• 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...

MMC said:
Oh and as to Bin Ladens Courier.....note what the CIA says about not ever being able to discover the courier without those EITs.
Click to expand...
It is really wonderful to see so much effort being applied to support the means justifying the ends....assuming that what is said by CIA sources (who have VERY vested interests in justifying torture) is true.
 
Uncensored2008 said:
What Feinstein has done is sensationalized the techniques. Just as Eric Holder has acted to incite and intensify race riots in Ferguson, Feinstein and the democrats have acted to incite and intensify anti-American sentiments and actions around the globe.

How long until we have ISIS cutting the head off an American on Youtube, citing Feinstein as justification? I'm actually surprised it hasn't happened already. Feinstein and the democrats are irresponsible, partisan hacks with no concern for the lives of Americans.
Click to expand...

OK, how does the information get released without "sensationalizing" it?

And if ISIS cuts of heads because it was revealed that we waterboarded people, which the world already knew, then the problem isn't the revelation but the act.
 
Uncensored2008 said:
It wasn't intended to cause outrage among Americans.

The intent of the democrats is to stir up ISIS and Al Qaeda.
Click to expand...

Well, thanks for that. No need to take your views seriously when you're so obviously partisan.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
It is really wonderful to see so much effort being applied to support the means justifying the ends....assuming that what is said by CIA sources (who have VERY vested interests in justifying torture) is true.
Click to expand...

Not at all.....it is a simple matter especially for those that believe they are highly moral.

You have a terrorist and you have great many lives you can save. You have a choice. You can torture the terrorist or let a great many people die. You decide. Will you torture to try and get some info. Or will you let all those people die? You make the call.

Which is it?
 
Uncensored2008 said:
It wasn't intended to cause outrage among Americans.

The intent of the democrats is to stir up ISIS and Al Qaeda.
Click to expand...

Intentional or not, it did just that. Which makes its release an act of treason, in my opinion.
 
MMC said:
Not at all.....it is a simple matter especially for those that believe they are highly moral.

You have a terrorist and you have great many lives you can save. You have a choice. You can torture the terrorist or let a great many people die. You decide. Will you torture to try and get some info. Or will you let all those people die? You make the call.

Which is it?
Click to expand...

That's not the actual choice. Even accepting the first premise - known terrorist who you know has information that if revealed, accurately, as a result of torture will save a great many from death - there are more choices than 1) torture, or 2) do nothing and let them all die.

We somehow fought the Germans and Japanese, among others, without the need to sanction torture of detainees as a legitimate interrogation tool.
 
JasperL said:
There are two events you're conflating. That we kill people during war doesn't justify torture as a legitimate interrogation technique because it's preferable or less harmful than killing them, or at least it hasn't justified it in our history. We tried torturers and sentenced them to jail. Should those Japanese charged with war crimes, among others, simply used the defense - "We could have shot them, so torture short of death cannot be a crime."?
Click to expand...

Please read the details of the Japanese war atrocities before to soil this thread with more demeaning moral equivalencies.
 
Uncensored2008 said:
What Feinstein has done is sensationalized the techniques. Just as Eric Holder has acted to incite and intensify race riots in Ferguson, Feinstein and the democrats have acted to incite and intensify anti-American sentiments and actions around the globe.

How long until we have ISIS cutting the head off an American on Youtube, citing Feinstein as justification? I'm actually surprised it hasn't happened already. Feinstein and the democrats are irresponsible, partisan hacks with no concern for the lives of Americans.
Click to expand...

Nobody's managed to explain how he did THAT, either, but I expect nothing less from you of all people.
 
Erod said:
Intentional or not, it did just that. Which makes its release an act of treason, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

As I recall, ISIS and AQ were active, and killing Americans, long before the Democrats released the report.

And you're still shooting the messenger. If it's treason to reveal what happened, surely the acts revealed were also treasonous.
 
MMC said:
Not at all.....it is a simple matter especially for those that believe they are highly moral.

You have a terrorist and you have great many lives you can save. You have a choice. You can torture the terrorist or let a great many people die. You decide. Will you torture to try and get some info. Or will you let all those people die? You make the call.

Which is it?
Click to expand...
You ask me to decide whether the means justify the ends....while you deny that what I accused you of was a matter of the means justifying the ends.

Watching too many episodes of "24" can be damaging.

But keep on bring forward more justification for torture....while you deny that you are doing so.
 
Rentoc said:
The REAL point is that this report was conceived by, prepared by, funded by and championed by the Democrats on the committee. This was published as a last poke in the eye to President Bush and to keep the attention off the hearings concerning Gruber and the Benghazi cover-up.
Click to expand...

You guys a riot sometimes. Anything that isn't about your little pet issue of the day (or, in the case of "the Benghazi cover-up," your pet issue for the last 2+ years) is a "distraction."
 
JasperL said:
The problem is the CIA has a history of self serving lies, over many years, with regard to the program and its results. So the defense is "The CIA says the CIA got great info from using the waterboard, ergo, we must conclude that the information about the awesomeness of CIA actions verified by CIA is correct!"



That's a good example - there are pictures of a waterboard set up in places where the CIA denies waterboarding took place.



I'm not defending democrats and blaming republicans - I don't think I've mentioned party a single time other than when required to respond.
Disgrace: Senate Democrats' Flawed, Reckless CIA Interrogation Report - Guy Benson
Click to expand...
[/QUOTE]


Where is this History, as going back to the Church/Pike hearings in the 70's was the last time you had committees going after the CIA for what some thought was illegal. But was then later discovered was all legal.

So then what about Other Politicians/Officials that were not on this committee that say they were shown the results from the information by the CIA in their briefings? Who else do you need to confirm to you that the methods worked? Who else can validate for you that what the CIA says is true?




Yet long before "waterboarding" entered the public discourse, the CIA gave key legislative overseers about 30 private briefings, some of which included descriptions of that technique and other harsh interrogation methods, according to interviews with multiple U.S. officials with firsthand knowledge.

With one known exception, no formal objections were raised by the lawmakers briefed about the harsh methods during the two years in which waterboarding was employed, from 2002 to 2003, said Democrats and Republicans with direct knowledge of the matter. The lawmakers who held oversight roles during the period included Pelosi and Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.) and Sens. Bob Graham (D-Fla.) and John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), as well as Rep. Porter J. Goss (R-Fla.) and Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan).

In a rare public statement last month that broached the subject of his classified objections, Feingold complained about administration claims of congressional support, saying that it was "not the case" that lawmakers briefed on the CIA's program "have approved it or consented to it."

Hill Briefed on Waterboarding in 2002
 
jmotivator said:
Please read the details of the Japanese war atrocities before to soil this thread with more demeaning moral equivalencies.
Click to expand...

We charged them with a crime for waterboarding U.S. soldiers. Are you saying it's not a problem if we do it? And it wasn't just the Japanese - I linked earlier to a legal analysis that demonstrates we've always considered waterboarding torture, and a crime, across more than a century, in various cases, from wars to domestically, done by U.S. soldiers or to them, etc. There was no question until 2002 or so whether it was torture - it was considered obviously torture, period.

And the core issue remains - that killing is part of war does not speak AT ALL to whether or not torture is morally justifiable or acceptable. We've separated those issues for our entire history as far as I can tell, but you're lumping them into the same moral question. If torture is justifiable because it falls short of killing, then you've opened a very large barn door.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
You ask me to decide whether the means justify the ends....while you deny that what I accused you of was a matter of the means justifying the ends.

Watching too many episodes of "24" can be damaging.

But keep on bring forward more justification for torture....while you deny that you are doing so.
Click to expand...


That's the Bottomline.....no matter what. Doesn't matter if the end Justifies the means. As it might not. There is no other variable. What does matter is all that hyped morality that you want to sound off with. So shall we put you down for torturing the terrorist then?

Nah I don't watch TV to much and certainly not Soap Operas that you are talking about.



What did this accomplish? It may fire up the lefty base and sate ideologues' political bloodlust after a brutal election, but this issue isn't a major advantage to posturing Democrats. Why? Americans overwhelmingly believe that "torture" is sometimes justified:

torture2.png



Yeah, lets go with what most of America thinks about some justification. :roll:
 
JasperL said:
As I recall, ISIS and AQ were active, and killing Americans, long before the Democrats released the report.

And you're still shooting the messenger. If it's treason to reveal what happened, surely the acts revealed were also treasonous.
Click to expand...

Might want to look up "treason".
 
MMC said:
That's the Bottomline.....no matter what. Doesn't matter if the end Justifies the means. As it might not. There is no other variable. What does matter is all that hyped morality that you want to sound off with. So shall we put you down for torturing the terrorist then?
Click to expand...

The question whether our government has the green light for torture (if it works perhaps) is far more than 'hyped morality.' It gets to a core value of the country.
 
MMC said:
That's the Bottomline.....no matter what. Doesn't matter if the end Justifies the means. As it might not. There is no other variable. What does matter is all that hyped morality that you want to sound off with. So shall we put you down for torturing the terrorist then?

Nah I don't watch TV to much and certainly not Soap Operas that you are talking about.



What did this accomplish? It may fire up the lefty base and sate ideologues' political bloodlust after a brutal election, but this issue isn't a major advantage to posturing Democrats. Why? Americans overwhelmingly believe that "torture" is sometimes justified:

torture2.png



Yeah, lets go with what most of America thinks about some justification. :roll:
Click to expand...
Uh, bub, this is about you. Obviously I do NOT believe the ends justify the means...but you keep finding all sorts of justifications for the means.

That is the point.

Further, it seems that it does not matter to you that the assumptions of achieving a true "end" are true, you will take at face value the statements of these CIA officials as true......those that have a vested interest in making valid torture.
 
Last edited:
Erod said:
Might want to look up "treason".
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure I won't find that the definition includes Congressional oversight of the CIA, and releasing findings of that oversight.

If you're complaining that I responded to your ridiculous accusation of treason by Feinstein with another ridiculous accusation, that's fair enough.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
It is really wonderful to see so much effort being applied to support the means justifying the ends....assuming that what is said by CIA sources (who have VERY vested interests in justifying torture) is true.
Click to expand...

Almost like the same 'the ends justifies the means' being applied to ObamaCare. Just sayin'
 
eohrnberger said:
Almost like the same 'the ends justifies the means' being applied to ObamaCare. Just sayin'
Click to expand...

Well, good point. Other than the issues are in entirely different moral galaxies separated by billions of light years, great analogy!
 
eohrnberger said:
Almost like the same 'the ends justifies the means' being applied to ObamaCare. Just sayin'
Click to expand...
I always find it amusing that folks like yourself will double down on lost arguments by comparing the success of the PPACA to torture.

Reductio ad absurdum.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom