Waterboarded 183 Times in One Month. Torture Issue Blows Up.

[buckethead]

What a Dick!

[Sportmotor]

What a Dick!

I'v been called worse by others. Mainly a Staff Sargent

So you think that they will behead our troops as a result of our torturing their friends and family?

They will regardless. They where ruled by fear once, and it worked.

[NotNow]

Gee whiz StephenDare!, since you continue to give out what my opinion is, can I give out yours?  Or would you agree that I should state it myself?  When you twist and spin it is called LYING.  Stop LYING about what my opinion is.  Just ask and I will be happy to give it.  

When you state that the interrogation techniques do not work you are wrong, at least in this case.  It has been well established that the information provided prevented the deaths of Americans:

http://www.cnsnews.com/Public/Content/Article.aspx?rsrcid=46949

Were those techniques illegal?  Let's see what Obama's special prosecutor comes up with.  I will be just as interested as you to see the outcome.  Your glee may be somewhat premature.

Do you really believe that we should release and apologize to Khalid Mouhammed?

And what is with the fixation on animal sodomy?  That's kind of a weird focus.  Blushing handmaidens and bestiality....hmmm.

[NotNow]

The Bush Administration has already admitted that Torture wasnt really useful.

The guy who Authorized it, against our treaties, is the only one who is claiming that it was justified.

Dick Cheney.

Could you show me your source for these two statements please?

[Sportmotor]

If it stops or deturs the loss or mistreatment of captured US troops it would be worth it.Since simply detaining them and treating (the majorty) fairly isnt working, a more aggressive approach would be nice. But then again we dont have to, we have other allies to do it for us lol

And what is with the fixation on animal sodomy?  That's kind of a weird focus.  Blushing handmaidens and bestiality....hmmm.

Makes me nervious!!!

[Sportmotor]

you might have a leg to stand on.

Paw*


lol


and where do you get the facts about the recrutment tools for iraqie rebs?

[NotNow]

Also AG was a poorly supervised group of guards.  They were punished for their childish pranks.  Hardly "torture".

[buckethead]

What a Dick!

I'v been called worse by others. Mainly a Staff Sargent

So you think that they will behead our troops as a result of our torturing their friends and family?

They will regardless. They where ruled by fear once, and it worked.

Sorry sport... That was in response to SD and his Dick Cheney comment.

We simulposted!

[buckethead]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-zoPgv_nYg

John McCain is not qualified to speak.

[civil42806]

Our daily 5 minutes of Emmanuel Goldstein time

[NotNow]

Leon Panetta said that information obtained using enhanced techniques led directly to OBL.   He said this when he was the Director of the CIA.  The former Director of Clandestine Operations Jose Rodriguez said the same thing.  I think these two men are in a position to know.

I am glad to see that you have changed your mind about wartime operations since Obama came into office though.  You now support entering into another sovereign nation in order to kill our enemies.  You now support killing American citizens who support or join those who would harm our nation.  You now support the interment of terrorist and their supporters at Gitmo in order to save American lives.  You support the use of electronic eavsdropping to locate our enemies so that they can be killed by military force.  Congratulations for coming around.

I can only assume the President has good reason to kill these guys on sight as opposed to capturing them and interrogating them for information. 

[BridgeTroll]

The democrats knew EXACTLY what was going on... and did not object... until they decided to try and make political points with it...  Clearly Pelosi and others... are also liars...

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/04/30/pelosis_tortured_explanation_96262.html

April 30, 2009
Pelosi's Tortured Explanation
By Debra Saunders

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had been pushing for a "truth commission" to investigate the CIA's use of "enhanced interrogation" techniques like waterboarding -- until Republicans started shining the spotlight on Pelosi herself. Now she is not so adamant.

Spokesman Brendan Daly told me that Pelosi wants a truth commission, "but she still realizes the political reality" -- as in the opposition of President Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

The rest of the reality may well be this: Pelosi knew that White House lawyers had sanctioned waterboarding in 2002 -- and did not protest.

According to the Senate Intelligence committee, the CIA briefed Pelosi, then the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, on the interrogation of Abu Zubaydah -- who was waterboarded -- in 2002.

The Washington Post reported in 2007 that the 2002 briefing provided Pelosi and company with a "virtual tour" of interrogation techniques. At the time of the story, a congressional source speaking for Pelosi, however, told the Post that Pelosi thought waterboarding was in the planning stages. The source admitted Pelosi did not object.

Who then is Pelosi to go after Bush lawyers for sanctioning waterboarding, which she now refers to as torture? This is what Pelosi told reporters last week: "We were not -- I repeat -- we were not told that waterboarding or any of these other enhanced interrogation methods were used." Yes, the Bush Office of Legal Counsel said the techniques "could be used," she explained, "but not that they would."

So Pelosi thought that just because the Bushies were sticking out their necks and authorizing the CIA's use of waterboarding, that did not mean the CIA would use it. And the Democrats called George W. Bush dim and ineffective?

Note that Pelosi used the term "enhanced interrogation methods" when referring to her CIA briefing. Not torture. On Tuesday, Pelosi added a twist to the story. She told CNN that the briefers "said they had a legal opinion they said they weren't going to use and when they did they would come back to Congress to report to us on that."

Daly added, "There's really not a whole lot you can do when you're being briefed" and you're a member of the minority. Then what is the point of having a bipartisan intelligence committee? Why not just buy a rubber stamp? Porter Goss, the House Intelligence Committee chairman in 2002 who went on to become director of the CIA has a different recollection. As he wrote in the Washington Post, he, Pelosi and the ranking Senate Intelligence Committee members were briefed extensively, "understood what the CIA was doing," and "gave the CIA our bipartisan support." Goss was "slack-jawed to read that members claim to have not understood that the techniques on which they were briefed were actually to be employed."

Rep. Pete Hoekstra, the ranking Republican on the Intelligence Committee, has called on the director of national intelligence to release complete CIA briefing documents -- including information as to who attended and what was said, so that Americans will know what congressional leaders like Pelosi knew. Daly told me that Pelosi supports that effort, as she generally believes in transparency.

Good riddance to a "truth commission." It's pretty sickening to think some Democrats have been poised to investigate and possibly prosecute those who sanctioned waterboarding in 2002. Yet when Pelosi knew the White House was pushing it, she did not try to move heaven and earth to make sure it never happened.

[NotNow]

Leon Panetta said that information obtained using enhanced techniques led directly to OBL.   He said this when he was the Director of the CIA.  The former Director of Clandestine Operations Jose Rodriguez said the same thing.  I think these two men are in a position to know.

I am glad to see that you have changed your mind about wartime operations since Obama came into office though.  You now support entering into another sovereign nation in order to kill our enemies.  You now support killing American citizens who support or join those who would harm our nation.  You now support the interment of terrorist and their supporters at Gitmo in order to save American lives.  You support the use of electronic eavsdropping to locate our enemies so that they can be killed by military force.  Congratulations for coming around.

I can only assume the President has good reason to kill these guys on sight as opposed to capturing them and interrogating them for information.

Leon Panetta is also a proven liar, and every official since then has said the literal opposite..  So um, thanks for trying to drag everyone else down into the kind of cesspool where they support torture, but its just not based on the facts.

Leon Panetta has been a prominent Democrat since the mid sixties.  He is a US Army vet, a former congressman, has served as Obama's CIA Director and is the current Secretary of Defense in the Obama administration.  If your going to call him a "proven liar", then you should provide some justification. 

As for "dragging everyone" anywhere, your dragging this country around and slinging mud is an obvious left wing political effort.  I pointed out two men of opposite political stripes who held the top jobs in the CIA.  I named them.  They both say the same thing. 

BT, some politicians just make you want to throw up, don't they?  Principles, honor, and character have always been rare qualities.

[NotNow]

Once again, a personal attack is not an acceptable answer.  Would you try to keep yourself under control and tell us:

What makes you say Panetta is a proven liar?
Why do you disregard the statement of the man who was on the scene (Rodriguez)?
Why do you not explain (or even admit) your "sudden change of principles" now that it is Obama doing the killing of American citizens overseas, the invasion of other countries, and the maintenance of a prison in Cuba?
Why do you suddenly support the killing of terrorist (rather than having them interrogated, or "tortured" in your opinion)? 

I've actually been in this fight.  Your use of the term "relish" is offensive.  Your assumption of moral authority is just as offensive.  Try to stick to your arguments and leave the personal attacks out of it.

[bill]

Try to stick to your arguments and leave the personal attacks out of it.


NN If he did this he would have nothing to say and god does he like to hear himself talk. Being the smartest guy in the room and all.