CIA 'Torture'

[SubGod22]

I still don't see this stuff as torture. There aren't long term effects. There was a study done on this stuff before 9/11 was ever in the picture and the study showed that there were no long-term physical or psychological effects at all.

If that's the case I don't see how any of this can be called torture. Waterboarding is the one most talk about and the only one I'd really consider listening to when it comes to "torture". There still are no long-term effects and nothing done hasn't been done to our own troops during training. And what's lost in a lot of this is only 3 suspects were waterboarded.

I still want to hear why any of these interrogation tactics should be called torture. Temporary discomfort doesn't cut it for me.

I heard Nancy Pelosi was one of the members of Congress that was involved in OK'ing these methods. I forget some of the other names. And none of these members said anything for years about it being 'bad'. Which tells me it's all political. I also recall McCain being involved in these Congressional meetings.

The legal advisors went through Congressional documents to see what was and wasn't considered torture and these things were OK'd. I still haven't done a search yet as I honestly forgot to do that earlier when I had some time. I don't really feel like doing it at the moment. Maybe tomorrow when I have more unproductive down time. Or if I have a lot of trouble sleeping tonight.

[rjl]

WuDrWu, your falling apart in this thread and reduction of posts to nothing more than junior-high level insults lets me know I'm right. Thanks.

Know what else lets me know I'm right?

How about... the guy who interrogated Abu Zubaydah?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/23/opinion/23soufan.html?_r=1&ref=opinion

One of the most striking parts of the memos is the false premises on which they are based. The first, dated August 2002, grants authorization to use harsh interrogation techniques on a high-ranking terrorist, Abu Zubaydah, on the grounds that previous methods hadn’t been working. The next three memos cite the successes of those methods as a justification for their continued use.

It is inaccurate, however, to say that Abu Zubaydah had been uncooperative. Along with another F.B.I. agent, and with several C.I.A. officers present, I questioned him from March to June 2002, before the harsh techniques were introduced later in August. Under traditional interrogation methods, he provided us with important actionable intelligence.

There was no actionable intelligence gained from using enhanced interrogation techniques on Abu Zubaydah that wasn’t, or couldn’t have been, gained from regular tactics. In addition, I saw that using these alternative methods on other terrorists backfired on more than a few occasions — all of which are still classified. The short sightedness behind the use of these techniques ignored the unreliability of the methods, the nature of the threat, the mentality and modus operandi of the terrorists, and due process.

Defenders of these techniques have claimed that they got Abu Zubaydah to give up information leading to the capture of Ramzi bin al-Shibh, a top aide to Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, and Mr. Padilla. This is false. The information that led to Mr. Shibh’s capture came primarily from a different terrorist operative who was interviewed using traditional methods. As for Mr. Padilla, the dates just don’t add up: the harsh techniques were approved in the memo of August 2002, Mr. Padilla had been arrested that May.

You hear than noise, Doc? That was your argument--or whatever was left of it after your junior high display--falling flat on its face.

I'm sorry, Doc, but I won't stand by and let anyone disgrace my country by promoting techniques as un-American as torture. What a filthy, filthy practice that should have nothing to do with the Red, White, and Blue.

JohnnieBallgame, I'm sorry you feel so disgraced defending what America is all about. Thankfully, you do not speak for any other soldier other than yourself.

[Downtown Shocker Brown]

WuDrWu, your falling apart in this thread and reduction of posts to nothing more than junior-high level insults lets me know I'm right. Thanks.

Know what else lets me know I'm right?

How about... the guy who interrogated Abu Zubaydah?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/23/opinion/23soufan.html?_r=1&ref=opinion

One of the most striking parts of the memos is the false premises on which they are based. The first, dated August 2002, grants authorization to use harsh interrogation techniques on a high-ranking terrorist, Abu Zubaydah, on the grounds that previous methods hadn’t been working. The next three memos cite the successes of those methods as a justification for their continued use.

It is inaccurate, however, to say that Abu Zubaydah had been uncooperative. Along with another F.B.I. agent, and with several C.I.A. officers present, I questioned him from March to June 2002, before the harsh techniques were introduced later in August. Under traditional interrogation methods, he provided us with important actionable intelligence.

There was no actionable intelligence gained from using enhanced interrogation techniques on Abu Zubaydah that wasn’t, or couldn’t have been, gained from regular tactics. In addition, I saw that using these alternative methods on other terrorists backfired on more than a few occasions — all of which are still classified. The short sightedness behind the use of these techniques ignored the unreliability of the methods, the nature of the threat, the mentality and modus operandi of the terrorists, and due process.

Defenders of these techniques have claimed that they got Abu Zubaydah to give up information leading to the capture of Ramzi bin al-Shibh, a top aide to Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, and Mr. Padilla. This is false. The information that led to Mr. Shibh’s capture came primarily from a different terrorist operative who was interviewed using traditional methods. As for Mr. Padilla, the dates just don’t add up: the harsh techniques were approved in the memo of August 2002, Mr. Padilla had been arrested that May.

You hear than noise, Doc? That was your argument--or whatever was left of it after your junior high display--falling flat on its face.

I'm sorry, Doc, but I won't stand by and let anyone disgrace my country by promoting techniques as un-American as torture. What a filthy, filthy practice that should have nothing to do with the Red, White, and Blue.

JohnnieBallgame, I'm sorry you feel so disgraced defending what America is all about. Thankfully, you do not speak for any other soldier other than yourself.

I'm sorry. Did Mr. ARAB lose the use of any limbs? Any broken bones? Permanant scars? Even require medical care of any sort afterward?

THEN SHUT UP!!

If you know anyone that was a POW in Vietnam, then you see the effects of torture. If you have ever heard one tell the story in detail, you know what TORTURE really is.

I don't give a flying flip what "Websters" or "Congress" defines as torture. "Waterboarding" and most of the techinques described in here are not.

We live in a world with a group of people trying to KILL US ALL!! They don't care about anything else. You really think they were reading the book on torture and giving a hoot about who they killed as the planes were crashing into the WTC and Pentagon??

We also live in a world of "BLAME SOMEONE" and "WHAT ELSE COULD WE HAVE DONE". We live in a world where victims seek money rather than justice. Where people blame each other instead of taking responsibility for thier own actions. Bush is attacked by the press and some citizens because enough action wasn't taken to prevent 9/11, yet any method they had taken, at the time, would have then been considered the reason for the attacks if they had not been able to stop them.

The safety of my family and my country come first, God help ANYONE who makes it clear to me they intend to harm them.

It is sad that the following quote is made to make the person seem like a monster, but in fact is why America was able to become it's own country, and become the most powerful in the world.

I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it! I'd rather you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand a post.

I heard a good discussion a while back when "Starship Troopers" came out. It was about the way citizenship is earned in a global society where it is Earth against a common enemy. You had to SERVE your country to have a say in who ran it or how it was ran. Some argued that gives the power to the few, and takes it away from the many. They were corrected by pointing out that that is the system now. Those people actually know what FREEDOM is. Give a poor man a fish, he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish, he can eat everyday.

I'm getting sick of hearing all these whining weasels that would be happy speaking Chinese as long as they could have thier Starbucks everyday.

[WuDrWu]

Blahblahblahblah

1)Like most things, this is being politicized to no end. The President is having trouble appeasing all of his backers so the country is getting mixed messages.

2)You're welcome for saving American lives. If I so desired, I can find an equal amount of people to back my claims that we did get useful information that saved lives.

3)Your side continues to try and vilify the Republicans in an effort to change the course of our nation. Like it or not, you're in for a fight.

4)Is this really how you want your government to spend time? Look at what actually happened....look hard. Take off your stupid hat and look at it, knucklehead. Is it going to make you feel better...spend a couple of billion to get 5 supremes to eventually say I was right anyway? Is it worth it?

I would think you would think there are better ways to use your power. Don't you have condoms to give away, unborn to slaughter, NAMBLA to defend and lazy, uneducated dope dealers to bring into the country and register as Democrats?


I thought so.


I'm on the side of right. You're and your ilk are on the side of revenge and stupidity. Roll call for you takes longer each and every day.

Next.

[SubGod22]

Congress Briefed Early and Often

[WuDrWu]

Only because I am a gentleman, do I not take pleasure in the thought of punching Pilosi right in the mouth. Now if someone else does it then it's fine.

Leahy and Reid, on the other hand, I would thoroughly enjoy beating the living crap out of those two worthless girls.

[Triticum]

Sub, even though we don't agree on this issue, I'd like to thank you for being civil. On to my thoughts...

I would like to read any study saying there are no long-term psychological effects of "enhanced interrogation." I did a quick search and found a handful of others that suggest otherwise.
Scholarly journal (one example of many):

http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/abstract/151/1/76

I chose this one because while it shows that torture &/or enhanced interrogation survivors as a group do suffer long-term effects, prior exposure and preparedness can protect against these effects. Presumably that's why the good guys are exposed to it during training.
Regular press:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-psychology-interrogationapr19,0,1934481.story

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103329522

So apparently psychologists think the discomfort is not temporary. There are bound to be psychologists that disagree with that, but I didn't uncover any.
If temporary discomfort is an approved standard, then what about temporary physical discomfort that does leave marks on the body? Flesh wounds heal (I am thinking about being lashed with a cane or something, not losing an eye or anything blatant like that).
If you think these techniques are no big deal, would you be ok if they were done to US citizens by our own government? What about to you? How does it make you feel to know captured US soldiers might have to endure this on top of everything else?

I am glad that you would consider waterboarding to potentially be classified as torture, but to me it seems not very different than some of the other techniques, especially considering that any one captive would be subjected to a wide variety of torments. So even if we don't call these actions "torture" by whatever standard you choose, they're still horribly ineffective, if not counterproductive, according to people that do this for a living. To me it seems like a lot of ambiguity and an awfully thin (and moving) line to walk when there are more effective, more humane options available.

While Bush was far from a great President in my view, I am not approaching this issue from a vindictive or partisan perspective (I usually vote as an Independent). To me, this is not about getting back at Bush and the neo-cons (it wouldn't surprise me a bit if any Congressional Dems had their fingers in the pie, too), it's about doing what's best for our country and our freedoms in the present and in the future. That means using the best interrogation techniques available and it means trying to steal the terrorists' political capital without abandoning our own ideals, the ideals that make our country great and make it worth fighting for.

[rjl]

I'm sorry. Did Mr. ARAB lose the use of any limbs? Any broken bones? Permanant scars? Even require medical care of any sort afterward?

THEN SHUT UP!!

If you know anyone that was a POW in Vietnam, then you see the effects of torture. If you have ever heard one tell the story in detail, you know what TORTURE really is.

I don't give a flying flip what "Websters" or "Congress" defines as torture. "Waterboarding" and most of the techinques described in here are not.

We live in a world with a group of people trying to KILL US ALL!! They don't care about anything else. You really think they were reading the book on torture and giving a hoot about who they killed as the planes were crashing into the WTC and Pentagon??

We also live in a world of "BLAME SOMEONE" and "WHAT ELSE COULD WE HAVE DONE". We live in a world where victims seek money rather than justice. Where people blame each other instead of taking responsibility for thier own actions. Bush is attacked by the press and some citizens because enough action wasn't taken to prevent 9/11, yet any method they had taken, at the time, would have then been considered the reason for the attacks if they had not been able to stop them.

The safety of my family and my country come first, God help ANYONE who makes it clear to me they intend to harm them.

It is sad that the following quote is made to make the person seem like a monster, but in fact is why America was able to become it's own country, and become the most powerful in the world.

I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it! I'd rather you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand a post.

I heard a good discussion a while back when "Starship Troopers" came out. It was about the way citizenship is earned in a global society where it is Earth against a common enemy. You had to SERVE your country to have a say in who ran it or how it was ran. Some argued that gives the power to the few, and takes it away from the many. They were corrected by pointing out that that is the system now. Those people actually know what FREEDOM is. Give a poor man a fish, he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish, he can eat everyday.

I'm getting sick of hearing all these whining weasels that would be happy speaking Chinese as long as they could have thier Starbucks everyday.

You clearly seem to be all for sacrificing what it is to be American. So then, what's the point?

If this torture is as harmless as you, SubGod22, and others in this thread make it out to be, then why even do it? I thought the idea of torture was to inflict enough pain or discomfort on someone that they eventually "talk", as flawed as that notion is. Well, why even do it if, as you say, it's not real torture? Sounds kind of dumb to me.

[rjl]

Blahblahblahblah

1)Like most things, this is being politicized to no end. The President is having trouble appeasing all of his backers so the country is getting mixed messages.

2)You're welcome for saving American lives. If I so desired, I can find an equal amount of people to back my claims that we did get useful information that saved lives.

3)Your side continues to try and vilify the Republicans in an effort to change the course of our nation. Like it or not, you're in for a fight.

4)Is this really how you want your government to spend time? Look at what actually happened....look hard. Take off your stupid hat and look at it, knucklehead. Is it going to make you feel better...spend a couple of billion to get 5 supremes to eventually say I was right anyway? Is it worth it?

I would think you would think there are better ways to use your power. Don't you have condoms to give away, unborn to slaughter, NAMBLA to defend and lazy, uneducated dope dealers to bring into the country and register as Democrats?


I thought so.


I'm on the side of right. You're and your ilk are on the side of revenge and stupidity. Roll call for you takes longer each and every day.

Next.

Every time your argument devolves into attempted insult, I know more and more that I've won. Why? Because you've simply got nothing else, and furthermore lack the creativity to come up with anything original.

Thanks.

[SubGod22]

I hope to have a chance to search for some of the stuff I've heard recently. Some have come from former judges and/or lawyers. Some info was provided by former military. I usually do this kind of research during downtime at work which we normally have a lot of but lately not so much.

I'll check out those links when I get more time to do so. If I can be convinced of long-term effects then I'll say we shouldn't do it. But I'd still be against prosecuting based off of what Congress has said in the past on these issues. But I need to find links for those as well so everyone else can see them. I don't doubt the people I got that info from.

Obviously this is a tough issue with a lot of people and I don't want to do things just because the enemy is worse. But getting information by tough means doesn't bother me unless it is torture which obviously at this point I don't think it has been. If things calm down a bit today I'll see what I can find. Otherwise I'll try and do it this weekend.

And just for the record I consider myself and Independent Conservative. I refuse to follow either party but will admit I agree with more of the GOP stances than the Dems. Too bad the GOP doesn't follow their party lines any more.

[SubGod22]

rjl, discomfort isn't torture. At least that's how many of us see it. Obviously you don't. If there aren't long term effects I don't see how it can be classified as torture. If anything uncomfortable qualifies than again, HS and college coaches around the country are guilty. They make athletes do things that cause pain and discomfort in order to get through to them or punish them for not doing what they should be.

And from what I'm hearing lately from a number of sources, Islam allows them (or at least this is howw they see it) to confess what they know if they've gone through so much they feel they can't hold out any longer. Maybe that's just what some want spread around but it's come from a number of different people. So by putting them through some discomfort they allow them to tell everything they know and they don't feel like they're letting Islam down.

[rjl]

RJL and KC,

I am an old soldier...I know a little about fighting. If there was anyway that I could have only fought for the people who appreciated my service I would certainly choose that now. There are times when I wish that all the true enemies of America and our constitution were all foreigners so I could have had a chance to make a real difference.

You guys sicken me...may the Lord have mercy on you both!

I am going to go pray for forgiveness for what I am thinking you deserve right now.

Guys, don't ever forget that some things are worth fighting for. Wouldn't it be fitting if the next terror attack only harmed those who feel George W Bush overstepped his bounds in protecting us?

You guys go ahead and feel morally superior on your way to assuming room temperature because the Muslim terrorist who will kill you the first chance they get, don't care if you and I disagree about intelligence gathering activities.

Obama and the rest of you morons have zero credibility and zero respect from many old soldiers like me. If you think running around the world and reading I'm sorry and America sucks from a teleprompter, makes any difference to a world that only respects and understands power, you are a fool.

Go ahead and mock me for my rant...sadly, it is guys like me who earned you that right. :-x

Something else that irks me about this statement.

If I may, Johnnie, let me summarize here.

You wish that everyone who doesn't share your iron-fisted view of global diplomacy was a foreigner so that you may physically fight them. We're either with you or against you, right?

You don't respect those who actually use the constitution you're defending and speak up when they feel that what their country is doing goes against everything it supposedly stands for.

You think that everyone in the United States should adopt your ideology or pay the consequences.

I'm also going to assume--not necessary based specifically on what you've said here, but just the general idea I get--that you think people like me have degenerated America to the point where it seriously needs an injection of religious based morals into law.

Please, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong here.

What then, other than wardrobe and geography, separates you and others like you from the Taliban? Your mantra sounds remarkably similar.

Others who praised this disgusting statement can feel free to comment too. Eagle, WstateU, WuDrWu, feel free to defend yourselves.

WuDrWu, I'm assuming you graduated junior high a while ago, so I won't accept any more low rent insults.

[rjl]

rjl, discomfort isn't torture. At least that's how many of us see it. Obviously you don't. If there aren't long term effects I don't see how it can be classified as torture. If anything uncomfortable qualifies than again, HS and college coaches around the country are guilty. They make athletes do things that cause pain and discomfort in order to get through to them or punish them for not doing what they should be.

And from what I'm hearing lately from a number of sources, Islam allows them (or at least this is howw they see it) to confess what they know if they've gone through so much they feel they can't hold out any longer. Maybe that's just what some want spread around but it's come from a number of different people. So by putting them through some discomfort they allow them to tell everything they know and they don't feel like they're letting Islam down.

SubGod, I'd like to agree with Triticum and thank you for attempting to keep this discussion civil.

I would say that making someone feel that you are drowning them would be extremely uncomfortable, but I've never been waterboarded, so I'm just assuming here. So we have that.

So then, what becomes the definition of torture? And what, exactly, are the benefits of torture? The story I posted said that they were getting good information from the suspects before any sort of torture was ever implemented, and after torture was implemented, much of the information they got was false or otherwise blew up in their face.

Studies after studies have shown that torture doesn't get the results many people think it does.

Let me tell everyone here a story. My grandfather had 8 brothers, all of whom fought in WWII. Some were killed, some were not.

One of his brothers, a P-38 pilot in the European theatre, was shot down over Germany. Detained by the SS, he was regularly beaten over the head with the butt of a Luger, and all he ever told them was his name, rank, and number. This son of a Pennsylvania coal miner, no more training than necessary for his role, gave them nothing.

He told my grandfather once that it got to the point where they KNEW he wasn't going to tell the SS anything, but they came in and beat him anyway just because they could do it.

War over, he came home. His last words as an American about 5 years later came in his doctor's office. "Doc," he said, "the headaches are killing me again." With that, he slumped over in his chair and died right there.

What good did torturing him do? He loved his country, he loved his cause, so all he did was give them nothing.

How reasonable is it to assume that everyone that we might torture would be the same?

Could it be that torturing these guys isn't necessarily about getting information but rather exacting some sick revenge? Humiliating them just because we can?

That sounds VERY un-American to me.

[WuDrWu]

What then, other than wardrobe and geography, separates you and others like you from the Taliban? Your mantra sounds remarkably similar.

Others who praised this disgusting statement can feel free to comment too. Eagle, WstateU, WuDrWu, feel free to defend yourselves.

WuDrWu, I'm assuming you graduated junior high a while ago, so I won't accept any more low rent insults.

On a list of stupid things you have said, and that is a remarkably long list, likening anyone here to Taliban has to be at or near the top.

The simple fact that inside your obviously poorly functioning brain you are either incapable, unwilling, or some twisted combination of both, to distinguish the difference proves my point beyond further discussion.

You are like the last player on the Y team that cannot be cut but thinks somehow that he is an entitled winner. You are not and the only reason you exist is because of people like johnnieballgame. You are right about free speech...you have every right to continue to spew the stupidity that you are so good at spewing. Spew away.

Frankly, as I see it, if there is a similarity to be drawn, it would seem to be between you and the Taliban because if jbg runs into either of you, you're going to get an ass beating.

[rjl]

What then, other than wardrobe and geography, separates you and others like you from the Taliban? Your mantra sounds remarkably similar.

Others who praised this disgusting statement can feel free to comment too. Eagle, WstateU, WuDrWu, feel free to defend yourselves.

WuDrWu, I'm assuming you graduated junior high a while ago, so I won't accept any more low rent insults.

On a list of stupid things you have said, and that is a remarkably long list, likening anyone here to Taliban has to be at or near the top.

The simple fact that inside your obviously poorly functioning brain you are either incapable, unwilling, or some twisted combination of both, to distinguish the difference proves my point beyond further discussion.

You are like the last player on the Y team that cannot be cut but thinks somehow that he is an entitled winner. You are not and the only reason you exist is because of people like johnnieballgame. You are right about free speech...you have every right to continue to spew the stupidity that you are so good at spewing. Spew away.

Frankly, as I see it, if there is a similarity to be drawn, it would seem to be between you and the Taliban because if jbg runs into either of you, you're going to get an ass beating.

I win.