Instead of congratulating ourselves for shutting down the detention EIT program, we should ask whether its closure is leading us to kill people we might otherwise capture.

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/human_nature/2013/01/the_case_for_torture_ex_cia_officials_explain_enhanced_interrogations.html

    Hayden acknowledged that prisoners might say anything to stop their suffering. (Like the other panelists, he insisted EITs weren't torture.) That’s why “we never asked anybody anything we didn’t know the answer to, while they were undergoing the enhanced interrogation techniques. The techniques were not designed to elicit truth in the moment.” Instead, EITs were used in a controlled setting, in which interrogators knew the answers and could be sure they were inflicting misery only when the prisoner said something false. The point was to create an illusion of godlike omniscience and omnipotence so that the prisoner would infer, falsely, that his captors always knew when he was lying or withholding information. More broadly, said Hayden, the goal was “to take someone who had come into our custody absolutely defiant and move them into a state or a zone of cooperation” by convincing them that “you are no longer in control of your destiny. You are in our hands.” Thereafter, the prisoner would cooperate without need for EITs. Rodriguez explained: “Once you got through the enhanced interrogation process, then the real interrogation began. … The knowledge base was so good that these people knew that we actually were not going to be fooled. It was an essential tool to validate that the people were being truthful. “

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    bump

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    "How about capture them and use time-proven interrogation techniques that don't involve torture?"

    The usual progressive bullcrap.... time proven interrogation techniques....How convenient,  Obama 's intelligence operatives are so much smarter...they can get rid of Al Queda wiith sweetness and good manners..

    'torture doesnt work'... Of course, torture is defined by the sensitive Left as anything unpleasant, including sleep deprivation , loud music and apparently not getting the Playboy Channel on cable... Experts know coercive interrogations often lead to the prisoner lying, but it may be a method that leads to critical information.

    So-called "torture" led directly to the killing of Bin Ladin , but hypocritical liberals deny reality.

    Slate:

    "If you refuse to exploit prisoners, you'll end up killing your enemies instead. All three panelists trashed the Obama-era conceit that we™are a better country because we scrapped the interrogation program. What weve really done, they argued, is replace interrogations with drone strikes. €œWe have made it so legally difficult and so politically dangerous to capture,€ said Hayden, that it seems, from the outside looking in, that the default option is to take the terrorists off the battlefield in another sort of way.€ Rizzo agreed, and he quoted The Godfather to suggest that the new policy is bloody and stupid: œYou cant kill everybody.€

    The Obama Administration increased the drone program dramatically, and also decided to skew statistics by categorizing every male killed in the strikes as a "militant"....

     

     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    Re: Instead of congratulating ourselves for shutting down the detention EIT program, we should ask whether its closure is leading us to kill people we might otherwise capture   [QUOTE]

    We won't capture people unless we get to torture them? Huh?
    How about capture them and use time-proven interrogation techniques that don't involve torture? 

    I don't see how you get to suggesting that there are only two choices here: kill or torture.




    We dont capture them if, we blow them up (and many around them) from 30,000 feet with an unmanned aircraft. genius!

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    Joe Scarborough:

    The left's twisted morality pose on this topic too often comes in fits and starts, with the most righteous of the lot declaring Bush a war criminal for his interrogation techniques while granting absolution to the man who champions a far more brutish approach. One wonders where these secular televangelists have gone in a week when BBC reporters tell of an 8-year-old girl having her young skin pierced by a drone bomb’s shrapnel while watching her grandmother being blown to a thousand pieces in front of her young eyes.

    Where have all the human rights heroes gone?

    Where are the ladies of Code Pink?

    Where are those protesters driven to rage over the waterboarding of 3 terrorists who are now so ambivalent about random killings?

    They are nowhere to be seen. The facts of the past decade have shown these "human rights activists" to be little more than opportunistic political hacks who share Jim Bakker’s selective morality. Like Bakker at the height of his PTL glory, these left wing ideologues choose silence and a political pose that owes more to the embrace of power than a respect for human rights.

    The release of the movie "Zero Dark Thirty" will surely lay waste to at least one of the left wing's lies: that the CIA's enhanced interrogation did nothing to gain actionable intelligence. “Zero” is generating angst amongst movie reviewers and essayists who were swept away by the film but left conflicted and uncomfortable specifically because this first draft of history accurately shows how the CIA's program played a major role in finding and killing Osama bin Laden.  



    Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2012/12/countdown-to-zero-dark-thirty-84904.html#ixzz2JZWwC6f6
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    Joe Scarborough:

    The left's twisted morality pose on this topic too often comes in fits and starts, with the most righteous of the lot declaring Bush a war criminal for his interrogation techniques while granting absolution to the man who champions a far more brutish approach. One wonders where these secular televangelists have gone in a week when BBC reporters tell of an 8-year-old girl having her young skin pierced by a drone bomb’s shrapnel while watching her grandmother being blown to a thousand pieces in front of her young eyes.

    Where have all the human rights heroes gone?

    Where are the ladies of Code Pink?

    Where are those protesters driven to rage over the waterboarding of 3 terrorists who are now so ambivalent about random killings?

    They are nowhere to be seen. The facts of the past decade have shown these "human rights activists" to be little more than opportunistic political hacks who share Jim Bakker’s selective morality. Like Bakker at the height of his PTL glory, these left wing ideologues choose silence and a political pose that owes more to the embrace of power than a respect for human rights.

    The release of the movie "Zero Dark Thirty" will surely lay waste to at least one of the left wing's lies: that the CIA's enhanced interrogation did nothing to gain actionable intelligence. “Zero” is generating angst amongst movie reviewers and essayists who were swept away by the film but left conflicted and uncomfortable specifically because this first draft of history accurately shows how the CIA's program played a major role in finding and killing Osama bin Laden.  



    Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2012/12/countdown-to-zero-dark-thirty-84904.html#ixzz2JZWwC6f6
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    We dont capture them if, we blow them up (and many around them) from 30,000 feet with an unmanned aircraft. genius!

    Whether or not we torture has nothing to do with whether or not we decide blow them up from 30,000 feet with an unmanned aircraft. genius!   [QUOTE] 

    Or did you not read your own dumb@ss thread title?




    LOL I did you obviously did not.

    If you refuse to exploit prisoners, you’ll end up killing your enemies instead. All three panelists trashed the Obama-era conceit that we’re a better country because we’ve scrapped the interrogation program. What we’ve really done, they argued, is replace interrogations with drone strikes. “We have made it so legally difficult and so politically dangerous to capture,” said Hayden, “that it seems, from the outside looking in, that the default option is to take the terrorists off the battlefield in another sort of way.” Rizzo agreed, and he quoted The Godfather to suggest that the new policy is bloody and stupid: “You can’t kill everybody.”

     

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    Nevermind that in reality, we know that the only information gleaned from it was redundant of information gained through traditional means.




    The problem is that so much of what you know is just not true!

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    "....an active enemy on the battlefield of his own choosing"

    Drones kill terrorist 'suspects' at their home, at funerals, driving down a road....so the entire country of Pakistan is the 'battlefield"?

    And your moral compass is anguished by 'sleep deprivation'  of an admitted terrorist truly captured on the battlefield , who has knowledge which will prevent future  mass terror attacks?

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    "....an active enemy on the battlefield of his own choosing"

    Drones kill terrorist 'suspects' at their home, at funerals, driving down a road....so the entire country of Pakistan is the 'battlefield"?

    And your moral compass is anguished by 'sleep deprivation'  of an admitted terrorist truly captured on the battlefield , who has knowledge which will prevent future  mass terror attacks?

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    Well I'd certainly be happier if they chose to form a standard army and fight us that way, but for obvious reasons they don't.

    I know you know I'm right....  but...it gets in the way of turd slinging.




    You don't even believe yourself! Where is this battlefield you speak of?

     

     

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    Is sleep deprivation and loud music 'torture'? This is in compliance with the Army Field Manual, yet liberals claim any coercive method is 'torture'..

     

     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    Where is this battlefield you speak of?

    Wherever they are, genius. 



    So anywhere in the world that has terrorist is the battlefield?

     

     

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:

    Someone explain to me how it would be possible to insert a spec op team into Yemen, Pakistan, Somalia, capture a target and then exfiltrate the team and prisoner.

    As much as you chickenhawks think spec ops are all Rambo's, no one is going to risk an entire team in a hostile country, with no support to capture one target. The rewards don't come close to the risk of losing 7/8/10 guys in a hostile foreign country. Not to mention the fact that if the shiiat does hit the fan- the PR of the terrorists would get from dragging the bodies of the soldiers through the streets would be devastating.

    If ya'll think it's worth the risk, then get your backsides down to the nearest recruiting station and sign up. They'll teach ya everything ya need to know ...




    So, your contention is that the US never infilitrates foriegn hostile areas and takes prisoners?

     

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:

    In response to tvoter's comment:

     

    In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:

     

    Someone explain to me how it would be possible to insert a spec op team into Yemen, Pakistan, Somalia, capture a target and then exfiltrate the team and prisoner.

    As much as you chickenhawks think spec ops are all Rambo's, no one is going to risk an entire team in a hostile country, with no support to capture one target. The rewards don't come close to the risk of losing 7/8/10 guys in a hostile foreign country. Not to mention the fact that if the shiiat does hit the fan- the PR of the terrorists would get from dragging the bodies of the soldiers through the streets would be devastating.

    If ya'll think it's worth the risk, then get your backsides down to the nearest recruiting station and sign up. They'll teach ya everything ya need to know ...

     




    So, your contention is that the US never infilitrates foriegn hostile areas and takes prisoners?

     

     

     




     

    Not in countries where we don't have some friendlies or our own support structure.

     



    Not that you know of.

    One example I have where we did that was Grenada.  Not a masive military power, but, hostile, lacking our own support structure.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to tvoter's comment:

    We dont capture them if, we blow them up (and many around them) from 30,000 feet with an unmanned aircraft. genius!



    Whether or not we torture has nothing to do with whether or not we decide blow them up from 30,000 feet with an unmanned aircraft. genius!

     

     

    Or did you not read your own dumb@ss thread title?



    Sure it does.  

     

    look, I think the drone approach is great, but don't for one second think that Obama got there becasue it was a better approach.  He got there becasue the last thing he wanted to do is ship anyone to Gitmo.  In other words, it solved a political problem for him.  The cost has been lost intelligence.  but, on the whole , it is the way to go.  Just don't feed me marlarkey that it doesn't matter.  that's so Hillary-like.

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    In response to 12-Angry-Men's comment:

    Not in countries where we don't have some friendlies or our own support structure. 




    LOL ok, so maybe we dont have spooks and black ops because we dont hear about it.

    May be we dont have secret prisons still today either!!

     

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    bump

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

    liberals claim any coercive method is 'torture'

     

    lol...    

     



    "Justicecampaign.org"

     

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:


    "Justicecampaign.org"

     

     

     




     

    Oh I see. Everyone bobin calls a "liberal" must believe everythign that a website he found says.

     

     

    But now that you mention it.....  

    Do you think we should sexually assault prisoners?

    Do you think we should torture one prisoner infront of another prisoner from whom we want information?

    All conservatives are rapists and sadists on your logic.




    What, then, in your absurd logic , is 'torture'?

    Can we interrogate prisoners at all ?  Can we make them , uncomfortable?

    Is the mere fact they are behind bars "torture" ? Should we release them all?

    You refuse to answer because you can't. Just smear American intelligence with the term "torture"...and cheer your President who kills 'suspects' and their immediate families on the battlefield in their homes...

    No disconnect there, eh? 

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    John Brennan, President Barack Obama’s nominee to head the CIA, had detailed, contemporaneous knowledge of the use of “enhanced interrogation techniques” on captured terrorism suspects during an earlier stint as a top spy agency official, according to multiple sources familiar with official records.

    Those records, the sources said, show that Brennan was a regular recipient of CIA message traffic about controversial aspects of the agency’s counter-terrorism program after September 2001, including the use of “waterboarding".

    Funny, no call by the Left for Brennan to be indicted as a war criminal along with Bush; no, instead Obama asks him to head the CIA!

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from tvoter. Show tvoter's posts

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

     

    Do you think we should sexually assault prisoners?

    Do you think we should torture one prisoner infront of another prisoner from whom we want information?


    No because 1 they may like and 2 the other may be a voyeur!

    amymore assinine questions from the kiddie room

     

Share