Bush on waterboarding: 'Damn right'

[Dos Equis]

Go George!   

Bush on waterboarding: 'Damn right'
November 5, 2010

Washington (CNN) -- Former President George W. Bush has stayed out of politics since he left the White House and, except for his own career, he largely keeps the subject at arm's length in his new memoir, "Decision 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.

"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."

. . . .

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/11/05/bush.book/index.html

[Soul Crusher]

I never had a problem with waterboarding. 

[Dos Equis]

I was torn, but reading his comments, I can't really argue with his thought process. 

[George Whorewell]

The more I learn about him, the more I like him. He really got a bad rap in many respects where the MSM went out of its way to portray him in a negative fashion. No doubt he fucked up plenty of times-- but what president doesn't?

He also has a lot of class for not frying Obama when most of the country would agree with him and for keeping his mouth shut about 2012.

[Dos Equis]

The more I learn about him, the more I like him. He really got a bad rap in many respects where the MSM went out of its way to portray him in a negative fashion. No doubt he fucked up plenty of times-- but what president doesn't?

He also has a lot of class for not frying Obama when most of the country would agree with him and for keeping his mouth shut about 2012.

Agree.

[Soul Crusher]

He also passes on commenting on President Obama, saying he wants to treat his successor the way, "I'd like to have been treated."

________________________ ___________________

Class.   

Now contrast that with the 24/7 blame Bush nonsense we got from Barry. 

[Cy Tolliver]

yep, i agree!

lets sink to the level of third world countries around the world and torture the piss out of people!

hell, with the patriot act many of us innocents who don't follow the party line may end up getting our balls electrocuted.

[Soul Crusher]

yep, i agree!

lets sink to the level of third world countries around the world and torture the piss out of people!

hell, with the patriot act many of us innocents who don't follow the party line may end up getting our balls electrocuted.

       



So, obviously 3,000 dead was not enough, how many, maybe 10k, 20k, or maybe the 200k Ramsi Yusef wanted dead in the  93 bombing? 

[Cy Tolliver]

     



So, obviously 3,000 dead was not enough, how many, maybe 10k, 20k, or maybe the 200k Ramsi Yusef wanted dead in the  93 bombing?  

were giving the cia free rein to water board innocent iraqis (who haven't even been charged with a crime) because some saudis (with the help of our government) attacked us on 9/11?

sounds like some shit stalin would pull...

maybe I'm just old fashioned, but I always admired fair minded, honorable men like George Washington.  Not worthless traitors like Bush.

[Soul Crusher]

were giving the cia free rein to water board innocent iraqis (who haven't even been charged with a crime) because some saudis (with the help of our government) attacked us on 9/11?

sounds like some shit stalin would pull...

maybe I'm just old fashioned, but I always admired fair minded, honorable men like George Washington.  Not worthless traitors like Bush.

    

Yeah, pouring water over someones head is the same as a bullet in teh head, got it. 

[Benny B]

July 22, 2010
Addicted to Bush
By PAUL KRUGMAN

For a couple of years, it was the love that dared not speak his name. In 2008, Republican candidates hardly ever mentioned the president still sitting in the White House. After the election, the G.O.P. did its best to shout down all talk about how we got into the mess we’re in, insisting that we needed to look forward, not back. And many in the news media played along, acting as if it was somehow uncouth for Democrats even to mention the Bush era and its legacy.

The truth, however, is that the only problem Republicans ever had with George W. Bush was his low approval rating. They always loved his policies and his governing style — and they want them back. In recent weeks, G.O.P. leaders have come out for a complete return to the Bush agenda, including tax breaks for the rich and financial deregulation. They’ve even resurrected the plan to cut future Social Security benefits.

But they have a problem: how can they embrace President Bush’s policies, given his record? After all, Mr. Bush’s two signature initiatives were tax cuts and the invasion of Iraq; both, in the eyes of the public, were abject failures. Tax cuts never yielded the promised prosperity, but along with other policies — especially the unfunded war in Iraq — they converted a budget surplus into a persistent deficit. Meanwhile, the W.M.D. we invaded Iraq to eliminate turned out not to exist, and by 2008 a majority of the public believed not just that the invasion was a mistake but that the Bush administration deliberately misled the nation into war. What’s a Republican to do?

You know the answer. There’s now a concerted effort under way to rehabilitate Mr. Bush’s image on at least three fronts: the economy, the deficit and the war.

On the economy: Last week Mitch McConnell, the Senate minority leader, declared that “there’s no evidence whatsoever that the Bush tax cuts actually diminished revenue. They increased revenue, because of the vibrancy of these tax cuts in the economy.” So now the word is that the Bush-era economy was characterized by “vibrancy.”

I guess it depends on the meaning of the word “vibrant.” The actual record of the Bush years was (i) two and half years of declining employment, followed by (ii) four and a half years of modest job growth, at a pace significantly below the eight-year average under Bill Clinton, followed by (iii) a year of economic catastrophe. In 2007, at the height of the “Bush boom,” such as it was, median household income, adjusted for inflation, was still lower than it had been in 2000.

But the Bush apologists hope that you won’t remember all that. And they also have a theory, which I’ve been hearing more and more — namely, that President Obama, though not yet in office or even elected, caused the 2008 slump. You see, people were worried in advance about his future policies, and that’s what caused the economy to tank. Seriously.

On the deficit: Republicans are now claiming that the Bush administration was actually a paragon of fiscal responsibility, and that the deficit is Mr. Obama’s fault. “The last year of the Bush administration,” said Mr. McConnell recently, “the deficit as a percentage of gross domestic product was 3.2 percent, well within the range of what most economists think is manageable. A year and a half later, it’s almost 10 percent.”

But that 3.2 percent figure, it turns out, is for fiscal 2008 — which wasn’t the last year of the Bush administration, because it ended in September of 2008. In other words, it ended just as the failure of Lehman Brothers — on Mr. Bush’s watch — was triggering a broad financial and economic collapse. This collapse caused the deficit to soar: By the first quarter of 2009 — with only a trickle of stimulus funds flowing — federal borrowing had already reached almost 9 percent of G.D.P. To some of us, this says that the economic crisis that began under Mr. Bush is responsible for the great bulk of our current deficit. But the Republican Party is having none of it.

Finally, on the war: For most Americans, the whole debate about the war is old if painful news — but not for those obsessed with refurbishing the Bush image. Karl Rove now claims that his biggest mistake was letting Democrats get away with the “shameful” claim that the Bush administration hyped the case for invading Iraq. Let the whitewashing begin!

Again, Republicans aren’t trying to rescue George W. Bush’s reputation for sentimental reasons; they’re trying to clear the way for a return to Bush policies. And this carries a message for anyone hoping that the next time Republicans are in power, they’ll behave differently. If you believe that they’ve learned something — say, about fiscal prudence or the importance of effective regulation — you’re kidding yourself. You might as well face it: they’re addicted to Bush.

[JOCKTHEGLIDE]

The more I learn about him, the more I like him. He really got a bad rap in many respects where the MSM went out of its way to portray him in a negative fashion. No doubt he fucked up plenty of times-- but what president doesn't?

He also has a lot of class for not frying Obama when most of the country would agree with him and for keeping his mouth shut about 2012.

thats because behind close doors,,,he has his friends ,,,fellow republicans doing that for him he is still gaining finaincally from the oil invasion,,econonmy meltdown etc,,fellas this guy is trying ti play nice after not playing so nice all those years while president he knows what he has done he is trying for redepmtion from the public for his offspring to beneift 20 years later

[Benny B]

George W. Bush is not a fan of Sarah Palin and thinks that she spoiled the GOP's best laid plans in 2008 and could potentially do it again, a friend of the former president recently said.

The New York Daily News reported Friday:

    "Naming Palin makes Bush think less of McCain as a man," a Republican official familiar with Bush's thinking told the Daily News.


    "He thinks McCain ran a lousy campaign with an unqualified running mate and destroyed any chance of winning by picking Palin."

Bush has addressed Palin as a relative non-factor before, characterizing her as a grossly unpolished candidate not ready for the political spotlight.

From a book released last year, former Bush staffer Matt Latimer wrote:

    "'I'm trying to remember if I've met her before. I'm sure I must have.' [Bush's] eyes twinkled, then he asked, 'What is she, the governor of Guam?'"


    "This woman is being put into a position she is not even remotely prepared for. She hasn't spent one day on the national level. Neither has her family. Let's wait and see how she looks five days out."

While the "Republican official" reports that Bush supposedly has certain strong feelings about Palin and her presidential qualifications, the former head of state told Oprah Winfrey Thursday that he wasn't going to do any 2012 forecasting.

"A lot is gonna happen between now and the nominating process, I have no clue," Bush said in response to a question about Palin being "the one" for Republicans.

[whork25]

He actually makes sence here and does not sound so stupid. Maybe he should just have been himself as the president and not listening so much to his fucked up advisors

[The Showstoppa]

The SERE school, you guys can google it to see what it is, used waterboarding during training up until the mid 90's....after that, I don't know....

[George Whorewell]

George W. Bush is not a fan of Sarah Palin and thinks that she spoiled the GOP's best laid plans in 2008 and could potentially do it again, a friend of the former president recently said.

The New York Daily News reported Friday:

    "Naming Palin makes Bush think less of McCain as a man," a Republican official familiar with Bush's thinking told the Daily News.


    "He thinks McCain ran a lousy campaign with an unqualified running mate and destroyed any chance of winning by picking Palin."

Bush has addressed Palin as a relative non-factor before, characterizing her as a grossly unpolished candidate not ready for the political spotlight.

From a book released last year, former Bush staffer Matt Latimer wrote:

    "'I'm trying to remember if I've met her before. I'm sure I must have.' [Bush's] eyes twinkled, then he asked, 'What is she, the governor of Guam?'"


    "This woman is being put into a position she is not even remotely prepared for. She hasn't spent one day on the national level. Neither has her family. Let's wait and see how she looks five days out."

While the "Republican official" reports that Bush supposedly has certain strong feelings about Palin and her presidential qualifications, the former head of state told Oprah Winfrey Thursday that he wasn't going to do any 2012 forecasting.

"A lot is gonna happen between now and the nominating process, I have no clue," Bush said in response to a question about Palin being "the one" for Republicans.

I agree 100% with what Bush said here. I hated Palin then and I hate her now.

[Arnold jr]

were giving the cia free rein to water board innocent iraqis (who haven't even been charged with a crime) because some saudis (with the help of our government) attacked us on 9/11?

sounds like some shit stalin would pull...

maybe I'm just old fashioned, but I always admired fair minded, honorable men like George Washington.  Not worthless traitors like Bush.

George Washington was fair minded, you're absolutely right and he killed hundreds if not thousands of men...fair minded doesn't always mean forceful action is not required.

[Cy Tolliver]

George Washington was fair minded, you're absolutely right and he killed hundreds if not thousands of men...fair minded doesn't always mean forceful action is not required.

Yes he did, with good reason!  He was fighting people with ideals like Bush/Cheney.  

He didn't round up innocent men, and lock them up without even charging them with a crime.  He also didn't torture anyone.  That's the kind of shit the people he was fighting would do.  

Please don't compare a great freedom loving man like George Washington to a coward, and a maniac like George W. Bush.

[Arnold jr]

Yes he did, with good reason!  He was fighting people with ideals like Bush/Cheney.  

He didn't round up innocent men, and lock them up without even charging them with a crime.  He also didn't torture anyone.  That's the kind of shit the people he was fighting would do. 

Please don't compare a great man like George Washington to a coward, and a maniac like George W. Bush.

War - "An act of violence whose object is to constrain the enemy, to accomplish our will." George Washington

Washington was adamant that prisoners of war be treated humanly and that they gave no reason to complain while they were held captive. Washington also understood that in a time of war violence as a means, although not a desirable one but out of necessity in order to "Accomplish our will."

Yes, there is a line, a fine line between what should be done, what should be allowed and permitted but there is also a point when information must be obtained at all cost if our enemy is to be defeated.

Now we can argue all day on whether we should or should not have been in Iraq but the fact remains, we went, those who were on the other side opposing us became our enemy, regardless if they should have been or enemy to start with is a mute point at that point, the fact remains, they are.

[Cy Tolliver]

War - "An act of violence whose object is to constrain the enemy, to accomplish our will." George Washington

Washington was adamant that prisoners of war be treated humanly and that they gave no reason to complain while they were held captive. Washington also understood that in a time of war violence as a means, although not a desirable one but out of necessity in order to "Accomplish our will."

Yes, there is a line, a fine line between what should be done, what should be allowed and permitted but there is also a point when information must be obtained at all cost if our enemy is to be defeated.

Now we can argue all day on whether we should or should not have been in Iraq but the fact remains, we went, those who were on the other side opposing us became our enemy, regardless if they should have been or enemy to start with is a mute point at that point, the fact remains, they are.

Now that we're in Iraq, I want to wipe those fucker out and bring our troops home.  You and I agree big time.  

He was using the United States as a tool to forward a fucked up international agenda.

I don't think George Bush should be forgiven though for invading a country that did nothing to us, posed absolutely no thread to us, and had no terrorist presence under Saddam Hussein.  He's a criminal, and although it will never happen, I'd love to see him and his "regime" tried for war crimes.

I don't believe for a second he was doing what he believed was right for our country.  That was the last thought in his mind.

[Arnold jr]

Now that we're in Iraq, I want to wipe those fucker out and bring our troops home.  You and I agree big time.  

He was using the United States as a tool to forward a fucked up international agenda.

I don't think George Bush should be forgiven though for invading a country that did nothing to us, posed absolutely no thread to us, and had no terrorist presence under Saddam Hussein.  He's a criminal, and although it will never happen, I'd love to see him and his "regime" tried for war crimes.

I don't believe for a second he was doing what he believed was right for our country.  That was the last thought in his mind.

I do believe he was doing what he thought was best. I don't think one could argue that Bush did not have a love for his country. That doesn't mean he didn't make mistakes.

[Cy Tolliver]

I do believe he was doing what he thought was best. I don't think one could argue that Bush did not have a love for his country. That doesn't mean he didn't make mistakes.

I guess that's where your opinion, and my opinion kind of split...

If even had an inkling of belief that he did what he thought was in our interest I'd be in the same boat as you...

[Arnold jr]

I guess that's where your opinion, and my opinion kind of split...

If even had an inkling of belief that he did what he thought was in our interest I'd be in the same boat as you...

When I look at Bush or Obama I see men who have made mistakes, just like every single president we've ever had or ever will have. Presidents are men, they're human beings, they will make mistakes. But there is a key difference when looking at say Bush and Obama. In Bush I see a man who love(s) America and everything it stands for, everything it's built on. In Obama I see a man who hates and despises those things and wants nothing more than a "Fundamental Transformation."

[Cy Tolliver]

When I look at Bush or Obama I see men who have made mistakes, just like every single president we've ever had or ever will have. Presidents are men, they're human beings, they will make mistakes. But there is a key difference when looking at say Bush and Obama. In Bush I see a man who love(s) America and everything it stands for, everything it's built on. In Obama I see a man who hates and despises those things and wants nothing more than a "Fundamental Transformation."

Maybe I'm delusional, but in both men I see people who couldn't careless about our country, and ran for President to serve their own selfish interests.

[Arnold jr]

Maybe I'm delusional, but in both men I see people who couldn't careless about our country, and ran for President to serve their own selfish interests.

Obama no doubt has a desire to see the America as we know it scrapped into the pit of history, he really makes no bones about it. Bush, I don't think anyone could make a case that says he wants to see the America as we know it tossed aside, did he have some other personal interest? I don't know, maybe some, probably, most would on some level but I really do believe he did what he thought was best to preserve American liberty but definitely made mistakes along the way.

I'm looking forward to Bush's interview this Tuesday night. If I'm not mistaken, this will be his firs major interview since he left office.