Cheney Calls for full Release of Memos

[Newby]

It's completely political. It's a witch hunt.

 

[Iriemon]

no catz,, I do read them, and I respect your opinions even though I disagree with them,, but as long as you are willing to let millions of us die so you can wear your white hat, you are a libral.

Same as saying that if you are willing to let the Govt use Gestapo torture techniques you are a nazi.

... asshole!...

Ignored.

 

[Yurt]

it is illogical to throw out the claim: appeal to emotion

this issue is about LIVES...you can't take that reality out of discussing this situation, you simply cannot take emotions out of discussing whether to torture or not because the reasons given for torture is that it SAVES LIVES. that is emotional, period.

i think those that dismiss arguments and hypos based on that are not being intellectually honest about the situation. it is not a logical fallacy to use emotional arguments if the argument necessarily is about emotional issues.

When are appeals to emotion appropriate, and when are they fallacious? No student would attempt to prove a mathematical theorem by playing upon the teacher's sympathy for the long hours of hard work put into it. Such an appeal would be obviously irrelevant, since either the proof is correct or it is flawed, despite the student's best efforts. In contrast, if the teacher attempts to motivate the student to work on proving the theorem by invoking the specter of a failing grade, this appeal to fear is not irrelevant.

Logical Fallacy: Emotional Appeal

in the instant discussion, the claim has been made by those who torture and those who support torture, that by not torturing there is a specter deaths, a reality and that specter necessarily is fearful. thus, appeal to emotions is NOT irrelevent. you simply cannot take emotions out of every single issue.

 

[Iriemon]

I don't use it as a slur,, I use it to denote a way of thinking.. I'm trying to wrap my mind around wearing a white hat and feeling all sanctimonious while watching millions die.. "Well" at least I didn't make anybody uncomfortable."
oh and don't preach to me about the rule of law.. NOt while 30 million or so people are allowed to break our law..and we give them "sanctuary" that's just downright dishonest of ya.

As you well know, I'm not a fan of illegal immigration and/or sanctuary status.

I work in a field where we deal with intense emotion all the time. Someone's kid is ALWAYS at risk of dying. The rule of law is what keeps us on the straight and narrow.

I've also seen, over the years, that cutting corners leads to BAD THINGS.

A guy can bring a suspect in, and beat a confession out of him, but what does that accomplish in the long run? It throws the entire case into question. It throws the department into question. It causes the community to distrust all police officers even more than they already do. In the long run, that community is more unlikely to report crimes. In the long run, the community begins to view the police as the enemy. In the long run, the life of every single officer on that departmetn becomes more dangerous.

The same is true with our national policies. America has survived as well as we have because for the most part, we've been able to claim that white hat. People have looked up to us, trusted us, and respected us. We have lost a lot of that, and the ramifications are only now being seen. This torture thing will allow other nations to villify us. This torture thing will be used to justify atrocities directed against Americans. This torture thing will be used in turn to justify torturing OUR SERVICE PERSONNEL.

I believe in following the rules because, in the long run, following the rules WORKS BETTER. I'm a pragmatic about this. There will always be a threat. We cannot, however, allow ourselves to change the rules with every threat. The rules are there for a larger reason than today's threat du jour.

Good post, spot on.

I used to like to think that America wasn't perfect, but was one of the "good guys".

If we use torture techniques of a type approved by the IJA, Gestapo, and Khmer Rouge, and that our nation prosecuted others for doing, its a little tougher to think of America as one of the good guys.

 

[Iriemon]

no catz,, I do read them, and I respect your opinions even though I disagree with them,, but as long as you are willing to let millions of us die so you can wear your white hat, you are a libral.

So, protecting the constitution, the rule of law, and the treaties that help to protect our military service personnel during overseas conflicts = liberal.

Good to know. If that's the case, then I will proudly claim the term.

See, you think that's some kind of slur. But I think that you, and others like you, have irreparably damaged the reputation of conservatism.

So, I guess we're even.

Welcome to the club. I used to call myself a conservative too.

 

[ABikerSailor]

You guys do know where we learned how to waterboard don't you?

From Pol Pot. He used it as a way to elicit FALSE CONFESSIONS.

 

[amrchaos]

Former Vice President Cheney Calls for full Release of Memos Showing Results of Interrogation Efforts

Former Vice President Cheney says he knows how successful the interrogation techniques were in collecting intelligence for the United States and wants that information to be released to the public as well as the legal memos explaining the decision to allow the heavily criticized methods.

Now that the memos showing the rulings of interrogation techniques have been released, the Obama administration should release additional documents that show what the interrogations yielded, and he wants the American people to understand that too.

"I acted primarily because of the exceptional circumstances that surrounded these memos," Obama said, adding that he has "fought to protect the integrity of classified information in the past and I will do so in the future."

Here’s McCain on the Memo release: "(The release) doesn't help America's image, does not help us address the issue and I think it was a serious mistake," McCain said.

Also today, from President Obama

Senior members of the Bush administration who approved the use of waterboarding and other harsh interrogation measures could face prosecution, President Obama disclosed today .

He said the use of torture reflected America "losing our moral bearings".

For the first time, today, he opened up the possibility that those in the administration who gave the go-ahead for the use of waterboarding could be prosecuted.

You do understand that Cheney is trying to win PUBLIC support for his position and not trying to win a judicial case based on law, Right?

There are two issues that destroys the pro-Torture debate.

1)The question of morality and justice: Is it just to perform an immoral act if you can benefit from it?

2)Alternatives:Was torture the only method to extract the information?

Answers--1 is no. 2 is no. So the question of why you wish to justify torture becomes the key issue for me.

Is it because of Wraith. You want to inflict as much pain on the enemy and as much as you can regardless of how it effects you?


Is it because you lack a sense of morality? If you can benefit from it then it is okay?

Is it because of politics? Know this--there were some Democrats in on the briefings and never said a word. I believe they are trying to hide behind a Democratic President!! I want them tried as well.

Whatever your reasons are, think about it much more deeply. The last thing we need is a public stamp of approval for Fascism. Any type of fascism.

 

[amrchaos]

The news is now reporting that Cheneys remark that he has asked the CIA to release the impact reports on torture is not true.

The CIA has said he never made any such request.

No matter what one may think of Cheney, if says on national tv, he made the request, which he is what happened, it is 100% true.

I know this is going to sound nutty but I have to say it.

I would be careful with information that deals with our government, especially if it comes out of our media.

There is something fundementally wrong going on with our system when dealing with public information through ANY news source.

 

[amrchaos]

it is illogical to throw out the claim: appeal to emotion

this issue is about LIVES...you can't take that reality out of discussing this situation, you simply cannot take emotions out of discussing whether to torture or not because the reasons given for torture is that it SAVES LIVES. that is emotional, period.

i think those that dismiss arguments and hypos based on that are not being intellectually honest about the situation. it is not a logical fallacy to use emotional arguments if the argument necessarily is about emotional issues.

When are appeals to emotion appropriate, and when are they fallacious? No student would attempt to prove a mathematical theorem by playing upon the teacher's sympathy for the long hours of hard work put into it. Such an appeal would be obviously irrelevant, since either the proof is correct or it is flawed, despite the student's best efforts. In contrast, if the teacher attempts to motivate the student to work on proving the theorem by invoking the specter of a failing grade, this appeal to fear is not irrelevant.

Logical Fallacy: Emotional Appeal

in the instant discussion, the claim has been made by those who torture and those who support torture, that by not torturing there is a specter deaths, a reality and that specter necessarily is fearful. thus, appeal to emotions is NOT irrelevent. you simply cannot take emotions out of every single issue.

But understand--the second arguement is cause and effect. If the student does not fear a failing grade the whole concept of "emotional appeal" is destroyed. You may not like a failing grade, but the person that the situation applies to can be indifferent.

Maybe this is another way to distinguish between the two... emotions by itself does not lend weight to the arguement.

 

[Newby]

Too bad the left conveniently ignores this point when the topic is abortion. It seems like it's only applied when it seems to further their side of the argument.

There are two issues that destroys the pro-Torture debate.

1)The question of morality and justice: Is it just to perform an immoral act if you can benefit from it?

 

[WillowTree]

Too bad the left conveniently ignores this point when the topic is abortion. It seems like it's only applied when it seems to further their side of the argument.

There are two issues that destroys the pro-Torture debate.

1)The question of morality and justice: Is it just to perform an immoral act if you can benefit from it?

yep,, the left defends pulling a baby out feet first, jamming scissors into it's skull and sucking out the brains,, and then they want to preach morality,

 

[Dr Grump]

no catz,, I do read them, and I respect your opinions even though I disagree with them,, but as long as you are willing to let millions of us die so you can wear your white hat, you are a libral.

Do you actually believe the crap you write Steph? Millions die??? Any more empty rhetoric you wish to expouse to "support" your willingness to put the US in the same category as third world shitholes that use similar practices...

 

[Dr Grump]

[yep,, the left defends pulling a baby out feet first, jamming scissors into it's skull and sucking out the brains,, and then they want to preach morality,

Only against extremist whackjobs. After all, the type of abortion you are describing is the norm, right? Just remember, if you find somebody blind and drunk enough to get you up the duff, and six months into the pregnancy the doc says "it's you or hte baby", just roll over and die. And while you lay their dying, just be satisfied you're going into the arms of the lord and your morality is in tact....

 

[WillowTree]

[yep,, the left defends pulling a baby out feet first, jamming scissors into it's skull and sucking out the brains,, and then they want to preach morality,

Only against extremist whackjobs. After all, the type of abortion you are describing is the norm, right? Just remember, if you find somebody blind and drunk enough to get you up the duff, and six months into the pregnancy the doc says "it's you or hte baby", just roll over and die. And while you lay their dying, just be satisfied you're going into the arms of the lord and your morality is in tact....

just like waterboarding is the norm you dishonest fuck.. and speaking of millions? how many will die in a nuke attack?? got any ideas jackazz?

 

[jreeves]

In his first visit as president to CIA headquarters in Langley, Va., President Obama defended the release of the Bush administration’s torture memos and told agency employees that they have a tougher job, and so does he, because they hold themselves to a higher standard in the fight against an unscrupulous enemy.

“What makes the United States special and what makes you special is precisely the fact that we are willing to uphold our values and our ideals even when it's hard, not just when it's easy; even when we are afraid and under threat, not just when it's expedient to do so. That's what makes us different,” Obama said. “So yes, you've got a harder job and so do I.”

Obama said that he put an end to the interrogation techniques outlined in the memos because, “I believe our nation is stronger and more secure when we deploy the full measure of both our power and the power of our values, including the rule of law.”

Let that ideological douche(Obama) talk about values after he has to stand in front of families that had loved ones who were vaporized by a 747 crashing into their building. Obama proves once again he is completely clueless and he will pay a political price for this BS.

If you are talking about 9/11, there were no 747s.
And no 747s will be hijacked, now. Security is too tight.

I'm sure the fact that the aircraft used on 9/11 were not 747's really comforted the families...It probably made their days that 767's were used instead....


BS, the only thing keeping us safe over the last 8 years was that the terrorist scumbags were on the run. If it isn't a plane, maybe its a vile of nerve gas released in a metro subway system, who knows. The simple fact is that Obama will have to explain to the family of loved ones who died in terror attacks, why he made this country less safe.

 

[American Horse]

What is the wisdom of the folks on this issue?

Thursday, April 23, 2009
58% Say Release of CIA Memos Endangers National Security

Fifty-eight percent (58%) believe the Obama administration's recent release of CIA memos about the harsh interrogation methods used on terrorism suspects endangers the national security of the United States. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 28% believe the release of the memos helps America's image abroad.

Rasmussen Report on Release of Interrogation Memos

Also; here's a link to the full Justice Dept Memos in PDF Form

.

 

[Chris]

Cheney is trying to keep from going to jail for authorizing torture.

He should go to jail.

 

[jreeves]

Cheney is trying to keep from going to jail for authorizing torture.

He should go to jail.

On what charge?

 

[Yurt]

Cheney is trying to keep from going to jail for authorizing torture.

He should go to jail.

so you support an investigation against pelosi too.....right

 

[jreeves]

Cheney is trying to keep from going to jail for authorizing torture.

He should go to jail.

On what charge?

Crissy are you speaking out of your ass again or do you have a specific charge that Cheney should be convicted of?