• 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!

Gitmo inmate: My treatment shames American flag [W:508,759]

j-mac said:
And how would you interrogate someone like KSM for example? Tell us.
Click to expand...
If I may interject.
KSM was waterboarded 180+ times.
If waterboarding is/was so effective at extracting info, what's up with all the repeat performances?
 
radioman said:
If I may interject.
KSM was waterboarded 180+ times.
If waterboarding is/was so effective at extracting info, what's up with all the repeat performances?
Click to expand...

It's not an instant process... answers over time must be consistent and verified. With someone who resists waterboarding well I would expect the process to take longer than normal.
 
Grant said:
Wrapping yourself in the cloak of 'ethics' and 'morals' doesn't help your argument. In fact it is immoral to attack those who have successfully prevented any further terror attacks on US soil, and you should be thanking them.
Click to expand...

You're just saying that if it involves national security, all criticism is off limits. That's ridiculous. It's not 'immoral' to disagree with your government on matters of war. It would be unconscionable to expect citizens to not question decisions with such horrific costs, which we know going in. People of high ethics, fully understanding the issues, WILL disagree, often strongly, and when they do they have an obligation to protest what they feel is wrong.


This says otherwise. Where does it go wrong?The Democrats' 'reckless and irresponsible' terror report
Click to expand...

We could post dueling opinion pieces all day, and yours is from an obviously right wing leaning outlet. But I'll take an early passage - 4th paragraph:

The report is so one-sided that not a single Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee would sign off on the thing. No wonder that, after sitting on the results for more than two years, Committee Chairwoman Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.) decided to release it now.
Click to expand...

First of all, that no republican signed off in this era is hardly surprising. 20 years ago it would be - not today when votes that break exactly along party lines are the norm. Second, anyone with the slightest interest in the report knows that the committee has been fighting and negotiating with the WH and CIA for a year or so about what can and what cannot be released, at least. So the committee did not 'sit on' the report for two years. That's just misleading to the point of a lie.

Second, the author says several times the report is 'untrue' and 'highly biased' but doesn't provide details. What is biased about the findings? What part of the report, specifically, is untrue. I accept that there WILL BE honest and legitimate differences of opinion about whether it should have been released and what part of it blacked out, but that's just because we're thinking humans. That does not mean those who disagree are biased or that the report is.

Do you know whose side you are on? Do you know who you support? Or are you confused by all the claims coming from the different political and ideological combatants? Sometimes you have to make a decision based on logic and available evidence.
Click to expand...

The side of the U.S.

Everyone is being paid so that point doesn't make much sense unless your idea is simply to taint one side. The fact is that no one in the actual decision making process was interviewed during the five years of questioning. Doesn't that strike you as odd?
Click to expand...

You avoided the point - questioning the government is the norm from conservatives on every issue except apparently the CIA on this subject.

The GOP wants everyone to be interviewed regarding Benghazi but the Dems seemingly wanted no one interviewed with direct involvement in keeping America safe. That's the difference.
Click to expand...

Again, not the point. If right wingers can't accept the line from the various people about Benghazi after many hearings, you can't then question my 'morality' when I do the same with the CIA on this issue, especially since on this issue the CIA has a documented history of lies and brazen attempts to hide information - hacking into the committee's computer to remove the Panetta report, which is the most comprehensive internal examination of the program, its successes and failures. If they have been honest, and the program's successes obvious, they should proudly hand over their internal review which supports all their assertions - why hide that from the investigators, then illegally attempt to remove that document? Something to hide, obviously....
 
radioman said:
If I may interject.
KSM was waterboarded 180+ times.
If waterboarding is/was so effective at extracting info, what's up with all the repeat performances?
Click to expand...
Were you told that only one time was necessary?
 
Kobie said:
I have no trouble with English. I do not, however, speak MMC.
Click to expand...

How about Ebonics aka jive talk ?

I don't speak Ebonics but I understand and can comprehend Ebonics.

Had no choice in the matter, back during the 70's if you were white and didn't understand Ebonics, you were labeled a racist. Something to do with cultural Marxism aka political correctness.
 
APACHERAT said:
How about Ebonics aka jive talk ?

I don't speak Ebonics but I understand and can comprehend Ebonics.

Had no choice in the matter, back during the 70's if you were white and didn't understand Ebonics, you were labeled a racist. Something to do with cultural Marxism aka political correctness.
Click to expand...

Go rant against taco trucks some more.
 
Grant said:
Americans overwhelmingly believe that "torture" is sometimes justified. In fact it was not even defined as 'torture', though the leftists prefer that word. The majority of the American people, bless 'em, are correct.
Click to expand...

Sure, we prefer to use the word that best describes some of the practices, instead of taking the Orwellian path of changing the word and pretend we've changed what occurred.

And that poll lumps in vast differences of opinion on this subject. A response of "often" is world's apart from a response of 'rarely.'
 
MMC said:
Did you want to say they didn't die for what they believed in? Btw at least the Military get a headstone with their Name on it when they die. These guys get something, but nothing to identify them.
Click to expand...

The point is that they're fighting and dying for their brothers in arms, their country, and and ideal. And torture is antithetical to all of them.

Here's a thought experiment. Why did the propagandists in WWII try to convince their own troops that the enemy would abuse and torture prisoners; and why did those same propagandists try to convince enemy troops that they would be well treated as prisoners?
 
Ockham said:
It's not an instant process... answers over time must be consistent and verified.
Click to expand...
I thought it WAS an instant process.
As in... "this guy knows where the nukes are, lets waterboard him"...
Instead, it seems to be a time consuming process.
By the time a KSM gives up any info, it would be obsolete.
Terrorists would adjust their MO's when any of their leaders are captured.

With someone who resists waterboarding well I would expect the process to take longer than normal.
Click to expand...
Again with the long process.
What sort of actionable info do you think KSM would have stored in his brain that would be critical in the never-ending "War on Terror"
Do you think he has intricate plots, Osama's phone number, addresses.....what exactly would he give up?
 
JUG said:
I recently came across this article of Samir Naji's 13 year incarceration at Gitmo. Obviously, this is a pretty convienent time for him to tell the tales of his cruel and unusual punishment. Which made me think; isn't that exactly what's being clamed here? Cruel and unusual punishment on United States territory. I've heard from my professor that an obvious consequence of closing Gitmo would be that if we brought these inmates back to the United States we would have to give them due-process. Well...I may be mistaken, but last time I checked, Guantanamo Bay is United states territory. I found it interesting how this man's story was written. Check it out if you wish to.

Gitmo inmate: My treatment shames U.S. flag - CNN.com
Click to expand...

After the guilt of the detainee terrorist has been established, it should take less than 6 months to extract any information by water boarding or similar uncomfortable methods.

After this, a quick military tribunal by majority vote---and off to the gallows.

ANY terror suspect not in uniform per Geneva Convention IS ripe for execution.
 
Threegoofs said:
Just when I thought I was learning how to speak MMC, he changes dialects.
Click to expand...

Sometimes I do like to see just how much those 5 dots throws you leftists for a loop. Although, I wouldn't trust you with any telegrams. Just sayin. :mrgreen:
 
Mithros said:
The point is that they're fighting and dying for their brothers in arms, their country, and and ideal. And torture is antithetical to all of them.

Here's a thought experiment. Why did the propagandists in WWII try to convince their own troops that the enemy would abuse and torture prisoners; and why did those same propagandists try to convince enemy troops that they would be well treated as prisoners?
Click to expand...

I wonder how many would put that to a test with one of their family members. After they were kidnapped and tortured.
 
MMC said:
Sometimes I do like to see just how much those 5 dots throws you leftists for a loop. Although, I wouldn't trust you with any telegrams. Just sayin. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

It's not your illiterate ellipses that makes your posts unreadable, it's the nonsensical syntax and vapid thought process.
 
Threegoofs said:
It's not your illiterate ellipses that makes your posts unreadable, it's the nonsensical syntax and vapid thought process.
Click to expand...

Even if such was the case. There is no mistaking the meaning. Which only certain condescending people think they can play with such. But then I have never had any trouble making sure one knew when they looked like a fool.
 
radioman said:
If I may interject.
Click to expand...


You may

KSM was waterboarded 180+ times.
Click to expand...

That is false...Although I know how you liberals take the NYTimes as Gospel itself, they lied here:

"The New York Times reported last week that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of the Sept. 11 terror attacks, was waterboarded 183 times in one month by CIA interrogators. The "183 times" was widely circulated by news outlets throughout the world.

It was shocking. And it was highly misleading. The number is a vast inflation, according to information from a U.S. official and the testimony of the terrorists themselves.

A U.S. official with knowledge of the interrogation program told FOX News that the much-cited figure represents the number of times water was poured onto Mohammed's face -- not the number of times the CIA applied the simulated-drowning technique on the terror suspect. According to a 2007 Red Cross report, he was subjected a total of "five sessions of ill-treatment."

Despite Reports, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed Was Not Waterboarded 183 Times | Fox News

If waterboarding is/was so effective at extracting info, what's up with all the repeat performances?
Click to expand...

They were effective enough that KSM started giving classes to CIA after he was, as he put it, freed from his obligation to remain silent....
 
radioman said:
I thought it WAS an instant process.
As in... "this guy knows where the nukes are, lets waterboard him"...
Instead, it seems to be a time consuming process.
By the time a KSM gives up any info, it would be obsolete.
Terrorists would adjust their MO's when any of their leaders are captured.


Again with the long process.
What sort of actionable info do you think KSM would have stored in his brain that would be critical in the never-ending "War on Terror"
Do you think he has intricate plots, Osama's phone number, addresses.....what exactly would he give up?
Click to expand...

Wasn't it KSM who provided the information on the compound that enabled the Seals to go in and capture Bin Laden?
 
Grant said:
Were you told that only one time was necessary?
Click to expand...
No, but at some point, say after waterboard #73, a reasonable person might conclude that the process isn't working with this guy.
Maybe try a different tack?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't KSM waterboarded several years after his capture?
What vital info would he be able to divulge at that point in time?
 
tres borrachos said:
Wasn't it KSM who provided the information on the compound that enabled the Seals to go in and capture Bin Laden?
Click to expand...

Actually he gave the name of the personal courier that OBL used...That led after observation to OBL.
 
Kobie said:
Your comment made no sense. Neither did this one.
Click to expand...

Yes MMC's comments did make sense. He was talking about the PC on steroids promoted on the left side of the aisle that has resulted in some folks not looking at things clearly. Not enough were willing to speak out against it and now we have a bunch of folks sympathizing with the enemy.

We are seeing the media being used as a propaganda machine to promote it. We are seeing Democrats through their decision to release the damn report comprised of third party persons and not those involved directly, that is putting our allies, and people who work for the CIA and our informants at risk. Even though Democrats almost unanimously supported the forms being used by the CIA through 39 friggin meetings where they were informed of the procedures they were being used on a limited number of detainees. Now all of a sudden Feinstein has a problem but didn't during all 39 briefings. In fact several Democrats words at the time were "do whatever it takes". Feinstein and other Democrats also have no problem using drones to target these terrorists which often kills a lot of innocent people along with our on the ground intelligent iinformers.

And this OP along with this new found decision to release the report while they do a kabookie dance unable to justify their own previous support is occurring while Obama just released more Gitmo prisoners and the media failed to cover it.

Hello Houston we have a problem, and it isn't the CIA.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom