• 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!

CIA 'threatened September 11 suspect's children'

Actually, my argument was your opinions and statements based on your idiotic repeated use of "Just wait and see" mentality is worthless coming from you and shows a pattern of your debate style, not that you have to provide immediete evidence. My argument was that your posts have became a bit of a joke because you like to make outrageous claims and then make the idiotic statement of "proof will come out to prove me correct" thus showing you're not wanting to deal with facts, reality, or debate but simply want to make outrageous statements that people can't call you out on because you will just fall back on "Its my opinion" and "just you wait, facts will come out".

Here you go, I'll play your game.

This was needed, because by doing that they averted a nuclear attack on the United States that would've simultaneously decimate the entire population of New York, Washington, Chicago, and L.A. Just you wait, facts will come out that prove me true. Maybe not today, maybe not next week, but you know, sometime....so that makes it true, just you wait. So its prefectly okay they did this.
 
Gill said:
All of them.
Click to expand...

Well the listing of Al-Nashiri's false confessions come from the Verbatim Transcript of Open Session Combatant Status Review Tribunal Hearing for ISN 10015. United States Department of Defense. pp. pages 1-36

For some reason its no longer on the DOD page. But you can find the information on Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

The fact that KSM and Zubayda were waterboarded 183 and 83 times respectively can be found in multiple news outlets but here's a right wing source stating such:

DOJ Memo: CIA Report Claims 9/11 Mastermind Waterboarded 183 Times - Political News - FOXNews.com

Abu Zubayda not being a member of Al-Qaeda was from a 2007 combatant review hearing but information can be found on wapo

CIA Says It Misjudged Role of High-Value Detainee Abu Zubaida, Transcript Shows - washingtonpost.com

Koreans and waterboarding you can find in the nytimes. The reason why the SERE program was developed was because of the Korean's use of waterboarding and other torture.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/22/us/politics/22detain.html

According to several former top officials involved in the discussions seven years ago, they did not know that the military training program, called SERE, for Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape, had been created decades earlier to give American pilots and soldiers a sample of the torture methods used by Communists in the Korean War, methods that had wrung false confessions from Americans.
Click to expand...

Any other questions? So again Gill I ask you if it was so effective like you say why the need to use it again and again if they were "singing like canaries" from the technique?
 
Zyphlin said:
Actually, my argument was your opinions and statements based on your idiotic repeated use of "Just wait and see" mentality is worthless coming from you and shows a pattern of your debate style, not that you have to provide immediete evidence.
Click to expand...

I provide plenty of links to prove a point when such proof is already available. If I state an opinion/hypothesis, I usually so identify it.
I think that's what these forums are all about....They are not just encyclopedias of provable facts.

If that's what you want...go here: [ame]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page[/ame]
 
Last edited:
Gill said:
No, just asking him to back up his allegations for once with actual facts.
Click to expand...

Weren't you trying to make it seem like the government sponsored the treatment by the soldiers in the article you listed?
 
Gill said:
What makes you think they didn't??
Click to expand...

Can you prove they did? You're making the contention. As opposed to what is happening now can you show any evidence this was a top down decision. There seems to be more and more information coming out showing this was a top down policy
 
Any other questions? So again Gill I ask you if it was so effective like you say why the need to use it again and again if they were "singing like canaries" from the technique?
Click to expand...

Each waterboarding session lasted only 10 seconds. Do you actually believe they could tell everything they knew in that amount of time??
 
Gill said:
Each waterboarding session lasted only 10 seconds. Do you actually believe they could tell everything they knew in that amount of time??
Click to expand...

Do you have a source for it only lasting 10 seconds? All the information I've read says it lasted longer. And the session usually is 3 attempts over the course of a day. Have you seen anyone get waterboarded? You're lucky if you can last 10 seconds. Christopher Hitchens has a video up of him getting waterboarded as well as Mancow Mueller. Also there was one of an independent news agency reporter who was waterboarded more intensely. Again if it was effective it wouldn't need to have been used so much

So you have an idea here is playboy writer Mike Guy getting waterboarded.

Video: Reporter gets waterboarded for his story, doesn?t like it | I Hate the Media - Fun with Liberal Media Bias
 
Last edited:
PogueMoran said:
Do you have a source for it only lasting 10 seconds? All the information I've read says it lasted longer. And the session usually is 3 attempts over the course of a day. Have you seen anyone get waterboarded? You're lucky if you can last 10 seconds. Christopher Hitchens has a video up of him getting waterboarded as well as Mancow Mueller. Also there was one of an independent news agency reporter who was waterboarded more intensely. Again if it was effective it wouldn't need to have been used so much

So you have an idea here is playboy writer Mike Guy getting waterboarded.

Video: Reporter gets waterboarded for his story, doesn?t like it | I Hate the Media - Fun with Liberal Media Bias
Click to expand...

I already posted it, but I guess this proves you don't even bother reading proof when I put it in a post.

The report explains that each application of water is counted separately, and most of the 83 applications lasted less than ten seconds.
Click to expand...
 
Gill said:
I already posted it, but I guess this proves you don't even bother reading proof when I put it in a post.
Click to expand...

Now there's a difference between each as you claimed and most as the IG report claims. Again you're emphatically qualifying what you're saying just like you did with "they sung like canaries." Now either it was effective and they sung like canaries from the technique as you first claimed or it wasn't that effective because it only lasted 10 seconds. Which one is it?
 
Gill said:
Yes, if he could start backing up his posts half as well as I do, then that would be great.

Thanks for the compliment.
Click to expand...

The problem is that you haven't even clearly examined the "evidence" you post, given that it is equally supportive of the opposing perspective (i.e., that torture doesn't work better, or that the evidence is unclear).
 
The report that Gill posted mentions Abu Zubaida several times:
http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...er-11-suspects-children-6.html#post1058213824

This is what we now know about this person, several months after the report:

"The government doesn't retreat from who KSM is, and neither does KSM," said Joseph Margulies, a professor of law at Northwestern University and one of Abu Zubaida's attorneys, using an abbreviation for Mohammed. "With Zubaida, it's different. The government seems finally to understand he is not at all the person they thought he was. But he was tortured. And that's just a profoundly embarrassing position for the government to be in."

...Even before President Obama suspended military commissions at the military base in Cuba, prosecutors had expunged Abu Zubaida's name from the charge sheets of a number of detainees who were captured with him and stood accused of conspiracy and material support for terrorism.

When they were first charged in 2005, these detainees were accused of conspiring with Abu Zubaida, and the charge sheets contained numerous references to Abu Zubaida's alleged terrorist activities. When the charges were refiled last year, his name had vanished from the documents.

...The application of techniques such as waterboarding -- a form of simulated drowning that U.S. officials had previously deemed a crime -- prompted a sudden torrent of names and facts. Abu Zubaida began unspooling the details of various al-Qaeda plots, including plans to unleash weapons of mass destruction.

Abu Zubaida's revelations triggered a series of alerts and sent hundreds of CIA and FBI investigators scurrying in pursuit of phantoms. The interrogations led directly to the arrest of Jose Padilla, the man Abu Zubaida identified as heading an effort to explode a radiological "dirty bomb" in an American city. Padilla was held in a naval brig for 3 1/2 years on the allegation but was never charged in any such plot. Every other lead ultimately dissolved into smoke and shadow, according to high-ranking former U.S. officials with access to classified reports.

"We spent millions of dollars chasing false alarms," one former intelligence official said.

Despite the poor results, Bush White House officials and CIA leaders continued to insist that the harsh measures applied against Abu Zubaida and others produced useful intelligence that disrupted terrorist plots and saved American lives.

Two weeks ago, Bush's vice president, Richard B. Cheney, renewed that assertion in an interview with CNN, saying that "the enhanced interrogation program" stopped "a great many" terrorist attacks on the level of Sept. 11.

"I've seen a report that was written, based upon the intelligence that we collected then, that itemizes the specific attacks that were stopped by virtue of what we learned through those programs," Cheney asserted, adding that the report is "still classified," and, "I can't give you the details of it without violating classification."

Since 2006, Senate intelligence committee members have pressed the CIA, in classified briefings, to provide examples of specific leads that were obtained from Abu Zubaida through the use of waterboarding and other methods, according to officials familiar with the requests.

The agency provided none, the officials said.
Click to expand...

Detainee's Harsh Treatment Foiled No Plots
 
Last edited:
I have asked this question at least 3 times with no response that I have seen....So I'll try again:

If Bush & Cheney could have produced classified evidence that proved waterboarding (torture) techniques actually produced good information, why didn't they "Leak" it when they had the power to do so???

(they had no problem leaking the name of a covert CIA agent in time of war, why wouldn't they have proved their torture techniques worked??)

Answer: Because torture doesn't work to get useful information....The "torturee" will simply concoct any BS to stop the torturing.
 
Last edited:
Devil505 said:
I have asked this question at least 3 times with no response that I have seen.

If Bush & Cheney could have produced classified evidence that waterboarding (torture) techniques actually produced good information, why didn't they "Leak" it when they had the power to do so???

(they had no problem leaking the name of a covert CIA agent in time of war, why wouldn't they have proved their torture techniques worked??)

Answer: Because torture doesn't work to get useful information....The "torturee" will simply concoct any BS to stop the torturing.
Click to expand...


Devil its the same answer as if Sadam had WMDs why didn't he use them on our soldiers when we invaded?
 
Devil505 said:
I have asked this question at least 3 times with no response that I have seen....So I'll try again:

If Bush & Cheney could have produced classified evidence that waterboarding (torture) techniques actually produced good information, why didn't they "Leak" it when they had the power to do so???

(they had no problem leaking the name of a covert CIA agent in time of war, why wouldn't they have proved their torture techniques worked??)

Answer: Because torture doesn't work to get useful information....The "torturee" will simply concoct any BS to stop the torturing.
Click to expand...
And you know this how?
 
American said:
And you know this how?
Click to expand...

What????

Have you seen any such leaked proof??

Edit:

OK...Now I understand your point.

Then you tell me....If torture works...... why did they not leak proof of that?? (because Bush/Cheney didn't want to break the law???):lol::lol:
 
Last edited:
Our children died on 9-11, better their children than ours. I did not make the world, I only try to survie in it. I prefer they die for their cause versus our children dying for ours. Don't like it,tuff. Kill what needs to be killed then stop until you have to kill some more.
 
rhinefire said:
Our children died on 9-11, better their children than ours. I did not make the world, I only try to survie in it. I prefer they die for their cause versus our children dying for ours. Don't like it,tuff. Kill what needs to be killed then stop until you have to kill some more.
Click to expand...

Yes, because striving to better our lots in life and promote some amount of diplomacy is just stupid. Better to sacrifice life after life of our own brethren for some ill conceived notion of war or ability to end it or plan on how it will improve things. Much better.
 
jfuh said:
Terrorists also threaten one's family as do mobsters.
What now diffrentiates between the CIA interrogators vs a gangster?
Click to expand...

CIA did this to protect our country. That's the difference.

Laila said:
We are supposed to be better, are we not?
What moral ground do we have if we resort to their tactics?
Click to expand...

It's not about being better. It's about defeating the enemy. There are no points for second place and this isn't a popularity contest.

jfuh said:
It's not just a matter of morals alone; it's the problem of the quality of the intel you get.
Through such measures you will never know whether or not the intel you collect is any good. People will admit to anything under duress.
Our soliders admitted to being criminals against humanity when the N. Koreans and Viet Cong tortured them. Giving taped confessions and admissions of guilt.
Look at the solider that was captured by the Taliban - on camera admitting various criminal and murderous acts.
It's a stupid methodology that only serves to satisfy a very primitive form of instinct by some very narrow minded who do not seek for intel, but punishment.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter what intel you get, or how you get it, it isn't credible until you confirm it. If torture didn't work, it would have faded out about 2,000 years ago. Since it's still in use, to this day, obviously, someone has achieved some good results from it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom