- Joined
- May 19, 2009
- Messages
- 28,721
- Reaction score
- 6,738
- Location
- Redneck Riviera
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
That is your personal opinion which unfortunately require one to have a pre-911 mentality and are not shared by people like me who understand that if lives are in danger and these less than severe methods could be a way to save them, then it makes perfect sense to use them.
First, let me say that I have probably dealt more closely, and at greater personal hazard, with lives in danger and violent criminals, than you ever will.
Secondly, I worked for a law enforcement agency, and currently train law enforcement officers. Protecting innocent civilians is one of my highest values.
WE DO NOT MAKE THIS COUNTRY SAFER BY UNDERMINING OUR CIVIL LIBERTIES.
But I will refer you to someone who knows far more and knows better of what he is talking about than you or I from your article:
One came from former CIA Director Michael V. Hayden, who expressed disbelief that the administration was prepared to expose methods it might later decide it needed.
"Are you telling me that under all conditions of threat, you will never interfere with the sleep cycle of a detainee?" Hayden asked a top White House official, according to sources familiar with the exchange.
There is a difference between "interfering with a sleep cycle" and SHACKLING PEOPLE WHO HAVE NEVER BEEN ADJUDICATED GUILTY OF A CRIME, NAKED IN DIAPERS, in such bodily contortion that they are in nearly constant pain and cannot sleep for days, feed themselves, or eliminate on their own auspices.
Let's be f'ing clear on that, shall we?
From the beginning, sleep deprivation had been one of the most important elements in the CIA's interrogation program, used to help break dozens of suspected terrorists, far more than the most violent approaches. And it is among the methods the agency fought hardest to keep.[/I]
There is a reason why the FBI pulled their agents away from these protocols. The FBI administration understood clearly where this was headed, and that it would potentially expose their agents to prosecution.
The CIA does not have a track record of respecting human rights or the law, to be quite blunt.
They sound like the methods used by a Democratic Nation under assault from terrorists who desire to find methods to kill even higher numbers of our people than what occurred on 9-11.
NO, they don't, dude.
9/11 scared me, too. Many of my co-workers were stranded around the U.S. by 9/11. I took my first flight to provide training 3 weeks after 9/11. I left two children and a husband, and the flight was f'ing terrifying. I spent the week that we bombed Afghanistan for the first time on a business trip in DC.
BUT WE DON'T DO THIS.
FEAR is not an excuse to violate the core principles this nation was founded upon. If we become like them, they've won.
I'm no liberal.
But, there is always an excuse to capitulate to tyranny. There is today, and there were 100 years ago, and there will be 100 years from now.
Patriots simply don't. I respect the blood of patriots that freed this nation from tyranny TOO DAMN MUCH to EVER allow partisan politics or a single political administration to justify dismantling our civil liberties.
The actions you describe are NOT the actions of a democratic country. They are the actions of cowards who felt they were above the law.
I have to say that I am fully culpable. I consider myself such. I voted for Bush--twice. I never believed he was capable of this. But, he was wrong, and these actions are in violation of our dearest, and most important principles.
Last edited: