• 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!

Amnesty International Wants Bush Prosecuted for Admitted Waterboarding

j-mac said:
You need more? How much more? What do you need to see? Because when it comes to taking the word of the nations leaders you seem to be just fine with it now that your ideological outlook is embodied in the WH?


j-mac
Click to expand...

I don't take anyone's word j, regardless of party. That's really your way of doing things. I need what I awalys need, actual evidence and not just someone saying it is so. You should need the same.
 
Ahlevah said:
I did, and, well, no, it doesn't. Nothing you wrote indicates whether liberaldom in general or just you needed convincing that useful information was obtained or if less coercive methods of interrogation would have been just as successful in obtaining information. In any case, as I already indicated, either instance would be engaging in a "fool's argument" because there is no way to prove the information could or could not have been obtained using other methods of interrogation. If you still want to go ahead and try to prove it could have, go ahead and knock yourself out. For my part, I'm prepared to move on and discuss other things, like my general impression the Obama Administration felt it had no overarching duty to convince anyone of anything:

ht_top_secret_090825_mn.jpg
Click to expand...

You're actually wrong. People have studied this for longer than we've been alive. People don't just guess, but instead have tested and measured and worked with all methods of interrogation. And across the board they report that methods other than toorture have always been more effective. Most of the literature reports that torture is best for getting confessions, regardless of guilt, something used more for propaganda than for information gathering.

It would be better if you went to the library and got some books, but you could likely find some adequate reading on this with a google search.
 
Boo Radley said:
I don't take anyone's word j, regardless of party. That's really your way of doing things. I need what I awalys need, actual evidence and not just someone saying it is so. You should need the same.
Click to expand...


Sure you do. We have all seen it before. You are not going to get your hands on "actual" intel so I guess you'll continue to be duped by the far left to make your decisions that are clearly biased.


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
Sure you do. We have all seen it before. You are not going to get your hands on "actual" intel so I guess you'll continue to be duped by the far left to make your decisions that are clearly biased.


j-mac
Click to expand...

Actually, you can get much of the NIE on line. And you can amass a lot of information if you look, and not rely on just what someone says. Of course, you have to look and be open to what you read, and hear. But when anyone says x is true, the question should be, "what is your evidence." And before you accept it, you should look at the evidence. And the rebuttals.

It is you and yours who hide before "we can't know, so it was said it must be true." No one has presented any evidence that Cheney's claims is true, and what he has produced has proven false. Why doesn't that cause you to at least pause?
 
Boo Radley said:
But when anyone says x is true, the question should be, "what is your evidence." And before you accept it, you should look at the evidence. And the rebuttals.
Click to expand...

So where's your evidence that before the CIA waterboarded KSM 183 times over the course of a month he would have been more forthcoming with softer methods of interrogation? :confused:
 
Ahlevah said:
So where's your evidence that before the CIA waterboarded KSM 183 times over the course of a month he would have been more forthcoming with softer methods of interrogation? :confused:
Click to expand...

As presented many times before, we know that the second wave Cheney spoke of was uncovered before KSM was even captured (this link was posted) and that we got that information without torture. That's evidence. We also have a lot of literature on torture and interrogation, and that literature overwhelming discusses the ineffective nature of torture, and the effectiveness of other methods. That's evidence. We can also point to the misinformation al Libi gave us under torture and how we used that misinformation in the argument for goign to war with Iraq. That too is evidence.

A lot of evidence has been presented over the years, as this isn't the first time this discussion has come up. I still suggest the library is the best place for one to search, and there are many books written on this. And they really are better than a fictional TV show like 24 (an old friend Muley used to alwys point to that show as evidence). ;)
 
inspector general of cia---after enhanced interrogations and 7.5 days of sleep deprivation, ksm became intel's "preeminent source on al qaeda"

wapo's report: "ksm cooperated, and to an extraordinary extent, only when his spirit was broken in the month after his capture march 1, 2003, as the inspector general's report and other documents released this week indicate"

ksm revealed specific plans for attacks in saudi arabia, asia and the us

"cross-referencing material from different detainees, and leveraging information from one to extract more detail from another, the cia and fbi went on to round up operatives both in the united states and abroad"

"detainees in mid-2003 helped us build a list of 70 individuals -- many of whom we had never heard of before -- that al-qaeda deemed suitable for western operations"

"according to the cia summary"

"ksm was an unparalleled source in deciphering al-qaeda's strategic doctrine, key operatives and likely targets, the summary said, including describing in 'considerable detail the traits and profiles' that al-qaeda sought in western operatives and how the terrorist organization might conduct surveillance in the us"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...28/AR2009082803874_3.html?sid=ST2009082804015

FACTS to be dismissed in 60 seconds of mindless narcissism
 
Last edited:
The Prof said:
inspector general of cia---after enhanced interrogations and 7.5 days of sleep deprivation, ksm became intel's "preeminent source on al qaeda"

wapo's report: "ksm cooperated, and to an extraordinary extent, only when his spirit was broken in the month after his capture march 1, 2003, as the inspector general's report and other documents released this week indicate"

ksm revealed specific plans for attacks in saudi arabia, asia and the us

"cross-referencing material from different detainees, and leveraging information from one to extract more detail from another, the cia and fbi went on to round up operatives both in the united states and abroad"

"detainees in mid-2003 helped us build a list of 70 individuals -- many of whom we had never heard of before -- that al-qaeda deemed suitable for western operations"

"according to the cia summary"

"ksm was an unparalleled source in deciphering al-qaeda's strategic doctrine, key operatives and likely targets, the summary said, including describing in 'considerable detail the traits and profiles' that al-qaeda sought in western operatives and how the terrorist organization might conduct surveillance in the us"

How a Detainee Became An Asset - washingtonpost.com

FACTS to be dismissed in 60 seconds of mindless narcissism
Click to expand...

Actually, as this is old, and well read and researched and discussed and gone over, it wasn't dismnissed in 60 seconds. A lot went into dismissing it. :coffeepap
 
Boo Radley said:
they really are better than a fictional TV show like 24
Click to expand...

24?

LOL!

you think the inspector general reached his conclusions after watching primetime drama?
 
Last edited:
The Prof said:
24?

LOL!

you think the inspector general reached his conclusions after watching primetime drama?
Click to expand...

I am worried about your reading skills. Read it again, and see if you can find your error. :coffeepap
 
preeminent source on al qaeda

cooperated---to an extraordinary extent---only when his spirit was broken

cross-referencing material from different detainees and leveraging information from one to extract more detail from another, the cia and fbi went on to round up operatives both in the united states and abroad

built a list of 70 individuals, many never heard of before

unparalleled source in deciphering al-qaeda's strategic doctrine, key operatives and likely targets

described in considerable detail the traits and profiles that al qaeda sought and how the terrorist organization might conduct surveillance in the us

according to the inspector general's report and other documents

as related by wapo
 
Conservative said:
Why do you continue to buy the rhetoric of leftwingers with an agenda. Amnesia International should have more to deal with than 3 high value al Qaeda animals that were interrogated at GITMO. How about the human shields that al Qaeda uses, how about the cutting off of heads, how about flying planes into buildings killing innocent civilians, how about strapping bombs on their backs and blowing up market places?

There is plenty of evidence on both sides regarding Waterboarding, the question is why do you buy the left's version and not the right? Why is there such passion for this issue if not just pure hatred for President Bush, all based upon ignorance?
Click to expand...

I think the "cutting off heads" part is what discourages Amnesty from getting involved over there. ;) At Gitmo they're guarded by US soldiers.
 
Boo Radley said:
As presented many times before, we know that the second wave Cheney spoke of was uncovered before KSM was even captured....
Click to expand...

And any of this is evidence that KSM would have been more forthcoming if we'd just given him his three squares, a prayer blanket, and a copy of the Koran how? Can you at least show us your Ouija Board or whatever it is that gives you special insight into all of the information KSM revealed, as well as what KSM would have revealed if we'd not waterboarded him? :confused:
 
Ahlevah said:
And any of this is evidence that KSM would have been more forthcoming if we'd just given him his three squares, a prayer blanket, and a copy of the Koran how? Can you at least show us your Ouija Board or whatever it is that gives you special insight into all of the information KSM revealed, as well as what KSM would have revealed if we'd not waterboarded him? :confused:
Click to expand...

First, no one suggest that. The extremes are never the only options. What has been suggested is that we use proven methods that do work. However, since we did learn of the second wave, for example, without torture, and can't find anything concrete we can present that KSM did give us, and we can point to misinformation we got by torture that we did use, it is fair to ask you why you have ushc faith in something that so many say is ineffective and back it with research (visit your library)?
 
Boo Radley said:
However, since we did learn of the second wave, for example, without torture, and can't find anything concrete we can present that KSM did give us, and we can point to misinformation we got by torture that we did use, it is fair to ask you why you have ushc faith in something that so many say is ineffective and back it with research (visit your library)?
Click to expand...

First of all, some of the information outlined in the Post article I think was significant. Secondly, we as average citizens can not assume that we're privy to everything that was learned from these detainess. Finally, don't forget that we had Nancy Pelosi to keep the CIA honest and egg it on to do more.
 
Guy Incognito said:
Actually, it's proper to wait until Bush is out of office to prosecute him for war crimes. Prosecutions of sitting heads of state for war crimes are generally discouraged under international law.

Maybe Congress should have impeached Bush, maybe they shouldn't have. But new evidence has come to light in the form of a confession from Bush himself. That's more than enough to move on a war crimes prosecution.
Click to expand...

First, who would prosecute Bush ? If the prosecution were to be done in the United States, then under US law, "criminal intent" would have to be established. (ex. If you stumbled and your elbow hit a window and broke it, then yes you "admit", to breaking that window, but since you didn't intend to do that, you are not guilty of a criminal act).
Since, Bush has only admitted to following the advice of his legal staffers, who told him the waterboarding was legal, then if it wasn't, Bush does not fall into the category of being liable for criminal intent. Thus, Bush's "confession" is tantamount to vindication.
 
Ahlevah said:
First of all, some of the information outlined in the Post article I think was significant. Secondly, we as average citizens can not assume that we're privy to everything that was learned from these detainess. Finally, don't forget that we had Nancy Pelosi to keep the CIA honest and egg it on to do more.
Click to expand...

This too is a flawed thought. We don't need to be privey to everything. We merely need actual evidence. Not claims, but actual evidence. You seem to be impressed that they claimed they got information, even if they can present nothign specific at all that would support their claim. Can you understand that someone more skeptical would not be so impressed?
 
megaprogman said:
Amnesty International Calls to Prosecute Bush for Admitted Waterboarding



I support this and basically feel that these activities constitute a war crime.
Click to expand...

Seems enhanced interrogation techniques, what you call a war crime was fundamental in getting Terrorist Number 1.

Would you like to recant your idiotic statement, or do you stand by it?

And how about the remainder of you folks that expressed similar sentiments? For without that info gained by adding water and not stirring, there wouldn't be:

1. Osama bin Fishfood at the bottom of the Arabian Sea

2. We wouldn't have scored a "Mother Load" of intel from his shack in Pakistan, and

3. Terroristas around the world would never have gotten the message on Hitler's Death Day that we don't give up.

I guess you support invading an allies sovereignty, assassinating a leader of a terror organization, not going to the UN, and doing this without international assistance, nor their knowledge.

My... that is a serious about face!

As you were.

.
 
Last edited:
Zimmer, you're factually incorrect:


Funny. You would think that if the C.I.A.’s interrogation of high-value detainees was all it took, the U.S. government would have succeeded in locating bin Laden before 2006, which is when the C.I.A.’s custody of so-called “high-value detainees” ended. Instead, after the Supreme Court ruled that year that prisoners needed to be treated humanely in compliance with the Geneva Conventions, the C.I.A. was forced to turn its special detainees over to the military for detention and interrogation using more lawful tactics in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. It took five more years before all the dots could be adequately connected.

Many key details are still missing. But according to the New York Times, the turning point came when detainees being held in Guantánamo—not in the C.I.A.’s secret black-site prisons—revealed to American interrogators the pseudonym used by a key bin Laden courier, whom they also identified as a protégé of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.



Read more News Desk: Bin Laden Dead, Torture Debate Lives On : The New Yorker

Tortured stope din 2006. We didn't get the name until 2007. It simpley couldn't have produced the name. This suggests that other methods were more effective.
 
Last edited:
Boo Radley said:
Zimmer, you're factually incorrect:


Funny. You would think that if the C.I.A.’s interrogation of high-value detainees was all it took, the U.S. government would have succeeded in locating bin Laden before 2006, which is when the C.I.A.’s custody of so-called “high-value detainees” ended. Instead, after the Supreme Court ruled that year that prisoners needed to be treated humanely in compliance with the Geneva Conventions, the C.I.A. was forced to turn its special detainees over to the military for detention and interrogation using more lawful tactics in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. It took five more years before all the dots could be adequately connected.

Many key details are still missing. But according to the New York Times, the turning point came when detainees being held in Guantánamo—not in the C.I.A.’s secret black-site prisons—revealed to American interrogators the pseudonym used by a key bin Laden courier, whom they also identified as a protégé of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.



Read more News Desk: Bin Laden Dead, Torture Debate Lives On : The New Yorker

Tortured stope din 2006. We didn't get the name until 2007. It simpley couldn't have produced the name. This suggests that other methods were more effective.
Click to expand...

I smell a lot of back pedaling coming from Libs... and it's a shame we can't harness this as an energy source because it might be enough to power a few major cities.

.
 
zimmer said:
I smell a lot of back pedaling coming from Libs... and it's a shame we can't harness this as an energy source because it might be enough to power a few major cities.

.
Click to expand...

You can pretend to smell whatever you want, but you can't and haven't disputed the timeline. If we did not get the name until 2007, as Fox reports, then we did not get from torture. In fact, torture failed to get it.
 
Boo Radley said:
You can pretend to smell whatever you want, but you can't and haven't disputed the timeline. If we did not get the name until 2007, as Fox reports, then we did not get from torture. In fact, torture failed to get it.
Click to expand...
Please do not wear out your Spin-O-Matic and please don't asphyxiate yourself while keeping head in sand.

US officials say one of the key clues that led to bin Laden was a thread of information about an al-Qaeda courier. That thread, they say, may have come from the mastermind of the September 11th attacks - Khalid Sheik Mohammed, or from the so-called 20th hijacker Mohammad al-Qahtani.

"The CIA got a nickname for one of bin Laden's couriers in interrogation of high targets - very controversial interrogation. Let's make no bones about it in 2002-2004 range," said David Ignatius, Washington Post.

Authorities acknowledge both Khalid Sheik Mohammad and Mohammad al-Qahtani had been subjected to enhanced interrogation, a policy authorized by former President George Bush.
Bin Laden death prompts more questions on enhanced interrogation - 13 WTHR and many other sources like FOXNEWS

The initial threads of intelligence began surfacing in 2003 and came in the form of information about a trusted bin Laden courier, a senior U.S. official told Fox News on condition of anonymity. The information included an alias for the courier.

Read more: Bush-Era Interrogations Provided Key Details on Bin Laden's Location - FoxNews.com
Click to expand...

.
 
Last edited:
zimmer said:
Please do not wear out your Spin-O-Matic and please don't asphyxiate yourself while keeping head in sand.



.
Click to expand...

Again, you're not addressing the point. Your sources say we got the name in 2007. Torture stopped in 2006. You have not addressed the timeline. A year later, after they tortured KSm, they got the name. While torturing, they did not get the name.

Your source:

But it was four years later, in 2007, that terror suspects at the Guantanamo Bay military prison started giving up information that led to the identification of the key courier.
Click to expand...

See, it could not have been from torture.
 
Last edited:
Boo Radley said:
Again, you're not addressing the point. Your sources say we got the name in 2007. Torture stopped in 2006. You have not addressed the timeline. A year later, after they tortured KSm, they got the name. While torturing, they did not get the name.

Your source:



See, it could not have been from torture.
Click to expand...

(Reuters) - The possibility that U.S. spies located Osama bin Laden with help from detainees who'd been subjected to "enhanced interrogation" techniques seems certain to reopen the debate over practices that many have equated with torture, security experts said on Monday.

One of the key sources for initial information about an al Qaeda "courier" who led U.S. authorities to bin Laden's Pakistani hide-out was Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the al Qaeda operative said to have masterminded the September 11, 2001 attacks, a former U.S. national security official said.

KSM, as he was known to U.S. officials, was subjected to "waterboarding" 183 times, the U.S. government has acknowledged.
Bin Laden kill may reopen CIA interrogation debate | Reuters
Click to expand...
Plus 1500 plus similar stories.

Now why would this reignite the use of waterboarding if it did not play a key role.

I didn't bother to post Cheney's comments on the likelihood because I didn't want the comment to pop your head off.

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