• 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!

George W Bush claims UK lives 'saved by waterboarding'

You were defending him against the charge of being a terrorist. The "lunacy" is where you went to claim he's not a terrorist -- that he's an enemy soldier conducting a war.

I'm pretty sure it's you (once again!) who's displaying the "absolutist" thought here.
What does the military call him, since they're the ones who are going to put him on trial?
 
We're not looking at a specific case or profile, nor even a specific event. I know I've come into the thread at a point where we're not really discussing this any more, but all I was saying was that America is as fallible as every other nation or group out there -- they make mistakes, and they inevitably make mistakes with political prisoners. That's all.

It's nothing groundbreaking.

So KSM is really nothing more than a 'political prisoner'? Is that right?


j-mac
 
Let's go with this scenario: A terrorist sets a bomb and to defuse it you need a special code, if you use the wrong code - KABOOM!!! You torture the terrorist so he will reveal the code and he gives you one. Do you believe him?

Also, how easy is it to make someone say "Uncle" when you have their arm twisted behind their back?

Report: KSM Lied to Avoid Further Waterboarding; ‘I Make Up Stories’ - Law Blog - WSJ

As he confessed to everything ever done, including killing the Easter Bunny, it seemed pretty obvious he a made a few things up. And there's no evidence I've seen that he gave us anything we didn't already have.
 
As he confessed to everything ever done, including killing the Easter Bunny, it seemed pretty obvious he a made a few things up. And there's no evidence I've seen that he gave us anything we didn't already have.

That is because of what you choose to believe and because of a bad case of BDS. You don't know much about Islam do you?
 
That is because of what you choose to believe and because of a bad case of BDS. You don't know much about Islam do you?

I'm sorry conservative, I usually at least follow your rantings. But ths is more than a bit confusing. There is nothing about Islam that changes the turht of what I said. Nor does it account for the fact we've seen no evidence of anything gained from KSM. You will have to be more specific and clear.
 
I'm sorry conservative, I usually at least follow your rantings. But ths is more than a bit confusing. There is nothing about Islam that changes the turht of what I said. Nor does it account for the fact we've seen no evidence of anything gained from KSM. You will have to be more specific and clear.

As stated, study up on Islam and learn exactly what it teaches people to say and when, get back to me after you do your research. There is plenty of evidence that we gained a lot from KSM including actual plots thwarted and individuals captured.
 
As stated, study up on Islam and learn exactly what it teaches people to say and when, get back to me after you do your research. There is plenty of evidence that we gained a lot from KSM including actual plots thwarted and individuals captured.

Again, that doesn't matter or change anything. Fact, KSM confessed to everything, so it should be doubted. Fact, there has been no evidence we got anything that we didn't already have. Regardless of Islam or anything they we taught, the facts remian the same.

And no, there is no evidence any plots were thrawed from intel received from KSM that I'm aware of. In fact, what Cheney presented when pushed was proven to be false as we knew about that plot before KSM was even captured.
 
As he confessed to everything ever done, including killing the Easter Bunny, it seemed pretty obvious he a made a few things up. And there's no evidence I've seen that he gave us anything we didn't already have.




:lol: seriously you don't think we have experts that can figure out what is true and not by a good margin? Intelligence is not your strong point... (I mean cia type of stuff of course.)
 
Again, that doesn't matter or change anything. Fact, KSM confessed to everything, so it should be doubted. Fact, there has been no evidence we got anything that we didn't already have. Regardless of Islam or anything they we taught, the facts remian the same.

And no, there is no evidence any plots were thrawed from intel received from KSM that I'm aware of. In fact, what Cheney presented when pushed was proven to be false as we knew about that plot before KSM was even captured.

First of all, you weren't there when KSM was waterboarded and don't know what he said or didn't say. Second you know nothing about Islam and what Islam teaches about what to say and what not to say and when. I suggest you find out. You have a bad case of BDS and suggest you get over it. You have enough problems with "your" President.
 
Second you know nothing about Islam and what Islam teaches about what to say and what not to say and when. I suggest you find out.


Since you think you know why don't you share what you think you know?
 
:lol: seriously you don't think we have experts that can figure out what is true and not by a good margin? Intelligence is not your strong point... (I mean cia type of stuff of course.)

I do, but they didn't get that across to the president and we went to war. And that cost us lives and money, hurting the country.

An article published in the November 5, 2005 New York Times quoted two paragraphs of a Defense Intelligence Agency report, declassified upon request by Senator Carl Levin, that expressed doubts about the results of al-Libi's interrogation in February 2002. The declassified paragraphs are:

This is the first report from Ibn al-Shaykh in which he claims Iraq assisted al-Qaida's CBRN efforts. However, he lacks specific details on the Iraqi's [sic] involved, the CBRN materials associated with the assistance, and the location where training occurred. It is possible he does not know any further details; it is more likely this individual is intentionally misleading the debriefers. Ibn al-Shaykh has been undergoing debriefs for several weeks and may describing [sic] scenarios to the debriefers that he knows will retain their interest.[cite this quote]

The January 2003 CIA paper Iraqi Support for Terrorism states that al-Libi told a foreign intelligence service that "Iraq — acting on the request of al-Qa'ida militant Abu Abdullah, who was Muhammad Atif's emissary — agreed to provide unspecified chemical or biological weapons training for two al-Qa'ida associates beginning in December 2000. The two individuals departed for Iraq but did not return, so al-Libi was not in a position to know if any training had taken place."[cite this quote] The September 2002 version of Iraqi Support for Terrorism stated that al-Libi said Iraq had "provided" chemical and biological weapons training for two al-Qaeda associates in 2000, but also stated that al-Libi "did not know the results of the training."[cite this quote]

The 2006 Senate Report on Pre-war Intelligence on Iraq stated that "Although DIA coordinated on CIA's Iraqi Support for Terrorism paper, DIA analysis preceding that assessment was more skeptical of the al-Libi reporting." In July 2002, DIA assessed "It is plausible al-Qa'ida attempted to obtain CB assistance from Iraq and Ibn al-Shaykh is sufficiently senior to have access to such sensitive information. However, Ibn al-Shaykh's information lacks details concerning the individual Iraqis involved, the specific CB materials associated with the assistance and the location where the alleged training occurred. The information is also second hand, and not derived from Ibn al-Shaykh's personal experience."[12]

(snip)

On June 11, 2008 Newsweek published an account of material from a "A previously undisclosed CIA report written in the summer of 2002". The article reported that on August 7, 2002 CIA analysts had drafted a high-level report that expressed serious doubts about the information flowing from al-Libi's interrogation. The information that al-Libi acknowledged being a member al-Qaeda' executive committee was not supported by information from other sources. According to al-Libi, in Egypt he was locked in a tiny box less than 20 inches high and held for 17 hours and after being let out he was thrown to the floor and punched for 15 minutes. According to CIA operational cables, only then did he tell his "fabricated" story about Al Qaeda members being dispatched to Iraq.

Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
First of all, you weren't there when KSM was waterboarded and don't know what he said or didn't say. Second you know nothing about Islam and what Islam teaches about what to say and what not to say and when. I suggest you find out. You have a bad case of BDS and suggest you get over it. You have enough problems with "your" President.

Like everyone else, i can only go by the evidence presented, which is why I make clear that this is based on what we know. And the administration did try to support their claim, but they failed. It's fair to question why. If you're going to argue tortured saves lives, you have to show how.

Also, you then ahve to declare that all countries can now torture. They are free to torture Americans and be justified because we, America, have deemed it acceptable. All they need to do is say it saved lives and offer no evidence that it did.
 
Like everyone else, i can only go by the evidence presented, which is why I make clear that this is based on what we know. And the administration did try to support their claim, but they failed. It's fair to question why. If you're going to argue tortured saves lives, you have to show how.

Also, you then ahve to declare that all countries can now torture. They are free to torture Americans and be justified because we, America, have deemed it acceptable. All they need to do is say it saved lives and offer no evidence that it did.

Yours is selective evidence based upon what you want to believe. Are you claiming that other countries don't torture and since we Waterboarded three high value al Qaeda they just changed their interrogation tactics?

RealClearPolitics - Waterboarding Worked on KSM
 
Boo Radley

Also, you then ahve to declare that all countries can now torture. They are free to torture Americans and be justified because we, America, have deemed it acceptable. All they need to do is say it saved lives and offer no evidence that it did.

This is what free people up against, and these atrocities have been carried out all over the world, to many thousands of innocents. Yet these are the guys you feel are the moral equivalent of the United States.

Taliban - Daniel Pearl Execution Video - Wretch

Any further words I might add would be against the house rules, but contemptible would be among them..
 
I do, but they didn't get that across to the president and we went to war. And that cost us lives and money, hurting the country.

An article published in the November 5, 2005 New York Times quoted two paragraphs of a Defense Intelligence Agency report, declassified upon request by Senator Carl Levin, that expressed doubts about the results of al-Libi's interrogation in February 2002. The declassified paragraphs are:

This is the first report from Ibn al-Shaykh in which he claims Iraq assisted al-Qaida's CBRN efforts. However, he lacks specific details on the Iraqi's [sic] involved, the CBRN materials associated with the assistance, and the location where training occurred. It is possible he does not know any further details; it is more likely this individual is intentionally misleading the debriefers. Ibn al-Shaykh has been undergoing debriefs for several weeks and may describing [sic] scenarios to the debriefers that he knows will retain their interest.[cite this quote]

The January 2003 CIA paper Iraqi Support for Terrorism states that al-Libi told a foreign intelligence service that "Iraq — acting on the request of al-Qa'ida militant Abu Abdullah, who was Muhammad Atif's emissary — agreed to provide unspecified chemical or biological weapons training for two al-Qa'ida associates beginning in December 2000. The two individuals departed for Iraq but did not return, so al-Libi was not in a position to know if any training had taken place."[cite this quote] The September 2002 version of Iraqi Support for Terrorism stated that al-Libi said Iraq had "provided" chemical and biological weapons training for two al-Qaeda associates in 2000, but also stated that al-Libi "did not know the results of the training."[cite this quote]

The 2006 Senate Report on Pre-war Intelligence on Iraq stated that "Although DIA coordinated on CIA's Iraqi Support for Terrorism paper, DIA analysis preceding that assessment was more skeptical of the al-Libi reporting." In July 2002, DIA assessed "It is plausible al-Qa'ida attempted to obtain CB assistance from Iraq and Ibn al-Shaykh is sufficiently senior to have access to such sensitive information. However, Ibn al-Shaykh's information lacks details concerning the individual Iraqis involved, the specific CB materials associated with the assistance and the location where the alleged training occurred. The information is also second hand, and not derived from Ibn al-Shaykh's personal experience."[12]

(snip)

On June 11, 2008 Newsweek published an account of material from a "A previously undisclosed CIA report written in the summer of 2002". The article reported that on August 7, 2002 CIA analysts had drafted a high-level report that expressed serious doubts about the information flowing from al-Libi's interrogation. The information that al-Libi acknowledged being a member al-Qaeda' executive committee was not supported by information from other sources. According to al-Libi, in Egypt he was locked in a tiny box less than 20 inches high and held for 17 hours and after being let out he was thrown to the floor and punched for 15 minutes. According to CIA operational cables, only then did he tell his "fabricated" story about Al Qaeda members being dispatched to Iraq.

Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia





wow 2 paragraphs is all the proof you need to fit your square peg in your round hole. Good for you, chief. :lamo
 
BBC News - George W Bush claims UK lives 'saved by waterboarding'

Goes to show, its effective to a degree. I'm personally okay with violating the rights of terrorists if it means protecting the right to life of innocent civilians.

Bush can claim whatever he wants.

UK says he is lying and denies it. Cameron condemns Bush and call out his bull****. Oh and UK disagrees with US. Water boarding is classified as torture.
Any information received is unreliable. Anyone facing torture will crack and tell the individuals what they wish to hear.

And if individuals in UK did willingly help US torture people. They ought to face a trial and go to jail.
 
Bush can claim whatever he wants.

UK says he is lying and denies it. Cameron condemns Bush and call out his bull****. Oh and UK disagrees with US. Water boarding is classified as torture.
Any information received is unreliable. Anyone facing torture will crack and tell the individuals what they wish to hear.

And if individuals in UK did willingly help US torture people. They ought to face a trial and go to jail.

But piracy -- that's just fine with you.
 
Laila
Bush can claim whatever he wants.

How generous of you!!

UK says he is lying and denies it.

But, as Bush himself said, who cares??
Cameron condemns Bush and call out his bull****. Oh and UK disagrees with US. Water boarding is classified as torture.

Sure, and as a result more Muslims are attempting terrorist acts from the UK than from any other Western European nation.
Any information received is unreliable. Anyone facing torture will crack and tell the individuals what they wish to hear.

As a matter of fact the information eventually ereceived from the Islamic terrorists was reliable, and this had been demonstrated repeatedly.
And if individuals in UK did willingly help US torture people. They ought to face a trial and go to jail.

The UK had better make up its mind quite soon as to whose side it really is on. In fact American leaders, including the current President, are already dismissing the British. That is not a good thing as far as I'm concerned, but if the Brits allow themselves to be intimidated by Muslims and increase their anti American propaganda, then they'll have made their own bed. What follows is anyone's guess.
 
Bush can claim whatever he wants.

UK says he is lying and denies it. Cameron condemns Bush and call out his bull****. Oh and UK disagrees with US. Water boarding is classified as torture.
Any information received is unreliable. Anyone facing torture will crack and tell the individuals what they wish to hear.

And if individuals in UK did willingly help US torture people. They ought to face a trial and go to jail.

Did you read Tony Blair's book? Didn't think so. Those with BDS need help. Whether you like it or not, lawyers said that Waterboarding wasn't torture and lives were saved. Wonder how you would react if one of your loved ones was an innocent killed by terrorists and knew that your President could have prevented it?
 
But piracy -- that's just fine with you.

Armed robbery is not the same as torture. LOL

Edit: I changed from support to quiet laughter btw.
 
Last edited:
Did you read Tony Blair's book? Didn't think so. Those with BDS need help. Whether you like it or not, lawyers said that Waterboarding wasn't torture and lives were saved. Wonder how you would react if one of your loved ones was an innocent killed by terrorists and knew that your President could have prevented it?

If Blair states he knowingly allowed torture to happen, he ought to face UK court too and go to jail.

I don't have a President btw. I have a Queen.
 
If Blair states he knowingly allowed torture to happen, he ought to face UK court too and go to jail.

I don't have a President btw. I have a Queen.

Sorry, didn't read your profile but the question remains, how would you feel if your leadership could have prevented the death of one of your loved ones but didn't? Waterboarding wasn't classified as torture by the lawyers regardless of what you claim and that action saved a lot of American lives. I support what Bush did and would take him back in a heartbeat.
 
Sorry, didn't read your profile but the question remains, how would you feel if your leadership could have prevented the death of one of your loved ones but didn't? Waterboarding wasn't classified as torture by the lawyers regardless of what you claim and that action saved a lot of American lives. I support what Bush did and would take him back in a heartbeat.

No problem. I would not support torture and I wouldn't take back Blair if you paid me.
 
No problem. I would not support torture and I wouldn't take back Blair if you paid me.

According to lawyers Waterboarding wasn't torture and I would do whatever possible to prevent the death of one of my loved ones. Looks like your country is a mess right now and trying to undue years of socialism
 
Back
Top Bottom