- Joined
- Aug 26, 2007
- Messages
- 50,241
- Reaction score
- 19,243
- Location
- San Antonio Texas
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
CNSNews.com - CIA Confirms: Waterboarding 9/11 Mastermind Led to Info that Aborted 9/11-Style Attack on Los Angeles(CNSNews.com) - The Central Intelligence Agency told CNSNews.com today that it stands by the assertion made in a May 30, 2005 Justice Department memo that the use of “enhanced techniques” of interrogation on al Qaeda leader Khalid Sheik Mohammed (KSM) -- including the use of waterboarding -- caused KSM to reveal information that allowed the U.S. government to thwart a planned attack on Los Angeles.
Before he was waterboarded, when KSM was asked about planned attacks on the United States, he ominously told his CIA interrogators, “Soon, you will know.”
According to the previously classified May 30, 2005 Justice Department memo that was released by President Barack Obama last week, the thwarted attack -- which KSM called the “Second Wave”-- planned “ ‘to use East Asian operatives to crash a hijacked airliner into’ a building in Los Angeles.”
CNSNews? Are you serious?
You cite a reknowned propoganda source and claim it proves your point.
Now THAT is funny.:doh
According to the article, the restrictions on such use were very well defined.Actually, this proves it CAN work. It doesn't prove it "does" work, as does suggests it works across the board all the time.
I think MOST reasonable people can accept that intense interrogation, mild torture, or even extreme torture can all yield legitimate results. As I've stated repeatedly, we would not put our own men in the military through things such as waterboarding and other things in preparation for being able to withstand it if captured if there wasn't a chance that they could give out legitimate information.
However, the question comes as follows:
1. Does it yield enough legitimate information on a consistant enough basis that it is worth it.
And what countries are we expecting to cheer us on for not doing such? France.. the same country that did, and does business with Iran?2. Does the damage to our integrety as a nation and world standing outweight the potential gains of using such techniques in light of #1.
If you know of any send them to the WH.3. Are there more effective ways to retrieve said information that is less questionable and has less effect in regards to #2.
I'd break the knee caps of any terrorist that had possible information to save lives and sleep well at night. I'd have nightmares if I learned I didn't act and people died.4. Does the potential for over reliance on a tactic whose information may yeild a high amount of false positives outweight the benefit of the legitimate information we can recieve.
This is a false argument. We treated Vietnamese POW's well, our boys were tortured.5. Does the use of such techniques raise the likihood that our soldiers in future wars against groups that previously did not routinely use such techniques or worse will be subject to such techniques due to the expectation that the U.S. will be doing it to theirs?
The real question to ask is, could you sleep at night knowing that terrorist in custody knew about that bomb and we didn't get the information in time.These are some of the questions I think one must begin to ask themselves once they accept the fact that it IS possible to get legitimate worth while information from not just these kind of techniques but even full out universally held acts of "torture" but also accept the fact that such a process is far from a perfect form of gaining information that does have at least POTENTIAL pitfalls.
4.
1. Does it yield enough legitimate information on a consistant enough basis that it is worth it.
2. Does the damage to our integrety as a nation and world standing outweight the potential gains of using such techniques in light of #1.
3. Are there more effective ways to retrieve said information...
that is less questionable and has less effect in regards to #2.
4. Does the potential for over reliance on a tactic whose information may yeild a high amount of false positives outweight the benefit of the legitimate information we can recieve.
5. Does the use of such techniques raise the likihood that our soldiers in future wars against groups that previously did not routinely use such techniques or worse will be subject to such techniques due to the expectation that the U.S. will be doing it to theirs?
However, the question comes as follows:
1. Does it yield enough legitimate information on a consistant enough basis that it is worth it.
2. Does the damage to our integrety as a nation and world standing outweight the potential gains of using such techniques in light of #1.
3. Are there more effective ways to retrieve said information that is less questionable and has less effect in regards to #2.
4. Does the potential for over reliance on a tactic whose information may yeild a high amount of false positives outweight the benefit of the legitimate information we can recieve.
5. Does the use of such techniques raise the likihood that our soldiers in future wars against groups that previously did not routinely use such techniques or worse will be subject to such techniques due to the expectation that the U.S. will be doing it to theirs?
These are some of the questions I think one must begin to ask themselves once they accept the fact that it IS possible to get legitimate worth while information from not just these kind of techniques but even full out universally held acts of "torture" but also accept the fact that such a process is far from a perfect form of gaining information that does have at least POTENTIAL pitfalls.
4.
Ethereal, would you support the systematic:
1. Deportation
2. Imprisonment
3. Murder
Of any muslim in the U.S. if it prevented just one terrorist attack?
Why is torture an option? :dohWhy is murder an option? :shock:
Why is torture an option? :doh
Why is murder an option? :shock:
Ethereal, would you support the systematic:
1. Deportation
2. Imprisonment
3. Murder
Of any muslim in the U.S. if it prevented just one terrorist attack?
All of you, EACH of you "But we cannot torture" people always leave out the fact the people being subjected to such... are terrorist, that desire to kill your fellow man. Why do you care more for the comfort of such people over the lives of innocent people?
I'll never ever understand that.
Until the CIA comes out and says, - we got no actionable intelligence from our interrogation until right after we waterboarded him - the claim is speacious at best. What that article says to me is that they used a LOT of different techniques.
Like ending them? Ending lives to save lives seems futile. All life is important, not just the lives of Americans.Define torture.
To me, using whatever means necessary to save lives and stopping is not torture.
So what happens when no vital information is extracted? Then you have beaten someone for days and nothing was gained. But that's okay, because it's only Americans that count, right?Beating some one for days for no reason... that's torture.
Being cruel, hurtful... causing pain for no legitimate purpose... that's torture.
Needing to save 1, 10, 1,000 or more lives and having to cause someone discomfort, or yes, even pain. Well, they made the choice to be a part of such events, we need to stop them.
That's the difference between torture, and extracting vital information.
I care for the comfort of all people, not just those who were born in my country by chance.All of you, EACH of you "But we cannot torture" people always leave out the fact the people being subjected to such... are terrorist, that desire to kill your fellow man. Why do you care more for the comfort of such people over the lives of innocent people?
I'll never ever understand that.
No, I would not sacrifice the entirety of our nation's moral integrity to prevent a terrorist attack. I would, however, sacrifice a measure of our moral integrity to prevent a terrorist attack. Discretion must be inherent to any interrogation or intelligence operation. We cannot simply mutilate a person because there's a ten percent chance they might know of an impending terrorist attack, but I would have no qualms about putting Osama Bin Laden's testicles in a vice if he were aware of such an attack.
The lines have always been blurred; the idea that they are well-defined is a contemporary illusion.
2. Does the damage to our integrety as a nation and world standing outweight the potential gains of using such techniques in light of #1.
Well thanks for your unsubstantiated opinion presented as fact.You know, the more I've thought about this issue the more I become convinced that had a President Obama been president during a major terrorist attack and had it been a Democratic administration interrogating these captured al qaeda suspects... the world community would never blink an eye about any of this.
No doubt in my mind. This whole 'torture' issue has been and always was a Bush bashing hate-fest. Nothing more.
:doh
So torture is bad, but its okay to do it, if we have a legitimate good chance to get information from the person?
How good of a chance should it be? Should there be any kind of accountable party that determines if its such? Should there be reprucussions if its found that the chance was far less than the people doing it claimed in some sort of substantial way? Should there be varying levels of torture allowed for varying chances? IE if its a 50% chance he has information its okay to waterboard but if its 90% chance he has information its okay to mutilate.
Am I the only one that sees the irony in many of those that scream fascism, tyranny, and socialism with every bailout, environmental protection, or social safety-net, are also some of the biggest defenders of government sanctioned torture, denial of habeas corpus, and warrantless wiretaps?
All of you, EACH of you "But we cannot torture" people always leave out the fact the people being subjected to such... are terrorist, that desire to kill your fellow man. Why do you care more for the comfort of such people over the lives of innocent people?
I'll never ever understand that.
I'm not even one of those "we cannot torture" people...
But can you guarantee that 100% of the time that these things happen they always occur to someone that is legitimately a terrorist....let alone someone that has actually violated ANY law or someone that actually has any information?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?