Conservatives Start Speaking Out Against Torture

[Gunny]

who are you trying to convince,?, hasn't the decision been made? all's left now is to live or die with it..

I'm hoping that people like you, Willow, good-hearted people who love this country, will take the risk of being exposed to something outside of the Sean Hannity bubble, and understanding why other conservatives, like me, are absolutely horrified at what we have done, as a country.

More fauz outrage. Got anything more to your argument than an appeal to emotion?

 

[NOBama]

If what John Kiriakou says is so, then BO shouldn't have any problem whatsoever with releasing the documents that Cheney claims yielded intel. It would solidify the case BO and his sheep are trying to make. One would think he would of thought of that by now.

 

[DiamondDave]

"Anyone who knows what waterboarding is could not be unsure. It is a horrible torture technique used by Pol Pot," - John McCain, October 2007.

Is John McCain not sufficiently heroic or conservative to speak on this subject? Is he also a leftist American hater who wants to weaken us and expose us to Jihad?

Just curious.

Again... being against it or wanting the practice stopped is one thing.. and I will not blame anyone for that stance... but using it as a partisan attack, claiming it to be something that it is not, etc.. that is quite different

 

[Gunny]

I dont' care whether it works or not..its WRONG!

Well, since y'all defined "torture", I'm sure you'll be more than happy to do the same for "wrong"?

 

[Gunny]

How CIA agents like Ali Soufan got terror suspects to talk...WITHOUT TORTURE.

‘We Could Have Done This the Right Way’ | Print Article | Newsweek.com

Agency operatives were aiming to crack him with rough and unorthodox interrogation tactics—including stripping him nude, turning down the temperature and bombarding him with loud music. But one impassioned young FBI agent wanted nothing to do with it. He tried to stop them.

The agent, Ali Soufan, was known as one of the bureau's top experts on Al Qaeda. He also had a reputation as a shrewd interrogator who could work fluently in both English and Arabic. Soufan yelled at one CIA contractor and told him that what he was doing was wrong, ineffective and an affront to American values. At one point, Soufan discovered a dark wooden "confinement box" that the contractor had built for Abu Zubaydah. It looked, Soufan recalls, "like a coffin." The mercurial agent erupted in anger, got on a secure phone line and called Pasquale D'Amuro, then the FBI assistant director for counterterrorism. "I swear to God," he shouted, "I'm going to arrest these guys!"

D'Amuro and other officials were alarmed at what they heard from Soufan. They fretted about the political consequences of abusive interrogations and the Washington blowback they thought was inevitable, say two high-ranking FBI sources who asked not to be identified discussing internal matters. According to a later Justice Department inspector general's report, D'Amuro warned FBI Director Bob Mueller that such activities would eventually be investigated. "Someday, people are going to be sitting in front of green felt tables having to testify about all of this," D'Amuro said, according to one of the sources.

Mueller ordered Soufan and a second FBI agent home. He then directed that bureau personnel no longer participate in CIA interrogations. In the corridors of the White House, Justice Department and U.S. intelligence agencies, heated debates ensued. Three months later, on Aug. 1, 2002, Justice lawyers issued a chilling memo blessing everything the CIA contractors had proposed—including waterboarding, or simulated drowning, a ghoulish technique that was administered to Abu Zubaydah 83 times.

Those of you who claim that torture works...I hope you will take the time to read the ENTIRE article. The FBI backed away from these tactics because THEY KNEW they were illegal.

Those of you that claim it doesn't are in denial.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

LOL... Rust Picker... the one immutable truth about torture is that it works... One can 'resist' only to the extent of one's means... and where one is a prisoner, there is ample time to stress beyond the means of anyone to resist.

Let's define "works," shall we?

Sure... Lets...

It works in that, under extreme physical pain, emotional duress, and activities that wear down an individual's mental capacity, PEOPLE WILL TELL YOU ANYTHING YOU WANT TO KNOW.

PRESTO! See how easy that was... Now where you'll want to go from here is ground which I covered in the post, you've sourced, but intentionally chose to separate from that explanation...

Where you people are confused is on the misnomer wherein, someone is believed to have information which one does not have. What those who you CHOOSE to believe are telling you, is that once the individual tells you everything he knows, if you continue to debrief them beyond that point, they will tell you whatever they think you want to hear.

Thus, interrogation, as I have repeatedly explained to you, IS a PROCESS... wherein, intelligence pieces together information from various debriefings, and tests it against given knowns... once that test is accomplished, the individual is brought back for further interrogation to set what he said formerly against what has been learned to be known values... It's hardly a perfect system, but that's OK, because nothing is... AND IT WORKS.

However, it DOES NOT WORK insofar as that information that you've received being more accurate than information gained through other, less un-American, means of interview and interrogation. In fact, there are serious concerns that information gained under physical duress is in fact SUBSTANTIALLY LESS ACCURATE. Thus, as far as I'm concerned, it DOES NOT WORK.

Of course this species of reasoning is spurious in that it sets aside the reality that 'other' avenues of interrogation take A LOT more time... and what's more is that the presumption is that the 'other' techniques... will at some unknown point, result in the information being advanced. Which if this were, as noted above, a criminal prosecution... that would be a PERFECTLY PLAUSIBLE alternative... Person A was or was not engaged in this or that activity, we know the activity, the locations, time frame, many of the processes relevant to the activity and where we can associate that individual to that process, time line and location... PRESTO... we have the evidence needed to establish their guilt; and we're ready for trial.

But that's the spurious nature of this argument... And why is this? It is so, because the information we are seeking is TIME SENSITIVE... in that unlike a CRIMINAL PROSECUTION, we are not seeking information which establishes guilt, by the individual being questioned, for the purposes of trying that evidence in open court... for a criminal act which has already taken place... NO!

WE ARE SEEKING INFORMATION ABOUT MASS MURDERS WHICH ARE PRESENTLY BEING PLOTTED BY THE ASSOCIATION OF WHICH THE INDIVIDUAL IS A KEY ELEMENT; PLOTS WHICH ARE IN STAGES OF EXECUTION OF WHICH WE ARE NOT PRIVY...

MEANING THAT THE MASS MURDER OF INNOCENT PEOPLE HAS NOT HAPPENED YET... WE SIMPLY KNOW THAT THE INDIVIDUAL IS REASONABLY BELIEVED TO POSSESS INFORMATION WHICH WILL PROVIDE US WITH THE MEANS, THE OPPORTUNITY TO PREVENT THAT MASS MURDER FROM HAPPENING.

So TIME is of the essence and the discomfort of the individual provides the INCENTIVE for them to be forthcoming... and where they mislead us... we provide greater incentive for them to measure their well being against their veracity...

It's not terribly complex... it's just sufficiently so to confuse those who are prone to lend the benefit of the doubt to THOSE ENGAGED IN MASS MURDERER... as a result of their ignorance of human rights and the responsibilities intrinsic to such rights.

 

[Gunny]

I dont' care whether it works or not..its WRONG!

You're right. But, I'm addressing the most common claim of the torture advocates in this forum and showing that their foundation for thier beliefs that torture is somehow justified are ENTIRELY FALSE.

You are incorrect on two counts. One does not have to advocate torture nor believe it to be justified to understand that it can easily work.

 

[WillowTree]

no, I didn't read them,, it's not about right and left with me,, everyone gets an opinion,, mine disagrees with yours.. and we live or die by what we believe I'm just not going to be grateful to you knowing that you will let me and everyone in my family die for your love of the terrorists. I can't figure it out.

God forbid your opinion should be based on facts. Let's just operate off of rabid fear and hyperbole.

The terrorists are coming! Your children are going to die in their beds unless we waterboard some towel heads!

The fact is the terrorist have come, lots of people died, lots of children live today as orphans, men without wives, wives without husbands.. that's the facts,, and you are mistaken if you think your kindness is going to change a terrorist mind,, well you are just a pollyanna.. so the long and short of it is you are willing to risk every American life based on your love for and faith in the terrorist,, as you have stated we Americans scare you more.. Sad sad commentary..

 

[catzmeow]

Anyone that says torture DOESN'T work is lying or stupid. Anyone that says it works 100% of the time is lying or stupid.

Anyone who defines "torture" outside the conventional defnitions historically used is a liar AND stupid.

Anyone who deludes themselves into thinking that we have not engaged in torture within our own nation as well as with enemies of outside this nation during times of war is delusional.

And this faux-outrage is getting old. What do you expect from a Nation of people that kicks the basis of our moral standard -- Judeo-Christianity -- to the curb?

Torture "works" in that the person you are torturing will tell you anything at all to get you to stop. It doesn't work in that the information you are receiving is as likely to be inaccurate as accurate. The more under duress a suspect is, the less likely his information is to be accurate.

Furthermore, LEGAL interview and interrogation "works" as well or better than terror. So why violate our own laws and ethics?

I don't care if my outrage is old to you. I defended the people at Abu Ghraib, and said that they were being villified by the left for no reason. Then, I came to believe that they were operating outside of the scope of normal orders.

Now, we learn that they were probably following orders at all times, and that those tactics were supported at the highest levels of our country, in violation of law and our ethics.

I sure as hell am outraged. Why aren't you?

 

[catzmeow]

More fauz outrage. Got anything more to your argument than an appeal to emotion?

I've posted solid evidence in this thread of every claim I've made, along with links to credible mainstream publications. Guess you didn't bother to read them.

 

[catzmeow]

Well, since y'all defined "torture", I'm sure you'll be more than happy to do the same for "wrong"?

HOw about "In violation of the 1984 convention on torture passed as law by our congress and signed into law by Ronald Reagan."

I.e., in violation of the law.

 

[editec]

And this faux-outrage is getting old. What do you expect from a Nation of people that kicks the basis of our moral standard -- Judeo-Christianity -- to the curb?

You haven't notice yet that the same people on this board who are about shoving Judeo-Christian value system down our throats are typically the same people advocating torture?

Seriously you haven't noticed who is supporting torture and who is not, yet?

 

[sealybobo]

Anybody trying to pass off the lie that waterboarding isn't torture is either seriously disinformed or simply condones torture.

I invite any of you to the editec compound where I will waterboard you for a few minutes.

THEN tell me it wasn't torturous.

Not a single person here trying to tell us that isn't torture will think it isn't torture ofter you go through a minute or to of the experience.

Oh yeah, one more thing?

If you waterboard people incorrectly they will die.

Why?

Because waterboarding is simply controlled drowding.

That's exactly WHY it's torture.

Because they are killing you by inches.

Horseshit

They are not killing you by inches... it's not controlled drowning... and there are indeed rules on how it is done, when it is done, how often it is done, medical personnel there, etc...

And I would invite you to actually go thru some training that many of my other fellow vets went thru that is above and beyond the 'torture' you and the rest of your kind complain about

And because some don't accept waterboarding as torture by definition, does not mean that those people condone torture... and it certainly does not mean that they are misinformed

They are misinformed and wrong. You right wingers make me want to puke. You have no fucking clue.

When you are being "waterboarded" by your commanders, what you don't realize is that you never gave up "complete control".

God, explaining this to an idiot like you is almost pointless. So this is for other people.

Anyways, you have no idea what it is like to truly lose control. McCain does, and thats why he's against torture.

Let me explain. A dog is put in a box with a floor that can shock the dog. There is another box and the dog can jump from box to box. So they shock the dog, and the dog jumps to the other box. But then they tie that dog down and shock it over and over until it realizes that it has LOST ALL CONTROL. So when they untie the dog and shock it, it doesn't even bother to jump. It has given up.

And then they try again in a year and the dog has still given up.

I know this is liberal mumbo jumbo science/facts/studies. I know this isn't just a right wing talking point, so you won't fucking understand. I'm sure the point went way over your head.

Anways, Hose Padilla is ruined for life. One other guy they tortured, to this day if you walk up to his cell, he automatically pisses in his pants.

You right wingers are sick, you should never lead this great country again.

Maybe we'll have some sick CIA or FBI Directors who will torture the real bad guys in secrecy, that is fine. But you guys tortured to get false confessions connecting Saddam to 9-11.

I don't think people realize how criminal the Bush/GOP were the last 8 years.

Investigations have been launched. Not that we don't already know, but they have to have a formal "investigation",

And you'll see that torture didn't work, the GOP lied, they were traitors, treasonist, and you fuckers protected/defended/argued for them the entire time.

My guess is you and Rush will just blame it all on the liberal media, because he is dishonest and you are stupid.

 

[WillowTree]

And you've won, we will not waterboard anymore.

 

[catzmeow]

I was always under the impression that the least harsh methods of interrogation were used to gain intel and then if they didn't work, harsher methods were used. I was also under the impression that those who were exposed to harsh interrogation methods were known (or very reasonably known) to have intel that would impact the safety of Americans because that's what the CIA's job entails. Is that not right?

I would suggest that you review the articles I've placed on the "Torture Works" thread.

 

[catzmeow]

And you've won, we will not waterboard anymore.

Until the next time when we conveniently forget or it is politically expedient.

 

[Gunny]

It's who we've ALWAYS been. Learn to deal.

Is it who we should be?

Depends entirely on circumstances. The problem with this topic period is there is no "one-size-fits-all" answer to each and every scenario. There is no one-size-fits-all definition of torture. One side claims nothing is torture and the other claims any kind of discomfort IS.

There's no logic nor common sense being applied to this argument. Not that I would wish harm on anyone, but I'd LOVE to see all of you Holier-than-thou, I suddenly found my morals and everyone should live by mine but don't shove yours on me folk in a situation where you had to choose between that and someone you knew, loved and or cared for possibly dying as a result of NOT scaring the crap out some jerkoff until he sings like a mockingbird.

 

[WillowTree]

And you've won, we will not waterboard anymore.

Until the next time when we conveniently forget or it is politically expedient.

it will become law.. our government chose the terrorist over the citizen.. Amazing.. I feel safe.

 

[catzmeow]

I've got to say Kitty, leftist Americans aren't haters and they don't wish to weaken us and expose us to Jihad, so STFU with that bullshit.

Sarcasm, Ravi. I'm clearly one of the leftist america haters now simply for speaking out against the use of torture. I've been called that on this thread and others.

 

[KittenKoder]

"Anyone who knows what waterboarding is could not be unsure. It is a horrible torture technique used by Pol Pot," - John McCain, October 2007.

Is John McCain not sufficiently heroic or conservative to speak on this subject? Is he also a leftist American hater who wants to weaken us and expose us to Jihad?

Just curious.

I've got to say Kitty, leftist Americans aren't haters and they don't wish to weaken us and expose us to Jihad, so STFU with that bullshit.

Ravi, you are attacking someone who is actually not saying what you think she is. She is actually asking the conservatives who are clinging to that contention if they would dare call McCain that as well ...