Page 12 of 13 FirstFirst ... 278910111213 LastLast
Results 221 to 240 of 241
  1. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #221  
    Quote Originally Posted by aero View Post
    Seriously it is from reading any number of books, articles, testimony, and indeed academic papers by people in the intelligence business and the military .

    You are making it sound like discussion of interrogation technique efficacy is some kind of very secret thing. It isn't.

    torture does work if you wish to get the subject to confess to something that never happened. It works great if you wish to get an innocent grandmother in 15th century New England to confess to witchcraft, a Jew in 16th Century Spain or Germany to confess to killing Christian children and poisoning wells. It also works if you wish to get al Qaeda suspects to falsely claim WMD in Iraq.
    You're speaking from the heart, and I appreciate that. But I'm looking for facts based on current events, e.g., the interrogations at GB. Nazis and Witch trials are off topic, as far as I'm concerned; at least, off topic of what I'm asking.

    You got my curiosity up on one point you raise: Did we torture al Qaeda suspect and get false claims of WMD of Iraq? This is the first I've heard of it. Can you please provide a source?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  2. #222  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Nice find, but I'm asking for actual results, not opinion or "popular perception". What were the actual results from the interrogations at guantanamo bay? The rest of this is academic discussion and opining.
    But it wasn't "popular perception", but rather opinions from experts who would have a basis for knowledge.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  3. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #223  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    But it wasn't "popular perception", but rather opinions from experts who would have a basis for knowledge.
    Please reread my comment.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  4. #224  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Please reread my comment.
    The simple answer is that there have been no documents that show a single bit of actionable intelligence that has come from our torture policy....and there are clear documents that it is against the law and our international agreements.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  5. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #225  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    The simple answer is that there have been no documents that show a single bit of actionable intelligence that has come from our torture policy....and there are clear documents that it is against the law and our international agreements.
    No, that would be the "convenient" answer for your side of the argument! And I don't blame you in the least for playing that card. But there is, in fact, such a document, it's classified, and Obama refuses to have it declassified. Gee, wonder why?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  6. #226  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    No, that would be the "convenient" answer for your side of the argument! And I don't blame you in the least for playing that card. But there is, in fact, such a document, it's classified, and Obama refuses to have it declassified. Gee, wonder why?
    Senator Patrick Leahy has publicly stated that this document does not in any way state that torture provided actionable intelligence. And Cheney himself has backed from his earlier statement, now stating that it shows that our interrogation program (which includes both standard and enhanced interrogation) was effective - not specifically the "enhanced" part.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  7. #227  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    You're speaking from the heart, and I appreciate that. But I'm looking for facts based on current events, e.g., the interrogations at GB. Nazis and Witch trials are off topic, as far as I'm concerned; at least, off topic of what I'm asking.

    You got my curiosity up on one point you raise: Did we torture al Qaeda suspect and get false claims of WMD of Iraq? This is the first I've heard of it. Can you please provide a source?
    Former U.S. Army psychiatrist, Maj. Charles Burney, and Lawrence Wilkerson, chief of staff for then-Secretary of State Colin Powell, have reported that interrogators at Gitmo were under "pressure" to produce evidence of non-existent ties between al Qaida and Iraq. In other words, torture was used for political ends, not to protect citizens.

    http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS.../iraq.torture/

    FBI interrogator Ali Soufan, who successfully gained intelligence from Abu Zubaydah before the CIA decided to waterboard him and he shut down, testified to Congress that the enhanced interrogation techniques were "ineffective, slow and unreliable, and as a result harmful to our efforts to defeat al-Qaida."
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  8. #228  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    You're speaking from the heart, and I appreciate that. But I'm looking for facts based on current events, e.g., the interrogations at GB. Nazis and Witch trials are off topic, as far as I'm concerned; at least, off topic of what I'm asking.

    You got my curiosity up on one point you raise: Did we torture al Qaeda suspect and get false claims of WMD of Iraq? This is the first I've heard of it. Can you please provide a source?
    NO I am speaking from objectivity facts and what the experts who do the interrogations say.

    How are interrogations by Witch trials "off topic"? They are the heart of the matter --torture subjects will confess to whatever they think the torturer wishes.

    As far as Iraq, the entire point of the multiple torture sessions was to justify the war with Iraq. That is already on the record. If it is the first you heard of it you may have missed any number of leaks as to what exactly the torture sessions were about.. It was the first priority -- justifying war with Iraq.

    Torture is never used to get real intelligence, it is used for political means, to get to a goal. You would have to ve crazy to think you will get accurate information from Torture since people will confess to being part of an invasion from Mars if you waterboard them enough.

    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    No, that would be the "convenient" answer for your side of the argument! And I don't blame you in the least for playing that card. But there is, in fact, such a document, it's classified, and Obama refuses to have it declassified. Gee, wonder why?
    Why? because it is profoundly embarrassing to the US! Why do you think we wont release more photo on the sexual humiliation of (often innocent) Moslem prisoners, and why that was blocked last month? Because Obama doesn't want the US to look like a cruel and outrageously depraved state.
  9. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #229  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    Senator Patrick Leahy has publicly stated that this document does not in any way state that torture provided actionable intelligence. And Cheney himself has backed from his earlier statement, now stating that it shows that our interrogation program (which includes both standard and enhanced interrogation) was effective - not specifically the "enhanced" part.
    Right. Leahy never postures for political reasons. Lets analyze the results and stop with the opining. Thats all I'm saying.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  10. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #230  
    Quote Originally Posted by aero View Post
    NO I am speaking from objectivity facts and what the experts who do the interrogations say.
    ok, so no actual facts, or sources, or documentation can be referenced to support your views. gotcha.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  11. #231  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    ok, so no actual facts, or sources, or documentation can be referenced to support your views. gotcha.
    What are you going on about? The entire body of work on interrogations shows torture doesn't work and causes people to make false confessions.

    Are you denying people confessed to witchcraft in the Puritan settlements of New England as the result of torture?
    So we have the current US intelligence people, especially those involved in anti terrorism saying it doesn't work.

    The only people who say it works are the people who used to to political aims that turned out to be false -- and deeply damaging to the US.
  12. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #232  
    Pelosi Has Provided No Proof that CIA ‘Misleads’ Congress, DeMint Says
    Friday, June 05, 2009
    By Nicholas Ballasy

    (CNSNews.com) - Contrary to her claim that the CIA “misleads” Congress “all the time” – in reference to the waterboarding of three al Qaeda terrorists – House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Claif.) has presented no proof that the CIA misled, nor has anyone else, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) told CNSNews.com.

    Pelosi made her remarks at a May 14 press conference. When asked whether the CIA had lied to her in a September 2002 briefing about the use of waterboarding (simulated drowning) as an interrogation technique, Pelosi said, “Yes, misleading the Congress of the United States.”

    When asked later at the same press conference about whether the CIA’s actions, Pelosi said, “They mislead us all the time. … Yeah, they did. They misrepresented every step of the way.” It is a crime for a federal employee or department to deliberately lie or mislead the Congress.

    When asked about whether he agreed with Pelosi, DeMint told CNSNews.com: “It’s a very unfortunate statement. I think the CIA is a large part of patriots serving in many places where their life is at risk.

    “I thought her statement was very irresponsible, and she has not come forward with any proof, and no one else has collaborated what she said. So, I think it’s a very unfortunate statement for a leader of the House of Representatives to make,” he added.

    Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.) said he did not believe the CIA had ever misled him, and when he served in the House of Representatives, he was on the same House Intelligence Committee as Pelosi, which received briefings from the CIA.

    “I don’t agree with her, because I don’t think they’ve [the CIA] ever mislead me, and I served in the same body she did,” Isakson told CNSNews.com.

    “I have never seen anything happen post-briefing contradicting the information they gave me when we were briefed,” he said. “I mean, you know, you either tell the truth or you don’t. I mean, you have these briefings, they tell you about circumstances, you make your own determination when you see things unfold, and I’ve never seen a situation where I ever thought I was misled or they didn’t tell the truth.”

    When asked what he thinks should happen if the facts come out and show that Pelosi was not being truthful, Isakson said Pelosi was wrong but was entitled to her opinion.

    “If everybody up here who didn’t tell the truth resigned, we’d have a hard time getting a quorum, so I think you have to be held accountable to the voters that elect you rather than calling a criminal investigation every time you disagree with somebody,” Isakson said.

    “I think Mrs. Pelosi is wrong, but she's within her rights to have an opinion. I don’t think the CIA has misled me, and I go to the same briefings that she has,” he added.

    ---

    and the beat goes on...
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  13. #233  
    I think it's ironic that the right is beating up on Pelosi for "denigrating the CIA", while **** Cheney is now saying that he was misled regarding Iraq--Al Queda connections by the CIA.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  14. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #234  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    I think it's ironic that the right is beating up on Pelosi for "denigrating the CIA", while **** Cheney is now saying that he was misled regarding Iraq--Al Queda connections by the CIA.
    Ok please help me out here. I'm googling like crazy trying to find a recent article that quotes him saying he was misled regarding Iraq.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  15. #235  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Ok please help me out here. I'm googling like crazy trying to find a recent article that quotes him saying he was misled regarding Iraq.
    Cheney said in 2004 that the evidence was "overwhelming" that al Qaeda had a relationship with Hussein's regime in Iraq. He stated as late as 2007 that there was an Iraq / Al Queda connection:
    Cheney reasserts al-Qaida-Saddam link - Conflict in Iraq- msnbc.com

    Now he states that "I do not believe and have never seen any evidence to confirm that [Hussein] was involved in 9/11. We had that reporting for a while, [but] eventually it turned out not to be true." He then identified former CIA Director George Tenet as the "prime source of information" on the non-existent relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda.

    Cheney: No link between Saddam Hussein, 9/11 - CNN.com


    For his part, Tenet now says that the Bush Administration, and Cheney in particular, pushed the country to war in Iraq without ever conducting a “serious debate” about whether Saddam Hussein posed an imminent threat to the United States.

    Ex-C.I.A. Chief, in Book, Assails Cheney on Iraq - New York Times
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  16. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #236  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    Cheney said in 2004 that the evidence was "overwhelming" that al Qaeda had a relationship with Hussein's regime in Iraq. He stated as late as 2007 that there was an Iraq / Al Queda connection:
    Cheney reasserts al-Qaida-Saddam link - Conflict in Iraq- msnbc.com

    Now he states that "I do not believe and have never seen any evidence to confirm that [Hussein] was involved in 9/11. We had that reporting for a while, [but] eventually it turned out not to be true." He then identified former CIA Director George Tenet as the "prime source of information" on the non-existent relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda.

    Cheney: No link between Saddam Hussein, 9/11 - CNN.com

    For his part, Tenet now says that the Bush Administration, and Cheney in particular, pushed the country to war in Iraq without ever conducting a “serious debate” about whether Saddam Hussein posed an imminent threat to the United States.

    Ex-C.I.A. Chief, in Book, Assails Cheney on Iraq - New York Times
    Thanks for the effort. I thought you had something from the last couple of days. You guys will forever be circling around the same red herrings. There were no WMD's in Iraq, and Bush lied about Al Queda and Saddam. For the love of pete, please please give it a rest! LOL
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  17. #237  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Ok please help me out here. I'm googling like crazy trying to find a recent article that quotes him saying he was misled regarding Iraq.
    Thanks for the effort. I thought you had something from the last couple of days. You guys will forever be circling around the same red herrings. There were no WMD's in Iraq, and Bush lied about Al Queda and Saddam. For the love of pete, please please give it a rest! LOL
    The CNN Tenet article was from 4 days ago. Just a thought: perhaps you should have read it before posting the comment above?

    So, in summary, you have asked for what the experts know, and that was addressed by sharing CIA experts views on torture, as well as a member of both the Defense and Homeland Security committees. You asked about torture and eliciting false claims, and that was addressed by showing you experts from the Army and from the State Department who testified to this. You asked for information about Cheney's view that the CIA gave him false information, and that was provided.

    Additionally, this thread has included definitions of torture from the Geneva Convention, from the UN Conventions Against Torture, and the US Army Field Manual. All of which indicate extremely clearly that torture is agains the law and our international commitments. You have flatly stated that the Geneva Conventions shouldn't apply, although the Supreme Court disagrees with your opinion.

    It sounds to me as if others have given you plenty of information, that you choose to discount. Perhaps its time for you to do a little of the work: can you provide any data or claim from an expert in interrogation that torture was effective, Can you provide any documentation that it is legal?
    Last edited by Bujin; 06/05/2009 at 04:41 PM.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  18. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #238  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    The CNN Tenet article was from 4 days ago. Just a thought: perhaps you should have read it before posting the comment above?
    Here's a thought: Read my comments more closely. It's the arguments (the same red herrings) that are false and old, not the date of the article.

    So, in summary, you have asked for what the experts know, and that was addressed by sharing CIA experts views on torture, as well as a member of both the Defense and Homeland Security committees. You asked about torture and eliciting false claims, and that was addressed by showing you experts from the Army and from the State Department who testified to this. You asked for information about Cheney's view that the CIA gave him false information, and that was provided.

    Additionally, this thread has included definitions of torture from the Geneva Convention, from the UN Conventions Against Torture, and the US Army Field Manual. All of which indicate extremely clearly that torture is agains the law and our international commitments. You have flatly stated that the Geneva Conventions shouldn't apply, although the Supreme Court disagrees with your opinion.

    It sounds to me as if others have given you plenty of information, that you choose to discount. Perhaps its time for you to do a little of the work: can you provide any data or claim from an expert in interrogation that torture was effective, Can you provide any documentation that it is legal?
    Again, the document was not released by THIS administration, and it would (reportedly) have provided data regarding the effectiveness of our interrogation tactics. Sorry, I can't produce classified materials. You got me there. Wait, since he's your president, I guess it's *you* that have failed to produce the documentation on its effectiveness.

    As for legality, I don't think I've indicated if I thought it was or wasn't legal. I think there should be contingencies for it's use in specific controlled circumstances, i.e., the President would have to approve.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  19. #239  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Wait, since he's your president, I guess it's *you* that have failed to produce the documentation on its effectiveness.
    I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure he's the President of the entire country?
    Grant Smith
    A+, Net+, MCPx2, BSIT/VC, MIS

    eNVENT Technologies
    Use your imagination.
    --
    Sprint HTC Evo 4G

    DISCLAIMER: The views, conclusions, findings and opinions of this author are those of this author and do not necessarily reflect the views of eNVENT Technologies.
  20. #240  
    Ok please help me out here. I'm googling like crazy trying to find a recent article that quotes him saying he was misled regarding Iraq.
    Thanks for the effort. I thought you had something from the last couple of days. You guys will forever be circling around the same red herrings. There were no WMD's in Iraq, and Bush lied about Al Queda and Saddam. For the love of pete, please please give it a rest! LOL
    The CNN Tenet article was from 4 days ago. Just a thought: perhaps you should have read it before posting the comment above?
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Here's a thought: Read my comments more closely. It's the arguments (the same red herrings) that are false and old, not the date of the article.
    No, you asked for specific information, that I then provided for you. You then said that you thought I "had something from the last couple of days", which I indeed did - Cheney's claim was brand new.

    As for the issue of effectiveness of torture, I provided tons of info from experts stating that it was ineffective, slow, illegal, in violation of international agreements, and hurt our standing in the world. I simply asked for a shred of data to show its effectiveness. You can't provide it, so that's fine.

    When trying to defend any position, having data or expert sources is a good thing. As Perry Gluckman once wrote: "if you don't have data as a backup, you're just another person with an opinion". I won't be convinced if there's no data, and you will not be convinced despite avalanches of data provided, so let's just call it a draw.
    Last edited by Bujin; 06/08/2009 at 05:07 PM.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
Page 12 of 13 FirstFirst ... 278910111213 LastLast

Posting Permissions