• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Senate panel releases scathing report on CIA interrogation...

Prior to the releasing of this document all the media claimed it would result in killings of Americans all over the world. Having listened to Diane Feinstein I almost broke out in laughter. Recall for a second what the Nazis said after learning about Patton being denounced for slapping a soldier. They said they would have shot the soldier. Now move to present day and imagine what other world leaders and terror group leaders thought when they heard old Diane read the list of "no-no's" the CIA did. Did she mention how many were hospitalized or died from these tactics? Did she mention a single broken bone or laceration? "Kept in the dark", "water boarded", "stripped naked and made to wear diapers"??!!! These are the monster tactics the document contains??!! Has she ever witnessed an American boxing match, an American football game or American martial arts? This could be one of the silliest items in our recent history. This is equal to calling 911 because you ordered a larger order of fries and got a small one.
 
rhinefire said:
Prior to the releasing of this document all the media claimed it would result in killings of Americans all over the world. Having listened to Diane Feinstein I almost broke out in laughter. Recall for a second what the Nazis said after learning about Patton being denounced for slapping a soldier. They said they would have shot the soldier. Now move to present day and imagine what other world leaders and terror group leaders thought when they heard old Diane read the list of "no-no's" the CIA did. Did she mention how many were hospitalized or died from these tactics? Did she mention a single broken bone or laceration? "Kept in the dark", "water boarded", "stripped naked and made to wear diapers"??!!! These are the monster tactics the document contains??!! Has she ever witnessed an American boxing match, an American football game or American martial arts? This could be one of the silliest items in our recent history. This is equal to calling 911 because you ordered a larger order of fries and got a small one.
Click to expand...


Excellent analysis rhine....What's amazing to me is that I see all sorts of libs wringing their hands, and screaming with pursed lips about how Cheney and the CIA lied on the one hand, and how wrong, and unconstitutional this was, while on the other their own lying about things like the ACA was perfectly fine...Bunch of hypocrites all of em....
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Control of the news and yet another attempt to bait the republicants into reacting stupidly. The hope is to paint the republicants as being pro torture and the fact that it may endanger US troops, embassy folks, contractors or tourists was deemed to be acceptable collateral damage.
Click to expand...

In 2005, the entire government, along with a large segment of the populace, was pro-torture, and proud of it.

Only we freethinkers opposed the practice. Only radicals called John Yoo and Bush & Cheney what they were. In a time of universal deception, speaking the truth is a radical act.
 
j-mac said:
Please don't do that...This "report" written solely by demo aids, and pushed forward without as much as a single interview of one person involved is little more than Feinstein's [sp] snotty little attempt to relieve her own conscience after knowing full well what was going on during the time. Not to mention there are reports that she released it in a revenge tirade, knowing full well it may cost other American's their lives. Anything, or anyone that gets killed over this is on her directly...Hope she feels better...Dumb bitch.
Click to expand...

Mornin JMac. :2wave: Here is Peter baker of the NY Times and what the pushback is with Feinstein.


What’s the pushback from Senator Feinstein’s people on this?

PB: Well, I mean, their argument would be that they’ve spent a lot of time on this, five years, really, and that this is the most comprehensive look at this that we’ve seen publicly, yet. You’re right. They didn’t interview everybody. They were, they say they were constrained, to some extent, because while they were doing a lot of the research, it happened to coincide with the Department of Justice inquiry, and they didn’t want to get in the way of a criminal inquiry. But you know, what it does is it leaves some unanswered questions. I find myself most interested in sort of what it tells about the White House, right? And it’s interesting, because they have a lot of these CIA documents about what CIA did or did not tell the White House. But that’s sort of the edge of the waters for them, because they don’t then take us inside the White House and say okay, if the President wasn’t briefed by the CIA on these interrogation techniques, one of the things they said, what was happening inside the White House? Did Condi Rice brief him? Did Steve Hadley brief him? What did he know about it? What did he not know about it? And because they didn’t interview those people, we don’t really have answer to some of those questions.

PB: Well, the Senate Committee, the Democratic majority does. They’ve done a case study of these 20 instances that have been most cited as examples of where the program provided intelligence that helped to thwart attacks or otherwise meaningfully improve our understanding of al Qaeda. And they argue that in some of these cases, they already had the information from other sources, or in other cases, the information wasn’t as critical as has been made out to be. And it’s been exaggerated or overstated. Part of the problem, of course, is you’re talking about counterfactuals, right? If they didn’t do this, what would have happened? And it’s sort of like if not this, then that, right? They did get some information. Could they have gotten it a different way? How do we know for sure people were drawing lines and coming to conclusions? But you know, in part, that’s going to be a matter of interpretation.....snip~
 
Henry David said:
In 2005, the entire government, along with a large segment of the populace, was pro-torture, and proud of it.

Only we freethinkers opposed the practice. Only radicals called John Yoo and Bush & Cheney what they were. In a time of universal deception, speaking the truth is a radical act.
Click to expand...

We have now evolved into simply zapping folks placed on a secret list - which is much better. ;)
 
MMC said:
Mornin JMac. :2wave: Here is Peter baker of the NY Times and what the pushback is with Feinstein.


What’s the pushback from Senator Feinstein’s people on this?

PB: Well, I mean, their argument would be that they’ve spent a lot of time on this, five years, really, and that this is the most comprehensive look at this that we’ve seen publicly, yet. You’re right. They didn’t interview everybody. They were, they say they were constrained, to some extent, because while they were doing a lot of the research, it happened to coincide with the Department of Justice inquiry, and they didn’t want to get in the way of a criminal inquiry. But you know, what it does is it leaves some unanswered questions. I find myself most interested in sort of what it tells about the White House, right? And it’s interesting, because they have a lot of these CIA documents about what CIA did or did not tell the White House. But that’s sort of the edge of the waters for them, because they don’t then take us inside the White House and say okay, if the President wasn’t briefed by the CIA on these interrogation techniques, one of the things they said, what was happening inside the White House? Did Condi Rice brief him? Did Steve Hadley brief him? What did he know about it? What did he not know about it? And because they didn’t interview those people, we don’t really have answer to some of those questions.

PB: Well, the Senate Committee, the Democratic majority does. They’ve done a case study of these 20 instances that have been most cited as examples of where the program provided intelligence that helped to thwart attacks or otherwise meaningfully improve our understanding of al Qaeda. And they argue that in some of these cases, they already had the information from other sources, or in other cases, the information wasn’t as critical as has been made out to be. And it’s been exaggerated or overstated. Part of the problem, of course, is you’re talking about counterfactuals, right? If they didn’t do this, what would have happened? And it’s sort of like if not this, then that, right? They did get some information. Could they have gotten it a different way? How do we know for sure people were drawing lines and coming to conclusions? But you know, in part, that’s going to be a matter of interpretation.....snip~
Click to expand...

So, it's lots of 'Monday morning quaterbacking', yet I just can't get over the fact that these people like Feinstein started a report 3 years after the last enemy was waterboarded, and took 5 years from that to compile, then release it against the wishes of even their own political protests from the WH today...Why? Does she think that Cheney is still to be "frog marched" to the ICC for trial? Do they care that they aid the enemy in their actions like this?

They are cretins....
 
j-mac said:
So, it's lots of 'Monday morning quaterbacking', yet I just can't get over the fact that these people like Feinstein started a report 3 years after the last enemy was waterboarded, and took 5 years from that to compile, then release it against the wishes of even their own political protests from the WH today...Why? Does she think that Cheney is still to be "frog marched" to the ICC for trial? Do they care that they aid the enemy in their actions like this?

They are cretins....
Click to expand...

They were yesterday Right after the report came out. ;)


Max Boot, senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.


MB: Well, I’m dismayed that it’s being released, that it really is not clear to me what the imperative is to put this out unto the world when we know it’s going to have harmful consequences. We know it’s going to become a recruiting tool for terrorists, that they will go to town on all of these allegations contained within the report. And yet the practices described therein have already been discontinued, long discontinued. So this is certainly not an attempt to change current policy. To me, it’s very counterproductive and harmful, and I’m deeply sorry that Senator Feinstein decided to release it.

MB: It certainly looks that way, and that’s certainly the impression you get from reading the Republican dissent. I mean, this is not at all a bipartisan document. It was prepared by the Democratic majority staff over the fierce objections of the Republicans. And now it’s out there for the entire world to make of it what they will. You know, to me, this is in some ways reminiscent of the 1970s when you had the Church Committee and the Pike Committee holding hearings, and releasing reports about alleged CIA misconduct, all of which turned out to actually be approved by the various presidents of the United States. So it really wasn’t CIA misconduct they were objecting to. It was covert actions that were fully and legally authorized, just as this program was fully and legally authorized by President Bush with the acquiescence and knowledge of the Congressional leadership, as you just mentioned.

MB: That’s true, and I think what makes this really troubling is the fact that both the House and Senate Intelligence Committees have a long record of bipartisan cooperation. This is not, these are not these committees where there’s typically a lot of partisan bickering and posturing. Most things are done with unanimity. So the fact that Senator Feinstein has pushed forward this report over such strong and vociferous opposition from very centrist Republicans, everybody on the panel except for Susan Collins, that, to me, is troubling. And it should signal right there that this is not an objective assessment of the facts, that there is some other agenda here, whether partisan or personal going on here, and it should certainly lead to questions about the report’s conclusions. But I fear that all this nuance is going to be lost in the kind of hyperactive media coverage that this report is receiving......snip~

Max Boot Blasts Release Of Senate Report « The Hugh Hewitt Show
 
Last edited:
j-mac said:
Oh, you mean you want to link again to other like minded libs crying about an inconvenient fact? go ahead and look as foolish as you want.

Fact is, war is not won, nor lives saved during it by offering our enemies tea, and crumpets for intel. I suggest that you study up on the D-Day invasion, and the Nazi 19 in the lead up, and educate yourself...When the chips are down, and American lives are on the line, we employ some tough measures....War isn't a board game.
Click to expand...
The reality is...I LIKE that we have soft fuzzy bunnies that are outraged at the harsh tactics and realities of war. I have grandkids and I dont want them to be exposed to the ugliness that others have to face sometimes to preserve peace and security for those soft cuddly fluffy bunnies. People want to be outraged that the CIA utilized harsh interrogation techniques (techniques that leaders of both parties were well briefed on) against terrorists in an attempt to gain information? Good for them. Those that are outraged have no business being in the national security game, but then...not everyone needs to be in that game. They can afford to be in the soft fuzzy bunny business precisely because others are willing to be in the cold hard harsh reality game.

Soft fuzzy bunnies should never be expected to deal with the kind of people that would rape and then butcher children in the name of their great and glorious cause. Soft fuzzy bunnies should not be expected to counter the kind of people that will kill unarmed innocent men women and children at random or chant the praises of their God while they methodically saw a mans head off in front of cameras. Soft fuzzy bunnies should not be expected to fight the kind of people that would hijack 4 airplanes and kill all the passengers on those planes as well as as many as the can kill in New York, DC, and other locales. Soft fuzzy bunnies should not be expected to confront people that will gather small children and methodically and while forcing the others to watch, one by one crush their skills with rocks. Soft fuzzy bunnies should not be expected to confront bad people and they should be happy they live in a country where they can be and most importantly AFFORD to be outraged that people would employ 'harsh' interrogation tactics to try to stop the kind of people listed above.

God bless the soft fuzzy bunnies.
 
“That rifle on the wall of the labourer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there.”

Orwell.
 
iliveonramen said:
It's irrelevant that the CIA lied to Congress...the Commander and Chief about the effectiveness and use of torture? Oh...to cap it off it leaked sensitive information to reporters misstating the usefulness of intel gained through torture?

Gotta love the perspective of your "freedom" loving Conservatives on this report.
Click to expand...
No, you went off on a tangent, not relevant to the point I was making that the democrats are endangering lives by releasing such a report.
 
Mithros said:
That's not a reason. The terrorists could say the exact same thing. The bad US murdered so and so, ergo these other people deserve everything they get.
Click to expand...

Hey, don't forget making them miss their bedtimes!
 
j-mac said:
Excellent analysis rhine....What's amazing to me is that I see all sorts of libs wringing their hands, and screaming with pursed lips about how Cheney and the CIA lied on the one hand, and how wrong, and unconstitutional this was, while on the other their own lying about things like the ACA was perfectly fine...Bunch of hypocrites all of em....
Click to expand...

That's also a great point. These putrid Washington politicians, mostly the democrats, mislead their sheeple, and point out all the wrongs done by everyone else, while they do much worse. The CIA is protecting us. They owe a debt of gratitude to them that they or other Americans haven't been blown to bits in their home or work.

But they go right ahead and defend terrorists, take our liberties, and the fruits of our labors as the point to others that do the work that they don't have the guts to do.

Now they have endangered us, once again.
 
Ikari said:
Yeah, I mean why should we even know anything that the government does. It's not like we were charged with controlling it.
Click to expand...

Well, here's a scenario. What if we never, ever, tortured anyone? But our public policy was that we would do anything to get the information out of someone?

How do you think one of these miscreants would react if they knew going in that they would be treated like a hotel guest vs. one that was convinced that anything was on the table?
 
Perotista said:
Fienstein wasn't the ideologue that her colleague from California is, Boxer. That is why releasing this report came as a surprise to me. Perhaps it was her way of getting back at the CIA for spying on the intel committee.
Click to expand...

Good morning, Pero. :2wave:

I don't understand this at all. Feinstein seems to be angry about the way the midterms turned out, but the voters have spoken. They were not thinking about Feinstein when they went into the voting booth, so why put this report out for the world to see about events that happened years ago, and were corrected years ago? I always sort of liked her, but this seems like vindictiveness on her part, which disappoints me about her, and could do great harm to our country and our personnel serving all over the world.

Perhaps you are correct in thinking this is a payback to the CIA for spying on her committee, but wasn't there a better way to handle that to keep it in-house? And more importantly, why were years spent compiling all the things the CIA was doing a long time ago? Don't they have enough to do? Does she think that Democrat President's have not used the CIA to get information they need or want? c'mon.....
 
ocean515 said:
LOL

Like you said? Epic FAIL

The reports found on the website I linked provide a verifiable cross referenced counter view to what is contained in the Democrats no human interview review of documents. They provide a thought provoking review of the effort the Democrats were making and the issues they were ignoring.

Rational, non agenda driven people would take the time to compare the two sides to the issue. It's obvious your not in that class.
Click to expand...

No, they didn't. You are factually incorrect.
 
cpwill said:
:shrug: You know as well as I do that I have linked and demonstrated it all for you before, but you cling to hypothetical counterfactuals as a defense.
Click to expand...

No, everything you have ever linked has been disputed. Not verifiable.


:roll: no.

A) If you decide to engage in warfare against America, we can kill you. Abraham Lincoln didn't feel the need to capture and put every Confederate soldier on trial, he ordered the Union army to use cannons to blast them into tiny pieces of bloody meat.

B) If in fact we were acting as partisan hacks, then we would be seeking partisan advantage, and attacking Obama as having taken an unconstitutional action when he killed that guy, instead of agreeing that the move was probably the right one. So your claims are self-contradicting.

Seriously. Usually your posts are at least pretty well thought out - did you skip your Wheaties this morning?
Click to expand...

Killing in battle is one thing. Torturing is another. And many here, admittedly not you, throw their morals out the door on this issue. They ignore the evil in torture, and run with their hatred. They only changed when it concerned Obama.

As for you, you seem a true believer. The only thing that bothers me is I have talked with two here who are haunted by what what they saw in terms of torture. I'm sad they have to suffer, and torture harms even those who are doing the torture, but glad to see they still have the humanity to know the evil in what was done. When you can no longer see it, something of the human being is lost.
 
polgara said:
Good morning, Pero. :2wave:

I don't understand this at all. Feinstein seems to be angry about the way the midterms turned out, but the voters have spoken. They were not thinking about Feinstein when they went into the voting booth, so why put this report out for the world to see about events that happened years ago, and were corrected years ago? I always sort of liked her, but this seems like vindictiveness on her part, which disappoints me about her, and could do great harm to our country and our personnel serving all over the world.

Perhaps you are correct in thinking this is a payback to the CIA for spying on her committee, but wasn't there a better way to handle that to keep it in-house? And more importantly, why were years spent compiling all the things the CIA was doing a long time ago? Don't they have enough to do? Does she think that Democrat President's have not used the CIA to get information they need or want? c'mon.....
Click to expand...

Well, under her gentle great-grandma facade is one of the most corrupt politicians in Washington. She has made millions of dollars championing and passing laws that directly impact her family's businesses. I wouldn't be surprised in the least to find that someone in her family runs a law practice with an active class action suit against the CIA. That is just how she rolls.
 
Boo Radley said:
No, everything you have ever linked has been disputed. Not verifiable.




Killing in battle is one thing. .
Click to expand...

You do know don't you that "killing in battle" is not the honorable, fair "clash of warriors" as depicted in television and movies?

In the modern era, most people "killed in battle" whether they be soldiers or civilians are about as helpless as if they were strapped to a gurney.
 
j-mac said:
Oh, you mean you want to link again to other like minded libs crying about an inconvenient fact? go ahead and look as foolish as you want.

Fact is, war is not won, nor lives saved during it by offering our enemies tea, and crumpets for intel. I suggest that you study up on the D-Day invasion, and the Nazi 19 in the lead up, and educate yourself...When the chips are down, and American lives are on the line, we employ some tough measures....War isn't a board game.
Click to expand...

I mean linking quite clearly that it wasn't so.

And like a true hack, you offer up something no one has argued we do. But, read the book the gamble and learn from the Generals themselves that we got more intel, better intel, and made progress not with torture,but with other more effective techniques. I linked that for you years ago as well. The book is a good read, so you should pick it up.
 
Boo Radley said:
I mean linking quite clearly that it wasn't so.

And like a true hack, you offer up something no one has argued we do. But, read the book the gamble and learn from the Generals themselves that we got more intel, better intel, and made progress not with torture,but with other more effective techniques. I linked that for you years ago as well. The book is a good read, so you should pick it up.
Click to expand...

So, is it a good book because it changed your mind or because it confirmed it?
 
Dayton3 said:
You do know don't you that "killing in battle" is not the honorable, fair "clash of warriors" as depicted in television and movies?

In the modern era, most people "killed in battle" whether they be soldiers or civilians are about as helpless as if they were strapped to a gurney.
Click to expand...

I understand that completely. In it's most brutal, it is still different.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom