Page 4 of 10 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 137

Thread: Torturers R US?

  1. #46
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,178
    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    How many times does the FACT that we have proven documentation that the selective use of waterboarding resulted in stopping more terrorist attempts and resulted in the eventual capture of Bin Laden before those who make the false claims we see above stop making such false claims.

    Why are those who wallow in blissful denial destined to keep repeating the idiot talking points of the left in a continual vacuum of reality or the facts?

    What can one say but; there you go again.
    No. We dont. This is simply NOT TRUE. The claim that the waterboarding led to the capture of bin laden is NOT TRUE.

    Debate continues over role of waterboarding in gathering bin Laden intel - Political Hotsheet - CBS News
    Since then, however, the White House, some leaders in Congress and former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld have all played down the notion that waterboarding or other "enhanced" techniques aided the mission
    "Mohammed did not discuss al-Kuwaiti while being subjected to the simulated drowning technique known as waterboarding... He acknowledged knowing him many months later under standard interrogation."

    In an interview Monday, Rumsfeld said that "no one was waterboarded at Guantanamo Bay."

    "It is true that some information that came from normal interrogation approaches at Guantanamo did lead to information that was beneficial in this instance," he said with respect to the death of bin Laden. "But it was not harsh treatment and it was not waterboarding."
    Donald Rumsfeld says you are ignorant and full of stinky brown stuff.
    If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen. —Samuel Adams

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,178
    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    You both are wandering far off the topic. Armed forces and the treatment of prisoners of war is clearly defined in the Geneva Convention and do not relate to the treatment of non-uniformed enemy combatants (who typically can be shot as spies) captured on the battlefield and whom have known/admitted ties to global terrorism.

    But while we are off topic, perhaps those who falsely claim we tortured prisoners can look at the Geneva Conventions definition of torture and make a connection between our selective use of water boarding to save lives to that of torture.

    Again, the premise of this thread is beyond stupid.
    No, your responses are beyond stupid.

    The indigenous population of a region who take up arms to resist an invading army, which is exactly what happened in Iraq and Afghanistan, enjoy the full protection of the geneva conventions and are specifically exempted from the uniform requirements.

    Further, the Geneva conventions do not contain a definition of torture. They do, however, contain this (article 17):

    "No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion, may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them information of any kind whatever. Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may not be threatened, insulted or exposed to unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind."
    Gee. I wonder if waterboarding would fall under that???

    Nitwit.
    If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen. —Samuel Adams

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    3,532
    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    How many times does the FACT that we have proven documentation that the selective use of waterboarding resulted in stopping more terrorist attempts and resulted in the eventual capture of Bin Laden before those who make the false claims we see above stop making such false claims.

    Why are those who wallow in blissful denial destined to keep repeating the idiot talking points of the left in a continual vacuum of reality or the facts?

    What can one say but; there you go again.
    show us the 'proven documentation'

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    3,532
    Quote Originally Posted by daewoo View Post
    No, your responses are beyond stupid.

    The indigenous population of a region who take up arms to resist an invading army, which is exactly what happened in Iraq and Afghanistan, enjoy the full protection of the geneva conventions and are specifically exempted from the uniform requirements.

    Further, the Geneva conventions do not contain a definition of torture. They do, however, contain this (article 17):



    Gee. I wonder if waterboarding would fall under that???

    Nitwit.
    no form of torture will ever meet his definition of torture, unless of course it is done to him

    Maybe he and 'freedom' have watched too many episodes of "24" or listened to too many speeches by Dubya, Cheney, Rumsfeld etc. I think this guy needs to re-calibrate his truth-detector for it is pointing to all the wrong places.

    Two Narratives of Torture

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,414
    Quote Originally Posted by Atlas View Post
    A soldier of Nazi Germany has done nothing wrong yet. He has been drafted, he has been sent to the front, he is captured. It just so happens that he knows what roads are working where, is this the same as torturing terrorists?

    To not be in that situation, he would risk death, imprisonment, and torture.

    The situation was even more extreme the farther back you go. In some places you would be given the choice to face total annihilation, or fight for the aggressor. (Middle to late Dark Ages.) The Persians gave two choices, give in, keep your religion and ways, or die wholesale.

    The need was obvious to many people during the enlightenment age that kings would go to war, and people would die. So a moderating code, for both sides, intended to limit the damage incurred by the war of aristocrats was forged socially.

    Are those rules of engagement needed now, in this conflict? Often it comes down to specifics, should one be able to torture a know bomber and genocidal maniac for information to avert thousands of deaths? Yes. Can you torture a brainwashed, slightly insane, mislead Pushtu fighter who saw only the gifts the Tali-ban gave, and the stories they told of atrocities of America?

    No.

    I see the need for a semi-secret convening authority, where by the status of a combatant is determined.
    So you're linking it to punishment, but most who argue for torture make the 'save more lives' argument a purely practical one.

    I totally agree with you about the source of these rules, which in it's nature is offensive on it's own. Essentially to allow for more war they outlawed total war. I think war is so terrible that it has not yet come time to take up a weapon unless you are willing to fight total war.

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    Originally Posted by Freedom
    I am of the school of thought that soldiers are responsible for making the moral decision regardless of orders. If a taxi driver ran over someone, he could not claim that his client told him 'go'.

    I think combat is fundamentally different from inflicting pain on the unarmed, I do not believe inflicting pain on the unarmed is fundamentally different from any other punishment.



    You both are wandering far off the topic. Armed forces and the treatment of prisoners of war is clearly defined in the Geneva Convention and do not relate to the treatment of non-uniformed enemy combatants (who typically can be shot as spies) captured on the battlefield and whom have known/admitted ties to global terrorism.

    But while we are off topic, perhaps those who falsely claim we tortured prisoners can look at the Geneva Conventions definition of torture and make a connection between our selective use of water boarding to save lives to that of torture.

    Again, the premise of this thread is beyond stupid.
    Just because they have ties does not mean they are spies, and water boarding is torture, a very light form of torture admittedly (we put our own people through it I think) but torture none the less. We were vaugely on-topic Atlas was addressing the question of whether torture is ever justified.

    I find it highly questionable that torture never works, the reliability issue that has been pointed out exists in any interrogation and it would be more apt to say enemy prisoners are bad sources of intel in general. That is why the prisoners would no doubt be tested with questions to which the answers are already known to detect lies. Torture is ancient and if never worked people would have figured it out a long time ago, not written manuals on how to verify information.

    Quote Originally Posted by daewoo View Post
    Gee. I wonder if waterboarding would fall under that???
    That's a pretty explicit statement, I don't think our police forces follow the Geneva convention
    Morals are a religious Myth.. - Xcaliber
    How is Evil Immoral? - Xcaliber
    I am right until you prove otherwise - Xcaliber

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,178
    Quote Originally Posted by Freedom View Post
    I find it highly questionable that torture never works, the reliability issue that has been pointed out exists in any interrogation and it would be more apt to say enemy prisoners are bad sources of intel in general. That is why the prisoners would no doubt be tested with questions to which the answers are already known to detect lies. Torture is ancient and if never worked people would have figured it out a long time ago, not written manuals on how to verify information.
    They are not bad sources of intel in general. They are excellent sources of intel. That is why we have spent so much time and money developing interrogation techniques that actually WORK.

    That was the point the FBI interrogators kept trying to make. They were working with KSM and getting good information. Then the CIA started torturing him and the information flow stopped. Contrary to the fact free claims of truth detector, the information that they got from KSM about Bin Ladens courier which some claimed help lead to his death came nearly a year AFTER the torture stopped and the FBI was allowed back in there to start back in with interrogation methods that we actually know WORK.

    That's a pretty explicit statement, I don't think our police forces follow the Geneva convention
    I dont think so either
    If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen. —Samuel Adams

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,414
    Quote Originally Posted by daewoo View Post
    They are not bad sources of intel in general. They are excellent sources of intel. That is why we have spent so much time and money developing interrogation techniques that actually WORK.

    That was the point the FBI interrogators kept trying to make. They were working with KSM and getting good information. Then the CIA started torturing him and the information flow stopped. Contrary to the fact free claims of truth detector, the information that they got from KSM about Bin Ladens courier which some claimed help lead to his death came nearly a year AFTER the torture stopped and the FBI was allowed back in there to start back in with interrogation methods that we actually know WORK.
    Well it would obviously depend on why they are saying something, if they're doing it in return for better treatment obviously torture won't improve the flow of information.

    Historically torture has been used after the appeal to ideals and bribing have been tried.

    If someone is really really intent on not giving information away there is nothing you can do to get it from them, including torture. The past however has proven there is a gap between total dedication and shallow dedication. A prisoner can be loyal enough to refuse bribes, promises, arguments... smart enough to see through psychological games and intellectual traps, and yet still not possess the will to endure torture for his/her secrets. Of course such a person's first instinct will to be a lie, and the torturers first task will be to convince the prisoner that lying is more trouble than it's worth by detecting them and 'punishing them'. Thus when the prisoner can not be sure whether his lie will be detected or not and is unwilling to undergo more torture he will tell the truth at all times because it's the only risk-less answer.

    Now suppose he/she knows what information is important and what is not, knows what his/her interrogators know about his side, and perhaps rehearsed with a central intelligence force on their side and was provided with plausible stories for the sensitive information and true but useless information as well. It is quite possible that such an equipped prisoner could never useful even if they would break under torture because you don't know when they've broken.

    That's possible, and it's even more possible that you simply don't have enough knowledge to catch him in lies, but to say torture never works is incorrect. Totally apart from gathering information it has been used as a weapon of terror for millennium, part of an ongoing campaign by a side to prove to the enemy that the conflict is not worth it. Now if the U.S. was making use of that weapon they would not try to hide torture, on the other hand they may have exaggerated these incidents for just that effect.
    Morals are a religious Myth.. - Xcaliber
    How is Evil Immoral? - Xcaliber
    I am right until you prove otherwise - Xcaliber

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ventura CA
    Posts
    158
    Quote Originally Posted by daewoo View Post
    No. We dont. This is simply NOT TRUE. The claim that the waterboarding led to the capture of bin laden is NOT TRUE.

    Debate continues over role of waterboarding in gathering bin Laden intel - Political Hotsheet - CBS News





    Donald Rumsfeld says you are ignorant and full of stinky brown stuff.
    The bolded part is ironic based on the incoherent rant above.

    Carry on; it is obvious that your rabid denial suggests something beyond mere stinky and brown.

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ventura CA
    Posts
    158
    Quote Originally Posted by daewoo View Post
    No, your responses are beyond stupid.

    The indigenous population of a region who take up arms to resist an invading army, which is exactly what happened in Iraq and Afghanistan, enjoy the full protection of the geneva conventions and are specifically exempted from the uniform requirements.

    Further, the Geneva conventions do not contain a definition of torture. They do, however, contain this (article 17):



    Gee. I wonder if waterboarding would fall under that???

    Nitwit.
    There you have it folks; the liberal lunatic argument summed up and three incoherent paragraphs.

    Terrorists are merely citizens taking up arms in a desperate bid to remain being ruled by brutal megalomaniac thugs and do not want to have representative governance.

    Carry on; it is obvious by your clueless rants that you wallow in blissful ignorance and denial.

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Limeyland
    Posts
    7,893
    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    There you have it folks; the liberal lunatic argument summed up and three incoherent paragraphs.

    Terrorists are merely citizens taking up arms in a desperate bid to remain being ruled by brutal megalomaniac thugs and do not want to have representative governance.

    Carry on; it is obvious by your clueless rants that you wallow in blissful ignorance and denial.
    I would imagine that our King George saw your point of view when he heard about the Boston tea party........just saying

  11. #56
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ventura CA
    Posts
    158
    Quote Originally Posted by Winston Smith View Post
    show us the 'proven documentation'
    The question of the efficacy of enhanced interrogation techniques, however, has continued to be debated. There is strong evidence that such interrogations have been effective in eliciting valuable intelligence. For example, a May 30, 2005 Justice Department memo noted the following:

    “[T]he CIA believes the intelligence acquired from these [enhanced] interrogations has been a key reason why al Qaeda has failed to launch a spectacular attack in the West since 11 September 2001.... In particular, the CIA believes that it would have been unable to obtain critical information from numerous detainees, including [Khalid Sheik Mohammed, a.k.a. 'KSM'] and Abu Zubaydah, without these enhanced techniques.... Before the CIA used enhanced techniques ... KSM resisted giving any answers to questions about future attacks, simply noting, 'Soon you will find out.' [Once the techniques were applied], interrogations have led to specific, actionable intelligence, as well as a general increase in the amount of intelligence regarding al Qaeda and its affiliates.”

    "[…] Interrogations of [Abu] Zubaydah—again, once enhanced techniques were employed—furnished detailed information regarding al Qaeda's organizational structure, key operatives, and modus operandi and identified KSM as the mastermind of the September 11 attacks.... Zubaydah and KSM also supplied important information about al-Zarqawi and his network [in Iraq].”

    When Abu Zubaydeh began to reveal information as a result of the waterboarding, he explained that he and his fellow al Qaeda operatives were obligated to resist only until they could no longer do so, at which point it became permissible for them to cooperate with interrogators. Indeed he advised his interrogators: "Do this for all the brothers."

    Of the thousands of unlawful combatants captured by the U.S., fewer than 35 were subjected to any enhanced techniques. Waterboarding in particular was used against an even smaller number of suspects. The amount of information yielded by such efforts, however, was immense. According to former CIA Director Michael Hayden, as of 2006, fully half of the government's knowledge about the structure and activities of al Qaeda had been learned via enhanced interrogation.


    Enhanced Interrogation Techniques (EIT) / Torture - Discover the Networks

    This is coming from a man with far more information than a few unemployed bloggers on a political debate site:

    ABC News’ Luis Martinez reports: CIA Director Michael Hayden offered a spirited defense of the agency’s controversial detention and interrogation techniques, such as waterboarding......

    "You can’t say it didn’t work. It worked," Hayden said in a wide-ranging farewell interview with reporters at the CIA’s headquarters in Langley, Va.

    Hayden was not CIA Director at the time that the enhanced techniques were legally authorized for use at secret CIA prisons, but he offered a strong defense nonetheless. "I am convinced that the program got the maximum amount of information. Particularly out of that first generation of detainees."


    CIA Director’s Strong Defense of Interrogation Techniques - ABC News

    Another top member of the Bush administration, former defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld, credited the use of so-called "enhanced interrogation techniques" with yielding "a major fraction" of US intelligence on al-Qaeda and called ending them a "mistake."


    Cheney, speaking on the "Fox News Sunday" program, said top intelligence officials had stated that "some of the early leads" that helped agents find bin Laden had come thanks to the harsh interrogation techniques used on terror suspects.

    "All have said one way or the other that the enhanced interrogation program played a role," he said. "My guess is that's probably the case that it contributed, just as did a number of other factors."

    Asked whether the methods should be reinstated if the United States were to capture a new high-value target, Cheney replied: "I certainly would advocate it. I'd be a strong supporter of it."


    Dick Cheney calls for the return of enhanced interrogation - Telegraph

    I am sure now that you will do the usual and claim that these men are just war mongering liars which is par for the course when dealing with libertarian nuts and liberal liars.

    But the people in the KNOW are far more inclined to disagree with the lunatic rants from the liberal intelligentsia who have never been right about anything....EVER.

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ventura CA
    Posts
    158
    Quote Originally Posted by Winston Smith View Post


    no form of torture will ever meet his definition of torture, unless of course it is done to him

    Maybe he and 'freedom' have watched too many episodes of "24" or listened to too many speeches by Dubya, Cheney, Rumsfeld etc. I think this guy needs to re-calibrate his truth-detector for it is pointing to all the wrong places.

    Two Narratives of Torture
    How trite and uninformed; but again, when asked to provide irrefutable proof of what constitutes torture all we get are tomes about how any kind of treatment to obtain information is torture when in fact the true definition suggests nothing of the sort.

    Of course I am hardly surprised that the loons on the left would want to infer Constitutional rights on terrorists and non-uniformed enemy combatants who work to undermine our freedoms and murder our citizens; after all, they hate their country.

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ventura CA
    Posts
    158
    Quote Originally Posted by Freedom View Post
    Just because they have ties does not mean they are spies, and water boarding is torture, a very light form of torture admittedly (we put our own people through it I think) but torture none the less. We were vaugely on-topic Atlas was addressing the question of whether torture is ever justified.

    I find it highly questionable that torture never works, the reliability issue that has been pointed out exists in any interrogation and it would be more apt to say enemy prisoners are bad sources of intel in general. That is why the prisoners would no doubt be tested with questions to which the answers are already known to detect lies. Torture is ancient and if never worked people would have figured it out a long time ago, not written manuals on how to verify information.
    The question of the efficacy of enhanced interrogation techniques, however, has continued to be debated. There is strong evidence that such interrogations have been effective in eliciting valuable intelligence. For example, a May 30, 2005 Justice Department memo noted the following:

    “[T]he CIA believes the intelligence acquired from these [enhanced] interrogations has been a key reason why al Qaeda has failed to launch a spectacular attack in the West since 11 September 2001.... In particular, the CIA believes that it would have been unable to obtain critical information from numerous detainees, including [Khalid Sheik Mohammed, a.k.a. 'KSM'] and Abu Zubaydah, without these enhanced techniques.... Before the CIA used enhanced techniques ... KSM resisted giving any answers to questions about future attacks, simply noting, 'Soon you will find out.' [Once the techniques were applied], interrogations have led to specific, actionable intelligence, as well as a general increase in the amount of intelligence regarding al Qaeda and its affiliates.”

    "[…] Interrogations of [Abu] Zubaydah—again, once enhanced techniques were employed—furnished detailed information regarding al Qaeda's organizational structure, key operatives, and modus operandi and identified KSM as the mastermind of the September 11 attacks.... Zubaydah and KSM also supplied important information about al-Zarqawi and his network [in Iraq].”

    When Abu Zubaydeh began to reveal information as a result of the waterboarding, he explained that he and his fellow al Qaeda operatives were obligated to resist only until they could no longer do so, at which point it became permissible for them to cooperate with interrogators. Indeed he advised his interrogators: "Do this for all the brothers."

    Of the thousands of unlawful combatants captured by the U.S., fewer than 35 were subjected to any enhanced techniques. Waterboarding in particular was used against an even smaller number of suspects. The amount of information yielded by such efforts, however, was immense. According to former CIA Director Michael Hayden, as of 2006, fully half of the government's knowledge about the structure and activities of al Qaeda had been learned via enhanced interrogation.


    Enhanced Interrogation Techniques (EIT) / Torture - Discover the Networks

    This is coming from a man with far more information than a few unemployed bloggers on a political debate site:

    ABC News’ Luis Martinez reports: CIA Director Michael Hayden offered a spirited defense of the agency’s controversial detention and interrogation techniques, such as waterboarding......

    "You can’t say it didn’t work. It worked," Hayden said in a wide-ranging farewell interview with reporters at the CIA’s headquarters in Langley, Va.

    Hayden was not CIA Director at the time that the enhanced techniques were legally authorized for use at secret CIA prisons, but he offered a strong defense nonetheless. "I am convinced that the program got the maximum amount of information. Particularly out of that first generation of detainees."


    CIA Director’s Strong Defense of Interrogation Techniques - ABC News

    Another top member of the Bush administration, former defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld, credited the use of so-called "enhanced interrogation techniques" with yielding "a major fraction" of US intelligence on al-Qaeda and called ending them a "mistake."


    Cheney, speaking on the "Fox News Sunday" program, said top intelligence officials had stated that "some of the early leads" that helped agents find bin Laden had come thanks to the harsh interrogation techniques used on terror suspects.

    "All have said one way or the other that the enhanced interrogation program played a role," he said. "My guess is that's probably the case that it contributed, just as did a number of other factors."

    Asked whether the methods should be reinstated if the United States were to capture a new high-value target, Cheney replied: "I certainly would advocate it. I'd be a strong supporter of it."


    Dick Cheney calls for the return of enhanced interrogation - Telegraph

    Quote Originally Posted by Freedom View Post
    That's a pretty explicit statement, I don't think our police forces follow the Geneva convention
    Please cite the exact Geneva Convention that applies to this case.

    Thank you.

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,178
    So on the one hand you have the CIA making broad generalizations about all the great info they obtained from their victims, but with absolutely no specifics.

    On the other hand you have the FBI stating unequivocally that better information was gathered WITHOUT torture, including specific examples, including the fact that the names of Bin Ladens couriers would have been known 1.5 years earlier if the CIA had not pulled KSM so they could torture them

    Hmm....generally when a government official gets vague, it is because they are lying.

    The fact is that this has been studies extensively for YEARS and you are WRONG. There is no question. The only argument in your favors it "I am not bright enough to read and understand research". Morals do not even enter into it. We should not torture because the FACT is that it is not an effective means to gather intel.
    If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen. —Samuel Adams

  15. #60
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ventura CA
    Posts
    158
    Quote Originally Posted by gansao View Post
    I would imagine that our King George saw your point of view when he heard about the Boston tea party........just saying
    How trite....."King George"; you people will stoop to any low level to make your non-factual points won't you?

    At least George had Congressional approval to go into Afghanistan and Iraq which is more than what Obama obtained to bomb Libyans.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •