received reassurance from an unlikely source: terror suspect Abu Zubaydah.
The former president writes, "His understanding of Islam was that he had to resist interrogation only up to a certain point. Waterboarding was the technique that allowed him to reach that threshold, fulfill his religious duty, and then cooperate." Bush elaborates that Zubaydah gave him a direct instruction, "'You must do this for all the brothers.'"
Intelligence gleaned from interrogations of Abu Zubaydah and other suspects led to the capture of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Bush writes. During a raid on Mohammed's compound, agents discovered more plans for terrorist attacks on U.S. soil.
Prompted by the discoveries, Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet asked if he had permission to use enhanced interrogation techniques including waterboarding on Mohammed.
Bush exposes his inner thoughts on what led him to reach this decision: "I thought about my meeting with Danny Pearl's widow, who was pregnant with his son when he was murdered. I thought about the 2,971 people stolen from their families by al Qaeda on 9/11. And I thought about my duty to protect my country from another act of terror.
'Damn right,' I said."

Yeah, GW would have been surprised how effective a firm handshake and a warm, sincere smile or better yet a deep and subservient bow is on fundamentalist terrorists, had he only tried.

But noooooooo.

Bob how often have you bowed?

Many, many, many times in prayer and several times in religous scenarios. Far less often otherwise. But, when I have met people (particularly Asians) whose social/cultural parctices involve bowing under the circumstances. Why not show respect and/or cordiality when doing so causes no harm and may enhance circumstances? Other times in gest gratitude or respect for the elderly, etc. Never made me feel or appear weak. Never made me lose any edge...

Of what?

"American presidents do not bow before foreign dignitaries, whether they are princes, kings, or emperors."

Rick: That may be so for you. I would bet my paycheck the Obama administration is continuing with the torture. And, to keep their hands clean, they turn certain people over to foreign governments and let them do the torturing. Either way, it's still the same.

I thought Obama was Mao and Marx in blackface?

If waterboarding 1000 suspected terrorists yielded one nugget of information that led to preventing a terrorist plot that saved even 1 American life then not only am I for it but I will sign up to refill the buckets.

This is not a war against another country, it is a Pursuit of Mass murdering Thugs. The tennants of war do not apply heer..

How's Lynndie England liking retirement?

Rick: Our forces, in conjunction with foreign militaries, continue to capture and interrogate Al Quida terrorists. Obama has already turned some of those captured over to foreign governments (allies) and some to Iraqi and Afghan forces. Obama knows what's going to happen to them. He know they will be tortured, waterboarded, and (most likely) killed in an attempt to gleen information. I really hate popping your bubble, but Obama is washing his hands and letting the foreign governments do much of his dirty work so he can claim to be the "saint" in all of this. In my opinion, this is a chickensh*t way out of it. What's worse, he's only fooling a handfull of ignorant and brainwashed Americans. The blood of those tortured is still on his hands.

Like I said earlier - you and I don't have to like it or support it. Still, it is happening and to think it isn't is naive.

I assume this does not apply to Israel.

We are (were) not torturing "anyone", only those with reasonable expectation of gaining information that could save lives.
We were not doing so because we had the power to do it, we were doing it because the alternative was relatively unthinkable.

Yes, it is a very distasteful moral slippery slope, that should be avioded if possible.
But at the cost of innocents?

What would you say to the parents of children killed by terrorists we could have stopped, becuase we had one who we KNEW had info, but just let sit in a cell?

We go to the greatest lengths and expense to ensure not one innocent American accused of a crime faces incoorect punishment (in America),
But we'll sacrifice innocents for the sake of the "rights" of foreign spys? That is what terrorists are - complete disregard not only for the standards of warfare, but of civilization in general. Take a look and see how history has regarded spies and their "rights".

We remain, by far, the most forward, justice loving nation in our treatment of those who wage war against us.
EVER

Sometimes I wish we could live in a black and white world where it would be easy and honest to say either "that is evil" or "that is good".
But we don't.

It's not torture. It's "enhanced interrogation." Torture is illegal. Get it right people.

Why torture them when you can have more fun

SPLITTING THEM IN 2 !

People with dirty coffee pots are the lowest form of scum and should be waterboarded!

I've had the extreme displeasure of watching terrorists kill American and British prisoners. The terrorists love to film it so they can show their power. Their choice of the weapon-of-death is usually simple - a dull butcher knife. Of course, taking a human head off with a dull butcher knife takes quite a bit longer than a sharp knife. The terrorists cut and saw and pull and cut and manipulate the knife for upwards of a minute trying to remove the head. All the while, the American or British prisoner is screaming and gurgling and gasping for breath as their windpipe and arteries are cut. It's a horrific sight to see and hear and I'll never forget it as long as I live. What's worse, it's a horrible way to die and how any human can do that to another human is beyond me. I could kill in battle when it's my life or theirs. But, to cut the head off your enemy when they are alive and screaming and filming to show their friends shows no respect for human lives.

At least our torture is nothing more than the fear of drowning. The terrorist gets to recover in a matter of seconds and live their life unlike the U.S. and British citizens whose heads was removed.

Go ahead, torture away if it saves lives - I'll support the decision when necessary.