How Many Lives Would Have Been Saved Had we Tortured the Captured Paris Terrorist?

Would torture have saved any lives in Brussells today?

  • No

    Votes: 18 47.4%
  • Yes

    Votes: 15 39.5%
  • I dunno

    Votes: 5 13.2%

  • Total voters
    38
WW2 because of the attack at Pearl Harbor. Self defense.

We were actively involved before Pearl Harbor because of our alliance with Great Britain. So how do you feel about the bombing of Japan?

WW1 was more complicated.

Not really, we have had and still do have an interest in our European Allies remaining in stable democracies. It's a unrealistic belief of the Liberal Left we need to only worry about ourselves.

But, do you have a point?

Obviously, one you can't seem to recognize...
 
Last edited:
Yes, it's really that hard for me to write YOUR opinions for you.

It's apparent most common sense topics are hard for you to comprehend, Saddam Hussein and his regime needed to go...

But to acknowledge this would require the ability to make tough decisions, have true conviction for the right outcome...
 
You would tell them anything - everything they want to hear. Truth is irrelevant, only the cessation of pain.

Which is why they tell the Truh instead of more lies, as they do not want to go through a repeat of the pain, dude.

You argue against you own position and fail to recognize it. Why? Are you running from something you failed to do?
*sigh*

I have already established with clear evidence why you are incorrect. I am not arguing against my own position - I am bringing up why truth is not gained or is too heavily mixed with falsehoods in a torture session.
No, yo have established nothing, nor have you rebutted the examples of the successful use of torture as well.

You are still in the hole pretending to have talked you way out instead of doing any actual climbing.

Torture works. It worked for Wallsingham, it worked for Cortez, it worked for the Vietnamese and it will work for us as well, no matter how many times you claim to have proven it useless.

roflmao

I must have missed the part where he proved it useless. Other than bleating that it doesn't work, how did he do that?
"Useless" is a bad term and I do not recall using if I had. Ineffective is what torture is.
 
You would tell them anything - everything they want to hear. Truth is irrelevant, only the cessation of pain.

Which is why they tell the Truh instead of more lies, as they do not want to go through a repeat of the pain, dude.

You argue against you own position and fail to recognize it. Why? Are you running from something you failed to do?
*sigh*

I have already established with clear evidence why you are incorrect. I am not arguing against my own position - I am bringing up why truth is not gained or is too heavily mixed with falsehoods in a torture session.
No, yo have established nothing, nor have you rebutted the examples of the successful use of torture as well.

You are still in the hole pretending to have talked you way out instead of doing any actual climbing.

Torture works. It worked for Wallsingham, it worked for Cortez, it worked for the Vietnamese and it will work for us as well, no matter how many times you claim to have proven it useless.

roflmao

I must have missed the part where he proved it useless. Other than bleating that it doesn't work, how did he do that?
"Useless" is a bad term and I do not recall using if I had. Ineffective is what torture is.

Still wrong. It's highly effective. The water boarding of Abu Zubaydah, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri worked like a dream. The claim that torture doesn't work is pure propaganda.
 
Which is why they tell the Truh instead of more lies, as they do not want to go through a repeat of the pain, dude.

You argue against you own position and fail to recognize it. Why? Are you running from something you failed to do?
*sigh*

I have already established with clear evidence why you are incorrect. I am not arguing against my own position - I am bringing up why truth is not gained or is too heavily mixed with falsehoods in a torture session.
No, yo have established nothing, nor have you rebutted the examples of the successful use of torture as well.

You are still in the hole pretending to have talked you way out instead of doing any actual climbing.

Torture works. It worked for Wallsingham, it worked for Cortez, it worked for the Vietnamese and it will work for us as well, no matter how many times you claim to have proven it useless.

roflmao

I must have missed the part where he proved it useless. Other than bleating that it doesn't work, how did he do that?
"Useless" is a bad term and I do not recall using if I had. Ineffective is what torture is.

Still wrong. It's highly effective. The water boarding of Abu Zubaydah, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri worked like a dream. The claim that torture doesn't work is pure propaganda.
And yet the independent panel that investigated that torture AND the result of it found that it was not effective. And I have already provided that brief - the one that you apparently have ignored.
 
*sigh*

I have already established with clear evidence why you are incorrect. I am not arguing against my own position - I am bringing up why truth is not gained or is too heavily mixed with falsehoods in a torture session.
No, yo have established nothing, nor have you rebutted the examples of the successful use of torture as well.

You are still in the hole pretending to have talked you way out instead of doing any actual climbing.

Torture works. It worked for Wallsingham, it worked for Cortez, it worked for the Vietnamese and it will work for us as well, no matter how many times you claim to have proven it useless.

roflmao

I must have missed the part where he proved it useless. Other than bleating that it doesn't work, how did he do that?
"Useless" is a bad term and I do not recall using if I had. Ineffective is what torture is.

Still wrong. It's highly effective. The water boarding of Abu Zubaydah, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri worked like a dream. The claim that torture doesn't work is pure propaganda.
And yet the independent panel that investigated that torture AND the result of it found that it was not effective. And I have already provided that brief - the one that you apparently have ignored.

You mean an "independent panel" that was staffed entirely by leftwing douche bags who despised the Bush administration found that it was not effective?
 
No, yo have established nothing, nor have you rebutted the examples of the successful use of torture as well.

You are still in the hole pretending to have talked you way out instead of doing any actual climbing.

Torture works. It worked for Wallsingham, it worked for Cortez, it worked for the Vietnamese and it will work for us as well, no matter how many times you claim to have proven it useless.

roflmao

I must have missed the part where he proved it useless. Other than bleating that it doesn't work, how did he do that?
"Useless" is a bad term and I do not recall using if I had. Ineffective is what torture is.

Still wrong. It's highly effective. The water boarding of Abu Zubaydah, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri worked like a dream. The claim that torture doesn't work is pure propaganda.
And yet the independent panel that investigated that torture AND the result of it found that it was not effective. And I have already provided that brief - the one that you apparently have ignored.

You mean an "independent panel" that was staffed entirely by leftwing douche bags who despised the Bush administration found that it was not effective?
As compared with your nothing?

Nice try.
 
I must have missed the part where he proved it useless. Other than bleating that it doesn't work, how did he do that?
"Useless" is a bad term and I do not recall using if I had. Ineffective is what torture is.

Still wrong. It's highly effective. The water boarding of Abu Zubaydah, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri worked like a dream. The claim that torture doesn't work is pure propaganda.
And yet the independent panel that investigated that torture AND the result of it found that it was not effective. And I have already provided that brief - the one that you apparently have ignored.

You mean an "independent panel" that was staffed entirely by leftwing douche bags who despised the Bush administration found that it was not effective?
As compared with your nothing?

Nice try.

5000 years of recorded history is "nothing?" The opinions of a gang of leftwing douche bags is nothing.
 
Waterboarding worked so well and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's story was so fascinating they wanted to hear it 183 times. Can't of any other reason they waterboarded him 183 times, can you?

I'm leaning towards a moral judgement that the so-called "civilized" westerners who participated in any torture sessions of anybody are morally more culpable than any of their victims, especially the medical personnel, whatever the uncharged, unconvicted victims were accused of.

  • The purpose of the waterboarding appears to have been to bring Mohammed as close as possible to death without actually killing him. As one C.I.A. medical officer who presided over the torture wrote, “In the new technique we are basically doing a series of near drownings.”
  • Mohammed was spirited to secret C.I.A. prisons in Afghanistan and Poland, where his interrogators went straight to brutality: slamming him against a wall (a practice known as “walling”), depriving him of sleep (at one point for more than a week), forcing him to stand or crouch in painful positions, stripping him during questioning, and engaging in a bizarre practice called “rectal rehydration.”
  • .....so much water was forced into Mohammed that his “abdomen was somewhat distended and he expressed water when the abdomen was pressed,”... One of the medical officers present said that, even though Mohammed was vomiting during the sessions, his “gastric contents” had become so diluted that he was “not concerned about regurgitated gastric acid damaging KSM’s esophagus.” Instead, the medical officer said, he was worried that Mohammed had been filled with so much water that there was a danger that the electrolytes in his blood had become dangerously diluted; the (medical) officer requested that C.I.A. interrogators use salted water during the waterboarding sessions.
  • The Senate report, which drew almost entirely on the C.I.A.’s internal communications, makes a convincing case that while the interrogation of Mohammed produced some valuable information, the interrogators never got what they wanted. No information provided by Mohammed led directly to the capture of a terrorist or the disruption of a terrorist plot.
  • “Overall view seems to be” that waterboarding “is not working in gaining KSM[’s] compliance,” one officer wrote....Duh....after 183 attempts they finally figured that out....
  • “Against KSM it has proven ineffective,” the deputy chief of the C.I.A. interrogation program wrote. “The potential for physical harm is far greater with the waterboard than with the other techniques, bringing into question the issue of risk vs. gain.”
  • “We seem to have lost ground,” the deputy chief continued, writing that the practice “may poison the well.”
  • An official C.I.A. assessment of the interrogations concluded that Mohammed managed to conceal his most valuable information, despite being tortured. (The report was titled “Precious Truths, Surrounded by a Bodyguard of Lies.”)


NEWS DESK
DECEMBER 31, 2014
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the C.I.A.
BY DEXTER FILKINS
Undated photo of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.CREDITPHOTOGRAPH: AP
“I M W KSM.”

So went the electrifying text message received by a C.I.A. operative in Islamabad, Pakistan, in February of 2003, sent by a mysterious man known as Asset X. The note confirmed what Asset X, whose real identity is an official secret, had been telling his C.I.A. handlers for months: that he could lead them to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, a senior Al Qaeda leader and the suspected mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. K.S.M., as he later came to be known in the West, was still at large, and the C.I.A. wanted him almost as badly as they wanted Osama bin Laden.

Within hours of the operative receiving the text message, C.I.A. and Pakistani intelligence officers followed Asset X’s lead, swooped into the compound where Mohammed was living, and captured him. The takedown of Mohammed had almost fallen apart several times, thanks to C.I.A. mismanagement of Asset X. Just as remarkable is how his capture was later used to justify the most brutal aspects of the C.I.A.’s special interrogation program that was put in place after the 9/11 attacks.


Soon after his capture in Rawalpindi, on March 1, 2003, Mohammed was spirited to secret C.I.A. prisons in Afghanistan and Poland, where his interrogators went straight to brutality: slamming him against a wall (a practice known as “walling”), depriving him of sleep (at one point for more than a week), forcing him to stand or crouch in painful positions, stripping him during questioning, and engaging in a bizarre practice called “rectal rehydration.” (According to a C.I.A. document, it was supposed to help “clear a person’s head.”) In Poland, the interrogators subjected Mohammed to waterboarding, a form of torture that makes a person believe he is drowning, at least a hundred and eighty-three times.

  • The details of Mohammed’s interrogation, described in the report issued earlier this month by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, make for grim, even sickening reading. During Mohammed’s waterboarding sessions, C.I.A. officers reported that he “yelled and twisted,” “seemed to lose control,” and became “somewhat frantic.” The purpose of the waterboarding appears to have been to bring Mohammed as close as possible to death without actually killing him. As one C.I.A. medical officer who presided over the torture wrote, “In the new technique we are basically doing a series of near drownings.”

On March 12, 2003, during a waterboarding session, so much water was forced into Mohammed that his “abdomen was somewhat distended and he expressed water when the abdomen was pressed,” the Senate report says, quoting from a C.I.A. cable. One of the medical officers present said that, even though Mohammed was vomiting during the sessions, his “gastric contents” had become so diluted that he was “not concerned about regurgitated gastric acid damaging KSM’s esophagus.” Instead, the medical officer said, he was worried that Mohammed had been filled with so much water that there was a danger that the electrolytes in his blood had become dangerously diluted; the officer requested that C.I.A. interrogators use salted water during the waterboarding sessions.

The Senate report, which drew almost entirely on the C.I.A.’s internal communications, makes a convincing case that while the interrogation of Mohammed produced some valuable information, the interrogators never got what they wanted. No information provided by Mohammed led directly to the capture of a terrorist or the disruption of a terrorist plot.

Here are some quotations from C.I.A. records filed during Mohammed’s interrogation:

“Overall view seems to be” that waterboarding “is not working in gaining KSM[’s] compliance,” one officer wrote.

“Against KSM it has proven ineffective,” the deputy chief of the C.I.A. interrogation program wrote. “The potential for physical harm is far greater with the waterboard than with the other techniques, bringing into question the issue of risk vs. gain.”

“We seem to have lost ground,” the deputy chief continued, writing that the practice “may poison the well.”

An official C.I.A. assessment of the interrogations concluded that Mohammed managed to conceal his most valuable information, despite being tortured. (The report was titled “Precious Truths, Surrounded by a Bodyguard of Lies.”) Another report, written after the waterboarding sessions had ended, said that interrogators “remain[ed] highly suspicious that KSM is withholding, exaggerating, misdirecting, or outright fabricating information” on weapons of mass destruction. “Pretend cooperation,’’ another report said. “May never be forthcoming or honest,” said another.


Maybe they water boarded him all those times because he was a murdering psychopath. I think that water boarding probably should not be used except in very extreme cases however . When interrogation fails and you have a person Like KSM, not just your average burglary suspect, but someone who held the keys potentially to an entire terrorist organization.
 
Waterboarding worked so well and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's story was so fascinating they wanted to hear it 183 times. Can't of any other reason they waterboarded him 183 times, can you?

I'm leaning towards a moral judgement that the so-called "civilized" westerners who participated in any torture sessions of anybody are morally more culpable than any of their victims, especially the medical personnel, whatever the uncharged, unconvicted victims were accused of.

  • The purpose of the waterboarding appears to have been to bring Mohammed as close as possible to death without actually killing him. As one C.I.A. medical officer who presided over the torture wrote, “In the new technique we are basically doing a series of near drownings.”
  • Mohammed was spirited to secret C.I.A. prisons in Afghanistan and Poland, where his interrogators went straight to brutality: slamming him against a wall (a practice known as “walling”), depriving him of sleep (at one point for more than a week), forcing him to stand or crouch in painful positions, stripping him during questioning, and engaging in a bizarre practice called “rectal rehydration.”
  • .....so much water was forced into Mohammed that his “abdomen was somewhat distended and he expressed water when the abdomen was pressed,”... One of the medical officers present said that, even though Mohammed was vomiting during the sessions, his “gastric contents” had become so diluted that he was “not concerned about regurgitated gastric acid damaging KSM’s esophagus.” Instead, the medical officer said, he was worried that Mohammed had been filled with so much water that there was a danger that the electrolytes in his blood had become dangerously diluted; the (medical) officer requested that C.I.A. interrogators use salted water during the waterboarding sessions.
  • The Senate report, which drew almost entirely on the C.I.A.’s internal communications, makes a convincing case that while the interrogation of Mohammed produced some valuable information, the interrogators never got what they wanted. No information provided by Mohammed led directly to the capture of a terrorist or the disruption of a terrorist plot.
  • “Overall view seems to be” that waterboarding “is not working in gaining KSM[’s] compliance,” one officer wrote....Duh....after 183 attempts they finally figured that out....
  • “Against KSM it has proven ineffective,” the deputy chief of the C.I.A. interrogation program wrote. “The potential for physical harm is far greater with the waterboard than with the other techniques, bringing into question the issue of risk vs. gain.”
  • “We seem to have lost ground,” the deputy chief continued, writing that the practice “may poison the well.”
  • An official C.I.A. assessment of the interrogations concluded that Mohammed managed to conceal his most valuable information, despite being tortured. (The report was titled “Precious Truths, Surrounded by a Bodyguard of Lies.”)


NEWS DESK
DECEMBER 31, 2014
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the C.I.A.
BY DEXTER FILKINS
Undated photo of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.CREDITPHOTOGRAPH: AP
“I M W KSM.”

So went the electrifying text message received by a C.I.A. operative in Islamabad, Pakistan, in February of 2003, sent by a mysterious man known as Asset X. The note confirmed what Asset X, whose real identity is an official secret, had been telling his C.I.A. handlers for months: that he could lead them to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, a senior Al Qaeda leader and the suspected mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. K.S.M., as he later came to be known in the West, was still at large, and the C.I.A. wanted him almost as badly as they wanted Osama bin Laden.

Within hours of the operative receiving the text message, C.I.A. and Pakistani intelligence officers followed Asset X’s lead, swooped into the compound where Mohammed was living, and captured him. The takedown of Mohammed had almost fallen apart several times, thanks to C.I.A. mismanagement of Asset X. Just as remarkable is how his capture was later used to justify the most brutal aspects of the C.I.A.’s special interrogation program that was put in place after the 9/11 attacks.


Soon after his capture in Rawalpindi, on March 1, 2003, Mohammed was spirited to secret C.I.A. prisons in Afghanistan and Poland, where his interrogators went straight to brutality: slamming him against a wall (a practice known as “walling”), depriving him of sleep (at one point for more than a week), forcing him to stand or crouch in painful positions, stripping him during questioning, and engaging in a bizarre practice called “rectal rehydration.” (According to a C.I.A. document, it was supposed to help “clear a person’s head.”) In Poland, the interrogators subjected Mohammed to waterboarding, a form of torture that makes a person believe he is drowning, at least a hundred and eighty-three times.

  • The details of Mohammed’s interrogation, described in the report issued earlier this month by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, make for grim, even sickening reading. During Mohammed’s waterboarding sessions, C.I.A. officers reported that he “yelled and twisted,” “seemed to lose control,” and became “somewhat frantic.” The purpose of the waterboarding appears to have been to bring Mohammed as close as possible to death without actually killing him. As one C.I.A. medical officer who presided over the torture wrote, “In the new technique we are basically doing a series of near drownings.”

On March 12, 2003, during a waterboarding session, so much water was forced into Mohammed that his “abdomen was somewhat distended and he expressed water when the abdomen was pressed,” the Senate report says, quoting from a C.I.A. cable. One of the medical officers present said that, even though Mohammed was vomiting during the sessions, his “gastric contents” had become so diluted that he was “not concerned about regurgitated gastric acid damaging KSM’s esophagus.” Instead, the medical officer said, he was worried that Mohammed had been filled with so much water that there was a danger that the electrolytes in his blood had become dangerously diluted; the officer requested that C.I.A. interrogators use salted water during the waterboarding sessions.

The Senate report, which drew almost entirely on the C.I.A.’s internal communications, makes a convincing case that while the interrogation of Mohammed produced some valuable information, the interrogators never got what they wanted. No information provided by Mohammed led directly to the capture of a terrorist or the disruption of a terrorist plot.

Here are some quotations from C.I.A. records filed during Mohammed’s interrogation:

“Overall view seems to be” that waterboarding “is not working in gaining KSM[’s] compliance,” one officer wrote.

“Against KSM it has proven ineffective,” the deputy chief of the C.I.A. interrogation program wrote. “The potential for physical harm is far greater with the waterboard than with the other techniques, bringing into question the issue of risk vs. gain.”

“We seem to have lost ground,” the deputy chief continued, writing that the practice “may poison the well.”

An official C.I.A. assessment of the interrogations concluded that Mohammed managed to conceal his most valuable information, despite being tortured. (The report was titled “Precious Truths, Surrounded by a Bodyguard of Lies.”) Another report, written after the waterboarding sessions had ended, said that interrogators “remain[ed] highly suspicious that KSM is withholding, exaggerating, misdirecting, or outright fabricating information” on weapons of mass destruction. “Pretend cooperation,’’ another report said. “May never be forthcoming or honest,” said another.


Maybe they water boarded him all those times because he was a murdering psychopath. I think that water boarding probably should not be used except in very extreme cases however . When interrogation fails and you have a person Like KSM, not just your average burglary suspect, but someone who held the keys potentially to an entire terrorist organization.

All terrorists with blood on their hands deserve to be tortured. I see no reason to spare them. If it saves just one life it's justified.
 
Waterboarding worked so well and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's story was so fascinating they wanted to hear it 183 times. Can't of any other reason they waterboarded him 183 times, can you?

I'm leaning towards a moral judgement that the so-called "civilized" westerners who participated in any torture sessions of anybody are morally more culpable than any of their victims, especially the medical personnel, whatever the uncharged, unconvicted victims were accused of.

  • The purpose of the waterboarding appears to have been to bring Mohammed as close as possible to death without actually killing him. As one C.I.A. medical officer who presided over the torture wrote, “In the new technique we are basically doing a series of near drownings.”
  • Mohammed was spirited to secret C.I.A. prisons in Afghanistan and Poland, where his interrogators went straight to brutality: slamming him against a wall (a practice known as “walling”), depriving him of sleep (at one point for more than a week), forcing him to stand or crouch in painful positions, stripping him during questioning, and engaging in a bizarre practice called “rectal rehydration.”
  • .....so much water was forced into Mohammed that his “abdomen was somewhat distended and he expressed water when the abdomen was pressed,”... One of the medical officers present said that, even though Mohammed was vomiting during the sessions, his “gastric contents” had become so diluted that he was “not concerned about regurgitated gastric acid damaging KSM’s esophagus.” Instead, the medical officer said, he was worried that Mohammed had been filled with so much water that there was a danger that the electrolytes in his blood had become dangerously diluted; the (medical) officer requested that C.I.A. interrogators use salted water during the waterboarding sessions.
  • The Senate report, which drew almost entirely on the C.I.A.’s internal communications, makes a convincing case that while the interrogation of Mohammed produced some valuable information, the interrogators never got what they wanted. No information provided by Mohammed led directly to the capture of a terrorist or the disruption of a terrorist plot.
  • “Overall view seems to be” that waterboarding “is not working in gaining KSM[’s] compliance,” one officer wrote....Duh....after 183 attempts they finally figured that out....
  • “Against KSM it has proven ineffective,” the deputy chief of the C.I.A. interrogation program wrote. “The potential for physical harm is far greater with the waterboard than with the other techniques, bringing into question the issue of risk vs. gain.”
  • “We seem to have lost ground,” the deputy chief continued, writing that the practice “may poison the well.”
  • An official C.I.A. assessment of the interrogations concluded that Mohammed managed to conceal his most valuable information, despite being tortured. (The report was titled “Precious Truths, Surrounded by a Bodyguard of Lies.”)


NEWS DESK
DECEMBER 31, 2014
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the C.I.A.
BY DEXTER FILKINS
Undated photo of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.CREDITPHOTOGRAPH: AP
“I M W KSM.”

So went the electrifying text message received by a C.I.A. operative in Islamabad, Pakistan, in February of 2003, sent by a mysterious man known as Asset X. The note confirmed what Asset X, whose real identity is an official secret, had been telling his C.I.A. handlers for months: that he could lead them to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, a senior Al Qaeda leader and the suspected mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. K.S.M., as he later came to be known in the West, was still at large, and the C.I.A. wanted him almost as badly as they wanted Osama bin Laden.

Within hours of the operative receiving the text message, C.I.A. and Pakistani intelligence officers followed Asset X’s lead, swooped into the compound where Mohammed was living, and captured him. The takedown of Mohammed had almost fallen apart several times, thanks to C.I.A. mismanagement of Asset X. Just as remarkable is how his capture was later used to justify the most brutal aspects of the C.I.A.’s special interrogation program that was put in place after the 9/11 attacks.


Soon after his capture in Rawalpindi, on March 1, 2003, Mohammed was spirited to secret C.I.A. prisons in Afghanistan and Poland, where his interrogators went straight to brutality: slamming him against a wall (a practice known as “walling”), depriving him of sleep (at one point for more than a week), forcing him to stand or crouch in painful positions, stripping him during questioning, and engaging in a bizarre practice called “rectal rehydration.” (According to a C.I.A. document, it was supposed to help “clear a person’s head.”) In Poland, the interrogators subjected Mohammed to waterboarding, a form of torture that makes a person believe he is drowning, at least a hundred and eighty-three times.

  • The details of Mohammed’s interrogation, described in the report issued earlier this month by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, make for grim, even sickening reading. During Mohammed’s waterboarding sessions, C.I.A. officers reported that he “yelled and twisted,” “seemed to lose control,” and became “somewhat frantic.” The purpose of the waterboarding appears to have been to bring Mohammed as close as possible to death without actually killing him. As one C.I.A. medical officer who presided over the torture wrote, “In the new technique we are basically doing a series of near drownings.”

On March 12, 2003, during a waterboarding session, so much water was forced into Mohammed that his “abdomen was somewhat distended and he expressed water when the abdomen was pressed,” the Senate report says, quoting from a C.I.A. cable. One of the medical officers present said that, even though Mohammed was vomiting during the sessions, his “gastric contents” had become so diluted that he was “not concerned about regurgitated gastric acid damaging KSM’s esophagus.” Instead, the medical officer said, he was worried that Mohammed had been filled with so much water that there was a danger that the electrolytes in his blood had become dangerously diluted; the officer requested that C.I.A. interrogators use salted water during the waterboarding sessions.

The Senate report, which drew almost entirely on the C.I.A.’s internal communications, makes a convincing case that while the interrogation of Mohammed produced some valuable information, the interrogators never got what they wanted. No information provided by Mohammed led directly to the capture of a terrorist or the disruption of a terrorist plot.

Here are some quotations from C.I.A. records filed during Mohammed’s interrogation:

“Overall view seems to be” that waterboarding “is not working in gaining KSM[’s] compliance,” one officer wrote.

“Against KSM it has proven ineffective,” the deputy chief of the C.I.A. interrogation program wrote. “The potential for physical harm is far greater with the waterboard than with the other techniques, bringing into question the issue of risk vs. gain.”

“We seem to have lost ground,” the deputy chief continued, writing that the practice “may poison the well.”

An official C.I.A. assessment of the interrogations concluded that Mohammed managed to conceal his most valuable information, despite being tortured. (The report was titled “Precious Truths, Surrounded by a Bodyguard of Lies.”) Another report, written after the waterboarding sessions had ended, said that interrogators “remain[ed] highly suspicious that KSM is withholding, exaggerating, misdirecting, or outright fabricating information” on weapons of mass destruction. “Pretend cooperation,’’ another report said. “May never be forthcoming or honest,” said another.


Maybe they water boarded him all those times because he was a murdering psychopath. I think that water boarding probably should not be used except in very extreme cases however . When interrogation fails and you have a person Like KSM, not just your average burglary suspect, but someone who held the keys potentially to an entire terrorist organization.

All terrorists with blood on their hands deserve to be tortured. I see no reason to spare them. If it saves just one life it's justified.


Sure they do deserve it. I will agree with that. I think water boarding should be left on the table, but it doesnt necessarily have to be the primary tool of interrogating terrorists. I guess that would be up to the discretion of the interrogator. sometimes just the psychological fear of something can be enough.
 
Waterboarding worked so well and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's story was so fascinating they wanted to hear it 183 times. Can't of any other reason they waterboarded him 183 times, can you?

I'm leaning towards a moral judgement that the so-called "civilized" westerners who participated in any torture sessions of anybody are morally more culpable than any of their victims, especially the medical personnel, whatever the uncharged, unconvicted victims were accused of.

  • The purpose of the waterboarding appears to have been to bring Mohammed as close as possible to death without actually killing him. As one C.I.A. medical officer who presided over the torture wrote, “In the new technique we are basically doing a series of near drownings.”
  • Mohammed was spirited to secret C.I.A. prisons in Afghanistan and Poland, where his interrogators went straight to brutality: slamming him against a wall (a practice known as “walling”), depriving him of sleep (at one point for more than a week), forcing him to stand or crouch in painful positions, stripping him during questioning, and engaging in a bizarre practice called “rectal rehydration.”
  • .....so much water was forced into Mohammed that his “abdomen was somewhat distended and he expressed water when the abdomen was pressed,”... One of the medical officers present said that, even though Mohammed was vomiting during the sessions, his “gastric contents” had become so diluted that he was “not concerned about regurgitated gastric acid damaging KSM’s esophagus.” Instead, the medical officer said, he was worried that Mohammed had been filled with so much water that there was a danger that the electrolytes in his blood had become dangerously diluted; the (medical) officer requested that C.I.A. interrogators use salted water during the waterboarding sessions.
  • The Senate report, which drew almost entirely on the C.I.A.’s internal communications, makes a convincing case that while the interrogation of Mohammed produced some valuable information, the interrogators never got what they wanted. No information provided by Mohammed led directly to the capture of a terrorist or the disruption of a terrorist plot.
  • “Overall view seems to be” that waterboarding “is not working in gaining KSM[’s] compliance,” one officer wrote....Duh....after 183 attempts they finally figured that out....
  • “Against KSM it has proven ineffective,” the deputy chief of the C.I.A. interrogation program wrote. “The potential for physical harm is far greater with the waterboard than with the other techniques, bringing into question the issue of risk vs. gain.”
  • “We seem to have lost ground,” the deputy chief continued, writing that the practice “may poison the well.”
  • An official C.I.A. assessment of the interrogations concluded that Mohammed managed to conceal his most valuable information, despite being tortured. (The report was titled “Precious Truths, Surrounded by a Bodyguard of Lies.”)


NEWS DESK
DECEMBER 31, 2014
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the C.I.A.
BY DEXTER FILKINS
Undated photo of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.CREDITPHOTOGRAPH: AP
“I M W KSM.”

So went the electrifying text message received by a C.I.A. operative in Islamabad, Pakistan, in February of 2003, sent by a mysterious man known as Asset X. The note confirmed what Asset X, whose real identity is an official secret, had been telling his C.I.A. handlers for months: that he could lead them to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, a senior Al Qaeda leader and the suspected mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. K.S.M., as he later came to be known in the West, was still at large, and the C.I.A. wanted him almost as badly as they wanted Osama bin Laden.

Within hours of the operative receiving the text message, C.I.A. and Pakistani intelligence officers followed Asset X’s lead, swooped into the compound where Mohammed was living, and captured him. The takedown of Mohammed had almost fallen apart several times, thanks to C.I.A. mismanagement of Asset X. Just as remarkable is how his capture was later used to justify the most brutal aspects of the C.I.A.’s special interrogation program that was put in place after the 9/11 attacks.


Soon after his capture in Rawalpindi, on March 1, 2003, Mohammed was spirited to secret C.I.A. prisons in Afghanistan and Poland, where his interrogators went straight to brutality: slamming him against a wall (a practice known as “walling”), depriving him of sleep (at one point for more than a week), forcing him to stand or crouch in painful positions, stripping him during questioning, and engaging in a bizarre practice called “rectal rehydration.” (According to a C.I.A. document, it was supposed to help “clear a person’s head.”) In Poland, the interrogators subjected Mohammed to waterboarding, a form of torture that makes a person believe he is drowning, at least a hundred and eighty-three times.

  • The details of Mohammed’s interrogation, described in the report issued earlier this month by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, make for grim, even sickening reading. During Mohammed’s waterboarding sessions, C.I.A. officers reported that he “yelled and twisted,” “seemed to lose control,” and became “somewhat frantic.” The purpose of the waterboarding appears to have been to bring Mohammed as close as possible to death without actually killing him. As one C.I.A. medical officer who presided over the torture wrote, “In the new technique we are basically doing a series of near drownings.”

On March 12, 2003, during a waterboarding session, so much water was forced into Mohammed that his “abdomen was somewhat distended and he expressed water when the abdomen was pressed,” the Senate report says, quoting from a C.I.A. cable. One of the medical officers present said that, even though Mohammed was vomiting during the sessions, his “gastric contents” had become so diluted that he was “not concerned about regurgitated gastric acid damaging KSM’s esophagus.” Instead, the medical officer said, he was worried that Mohammed had been filled with so much water that there was a danger that the electrolytes in his blood had become dangerously diluted; the officer requested that C.I.A. interrogators use salted water during the waterboarding sessions.

The Senate report, which drew almost entirely on the C.I.A.’s internal communications, makes a convincing case that while the interrogation of Mohammed produced some valuable information, the interrogators never got what they wanted. No information provided by Mohammed led directly to the capture of a terrorist or the disruption of a terrorist plot.

Here are some quotations from C.I.A. records filed during Mohammed’s interrogation:

“Overall view seems to be” that waterboarding “is not working in gaining KSM[’s] compliance,” one officer wrote.

“Against KSM it has proven ineffective,” the deputy chief of the C.I.A. interrogation program wrote. “The potential for physical harm is far greater with the waterboard than with the other techniques, bringing into question the issue of risk vs. gain.”

“We seem to have lost ground,” the deputy chief continued, writing that the practice “may poison the well.”

An official C.I.A. assessment of the interrogations concluded that Mohammed managed to conceal his most valuable information, despite being tortured. (The report was titled “Precious Truths, Surrounded by a Bodyguard of Lies.”) Another report, written after the waterboarding sessions had ended, said that interrogators “remain[ed] highly suspicious that KSM is withholding, exaggerating, misdirecting, or outright fabricating information” on weapons of mass destruction. “Pretend cooperation,’’ another report said. “May never be forthcoming or honest,” said another.


Maybe they water boarded him all those times because he was a murdering psychopath. I think that water boarding probably should not be used except in very extreme cases however . When interrogation fails and you have a person Like KSM, not just your average burglary suspect, but someone who held the keys potentially to an entire terrorist organization.

All terrorists with blood on their hands deserve to be tortured. I see no reason to spare them. If it saves just one life it's justified.


You understand that they feel the same way.

Payback is a bitch.

It would be a lot easier to force the bureaucrats to comply with the Constitution by ceasing and desisting from intervening in the internal affairs of other nations.


.
 
Waterboarding worked so well and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's story was so fascinating they wanted to hear it 183 times. Can't of any other reason they waterboarded him 183 times, can you?

I'm leaning towards a moral judgement that the so-called "civilized" westerners who participated in any torture sessions of anybody are morally more culpable than any of their victims, especially the medical personnel, whatever the uncharged, unconvicted victims were accused of.

  • The purpose of the waterboarding appears to have been to bring Mohammed as close as possible to death without actually killing him. As one C.I.A. medical officer who presided over the torture wrote, “In the new technique we are basically doing a series of near drownings.”
  • Mohammed was spirited to secret C.I.A. prisons in Afghanistan and Poland, where his interrogators went straight to brutality: slamming him against a wall (a practice known as “walling”), depriving him of sleep (at one point for more than a week), forcing him to stand or crouch in painful positions, stripping him during questioning, and engaging in a bizarre practice called “rectal rehydration.”
  • .....so much water was forced into Mohammed that his “abdomen was somewhat distended and he expressed water when the abdomen was pressed,”... One of the medical officers present said that, even though Mohammed was vomiting during the sessions, his “gastric contents” had become so diluted that he was “not concerned about regurgitated gastric acid damaging KSM’s esophagus.” Instead, the medical officer said, he was worried that Mohammed had been filled with so much water that there was a danger that the electrolytes in his blood had become dangerously diluted; the (medical) officer requested that C.I.A. interrogators use salted water during the waterboarding sessions.
  • The Senate report, which drew almost entirely on the C.I.A.’s internal communications, makes a convincing case that while the interrogation of Mohammed produced some valuable information, the interrogators never got what they wanted. No information provided by Mohammed led directly to the capture of a terrorist or the disruption of a terrorist plot.
  • “Overall view seems to be” that waterboarding “is not working in gaining KSM[’s] compliance,” one officer wrote....Duh....after 183 attempts they finally figured that out....
  • “Against KSM it has proven ineffective,” the deputy chief of the C.I.A. interrogation program wrote. “The potential for physical harm is far greater with the waterboard than with the other techniques, bringing into question the issue of risk vs. gain.”
  • “We seem to have lost ground,” the deputy chief continued, writing that the practice “may poison the well.”
  • An official C.I.A. assessment of the interrogations concluded that Mohammed managed to conceal his most valuable information, despite being tortured. (The report was titled “Precious Truths, Surrounded by a Bodyguard of Lies.”)


NEWS DESK
DECEMBER 31, 2014
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the C.I.A.
BY DEXTER FILKINS
Undated photo of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.CREDITPHOTOGRAPH: AP
“I M W KSM.”

So went the electrifying text message received by a C.I.A. operative in Islamabad, Pakistan, in February of 2003, sent by a mysterious man known as Asset X. The note confirmed what Asset X, whose real identity is an official secret, had been telling his C.I.A. handlers for months: that he could lead them to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, a senior Al Qaeda leader and the suspected mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. K.S.M., as he later came to be known in the West, was still at large, and the C.I.A. wanted him almost as badly as they wanted Osama bin Laden.

Within hours of the operative receiving the text message, C.I.A. and Pakistani intelligence officers followed Asset X’s lead, swooped into the compound where Mohammed was living, and captured him. The takedown of Mohammed had almost fallen apart several times, thanks to C.I.A. mismanagement of Asset X. Just as remarkable is how his capture was later used to justify the most brutal aspects of the C.I.A.’s special interrogation program that was put in place after the 9/11 attacks.


Soon after his capture in Rawalpindi, on March 1, 2003, Mohammed was spirited to secret C.I.A. prisons in Afghanistan and Poland, where his interrogators went straight to brutality: slamming him against a wall (a practice known as “walling”), depriving him of sleep (at one point for more than a week), forcing him to stand or crouch in painful positions, stripping him during questioning, and engaging in a bizarre practice called “rectal rehydration.” (According to a C.I.A. document, it was supposed to help “clear a person’s head.”) In Poland, the interrogators subjected Mohammed to waterboarding, a form of torture that makes a person believe he is drowning, at least a hundred and eighty-three times.

  • The details of Mohammed’s interrogation, described in the report issued earlier this month by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, make for grim, even sickening reading. During Mohammed’s waterboarding sessions, C.I.A. officers reported that he “yelled and twisted,” “seemed to lose control,” and became “somewhat frantic.” The purpose of the waterboarding appears to have been to bring Mohammed as close as possible to death without actually killing him. As one C.I.A. medical officer who presided over the torture wrote, “In the new technique we are basically doing a series of near drownings.”

On March 12, 2003, during a waterboarding session, so much water was forced into Mohammed that his “abdomen was somewhat distended and he expressed water when the abdomen was pressed,” the Senate report says, quoting from a C.I.A. cable. One of the medical officers present said that, even though Mohammed was vomiting during the sessions, his “gastric contents” had become so diluted that he was “not concerned about regurgitated gastric acid damaging KSM’s esophagus.” Instead, the medical officer said, he was worried that Mohammed had been filled with so much water that there was a danger that the electrolytes in his blood had become dangerously diluted; the officer requested that C.I.A. interrogators use salted water during the waterboarding sessions.

The Senate report, which drew almost entirely on the C.I.A.’s internal communications, makes a convincing case that while the interrogation of Mohammed produced some valuable information, the interrogators never got what they wanted. No information provided by Mohammed led directly to the capture of a terrorist or the disruption of a terrorist plot.

Here are some quotations from C.I.A. records filed during Mohammed’s interrogation:

“Overall view seems to be” that waterboarding “is not working in gaining KSM[’s] compliance,” one officer wrote.

“Against KSM it has proven ineffective,” the deputy chief of the C.I.A. interrogation program wrote. “The potential for physical harm is far greater with the waterboard than with the other techniques, bringing into question the issue of risk vs. gain.”

“We seem to have lost ground,” the deputy chief continued, writing that the practice “may poison the well.”

An official C.I.A. assessment of the interrogations concluded that Mohammed managed to conceal his most valuable information, despite being tortured. (The report was titled “Precious Truths, Surrounded by a Bodyguard of Lies.”) Another report, written after the waterboarding sessions had ended, said that interrogators “remain[ed] highly suspicious that KSM is withholding, exaggerating, misdirecting, or outright fabricating information” on weapons of mass destruction. “Pretend cooperation,’’ another report said. “May never be forthcoming or honest,” said another.


Maybe they water boarded him all those times because he was a murdering psychopath. I think that water boarding probably should not be used except in very extreme cases however . When interrogation fails and you have a person Like KSM, not just your average burglary suspect, but someone who held the keys potentially to an entire terrorist organization.

All terrorists with blood on their hands deserve to be tortured. I see no reason to spare them. If it saves just one life it's justified.


You understand that they feel the same way.

Payback is a bitch.

It would be a lot easier to force the bureaucrats to comply with the Constitution by ceasing and desisting from intervening in the internal affairs of other nations.


.
Who cares how they feel? They're bloodthirsty savages. They're feelings aren't important. Doing whatever it takes to defang them is the only thing that matters.
 
Waterboarding worked so well and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's story was so fascinating they wanted to hear it 183 times. Can't of any other reason they waterboarded him 183 times, can you?

I'm leaning towards a moral judgement that the so-called "civilized" westerners who participated in any torture sessions of anybody are morally more culpable than any of their victims, especially the medical personnel, whatever the uncharged, unconvicted victims were accused of.

  • The purpose of the waterboarding appears to have been to bring Mohammed as close as possible to death without actually killing him. As one C.I.A. medical officer who presided over the torture wrote, “In the new technique we are basically doing a series of near drownings.”
  • Mohammed was spirited to secret C.I.A. prisons in Afghanistan and Poland, where his interrogators went straight to brutality: slamming him against a wall (a practice known as “walling”), depriving him of sleep (at one point for more than a week), forcing him to stand or crouch in painful positions, stripping him during questioning, and engaging in a bizarre practice called “rectal rehydration.”
  • .....so much water was forced into Mohammed that his “abdomen was somewhat distended and he expressed water when the abdomen was pressed,”... One of the medical officers present said that, even though Mohammed was vomiting during the sessions, his “gastric contents” had become so diluted that he was “not concerned about regurgitated gastric acid damaging KSM’s esophagus.” Instead, the medical officer said, he was worried that Mohammed had been filled with so much water that there was a danger that the electrolytes in his blood had become dangerously diluted; the (medical) officer requested that C.I.A. interrogators use salted water during the waterboarding sessions.
  • The Senate report, which drew almost entirely on the C.I.A.’s internal communications, makes a convincing case that while the interrogation of Mohammed produced some valuable information, the interrogators never got what they wanted. No information provided by Mohammed led directly to the capture of a terrorist or the disruption of a terrorist plot.
  • “Overall view seems to be” that waterboarding “is not working in gaining KSM[’s] compliance,” one officer wrote....Duh....after 183 attempts they finally figured that out....
  • “Against KSM it has proven ineffective,” the deputy chief of the C.I.A. interrogation program wrote. “The potential for physical harm is far greater with the waterboard than with the other techniques, bringing into question the issue of risk vs. gain.”
  • “We seem to have lost ground,” the deputy chief continued, writing that the practice “may poison the well.”
  • An official C.I.A. assessment of the interrogations concluded that Mohammed managed to conceal his most valuable information, despite being tortured. (The report was titled “Precious Truths, Surrounded by a Bodyguard of Lies.”)


NEWS DESK
DECEMBER 31, 2014
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the C.I.A.
BY DEXTER FILKINS
Undated photo of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.CREDITPHOTOGRAPH: AP
“I M W KSM.”

So went the electrifying text message received by a C.I.A. operative in Islamabad, Pakistan, in February of 2003, sent by a mysterious man known as Asset X. The note confirmed what Asset X, whose real identity is an official secret, had been telling his C.I.A. handlers for months: that he could lead them to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, a senior Al Qaeda leader and the suspected mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. K.S.M., as he later came to be known in the West, was still at large, and the C.I.A. wanted him almost as badly as they wanted Osama bin Laden.

Within hours of the operative receiving the text message, C.I.A. and Pakistani intelligence officers followed Asset X’s lead, swooped into the compound where Mohammed was living, and captured him. The takedown of Mohammed had almost fallen apart several times, thanks to C.I.A. mismanagement of Asset X. Just as remarkable is how his capture was later used to justify the most brutal aspects of the C.I.A.’s special interrogation program that was put in place after the 9/11 attacks.


Soon after his capture in Rawalpindi, on March 1, 2003, Mohammed was spirited to secret C.I.A. prisons in Afghanistan and Poland, where his interrogators went straight to brutality: slamming him against a wall (a practice known as “walling”), depriving him of sleep (at one point for more than a week), forcing him to stand or crouch in painful positions, stripping him during questioning, and engaging in a bizarre practice called “rectal rehydration.” (According to a C.I.A. document, it was supposed to help “clear a person’s head.”) In Poland, the interrogators subjected Mohammed to waterboarding, a form of torture that makes a person believe he is drowning, at least a hundred and eighty-three times.

  • The details of Mohammed’s interrogation, described in the report issued earlier this month by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, make for grim, even sickening reading. During Mohammed’s waterboarding sessions, C.I.A. officers reported that he “yelled and twisted,” “seemed to lose control,” and became “somewhat frantic.” The purpose of the waterboarding appears to have been to bring Mohammed as close as possible to death without actually killing him. As one C.I.A. medical officer who presided over the torture wrote, “In the new technique we are basically doing a series of near drownings.”

On March 12, 2003, during a waterboarding session, so much water was forced into Mohammed that his “abdomen was somewhat distended and he expressed water when the abdomen was pressed,” the Senate report says, quoting from a C.I.A. cable. One of the medical officers present said that, even though Mohammed was vomiting during the sessions, his “gastric contents” had become so diluted that he was “not concerned about regurgitated gastric acid damaging KSM’s esophagus.” Instead, the medical officer said, he was worried that Mohammed had been filled with so much water that there was a danger that the electrolytes in his blood had become dangerously diluted; the officer requested that C.I.A. interrogators use salted water during the waterboarding sessions.

The Senate report, which drew almost entirely on the C.I.A.’s internal communications, makes a convincing case that while the interrogation of Mohammed produced some valuable information, the interrogators never got what they wanted. No information provided by Mohammed led directly to the capture of a terrorist or the disruption of a terrorist plot.

Here are some quotations from C.I.A. records filed during Mohammed’s interrogation:

“Overall view seems to be” that waterboarding “is not working in gaining KSM[’s] compliance,” one officer wrote.

“Against KSM it has proven ineffective,” the deputy chief of the C.I.A. interrogation program wrote. “The potential for physical harm is far greater with the waterboard than with the other techniques, bringing into question the issue of risk vs. gain.”

“We seem to have lost ground,” the deputy chief continued, writing that the practice “may poison the well.”

An official C.I.A. assessment of the interrogations concluded that Mohammed managed to conceal his most valuable information, despite being tortured. (The report was titled “Precious Truths, Surrounded by a Bodyguard of Lies.”) Another report, written after the waterboarding sessions had ended, said that interrogators “remain[ed] highly suspicious that KSM is withholding, exaggerating, misdirecting, or outright fabricating information” on weapons of mass destruction. “Pretend cooperation,’’ another report said. “May never be forthcoming or honest,” said another.


Maybe they water boarded him all those times because he was a murdering psychopath. I think that water boarding probably should not be used except in very extreme cases however . When interrogation fails and you have a person Like KSM, not just your average burglary suspect, but someone who held the keys potentially to an entire terrorist organization.

All terrorists with blood on their hands deserve to be tortured. I see no reason to spare them. If it saves just one life it's justified.


You understand that they feel the same way.

Payback is a bitch.

It would be a lot easier to force the bureaucrats to comply with the Constitution by ceasing and desisting from intervening in the internal affairs of other nations.


.
Who cares how they feel? They're bloodthirsty savages. They're feelings aren't important. Doing whatever it takes to defang them is the only thing that matters.

Yes, they are blood thirsty savages, but what they feel about the process they should be subjected to is part oft the puzzle in unlocking their minds to spill secrets.

Their feelings are important for only that reason.
 
"How Many Lives Would Have Been Saved Had we Tortured the Captured Paris Terrorist?"

How many rightwing threads are going to fail because they’re loaded questions fallacies – this thread being one of many examples.

You just committed the fallacy called, I got nothing but I'm going to post anyway ...
 
You would tell them anything - everything they want to hear. Truth is irrelevant, only the cessation of pain.

Which is why they tell the Truh instead of more lies, as they do not want to go through a repeat of the pain, dude.

You argue against you own position and fail to recognize it. Why? Are you running from something you failed to do?
*sigh*

I have already established with clear evidence why you are incorrect. I am not arguing against my own position - I am bringing up why truth is not gained or is too heavily mixed with falsehoods in a torture session.
No, yo have established nothing, nor have you rebutted the examples of the successful use of torture as well.

You are still in the hole pretending to have talked you way out instead of doing any actual climbing.

Torture works. It worked for Wallsingham, it worked for Cortez, it worked for the Vietnamese and it will work for us as well, no matter how many times you claim to have proven it useless.

roflmao

I must have missed the part where he proved it useless. Other than bleating that it doesn't work, how did he do that?

That is the point; he did not do that whatsoever. He declared victory and walked away patting himself on the back.
 
Waterboarding worked so well and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's story was so fascinating they wanted to hear it 183 times. Can't of any other reason they waterboarded him 183 times, can you?

I'm leaning towards a moral judgement that the so-called "civilized" westerners who participated in any torture sessions of anybody are morally more culpable than any of their victims, especially the medical personnel, whatever the uncharged, unconvicted victims were accused of.

  • The purpose of the waterboarding appears to have been to bring Mohammed as close as possible to death without actually killing him. As one C.I.A. medical officer who presided over the torture wrote, “In the new technique we are basically doing a series of near drownings.”
  • Mohammed was spirited to secret C.I.A. prisons in Afghanistan and Poland, where his interrogators went straight to brutality: slamming him against a wall (a practice known as “walling”), depriving him of sleep (at one point for more than a week), forcing him to stand or crouch in painful positions, stripping him during questioning, and engaging in a bizarre practice called “rectal rehydration.”
  • .....so much water was forced into Mohammed that his “abdomen was somewhat distended and he expressed water when the abdomen was pressed,”... One of the medical officers present said that, even though Mohammed was vomiting during the sessions, his “gastric contents” had become so diluted that he was “not concerned about regurgitated gastric acid damaging KSM’s esophagus.” Instead, the medical officer said, he was worried that Mohammed had been filled with so much water that there was a danger that the electrolytes in his blood had become dangerously diluted; the (medical) officer requested that C.I.A. interrogators use salted water during the waterboarding sessions.
  • The Senate report, which drew almost entirely on the C.I.A.’s internal communications, makes a convincing case that while the interrogation of Mohammed produced some valuable information, the interrogators never got what they wanted. No information provided by Mohammed led directly to the capture of a terrorist or the disruption of a terrorist plot.
  • “Overall view seems to be” that waterboarding “is not working in gaining KSM[’s] compliance,” one officer wrote....Duh....after 183 attempts they finally figured that out....
  • “Against KSM it has proven ineffective,” the deputy chief of the C.I.A. interrogation program wrote. “The potential for physical harm is far greater with the waterboard than with the other techniques, bringing into question the issue of risk vs. gain.”
  • “We seem to have lost ground,” the deputy chief continued, writing that the practice “may poison the well.”
  • An official C.I.A. assessment of the interrogations concluded that Mohammed managed to conceal his most valuable information, despite being tortured. (The report was titled “Precious Truths, Surrounded by a Bodyguard of Lies.”)


NEWS DESK
DECEMBER 31, 2014
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the C.I.A.
BY DEXTER FILKINS
Undated photo of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.CREDITPHOTOGRAPH: AP
“I M W KSM.”

So went the electrifying text message received by a C.I.A. operative in Islamabad, Pakistan, in February of 2003, sent by a mysterious man known as Asset X. The note confirmed what Asset X, whose real identity is an official secret, had been telling his C.I.A. handlers for months: that he could lead them to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, a senior Al Qaeda leader and the suspected mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. K.S.M., as he later came to be known in the West, was still at large, and the C.I.A. wanted him almost as badly as they wanted Osama bin Laden.

Within hours of the operative receiving the text message, C.I.A. and Pakistani intelligence officers followed Asset X’s lead, swooped into the compound where Mohammed was living, and captured him. The takedown of Mohammed had almost fallen apart several times, thanks to C.I.A. mismanagement of Asset X. Just as remarkable is how his capture was later used to justify the most brutal aspects of the C.I.A.’s special interrogation program that was put in place after the 9/11 attacks.


Soon after his capture in Rawalpindi, on March 1, 2003, Mohammed was spirited to secret C.I.A. prisons in Afghanistan and Poland, where his interrogators went straight to brutality: slamming him against a wall (a practice known as “walling”), depriving him of sleep (at one point for more than a week), forcing him to stand or crouch in painful positions, stripping him during questioning, and engaging in a bizarre practice called “rectal rehydration.” (According to a C.I.A. document, it was supposed to help “clear a person’s head.”) In Poland, the interrogators subjected Mohammed to waterboarding, a form of torture that makes a person believe he is drowning, at least a hundred and eighty-three times.

  • The details of Mohammed’s interrogation, described in the report issued earlier this month by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, make for grim, even sickening reading. During Mohammed’s waterboarding sessions, C.I.A. officers reported that he “yelled and twisted,” “seemed to lose control,” and became “somewhat frantic.” The purpose of the waterboarding appears to have been to bring Mohammed as close as possible to death without actually killing him. As one C.I.A. medical officer who presided over the torture wrote, “In the new technique we are basically doing a series of near drownings.”

On March 12, 2003, during a waterboarding session, so much water was forced into Mohammed that his “abdomen was somewhat distended and he expressed water when the abdomen was pressed,” the Senate report says, quoting from a C.I.A. cable. One of the medical officers present said that, even though Mohammed was vomiting during the sessions, his “gastric contents” had become so diluted that he was “not concerned about regurgitated gastric acid damaging KSM’s esophagus.” Instead, the medical officer said, he was worried that Mohammed had been filled with so much water that there was a danger that the electrolytes in his blood had become dangerously diluted; the officer requested that C.I.A. interrogators use salted water during the waterboarding sessions.

The Senate report, which drew almost entirely on the C.I.A.’s internal communications, makes a convincing case that while the interrogation of Mohammed produced some valuable information, the interrogators never got what they wanted. No information provided by Mohammed led directly to the capture of a terrorist or the disruption of a terrorist plot.

Here are some quotations from C.I.A. records filed during Mohammed’s interrogation:

“Overall view seems to be” that waterboarding “is not working in gaining KSM[’s] compliance,” one officer wrote.

“Against KSM it has proven ineffective,” the deputy chief of the C.I.A. interrogation program wrote. “The potential for physical harm is far greater with the waterboard than with the other techniques, bringing into question the issue of risk vs. gain.”

“We seem to have lost ground,” the deputy chief continued, writing that the practice “may poison the well.”

An official C.I.A. assessment of the interrogations concluded that Mohammed managed to conceal his most valuable information, despite being tortured. (The report was titled “Precious Truths, Surrounded by a Bodyguard of Lies.”) Another report, written after the waterboarding sessions had ended, said that interrogators “remain[ed] highly suspicious that KSM is withholding, exaggerating, misdirecting, or outright fabricating information” on weapons of mass destruction. “Pretend cooperation,’’ another report said. “May never be forthcoming or honest,” said another.


Maybe they water boarded him all those times because he was a murdering psychopath. I think that water boarding probably should not be used except in very extreme cases however . When interrogation fails and you have a person Like KSM, not just your average burglary suspect, but someone who held the keys potentially to an entire terrorist organization.

All terrorists with blood on their hands deserve to be tortured. I see no reason to spare them. If it saves just one life it's justified.



Waterboarding worked so well and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's story was so fascinating they wanted to hear it 183 times. Can't of any other reason they waterboarded him 183 times, can you?

I'm leaning towards a moral judgement that the so-called "civilized" westerners who participated in any torture sessions of anybody are morally more culpable than any of their victims, especially the medical personnel, whatever the uncharged, unconvicted victims were accused of.

  • The purpose of the waterboarding appears to have been to bring Mohammed as close as possible to death without actually killing him. As one C.I.A. medical officer who presided over the torture wrote, “In the new technique we are basically doing a series of near drownings.”
  • Mohammed was spirited to secret C.I.A. prisons in Afghanistan and Poland, where his interrogators went straight to brutality: slamming him against a wall (a practice known as “walling”), depriving him of sleep (at one point for more than a week), forcing him to stand or crouch in painful positions, stripping him during questioning, and engaging in a bizarre practice called “rectal rehydration.”
  • .....so much water was forced into Mohammed that his “abdomen was somewhat distended and he expressed water when the abdomen was pressed,”... One of the medical officers present said that, even though Mohammed was vomiting during the sessions, his “gastric contents” had become so diluted that he was “not concerned about regurgitated gastric acid damaging KSM’s esophagus.” Instead, the medical officer said, he was worried that Mohammed had been filled with so much water that there was a danger that the electrolytes in his blood had become dangerously diluted; the (medical) officer requested that C.I.A. interrogators use salted water during the waterboarding sessions.
  • The Senate report, which drew almost entirely on the C.I.A.’s internal communications, makes a convincing case that while the interrogation of Mohammed produced some valuable information, the interrogators never got what they wanted. No information provided by Mohammed led directly to the capture of a terrorist or the disruption of a terrorist plot.
  • “Overall view seems to be” that waterboarding “is not working in gaining KSM[’s] compliance,” one officer wrote....Duh....after 183 attempts they finally figured that out....
  • “Against KSM it has proven ineffective,” the deputy chief of the C.I.A. interrogation program wrote. “The potential for physical harm is far greater with the waterboard than with the other techniques, bringing into question the issue of risk vs. gain.”
  • “We seem to have lost ground,” the deputy chief continued, writing that the practice “may poison the well.”
  • An official C.I.A. assessment of the interrogations concluded that Mohammed managed to conceal his most valuable information, despite being tortured. (The report was titled “Precious Truths, Surrounded by a Bodyguard of Lies.”)


NEWS DESK
DECEMBER 31, 2014
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the C.I.A.
BY DEXTER FILKINS
Undated photo of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.CREDITPHOTOGRAPH: AP
“I M W KSM.”

So went the electrifying text message received by a C.I.A. operative in Islamabad, Pakistan, in February of 2003, sent by a mysterious man known as Asset X. The note confirmed what Asset X, whose real identity is an official secret, had been telling his C.I.A. handlers for months: that he could lead them to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, a senior Al Qaeda leader and the suspected mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. K.S.M., as he later came to be known in the West, was still at large, and the C.I.A. wanted him almost as badly as they wanted Osama bin Laden.

Within hours of the operative receiving the text message, C.I.A. and Pakistani intelligence officers followed Asset X’s lead, swooped into the compound where Mohammed was living, and captured him. The takedown of Mohammed had almost fallen apart several times, thanks to C.I.A. mismanagement of Asset X. Just as remarkable is how his capture was later used to justify the most brutal aspects of the C.I.A.’s special interrogation program that was put in place after the 9/11 attacks.


Soon after his capture in Rawalpindi, on March 1, 2003, Mohammed was spirited to secret C.I.A. prisons in Afghanistan and Poland, where his interrogators went straight to brutality: slamming him against a wall (a practice known as “walling”), depriving him of sleep (at one point for more than a week), forcing him to stand or crouch in painful positions, stripping him during questioning, and engaging in a bizarre practice called “rectal rehydration.” (According to a C.I.A. document, it was supposed to help “clear a person’s head.”) In Poland, the interrogators subjected Mohammed to waterboarding, a form of torture that makes a person believe he is drowning, at least a hundred and eighty-three times.

  • The details of Mohammed’s interrogation, described in the report issued earlier this month by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, make for grim, even sickening reading. During Mohammed’s waterboarding sessions, C.I.A. officers reported that he “yelled and twisted,” “seemed to lose control,” and became “somewhat frantic.” The purpose of the waterboarding appears to have been to bring Mohammed as close as possible to death without actually killing him. As one C.I.A. medical officer who presided over the torture wrote, “In the new technique we are basically doing a series of near drownings.”

On March 12, 2003, during a waterboarding session, so much water was forced into Mohammed that his “abdomen was somewhat distended and he expressed water when the abdomen was pressed,” the Senate report says, quoting from a C.I.A. cable. One of the medical officers present said that, even though Mohammed was vomiting during the sessions, his “gastric contents” had become so diluted that he was “not concerned about regurgitated gastric acid damaging KSM’s esophagus.” Instead, the medical officer said, he was worried that Mohammed had been filled with so much water that there was a danger that the electrolytes in his blood had become dangerously diluted; the officer requested that C.I.A. interrogators use salted water during the waterboarding sessions.

The Senate report, which drew almost entirely on the C.I.A.’s internal communications, makes a convincing case that while the interrogation of Mohammed produced some valuable information, the interrogators never got what they wanted. No information provided by Mohammed led directly to the capture of a terrorist or the disruption of a terrorist plot.

Here are some quotations from C.I.A. records filed during Mohammed’s interrogation:

“Overall view seems to be” that waterboarding “is not working in gaining KSM[’s] compliance,” one officer wrote.

“Against KSM it has proven ineffective,” the deputy chief of the C.I.A. interrogation program wrote. “The potential for physical harm is far greater with the waterboard than with the other techniques, bringing into question the issue of risk vs. gain.”

“We seem to have lost ground,” the deputy chief continued, writing that the practice “may poison the well.”

An official C.I.A. assessment of the interrogations concluded that Mohammed managed to conceal his most valuable information, despite being tortured. (The report was titled “Precious Truths, Surrounded by a Bodyguard of Lies.”) Another report, written after the waterboarding sessions had ended, said that interrogators “remain[ed] highly suspicious that KSM is withholding, exaggerating, misdirecting, or outright fabricating information” on weapons of mass destruction. “Pretend cooperation,’’ another report said. “May never be forthcoming or honest,” said another.


Maybe they water boarded him all those times because he was a murdering psychopath. I think that water boarding probably should not be used except in very extreme cases however . When interrogation fails and you have a person Like KSM, not just your average burglary suspect, but someone who held the keys potentially to an entire terrorist organization.

All terrorists with blood on their hands deserve to be tortured. I see no reason to spare them. If it saves just one life it's justified.


You understand that they feel the same way.

Payback is a bitch.

It would be a lot easier to force the bureaucrats to comply with the Constitution by ceasing and desisting from intervening in the internal affairs of other nations.


.
Who cares how they feel? They're bloodthirsty savages. They're feelings aren't important. Doing whatever it takes to defang them is the only thing that matters.


My concepts of "morality" were heavily influenced by the "brainwashing" of American cultural input while "growing up". I wonder what yours are the result of.
 
Waterboarding worked so well and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's story was so fascinating they wanted to hear it 183 times. Can't of any other reason they waterboarded him 183 times, can you?

I'm leaning towards a moral judgement that the so-called "civilized" westerners who participated in any torture sessions of anybody are morally more culpable than any of their victims, especially the medical personnel, whatever the uncharged, unconvicted victims were accused of.

  • The purpose of the waterboarding appears to have been to bring Mohammed as close as possible to death without actually killing him. As one C.I.A. medical officer who presided over the torture wrote, “In the new technique we are basically doing a series of near drownings.”
  • Mohammed was spirited to secret C.I.A. prisons in Afghanistan and Poland, where his interrogators went straight to brutality: slamming him against a wall (a practice known as “walling”), depriving him of sleep (at one point for more than a week), forcing him to stand or crouch in painful positions, stripping him during questioning, and engaging in a bizarre practice called “rectal rehydration.”
  • .....so much water was forced into Mohammed that his “abdomen was somewhat distended and he expressed water when the abdomen was pressed,”... One of the medical officers present said that, even though Mohammed was vomiting during the sessions, his “gastric contents” had become so diluted that he was “not concerned about regurgitated gastric acid damaging KSM’s esophagus.” Instead, the medical officer said, he was worried that Mohammed had been filled with so much water that there was a danger that the electrolytes in his blood had become dangerously diluted; the (medical) officer requested that C.I.A. interrogators use salted water during the waterboarding sessions.
  • The Senate report, which drew almost entirely on the C.I.A.’s internal communications, makes a convincing case that while the interrogation of Mohammed produced some valuable information, the interrogators never got what they wanted. No information provided by Mohammed led directly to the capture of a terrorist or the disruption of a terrorist plot.
  • “Overall view seems to be” that waterboarding “is not working in gaining KSM[’s] compliance,” one officer wrote....Duh....after 183 attempts they finally figured that out....
  • “Against KSM it has proven ineffective,” the deputy chief of the C.I.A. interrogation program wrote. “The potential for physical harm is far greater with the waterboard than with the other techniques, bringing into question the issue of risk vs. gain.”
  • “We seem to have lost ground,” the deputy chief continued, writing that the practice “may poison the well.”
  • An official C.I.A. assessment of the interrogations concluded that Mohammed managed to conceal his most valuable information, despite being tortured. (The report was titled “Precious Truths, Surrounded by a Bodyguard of Lies.”)


NEWS DESK
DECEMBER 31, 2014
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the C.I.A.
BY DEXTER FILKINS
Undated photo of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.CREDITPHOTOGRAPH: AP
“I M W KSM.”

So went the electrifying text message received by a C.I.A. operative in Islamabad, Pakistan, in February of 2003, sent by a mysterious man known as Asset X. The note confirmed what Asset X, whose real identity is an official secret, had been telling his C.I.A. handlers for months: that he could lead them to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, a senior Al Qaeda leader and the suspected mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. K.S.M., as he later came to be known in the West, was still at large, and the C.I.A. wanted him almost as badly as they wanted Osama bin Laden.

Within hours of the operative receiving the text message, C.I.A. and Pakistani intelligence officers followed Asset X’s lead, swooped into the compound where Mohammed was living, and captured him. The takedown of Mohammed had almost fallen apart several times, thanks to C.I.A. mismanagement of Asset X. Just as remarkable is how his capture was later used to justify the most brutal aspects of the C.I.A.’s special interrogation program that was put in place after the 9/11 attacks.


Soon after his capture in Rawalpindi, on March 1, 2003, Mohammed was spirited to secret C.I.A. prisons in Afghanistan and Poland, where his interrogators went straight to brutality: slamming him against a wall (a practice known as “walling”), depriving him of sleep (at one point for more than a week), forcing him to stand or crouch in painful positions, stripping him during questioning, and engaging in a bizarre practice called “rectal rehydration.” (According to a C.I.A. document, it was supposed to help “clear a person’s head.”) In Poland, the interrogators subjected Mohammed to waterboarding, a form of torture that makes a person believe he is drowning, at least a hundred and eighty-three times.

  • The details of Mohammed’s interrogation, described in the report issued earlier this month by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, make for grim, even sickening reading. During Mohammed’s waterboarding sessions, C.I.A. officers reported that he “yelled and twisted,” “seemed to lose control,” and became “somewhat frantic.” The purpose of the waterboarding appears to have been to bring Mohammed as close as possible to death without actually killing him. As one C.I.A. medical officer who presided over the torture wrote, “In the new technique we are basically doing a series of near drownings.”

On March 12, 2003, during a waterboarding session, so much water was forced into Mohammed that his “abdomen was somewhat distended and he expressed water when the abdomen was pressed,” the Senate report says, quoting from a C.I.A. cable. One of the medical officers present said that, even though Mohammed was vomiting during the sessions, his “gastric contents” had become so diluted that he was “not concerned about regurgitated gastric acid damaging KSM’s esophagus.” Instead, the medical officer said, he was worried that Mohammed had been filled with so much water that there was a danger that the electrolytes in his blood had become dangerously diluted; the officer requested that C.I.A. interrogators use salted water during the waterboarding sessions.

The Senate report, which drew almost entirely on the C.I.A.’s internal communications, makes a convincing case that while the interrogation of Mohammed produced some valuable information, the interrogators never got what they wanted. No information provided by Mohammed led directly to the capture of a terrorist or the disruption of a terrorist plot.

Here are some quotations from C.I.A. records filed during Mohammed’s interrogation:

“Overall view seems to be” that waterboarding “is not working in gaining KSM[’s] compliance,” one officer wrote.

“Against KSM it has proven ineffective,” the deputy chief of the C.I.A. interrogation program wrote. “The potential for physical harm is far greater with the waterboard than with the other techniques, bringing into question the issue of risk vs. gain.”

“We seem to have lost ground,” the deputy chief continued, writing that the practice “may poison the well.”

An official C.I.A. assessment of the interrogations concluded that Mohammed managed to conceal his most valuable information, despite being tortured. (The report was titled “Precious Truths, Surrounded by a Bodyguard of Lies.”) Another report, written after the waterboarding sessions had ended, said that interrogators “remain[ed] highly suspicious that KSM is withholding, exaggerating, misdirecting, or outright fabricating information” on weapons of mass destruction. “Pretend cooperation,’’ another report said. “May never be forthcoming or honest,” said another.


Maybe they water boarded him all those times because he was a murdering psychopath. I think that water boarding probably should not be used except in very extreme cases however . When interrogation fails and you have a person Like KSM, not just your average burglary suspect, but someone who held the keys potentially to an entire terrorist organization.

All terrorists with blood on their hands deserve to be tortured. I see no reason to spare them. If it saves just one life it's justified.



Waterboarding worked so well and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's story was so fascinating they wanted to hear it 183 times. Can't of any other reason they waterboarded him 183 times, can you?

I'm leaning towards a moral judgement that the so-called "civilized" westerners who participated in any torture sessions of anybody are morally more culpable than any of their victims, especially the medical personnel, whatever the uncharged, unconvicted victims were accused of.

  • The purpose of the waterboarding appears to have been to bring Mohammed as close as possible to death without actually killing him. As one C.I.A. medical officer who presided over the torture wrote, “In the new technique we are basically doing a series of near drownings.”
  • Mohammed was spirited to secret C.I.A. prisons in Afghanistan and Poland, where his interrogators went straight to brutality: slamming him against a wall (a practice known as “walling”), depriving him of sleep (at one point for more than a week), forcing him to stand or crouch in painful positions, stripping him during questioning, and engaging in a bizarre practice called “rectal rehydration.”
  • .....so much water was forced into Mohammed that his “abdomen was somewhat distended and he expressed water when the abdomen was pressed,”... One of the medical officers present said that, even though Mohammed was vomiting during the sessions, his “gastric contents” had become so diluted that he was “not concerned about regurgitated gastric acid damaging KSM’s esophagus.” Instead, the medical officer said, he was worried that Mohammed had been filled with so much water that there was a danger that the electrolytes in his blood had become dangerously diluted; the (medical) officer requested that C.I.A. interrogators use salted water during the waterboarding sessions.
  • The Senate report, which drew almost entirely on the C.I.A.’s internal communications, makes a convincing case that while the interrogation of Mohammed produced some valuable information, the interrogators never got what they wanted. No information provided by Mohammed led directly to the capture of a terrorist or the disruption of a terrorist plot.
  • “Overall view seems to be” that waterboarding “is not working in gaining KSM[’s] compliance,” one officer wrote....Duh....after 183 attempts they finally figured that out....
  • “Against KSM it has proven ineffective,” the deputy chief of the C.I.A. interrogation program wrote. “The potential for physical harm is far greater with the waterboard than with the other techniques, bringing into question the issue of risk vs. gain.”
  • “We seem to have lost ground,” the deputy chief continued, writing that the practice “may poison the well.”
  • An official C.I.A. assessment of the interrogations concluded that Mohammed managed to conceal his most valuable information, despite being tortured. (The report was titled “Precious Truths, Surrounded by a Bodyguard of Lies.”)


NEWS DESK
DECEMBER 31, 2014
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the C.I.A.
BY DEXTER FILKINS
Undated photo of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.CREDITPHOTOGRAPH: AP
“I M W KSM.”

So went the electrifying text message received by a C.I.A. operative in Islamabad, Pakistan, in February of 2003, sent by a mysterious man known as Asset X. The note confirmed what Asset X, whose real identity is an official secret, had been telling his C.I.A. handlers for months: that he could lead them to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, a senior Al Qaeda leader and the suspected mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. K.S.M., as he later came to be known in the West, was still at large, and the C.I.A. wanted him almost as badly as they wanted Osama bin Laden.

Within hours of the operative receiving the text message, C.I.A. and Pakistani intelligence officers followed Asset X’s lead, swooped into the compound where Mohammed was living, and captured him. The takedown of Mohammed had almost fallen apart several times, thanks to C.I.A. mismanagement of Asset X. Just as remarkable is how his capture was later used to justify the most brutal aspects of the C.I.A.’s special interrogation program that was put in place after the 9/11 attacks.


Soon after his capture in Rawalpindi, on March 1, 2003, Mohammed was spirited to secret C.I.A. prisons in Afghanistan and Poland, where his interrogators went straight to brutality: slamming him against a wall (a practice known as “walling”), depriving him of sleep (at one point for more than a week), forcing him to stand or crouch in painful positions, stripping him during questioning, and engaging in a bizarre practice called “rectal rehydration.” (According to a C.I.A. document, it was supposed to help “clear a person’s head.”) In Poland, the interrogators subjected Mohammed to waterboarding, a form of torture that makes a person believe he is drowning, at least a hundred and eighty-three times.

  • The details of Mohammed’s interrogation, described in the report issued earlier this month by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, make for grim, even sickening reading. During Mohammed’s waterboarding sessions, C.I.A. officers reported that he “yelled and twisted,” “seemed to lose control,” and became “somewhat frantic.” The purpose of the waterboarding appears to have been to bring Mohammed as close as possible to death without actually killing him. As one C.I.A. medical officer who presided over the torture wrote, “In the new technique we are basically doing a series of near drownings.”

On March 12, 2003, during a waterboarding session, so much water was forced into Mohammed that his “abdomen was somewhat distended and he expressed water when the abdomen was pressed,” the Senate report says, quoting from a C.I.A. cable. One of the medical officers present said that, even though Mohammed was vomiting during the sessions, his “gastric contents” had become so diluted that he was “not concerned about regurgitated gastric acid damaging KSM’s esophagus.” Instead, the medical officer said, he was worried that Mohammed had been filled with so much water that there was a danger that the electrolytes in his blood had become dangerously diluted; the officer requested that C.I.A. interrogators use salted water during the waterboarding sessions.

The Senate report, which drew almost entirely on the C.I.A.’s internal communications, makes a convincing case that while the interrogation of Mohammed produced some valuable information, the interrogators never got what they wanted. No information provided by Mohammed led directly to the capture of a terrorist or the disruption of a terrorist plot.

Here are some quotations from C.I.A. records filed during Mohammed’s interrogation:

“Overall view seems to be” that waterboarding “is not working in gaining KSM[’s] compliance,” one officer wrote.

“Against KSM it has proven ineffective,” the deputy chief of the C.I.A. interrogation program wrote. “The potential for physical harm is far greater with the waterboard than with the other techniques, bringing into question the issue of risk vs. gain.”

“We seem to have lost ground,” the deputy chief continued, writing that the practice “may poison the well.”

An official C.I.A. assessment of the interrogations concluded that Mohammed managed to conceal his most valuable information, despite being tortured. (The report was titled “Precious Truths, Surrounded by a Bodyguard of Lies.”) Another report, written after the waterboarding sessions had ended, said that interrogators “remain[ed] highly suspicious that KSM is withholding, exaggerating, misdirecting, or outright fabricating information” on weapons of mass destruction. “Pretend cooperation,’’ another report said. “May never be forthcoming or honest,” said another.


Maybe they water boarded him all those times because he was a murdering psychopath. I think that water boarding probably should not be used except in very extreme cases however . When interrogation fails and you have a person Like KSM, not just your average burglary suspect, but someone who held the keys potentially to an entire terrorist organization.

All terrorists with blood on their hands deserve to be tortured. I see no reason to spare them. If it saves just one life it's justified.


You understand that they feel the same way.

Payback is a bitch.

It would be a lot easier to force the bureaucrats to comply with the Constitution by ceasing and desisting from intervening in the internal affairs of other nations.


.
Who cares how they feel? They're bloodthirsty savages. They're feelings aren't important. Doing whatever it takes to defang them is the only thing that matters.


My concepts of "morality" were heavily influenced by the "brainwashing" of American cultural input while "growing up". I wonder what yours are the result of.

My conception of morality is based on simple logic. You don't owe anything to people who are trying to kill you, people who would cut off your head or cook you in an iron cage if given the chance. They aren't entitled to decent treatment.
 
Waterboarding worked so well and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's story was so fascinating they wanted to hear it 183 times. Can't of any other reason they waterboarded him 183 times, can you?

I'm leaning towards a moral judgement that the so-called "civilized" westerners who participated in any torture sessions of anybody are morally more culpable than any of their victims, especially the medical personnel, whatever the uncharged, unconvicted victims were accused of.

  • The purpose of the waterboarding appears to have been to bring Mohammed as close as possible to death without actually killing him. As one C.I.A. medical officer who presided over the torture wrote, “In the new technique we are basically doing a series of near drownings.”
  • Mohammed was spirited to secret C.I.A. prisons in Afghanistan and Poland, where his interrogators went straight to brutality: slamming him against a wall (a practice known as “walling”), depriving him of sleep (at one point for more than a week), forcing him to stand or crouch in painful positions, stripping him during questioning, and engaging in a bizarre practice called “rectal rehydration.”
  • .....so much water was forced into Mohammed that his “abdomen was somewhat distended and he expressed water when the abdomen was pressed,”... One of the medical officers present said that, even though Mohammed was vomiting during the sessions, his “gastric contents” had become so diluted that he was “not concerned about regurgitated gastric acid damaging KSM’s esophagus.” Instead, the medical officer said, he was worried that Mohammed had been filled with so much water that there was a danger that the electrolytes in his blood had become dangerously diluted; the (medical) officer requested that C.I.A. interrogators use salted water during the waterboarding sessions.
  • The Senate report, which drew almost entirely on the C.I.A.’s internal communications, makes a convincing case that while the interrogation of Mohammed produced some valuable information, the interrogators never got what they wanted. No information provided by Mohammed led directly to the capture of a terrorist or the disruption of a terrorist plot.
  • “Overall view seems to be” that waterboarding “is not working in gaining KSM[’s] compliance,” one officer wrote....Duh....after 183 attempts they finally figured that out....
  • “Against KSM it has proven ineffective,” the deputy chief of the C.I.A. interrogation program wrote. “The potential for physical harm is far greater with the waterboard than with the other techniques, bringing into question the issue of risk vs. gain.”
  • “We seem to have lost ground,” the deputy chief continued, writing that the practice “may poison the well.”
  • An official C.I.A. assessment of the interrogations concluded that Mohammed managed to conceal his most valuable information, despite being tortured. (The report was titled “Precious Truths, Surrounded by a Bodyguard of Lies.”)


NEWS DESK
DECEMBER 31, 2014
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the C.I.A.
BY DEXTER FILKINS
Undated photo of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.CREDITPHOTOGRAPH: AP
“I M W KSM.”

So went the electrifying text message received by a C.I.A. operative in Islamabad, Pakistan, in February of 2003, sent by a mysterious man known as Asset X. The note confirmed what Asset X, whose real identity is an official secret, had been telling his C.I.A. handlers for months: that he could lead them to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, a senior Al Qaeda leader and the suspected mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. K.S.M., as he later came to be known in the West, was still at large, and the C.I.A. wanted him almost as badly as they wanted Osama bin Laden.

Within hours of the operative receiving the text message, C.I.A. and Pakistani intelligence officers followed Asset X’s lead, swooped into the compound where Mohammed was living, and captured him. The takedown of Mohammed had almost fallen apart several times, thanks to C.I.A. mismanagement of Asset X. Just as remarkable is how his capture was later used to justify the most brutal aspects of the C.I.A.’s special interrogation program that was put in place after the 9/11 attacks.


Soon after his capture in Rawalpindi, on March 1, 2003, Mohammed was spirited to secret C.I.A. prisons in Afghanistan and Poland, where his interrogators went straight to brutality: slamming him against a wall (a practice known as “walling”), depriving him of sleep (at one point for more than a week), forcing him to stand or crouch in painful positions, stripping him during questioning, and engaging in a bizarre practice called “rectal rehydration.” (According to a C.I.A. document, it was supposed to help “clear a person’s head.”) In Poland, the interrogators subjected Mohammed to waterboarding, a form of torture that makes a person believe he is drowning, at least a hundred and eighty-three times.

  • The details of Mohammed’s interrogation, described in the report issued earlier this month by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, make for grim, even sickening reading. During Mohammed’s waterboarding sessions, C.I.A. officers reported that he “yelled and twisted,” “seemed to lose control,” and became “somewhat frantic.” The purpose of the waterboarding appears to have been to bring Mohammed as close as possible to death without actually killing him. As one C.I.A. medical officer who presided over the torture wrote, “In the new technique we are basically doing a series of near drownings.”

On March 12, 2003, during a waterboarding session, so much water was forced into Mohammed that his “abdomen was somewhat distended and he expressed water when the abdomen was pressed,” the Senate report says, quoting from a C.I.A. cable. One of the medical officers present said that, even though Mohammed was vomiting during the sessions, his “gastric contents” had become so diluted that he was “not concerned about regurgitated gastric acid damaging KSM’s esophagus.” Instead, the medical officer said, he was worried that Mohammed had been filled with so much water that there was a danger that the electrolytes in his blood had become dangerously diluted; the officer requested that C.I.A. interrogators use salted water during the waterboarding sessions.

The Senate report, which drew almost entirely on the C.I.A.’s internal communications, makes a convincing case that while the interrogation of Mohammed produced some valuable information, the interrogators never got what they wanted. No information provided by Mohammed led directly to the capture of a terrorist or the disruption of a terrorist plot.

Here are some quotations from C.I.A. records filed during Mohammed’s interrogation:

“Overall view seems to be” that waterboarding “is not working in gaining KSM[’s] compliance,” one officer wrote.

“Against KSM it has proven ineffective,” the deputy chief of the C.I.A. interrogation program wrote. “The potential for physical harm is far greater with the waterboard than with the other techniques, bringing into question the issue of risk vs. gain.”

“We seem to have lost ground,” the deputy chief continued, writing that the practice “may poison the well.”

An official C.I.A. assessment of the interrogations concluded that Mohammed managed to conceal his most valuable information, despite being tortured. (The report was titled “Precious Truths, Surrounded by a Bodyguard of Lies.”) Another report, written after the waterboarding sessions had ended, said that interrogators “remain[ed] highly suspicious that KSM is withholding, exaggerating, misdirecting, or outright fabricating information” on weapons of mass destruction. “Pretend cooperation,’’ another report said. “May never be forthcoming or honest,” said another.


Maybe they water boarded him all those times because he was a murdering psychopath. I think that water boarding probably should not be used except in very extreme cases however . When interrogation fails and you have a person Like KSM, not just your average burglary suspect, but someone who held the keys potentially to an entire terrorist organization.

All terrorists with blood on their hands deserve to be tortured. I see no reason to spare them. If it saves just one life it's justified.



Maybe they water boarded him all those times because he was a murdering psychopath. I think that water boarding probably should not be used except in very extreme cases however . When interrogation fails and you have a person Like KSM, not just your average burglary suspect, but someone who held the keys potentially to an entire terrorist organization.

All terrorists with blood on their hands deserve to be tortured. I see no reason to spare them. If it saves just one life it's justified.


You understand that they feel the same way.

Payback is a bitch.

It would be a lot easier to force the bureaucrats to comply with the Constitution by ceasing and desisting from intervening in the internal affairs of other nations.


.
Who cares how they feel? They're bloodthirsty savages. They're feelings aren't important. Doing whatever it takes to defang them is the only thing that matters.


My concepts of "morality" were heavily influenced by the "brainwashing" of American cultural input while "growing up". I wonder what yours are the result of.

My conception of morality is based on simple logic. You don't owe anything to people who are trying to kill you, people who would cut off your head or cook you in an iron cage if given the chance. They aren't entitled to decent treatment.


SCOTUS ruled a long time ago that Americans have a right to stand their ground IF IF IF IF the perpetrator was NOT PROVOKED


"A man assailed on his own grounds, without provocation, by a person armed with a deadly weapon and apparently seeking his life is not obliged to retreat, but may stand his ground and defend himself with such means as are within his control; and so long as there is no intent on his part to kill his antagonist, and no purpose of doing anything beyond what is necessary to save his own life, is not guilty of murder or manslaughter if death results to his antagonist from a blow given him under such circumstances."


Beard v. United States, 158 U.S. 550 (1895)


The US has provoked the Muslims on numerous
occasions , the first one

1- In 1949 , Harry S Truman threw 1.5 millions Muslim under the bus when it made them foreigners in their own land in exchange for a 2M contribution from Ben Gurion
 

Forum List

Back
Top