Where fools rush in.. (Dem's & hearings)

[Kapitan_Phillips]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

May as well lock it anyhow its wandered so far off the topic its not even reconizable.

No, there's still potential for intelligent debate, if people can resist getting patronising or agressive.

In the words of Hilent Sunter 3:

"Be less agressive!" :P

[August]

This thread has become torture to read. I'm reporting all you evil people to the UN human rights commission.

[AVGWarhawk]

Tchocky,

I do not understand you. Here is what you wrote in the Nazi wanna be thread who went after some Jews a day ago.

Tchocky
People who don't respect the rule of law should be beaten up and locked up on sight.

Not for nothing Tchocky, terrorists who do not respect the law of the land should be beaten up and locked up on sight.

I can't understand your reasoning, AVG. Torture is OK because there are other people doing worse things.

AVGwarhawk
You know what, beheading individuals is far worse then what waterboarding is...specifically if these individuals are just citizens or reporters doing a job. So yep, I have no issue with it.

Tchocky
I wasn't asking specifically about waterboarding, but about torture. Are you in favour of using torture as a means of furthering US policy?

I'm talking about waterboarding. The thread concerned what Pelosi was told in 2003 concerning waterboarding. Not 'one more turn Rackmaster" type torture. I do not understand how you can remotely equate waterboarding with the beheadings of innocents. As far as out and out physical torture such as the likes of John McCain received...no I do not think it is a viable means of furthering US policy. In fact, it was to further getting information, not further US policy as I see it.

So judging by the Neo Nazi kids who did a mean thing to some Jewish folks, you believe they should be beaten to the very inch of their lives until the see the light of the law and grow up. Should not a terrorist that killed thousands receive the same or is he a misguided individual that needs counseling?

[Tchocky]

I was being sarcastic. Read the rest of my posts in that thread.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

I was being sarcastic. Read the rest of my posts in that thread.

People who don't respect the rule of law should be beaten up and locked up on sight.

It's hard to tell who's the fascist there, dude.

Isn't the point of a "human right" that it is inalienable?

I did not read sarcasim in this post. At any rate, this is not an argument. I think waterboarding is fine. Sure beats the hell out of beheading. Sure, two wrongs do not make a right but, when terrorists are killing thousands, creating roadside bombs, using innocent women and children to deliver bombs to market places, beheading an innocent who was in the wrong place at the wrong time, attacking subway stations and look to do more harm to many...yep...waterboard away.

[Max2147]

Originally Posted by Aramike

It's called "intelligence". It works.

Well, your intelligence isn't working, because you're getting my position completely wrong and being very condescending at the same time.

I'm not saying that the CIA interrogators and those who approved their actions are idiots for thinking that torture works. Smart people can make mistakes. One thing that I've learned in the past few years is that intelligence is a very imperfect art. People in the intel community like to think that it's a science, but it's not anywhere close.

The smart people at the CIA and our other intelligence agencies were sure that Iraq had WMD in early 2003. I've talked to people who saw the intel, smart people who have no political stake in the decision whatsoever, and they said that they were stunned when we didn't find WMD after we went in. Unlike a lot of your stereotypical lefties, I don't think the WMD findings were politically motivated. It was a genuine mistake.

The smart people at the CIA also got it completely wrong during the Cold War. Robert Gates - somebody who I have tremendous respect for - was telling Reagan every chance he could that Gorbachev coudln't be trusted on arms control issues. Oops. Fortunately Gates is man enough to admit he was wrong.

Our intel also messed up badly when it came to the Soviets' nuclear stockpile. One of the most important questions of the Cold War was how many nuclear warheads the Soviets had. I'm sure our intel agencies put a lot of time and effort into finding out the number of warheads. They put the best people they had on that question. The result? Our estimate was about half of what the Soviets really had. For most of the Cold War the Soviets had twice as many nukes as we thought they had.

The point I'm trying to make is that intelligence is not perfect, in fact it's not even close. Intel people will tell you waht they think, and they'll be honest about it, but they can be very wrong.

So when the CIA comes forward and says that they're 100% sure that this detainee knows exactly where the next terrorist attack is coming, and that we just need to waterboard him to get the info, you have to take that with more than a grain of salt. You need an entire salt mine.

You never know anything for a fact in the intelligence world. I'm not trying to say that our intel people are idiots, that they're political hacks, or that they're sadists. It's just the nature of the field. All things considered our intel agencies do a damn good job, but they're up against an impossible challenge.

So getting back to torture, in a scenario with perfect information, I might be okay with torture in very limited circumstances. But based on everything I've learned about intel, I'm firmly convinced that perfect information never exists. Even if I'm the one who thinks that I have perfect information, I have to remember the nature of intel and the fact that I'm fallible. Therefore, I can't support torture ever. At best it simply means confusing yourself by doing awful things to an awful person. But it can also mean degrading yourself by doing awful things to a genuinely innocent person and inspiring others to do those same awful things to your people.

[SteamWake]

In a weak attempt to get this back on topic...

Ms. Pelosi which is it? Did you or did you not know and when did you not know it.

The House majority leader reluctantly agreed Tuesday that congressional hearings should investigate Speaker Nancy Pelosi's assertion that she wasn't informed, more than six years ago, that harsh interrogation methods were used on an al-Qaida leader.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...maJKwD984UT0O0

[AVGWarhawk]

Of course she knew....this is just some vast rightwing conspiracy

[Tchocky]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

I think waterboarding is fine. Sure beats the hell out of beheading. Sure, two wrongs do not make a right but, when terrorists are killing thousands, creating roadside bombs, using innocent women and children to deliver bombs to market places, beheading an innocent who was in the wrong place at the wrong time, attacking subway stations and look to do more harm to many...yep...waterboard away.

Is that your reasoning?

It's ok to torture people because they do worse?

[Aramike]

Says it all , torture is torture , no two ways about it , putting it in parenthesis just shows that your views are totally ignorant on the subject.

Erm, how does that show that I'm ignorant on the subject, are you are just spouting meaningless drivel in an attempt to avoid making a point?

I mean, isn't part of the debate that we disagree with what constitutes torture? It is interesting how you're attempting to settle that difference by essentially simply stating that it is settled, and then stating that those who disagree are "ignorant on the subject".

You may be better off debating a rock. You'd have a 50/50 chance of winning.

Yes therei s a way , which is why the ticking bomb to justify torture arguement is crap , because torture doesn't provide reliable information .

So, because you have found a couple sources who have a couple of instances where enhanced techniques haven't provided reliable information (with the veracity of these sources in question, even), you now make the broad inference that "torture" doesn't provide reliable information?

Okay, I'll bite. Maybe it doesn't. But I don't believe waterboarding is torture. And I know for a fact that it DOES provide reliable information - if applied properly.

Go on then, you don't need my permission to post something.

I wasn't asking for your permission. I was wondering if I actually needed to post something that is simple to research/figure out.

In any interrogation, it is important to ask a subject a mix of questions you know the answers to, and questions you want to learn the answers to. That's how interrogators attempt to decipher reliable information. For instance, let's say you have an individual in custody, who you know for a fact was at a planning meeting with his terrorist pals. Instead of just asking "what are you planning?", you ask him if he was at the meeting, where it was, etc. Once a subject begins answering those questions, that's an indication that he's broken.

Now yes, a subject will say ANYTHING to make the interrogation stop - if you tell them what to say. If you were to be waterboarded, you'd confess to being a replublican in about 5 seconds if asked. The average CIA officer lasts about 14 seconds. That's why simple yes/no questions aren't asked - it makes no sense.

However, the creative part of the brain shuts down (or slows down) when the body is in peril, or believes it is. Flight response followed by logic takes over. Lies simply aren't compelling at this stage.

These are some of the reasons I support the limited application of enhanced interrogation techniques, in specific and direct cases.

Posession of a funtioning brain shows you to be wrong , substantively wrong . Torture is illegal , waterboarding under every definition of torture is torture , torture is ineffective at providing reliable information , unreliable information is not much use and is actually a hinderence in cases like the "ticking bomb" where accuracy is essential .
Plus of course for good measure your knowledge of both international and American law is woefully lacking any credibility , which of course completely undrmines your "destroying way of life" nonsense .

Ah yes, the typical argument of "you are wrong therefore you are wrong" without ANY basis whatsoever.

Nice try (yeah, not really).

But hey lets put it simply so that perhaps even you can grasp it . America says waterboarding is torture , American courts say waterboarding is torture . Every year the American government does these nice little reports on how screwed up countries are , one measure for assesment of how screwed up the country is is the use of torture in those countries , crazy tin pot dictatorships get bad marks from the State Dept because they use torture . If you support your country using torture you are lowering it to the same level of those crazy tin pot dictatorships .
Now if you don't think that making your country the moral equivalent of N.Korea or Sudan is destroying your way of life then you really havn't thought at all

We'd have to go a lot further than any waterboarding that has ever happened to be the moral equivalent of North Korea of Sudan. I know it's tough for you to grasp (clearly, because all of your arguments are of the "just because" nature), but you should try actually researching something beyond the op-ed page of the New York Times prior to making your claims.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

Is that your reasoning?

It's ok to torture people because they do worse?

No, my reasoning is this, waterboarding has been put on the table as the most evil practice on the earth as of late. We are deemed as some sort of monster for waterboarding terrorists. In my view, he is getting off much lighter then those who are paraded around on the internet before, during and after the beheadings. And again, as stated above, torture in the physical sense that John McCain received I do not agree with. Suffering a bit with a cloth on your face and water poured over it to simulate drowning, although not pleasent and not meant to be, is fine by me. Although you may not see my view on this I do not see your view on waterboarding(not out and out torture for the rackmaster as you believe I'm thinking)...just the sole question and debate on waterboarding itself.

As far as I'm concerned, any right to anything a terrorist might have was lost just after the aircrafts crashed into several buildings killing thousands on 9/11.

[Aramike]

No. I don't think that. I haven't a clue where you're picking that up from. Show me where I said that this was the "only information ever obtained".

Okay, seriously, your point was that, due to some "bad" information, enhanced interrogation shouldn't occur. My counter-point is that there is good information being learned as well, but that you're acting as though only bad information exists.

By the way, have you ever stopped and REALLY thought about it? If so, you'd recognize that a lot of the "bad" information gathered is a result not of the technique being used, but of the subject simply believing bad information.

That should clear things up.[quote]The information received under torture of this person was the centrepiece for Colin Powells claim that Saddam and Al-Qaeda were working on WMD's together. I posted that above.
The information was wrong, and known to be problematic by DIA and some CIA. But it was included anyway. To me that displays a lack of concern to whether the information is accurate, or at least a willingness to accept non-verified information. Like Curveball.[quote]I agree, and have said for years that this is a problem. But this has nothing to do with the subject being discussed.

Go on then, you don't need my permission to post something.

I accidently posted this in the previous post.

Not everything comes down to someone's "side". This guy was in the room, doing the interrogation. And he states that normal interrogation was working, contrary to what the OLC memo states.

In this case it does come down to someone's side, as there are plenty of OTHER people in the room who state otherwise.

So listening to the people who were involved in the process isn't "common sense"?
The words of the interrogators are discounted because of possible political bias?

Listening to the one or two that agree with your point while discounting the others of similar qualifications isn't common sense when honestly making an attempt to find the truth. Sorry.

Can you leave this out? It's really tiresome.

Apologies. I confused you with Tribesman.

[Aramike]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

No, my reasoning is this, waterboarding has been put on the table as the most evil practice on the earth as of late. We are deemed as some sort of monster for waterboarding terrorists. In my view, he is getting off much lighter then those who are paraded around on the internet before, during and after the beheadings. And again, as stated above, torture in the physical sense that John McCain received I do not agree with. Suffering a bit with a cloth on your face and water poured over it to simulate drowning, although not pleasent and not meant to be, is fine by me. Although you may not see my view on this I do not see your view on waterboarding(not out and out torture for the rackmaster as you believe I'm thinking)...just the sole question and debate on waterboarding itself.

As far as I'm concerned, any right to anything a terrorist might have was lost just after the aircrafts crashed into several buildings killing thousands on 9/11.

Good post.

To expand, these people do not have Constitutional rights to begin with. That, and the fact that they wish to destroy everything that the Constitution stands for, is sufficient argument for not providing Constitutional due process, in my view.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Aramike

Good post.

To expand, these people do not have Constitutional rights to begin with. That, and the fact that they wish to destroy everything that the Constitution stands for, is sufficient argument for not providing Constitutional due process, in my view.

Some might see it differently than we but those like you and me who are here today are living with the aftermath of 9/11. The world was never the same for anyone here in the US. That day I remember clearly. That day I pulled all my delivery drivers from Washington DC because one sole aircraft was in the air...the world stopped to watch and listen. At the end of the day I went home and hugged my two daughters knowing the world I grew up in will be very different from the world my daughters will grow up in.

In short, I could give a rats a$$ about a terrorist getting waterboarded. In fact, the water is fine....come on in.

[Aramike]

Well, your intelligence isn't working, because you're getting my position completely wrong and being very condescending at the same time.

I've read your post and have yet to see how I'm getting your position wrong.

You're against enhanced interrogation methods, correct?

As far as being condescending, yeah, I'm good at that.

I'm not saying that the CIA interrogators and those who approved their actions are idiots for thinking that torture works. Smart people can make mistakes. One thing that I've learned in the past few years is that intelligence is a very imperfect art. People in the intel community like to think that it's a science, but it's not anywhere close.

First off, I like how you present this argument. You're attempting to say that you know more about the intelligence community than the people in it.

Wrong.

Secondly, intelligence in a science and art combined, or either, depending on your role in gathering and deciphering it.

The smart people at the CIA and our other intelligence agencies were sure that Iraq had WMD in early 2003. I've talked to people who saw the intel, smart people who have no political stake in the decision whatsoever, and they said that they were stunned when we didn't find WMD after we went in. Unlike a lot of your stereotypical lefties, I don't think the WMD findings were politically motivated. It was a genuine mistake.

Fair enough regarding the "lefty" point. I'll take you out of the category, in my view.

In any case, even regarding the mistakes made in the matter, the agencies learned from and made adjustments to help prevent future mistakes. Here we fall back on the three options, as for some reason the agency as a whole is not interested in making any adjustments, thereby not acknowledging any mistakes.

The point I'm trying to make is that intelligence is not perfect, in fact it's not even close. Intel people will tell you waht they think, and they'll be honest about it, but they can be very wrong.

I agree with this and know this first hand. However, they are indeed correct more often than not.

So when the CIA comes forward and says that they're 100% sure that this detainee knows exactly where the next terrorist attack is coming, and that we just need to waterboard him to get the info, you have to take that with more than a grain of salt. You need an entire salt mine.

You went from good post to not-so-good post right there. By your logic, why trust ANYTHING that the CIA produces?

Again, they get it right WAY more often than not. It's just that it doesn't make the New York Times when they get it right.

So if the CIA says they need to waterboard a subject, I'm inclined to believe them.

You never know anything for a fact in the intelligence world. I'm not trying to say that our intel people are idiots, that they're political hacks, or that they're sadists. It's just the nature of the field. All things considered our intel agencies do a damn good job, but they're up against an impossible challenge.

I find it odd that you say that just after saying you should take certain recommendations with a grain of salt.

Also, you DO know things for a fact in the intelligence world. We're not talking mood-setting lines in a Tom Clancy novel, here. In the real world, the intelligence community focuses on obtaining information, with an emphasis on FACTUAL, VERIFIABLE information. And, it gains a lot of it.

So getting back to torture, in a scenario with perfect information, I might be okay with torture in very limited circumstances. But based on everything I've learned about intel, I'm firmly convinced that perfect information never exists.

Perfect information always exists. The key is obtaining it. The trick is that you never know its veracity until you have it. So, I err on the side of having the information.

Therefore, I can't support torture ever. At best it simply means confusing yourself by doing awful things to an awful person. But it can also mean degrading yourself by doing awful things to a genuinely innocent person and inspiring others to do those same awful things to your people.

That's mumbo-jumbo, sorry. "Confusing yourself"? Huh? Inspiring others? What? I'm pretty sure that, prior to the public hubbub about waterboarding, people were inspired to attack us all the same. And, quite frankly, they were a lot more successful at it back then.

And, if we're "torturing" innocent people, I'd advocate for that to stop, just like you. But not the practice as a whole. That'd be like saying that, due to innocent people being wrongly sent to prison, we should eliminate prisons.

PS: I'll lay off the condescending remarks to you too (as best I can). I keep thinking everyone is Tribeman.