< Back to Front Page Text size +

Poll: Waterboarding is torture, but no investigations

Posted by Foon Rhee, deputy national political editor May 6, 2009 12:25 PM

Most Americans, a new poll suggests, agree with President Obama -- terrorist suspects were tortured with waterboarding and other brutal interrogation techniques, but there shouldn't be an investigation of what happened.

The CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey released this afternoon found that while 60 percent of respondents believed the tactics did amount to torture, they were evenly divided on their use -- 50 percent approved, while 46 percent disapprove.

Asked whether Congress should investigate the Bush administration officials who authorized the techniques, 57 percent answered no, and 65 percent oppose investigating those who carried out the interrogations. Also, 55 percent oppose an independent probe of those who authorized the interrogation tactics and 64 percent oppose an independent inquiry of those who conducted the interrogations.

The poll, conducted April 23-26, has a margin of error of plus or minus 2 percentage points.

  • CommentComment
  • EmailEmail
.

Lets all laugh together at this comedy show title "WATERBOARDING INVESTIGATION".Ha,ha,ha,ha,he,he,he,he,that's it folks we'll see in the next election.

Posted by skmj May 6, 09 12:39 PM
.

Obviously so many Americans believe waterboarding is torture because the media has rammed it down their throats. If more Americans did their own digging instead of blindly following the media, it would be 50/50 or even in favor of those who believe it is not torture. Torture is a very different thing than simulated drowning, where the subject survives without any real physical harm.

Posted by cmon May 6, 09 12:46 PM
.

Oh delightful! ...the great unwashed hoardes can finally see the obvious. ... can finally agree it's torture and then, just as fast, absolve themselves of any punishment. Lovely... lovely... I give you, a population that can't parse any of life's difficult questions, or take responsibility for mis-steps.

Posted by Jasper von Blowhole May 6, 09 01:20 PM
.

When people toss out their party affiliation and start to think about it, I think most realize that that circumstance and the persons in question matter greatly - that there are a whole lotta shades of gray.

To those who outright oppose it, I ask you the following questions:

1. Your young child has been kidnapped and buried alive by a man they have arrested. He readily admits he did it and that the child has 1 hour of air left. At that point he won't say anymore. Are you okay with leaving it at that point?

2. Sitting on a chair you have Hitler and on another you have Mother Theresa. One will die, you get to decide who. Do you accept that a random coin flip is the fair way to do it, their past work does not matter?

3. Three pirates were executed to save one American who may or may not have survived anyway. Very little negative reaction to this. Can you side with this and be against waterboarding terrorist captives?

4. A man in custody is waterboarded because those in charge think it would be fun. Another is waterboarded to try to get information crucial to defense of your country. These are the same?

Posted by mm May 6, 09 01:33 PM
.

Let's waterboard you 200+ times and see if you still think it is not torture. The people that order it done and the people who were just following order make me sick. This is not the America that I love and if we let them get away with it, it will be at a police station in your home town soon.

Posted by Drake May 6, 09 01:34 PM
.

So, waterboaring is torture only when it is done against Americans and American allies. And American public supports that - is that new? International laws which we are signatory of, only applies to us when it pleases us. That is a real ethical and just thing to practice. In fact I want to make love to most beautiful women even if they do not agree, and I do not want any investigation, as media would be ramming down everybody's throat. And skmj can start laughing.

Posted by GWB May 6, 09 01:36 PM
.

There is no debate legally about what is torture. The Conventions/Treaties/Laws that via the Constitution teh USA is required to adhere to is very, very clear.

And there were no "suitcase" bombs either. I think the Red Cross has said on several occasions that torture was and is happening. And the Armed services has convicted over 400 cases of abuse.

One interesting thing about the laws, is that they say specially that no offical (means Prez, too) can redefine torture even in the even of war, and no official can convey an policy/order for the re-definition of torture.

The King of Jordan indicated that many in the Middle-east are looking to see if America is about the rule of law. And there will be harsh events if America does not do anything.

Posted by john May 6, 09 01:37 PM
.

Torture does not always leave a permanent "physical" mark. Indeed, it need not even leave any "visible" marks. To suggest otherwise is to betray a stunning ignorance of the many different ways in which people can be made to suffer horribly.
Oh, and just so there's no confusion, making people suffer horribly IS torture.

Posted by John Nelson May 6, 09 01:41 PM
.

It is true we aren't talking about pulling off fingernails with pliers or smashing digits with thumb screws. I think torture encompasses more than just physical harm though. You can run electricity through someones nipples without causing physical damage. You can also tazer someone if they don't tell you what you want to hear. It's still torture, it's still fact that torture does not work. People will say anything to stop being tortured. The fact that the Bush administration authorized torture is a stain on this great country. They must be held accountable because if they aren't a disturbing precedent will be set for future administrations. What is the point of having laws if they aren't obeyed and offenders aren't punished?

Posted by Vlad May 6, 09 01:41 PM
.

Beheading is certainly a stronger "tortue". Who gives a damn! I think they should tear the fingernails off the ****ards. They declare themselves our enemies! Why should we declare them citizens -- or give them citizen's rights!

Posted by J. Hicks May 6, 09 01:42 PM
.

This is still more hype in an attempt to deflect public attention from what the Obama Administration is doing in other areas.

Posted by MikeMca May 6, 09 01:43 PM
.

mm: Very good questions! =)

Here are my thoughts on the points you brought up:

1. Let's say you torture this guy and he coughs up some information to get you to stop. There has been no scientific evidence that the information obtained via torture is particularly useful. So this guy can easily just tell you some location that will take you an hour to verify and your child is lost anyways.

2. Past actions should definitely be taken into consideration, or else criminal justice would make no sense since anything any criminal did would be in the past at the time of the trial.

3. In the case of the Somali pirates and the American captain, the three Somali pirates were not executed, they were armed combatants holding a prisoner. If they were already in our custody and somehow executing them resulted in the rescue of the American captain, then this analogy would have more meaning.

4. Torturing for fun is obviously wrong to most people. Torturing for information is only arguable if the gain outweighs the loss to most people. There have been countless examples of false confessions and false information given by people who have been tortured. Is the gain of unreliable information worth the loss of our moral high ground? My opinion is that it is not.

Posted by Calvin May 6, 09 02:02 PM
.

If it's necessary to protect Americans, then I say waterboard away. Would I want to be waterboarded? of course not. But that's not the issue....if it could stop an attack on Atlanta or Los Angeles, then I pick waterboard treatment.

Posted by L.C.Patterson May 6, 09 02:04 PM
.

Type your comment here...Face it. America has become the modern-day Nazi's of the world in the views of most people that live outside of the USA and for about 50% of the people that live here. We'll never be able to live this down thats to Bush Cheaney and the Republican party.

Posted by ken May 6, 09 02:06 PM
.

Calvin, I like that you provided thoughtful answers. I chose the words and questions carefully to bring out a few points:

1. Situations matter. I think if most folks honestly answered my first question, that most would say some form of coersion would be justified.
2. Background matters. An Al Qaeda operative is differnent than a Somalian Pirate.
3. I used the word "execute" in question 3 to show it is an impact work. Like torture. When does kill becom execute? When does coersion become torture? Fair enough to call it that, but look at the spectrum, from waterboarding to breaking bones to cutting off fingers to real starvation, etc. The spctrum is HUGE.

Point being, only an idealogue can truly say there is a black and white line when in fact I think most folks see very different shades of gray. I think some/many (myself included) would see a big difference between waterboarding a Somalian pirate to find out their lair vs. waterboarding an Al Qaeda operative to find out attack plans against the mainland USA.

The one thing I disagree with in your post is "no scientific evidence it works" and the potential for "unrealiable information." Certailny those figure into the equation as well but I don't see how that is an argument against it 100% of the time.

I view it more along the line of this. A man shot another man with a gun. That is murder correct? When even in the US that can be anything from self defense to justifiable homicide to manslaughter to various degrees of murder to capital murder. Shades of gray dependent upon circumstances, people involved, motive, intent.

Posted by mm May 6, 09 02:57 PM
.

Why was water boarding torture when the Japanese did it to us in WWII, but not now if we do it to someone else? Let's not be hypocrites: it is torture!

So you say you don't care? We've only got one hour to save a kitten/child/the world? What if we have the wrong suspect in custody? Under duress, they'll "confess" to whatever they think will stop the agony. We send in the troops--and meanwhile, the real thing is happening somewhere else and we're not there. What if we've got the right guy but he wants to be a martyr and sends us the wrong way on purpose? Confessions obtained through torture are unreliable. Not the kind of data worth compromising our integrity to obtain.

Posted by NB May 6, 09 04:16 PM
.

I don't think people are reading the news enough to understand why this is a big deal...again! Waterboarding is torture! Now that we got that out of the way, why is it a big deal now? Its simple...the Republican Party has been exposed to tons of errors with the Bush administration...Cheney is against Obama's party so hastily and so aggressively because they lied to us!! They were asked years ago if they used torture...denied it. Now they admit it, but only to say it was used on a few?! That doesn't make sense at all... Cheney claims he wants to protect the U.S. anyway necessary and their tactics have assumes tons of "invaluable information"...with the Al Queda operatives in captivity (definately more than a few) you would think these methods would have been more effective in capturing Osama. What was the result of all these operatives being captured? More war...more national debt...more suffering because of retaliation. It won't stop anytime soon, and bring them here on U.S. soil makes sense because they will get justice as they have been waiting for. Its no different from our everyday maximum security detainees already...

Do we really have to wait until the next election to do something about Guantanamo?

Posted by Kill@dor May 21, 09 03:34 PM
add your comment *(If you put a URL in your comment, it must be relevant )
Required
Required (will not be published)

This blogger might want to review your comment before posting it.

About Political Intelligence

Reports from Boston Globe reporters and editors about the Obama administration, the Massachusetts congressional delegation, and other national political happenings.

News from the Washington Bureau

Hurdles remain after Senate approves health care bill

WASHINGTON - Convening before sunrise for a historic Christmas Eve session, the Senate approved sweeping health care legislation yesterday in a party-line vote, moving Congress toward the brink of enacting a broad expansion of health coverage. (Globe Staff, 12/25/09)

GOP fights to the end on health

WASHINGTON - As jubilant Democrats yesterday cleared the final 60-vote hurdle to passing a sweeping health care bill and prepared for a final vote at 7 this morning, Republicans fired off a last-ditch round of attacks, calling the bill an unconstitutional budget-buster laden with special deals and unscrutinized details. (Globe Staff, 12/24/09)

Health fight shifts to insurer shopping

The public option is gone. Expansion of Medicare is dead. But an intense fight continues over a crucial issue in the proposed health care overhaul: how far Congress should go in emulating the type of insurance marketplace that is at the center of the pioneering Massachusetts insurance program. (Globe Staff, 12/22/09)

Mass. push saves costly engine plan

Massachusetts lawmakers, over the fierce objections of the White House, have succeeded in reviving a costly plan to build a jet fighter engine at General Electric’s Lynn plant in an effort to protect thousands of Bay State jobs. (Globe Staff, 12/22/09)

Unseasonal atmosphere on Capitol Hill, as health care maneuvers put Christmas on hold

WASHINGTON - Snowbound Senate aides have been crashing in Capitol Hill hotels, paying the bill out of their own pockets. Senators are rolling up to the Capitol steps past midnight and before dawn to vote. (Globe Staff, 12/21/09)

Despite deal on health, Republicans vow a fight to the finish

WASHINGTON - Elated Senate Democrats won the first critical procedural vote required to advance major health care legislation just after 1 a.m. this morning, one of four votes required this week to pass the proposal by their self-imposed Christmas deadline. (Globe Staff, 12/21/09)

GOP critics in Senate shaping financial overhaul bill

WASHINGTON - Senate Banking Committee chairman Christopher Dodd, who one month ago proposed an overhaul of financial regulations that was hailed by many consumer activists, has all but jettisoned that proposal following Republican objections and has initiated talks for a new approach designed to satisfy some of his fiercest GOP critics. (Globe Staff, 12/21/09)

Democrats grab final vote for health bill

Senate Democrats clinched the final 60th vote required to push a major health care bill through the Senate by Christmas, announcing a compromise yesterday with Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska that includes restrictions on abortion coverage and millions in additional Medicaid funding for his state. (Globe Staff, 12/19/09)

Democrats push to close gap on health care plan

Senate Democratic leaders appeared on the verge of an agreement late last night that would secure the critical 60th vote for their sweeping health care bill and seemed poised to try to push through the package before their self-imposed deadline of Christmas. (Globe Staff, 12/19/09)

Rail stimulus funds to bypass Northeast

The railroad tracks from Boston to Washington - the busiest rail artery in the nation, and one that also carries America’s only high-speed train, the Acela - have been virtually shut out of $8 billion worth of federal stimulus money set aside for high-speed rail projects because of a strict environmental review required by the Obama administration. (Globe Correspondent, 12/16/09)
archives