~>  EC> The so-called "water treatment" was commonly applied. The
~>  EC> victim was bound or otherwise secured in a prone position;
~>  EC> and water was forced through his mouth and nostrils into
~>  EC> his lungs and stomach until he lost consciousness. Pressure
~>  EC> was then applied, sometimes by jumping upon his abdomen to
~>  EC> force the water out. The usual practice was to revive the
~>  EC> victim and successively repeat the process. There was
 
~>  ...
 
~>  EC> THAT is the practice that YOU claim is identical to what
~>  EC> was done by the US to three terrorists six years ago.
 
~>  No, it is not.

It is not identical.  It is not even close.  That was the point.  And yet
you repeatedly claimed that it was.

~>  Consider then, this testimony about his treatment in Tokyo,by
~>  CPT Chase Nielsen

He testified for two days, in addition to being interviewed afterward and
turning over the letters between him and Doolittle to the National
Archives.  Consider the more complete description of his "treatment" since
you have repeatedly ignored it: specifically on the interrogation of
Nielsen, Meder, and Hallmark "The water torture was first.  The men were
tied and stretched flat on their backs on the floor with guards holding
their legs.  Water was forced into their mouths and noses until they passed
out; it was not unlike drowning.  The Japanese would force the water out,
usually by jumping on their stomachs.  When they revived, brought back from
the point of death, they were stretched out again and the process was
repeated.  The Kempei Tai knew exactly how far to go before reviving them."

~>  A: Well, I felt more or less like I was drowning

And now you know that he WAS drowning, which establishes intent behind your
falsehoods.

~>  /United States v. Sawada/ et a., Trial Record, Volume I,
~>  p.55.18 March, 1946.

The Law Reports of Trials of War Criminals, volume 5, has a rather
extensive 24 page summary of the Sawada case.  It indicates, among other
things, that his interrogators were not tried for torture at all.  You said
there were Japanese prosecuted "for using the same method" that US
interrogators used.  And you claimed that "one of those tortured THAT WAY"
was Nielsen.  But now you know that they did not use "the same method" and
you know that Nielsen was not interrogated "that way" but in a far more
painful and dangerous way.

Sadly the facts mean nothing to you.  You stick with your story in spite of
the facts being to the contrary.

~>  EC> "During WW2 both forms were used by the Japanese, and
~>  EC> Japanese military personell, and some civilians, were
~>  EC> prosecuted for using the same method the US interrogators."

~>  EC>  And for all of your blithering and diversions, you cannot
~>  EC>  show that it is even close to being "the same."
 
And you don't even try.  Again.

~>  EC> And it was also used on Chase Nielsen.  You brought up the
~>  EC> example but you were ignorant on what was actually done to

But now you don't have your ignorance plea to fall back on, which leaves
mendacity.  You ceppaed the paragraph, so here is the rest restored:

"And it was also used on Chase Nielsen.  You brought up the example but you
were ignorant on what was actually done to him.  Wallach selectively quoted
Nielsen but a more complete description was given in the book _The Doolittle
Raid_, by Schultz, p. 233, concerning the interrogation of Nielsen, Meder,
and Hallmark:
 
"The water torture was first.  The men were tied and
stretched flat on their backs on the floor with guards
holding their legs.  Water was forced into their mouths and
noses until they passed out; it was not unlike drowning.
The Japanese would force the water out, usually by jumping
on their stomachs.  When they revived, brought back from
the point of death, they were stretched out again and the
process was repeated.  The Kempei Tai knew exactly how far
to go before reviving them.""

~>  EC> You claimed that the same thing is done by US
~>  EC> interrogators, but at this point no sane person would
~>  EC> believe you.  And you claimed that Japanese were convicted
~>  EC> of war crimes for doing THE SAME THING that US
 
~>  Now you are confusing me with someone else.

It was not "someone else" who cited the "post war tribunal
precedent."  You
did.  You just didn't know what it was.  Now you do, but again the facts
mean nothing to you.

 
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5a