• 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!

Guantánamo leaks lift lid on world's most controversial prison

LOL!

preeminent source, baby!

THANKS, president slash!

keep them detentions and renditions and wiretaps comin!

and while you're at it go ASSASSINATE the others!

USA!
 
The Prof said:
LOL!

preeminent source, baby!

THANKS, president slash!

keep them detentions and renditions and wiretaps comin!

and while you're at it go ASSASSINATE the others!

USA!
Click to expand...

Source is not equal to verifiable evidence. He and others have to present exactly what was gained, and it has to prove true. :coffeepap
 
Boo Radley said:
He and others have to present exactly what was gained
Click to expand...

you expect LANGLEY to tell you exactly what it got and how?

LOL!

that's dumber than sydney

anyway, thanks are due to president slasher for NOT dismantling the anti terror techniques of his predecessor, thus enabling this assassination

keep up the good work, slash!
 
The Prof said:
you expect LANGLEY to tell you exactly what it got and how?

LOL!

that's dumber than sydney

anyway, thanks are due to president slasher for NOT dismantling the anti terror techniques of his predecessor, thus enabling this assassination

keep up the good work, slash!
Click to expand...

I expect claims to be supported. As noted, what little we have been told proved to be false. And we know that we did not get the intel needed to get OBL until long after the EITs. So, yes, if someone, anyone, claims that we got good intel, they have to provide actual intel that can be verified.
 
Boo Radley said:
I expect claims to be supported
Click to expand...

LOL!

few care what you do or don't expect

we know that we did not get the intel needed to get OBL until long after the EITs
Click to expand...

yup, we got the intel we needed to get ubl "after ksm's spirit was broken," during the time he conducted "terrorist tutorials" and was langley's "preeminent source"

other important leads came from zebaydah, libi and ghul, all eit'd

at least that's what the ig said

according to ERIC HOLDER

thank you, president slasher, for not undoing (despite your best efforts) the anti terror policies of your predecessor

keep up the good work, the detentions, renditions, wiretapping and ASSASSINATIONS

continue to ignore the fringe elements of your base which consider said tactics criminal

america is grateful
 
Prof, you have no idea what you're talking about. Wiretapping stopped years ago, when the Deputy AG refused to sign off on it and the FBI director threatened to resign because of it.

He did undo the terror policies of his predecessor. No new detainees have gone to gitmo.

There is no information from any of these people. Please re-read all of the posts I made on the last few pages. I doubt you will though. Most typical fringe conservative just ignore anything that counters what they say.
 
Last edited:
The Prof said:
LOL!

few care what you do or don't expect
Click to expand...

You clearly care. I can tell by your repeated posts to me. ;)

And no, the intel we got was much too far removed from the EIT for them to have played any role. You really ahve to suspend disbelief to accept that tortured logic that it was the EITs that gots this nearly a year later, but not while they were using them.
 
ERIC HOLDER suspended disbelief?

LOL!

how absurd
 
Boo Radley said:
Can't speak for the left, but the old McCain had a lot of good qualities. His appeasement of the far right hurt him, as did his vice presidential cadidate.

But, he does know something about torture, and always rightly spoke against it.
Click to expand...


Actually, while all this was going on, John McCain was on the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee and Indian Affairs.

Not to say the man isn't a patriot but he wasn't really in the inner circle and, as far as I know, he has never been waterboarded.
 
Boo Radley said:
All you have to do is present verifiable intel we actually got. We know that we got the OBL intel long after KSM was tortured, so you ahve to torture logic to believe EIT got us that intel. :coffeepap
Click to expand...

You seem quick enough to defend John McCain's point of view but not those who were actually directly involved.
 
The Prof said:
Phone Call by Kuwaiti Courier Led to Bin Laden - ABC News
Click to expand...

Yup. That's not domestic illegal wiretapping. Read the actual article. Especially the part saying Mohammed talked under normal interrogation but made up names under coerced. I love how you totally ignored my post. Typical right wing fringe poster.

John McCain was put through worse than waterboarding. He said himself that he named the starting line of the greenbay packers to stop the torture when they asked for members of his unit.
 
but jim ringo wasn't the courier's nom de guerre

These scenes provide previously unpublicized details about the transformation of the man known to U.S. officials as KSM from an avowed and truculent enemy of the United States into what the CIA called its "preeminent source" on al-Qaeda. This reversal occurred after Mohammed was subjected to simulated drowning and prolonged sleep deprivation, among other harsh interrogation techniques.

"KSM, an accomplished resistor, provided only a few intelligence reports prior to the use of the waterboard, and analysis of that information revealed that much of it was outdated, inaccurate or incomplete," according to newly unclassified portions of a 2004 report by the CIA's then-inspector general released Monday by the Justice Department.

The evidence is clear: Mohammed 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.

"Certain of the techniques seemed to have little effect, whereas waterboarding and sleep deprivation were the two most powerful techniques and elicited a lot of information," [CIA Inspector General John Helgerson] said in an interview. 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. Mohammed 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 United States.
Click to expand...

How a Detainee Became An Asset - washingtonpost.com
 
Why would people argue about this as if they had even close to the requisite information to come to any type of conclusion?
 
Nanten Janubi said:
Why would people argue about this as if they had even close to the requisite information to come to any type of conclusion?
Click to expand...

Excellent question. Like I've said before, officials from the CIA are not reliable sources. I don't care what the Director said, or the associate director said. Those are political appointments. The republican ones will say it worked, the democratic ones will say it didn't.

Talk to someone who has actually interrogated people before. They will tell you that torture doesn't work. That simple. Any FBI agent or CIA officer interviewed says it doesn't work. I have seen torture before, and no, it doesn't work. One case, I arrested someone for reentering the US after being deported, and a police department contacted us saying the man I arrested was involved with a cop shooting. We let the department take him, and they ended up beating him for hours, and placing a bag over his head and stopping him from breathing at periodic intervals. Did he confess to shooting anyone? Nope. Did he give up whichever one of his friends shot the officer? Nope. He didn't. They ended up finding out who shot the officer through regular police work, which is how you get intelligence, not by beating it out of people. This was back in the 80s, but again, no matter what date it is, it doesn't change the fact that it doesn't work.

Oh, and don't forget what else torture does. Helps al-Qaeda recruit, puts our soldiers at risk from al-Qaeda, and it opens the door for other nations to torture our troops. Say we go to war with China 50 years from now. They will argue that they have the right to torture our captive troops because we did it and said it was OK back in the 2000s.
 
I've never talked to an FBI agent about it, but I have talked to CIA/NSA/DIA and military operatives about it. I don't know why someone would say torture (or even waterboarding) 'doesn't work' in such broad terms. Ever? Never ever? Never ever ever? That seems particularly short-sighted. That said, no one without an HCS clearance can tell anyone either way.
 
Nanten Janubi said:
I've never talked to an FBI agent about it, but I have talked to CIA/NSA/DIA and military operatives about it. I don't know why someone would say torture (or even waterboarding) 'doesn't work' in such broad terms. Ever? Never ever? Never ever ever? That seems particularly short-sighted. That said, no one without an HCS clearance can tell anyone either way.
Click to expand...

Not actually what's being claimed. What the litatrue says is that it is unrealiable, more unreliable than other methods. Absolutes are rarely used because they are rarely true. However, considering the draw backs, and that we know and have verifiable evidence of misinformatiuon that was not only given by those who received IETs, but that we used that misinofrmation in our decision making process, and that we cannot point to anything as specific or verifiable that we actually got that wa valid, well, there is little reason to consider torture a prefered method. Then, add that it is not only immoral, but against the law, and you have to ask why are people working so hard to try and justify this?
 
Grant said:
You seem quick enough to defend John McCain's point of view but not those who were actually directly involved.
Click to expand...

Those who are involved have reason to deceive. As someone torture, McCain has little reason to do the same. Also, McCain's story is known, and verifiable to a degree that those directly involved have not equaled.
 
Boo Radley said:
Those who are involved have reason to deceive. As someone torture, McCain has little reason to do the same. Also, McCain's story is known, and verifiable to a degree that those directly involved have not equaled.
Click to expand...

So no matter what those directly involved say, you will not believe them?

Instead you prefer to believe those who have no real knowledge of what happened.

How is McCain's story verifiable if he didn't participate?
 
Grant said:
So no matter what those directly involved say, you will not believe them?

Instead you prefer to believe those who have no real knowledge of what happened.

How is McCain's story verifiable if he didn't participate?
Click to expand...

It is not a matter of belief. This is what I always try to get across to those on your side. Anyone relying on belief can be fooled. No matter who says anything like this of a factual nature, your response should be what evidence do you have. It doesn't matter who says it. Part of our mistake with Iraq for example was too many relied on belief and not actual evidence. Anyone can say anything, and there are often reasons for them to do so. We should always ask for more.
 
Boo Radley said:
As someone torture (sic), McCain has little reason to do the same.
Click to expand...

so the fact that the maverick was hung by his arms in VIETNAM gives him more authority than ERIC HOLDER about what happened in a SECRET PRISON in eastern europe?

LOL!

think much?
 
Boo Radley said:
It is not a matter of belief.
Click to expand...
Of course it's a matter of belief because you refuse to believe those who were actually there and saw the results and are instead following the word of a person with no involvement whatsoever. That is clearly what you have chosen to believe.
.This is what I always try to get across to those on your side. Anyone relying on belief can be fooled. No matter who says anything like this of a factual nature, your response should be what evidence do you have. It doesn't matter who says it. Part of our mistake with Iraq for example was too many relied on belief and not actual evidence. Anyone can say anything, and there are often reasons for them to do so. We should always ask for more.
Click to expand...

Yu really shuld follow your own advice.

The evidence is clear and those who participated have been quite straightforward, apart from Panetta who tried to obfuscate a little, just what they did and what the results were. You may believe these people are lying, but that is only your belief. So far there is no one who was directly involved who denied what happened.
Click to expand...
 
Boo Radley said:
Not actually what's being claimed. What the litatrue says is that it is unrealiable, more unreliable than other methods. Absolutes are rarely used because they are rarely true. However, considering the draw backs, and that we know and have verifiable evidence of misinformatiuon that was not only given by those who received IETs, but that we used that misinofrmation in our decision making process, and that we cannot point to anything as specific or verifiable that we actually got that wa valid, well, there is little reason to consider torture a prefered method.
Click to expand...

But...does anyone consider it a preferred method? I believe it is considered one of the last resorts, used extremely rarely- considering that probably tens of thousands of individuals in Iraq and Afghanistan have been questioned at some point or another over the last decade, I would imagine waterboarding (to say nothing of torture) has been performed on far less than even 1% of the subjects. It seems to be another tool in the toolbox, used extremely rarely at best. Not the standard welcome-to-this-interrogation-before-we-get-started-put-this-over-your-head that many like to imagine it to be.

Then, add that it is not only immoral, but against the law, and you have to ask why are people working so hard to try and justify this?
Click to expand...

I would imagine for effectiveness.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom