"There is a lot of talk coming from CitiGroup about how Dodd-Frank isn't perfect, So let me say this to anyone listening at Citi —I agree with you. Dodd-Frank isn't perfect. It should have broken you into pieces." -- Elizabeth Warren
...... no coffeepap emoticon?
No you haven't. You denied that the data presented proved beyond all doubt that we couldn't have stopped the attacks using other methods.And over the years, I have looked up every claim. I've followed every link. And read the what Demsoc posted. You'll see a different explanation.
That's because it wasn't directed at you - it was quoting and responding to someone else. Perhaps you should check out that "originally posted by" before you go around accusing others of being lost in the conversation?You got lsot already. This doesn't speak to anything I said, at least not as written.
The answer to specifically and carefully define torture so as to ensure that we maintained the ability to save lives without crossing that line is hardly evilNo we did engage in torture. The effort to redefine torture was in itself evil.
A) There are "no good guys in war" to the extent that "there are no good people". Warfare features lots of acts of cruelty (which isn't necessarily bad) and acts of evil, as well as acts of supreme sacrifice and goodness.And while there are no good guys in war, it is still different than torture which requires a much more personal and sadistic act.
B) Torture doesn't have to be personal or sadistic - if anything, for those who actually torture, becoming personal and sadistic will probably make them less effective.
C) Interrogation such as we performed was neither personal nor sadistic, but rather professionally and deliberately crafted.
Huh. And this guy committed torture?One of the fellows I talked to at first said it didn't bother him. His wife gave an odd look. I questioned the look. She talked about how he didn't sleep at night. He began talking about the things he had done, and largely the redefined things you speak of, and finally admitted it was why he couldn't sleep. I only listened.
I was placed in stress conditions and made to expose myself for prolonged, sleep deprived periods in the military. Was I tortured? We've got guys on this forum who have been waterboarded - they'll tell you it is n't torture.I can't speak for you and won't, but what we did is and always has been torture.
.When we first started talking about this, there was a post with the CIA handbook on this. I can't find it now, but hopefully you'll remember it
Yeah - and I gave you a rundown of multiple attacks stopped with the detainee reporting, and described to you how deeply our understanding of al-Qa'ida on that program, and even quoted KSM saying that we should waterboard all the detainees because it would make life easier on them... and you gave me in response the FBI guy who claimed that if only he'd gotten more time his nice-guy approach would have eventually worked, he pretty promises.
“If we must have an enemy at the head of Government, let it be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible, who will not involve our party in the disgrace of his foolish and bad measures.”
- Alexander Hamilton. Spiritual father of #NeverTrump
No the CIA didn't come up empty.....they have cited cases and there is a lot that is still classified.
The point is.....we don't have an Open Policy to torture.
A group of former top-ranking CIA officials disputed a U.S. Senate committee's finding that the agency's interrogation techniques produced no valuable intelligence, saying such work had saved thousands of lives. Former CIA directors George Tenet, Porter Goss and Michael Hayden, along with three ex-deputy directors, wrote in an op-ed article published on Wednesday in the Wall Street Journal that the Senate Intelligence Committee report also was wrong in saying the agency had been deceptive about its work following the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States.
"The committee has given us ... a one-sided study marred by errors of fact and interpretation - essentially a poorly done and partisan attack on the agency that has done the most to protect America after the 9/11 attacks," they said. The report concluded the CIA failed to disrupt any subsequent plots despite torturing captives during the presidency of George W. Bush. But the former CIA officials said the United States never would have tracked down and killed al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in 2011 without information acquired in the interrogation program. Their methods also led to the capture of ranking al Qaeda operatives, provided valuable information about the organization and saved thousands of lives by disrupting al Qaeda plots, including one for an attack on the U.S. West Coast that could have been similar to the Sept. 11 attacks.
The intelligence officials criticized the committee staff for not interviewing any of them and said the staff had already concluded the interrogation methods gave no useful intelligence before conducting their investigation......snip~
Ex-CIA officials say torture report is one-sided, flawed
Hope that sheds some light on what you didn't think the CIA had.
Not persuasive. Our 'standards' were thrown out the window when we didn't get what we wanted, (see, KSM) so depending on the U.S. adhering to standards would have proved foolish. People died in our custody, and I'm sure more died in the black sites, but we'll never know about those because we handed them off to 'third parties.'Yes, I have thought about the difference between knowing and not knowing, if you are to die. Without wanting to go into it, I do not think that it makes the difference. In the case of the prisoners of whom we know, we are talking of ones that were well briefed on American methods. They would very probably have known the going would be very bad but not deadly.
When can using a cattle prod on someone during an interrogation be NOT-torture?Yes, you are quite right. We as a nation and as a community of nations need to talk about what torture is. We got it wrong in the UN Charter and have demeaned the term. Take your cattle prod. Using it on a person can be torture, but it need not be. This has been long overdue and
is why I thought it so good a step, when the Bush White House asked it to be looked at, analyzed and defined. It was only a first step, but more than most countries have had the sense and courage to do. It is very unpleasant a topic. Politically a nightmare. But we should demand the discussion.
And IMO the memos justifying torture were a huge step down a path we do not want to be on. There's a good reason why "just a little bit of torture" was paired with rendition, black sites, etc. If something that didn't fit in the narrow confines of ridiculous rules justifying torture so long as it wasn't TOO bad was necessary, we just arranged for someone else to do it, or threw out our own standards. Once you obliterate a moral line, then you should expect people to behave as if the moral line was obliterated.
And, heck, it's now confirmed that there are no consequences to stepping over the already obliterated lines. The people involved have been promoted, certainly haven't faced any legal difficulties, and the only ones in jail related to our torture program are the whistleblowers. And a good part of the public denies that torture is torture. See this thread.
By some accounts, the key information about a courier was obtained through normal methods. And even if the torture sessions produced some evidence that was eventually, 8 years later, useful, it's also clear that we also relied on vast amounts of information that was gathered through conventional means, and we'll never know whether or not that information from torture, or better information, could have been obtained through conventional means. Professional interrogators have repeatedly testified that torture is an inferior technique to gather actionable intelligence - not inferior morally or ethically but on a practical level. That it might produce SOME evidence isn't actually any proof that, even if we accept self serving claims by the torturers, that torture is the better method.
and I have been following what torture means, has been applied and works since I was a kid. There have been a good number of studies and reports available over the years. And you do not seem to have read much.
Well saying not only this report states but many other said torture didnt work.. So yea..Not one Democrat would say anything about Intel that came thru torture if it prevented a major attack and certainly not one that involved a nuke.
But hey at least we admitted we torture people..
The best you got?So how you looking now with all that preaching of morality.....while not giving a **** about how many lives you put in danger over a report that is old news and doesn't change any policy?
""Torture and abuse cost American lives...I learned in Iraq that the No. 1 reason foreign fighters flocked there to fight were the abuses carried out at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo. Our policy of torture was directly and swiftly recruiting fighters for al-Qaeda in Iraq...How anyone can say that torture keeps Americans safe is beyond me -- unless you don't count American soldiers as Americans." -Matthew Alexander, leader of an interrogations team assigned to a Special Operations task force in Iraq in 2006.
☮★★☮ Just a democratic-socialist in the heartland of America.CHECK OUT MY TUMBLR(BLOG)HERE "Life is beautiful. Let the future generations cleanse it of all evil, oppression, and violence, and enjoy it to the full."
You mean from the pure left wing view of it. If you haven't read it yet, the ex-CIA Directors Op-ED today painted a completely different picture than the one by the all knowing DiFi.1) Such information was already made public years ago. The only difference here is the details as to how helpful torture was to intelligence gather. From the looks of it, not very.
That's not happening because our interrogation methods here are a joke compared to the rest of the world. It's like the pot calling the corningware black.2) Most nations would consider beheadings to be far worse than any act of torture (mainly because it's their people - Europeans as well as Americans - who are being beheaded).
The only nations that might get in an uproar over this are the Saudis and the UAE and their hands are so clean here either. Nonetheless, if people across the world start complaining loud enough condemning America for our torturous deeds especially if world leaders take this up to the U.N., we might see some pressure to do something about this besides publishing a torture report.
"We have met the enemy and they are ours..." -- Oliver Hazard Perry
"I don't want a piece of you... I want the whole thing!" -- Bob Barker