Waterboarding Lies

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:don't care sorry I don't..not if it's going to get a terrorist to fess up to something and save someone's life

Except in the case of Abu Zaida, it has been shown that waterboarding didn't work. He was a low-level guy and gave up a lot of info before they moved to waterboarding but the powers that be were convinced he was higher-level than he was. That's when they insisted on waterboarding him and he gave up all kinds of false information and the CIA wasted lots of time running down empty leads.

Ban waterboarding because it doesn't work!

[Anonymous]

It's banned already - but I don't get the need to publish all the rest of the stuff. I don't buy Jeff's argument that if we are nice to them they will be nice to us. Moral high ground is a cold comfort to a US citizen in a coffin due to terrorism.

[Anonymous]

It's banned already - but I don't get the need to publish all the rest of the stuff. I don't buy Jeff's argument that if we are nice to them they will be nice to us. Moral high ground is a cold comfort to a US citizen in a coffin due to terrorism.

Huh? Maybe I missed something, but I didn't see that among his arguments at all.

As I read it, his argument is rather that the US loses its credibility when it purports to be the leader of the just and free world but then engages in torture as an interrogation practice. That loss of credibility is not just some abstract thing - it alienates allies and serves as one hell of a recruiting tool for terrorist organizations.

[Anonymous]

It's banned already - but I don't get the need to publish all the rest of the stuff. I don't buy Jeff's argument that if we are nice to them they will be nice to us. Moral high ground is a cold comfort to a US citizen in a coffin due to terrorism.

This line of argument reminds me of Larouche tactics - if you don't think that Lyndon is the savior of the world, you must be a lover of tyranny - the argument is much more complex than this.

[Anonymous]

Ah Mr. Steele you are wrong regaring my experience with terrorism loss and it first happend on PAN AM 103 and evolved to the trade center. I again have no problem with CIA methods and I trust those professionals to do what they think is the right thing. I am sick of Obama apologizing for US policies as if he speaks for everyone..he doesn't..again..almost half the country..did not vote for him and his "I am so sorry the US has been party to doing the wrong thing" angers me. He comes across as sophmoric and just not very bright.

[Anonymous]

Ah Mr. Steele you are wrong regaring my experience with terrorism loss and it first happend on PAN AM 103 and evolved to the trade center. I again have no problem with CIA methods and I trust those professionals to do what they think is the right thing. I am sick of Obama apologizing for US policies as if he speaks for everyone..he doesn't..again..almost half the country..did not vote for him and his "I am so sorry the US has been party to doing the wrong thing" angers me. He comes across as sophmoric and just not very bright.

I trust that you realize this works both ways - I got pretty damn sick of Bush (who didn't even win the majority of voters in 2000) speaking for me. I got sick of him completely disregarding any degree of intellectual honesty, followed by being completely unapologetic about it, all the while repeating ad nauseam that the US is the best and most just nation in the world.

I'm also happy to point out that you are in the minority of those who think Obama is sophmoric and not bright, particularly in comparison to our former president.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ah Mr. Steele you are wrong regaring my experience with terrorism loss and it first happend on PAN AM 103 and evolved to the trade center. I again have no problem with CIA methods and I trust those professionals to do what they think is the right thing. I am sick of Obama apologizing for US policies as if he speaks for everyone..he doesn't..again..almost half the country..did not vote for him and his "I am so sorry the US has been party to doing the wrong thing" angers me. He comes across as sophmoric and just not very bright.

Well, I would like them to do what works! It seems to me the issue isn't whether terrorists deserved to be tortured but whether torture actually works. And as was detailed in the Post a few weeks ago, torturing one Al-Qaeda suspect actually led to the government wasting valuable resources chasing down stories that weren't based on reality -- but once torture was used, the suspect was willing to say anything to get his torturers to stop.

Waste. Of. My. Taxes.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Ah Mr. Steele you are wrong regaring my experience with terrorism loss and it first happend on PAN AM 103 and evolved to the trade center. I again have no problem with CIA methods and I trust those professionals to do what they think is the right thing. I am sick of Obama apologizing for US policies as if he speaks for everyone..he doesn't..again..almost half the country..did not vote for him and his "I am so sorry the US has been party to doing the wrong thing" angers me. He comes across as sophmoric and just not very bright.

Please, I hate being called "Mr. Steele". Jeff, jsteele, hey asshole, whatever, but not Mr. Steele.

As for "the professionals", here is what Laura Rozen (who may actually participate on DCUM) reported on ForeignPolicy.com that one said (referring to the Jane Harmon/AIPAC/Wiretap controversy):

"Is this about taking pressure off the revelations of waterboarding and the memos?" he speculated. "And the fact," he added, "that no real intelligence came out of this whole effort?" referring to the enhanced interrogation/torture regime revealed in the memos, which he said produced no actionable intelligence.

Emphasis added.

http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/04/20/bush_era_cia_officials_push_back

"No actionaable intelligence." Is that clear enough?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ah Mr. Steele you are wrong regaring my experience with terrorism loss and it first happend on PAN AM 103 and evolved to the trade center. I again have no problem with CIA methods and I trust those professionals to do what they think is the right thing. I am sick of Obama apologizing for US policies as if he speaks for everyone..he doesn't..again..almost half the country..did not vote for him and his "I am so sorry the US has been party to doing the wrong thing" angers me. He comes across as sophmoric and just not very bright.

Well, I would like them to do what works! It seems to me the issue isn't whether terrorists deserved to be tortured but whether torture actually works. And as was detailed in the Post a few weeks ago, torturing one Al-Qaeda suspect actually led to the government wasting valuable resources chasing down stories that weren't based on reality -- but once torture was used, the suspect was willing to say anything to get his torturers to stop.

Waste. Of. My. Taxes.

LOL! You are concerned about your taxes being wasted on waterboarding? If that's the case, then you better brace yourself for the years to come!!!!

[Anonymous]

I for one am with the poster who cannot work up much sympathy for admitted terrorists whose avowed mission is to destroy my country if they get roughed up in interrogation. No permanent injury, damage, or disability, no problem is my feeling. On the other hand, I am all for being effective. I think the jury is out on whether the so-called torture was effective - just as the jury is out on global warming. People are passionate on both sides, which is a good thing because it will cause us to more closely examine the problem IMO.

[Anonymous]

I for one am with the poster who cannot work up much sympathy for admitted terrorists whose avowed mission is to destroy my country if they get roughed up in interrogation. No permanent injury, damage, or disability, no problem is my feeling. On the other hand, I am all for being effective. I think the jury is out on whether the so-called torture was effective - just as the jury is out on global warming. People are passionate on both sides, which is a good thing because it will cause us to more closely examine the problem IMO.

Okay, this is such typical Bush era bullshit. Block out the evidence and play defense by mounting an offense on a completely unrelated issue.

PS. That the jury is out on global warming is one of those myths perpetuated by Limbaugh republicans. Within the actual scientific community, there is strong consensus that the jury has in fact returned with the verdict...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Well, I would like them to do what works! It seems to me the issue isn't whether terrorists deserved to be tortured but whether torture actually works. And as was detailed in the Post a few weeks ago, torturing one Al-Qaeda suspect actually led to the government wasting valuable resources chasing down stories that weren't based on reality -- but once torture was used, the suspect was willing to say anything to get his torturers to stop.

Waste. Of. My. Taxes.

LOL! You are concerned about your taxes being wasted on waterboarding? If that's the case, then you better brace yourself for the years to come!!!!

I thought Obama had stopped waterboarding and other forms of torture. Too bad if he hasn't because my tax dollars would have been used more effectively. Sorry to hear he is going to continue to send CIA agents on wild goose chases after false information just like Bush and Cheney.

[Anonymous]

[quote=Anonymous
PS. That the jury is out on global warming is one of those myths perpetuated by Limbaugh republicans. Within the actual scientific community, there is strong consensus that the jury has in fact returned with the verdict...

Didn't I read today that a 30 year Brit study of Antartica and the polar ice cap showed that while indeed it was shrinking on one coast (all the global warming hysteria) it was in fact growing on another coast, and by more than the sum of the loss?

{just shaking my head}

[Anonymous]

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/Global-Warming/Antarctic-ice-growing-not-shrinking-/articleshow/4418558.cms

I don't know, maybe the Economic Times is a Limbaugh Republican mouth piece. Not familiar with the pub myself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ah Mr. Steele you are wrong regaring my experience with terrorism loss and it first happend on PAN AM 103 and evolved to the trade center. I again have no problem with CIA methods and I trust those professionals to do what they think is the right thing. I am sick of Obama apologizing for US policies as if he speaks for everyone..he doesn't..again..almost half the country..did not vote for him and his "I am so sorry the US has been party to doing the wrong thing" angers me. He comes across as sophmoric and just not very bright.

Well, since you trust the CIA so much, they seemed to be cheering the President the other day. Maybe they agree with him.