| Revision as of 17:16, 14 November 2010 editWilliam S. Saturn (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers13,287 edits Undid revision 396677969 by Jehochman (talk) please do not remove discussion← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 13:51, 6 November 2024 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,302,808 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Talk:Waterboarding/Archive 14) (bot | ||
| (643 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{Skip to talk}} | |||
| {{Talk header|noarchive=yes|WT:WATER}} | |||
| {{User:MiszaBot/config | {{User:MiszaBot/config | ||
| |counter = |
|counter = 14 | ||
| |algo = old( |
|algo = old(365d) | ||
| |archive = Talk:Waterboarding/Archive %(counter)d | |archive = Talk:Waterboarding/Archive %(counter)d | ||
| |maxarchivesize=200K | |||
| | archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}} | |||
| }} | }} | ||
| {{FAQ|collapsed=no}} | |||
| {{Article probation}} | |||
| {{calm talk|#FFCCCC}} | |||
| {{Round In Circles|search=yes}} | |||
| {{ArticleHistory|action1=GAN|action1date=22:58, 20 December 2007|action1result=not listed|action1oldid=179244535 | {{ArticleHistory|action1=GAN|action1date=22:58, 20 December 2007|action1result=not listed|action1oldid=179244535 | ||
| |action2=FAC|action2date=00:43, 17 March 2008|action2link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Waterboarding/archive1|action2result=not promoted|action2oldid=198710041 | |action2=FAC|action2date=00:43, 17 March 2008|action2link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Waterboarding/archive1|action2result=not promoted|action2oldid=198710041 | ||
| |currentstatus=FFAC | |currentstatus=FFAC | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| {{WikiProject banner shell|class=B| | |||
| {{WikiProjectBannerShell| | |||
| {{WikiProject Human rights|importance=high |
{{WikiProject Human rights|importance=high}} | ||
| {{ |
{{WikiProject Military history|class=B|B-Class-1=yes|B-Class-2=yes|B-Class-3=yes|B-Class-4=yes|B-Class-5=yes|Intel=yes}} | ||
| {{WikiProject Correction and Detention Facilities |
{{WikiProject Correction and Detention Facilities|importance=high}} | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| {{annual readership}} | |||
| {{FAQ}} | |||
| {{press | author=Loretta Keller | date=16 Nov 2007 | url=http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/opinions/ci_7484561 | title=Torture harms more than the victim<br /><nowiki></nowiki> | org=]}} | {{press | author=Loretta Keller | date=16 Nov 2007 | url=http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/opinions/ci_7484561 | title=Torture harms more than the victim<br /><nowiki></nowiki> | org=]}} | ||
| {{Archives|search=yes|age= |
{{Archives|search=yes|auto=short|age=365|bot=Lowercase sigmabot III|index=/Archive index|''']''': Is waterboarding a form of torture? (]), ''']''' (]), ''']'''}} | ||
| {{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn | {{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn | ||
| |target=/Archive index | |target=/Archive index | ||
| | |
|mask1=/Archive <#> | ||
| | |
|mask2=/Definition | ||
| | |
|mask3=/Sources | ||
| | |
|mask4=/FAQ | ||
| |leading_zeros=0 | |leading_zeros=0 | ||
| |indexhere=yes}} | |indexhere=yes}} | ||
| == Waterboarding |
== MythBusters Waterboarding Demonstration == | ||
| I was surprised I didn't see a mention of the MythBusters Water Torture episode under demonstrations. For those who don't know which episode I'm talking about, here's a link to the section on youtube: <- Link redacted -> | |||
| Interesting paper here - . ] (]) 16:47, 30 June 2010 (UTC) | |||
| While it doesn't involve a mask or face covering, it's still pretty similar. Would it make sense to add it to the article under that header? ] (]) ] (]) 06:06, 19 December 2022 (UTC) | |||
| == Waterboarding your girlfriend == | |||
| :I have had to redact the Youtube link you provided, as the video appears not to have been uploaded by the copyright owner. We do not permit links to copyright violations. | |||
| Evidently, this activity has caught on in Nebraska See . Perhaps their should be a crime area in this article. ] (]) 15:31, 29 October 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :As for anything Mythbusters did on the subject of waterboarding, it is unlikely to be seen as a ] for anything of significance. We have credible scholarly and media sources discussing the topic, and we don't need to resort to content made for entertainment. ] (]) 06:13, 19 December 2022 (UTC) | |||
| == Bush says "Damn right" he ordered waterboarding == | |||
| == "Dry drowning" should be edited out == | |||
| Evidently, Bush's new book states that he said "damn right" when asked to authorized the use of waterboarding on KSM. Here is a link to the article . Maybe it should be included. Thoughts? ] (]) 16:58, 4 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| *Agreed. ] (]) 17:07, 4 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| *Agreed. --] (]) 17:13, 4 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| *Absolutely, given there is an entire article about it and there is even a slight chance he will have to pay for this confession. ] ] 18:09, 4 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| *Sure, but with proper attribution ("Bush claimed..."). --] (]) 18:35, 4 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| *Probably best to wait until the book is released so we can lift the actual quote. That article hedges a little with the 'according to someone who has read the book' part. ] (]) 21:29, 4 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ===Lauer interview=== | |||
| Bush talked pretty extensively about waterboarding, its legal justification, and his use of it with his interview with Matt Lauer. Here is a link to the transcript . Here is the excerpt below. I think this should be incorporated somehow into the article. Thoughts?] (]) 12:25, 9 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :BUSH: Let-- let-- let's talk about waterboarding. | |||
| :LAUER: Okay. | |||
| :BUSH: We believe America's going to be attacked again. There's all kinds of intelligence comin' in. And-- and-- one of the high value al Qaeda operatives was Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the chief operating officer of al Qaeda… ordered the attack on 9/11. And they say, "He's got information." I said, "Find out what he knows.” And so I said to our team, "Are the techniques legal?" He says, "Yes, they are." And I said, "Use 'em." | |||
| :LAUER: Why is waterboarding legal, in your opinion? | |||
| :BUSH: Because the lawyer said it was legal. He said it did not fall within the Anti-Torture Act. I'm not a lawyer., but you gotta trust the judgment of people around you and I do. | |||
| :LAUER: You say it's legal. "And the lawyers told me." | |||
| :BUSH: Yeah. | |||
| :LAUER: Critics say that you got the Justice Department to give you the legal guidance and the legal memos that you wanted. | |||
| :BUSH: Well— | |||
| :LAUER: Tom Kean, who a former Republican co-chair of the 9/11 commission said they got legal opinions they wanted from their own people. | |||
| :BUSH: He obviously doesn't know. I hope Mr. Kean reads the book. That's why I've written the book. He can, they can draw whatever conclusion they want. But I will tell you this. Using those techniques saved lives. My job is to protect America and I did. | |||
| :LAUER: You talk about Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. There's another guy you write about in the book, Abu Zabeta, another high profile terror suspect. He was waterboarded. By the way, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was waterboarded, according to most reports, 183 times. This guy was waterboarded more than 80 times. And you explain that his understanding of Islam was that he had to resist interrogation up to a certain point and waterboarding was the technique that allowed him to reach that threshold and fulfill his religious duty and then cooperate. And you have a quote from him. "You must do this for all the brothers." End quote. | |||
| :BUSH: Yeah. Isn't that interesting? | |||
| :LAUER: Abu Zabeta really went to someone and said, "You should waterboard all the brothers? | |||
| :BUSH: He didn't say that. He said, "You should give brothers the chance to be able to fulfill their duty." I don't recall him saying you should water-- I think it's-- I think it's an assumption in your case. | |||
| :LAUER: Yeah, I-- when "You must do this for--" | |||
| :BUSH: But… | |||
| :LAUER: …"All the brothers." So to let them get to that threshold? | |||
| :BUSH: Yeah, that's what-- that's how I interpreted. I-- look, first of all we used this technique on three people. Captured a lot of people and used it on three. We gained value-- information to protect the country. And it was the right thing to do as far as I'm concerned. | |||
| :LAUER: So if-- if it's legal, President Bush, then if an American is taken into custody in a foreign country, not necessarily a uniformed-- | |||
| :BUSH: Look, I -- | |||
| :LAUER: American-- | |||
| :BUSH: I'm not gonna the issue, Matt. I, I really-- | |||
| :LAUER: I'm just asking. Would it be okay for a foreign country to waterboard an American citizen? | |||
| :BUSH: It's all I ask is that people read the book. And they can reach the same conclusion. If they'd have made the same decision I made or not. | |||
| :LAUER: You'd make the same decision again today? | |||
| :BUSH: Yeah, I would. | |||
| "Dry drowning" is a discredited term and should not be used in this page. Its wiki article says this when you click on it. I apologize if I'm writing this post incorrectly- I made this account recently. Thank you! ] (]) 10:05, 6 May 2023 (UTC) | |||
| == Justice Dept. / Los Angeles attack == | |||
| :I was wondering the same. One of the articles is clearly wrong. ] (]) 07:18, 6 August 2023 (UTC) | |||
| "According to Justice Department documents, the waterboarding of Khalid Sheik Mohammed provided information about an unrealized terrorist attack on Los Angeles." | |||
| == Edit needed == | |||
| I'd suggest this should be removed (or at least moved). First, the supporting link no longer exists. Second, unless they actually produced some evidence that this is true, rather than just asserting that it is, should is really be mentioned at this point in the article? Perhaps, there should be a section contrasting the claims of the efficacy of waterboarding versus the counter claims that it is entirely unproductive - some examples: | |||
| If you read the sources quoted in footnote 119 and 120 it states that the supervising soldier was courtmartialled. But the article describes 2 US soldiers involved as shown on the picture of the event as well. I found that confusing so I propose to add the word “supervising” to “soldier”, at the place where it reads that he was punished. ] (]) 13:58, 29 July 2023 (UTC) | |||
| http://www.vanityfair.com/magazine/2008/12/torture200812 | |||
| http://www.andyworthington.co.uk/2010/11/06/no-appetite-for-prosecution-in-memoir-bush-admits-he-authorized-the-use-of-torture-but-no-one-cares/ | |||
| == Citation needed == | |||
| Where this currently appears in the article, isolated from context and counter argument, seems misplaced (if not actually POV). | |||
| The section on ] states: | |||
| Finally, since this article accepts the view the waterboarding is torture (which it is) then this sentence can be rewritten as "According to Justice Department documents, the torture of Khalid Sheik Mohammed provided information...". Stated like this, it seems even more out of place. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 13:37, 10 November 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| Hitchens, who had previously expressed skepticism over waterboarding being | |||
| == To PhGustaf: "will this never end?" == | |||
| considered a form of torture, changed his mind. | |||
| This statement, if true, merits a citation. I have read the Vanity Fair article of his | |||
| Perhaps it will "never end" because a certain group of editors have seized control of this article and made it entirely POV, while ruthlessly suppressing other viewpoints. You have decided tht "waterboarding is torture" is a 'fact' Divinely Pronounced from Mt Horeb, and in trying to maintain the illusion of that 'fact' are almost certainly going to get dissenting voices from now until whatever time the epistemic closure ceases. Hint: when editor after editor tries to sway an article from Received Opinion, that's a big clue that the article violates NPOV. Have we learned nothing from the William Connolley debacle? --] (]) 13:56, 13 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| personal experience with waterboarding, and at no point in the article does he express | |||
| :There are hundreds of reliable sources, from law professors to physicians to human rights experts to military lawyers to US presidential candidates (of both major parties) to ] who support that fact that waterboarding is torture. Many of the sources are in the archives. I'm sorry, but ] is on the ]. --] (]) 14:10, 13 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| this skepticism. He does, however, accurately describe the beliefs of others that | |||
| ::Oh, it's just Glenn Beck? Sorry, I don't listen to him. You're trying to decide 'fact by majority vote'- sources whose ''opinions'' (I stress that) agree with yours are reliable, whereas others who don't, aren't. '''Whether or not waterboarding constitutes 'torture' is a matter of ''opinion.''''' It's not and cannot be a 'fact' no matter what Christopher Hitchens says, or law professors (who are in the business of opinion, not fact), or 'human rights activists' (hardly an unbiased crew). You could line up much of the same 'support' for a declaration that "Capital punishment is a crime against humanity", and it would still be a) opinion and b) POV. | |||
| do not believe waterboarding to be torture. ] (]) 14:04, 23 September 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == US perspective == | |||
| :: A proper NPOV lede would run something like ''Waterboarding is a coercive interrogation technique which many authorities consider to be a form of torture.'' '''That''' would be a non-idiological NPOV approach. Wiki is not supposed to present ''opinion''- not even the massed opinions of a lot of people- as "fact"--] (]) 14:28, 13 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::Freudian slip on the "activists"? Your suggestion is not POV, but is, indeed, wrong. Note that waterboarding has been used for many other things than interrogation, including punishment and coercion, just like other forms of torture. Unless you have significant reliable sources denying the claim, it stands. Note that such sources are easy to find for capital punishment. --] (]) 14:40, 13 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| I don't really think this article deserves the "US perspective" tag. Most current news and examples are American simply because they exist. If other countries currently engage in the practice they're clearly more secretive about it. Historically, in this article, there are plenty of non-US examples. --] (]) 00:58, 6 November 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::::You are playing the definition game- trying to take something which can not, categorically, be other than opinion and claim it as 'fact.' It is no different, save heated politics, from the debate in ] over whether they fit the definition of "battlecruiser" or not. ''That's all it boils down to''- how one defines the term "torture" and whether waterboarding fits within it, which cannot be anything other than opinion. "Unless you have significant reliable sources denying the claim, it stands. ". Such sources are easy to find, including a few which the article includes (and dismisses out of hand). But to you, any such source like the Bush Justice Department is inherently "not reliable"- because it disagrees with your views. Circularity in action.--] (]) 15:08, 13 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::::While postmodern "it depends on what the definition of ''is'' is" may be fine for you or Bill Clinton, they are not useful for building an encyclopaedia. If you have sources, bring them. --] (]) 15:21, 13 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::Opinions cannot be facts. Waterboarding is largely considered torture, however the claim that it "is torture" is not acceptable in the spirit of NPOV. does not even define it as such.--] (]) 17:36, 13 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::By the same argument the United States of America is not a democracy. ] ] 09:39, 14 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
| It is neither 'postmodern' nor Clintonesque, my characteristically smug Lefty friend; it is a categorical observation. It is no more a matter of ''fact'' than whether or not Israeli construction in East Jerusalem constitutes "settlements." You demand "sources;" you have sources, and have scrubbed sources, and if I were to bring more, you would dismiss them in the same way you have all the others, as "unreliable" or "fringe." To you a "reliable" source is one that agrees with you. | |||
| No, what you've got (and you certainly act as if you think you "own" this page) is sufficient numbers and Wikipower to ensure that you can present your political POV as 'fact,' simply because you can outmuscle opposition. As far as you're concerned, you are objectively Correct and there's an end on't: which is the ''diametric opposite'' of making an encyclopedia. Good God, the page on ] studiously avoids calling him a 'terrorist.' | |||
| I think there is something to Wikis as exploitative and perhaps repressive tools in most political and societal sense, not just the personal pwn'ing of individual editors.... At the same time wiki software and culture facilitates the concentration of privileged (literally', in the "permission" sense) into the hands of a few pre-selected and thereafter self-reinforced actors. The wiki is a rigged game that exists for benefit and use these privileged actors while the egalitarian illusion keeps the bulk of exploited labor grinding away. This game fixing is then rigorously denied and hidden. The story for consumption is that everyone contributes on a level playing field and only merit and hard work distinguishes participants. This is the story bought hook-line-and-sinker by the ultra-democratic community and wiki boosters best embodied by Everyking.--Wikipediareview | |||
| It seems that little was learned from the Wikia/Durova fiasco--] (]) 18:18, 13 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 13:51, 6 November 2024
 view · edit Frequently asked questions
Does the lead with the phrase "Waterboarding is a form of torture" follow Misplaced Pages's neutrality guidelines?
Isn't the current debate enough to call the status into question?
I still do not agree that this article's lead is neutral—how can I change it?
|
 | Waterboarding is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
| Current status: Former featured article candidate | |||||||||||||
 | This article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Referencing and citation: criterion met
 | This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
 Archives |
|
Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14 |
|
Definition: Is waterboarding a form of torture? (RfC), Sources (discussion), FAQ |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
MythBusters Waterboarding Demonstration
I was surprised I didn't see a mention of the MythBusters Water Torture episode under demonstrations. For those who don't know which episode I'm talking about, here's a link to the section on youtube: <- Link redacted ->
While it doesn't involve a mask or face covering, it's still pretty similar. Would it make sense to add it to the article under that header? 2601:1C0:8500:1161:E802:4299:719A:734A (talk) 2601:1C0:8500:1161:E802:4299:719A:734A (talk) 06:06, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- I have had to redact the Youtube link you provided, as the video appears not to have been uploaded by the copyright owner. We do not permit links to copyright violations.
- As for anything Mythbusters did on the subject of waterboarding, it is unlikely to be seen as a reliable source for anything of significance. We have credible scholarly and media sources discussing the topic, and we don't need to resort to content made for entertainment. AndyTheGrump (talk) 06:13, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
"Dry drowning" should be edited out
"Dry drowning" is a discredited term and should not be used in this page. Its wiki article says this when you click on it. I apologize if I'm writing this post incorrectly- I made this account recently. Thank you! Treepersonified (talk) 10:05, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
- I was wondering the same. One of the articles is clearly wrong. 2800:300:6291:7F50:0:0:0:2 (talk) 07:18, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Edit needed
If you read the sources quoted in footnote 119 and 120 it states that the supervising soldier was courtmartialled. But the article describes 2 US soldiers involved as shown on the picture of the event as well. I found that confusing so I propose to add the word “supervising” to “soldier”, at the place where it reads that he was punished. 2A02:A467:9E7C:1:9DF5:A18C:C999:F444 (talk) 13:58, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
Citation needed
The section on Christopher Hitchens states:
Hitchens, who had previously expressed skepticism over waterboarding being considered a form of torture, changed his mind.
This statement, if true, merits a citation. I have read the Vanity Fair article of his personal experience with waterboarding, and at no point in the article does he express this skepticism. He does, however, accurately describe the beliefs of others that do not believe waterboarding to be torture. Trammell (talk) 14:04, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
US perspective
I don't really think this article deserves the "US perspective" tag. Most current news and examples are American simply because they exist. If other countries currently engage in the practice they're clearly more secretive about it. Historically, in this article, there are plenty of non-US examples. --24.80.199.58 (talk) 00:58, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
Categories: