Releasing Torture documents

[EXman]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: BarrySotero

AQ don't forget was taking Iraqi kids faces off with piano wire (not that any of you would care about that)

You don't defeat evil by becoming the evil you seek to defeat. Obviously, it's too late for that lesson in your case. :|

You also don't defeat evil with sending them milk and cookies. Being their friend and jerking them off then send them to Bahamas or U.S. Prisons. BHO has emboldened the Bad guys of the world against us by showing his yellow stripe down his back.


Let's just go back to Pre 9/11 mentality...

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: ManSnake

Freedom isn't free!!!

If the freedom you're talking about is all lies, it isn't freedom, it's slavery.

If things like these are released to the public, they will put the brave American men and women serving the country with their lives at risk overseas protecting America from terrorists and nuclear weapons in places like Afghanistan. Surely none of you would want that do you?

BULLSHIT! Your mercifully EX-Traitor In Chief and his criminal cabal committed horrendous war crimes and crimes against humanity. Even worse, they did it in our name, and they lied to us and the world about it. If we cannot tell the truth and disclose those crimes, we endorse and assume the same guilt as those who committed them, and we are the same evil monsters as Al Qaeda, the Taliban and every other war criminal throughout history.

Those people who want this kind of information released are simply unpatriotic. If any of them are Americans, they should be tried for treason and jailed!

BULLSHIT! Those who would suppress the truth are immoral,unethical dictatorial totalitarian assholes. It is they who are unpatriotic and disloyal to the principles of justice and equality announced in our once honored, once valued U.S. Constitution.

Like the great 43rd American president once said, you are either with us or against us.
Now which is it?

The 43rd American president and his criminal cabal are traitors, murderers, war criminals and liars. I am proud to be an American citizen, and I support our Constitution and our laws. That is why I stand AGAINST them and everything they represent. If that is who you mean by "us," I stand against the "us" that includes them and the ethical dwarves and moral midgets like you.

They and those who would cover up their crimes are a greater threat to the United States of America than Osama Bin Laden, Al Qaeda and all the Al Qaeda wannabes in the world. At least, Bin Laden and Al Qaeda admit they want to destroy us while the Bushwhackos and the lying neocon criminal pimps are actually doing it from the inside and lying about it.

Originally posted by: EXman

Originally posted by: Harvey

You don't defeat evil by becoming the evil you seek to defeat. Obviously, it's too late for that lesson in your case. :|

You also don't defeat evil with sending them milk and cookies. Being their friend and jerking them off then send them to Bahamas or U.S. Prisons. BHO has emboldened the Bad guys of the world against us by showing his yellow stripe down his back.

Actually, you couldn't be more wrong. I'll speak v-e-r-y s-l-o-w-l-y so tards like you have a chance of comprehending, the experienced military interrogator who first interrogated Khalid Shaikh Mohammed testified that the only useful intelligence gained through his interrogation came from treating him with kindness.

Inside a 9/11 Mastermind?s Interrogation

By SCOTT SHANE
Published: June 22, 2008

WASHINGTON ? In a makeshift prison in the north of Poland, Al Qaeda?s engineer of mass murder faced off against his Central Intelligence Agency interrogator. It was 18 months after the 9/11 attacks, and the invasion of Iraq was giving Muslim extremists new motives for havoc. If anyone knew about the next plot, it was Khalid Shaikh Mohammed.

The interrogator, Deuce Martinez, a soft-spoken analyst who spoke no Arabic, had turned down a C.I.A. offer to be trained in waterboarding. He chose to leave the infliction of pain and panic to others, the gung-ho paramilitary types whom the more cerebral interrogators called ?knuckledraggers.?

Mr. Martinez came in after the rough stuff, the ultimate good cop with the classic skills: an unimposing presence, inexhaustible patience and a willingness to listen to the gripes and musings of a pitiless killer in rambling, imperfect English. He achieved a rapport with Mr. Mohammed that astonished his fellow C.I.A. officers.

A canny opponent, Mr. Mohammed mixed disinformation and braggadocio with details of plots, past and planned. Eventually, he grew loquacious. ?They?d have long talks about religion,? comparing notes on Islam and Mr. Martinez?s Catholicism, one C.I.A. officer recalled. And, the officer added, there was one other detail no one could have predicted: ?He wrote poems to Deuce?s wife.?

Mr. Martinez, who by then had interrogated at least three other high-level prisoners, would bring Mr. Mohammed snacks, usually dates. He would listen to Mr. Mohammed?s despair over the likelihood that he would never see his children again and to his catalog of complaints about his accommodations.
.
.
(continues)

So maybe it wasn't "milk and cookies." Some captured terrorists prefer dates and other snacks. KSM's cooperation ended, and he clammed up once they started waterboarding.

So much for your bullshit theories of interrogation. :roll:

Second, (listen carefully)... TORTURE DOES NOT WORK!!! You don't have to take my word for it. In 2002, Donald Rumsfeld's attorney, William Haynes, requested info from S.E.R.E., the U.S. Airforce's Survival, Evasion, Resistance, Escape program regarding administration's intended use of "enhanced interrogation" techniques.

This is a small specialized career field in the US Air Force comprised of approximately 325 enlisted personnel. Air Force SERE Specialists train aircrew members and high risk of capture personnel from all branches of the military. The students are trained in skills which allow them to survive in all climatic conditions as well as how to survive while being held captive.

Per their name, the purpose of S.E.R.E. is to train our troops who may be captured to survive possible torture by, and to resist giving any helpful information to, our enemies. Their mission is specifically NOT to describe or define methods to be used by our own intelligence agencies to interrogate possible enemies captured by U.S. forces.

S.E.R.E is the specific military group tasked to understand and teach our troops to resist torture.

S.E.R.E is NOT tasked to develop means and methods of torturing those we capture.

S.E.R.E's report to Haynes explicitly:

1. labels "enhanced interrogation" techniques TORTURE.
   
2. says "enhanced interrogation" techniques DO NOT WORK.
   
3. says "enhanced interrogation" techniques could have "potential impact on the safety of U.S. personnel captured by current and future adversaries."

Here's the complete report from S.E.R.E. to Haynes.

OPERATIONAL ISSUES PERTAINING TO THE USE of PHYSICAL/PSYCHOLIGCAL [sic] COERCION [sic] IN INTERROGATION
An Overview

(U) INTRODUCTION: Throughout history, interrogation has frequently involved the application of various physical anellor psychological means of inducing duress. The objective of this application was to elicit information, compel the prisoner to produce propaganda, submit to political conversion, and or as a vehicle for intimidation. Throughout most of recorded history, the rights of prisoners were limited at best. The concept of international law that governs the treatment of prisoners is a modem phenomenon that remains the topic of continuing debate. This discussion is not intended to address the myriad legal, ethical, or moral implications of torture; rather, this document will seeks to describe the key operational considerations relative to the use of physical and psychological pressures.

(U) PRIMARY OBJECTIVE of INTERROGATION: The primary objective of interrogation within the context of intelligence is the collecting of timely, accurate, and reliable information. The question that should immediately come to mind is whether the application of physical and/or psychological duress will enhance the interrogator's ability to achieve this objective. The requirement to obtain information from an uncooperative source as quickly as possible-in time to prevent, for example, an impending terrorist attack that could result in loss of life has been forwarded as a compelling argument for the use of torture. Conceptually, proponents envision the application of torture as a means to expedite the exploitation process. In essence, physical and/or psychological duress are viewed as an alternative to the more time-consuming conventional interrogation process. The error inherent in this line of thinking is the assumption that, through torture, the interrogator can extract reliable and accurate intelligence. History and a consideration of human behavior would appear to refute this assumption. (NOTE: The application of physical and or psychological duress will likely result in physical compliance. Additionally, prisoners may answer and/or comply as a result of threats of torture. However, the reliability and accuracy information must be questioned.)

(U) OPERATIONAL CONCERNS:

(U) As noted previously, upwards of 90 percent of interrogations have been successful through the exclusive use of a direct approach, where a degree of rapport is established with the prisoner. Once any means of duress has been purposefully applied to the prisoner, the formerly cooperative relationship can not be reestablished. In addition, the prisoner's level of resolve to resist cooperating with the interrogator will likely be increased as a result of harsh or brutal treatment.

(U) For skilled interrogators, the observation of subtle nonverbal behaviors provides an invaluable assessment of the prisoner's psychological and emotional state. This offers important insights into how the prisoner can be most effectively leveraged into compliance. Further, it often enables the interrogator to form a reasonably accurate assessment of the prisoner's veracity in answering pertinent questions. The prisoner's physical response to the pain inflicted by an interrogator would obliterate such nuance and deprive the interrogator of these key tools.

(U) The key operational deficits related to the use of torture is its impact on the reliability and accuracy of the information provided. If an interrogator produces information that resulted from the application of physical and psychological duress, the reliability and accuracy of this information is in doubt. In other words, a subject in extreme pain may provide an answer, any answer, or many answers in order to get the pain to stop.

1. (U) In numerous cases, interrogation has been used as a tool of mass intimidation by oppressive regimes. Often, the interrogators operate from the assumption (often incorrect) that a prisoner possesses information of interest. When the prisoner is not forthcoming, physical and psychological pressures are increased. Eventually, the prisoner will provide answers that they feel the interrogator is seeking. In this instance, the information is neither reliable nor accurate (note: A critical element of the interrogation process is to assess the prisoner's knowledgeability. A reasoned assessment of what the prisoner should know, based on experience, training, position, and access should drive the questioning process.)

(U) Another important aspect of the debate over the use of torture is the consideration of its potential impact on the safety of U.S. personnel captured by current and future adversaries. The unintended consequence of a U.S. policy that provides for the torture of prisoners is that it could be used by our adversaries as justification for the torture of captured U.S. personnel. While this would have little impact on those regimes or organizations that already employ torture as a standard means of operating, it could serve as the critical impetus for those that are currently weighing the potential gains and risks associated with the torture of U.S. persons to accept torture as an acceptable option.

(U) CONCLUSION: The application of extreme physical and/or psychological duress (torture) has some serious operational deficits, most notably, the potential to result in unreliable information. This is not to say that the manipulation of the subject's environment in an effort to dislocate their expectations and induce emotional responses is not effective. On the contrary, systematic manipulation of the subject's environment is likely to result in a subject that can be exploited for intelligence information and other national strategic concerns.

HQ JPRA·CC/25 Jut 02JOSN 654-2509
CLASSIFIED BY: MULTIPLE SOURCES
REASON: EO 12958 (A, C)
DECLASSIFY: Xi or X4

Key sentences and phrases:

• The question that should immediately come to mind is whether the application of physical and/or psychological duress will enhance the interrogator's ability to achieve this objective.
  
• The error inherent in this line of thinking is the assumption that, through torture, the interrogator can extract reliable and accurate intelligence. History and a consideration of human behavior would appear to refute this assumption.
  
• The application of physical and or psychological duress will likely result in physical compliance. Additionally, prisoners may answer and/or comply as a result of threats of torture. However, the reliability and accuracy information must be questioned.
  
• Once any means of duress has been purposefully applied to the prisoner, the formerly cooperative relationship can not be reestablished. In addition, the prisoner's level of resolve to resist cooperating with the interrogator will likely be increased as a result of harsh or brutal treatment.
  
• For skilled interrogators, the observation of subtle nonverbal behaviors provides an invaluable assessment of the prisoner's psychological and emotional state. This offers important insights into how the prisoner can be most effectively leveraged into compliance. Further, it often enables the interrogator to form a reasonably accurate assessment of the prisoner's veracity in answering pertinent questions. The prisoner's physical response to the pain inflicted by an interrogator would obliterate such nuance and deprive the interrogator of these key tools.
  
• ... a subject in extreme pain may provide an answer, any answer, or many answers in order to get the pain to stop.
  
• The unintended consequence of a U.S. policy that provides for the torture of prisoners is that it could be used by our adversaries as justification for the torture of captured U.S. personnel.

Now, you have the express statement from S.E.R.E., THE authority on the subject, that labels the "enhanced interrogation" techniques defined and specified in Haynes' request, including waterboarding, as torture and concludes that TORTURE DOES NOT WORK!!!

Anyone who commits, supports, condones or attempts excuses torture is an unethical, immoral sub-human piece of shit! :|

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: EXman

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: BarrySotero

AQ don't forget was taking Iraqi kids faces off with piano wire (not that any of you would care about that)

You don't defeat evil by becoming the evil you seek to defeat. Obviously, it's too late for that lesson in your case. :|

You also don't defeat evil with sending them milk and cookies. Being their friend and jerking them off then send them to Bahamas or U.S. Prisons. BHO has emboldened the Bad guys of the world against us by showing his yellow stripe down his back.


Let's just go back to Pre 9/11 mentality...

Ignoring for a moment how stupid of an argument it is to suggest that the only alternative to torturing prisoners is giving them milk and cookies, I don't see a lot of evidence to suggest that the "post-9/11" mentality is a big improvement over the "pre-9/11" mentality. It gives politicians another emotional button to push to make you do what they want without thinking about it too hard, it's made patriotism into a feeling you can have with a $3.50 flag bumper sticker, and up until the current economic problems, it's taken the majority of our national focus, shaping all our foreign and domestic security policy around a handful of idiots who got lucky. And all it's cost us is our ethical standards and civil liberties.

I would GLADLY go back to a pre-9/11 mentality. Even if it resulted in a slightly increased risk of terrorist attacks, the threat just isn't big enough to justify shaping our entire country around it. And the great thing is, we don't even have to make that trade-off. The most invasive changes we've made as part of the "post-9/11" way of thinking have done NOTHING to increase our security.

It's ironic that terrorism is referred to as a major threat to freedom and democracy...when the real harm to those two institutions is coming from the "post-9/11 mentality" we've embraced in order to fight the terrorists.

 

[LunarRay]

You can't prove they or he didn't volunteer to have or even request a vasectomy.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: LunarRay

You can't prove they or he didn't volunteer to have or even request a vasectomy.

Did you forget the < sarcasm > < /sarcasm > tags, or is that the answer to question 5 on the test for your stupidity license? :roll:

 

[JSt0rm]

This stuff is coming out fast enough that people will be held accountable for their actions. I just can't see the majority of the public going along with the "keep it silent so nobody knows freedom rabble rabble" crowd

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: BarrySotero

Originally posted by: SammyJr

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat
Link

The 25 lines edited out of the court papers contained details of how Mr Mohamed's genitals were sliced with a scalpel and other torture methods so extreme that waterboarding, the controversial technique of simulated drowning, "is very far down the list of things they did," the official said.

So slicing a guy's balls is not torture somehow? I'll leave it to the neocon trolls here to come up with excuses for this.

Americans and Muslims are both big fans of male genital slicing. I could see some getting off on this sort of thing.

The only Americans I know into harming genitals are all the kids I know getting their bits pierced. AQ don't forget was taking Iraqi kids faces off with piano wire (not that any of you would care about that)

Removing 50+% of the nerve endings on a penis and making the rest about 10-20% as sensitive isn't something good.

Its actually quite like removing the inner labia and the hood of the clit, leaving the clit be less sensitive.

I actually don't know why the US do circumsisions.

 

[alchemize]

Sounds like torture to me.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: LunarRay

You can't prove they or he didn't volunteer to have or even request a vasectomy.

Did you forget the < sarcasm > < /sarcasm > tags, or is that the answer to question 5 on the test for your stupidity license? :roll:

I kinda think there is more to come, what do you think?

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: LunarRay

You can't prove they or he didn't volunteer to have or even request a vasectomy.

Did you forget the < sarcasm > < /sarcasm > tags, or is that the answer to question 5 on the test for your stupidity license? :roll:

I kinda think there is more to come, what do you think?

Or an adult circumcision?

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: LunarRay

You can't prove they or he didn't volunteer to have or even request a vasectomy.

Did you forget the < sarcasm > < /sarcasm > tags, or is that the answer to question 5 on the test for your stupidity license? :roll:

I kinda think there is more to come, what do you think?

Or an adult circumcision?

Stop thinking about my penis.

I meant more revelations for the public.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

I'll wait for the actual content of the documents to be released before immediately jumping to a conclusion, as certain people have done in here. A reading of Greenwald's story doesn't actually make it clear who it was that sliced this guy's genitals, though he does seem to try his best to imply it was people in the CIA.

If it's the case that it was the CIA then it definitely constitutes torture and the individuals involved should be tried for their crimes.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
I'll wait for the actual content of the documents to be released before immediately jumping to a conclusion, as certain people have done in here. A reading of Greenwald's story doesn't actually make it clear who it was that sliced this guy's genitals, though he does seem to try his best to imply it was people in the CIA.

If it's the case that it was the CIA then it definitely constitutes torture and the individuals involved should be tried for their crimes.

If it just meant whacking the testicles until it hurt too much would that be torture?

Do you even know the meaning of the word torture?

Could i make you confess to commiting a murder that you did not know about without leaving a mark on you body?

Could i do that in less than one hour?

I'd use a pillow and water and it would take me less than five minutes to get you to confess to anything i want you to confess.

Painful torture isn't really effective, knowint that you are about to die unless you confess IS, that is why waterboarding works while using a soldering iron does not.

Of course, all confessions are pointless as anyone will confess to anything suggested by the interrogator.

Torture works in some cases when you can find a weak spot, like their children or rellatives but the drowning technique only works for them alone and the true terrorists don't mind dying and will more likely send you on a wild goose chase.

That is why waterboarding has not produced ONE positive result, well that and those waterboarded are mostly dead or released as innocents at this point.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
I'll wait for the actual content of the documents to be released before immediately jumping to a conclusion, as certain people have done in here. A reading of Greenwald's story doesn't actually make it clear who it was that sliced this guy's genitals, though he does seem to try his best to imply it was people in the CIA.

If it's the case that it was the CIA then it definitely constitutes torture and the individuals involved should be tried for their crimes.

If it just meant whacking the testicles until it hurt too much would that be torture?

Do you even know the meaning of the word torture?

Could i make you confess to commiting a murder that you did not know about without leaving a mark on you body?

Could i do that in less than one hour?

I'd use a pillow and water and it would take me less than five minutes to get you to confess to anything i want you to confess.

Painful torture isn't really effective, knowint that you are about to die unless you confess IS, that is why waterboarding works while using a soldering iron does not.

WTF are you talking about? Are you so eager to be a confrontational asshat of a bully in P&N that you constantly have to shove words down people's throats, building men of straw in the process?

ah heck off until you can learn how to communicate with people instead of constantly puffing up your chest and pretending to be some cock of the walk.

 

[SammyJr]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

I actually don't know why the US do circumsisions.

The United States has a radically different philosophy on medicine than does the U.K. The U.K. has a primary focus on treating the sick. The U.S.A. has a primary focus on doing as many procedures as possible with the idea of increasing the bottom line.

Although, I have to wonder why American insurance companies tolerate something as stupid as newborn circumcision. It costs them money over the long haul. They have to pay for the procedure, revisions, corrections, adhesions, meatal stenosis, and other problems that are a direct result of circumcision.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
I'll wait for the actual content of the documents to be released before immediately jumping to a conclusion, as certain people have done in here. A reading of Greenwald's story doesn't actually make it clear who it was that sliced this guy's genitals, though he does seem to try his best to imply it was people in the CIA.

If it's the case that it was the CIA then it definitely constitutes torture and the individuals involved should be tried for their crimes.

If it just meant whacking the testicles until it hurt too much would that be torture?

Do you even know the meaning of the word torture?

Could i make you confess to commiting a murder that you did not know about without leaving a mark on you body?

Could i do that in less than one hour?

I'd use a pillow and water and it would take me less than five minutes to get you to confess to anything i want you to confess.

Painful torture isn't really effective, knowint that you are about to die unless you confess IS, that is why waterboarding works while using a soldering iron does not.

WTF are you talking about? Are you so eager to be a confrontational asshat of a bully in P&N that you constantly have to shove words down people's throats, building men of straw in the process?

ah heck off until you can learn how to communicate with people instead of constantly puffing up your chest and pretending to be some cock of the walk.

I'm talking abot the effects of torture, read and comprehend for once in your life.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

So slicing a guy's balls is not torture somehow? I'll leave it to the neocon trolls here to come up with excuses for this.

Seems like the only "troll" here is the OP unless he can show where a "neocon" has stated that slicing genitals isn't "torture".

to give you some energy for your search...

There are plenty of people here that have supported all sorts of torture for the past 4+ years. From the " they are just terroristsand have no rights" defense, to the "waterboarding isn't torture, since we aren't hurting them" defense. Do a search, I'm sure you you will find plenty of people supporting the torture of terrorists.

So I'm waiting to see people make excuses/defenses of yet another new revelation. They defend waterboarding, why not this?

And from the responses so far, plenty of people are either ignoring or playing it down. Guess we know the answer.

I don't care who did it. Everyone involved need to charged and prosecuted. Dem, Rep, Martian, whatever.

So do you support prosecution for all involved? Well?

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
I'll wait for the actual content of the documents to be released before immediately jumping to a conclusion, as certain people have done in here. A reading of Greenwald's story doesn't actually make it clear who it was that sliced this guy's genitals, though he does seem to try his best to imply it was people in the CIA.

If it's the case that it was the CIA then it definitely constitutes torture and the individuals involved should be tried for their crimes.

If it just meant whacking the testicles until it hurt too much would that be torture?

Do you even know the meaning of the word torture?

Could i make you confess to commiting a murder that you did not know about without leaving a mark on you body?

Could i do that in less than one hour?

I'd use a pillow and water and it would take me less than five minutes to get you to confess to anything i want you to confess.

Painful torture isn't really effective, knowint that you are about to die unless you confess IS, that is why waterboarding works while using a soldering iron does not.

WTF are you talking about? Are you so eager to be a confrontational asshat of a bully in P&N that you constantly have to shove words down people's throats, building men of straw in the process?

ah heck off until you can learn how to communicate with people instead of constantly puffing up your chest and pretending to be some cock of the walk.

We are discussing torture so ... no strawman.

I'm TELLING you what torture entails and how it usually works.

If you find that offensive, i'm not really the go to guy but if you want to protest it i'll be happey to give you his name.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

So slicing a guy's balls is not torture somehow? I'll leave it to the neocon trolls here to come up with excuses for this.

Seems like the only "troll" here is the OP unless he can show where a "neocon" has stated that slicing genitals isn't "torture".

to give you some energy for your search...

There are plenty of people here that have supported all sorts of torture for the past 4+ years. From the " they are just terroristsand have no rights" defense, to the "waterboarding isn't torture, since we aren't hurting them" defense. Do a search, I'm sure you you will find plenty of people supporting the torture of terrorists.

So I'm waiting to see people make excuses/defenses of yet another new revelation. They defend waterboarding, why not this?

And from the responses so far, plenty of people are either ignoring or playing it down. Guess we know the answer.

I don't care who did it. Everyone involved need to charged and prosecuted. Dem, Rep, Martian, whatever.

So do you support prosecution for all involved? Well?

Sure. If it includes everyone. Including the senate who funded it. But if people are going to be cherry picked, which is really what most people want, then no. Leave it alone.

 

[EXman]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: EXman

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: BarrySotero

AQ don't forget was taking Iraqi kids faces off with piano wire (not that any of you would care about that)

You don't defeat evil by becoming the evil you seek to defeat. Obviously, it's too late for that lesson in your case. :|

You also don't defeat evil with sending them milk and cookies. Being their friend and jerking them off then send them to Bahamas or U.S. Prisons. BHO has emboldened the Bad guys of the world against us by showing his yellow stripe down his back.


Let's just go back to Pre 9/11 mentality...

Ignoring for a moment how stupid of an argument it is to suggest that the only alternative to torturing prisoners is giving them milk and cookies, I don't see a lot of evidence to suggest that the "post-9/11" mentality is a big improvement over the "pre-9/11" mentality. It gives politicians another emotional button to push to make you do what they want without thinking about it too hard, it's made patriotism into a feeling you can have with a $3.50 flag bumper sticker, and up until the current economic problems, it's taken the majority of our national focus, shaping all our foreign and domestic security policy around a handful of idiots who got lucky. And all it's cost us is our ethical standards and civil liberties.

I would GLADLY go back to a pre-9/11 mentality. Even if it resulted in a slightly increased risk of terrorist attacks, the threat just isn't big enough to justify shaping our entire country around it. And the great thing is, we don't even have to make that trade-off. The most invasive changes we've made as part of the "post-9/11" way of thinking have done NOTHING to increase our security.

It's ironic that terrorism is referred to as a major threat to freedom and democracy...when the real harm to those two institutions is coming from the "post-9/11 mentality" we've embraced in order to fight the terrorists.

Funny I think after BHO has unleashed the hounds of leftists in the government and the medias cooperation we are alomost back to pre 9/11 mentality. Lets face it BHO is ultra weak on foreign policy and we are going to see more chaos due to our percieved weakness. Bad thing is WHEN we get hit again you better belive BHO Rahm and the Clintonista will make a huge power grab which will makes Bush's Patriot Act look like a cub scout exercise.

Harvey take another pill. KSM deserves punishnment anyway you look at it. Death is to good for him. Didn't Obama say he was gonna close Gitmo ASAP? I guess it does serve purpose then. I'm sure milk and cookies are effective if you show him the torture chamber in the next room! Hell even Libs on 9/12 were asking why we were not doing more to protect us.

Peace out,

EX

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

So slicing a guy's balls is not torture somehow? I'll leave it to the neocon trolls here to come up with excuses for this.

Seems like the only "troll" here is the OP unless he can show where a "neocon" has stated that slicing genitals isn't "torture".

to give you some energy for your search...

There are plenty of people here that have supported all sorts of torture for the past 4+ years. From the " they are just terroristsand have no rights" defense, to the "waterboarding isn't torture, since we aren't hurting them" defense. Do a search, I'm sure you you will find plenty of people supporting the torture of terrorists.

So I'm waiting to see people make excuses/defenses of yet another new revelation. They defend waterboarding, why not this?

And from the responses so far, plenty of people are either ignoring or playing it down. Guess we know the answer.

I don't care who did it. Everyone involved need to charged and prosecuted. Dem, Rep, Martian, whatever.

So do you support prosecution for all involved? Well?

Sure. If it includes everyone. Including the senate who funded it. But if people are going to be cherry picked, which is really what most people want, then no. Leave it alone.

Actually, everyone who KNEW and was of higher rank should be held responsible but those not knowing should not be. I don't get how that would be cherry picking.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

So slicing a guy's balls is not torture somehow? I'll leave it to the neocon trolls here to come up with excuses for this.

Seems like the only "troll" here is the OP unless he can show where a "neocon" has stated that slicing genitals isn't "torture".

to give you some energy for your search...

There are plenty of people here that have supported all sorts of torture for the past 4+ years. From the " they are just terroristsand have no rights" defense, to the "waterboarding isn't torture, since we aren't hurting them" defense. Do a search, I'm sure you you will find plenty of people supporting the torture of terrorists.

So I'm waiting to see people make excuses/defenses of yet another new revelation. They defend waterboarding, why not this?

And from the responses so far, plenty of people are either ignoring or playing it down. Guess we know the answer.

I don't care who did it. Everyone involved need to charged and prosecuted. Dem, Rep, Martian, whatever.

So do you support prosecution for all involved? Well?

Sure. If it includes everyone. Including the senate who funded it. But if people are going to be cherry picked, which is really what most people want, then no. Leave it alone.

Actually, everyone who KNEW and was of higher rank should be held responsible but those not knowing should not be. I don't get how that would be cherry picking.

Of higher rank? Are you fucking kidding? Tell me you think there is a senator who was naive to it. FFS it was all over the news. Hell, even staffers knew.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: EXman

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: EXman

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: BarrySotero

AQ don't forget was taking Iraqi kids faces off with piano wire (not that any of you would care about that)

You don't defeat evil by becoming the evil you seek to defeat. Obviously, it's too late for that lesson in your case. :|

You also don't defeat evil with sending them milk and cookies. Being their friend and jerking them off then send them to Bahamas or U.S. Prisons. BHO has emboldened the Bad guys of the world against us by showing his yellow stripe down his back.


Let's just go back to Pre 9/11 mentality...

Ignoring for a moment how stupid of an argument it is to suggest that the only alternative to torturing prisoners is giving them milk and cookies, I don't see a lot of evidence to suggest that the "post-9/11" mentality is a big improvement over the "pre-9/11" mentality. It gives politicians another emotional button to push to make you do what they want without thinking about it too hard, it's made patriotism into a feeling you can have with a $3.50 flag bumper sticker, and up until the current economic problems, it's taken the majority of our national focus, shaping all our foreign and domestic security policy around a handful of idiots who got lucky. And all it's cost us is our ethical standards and civil liberties.

I would GLADLY go back to a pre-9/11 mentality. Even if it resulted in a slightly increased risk of terrorist attacks, the threat just isn't big enough to justify shaping our entire country around it. And the great thing is, we don't even have to make that trade-off. The most invasive changes we've made as part of the "post-9/11" way of thinking have done NOTHING to increase our security.

It's ironic that terrorism is referred to as a major threat to freedom and democracy...when the real harm to those two institutions is coming from the "post-9/11 mentality" we've embraced in order to fight the terrorists.

Funny I think after BHO has unleashed the hounds of leftists in the government and the medias cooperation we are alomost back to pre 9/11 mentality. Lets face it BHO is ultra weak on foreign policy and we are going to see more chaos due to our percieved weakness. Bad thing is WHEN we get hit again you better belive BHO Rahm and the Clintonista will make a huge power grab which will makes Bush's Patriot Act look like a cub scout exercise.

Harvey take another pill. KSM deserves punishnment anyway you look at it. Death is to good for him. Didn't Obama say he was gonna close Gitmo ASAP? I guess it does serve purpose then. I'm sure milk and cookies are effective if you show him the torture chamber in the next room! Hell even Libs on 9/12 were asking why we were not doing more to protect us.

Peace out,

EX

Actually, Gitmo is closing down.

Now you'll need to argue that that is a bad thing instead because you cannot possibly agree with the Kenyan Muslim who's name rhymes with Osama and who has the same name as the guy who was stockpiling nukes and other weapons of mass destruction that was going to be used imminently to attack the US.

Well, either that or give the fuck up and go with reality as it is.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: EXman

Harvey take another pill. KSM deserves punishnment anyway you look at it. Death is to good for him.

KSM may deserve punishment, but NO human being deserves to be tortured, and I don't need a pill to know that anyone who commits, supports, condones or attempts excuses torture is an unethical, immoral sub-human piece of shit. I guess you're telling that includes you.

Didn't Obama say he was gonna close Gitmo ASAP? I guess it does serve purpose then.

I'm sure you don't know your ass from that hole in the groound you keep digging. You can try to distort the facts as much as you wish, but what we do know is that Obama has tried to close Guantanamo, and he has found that there are logistical problems to deal with that have taken longer than he anticipated.

That's not the same as the crimes of your mercifully EX-Traitor In Chief and his criminal cabal setting up their illegal prison and torturing their captives.

I'm sure milk and cookies are effective if you show him the torture chamber in the next room!

WTF??? You're the jackass who posted in this very thread:

Originally posted by: EXman

You also don't defeat evil with sending them milk and cookies. Being their friend and jerking them off then send them to Bahamas or U.S. Prisons. BHO has emboldened the Bad guys of the world against us by showing his yellow stripe down his back.

Hell even Libs on 9/12 were asking why we were not doing more to protect us.

The better question is, why your thankfully EX-Traitor In Chief and his criminal cabal weren't paying attention when they were warned BEFORE 9-11 and why they did everything they could to damage our defenses... and they succeeded.

Peace out

I peace all over your peace poor understanding of the word, peace. :thumbsdown: :|

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: GarfieldtheCat

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

So slicing a guy's balls is not torture somehow? I'll leave it to the neocon trolls here to come up with excuses for this.

Seems like the only "troll" here is the OP unless he can show where a "neocon" has stated that slicing genitals isn't "torture".

to give you some energy for your search...

There are plenty of people here that have supported all sorts of torture for the past 4+ years. From the " they are just terroristsand have no rights" defense, to the "waterboarding isn't torture, since we aren't hurting them" defense. Do a search, I'm sure you you will find plenty of people supporting the torture of terrorists.

So I'm waiting to see people make excuses/defenses of yet another new revelation. They defend waterboarding, why not this?

And from the responses so far, plenty of people are either ignoring or playing it down. Guess we know the answer.

I don't care who did it. Everyone involved need to charged and prosecuted. Dem, Rep, Martian, whatever.

So do you support prosecution for all involved? Well?

Sure. If it includes everyone. Including the senate who funded it. But if people are going to be cherry picked, which is really what most people want, then no. Leave it alone.

Actually, everyone who KNEW and was of higher rank should be held responsible but those not knowing should not be. I don't get how that would be cherry picking.

Of higher rank? Are you fucking kidding? Tell me you think there is a senator who was naive to it. FFS it was all over the news. Hell, even staffers knew.

You don't get how this works, people of lower rank may complain but if no action is taken by those of higher rank then it's done with their permission.

Some techniques lead to the death of more than 30 people with the good mind of everyone in the chain of command, no one was ever charged even though it was well documented.

Some techniques led to oxygen deprevation to a degree where they are basically in a coma, some others led to paralysation.

Of course, waterboarding isn't torture so that couldn't have caused it, it just fucking happened all of a sudden.

There are hundreds of people in the chain of command who knew about this, all the way up to the final reports that were handed to the MI6 and the UK PM as well as the US admin.