Reply With Quote
I'm okay with the enhanced interrogation techniques employed by the U.S., yes.
Nope, we're not anything like countries that actually torture their prisoners and detainees.
Yonivore. Still parsing and defending torture .
I'm okay with the enhanced interrogation techniques employed by the U.S., yes.
Nope, we're not anything like countries that actually torture their prisoners and detainees.
Defending enhanced interrogation techniques that prevented terrorism. Yep.
what got prevented? be specific, if you can, and show the link to US sanctioned torture techniques
I'm simply relying on President Obama's change in rhetoric. I don't have the clearance necessary to answer your question.
I remember when conservatives scoffed at semantics. If I remember correctly, that sort of word-parsing help to fuel a quixotic impeachment. But I guess when it suits your needs and is the only way to defend the indefensible, it's a pretty swell game.
Are you suggesting there's no difference between the enhanced interrogation techniques employed by the United States and actual torture?
It's not a semantics game - there is a difference; just as there are significant differences in the mul ude of various techniques collectively called "waterboarding."
Just ask Attorney General Eric Holder:
Holder on Waterboarding -- Proving It’s Not Torture While Insisting It Is
But, that's not the point of my post. As President Obama learned, once he took the Presidential Oath and became privvy to the information, the enhanced interrogation techniques DID produce good intelligence. Period.
Last edited by Yonivore; 11-17-2014 at 07:05 PM.
Nothing but bloviation and blind faith in the vague pronouncements of government officials, as usual.
Yeah, like I would ever have blind faith in anything President Bloviator ever said.
How do you explain the change in his rhetoric, pre- and post- Presidential Oath?
Here's how I explain it; His sources of information were expanded greatly. Just like you, before becoming President, he ignored anything that didn't come from sources that tended to agree with his narrative, ideology, or bias. Once he was President, he became exposed to the facts, many of us became aware of in less -- let's say, progressive -- news sources.
Enhanced Interrogations Worked
Former CIA spokesman says enhanced interrogation techniques paid dividends"Specifically, interrogation with enhanced techniques "led to the discovery of a KSM plot, the 'Second Wave,' 'to use East Asian operatives to crash a hijacked airliner into' a building in Los Angeles." KSM later acknowledged before a military commission at Guantanamo Bay that the target was the Library Tower, the tallest building on the West Coast. The memo explains that "information obtained from KSM also led to the capture of Riduan bin Isomuddin, better known as Hambali, and the discovery of the Guraba Cell, a 17-member Jemmah Islamiyah cell tasked with executing the 'Second Wave.' " In other words, without enhanced interrogations, there could be a hole in the ground in Los Angeles to match the one in New York."
"Controversial enhanced interrogation techniques, or EITs, played an important role in the fight against the al-Qaida terrorist network, former CIA spokesman Bill Harlow told a University of Delaware Global Agenda audience Wednesday night in Mitc Hall.
"Harlow, the opening speaker in the spring series focused on 'America’s Role in the World,' said it is an 'annoying myth' that no good came of intelligence gathered through EITs.
"'Do the math,' he said, noting that there have been no mass casualty attacks on U.S. soil for a decade."
...
Harlow said that what the CIA had before the attacks was a million piece jigsaw puzzle with no boxtop with a picture to guide them in putting the pieces together – a million-piece puzzle with another million pieces that looked like they could fit but did not. The Sept. 11 attacks, he said, were the boxtop.
"In shifting its focus to al-Qaida, the agency found evidence that a second wave of attacks was in the plans, with one terrorist already having pre-taped a celebratory video.
"Had there been a second wave, Harlow said the CIA 'would have felt that we had blood on our hands,' and the agency began work in earnest to dismantle the terrorist network.
"With the use of enhanced interrogation techniques, he said, 'results came fairly quickly.' And he reminded the audience that the trail to Abbottabad, Pakistan, where a U.S. Navy SEAL team found and killed bin Laden, began with enhanced interrogations."
Obama is just as wrong as Bush was, and you are.
LOL you siding with Obama.... that is funny.
I didn't side with him. Again, I merely noted the change in his rhetoric after becoming President.
And, as far as him being wrong, what evidence do you have his statement, enhanced interrogation techniques produced good intelligence, is untrue (or, as you say, "wrong")?
Provided to you previously in this thread.
I can provide testimony from John McCain, whose expertise on the subject is not something I would wish on anyone.
Nowhere does Harlow say that particular EITs saved lives or thwarted plots, only that they were part of a bigger mosaic on information that "led to Osama Bin Laden in Abbotabad." Also, the math he asks us to do is fallacious. He's wrong to say there have been no terrorist attacks on the US since 2001 and wrong to ask us to conclude from that supposed absence of attacks that EITs are the reason why.
AEI scholar, of course he wants to exonerate head, dubya, and all the criminals in the CIA.
Argument from expediency. The torture was justified because one bad guy was identified.
Apparently the ends justify the means. Whatever happened to morality on the right?
If torture or advanced interrogation methods or whatever they call them work, I don't see the point in not using them if there aren't other alternatives. These ers are crazy, violent human beings who'd blow up your entire neighborhood if they could. If you can get intel by sticking stuff up their bum then I've no problem with it.
there's not much evidence for that, and much that it's counterproductive. people being tortured will say anything to make it stop. people without information will lie and make stuff up.
Actually, there is.
All six of the former CIA Directors (Democrats included) say, unequivocally, the measures elicited actionable intelligence that 1) prevented a mass-scale attack on the West Coast and 2) led to the location of Osama bin Laden.
That alone makes the very limited use of enhanced interrogation techniques worth it for me.
If "enhanced interrogation" techniques aren't effective, it doesn't make sense that they would continue using them. Unless they just wanted to be big bad meanies to muslims.
lol
CYA, of course they would say their torturing was effective. Do you expect them, CIA/NSA/FBI, EVER to tell the truth?
There are already reports that drone strikes have killed 1000s of non-combattants along with the combattants, but Scarborough isn't mentioning the 6000 US military lives WASTED in Iraq and Afghanistan, or the 100Ks of Iraqi/Afgani lives "improved to death" by American bull , botched wars.
Yes. There's a pretty extensive timeline of Congressional meetings and briefing wherein the agency says they fully informed the administration and Congress of their activities and the results. The administration has released the Yoo and Bybee memos to show they considered the implications of the activities. President Obama and former CIA Director Leon Panetta have both conceded the measures were successful in obtaining actionable intelligence.
If anyone is lying, it appears to be the politicians. Do you expect THEM to ever tell the truth?
You're placing your trust in politicians?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
