2012 Feb 22 |
 |
http://www.theatlanticright.com/2009/05/29/did-mancow-fake-his-waterboarding/
0
0
Posted by Michael Merritt   |   19 comments

mancow-ddw

That’s the question that Gawker is asking tonight.  Did conservative shockjock Erich “Mancow” Muller fake his May 22 waterboarding?  They’ve been doing a little digging on the issue after a tipster alerted them to a set of emails outlining the possible hoax.  Maybe the most important part (emph. Gawker’s):

It is going to have to look “real” but of course would be simulated with Mancow acting like he is drowning. It will be a hoax but have to look real. Would be great if they could dress in fatigues and bring whatever is needed. We will supply the water

One word: ouch.

Publicist Linda Shafran of the Jerry Springer Show responded:

It was NOT a hoax. Early on when we were looking for someone to waterboard, an email was sent out looking for someone to do it and I mistakenly said it would be staged. That was my mistake and a misunderstanding.

But that was early and NOT TRUE AT ALL. It was not staged. NOT AT ALL. When it happened several days later, it was real, honest, actual, not staged.

Any info you have was my mistake. THE WATERBOARDING OF MANCOW WAS REAL!!!!!!

Gawker’s calling BS because the waterboarding was done the day after the emails, and not several days afterward as Shafran claims.  MSNBC host Keith Olbermann (or at least some of his producers) may be implicated in the hoax as well, if it’s true.  He had Mancow on his show after the waterboarding, as part of his charity challenge originally offered to Sean Hannity, then switched to Mancow after the waterboarding).  The producers apparently knew about the emails but went along with the segment anyway.

The site compared the video of Mancow’s waterboarding to that of Christopher Hitchens, who underwent it last year.  They noted that several things were done improperly.  It could simply be because the people involved had to find someone new at the last minute.  The original waterboarder dropped out a day before it was supposed to happen.

Or maybe not.  Gawker provides videos for reference.  Mancow’s waterboarding was definitely different, and everything I’ve read indicates a complete covering of the face, but Mancow’s face was only partially covered.  Mancow was also not restrained, as was Hitchens.  Basically, they ended up just pouring water into his mouth and probably part of his nasal cavity.  Water going directly to the lungs?  I think that under most common definitions of the word, that really is drowning.

  1. Pingback | Link #95189
    Did Mancow Fake His Waterboarding? - Poli Gazette « AddingInfo.com [...] a little digging on the issue after a tipster alerted them to a set of emails outlining … Read Full Post: Did Mancow Fake His Waterboarding? - Poli Gazette Related Info:Olbermann Yanks Waterboarding Offer to Hannity - NewsMax.comU.S. Supreme Court [...]
  2. Posted by Doomed
    | Quote | Trackback | Link #95197
    Doomed Whats missed in all this is the GLEE to which Olberman is so anxious to WATER FREAKIN BOARD a Conservative.........ANY Conservative. Olberman's hatred for the GOP and conservatives is so powerful that hes willing to TORTURE Conservatives. Video tape it and MAKE MONEY FROM IT. The VERY thing he despises he is willing to use on his Political Adversaries.
  3. | Quote | Trackback | Link #95199
    Jason Arvak A more charitable interpretation of Olbermann's position actually makes him look worse. Olbermann doesn't want to torture just any conservative for reasons of pure political disagreement. He wants to waterboard ones that disagree that waterboarding is torture in order to resolve the argument about what is "torture" and prove his position -- that waterboarding is "torture" -- correct. But let's look at what priorities that reveals: 1) Olbermann believes that the crime of murdering people is not sufficient to justify the torture of waterboarding. 2) Olbermann believes that the crime of holding a wrong view about what is and is not "torture" IS sufficient to justify the torture of waterboarding. By his own actions, Olbermann exposes his underlying belief that disagreeing with him about the definition of "torture" is a worse crime than mass murder. Yet Olbermann and his fans want us to believe that they are the "tolerant" ones.
  4. Posted by Jeb
    | Quote | Trackback | Link #95204
    Jeb I'm not a fan of Olberman. I find him, O'Reilly, Hannity, and the rest of the screaming punditry grating. That said, I don't think your characterization below is fair.
    Olbermann believes that the crime of holding a wrong view about what is and is not “torture” IS sufficient to justify the torture of waterboarding.
    I don't think that he expected anyone to take up his challenge. He would then be able to continue to gloat about how none of the water boarding isn't torture crowd in the screaming punditry are willing to be subjected to it and so show (to him and his at least) that in their heart of hearts that they really do know it it torture. Faced with someone who was willing to pick up the gauntlet he had to scramble and this fiasco ensued.
  5. | Quote | Trackback | Link #95209
    Jason Arvak Ok. That's an alternative, but it really doesn't help Olbermann look any better to simply say that he's being willfully dishonest about wanting to torture people who disagree with his definition of torture. Whether he actually wants to do it or is just saying that he wants to do it, he still is displaying priorities that are seriously out of whack. BTW, why is no similar charity in interpretation extended to those who talk about wanting to torture terrorists? Can't we explain away their statements as simply emotional reactions to a grotesque criminal? Why do their statements reveal them as hopeless moral reprobates while Olbermann's statements about wanting to waterboard those who disagree with him are indulgingly dismissed as merely a "scramble"? This difference in interpretation and spin seems to me just another example of how liberals demand the benefit of every doubt for their side but are willing to tolerate only the most harsh interpretations possible for the other side.
  6. Posted by Doomed
    | Quote | Trackback | Link #95211
    Doomed No spin works for Olberman. He wants to torture people in a gleeful manner that will bring pleasure to his virtuous self absorbed psyche. No spin works. He hates Conservatives who disagree with him on this that hes willing to waterboard them to prove a point. This from an ESPN anchor whom I despised before I even had a clue what his politics was. NO one was capable of living up to his standards in sports and the same is true in politics.
  7. Posted by Tully
    | Quote | Trackback | Link #95215
    Tully Your noting of the procedural differences is very relevant. Mancow's opinion is, of course, subjective at best and self-serving at worst. He got the publicity he wanted. And of course my usual refrain. "Torture" is defined in law, and waterboarding depending on exactly how performed may or may not meet that definition. Oh yeah, Olbermann needs his tinfoil renewed. I think it's leaking.
  8. Posted by Jeb
    | Quote | Trackback | Link #95217
    Jeb
    Ok. That’s an alternative, but it really doesn’t help Olbermann look any better to simply say that he’s being willfully dishonest about wanting to torture people who disagree with his definition of torture.
    I think all of the screaming punditry is willfully dishonest and have little use for any of them Olberman included.
    BTW, why is no similar charity in interpretation extended to those who talk about wanting to torture terrorists? Can’t we explain away their statements as simply emotional reactions to a grotesque criminal?
    Yes.
    Why do their statements reveal them as hopeless moral reprobates while Olbermann’s statements about wanting to waterboard those who disagree with him are indulgingly dismissed as merely a “scramble”?
    I don't believe that I have negatively characterized anyone other than Olberman.
  9. Posted by Doomed
    | Quote | Trackback | Link #95223
    Doomed If Olberman does not speak for the anti torture crowd then how is it Limbaugh is portrayed as the spokesman for the Far right? As the GOP is continually painted with the brush of their more radical members as the voice of the party, any attempt at returning the favor is met with outrage and an attempt to redefine the argument. Olberman speaks for a wing of the Democratic party. Most notably the far left. The same base that Obama is indebted to and is playing his fiddle for.
  10. Posted by Grewgills
    | Quote | Trackback | Link #95227
    Grewgills
    If Olberman does not speak for the anti torture crowd
    The "anti-torture crowd" has much better and more able spokespeople. Gates and Petreaus are both part of that crowd and I doubt they would say Olberman spoke for them.
    As the GOP is continually painted with the brush of their more radical members as the voice of the party, any attempt at returning the favor is met with outrage and an attempt to redefine the argument.
    So your argument boils down to an eye for an eye? Both sides paint with broad brush, both sides express outrage or faux outrage to redirect debate, and both are wrong for doing it; but that's politics. We can all wish it weren't so and we can work to elevate the debate and we should, but politics will remain politics.
  11. Posted by Jeb
    | Quote | Trackback | Link #95229
    Jeb
    If Olberman does not speak for the anti torture crowd then how is it Limbaugh is portrayed as the spokesman for the Far right?
    That is an interesting dichotomy you have created and not one that I think serves you well. I would not place those who advocate against torture at a pole opposite the far right. Some on the right advocate for policies that include torture (in at least some cases), but many on the right have also advocated against torture in all cases. The dichotomy that is more apt is that Olberman speaks for a left fringe in the Dem coalition and Limbaugh speaks for a right fringe in the Rep coalition. Neither speak for the majority of either party. Limbaugh does have a much larger audience but I'm not sure how it breaks down (right leaning and left leaning outrage junkies). There are certainly some who consider him a leader in the conservative movement (both those within and without) but I don't know of anyone on the left who considers Olberman a leader in the progressive movement. That said, I would be happy if both of them and the rest of the screaming punditry vanished from the public debate. Both of them add little to no value and both coarsen the debate and make genuine dialogue more difficult.
  12. Posted by Linda
    | Quote | Trackback | Link #95231
    Linda BORED BLOGGERS ARE ALL WET By Mancow Muller May 29, 2008 "I am not a magician. Many news cameras were there! Obviously, it was on the radio and I wasn’t in prison. I’m also not a radicalized Muslim terrorist. But it was not a hoax! I repeat: NOT A HOAX. We kept telling management, the insurance companies, and the local Chicago cops we weren’t really going to do it - until we did. Otherwise, they weren’t gonna let us do it! We got a U.S. Marine that told us he had studied how to do it and he volunteered to waterboard me in return for a mention of his charity. I was on a decline and I was waterboarded. Was I in chains? No. Does that make it less real? I am failing to get the point attempted by my detractors. We never claimed it was an exact recreation. The CIA technique is exactly what we did: 1. Keep the chest elevated above the head and neck to keep the lungs “above the waterline.” 2. Incline the head, both to keep the throat open and to present the nostrils for easier filling. 3. Force the mouth open so that water can be poured into both the nose and mouth. Sorry, I thought for years it wasn’t torture and now I do. The video is there for all to see. The left has taken my message and distorted it as well. Would I waterboard to save my daughters (or any American children)? Yes! The three terrorists that were waterboarded at Guantanamo were done so by military professionals. And it was done to save lives with America’s best interests at heart. Mine was a silly radio time filler in comparison. Its apples & hand grenades! It would be insane to equate what I did with anything that happens in prison. I am simply a free man in a radio studio that always tries to get inside the big issues. This is an ugly issue with no easy answers. But I now see it’s easier for some to dismiss me than to do any real soul searching on this very heady issue.
  13. Posted by Doomed
    | Quote | Trackback | Link #95238
    Doomed So your argument boils down to an eye for an eye? There are many people who speak out against waterboarding. It is a pretty sure bet that waterboarding is uncomfortable, unpleasant and is effective. If it were not all of the intell services around the world would not still be using it. However that as an aside. Lets say its this horrible torture that no human being should endure. Olberman wants Conservatives to endure it. He wants to film it and he wants to make money off of it. He wants his ratings to go up. He gleefully begs a conservative to undergo life threatening torture............and for what? A buck? Thats pretty pathetic dont cha think? Spin it all you want. Olberman simply wants Conservatives who defend waterboarding to be waterboarded. 1. Waterboarding is life threatening and hence Olberman is hoping Sean Hannity will die or suffer permanent psychological damage. 2. Waterboarding is not so bad and Olberman wants to improve his ratings at the expense of those baffons(his thinking)who think waterboarding is really that bad. Either path he takes is pathetic. He would be better served and apologize to those on his right whom he wishes bodily harm too.
  14. Posted by Jeb
    | Quote | Trackback | Link #95239
    Jeb
    It is a pretty sure bet that waterboarding is uncomfortable, unpleasant and is effective.
    It is mostly effective in getting the waterboarded individual to say watever the torturer wants him to say.
    If it were not all of the intell services around the world would not still be using it.
    That is far from true. No western democracy I am aware of employs it. Bush took it off the table for us some time ago and Obama has kept it that way. The countries that do still use it are not countries that we should emulate in that or most anything else.
    Olberman simply wants Conservatives who defend waterboarding to be waterboarded.
    I think he wanted conservatives to refuse his challenge and to be able to use that as a rhetorical club to beat them with. When Mankow took up the gauntlet he had two options: he could go ahead with it or he could back down. The option that would leave whatever integrity on the issue he had intact would be to back down and say that he was not comfortable torturing anyone whether or not they were a willing subject. His ego would not allow that so he went forward with it.
    He wants to film it and he wants to make money off of it.
    I am sure ratings also played into his calculus. I am not trying to say what Olberman did was right, I simply disagree with you about his most likely motivations. Again the political landscape would be a much better place without Olberman, Hannity, and the rest of the screaming punditry. They are all loud, obnoxious, dishonest, and they poison the national debate on every issue they touch.
  15. Michael Merritt There's a few misconceptions going around, I think. From my understanding, Mancow was already going to do this. Then he heard about Olbermann's offer and his people called in to make that part happen. And I don't like Olbermann much either, but I fail to see how the portrayal of him as a man who wants to torture his enemies holds up. Does he want higher ratings? Sure. Does he want to make a point? You bet. That said, maybe both Hannity and Olbermann should undergo waterboarding...simultaneously.
  16. Posted by Doomed
    | Quote | Trackback | Link #95252
    Doomed It is mostly effective in getting the waterboarded individual to say watever the torturer wants him to say. Spin it anyway you want. He still wants to murder Conservatives for his cause. Right? Isnt waterboarding Torture? Isnt it a near death experience? Arent people supposed to die from it? Isnt it a horrendous experience? Spin it how you want. Olberman is as ass who appears to want to see his idealogical opposites suffer horrendous torturous episodes for money, ratings and the smug satisfaction that is K. Olberman
  17. Posted by Tully
    | Quote | Trackback | Link #95269
    Tully That said, maybe both Hannity and Olbermann should undergo waterboarding…simultaneously. Could we let them waterboard each other? Just askin'. Make a great pay-per-view. Funny, Linda, but I actually read the Bybee memo and the procedure I saw used on Mancow and described in Mancow's letter is NOT the procedure approved for use on KSM and two other high-level AQ terrorists. What was done to Mancow is certifiably worse. Your own mileage as to why Mancow would subject himself to an even harsher treatment and claim it was what the CIA did.
  18. Posted by Doomed
    | Quote | Trackback | Link #95274
    Doomed Spin it how you want. Olberman is as ass who appears to want to see his idealogical opposites suffer horrendous torturous episodes for money, ratings and the smug satisfaction that is K. Olberman Oh and incidently Im not advocating that waterboarding is this horrendous torturous method but that is what the left proclaims and Olberman advocates. Thus if he truly believes that why would any sane person want to do that to a law abiding citizen who just happens to disagree as opposed to actually using it on mass murderers who are plotting even more mass murders? Sure puts Olberman at the bottom of my food chain.
  19. Posted by c3
    | Quote | Trackback | Link #95285
    c3 I'm not so hot on torture but I don't see how this adds to the discussion regarding waterboarding. Is this any different than a Navy Seal candidate saying to himself and others "I can do this!" and then discovering its much more uncomfortable than he thought. Did we think waterboarding was a piece of cake?