CIA Waterboarded Mohammed 183X in 1 Month, Zubaydah 83X in 1 month

[Marlo Manson]

I have mixed feelings about this. on one hand it prolly saved countless American lives that would have been lost if we hadn't obtained the info being withheld by unwilling enemies, but in retrospect we raise hell and wanna start droppin bombs and firing rockets when we findout Americans are being tortured abroad.

I do realize that many of the Americans being tortured abroad, are in the hands of religious fanaticals and they don't follow, care about, nor recognize the Geneva act.

therefore the our prisoners in enemy hands doing the torturing, obviously have no mercy for Americans, westerners, and Zionists in the least bit anyway, So on one hand, I think our use of unlawful or dirty tatics of extracting life saving information is justified in these situations, an eye for an eye as they say, if the enemy isn't following prisoner / torture protocol regcognized by the geneva act, why should we have to follow torture protocol with anybody captured and known to be unlawful combatants / terrorists that do as they please and use dirty tactics against us already. :dunno::2 cents:

 

[Legzman]

I have mixed feelings about this. on one hand it prolly saved countless American lives that would have been lost if we hadn't obtained the info being withheld by unwilling enemies, but in retrospect we raise hell and wanna start droppin bombs and firing rockets when we findout Americans are being tortured abroad.

I do realize that many of the Americans being tortured abroad, are in the hands of religious fanaticals and they don't follow, care about, nor recognize the Geneva act.

therefore the our prisoners in enemy hands doing the torturing, obviously have no mercy for Americans, westerners, and Zionists in the least bit anyway, So on one hand, I think our use of unlawful or dirty tatics of extracting life saving information is justified in these situations, an eye for an eye as they say, if the enemy isn't following prisoner / torture protocol regcognized by the geneva act, why should we have to follow torture protocol with anybody captured and known to be unlawful combatants / terrorists that do as they please and use dirty tactics against us already. :dunno::2 cents:

my point exactly! :hatsoff:

 

[gunslingingbird]

they prefer to be called sheet heads...

Really? I thought the politically correct term was camel jockeys. Or was it carpet pilots? I've heard differing versions. :dunno:

 

[Red Spyder]

What the hell was "president" Obama smoking when he decided to put a stop to that kind of interrogation? He should let the interrogation experts do their job with all their tools at their disposal and let them at their discretion decided how far to go when interrogating some terroritst, whether it's saying "please, pretty please" or all the way to showering him with boiling oil. I personally trust the experts more than someone who has never been involved in the intelligence service, neither have I, so I leave the intelligence gathering bussiness to the intelligence gathering people, without tying a hand behind their back.

Now, as far as I'm concerned, I don't believe the U.S. is lowering itself by allowing interrogators to waterboard KSM or any of his minions. We are not lowering ourselves, THEY are pulling us down to theirs.

Imagine, you're a boxer, and you want to fight by the rules of boxing, but a guy trips you up and fights you in the floor, you can't use the rules of boxing there, he wants to fight in the floor you got to learn to fight in the floor.

 

[gunslingingbird]

i agree with facal 100%

So who are you agreeing with: Facial King, or baconsalts?

 

[Boothbabe]

What the hell was "president" Obama smoking when he decided to put a stop to that kind of interrogation? He should let the interrogation experts do their job with all their tools at their disposal and let them at their discretion decided how far to go when interrogating some terroritst, whether it's saying "please, pretty please" or all the way to showering him with boiling oil. I personally trust the experts more than someone who has never been involved in the intelligence service, neither have I, so I leave the intelligence gathering bussiness to the intelligence gathering people, without tying a hand behind their back.

Now, as far as I'm concerned, I don't believe the U.S. is lowering itself by allowing interrogators to waterboard KSM or any of his minions. We are not lowering ourselves, THEY are pulling us down to theirs.

Imagine, you're a boxer, and you want to fight by the rules of boxing, but a guy trips you up and fights you in the floor, you can't use the rules of boxing there, he wants to fight in the floor you got to learn to fight in the floor.

Sheeple....and nothing will ever change.

 

[Hot Mega]

It seems allot of people have these mythical scenarios in their mind about what capturing a terrorist or suspect and torturing information out of them is.

The only thing torture is practically good for (other than inflicting punishment on the subject) is getting the subject to concede to what you already know or believe... or to have them make some statement you want them to make.

For torture to be useful under the circumstances of preventing an imminent threat, you must have a subject with specific knowledge of some event or fact you already have some degree of knowledge about.

Consider this, if you happen to capture a suspect and you don't have specific knowledge that they have specific knowledge of some pending attack (in this case), what baseline do you use for determining the truth if they tell you they don't?

Most familiar with torture understand that it rarely yields actionable intelligence in real life circumstances. It's far more likely to do more harm than good by triggering you to respond to phony or inaccurate information. The biggest indictment against torture being useful for garnering actionable intelligence is the fact that subjects are tortured multiple times. If it worked, why would you need to do it more than once?

The most amount of actionable intelligence retrieved from the capture of (terrorist in the case) suspects usually comes from investigating what you find on them and not what they tell you.

In the overwhelming majority of cases, torture is used (and has been in the past) to coerce a statement from a captive in order to then exploit that statement against them, exploit it for propaganda or to misinform.

If we tortured individuals under Bush, it was most likely used to illicit some statement from the subject linking Iraq or Saddam to 9/11 or AQ IMO in order to draw cover for an invasion absent a credible case against WMDs.

Last, some suggest it's worth it to "dunk' someone's head under water if it saves thousands of lives. Aside from the credibility of such a claim, the question simply put at that point is, do you believe in torture or not? Because finding reason in that argument, naturally you should find it reasonable to chop off a finger, gouge an eye, shiv, burn or beat one person to save thousands of lives. So again, the question is do you believe in torture or not? If the answer to that is "yes", then you should support our withdrawing from the Geneva Convention and changing our law. But even changing our laws and withdrawing from the GC does not absolve someone of the crimes unless the new laws are ex post facto laws.

 

[Shindekudasai]

And treat them like the human beings that they are not!

You got to be f***ing kidding me. You're actually saying here that they're no human beings because you think they're terrorist? You know who the last ones were that talked like that, claiming some people(s) are no human beings because of this or that? The Nationalsocialists.

When it's about marching into other countries and imposing your mindset, laws and way of life, you're the pinnacle of morality, the stronghold of democracy, the fortress of freedom, but when it's about breaking your own rules and dragging everything you demand from others through the dirt, it's suddenly the enemies fault and you're forced to play on their level and torturing everyone in your way is necessary to protect quadrillions of Americans and blahblahblah. Absolutely shameless, if you ask me.
Stuff like that makes me kinda furious. Well, good thing not all Americans think that way.

 

[Hot Mega]

He should let the interrogation experts do their job with all their tools at their disposal and let them at their discretion decided how far to go when interrogating some terroritst,

Now, as far as I'm concerned, I don't believe the U.S. is lowering itself by allowing interrogators to waterboard KSM or any of his minions. We are not lowering ourselves, THEY are pulling us down to theirs.

Most experts don't support methods of torture and generally believe it does more to hurt your efforts than it does to help.

Also, just because criminals murder and maim does that now mean cops need to lower themselves to the levels of the criminals?

 

[Legzman]

I wish that here in America we would stay the fuck out of other peoples business. Pull all our troops home and leave them here to defend us from the crazy fucks in other countries. We need to stop policing the world. But thats just not gonna happen. As for these terror suspects they are humans by definition, but they act like fucking animals!

Here is their techniques for torture.
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0524072torture1.html

now tell me that waterboarding is torture compared to that and you sir are out of your fucking mind! Seems pretty tame in comparison. So yes, we should continue to waterboard these detainees. Hell maybe we should even step it up a notch!

 

[Jagger69]

So who are you agreeing with: Facial King, or baconsalts?

Fucking great!!!

:glugglug:

 

[Hot Mega]

I wish that here in America we would stay the fuck out of other peoples business. Pull all our troops home and leave them here to defend us from the crazy fucks in other countries. We need to stop policing the world.

Here is their techniques for torture.
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0524072torture1.html

now tell me that waterboarding is torture compared to that and you sir are out of your fucking mind! Seems pretty tame in comparison. So yes, we should continue to waterboard these detainees. Hell maybe we should even step it up a notch!

We should go after terrorists. That's not policing the world, that's protecting our country. Invading Afghanistan was the right thing to do because fugitives of US justice where hold up there and the regime of that country was providing support and a haven for them.

Secondly, waterboarding is torture plain and simple and one of the main reasons it would be used by someone who could face criminal charges is that it doesn't maim, leave marks and is difficult to prove. Not because it's more humane.

 

[Galactic]

If you wanna call something torture, it don't make it so.

We're the same level as out enemies if we use anything to accomplish our goals that they also do?
OK, then you (and your family) are walking dead. Are you packing already? Better get to another place...maybe Venezuela, you'll be safe there and can speak out freely against the government. Unlike here...
Oh, wait...scratch that.
Maybe you can go underground, there are so many better places to be than the repressive "torturing their enemies" US of A.

Yep. I have no problem with torturing these animals. Keep this country safe.


By any means necessary. :thefinger

 

[Bloodshot Scott]

Blair: Congress Approved CIA Interrogations

a letter within the intelligence community last week that could prove embarrassing to both Democrats and the Obama administration.

 

[Hot Mega]

Blair: Congress Approved CIA Interrogations

Trying to explain "harsh tactics" to some members of congress would be like expecting them to swallow all the water from a fire hose.

 

[ragincaucasian]

I am hearing the idea started from former Bush speechwriter Marc A. Thiessen purported that the use of harsh interrogation techniques -- including waterboarding -- on Khalid Shaikh Mohammed "stopped an attack on the Library Tower in Los Angeles." This has been a big rallying cry I've heard in the last few days as the stake in the "torture gets results" banner.....

This makes me wonder, because the White House broke up the Library Tower attack in 2002, announced it at that point, and KSM was captured in 2003. Therefore, Thiessen's position that the capture and waterboarding of KSM in 2003 prevented that attack in 2002 is simply wrong.

i am still unsure

1) is torture wrong?

a) if so, why is it okay to torture here and other times it isn't?

b) if no, then this isn't torture, even though it has been defined as such by America, the Red Cross, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, ACLU, and the Geneva Convention except for some reason it doesn't apply here.​

2) we are certain that those being tortured were all people caught in the act of attempting to blow up / kill Americans? there is no doubt that every one tortured was guilty of said act? These are all people engaged in the heat of battle and there were no civilians whatsoever tortured?


i am looking for clarity of what the official stance a moral patriot is supposed to have because i am not sure which one of these statements are true. One minute I hear that America doesn't torture, that this was just Frat house pranks, then the other minute it is torture and that is okay because Jack Bauer does it.

 

[Philbert]

^ At least two people still don't get it.

3, and keep counting...!

 

[Philbert]

And to everybody living:
This is just a democrat/media smokescreen.
nothing more.
The people of the US, many at least are not pleased with obamas actions.
So the democrat/media makes the TOP STORY this week about hating BUSH again and those evil republicans.
Taking focus off whats really happening.
Smoke screen, diversion.

This pretty much explains it ...!

http://server6.theimagehosting.com/image.php?img=Project2.94f.jpg

 

[Facetious]

A radical religious ideology consists of a set of ideas.

May I advance that to mandates ?

As for building bridges, why don't you start with creating allies instead of enemies.

I'm generally all about building bridges, as idealistic as that sounds, but not at the cost of my liberties or my pocketbook, unless of course I consent to it.
I am just yet another relatively powerless citizen living under a government that allows its people a marginal amount of say so as far as policy goes.

There are a lot of muslims who want terrorism to stop just as much as you.

Well understood, it's just that the peace loving ones are too much intimidated to rally against the 10% + of radicals which . . . if my mathematics are correct number 100,000 + per million population.

Example article about reporting under conditions of anonymity because of the intimidation factor.

 

[ragincaucasian]

Well understood, it's just that the peace loving ones are too much intimidated to rally against the 10% + of radicals which . . . if my mathematics are correct number 100,000 + per million population.
.

ditto to the "West" standing up to the Evangelical kooks.