gekaap
Active member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2011
- Messages
- 474
- Reaction score
- 124
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
I do not believe that is you.
I've been waterbaorded...as has nearly everyone that's been through S.E.R.E.
I've been waterbaorded...as has nearly everyone that's been through S.E.R.E.
That explains why you continually ramble without saying anything of real value....
omg this "Bush didn't try to catch OBL" BS is getting ridiculous. I will never be Bush's #1 fan (except maybe when it comes to comedic value), but let's drop this bull**** notion that he didn't try to get Osama. He did try, he either just didn't have enough intel to act, or he screwed up (like in Tora Bora). Bush cannot be faulted for lack of trying.
omg this "Bush didn't try to catch OBL" BS is getting ridiculous. I will never be Bush's #1 fan (except maybe when it comes to comedic value), but let's drop this bull**** notion that he didn't try to get Osama. He did try, he either just didn't have enough intel to act, or he screwed up (like in Tora Bora). Bush cannot be faulted for lack of trying.
Agents in the Minneapolis FBI Office immediately confirm the information and seek permission to search by warning FBI Headquarters in over 60 emails and frantic telephone calls that "this is a guy who could fly into the World Trade Center." Although the 'Director of Central Intelligence' is briefed within days with a presentation titled "Islamic Extremist Learns to Fly", neither the FBI or CIA staff does anything until after 9/11.
Coleen Rowley: Government Whistleblower Protection: the Long Ignored Way to Better Connect the Dots
It said: 'Reportedly a high-level meeting was held where six suicide bombers were given orders for an operation in northern Afghanistan. These meetings take place once every month.'
According to the Guardian, which has received the documents, the report went on: 'The top four people in these meetings are Mullah Omar [the Taliban leader], Osama Bin Laden, Mullah Dadullah and Mullah [Baradar].'
If true, it could mean forces came close to having the opportunity to wipe out the senior leadership of the Afghan insurgency that has so far claimed the lives of 320 British soldiers.
Wikileaks reveals Osama Bin Laden was seen at village meetings | Mail Online
Don't think we have any "reformed/born-again liberals" around here.
everyone is born a liberal....some of us grow up.
Not if this forum is any indication lol. Some transform into conservatives...but they don't grow up.
Even when the facts are not in dispute, the conclusion drawn from the facts may not all agree and be correct.The facts are not disputed: the Wikileaks docs state that the CIA obtained the information leading to bin Laden from interrogating one of his couriers caught in 2005 and traced his network of couriers. . .
That document is dated 2008. So there it is, and if it's true, then bush could've killed bin Laden in 2008. Why didn't he do so?
Now you're changing the goalposts from "effective" to "efficient."Either he was lazy, stupid, or sufficient intelligence was not available, i. e. the trace of the network by the CIA was inadequate.
Bottom line: if anyone wants to show that waterboarding is effective, then there must be evidence demonstrating its efficiency in capturing and killing dangerous criminals and terrorists.
I am not making a case "for torture." You said that torture didn't work for acquiring information and you offered up a false dilemma.But it's difficult to make a case for torture by stating that the information obtained from it turned out to be actionable 10 years later.
Showing that torture produces some information is insufficient to show that torture is a best practice.If the latter is the case, then, in fact, the torture only extracted a tiny piece of the whole puzzle--a seemingly small benefit in exchange for cruelty.
Then you shouldn't have much trouble articulating your case as an expert rather than merely pointing to the laurels on your seat.22 years in the military, working with, in and around, intelligence...you tell me.
Iirc, upon joining aQ one does not swear an oath to uphold their ideals, but rather swear an oath of fealty to ObL himself. So, "merely symbolic" can have practical impacts.Just a reminder to all Bin Laden was not a shooter or even a planner. His demise is important only symbolically. Only
I believe the saying is:
"If you're 20 and conservative, you have no heart; if you're 40 and liberal, you have no brain."
And yet, Bush made no attempt to pursue the matter and to get bin Laden. Which is why Bush deserves no credit for the kill. He gets credit for not caring, for failing to deliver, and that's about it.
I'm a liberal. I'm not bashing Bush. Neither is repeter, who agreed with my post.
I do not believe that is you.
That explains why you continually ramble without saying anything of real value....
Iirc, upon joining aQ one does not swear an oath to uphold their ideals, but rather swear an oath of fealty to ObL himself. So, "merely symbolic" can have practical impacts.
Then you shouldn't have much trouble articulating your case as an expert rather than merely pointing to the laurels on your seat.
I did not make either of the assertions you're refuting.You got it wrong....
1 AQ does not recruit and
2 They turn people that want to join away.
I believe the saying is:
"If you're 20 and conservative, you have no heart; if you're 40 and liberal, you have no brain."
What is really sad is the dumbing of America where many conservatives placed tv reality star Pain on the same level as Ronald Reagan. To many conservatives she was Einstein.
As H.L. Menken said " Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intellingence of the American public."
Palin, Bauchman, Pelosi, Trump, Frank, Sharpton, Boxer, Obama, Ventura, Franken, Paul........
It's amazing how little basic leadership skill, tact, experience, statesmanship, class, and integrity is required to be an elected leader in this country today.
This is the result of our loss of basic family structure and the resulting lack of moral fiber, which in turn has led to widespread institutionalized government dependence.
Compare our current "statemen" with those who signed the declaration and the level of debate that occurred in Independence Hall in those days.
Leon Panetta, the CIA director, has confirmed that controversial "enhanced interrogation techniques" such as waterboarding yielded some of the intelligence information that ultimately led to Osama bin Laden.
"In the intelligence business you work from a lot of sources of information and that was true here," he told NBC News. "It's a little difficult to say it was due just to one source of information that we got. I think some of the detainees clearly were, you know, they used these enhanced interrogation techniques against some of these detainees."
The White House and its Capitol Hill allies had earlier been at pains to state that such techniques, used under the Bush administration but banned by Mr Obama as amounting to torture, had not played a part in yielding significant information.
Mr Panetta's admission lays Mr Obama open to politically explosive claims that bin Laden would not have been killed had it not been for the use of those techniques by the Bush administration.
In his 2009 Senate confirmation hearings, Mr Panetta, a moderate Democrat and former California congressman, argued that "waterboarding is torture and it's wrong".
But he stated candidly last night that discussion about its use will continue. "Whether we would have gotten the same information through other approaches I think is always gonna be an open question," he said.