• 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!

Obama Rules Out Charging C.I.A. Agents in Interrogations

I love watching people make up arguments to support their inane and naive points of view.

The only ones who are apologizing for what went on are the empty headed Liberal loons in the Democrat party that now infest our Government.

The only thing more laughable about this idiotic notion about our torturing terrorists is the equally idiotic notion that coddling them will somehow get them to talk.

I am feeling so much safer now that the secrets are all out for the terrorists and our enemies to see that they will have Constitutional rights and be coddled should they murder more of our citizens.

Carry on. :roll:

I don't see how you can apply constitutional rights to non-citizens within the context of a war situation. What do you want to do, give enemy soldiers a fair trial before you shoot them? Forbid yourself from jamming their communications transmissions because you're violating their right to free speech? Not disarm them when they're taken into custody so as not to violate their right to bear arms? Get a warrant from a judge before you search them or their property? The rules of war are dictated by international and domestic law, including the constitution, under which neither warfare in general nor these techniques are illegal.
 
I don't see how you can apply constitutional rights to non-citizens within the context of a war situation. What do you want to do, give enemy soldiers a fair trial before you shoot them? Forbid yourself from jamming their communications transmissions because you're violating their right to free speech? Not disarm them when they're taken into custody so as not to violate their right to bear arms? Get a warrant from a judge before you search them or their property? The rules of war are dictated by international and domestic law, including the constitution, under which neither warfare in general nor these techniques are illegal.

I don't either; but we have the ACLU and Liberals desperately trying to grant these terrorists Habeas Corpus.
 
To which I would reply that this wasn't torture, hence our troops receive resistance training to these techniques in SERE school. I'm also sorry that you are unable to listen to reason and appreciate the unique challenge posed by this decentralized, transnational, religiously/ideologically hardened, terrorist organization.

As it stands, these practices are not illegal under international or domestic law. The CIA works at the edge of the law. It's their job to defend our country. The only way to curb it permanently would be to tighten the law, preferably internationally so that it's reciprocated by our potential adversaries.

Outstanding commentary and sums up the FACTS pretty well in two short paragraphs. Bravo! :applaud
 
Outstanding commentary and sums up the FACTS pretty well in two short paragraphs. Bravo! :applaud

Tell me how they don't. I'm not too dense to see through your sockpuppet facade.
 
blah blah blah. Why don't you just engage in debate like a normal person instead of trying to make your point through Socratic Irony?

It was an illustration of the absurdity of the “anti-torture argument;” I think you missed the intended irony.
:2wave:
 
Come again? I just complimented you on a well stated comment and you insult me?

I think you are confused dude. :doh

LOL. I know what you're doing. You dont actually believe the things that you say. You speak in socratic irony. You're pretty smart though. Who are you? Agnapostate?
 
Torture doesn't work. It doesn't yield useful information. If you were torturing a terrorist about a ticking bomb, he wouldn't tell you squat.

This is one of those wonderful bits of rhetoric that gets spread around so fervently that it becomes dogma, and that to even question it becomes, well, suspect.

Is there a debate about the effectiveness of torture? Of course.

Is there a debate about what constitutes torture and what constitutes legal interrogation technique? Yes.

Do we know that useful information can be obtained from legal interrogation? Of course.

Are some legal interrogation techniques unpleasant? Certainly.

To say that torture doesn't work, period, is not much more creditable than to say that harsh interrogation techniques don't work, period. Interrogation techniques vary in effectiveness from individual to individual. They may lead to valuable information in some cases and disinformation in others.

None of this is black and white. But it is tempting to take a very simplistic stand and state emphatically... 'The U.S. doesn't torture.' That's about as compelling a statement as 'You're either with us or you're with the Terrorists.' It's political rhetoric designed to appeal to world opinion.

;)
 
Torture doesn't work. If you were really in the business you would know that.

Do you have any evidence to prove that claim. Torture does work in certain situations and if done right. And according to the left torture means more than just pulling fingernails. If you think sleep dep and humiliation are not effective tools you dont know what you are talking about.
 
Last edited:
Were 9/11 detainee's children tortured by insects?
Bush memos parallel claim 9/11 mastermind’s children were tortured with insects
The memo was dated Aug. 1, 2002. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s children were captured and held in Pakistan the following month, according to a report by Human Rights Watch.

While an additional memo released Thursday claims that the torture with insects technique was never utilized by the CIA, the allegations regarding the children would have transpired when the method was authorized by the Bush Administration.

At a military tribunal in 2007, the father of a Guantanamo detainee alleged that Pakistani guards had confessed that American interrogators used ants to coerce the children of alleged 9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed into revealing their father’s whereabouts.

I'm thinking this is all going to come down to "You should'a let management and a small group of Red Cross in and alert them of the bluffing torture setup you supposedly had."
 
The "successful" examples of torture which were prominently publicized by the Bush administration, turned out to be fiction. But many servicemen risked their lives discovering they were fiction. Whatever AlQaeda are, they are not ******s, and they will not give up their comrades just because you set their feet on fire.

Who set anyone's feet on fire? Do you have any response to the LAT article I just provided that directly contradicted your claims?

Were 9/11 detainee's children tortured by insects?
Bush memos parallel claim 9/11 mastermind’s children were tortured with insects

Oh, ****. Well, if the father of a Guantanamo detainee said that some Pakistani guards told him that some Americans said that they heard it happened, it must have happened.
 
I guess it was your vast intellectual prowess which makes your witty prose beyond my simplistic ability to read and comprehend. :cool:
I doubt it.
But thank you anyway.
I'm not too proud to accept any sort of a compliment I can manage to get.
 
Lee Stranahan: CIA Official: Waterboard #184 Would Have "Worked Like A Charm"

LANGLEY, VA: Confirming reports that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was waterboarded 183 times in one month in 2003, CIA officials officially stated that America had been put in grave peril by the agency stopping just shy of the 'magic number' of 184 waterboarding sessions during that month.

"We were really close with KSM -- maybe just a Super Big Gulp of water away from breaking a number of major cases wide open" said officials. "Before we were pulled back. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was about to tell us who assassinated JFK, why Building 7 collapsed at the World Trade Center and was also about to solve an episode of Cold Case where a closeted gay high school athlete was found dead on the basketball court in 1953."

The unnamed officials spoke under the condition that Dick Cheney would "stop hanging around outside their house and pestering their kids."

Everyone knows if you gotta do something 183 times in a month it must be a very effective task...

lol damn that story is funny.
 
Last edited:
C'mon.

Did even the Obama worshippers and disciples expect anything more? The minute Senator Obama turned into President Obama he was exposed to the real world beyond the politics and BS. He was exposed to the disturbing ugliness of this world and was presented the intelligence and truth of the past 7 years. It most certainly is not black and white. People state that they understand such things, but I don't think they do.

President Obama was exposed to all the little secrets that ensure that the average American can sleep in his bed secure at night or secure in the notion that he can go to the local store and purchase his gas or latest technological goodie. It is a fact that sometimes a-holes need punched in the mouth. The thug in this country or the brute in that country could care less that the average American feels good about his life. He simply wants what he wants like the rest of us do. This means that no matter what it is - financial gain, religious reward, revenge, or whatever - he will try to ensure that he gets it. Which, in turn, means that it cannot conflict with what the average American wants for his life. An assassination here, a coup there, maybe a nudge of friendly support here on top of a deal there, Americans get their gas and security from an entire region.

If Obama was to go after the agents of the past, he would ensure that he no longer had the necessary tools used in the past. President after President after President has had the complete arsenol of the American power at his beckon call. (The only mistake Bush made was letting Democrats expose certain truths, and thereby doing this nation a diservice for their own political BS.) From dealing with agents of the Cold War to dealing with international trades in terrorism, this nation has always done what it had to. President Clinton was the first to cast the UN to the side (twice) even though President Bush would get the media honors. Pesident Obama will certainly do the same through men in military uniform and black and white business suits who have acknowldged that getting dirty is neccecery. Why Americans, in their jaded little worlds, allows the hiprocacy of other nations to scoff at them is beyond me.

Perhaps it's because I've been exposed to this type of thing. Perhaps it's because I've seen prisoners of "war" given to a military friend in Europe to interrogate for us. Perhaps it's because I've seen a friend in Europe betray American forces and thereby the international community (who would later support the removal of Hussein - possibly to make ammends?) Perhaps it's because after 12 years of deciding the fate of a nation and ignoring soveriegnty, the UN only cared about "soveriegnty" when Americn decided that enough was enough. Or perhaps it is simply that I'm not naive enough to believe that freedom, democracy, and our way of life has come because we have asked politely to those, who have their own dastardly agendas in mind, to be nice to us.

Wake up and stop being stupid.
 
Last edited:
Sept. 11 planner waterboarded 183 times: report


WASHINGTON (Reuters) – CIA interrogators used the waterboarding technique on Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the admitted planner of the September 11 attacks, 183 times and 83 times on another al Qaeda suspect, The New York Times said on Sunday.

The Times said a 2005 Justice Department memorandum showed that Abu Zubaydah, the first prisoner questioned in the CIA's overseas detention program in August 2002, was waterboarded 83 times, although a former CIA officer had told news media he had been subjected to only 35 seconds underwater before talking.


Damn looks like the number of times he was water boarded is a thread killer.
 
Sept. 11 planner waterboarded 183 times: report

Damn looks like the number of times he was water boarded is a thread killer.

This story is beyond suspect; but isn't it fascinating that the NYT has no curiosity what it means to even make this statement:

"The Justice Department memo said the simulated drowning technique was used on Mohammed 183 times in March 2003. The Times said some copies of the memos appeared to have the number of weatherboardings redacted while others did not."

Let's do some simple math to determine the common sense of such idiotic claims; in order to willingly swallow such swill, we would have to believe that Mohammed was water boarded almost 6 times a day.

Now I am not an expert, but 6 times a day people? This sounds beyond absurd. But on top of this, if someone needs to be water boarded 6 times a day, it is pretty obvious the technique is not working. So in order to also believe this lunatic assertion, one has to also believe that the agents in the CIA are raving morons who don't know when a technique is not working.

Let's face it folks, the disingenuous lies and distortions that this administration wallows in now suggests that these memos were being released NOT to prosecute, but to inform the American people; what a pile of BS.

If you are NOT going to prosecute anyone for a crime, why release the memos in the first place? I can tell you why, but I am sure those of you with more than half a brain can figure it out.
 
Sept. 11 planner waterboarded 183 times: report

Damn looks like the number of times he was water boarded is a thread killer.

From the New York Times and their SOURCE of this information:

The new information on the number of waterboarding episodes came out over the weekend when a number of bloggers, including Marcy Wheeler of the blog emptywheel, discovered it in the May 30, 2005, memo.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/20/world/20detain.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=waterboarding&st=cse

Anyone with a brain has to ask themselves, you're kidding me right NYTimes?

Whatever happened to HONEST and in depth investigative journalism? Now we are taken un-vetted information from Left Wing bloggers as our news sources?

:roll:
 
Waterboarding Used 266 Times on 2 Suspects

The New York Times stoops to a new low level for journalism where it has decided to quote Left Wing blog sites and unsubstantiated anonymous sources as being credible sources for investigative news.

With the purely partisan political release of CIA memos on water boarding which will serve to weaken our intelligence gathering efforts and make a mockery of the CIA, the New York Times decided that the American public has become so gullible and stupid that they can publish and article that defies logic.

Just some simple math folks, this article claims that Mohammad was supposedly water boarded 6 times daily for 31 days. Only those willingly suspending common sense can think there is any truth in this report.

But we should not be surprised with such suspect reporting; after all, the NYTs led the campaign of ignorance against George Bush and the war in Iraq.

Here are a few pertinent excerpts.

Waterboarding Used 266 Times on 2 Suspects
By SCOTT SHANE
Published: April 19, 2009

The new information on the number of waterboarding episodes came out over the weekend when a number of bloggers, including Marcy Wheeler of the blog emptywheel, discovered it in the May 30, 2005, memo.

The Times article, based on information from former intelligence officers who spoke on condition of anonymity, said Abu Zubaydah had revealed a great deal of information before harsh methods were used and after his captors stripped him of clothes, kept him in a cold cell and kept him awake at night.


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/20/world/20detain.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=waterboarding&st=cse

The NYTs should not be surprised their readership has declined to precipitously low volume and losing advertising dollars. When you reduce the integrity of your reporting to that of the Star, should anyone be surprised?
 
re: Waterboarding Used 266 Times on 2 Suspects

The New York Times stoops to a new low level for journalism where it has decided to quote Left Wing blog sites and unsubstantiated anonymous sources as being credible sources for investigative news.

With the purely partisan political release of CIA memos on water boarding which will serve to weaken our intelligence gathering efforts and make a mockery of the CIA, the New York Times decided that the American public has become so gullible and stupid that they can publish and article that defies logic.

Just some simple math folks, this article claims that Mohammad was supposedly water boarded 6 times daily for 31 days. Only those willingly suspending common sense can think there is any truth in this report.

But we should not be surprised with such suspect reporting; after all, the NYTs led the campaign of ignorance against George Bush and the war in Iraq.

Here are a few pertinent excerpts.

Waterboarding Used 266 Times on 2 Suspects
By SCOTT SHANE
Published: April 19, 2009

The new information on the number of waterboarding episodes came out over the weekend when a number of bloggers, including Marcy Wheeler of the blog emptywheel, discovered it in the May 30, 2005, memo.

The Times article, based on information from former intelligence officers who spoke on condition of anonymity, said Abu Zubaydah had revealed a great deal of information before harsh methods were used and after his captors stripped him of clothes, kept him in a cold cell and kept him awake at night.


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/20/world/20detain.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=waterboarding&st=cse

The NYTs should not be surprised their readership has declined to precipitously low volume and losing advertising dollars. When you reduce the integrity of your reporting to that of the Star, should anyone be surprised?

I guess I don't really understand your outrage here. The article does mention left-wing bloggers, but not as a resource. From the very thing you pasted here it merely mentions that these things were discovered in a report by left-wing bloggers.
As for the anonymous intelligence officers it doesn't try to pass them off as legitimate sources and even mentions that they spoke to them only on the condition that they remained anonymous.
Also, how exactly does your personal outrage over this issue qualify as breaking news?
 
Re: Waterboarding Used 266 Times on 2 Suspects

Moderator's Warning:
Title changed to match title of cited article. Please read breaking news guidelines.
 
Re: Lies passed off as Journalism?

Had the Islamic extremists never attacked our World Trade Center towers, this water-boarding would never have happened..
Or...those who play with fire end up being burned..
This has nothing to do with Liberal or Conservative..
I am not say the "torture" is wrong or right.
I am saying that the Iraq adventure, like the Vietnam era ,were both wrong..
We cannot, must not, impose our values, our morals, our rights on other nations....even if we mean well, they do not merit it....
Our nation can heal itself, can progress , can go forward ,if, and only if we learn from these mistakes....
When other less developed, less civilized nations are ready for human rights, they will let us know..
 
Re: Waterboarding Used 266 Times on 2 Suspects

Just some simple math folks, this article claims that Mohammad was supposedly water boarded 6 times daily for 31 days. Only those willingly suspending common sense can think there is any truth in this report.

Why? It is fully possible for a captive to be water-boarded 6 times for 31 days. This suspending common sense would require the act to be impossible, which it is not.
 
Re: Lies passed off as Journalism?

Had the Islamic extremists never attacked our World Trade Center towers, this water-boarding would never have happened..
Or...those who play with fire end up being burned..
This has nothing to do with Liberal or Conservative..
I am not say the "torture" is wrong or right.
I am saying that the Iraq adventure, like the Vietnam era ,were both wrong..
We cannot, must not, impose our values, our morals, our rights on other nations....even if we mean well, they do not merit it....
Our nation can heal itself, can progress , can go forward ,if, and only if we learn from these mistakes....
When other less developed, less civilized nations are ready for human rights, they will let us know..

Maybe if we weren't becoming more and more global every year with all the economies & resources being so linked, connected, and dependent on one another.

I personally don't see the justification of allowing blatant human rights violations in this day and age. Certain human rights issues must become universal. Not necessarily saying we should go to war over these issues however we most definitely should exert our influence and not just ignore or turn a blind eye towards all human rights violations because they don't happen to be taking place within our borders.
 
Back
Top Bottom