• 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!

Should the Report on Torture Be Released Publicly?

Should The Torture Report be Released Publicly?


  • Total voters
    90
One of the last Leftist's final attempts to throw the Right under the bus.



The right threw itself under the bus when it decided to abandon American and international principals and engage in the torture of a lot of people, some of whom were guilty of nothing. :roll:

I continue to believe that eventually some of those torturers will pay for their crimes.
 
Hard to control the government if they keep everything secret. Things need to be open. Not that this report will be honest, likely not. But I think the real fear isn't from increased attack, but from pissing off The People even more.

Heya Ikari. :2wave: I don't think to many of the people were even focused on this with all the protests taking place. This is all about going after the CIA which BO and his team has been shining that Bad light down on them ever since Benghazi and the CIA blaming the State Dept. Which State was doing work for BO, and some that they shouldn't have been.

This report could have been dealt with in several ways. Which would give overcite. Without the Public needing to know any specific details. Yet still being told what came from the findings.
 
Diane Feinstein and the Democrats are releasing the Torture Report this week, they are saying. They meaning the Demos, Feinstein, and the MS Media.

Foreign governments and U.S. intelligence agencies are predicting that the release of a Senate report examining the use of torture by the CIA will cause "violence and deaths" abroad. BO is backing the release of this report. Since he came out and stated we tortured some folks. Then other countries Intel services stated this will cause more violence and death to take place. This was all reported back to BO. Yet he and the Democrats are all for it.

The Republicans are disputing this report and will come out with their own report. Feinstein said she would go ahead with the release. Even after Kerry asked her to hold off with the timing.
What say ye?



Anytime a group of people is afraid of what will happen if everyone knows what they did they probably shouldn't have done what they did.

Does anyone think that any of them have learned anything from this?

I don't and what's more I believe that some of them would do the same things again.
Which is a darn good reason to put them on trial.
 
Reaction to the Senate interrogation report going about as expected: ‘May Allaah destroy these filthy bastards’.....

Fantastic. Exit note, the Guardian also credits @ShamiWitness as playing a role helping ISIS recruit foreign fighters:

The most influential tweeter for foreign fighters was named as Shami Witness, a social media operator whose popularity has swollen in tandem with the territorial expansion of Isis, from 4,700 to 11,900 followers since April. It is an increase that some experts say chimes with his apparent evolution from anti-Assad activist to supporter of Isis, but his political evolution has, says Neumann, implications for western security. “You might have a wannabe foreign fighter sitting at home in Portsmouth and he can simply reach out to Shami Witness. He plays a role linking wannabes with foreign fighters.”

Over to you, Sen. Feinstein.....snip~

Reaction to the Senate interrogation report going about as expected: ‘May Allaah destroy these filthy bastards’ | Twitchy

Like that shouted reply wasn't orchestrated! :yawn: I would have been disappointed if it hadn't been - this is so dramatically important, you know, even though it's been years since it was discontinued! And it isn't going to absolve Gruber of anything he said.
 
Emphatically yes. We - the people - are ultimately responsible for what our government does.
 
Anytime a group of people is afraid of what will happen if everyone knows what they did they probably shouldn't have done what they did.

Does anyone think that any of them have learned anything from this?

I don't and what's more I believe that some of them would do the same things again.
Which is a darn good reason to put them on trial.


It has nothing to do with being afraid for themselves. People trust us and were helping us to capture most of the Terrorists. People who believed in Democracy, believe in us and that we will do and what we can for what is Right. Our moles and contacts, Friends who risk their whole families at times.

BO and his team even acknowledge it will raise the Risk of harm to Americans in certain countries.
 
So you'd be perfectly fine with terrorists using the exact same techniques on American troops? Even if said soldier was a member of your family? Heck it's not torture--as you say--so no big whoop, right?

They already do. There's nothing I can do about it. In fact, they even behead their prisoners - something that I feel any of us would find impossible to prove that the US has ever done.

To compare what the US has done, to what a terrorist would do, is insulting to anyone like me that is a vet, especially those of us that are disabled because of our service, due to enemy fire. (just saying, so you know next time)
 
Contra Mrs Pelosi, Democrats in the Congress were briefed on this when it was going on. I'm sure that is what they tell others, and what they tell themselves. I'm also pretty sure that if they were morally horrified at the notion that we might trade Abu McSlayTheChildrenOfTheInfedels being uncomfy for a few hours in return for saving dozens or hundreds of lives, they had the opportunity to speak up and chose not to..

Well the report actually has that information in it. It actually shows that the interrogation techniques were used since 2002...and the President wasn't even informed until 2006. it also states that the CIA actually lied or didn't answer questions specific to the interrogation techniques. When the President did know about it he didn't even tell Powell or Rumsfeld about it. See...that's why this report is useful. When there's no definitive version of events people can completely fabricate things out of no where...like this idea that Congress was informed.
 
Diane Feinstein and the Democrats are releasing the Torture Report this week, they are saying. They meaning the Demos, Feinstein, and the MS Media.

Foreign governments and U.S. intelligence agencies are predicting that the release of a Senate report examining the use of torture by the CIA will cause "violence and deaths" abroad. BO is backing the release of this report. Since he came out and stated we tortured some folks. Then other countries Intel services stated this will cause more violence and death to take place. This was all reported back to BO. Yet he and the Democrats are all for it.

The Republicans are disputing this report and will come out with their own report. Feinstein said she would go ahead with the release. Even after Kerry asked her to hold off with the timing.

What say ye?

In Germany, schoolchildren are forced to learn about the atrocities they committed during WWII. In Japan, from what I understand, this is not the case - the children don't learn about things like the Rape of Nanking.

How can we possibly learn from our mistakes, from our nation's misdeeds, if we are never made aware of what we did? Yes, there will be more violence because of the release of the report, when others see our truly dirty laundry. But that's what we get for having committed the crimes to begin with. Maybe next time, when we're faced with the choice of whether or not to torture, we'll know better because of what happened with the release of this report.

After all, when we committed that torture, did the United States of America face any truly existential threat? I ask because when George Washington stated his opinion on torture and mistreatment of prisoners, even the possibility of a United States of America was very much in doubt:

"Should any American soldier be so base and infamous as to injure any [prisoner]. . . I do most earnestly enjoin you to bring him to such severe and exemplary punishment as the enormity of the crime may require. Should it extend to death itself, it will not be disproportional to its guilt at such a time and in such a cause... for by such conduct they bring shame, disgrace and ruin to themselves and their country."

-- George Washington, charge to the Northern Expeditionary Force, Sept. 14, 1775
 
No. I seriously doubt that any detainees died because of enhanced interrogation while in US custody.

Of course, that doesn't speak to any of the deaths that occurred while in custody of any other nations.

Sexual threats, other CIA methods detailed in new U.S. report
"Specific examples of brutality by CIA interrogators cited in the report include the November 2002 death from hypothermia of a detainee who had been held partially nude and chained to a concrete floor at a secret CIA prison."
 
Your post lacks credibility. Perhaps you could strive for some in the future.

But thanks for your opinion. Perhaps you can work on accuracy in your posts, a splash of credibility might be refreshing.

If you're too lazy to form rebuttals we can just call it here. Run along, boy.
 
One of the last Leftist's final attempts to throw the Right under the bus.

Righties are the gift that just keep on giving, you righties need no help from lefties at all, you're doin' a great job. :lamo

 
One of the last Leftist's final attempts to throw the Right under the bus.

Yeah, what a bunch of snitches.
 
"Torture Report"?

Did we do something more than waterboarding and stress positions?
the stress positions were egregious -at least enough so the tapes were destroyed.

Enhanced interrogation techniques - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

what I'm wondering is if we got anything out of this in terms of Intel -there are conflicting reports as this is now a partisan "issue"

I read one of the detainees , or black prisoners gave up the idea that bin Laden used a courier, and that was instrumental in finding and killing him.
I've heard references to "thwarting plots", but nothing concrete.

If I had to bottom line it all, i'd say it was worth it if we saved other's lives - the other question is would there have been other means to do so.

The CIA hacking into the Senate computers provided by the CIA at the Hart office building is just as bad a Constitutional "crime" ( abuse)
in terms of /separation of powers/oversight.
 
You don't see why it should be pointed out, that there will be two separate reports?

What about not one Demo talking to anyone in the program? Do you think that is irrelevant to?
It's SO symbolic/indicative that hyper-partisanship is ruing this country's ability to govern;
that a freaking report by the Senate Intel Committee cannot even be agreed upon, or at least issued without rank partisanship making us all wonder what the **** really happened.

I mean for great Buddha's sake - cannot the cream of the elected intelligence officials just not put aside politics for once and issue a well documented factual report?

There is basic disagreement as to even the FACTS.
 
So you'd be perfectly fine with terrorists using the exact same techniques on American troops? Even if said soldier was a member of your family? Heck it's not torture--as you say--so no big whoop, right?

...holding the moral high ground means walking the moral high ground. Sorry, but getting to and staying on the high ground ain't easy.

....then again, what do you know about the high ground? You seem satisfied in that lesser place in the Middle.
 
It's SO symbolic/indicative that hyper-partisanship is ruing this country's ability to govern;
that a freaking report by the Senate Intel Committee cannot even be agreed upon, or at least issued without rank partisanship making us all wonder what the **** really happened.

I mean for great Buddha's sake - cannot the cream of the elected intelligence officials just not put aside politics for once and issue a well documented factual report?

There is basic disagreement as to even the FACTS.

Heya AT. :2wave: Report is out. Looks like this will be trouble for our people overseas and our contacts.


http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...port-cia-interrogation-11.html#post1064072084
 
In Germany, schoolchildren are forced to learn about the atrocities they committed during WWII. In Japan, from what I understand, this is not the case - the children don't learn about things like the Rape of Nanking.

How can we possibly learn from our mistakes, from our nation's misdeeds, if we are never made aware of what we did? Yes, there will be more violence because of the release of the report, when others see our truly dirty laundry. But that's what we get for having committed the crimes to begin with. Maybe next time, when we're faced with the choice of whether or not to torture, we'll know better because of what happened with the release of this report.

After all, when we committed that torture, did the United States of America face any truly existential threat? I ask because when George Washington stated his opinion on torture and mistreatment of prisoners, even the possibility of a United States of America was very much in doubt:

"Should any American soldier be so base and infamous as to injure any [prisoner]. . . I do most earnestly enjoin you to bring him to such severe and exemplary punishment as the enormity of the crime may require. Should it extend to death itself, it will not be disproportional to its guilt at such a time and in such a cause... for by such conduct they bring shame, disgrace and ruin to themselves and their country."

-- George Washington, charge to the Northern Expeditionary Force, Sept. 14, 1775



Yeah and I don't think Washington's thoughts included.....what is a terrorist.

The report is out.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...port-cia-interrogation-11.html#post1064072084
 
I'm certain that all these countries also entertain Al Qaeda, Muslim Brotherhood and various other terrorist gangs.


Move westward and accomplish what exactly?


The fact that there are multiple terrorist gangs vying for power undermines their ability to do much damage.
Their internecine battles will keep them weak.

Libyan "instability" ( dueling governments - host to various AQ entities, and now ISIL in Derna) is a failed state, and so much a direct threat to Egypt, that Egypt recent sent planes in ...against another Muslim country.

The internecine idea is valid, except the various groups are united in overthrowing anything not Sharia -
you can see that in Syria, as well as Libya.
 
Last edited:
Yeah and I don't think Washington's thoughts included.....what is a terrorist.

The report is out.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...port-cia-interrogation-11.html#post1064072084

One man's terrorist is another man's patriot. At the time, the Brits probably thought that Washington et al were that time's equivalent of a terrorist. Just because a guy doesn't wear a uniform doesn't mean he's not a soldier - in fact, if you'll look throughout history, it was often only the elite or the well-to-do who wore uniforms or suits of armor...and the poorest soldiers wore whatever they could get their hands on.
 
Back
Top Bottom