It’s a tough call I agree. Seems to me it does imply death with the term suffocation but I think suffocation can also mean discomfort through lack of oxygen. As you can see I am no etymologist.

drowning
One entry found.

Main Entry:
drown Listen to the pronunciation of drown
Pronunciation:
\ˈdrau̇n\
Function:
verb
Inflected Form(s):
drowned Listen to the pronunciation of drowned \ˈdrau̇nd\ ; drown·ing Listen to the pronunciation of drowning \ˈdrau̇-niŋ\
Etymology:
Middle English drounen
Date:
14th century

intransitive verb: to become drowned transitive verb1 a: to suffocate by submersion especially in water b: to submerge especially by a rise in the water level c: to soak, drench, or cover with a liquid2: to engage (oneself) deeply and strenuously 3: to cause (a sound) not to be heard by making a loud noise —usually used with out4 a: to drive out (as a sensation or an idea) b:

No doubt, his is a descriptive interpretation of the very well-known torturous procedure known as waterboarding a based on a horrific personal experience.

It is, however, obviously, a fact that waterboarding is not drowning.’

In medicine, we see ‘near-drownings’ quite often.

How else do you think Mukasey was able to get away with (not)
answering the question ‘Is waterboarding torture’ as he did
ie ‘I would feel that it was’?

He had no idea what else he should think, anymore than the rest of us who never experienced it, at that point, other than to say that it was already considered torture, worldwide, and had been for centuries.

It was already illegal. It was already a war crime. No matter what the administration said in preparation of, just prior to, or after the fact as justification or since.

The only question now is ‘Who ordered it’?

Rafflaw, my problem with Jill is that, too often, she doesn’t know what she’s is talking about.

“My name is Malcolm Wrightson Nance. I am a former member of the U.S. military intelligence community, a retired U.S. Navy Senior Chief Petty Officer. I have served honorably for 20 years.

Waterboarding has the ability to make the subject answer any question with the truth, a half-truth or outright lie in order to stop the procedure. Subjects usually resort to all three, often in rapid sequence. Most media representations or recreations of the waterboarding are inaccurate, amateurish and dangerous improvisations, which do not capture the true intensity of the act. Contrary to popular opinion, it is not a simulation of drowning — it is drowning.

In my case, the technique was so fast and professional that I didn’t know what was happening until the water entered my nose and throat. It then pushes down into the trachea and starts the process of respiratory degradation.

It is an overwhelming experience that induces horror and triggers frantic survival instincts. As the event unfolded, I was fully conscious of what was happening — I was being tortured.”

“Hilarity run amuck.”

*********

I hear Eichmann and Goebbels were a riot too. How’d they end up?

I think drowning means you have died, much like electrocution means you have been shocked to death. I will check the dictionary.

The only question to ask is how will they (the left) present it as a 100% different situation Obama was in than Bush and why what Obama did was necessary but what Bush did was criminal.

Hilarity run amuck.

Then when America gets attacked under Obama (and we for sure will they way he is running up the white flags) the liberals will scream “WATERBOARDING WAS NECESSARY IN LIMITED USE BUT THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION OVERDID IT SO OBAMA WASN’T ABLE TO USE IT ON A SUSPECT WE HAD IN CUSTODY! IT IS ALL BUSH’S FAULT!”

LOL! SO SAD.

It is torture BECAUSE it ’simulates’ drowning. Otherwise, it would be murder.

People have died, but from causes other than ’simulated’ drowning which is not only frightening, but can be life-threatening if performed ‘unproperly’.

Jill, I am going to make a direct request – that you stop perpetrating such disinformation, especially medical and scientific.

You are not helping.

Let’s hope we don’t get a repete with Holder. Also see how the press says waterboarding “simulates” drowning. It doesn’t simulate drowning, it is drowning. People have died under this “simulation”. Notice how he feels about expanded presidential authority. There is no way this man should have been confirmed and neither should Holder if he feels the same on either/both points.

This may interest you as well: It’s an old article on Mukasey. Best wishes to your family and especially, your new grandson!

New York Times | PHILIP SHENON | October 18, 2007 10:31 PM

“President Bush’s nominee for attorney general, Michael B. Mukasey, declined Thursday to say if he considered harsh interrogation techniques like waterboarding, which simulates drowning, to constitute torture or to be illegal if used on terrorism suspects.

On the second day of confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Mr. Mukasey went further than he had the day before in arguing that the White House had constitutional authority to act beyond the limits of laws enacted by Congress, especially when it came to national defense.”

rafflaw,

I will go a step farther and say that the Senate displayed a bit of professional cowardice regarding Mukasey’s questioning. I would have grounded my son—when he was younger and not so tall—if he had lied about the weatherboarding issue like Mukasey did.

Mr. Sands agrees with JT on that. I have the link to his interview below. Transcripts cost $3.95. I clicked on “transcripts” at the bottom of the page to get the info. Best, Jill

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=99061358

In my opinion Mukasey was confirmed precisely because he would not say waterboarding is a crime. Some of the Senators have agreed with cheneybush that torture was O.K. with them. They would be looking at the charge of war crimes as well. They couldn’t afford to put anyone in place who would expose them to that risk. I can’t prove what I just said but I think it’s a plausible explanation.

Mr. Sands also stated that the new AG must admit that waterboarding is a crime and then order a criminal investigation.

Do you know if there is a free written transcript of the NPR/Sands interview that you linked to last week?

“Eric Holder should be asked the same question that Mukasey refused to answer in his confirmation hearing: is waterboarding a crime? If he refuses to answer or denies that it is a crime, he should not be confirmed. If he admits that it is a crime, he should order a criminal investigation.

““This is precisely why Mukasey refused to answer the question (after first stating implausibly that he did not know what waterboarding is). The appearance around the world of not only a presumptive war crime but our continued debate over whether to investigate is destroying any credibility left after eight years of controversy. The rule of law demands that crimes be investigated equally for crimes equally whether they are committed by the lowest and the highest in our society.”

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/11/19/holder/

No more, one (1) was enough.

Caveat: a person must never immediately trust MSM or other news sources without in-depth verifications. The honesty and ethicalness of the 1950s/60s news media is extinct.

When will you be posting some more Hamas propaganda links?

Later on, I will reply with further discussion regarding our philosophical differences of Clinton’s lack of presidential character rather than questioning any substantive differences we might have concerning Mr. Obama.

The important aspect now is that we all voted for Mr. Obama and we must ensure that his administration does not follow the same disastrous demagogic path of unchallenged partisan ideologies that many of the past public officials have followed that resulted in the ruinous financial and infrastructure declines we are experiencing.

As for Bill Clinton, I wasn’t then and am not now a fan of him or his Presidency. Where we might part company was in the fact that the Lewinsky Affair, pathetic as his part was, is just the continuation of the Washington Go Round of Adultery that seems to characterize men so empowered by ego. Many of his congressional inquisitors were also carrying on adulterous affairs, exploitative relationships, or hiding their homosexuality in the closet. JFK’s exploits alone make Clinton a sexual piker and LBJ wasn’t far behind.

My problem with Clinton began with “don’t ask don’t tell.” Forgetting for a minute one’s pro or con feeling about the policy (I fall on the side of The Spartans, among the greatest warriors in history), his immediate surrender on his own campaign commitments showed his opponents and supporters like me, that he was to be a weak president. Hilary’s health care disaster, phony welfare reform and caving in on other key issues led directly to the Republican’s retaking the house, the ascendancy of Gingrich, Lott and DeLay (three of the slimiest pols in US history) and the election of G.W. Bush, who has created the nadir of Presidencies. In the end Clinton’s another self-serving egotist, who just happens to choose the Democratic Party as his home team.

On the other hand though his takedown by the Washington establishment was based on social class and so was equally disgraceful. As you can guess I was never a Hilary supporter.

As for me, I don’t think too may folks are worried about it one way or the other. I think Congressmn Conyers and Wexler will have something to say about the matter. The fact is that Obama is IN and the evil-doers and many of their Congressional and Senate cabal are OUT. Ahhhhhh! It feels great to have our country back.

“If I had advice to give it would be, before you (Obama) start to implement your campaign rhetoric, you need to sit down and find out precisely what it is we did and how we did it, because it is going to be vital to keeping the nation safe and secure in the years ahead,” Cheney told CBS Radio.

Obama was also flustered when asked what directives he would give the CIA and interrogation. He replied along the line that obviously he doesn’t want to endanger the country by causing CIA operatives to have to continually look behind their back.

**********

Even if true this would not disqualify him from the AG’s job. Look at Alberto Gonzalez. Corruption and disregard for law were written into the job description by Bush’s doppelganger Monica Doodling, er make that, Goodling.

Professor Turley always provides a link to the full story which all of the literate and open-minded readers of this blawg access for more detail. The information within this blawg is space limited and Turley adds his wit to the articles that are not part of the original full story. If you do not or cannot understand the process, then your bell is cracked and fouled up beyond repair.

Regarding the topic, I do not like Mr. Holder and I think Mr. Obama could find a more honest, ethical, and acceptable AG.

Mr. Clinton destroyed the honor of the presidency, became a salacious joke, and most critically by his actions, he set the stage for the religious backlash that allowed the election of the disastrous Mr. Bush.

Clinton’s pardon decisions were unpardonable and Mr. Holder could have strongly opposed and advised against those decisions. Mr. Holder was a key player in the Clinton White House ‘legacy’. I would have voted for Mr. Gore, but like many other voters, I was thoroughly disgusted by Clinton and all things Democratic.

That is a good question and I think JT’s query would answer it. He wants a straight answer to this question; is waterboarding torture?

This sums up not only politicians but our press at this time. When it comes to constantly missing what’s important and focusing on the tangential or celebrity realated issues, “I don’t believe in accidents”. This is a consistent and dangerous pattern. It seems they all follow the DOD manual on civilian psy-ops– FOCUS ATTENTION AWAY FROM THE MEANINGFUL ISSUES. If ever there was a time for hard hitting investigation, this would be it. Surrealistically, this is no where in sight.

I find it interesting how when reading Turley’s news notes he changes a word here and there and otherewise manages to interwine his left wing demented agenda into the article.

This is sort of like the Bush Administration announcing that 5, not 4 as previously reported, terrorists had been subject to harsh interrogation. Then adding to the report the increase was due to a redefinition of harsh interrogation and not suddenly finding their numbers were wrong.

the Turley Olbermann Maddow take on this would be “Bush Administration now tells us 25 PERCENT more detainees had been tortured than previously reported!” Then they would switch to Tom Wolf of Newsweek who would say “The world is stunned by this revelation and the outrage is pouring in”.

See what a word or two can do and Turley does it consistanly here.