Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 241
  1. #61  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    You can die from taking too much aspirin. I have not found any reference anywhere to anyone dying in American hands during a water boarding. Also, the CIA and others have stated they did receive valuable information from water boarding - so to say thing is gained, well they just are all wet.
    Speaking of the CIA:

    • CIA Inspector General John Helgerwon: the techniques "appeared to constitute cruel, and degrading treatment under the (Geneva) convention."
    • Former CIA officer Bob Baer: It is "bad interrogation. I mean you can get anyone to confess to anything if the torture's bad enough"
    • Larry Johnson, a former CIA officer and a deputy director of the State Department's office of counterterrorism: "What real CIA field officers know firsthand is that it is better to build a relationship of trust … than to extract quick confessions through tactics such as those used by the Nazis and the Soviets."

    You are just babbling the democrat talking point trash. Nothing you say below has any truth to it.
    Other examples of 'democrat talking point trash':

    • "Some may argue that we would be more effective if we sanctioned torture or other expedient methods to obtain information from the enemy. They would be wrong. Beyond the basic fact that such actions are illegal, history shows that they also are frequently neither useful nor necessary." -- Gen. David Petraus
    • "Well, waterboarding to me is torture, OK? And waterboarding was advocated by the administration and, according to published reports, was used." -- John McCain
    Last edited by Bujin; 05/20/2009 at 09:46 PM.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  2. fry8's Avatar
    Posts
    66 Posts
    Global Posts
    157 Global Posts
    #62  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    You can die from taking too much aspirin. I have not found any reference anywhere to anyone dying in American hands during a water boarding. Also, the CIA and others have stated they did receive valuable information from water boarding - so to say thing is gained, well they just are all wet.
    "You can die from taking too much aspirin" Well yes, you can die if you fall of a cliff, if you are poisoned, you can die if you get shot with a gun, you can die from a drug overdose. I have no idea what you are trying to get at. Many things can kill you, and if someone shoved 800 pills of aspirin down your throat does that mean it's ok? Does a common household item that can kill you downplay the role of death from torture? I would like to see you try to last more than five minutes of being waterboarded. When water goes down your throat and you can't breathe, you can die.

    Does enduring an agonizing feeling of water overpowering your gag reflex, and feeling your throat open and allowing pint after pint of water to involuntarily fill your lungs, does that sound fun? Does that sound like an interrogation? Because I thought interrogations enhanced (double speak) or not, do not involve pain and water in lungs.

    "Waterboarding is a controlled drowning that, in the American model, occurs under the watch of a doctor, a psychologist, an interrogator and a trained strap-in/strap-out team. It does not simulate drowning, as the lungs are actually filling with water. There is no way to simulate that. The victim is drowning. How much the victim is to drown depends on the desired result (in the form of answers to questions shouted into the victim’s face) and the obstinacy of the subject. A team doctor watches the quantity of water that is ingested and for the physiological signs which show when the drowning effect goes from painful psychological experience, to horrific suffocating punishment to the final death spiral."

    -Small Wars Journal

    These techniques you seemingly gloss over, were used by the Japanese in WWII and we tried them for war crimes. The Khmer Rouge used it as well. The Khmer Rouge committed genocide in Cambodia, almost 2 million people died; these are the techniques we justify? By the way the Khmer Rouge was supported by western intelligence, including the CIA. Thats a bit of history to put things in perspective.

    "Washington took immediate steps to preserve the Khmer Rouge as a guerrilla movement,” according to Jack Colhoun in Covert Action Quarterly magazine, Summer 1990

    Zbigniew Brzezinski (National Security Advisor to Carter and is involved with the infamous trilateral commission) said, “I encouraged the Chinese to support Pol Pot. I encouraged the Thai to help the DK (Democratic Kampuchea).”

    In 1982, the US invented the Coalition of the Democratic Government of Kampuchea.

    According to John pilger, the ‘Coalition’ was dominated, diplomatically and militarily, by the Khmer Rouge.

    One of Pol Pot’s closet cronies, Thaoun Prasith, ran the office at the UN in New York.

    In 1991, John pilger interviewed a member of “R” (reserve) Squadron of the SAS (British intelligence), who had served on the border.

    “We trained the KR in a lot of technical stuff - a lot about mines,” he said.

    “We used mines that came originally from Royal Ordnance in Britain, which we got by way of Egypt with marking changed . . .“We even gave them psychological training. At first, they wanted to go into the villages and just chop people up. We told them how to go easy . . .”

    ^ That was just to let you know a bit of history and do you think that employing the torture from war criminals that we supported is ok?

    How do we know someone is guilty unless we give them a trial to prove this accusation? How do we know that we aren't torturing innocent people? It's unconstitutional and it is against the geneva conventions. Torture does not prove effective and does not merit reliable information, granted anyone will say anything whatever it may be to end the torture. There are of course better ways of getting information; intelligence isn't a one way street, one can gather information emotionally, rather than physically.

    Good detectives and interrogators gain tons of valid information per year on multiple subjects and they don't use physical means to achieve this. I would like to see the reliable information the CIA obtained from using torture, that conclusively couldn't have been done via emotional interrogation.

    Sorry I wrote a lot, but you must really understand the context of this and how the DHS is not just for arabs, but for the American people as well.

    And you should watch this
  3. #63  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    It's so pathetic that everything we as Americans claim America is--freedom of speech, no torture, separation of church and state--goes right out the window when we suddenly feel threatened--even when the threat is made up. With Iraq, it was COMPLETELY made up. Completely--and mainly for money--to control oil in the Middle East, for large American corporations to reaps billions in profit from war mongering.
    Evidence? What control of oil has occurred?
  4. #64  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Even if there is a direct threat, torture doesn't get you the real answers. It doesn't work. PERIOD
    And you know this how?
  5. #65  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    I realize that people can be convinced of anything.
    Got that right.
  6. #66  
    Quote Originally Posted by fry8 View Post
    Thats percicesly the point for torture. O and by the way the department of homeland security is not just for arabs, it's for the American people. The 9/11 commission received much information via torture. I remember one man was waterboarded and had to sign a statement he couldn't read so he could be released, now that's the "American way." Waterboarding is torture by the way. One can die from it and cops don't do it to get information when they are doing interrigations, becuase cops are lower on the todem pole and lawsuits would be flooding courts.
    ?
  7. #67  
    Quote Originally Posted by sblanter View Post
    And you know this how?
    Addressed in posts #21 and #63.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  8. #68  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    Addressed in posts #21 and #63.
    No, I asked how this was known. Those posts just indicate someone said it's true.
  9. #69  
    Quote Originally Posted by sblanter View Post
    No, I asked how this was known. Those posts just indicate someone said it's true.
    Army Field Manual 34-52 Chapter 1

    The use of force, mental torture, threats, insults, or exposure to unpleasant and inhumane treatment of any kind is prohibited by law and is neither authorized nor. condoned by the US Government. Experience indicates that the use of force is not necessary to gain the cooperation of sources for interrogation. Therefore, the use of force is a poor technique, as it yields unreliable results, may damage subsequent collection efforts, and can induce the source to say whatever he thinks the interrogator wants to hear.
    Evidence throughout history confirms this, hence the Army's stance. Read up on historical atrocities such as the Roman Inquisition and the Spanish Inquisition to see how many people confessed to completely irrational charges just to stop torturous interrogations...

    Anyone with a rational mind can see how torture would lead to appeasement and not, necessarily, to fact...

    And, let us not forget that, regardless of its effectiveness, it is ILLEGAL...

    Geneva Convention (III) relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.

    Art 3. In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following
    provisions:
    (1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria. To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:
    (a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;
    (b) taking of hostages;
    (c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;
    (d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.
    UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

    Article 2
    1. Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction.

    2. No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.

    3. An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be
    invoked as a justification of torture
    .
    Regarding the topic of this thread, Nancy screwed up, she is human.

    As is the 'human way' she should apologize for and accept responsibility for her mistakes and endeavor not to make further mistakes.

    However, this is not so severe a mistake that she need be treated like a war criminal or a complete hack. Her 'lie' did not send us to war nor did it order people tortured.

    As was mentioned above, the only evidence I've seen points to the fact that she should have (a) spoken up sooner about this atrocity and (b) she should not have played as if it was unknown to her later on down the road.

    Given the past course of these discussions, I will most likely not bother responding any further.
    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.
  10. #70  
    Nancy Polluter being treated like a war criminal? Yes as a hack and stupid, but not at all like a war criminal. Any proof of that floating around anywhere? Has she been shot? Has she been tortured? Really, I find it difficult to believe you pity her.

    Also hang the UN.
  11. #71  
    Nancy Polluter being treated like a war criminal? Yes as a hack and stupid, but not at all like a war criminal. Any proof of that floating around anywhere? Has she been shot? Has she been tortured? Really, I find it difficult to believe you pity her.

    Also hang the UN.
  12. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #72  
    Quote Originally Posted by gksmithlcw View Post
    Regarding the topic of this thread, Nancy screwed up, she is human.
    Of course she's human. People mess up. People are liable for their messes, too. We have prisons full of people that have screwed up.
    As is the 'human way' she should apologize for and accept responsibility for her mistakes and endeavor not to make further mistakes.

    However, this is not so severe a mistake that she need be treated like a war criminal or a complete hack. Her 'lie' did not send us to war nor did it order people tortured.
    Well maybe her 'lie' didn't, but the fact that she condoned waterboarding as a possible technique to get information did get people waterboarded. Oh sweet irony.
    As was mentioned above, the only evidence I've seen points to the fact that she should have (a) spoken up sooner about this atrocity and (b) she should not have played as if it was unknown to her later on down the road.
    Ok, so lets give Nancy a pass.... and now, lets get on with lynching the others... you know, Cheney and Bush for waterboarding.
    Given the past course of these discussions, I will most likely not bother responding any further.
    LOL! You just drop a bomb and move on... I love it!
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  13. #73  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Well maybe her 'lie' didn't, but the fact that she condoned waterboarding as a possible technique to get information did get people waterboarded. Oh sweet irony.
    Wow! Now that just grabbed my attention as a very good argument.
    It made me think of some horrifying crime being done in someones basement. If I knew about it and said nothing... O' the guilt I bear. I could of stopped it.

    No! her saying she's sorry is not enough.
    And using the argument that others bear more guilt, or what about this/that guy, still doesn't exempt her.
  14. #74  
    Nah. She needs to go. So does Joey for disclosing where the VP hides. So does Emanuel and his collection of fish.
  15. Rusty J's Avatar
    Posts
    178 Posts
    Global Posts
    183 Global Posts
    #75  
    To sblanter: denial of access to a resource is a form of control.

    Generally: Aside from the discrepancies in the CIA'S timeline, there's the simpletter that the briefed information was classified - and could not have even been mentioned without risking prosecution.
    -Rusty
    Blackjack, Tilt; Treo 90, 270-680; Palm Vx, i705, T|T3, iQue 3200; Nokia N800, E71
  16. Rusty J's Avatar
    Posts
    178 Posts
    Global Posts
    183 Global Posts
    #76  
    er... "simple matter"
    Can't editpropely from a Nokia E71's browser...
    -Rusty
    Blackjack, Tilt; Treo 90, 270-680; Palm Vx, i705, T|T3, iQue 3200; Nokia N800, E71
  17. #77  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    LOL! You just drop a bomb and move on... I love it!
    I 'moved on' because, in the past, rational discussion was not really an option in these topics. However, I've been assured that personal attacks will not be tolerated.

    Quote Originally Posted by berdinkerdickle View Post
    Wow! Now that just grabbed my attention as a very good argument.
    It made me think of some horrifying crime being done in someones basement. If I knew about it and said nothing... O' the guilt I bear. I could of stopped it.

    No! her saying she's sorry is not enough.
    And using the argument that others bear more guilt, or what about this/that guy, still doesn't exempt her.
    As a person of conscience, I agree that her guilt in the matter is not excusable any more than Bush's and Cheney's. However, there ARE degrees of severity which must be considered. This is not a black and white issue.

    And let us not forget that the people screaming for her to be punished are the same people screaming that Bush and Cheney were only doing what was necessary. This is, plainly and simply, hypocrisy.
    Last edited by gksmithlcw; 05/21/2009 at 01:22 PM.
    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.
  18. #78  
    Quote Originally Posted by gksmithlcw View Post
    However, the people screaming for her to be punished are the same people screaming that Bush and Cheney were only doing what was necessary. This is, plainly and simply, hypocrisy.
    Which is a total shame.
    We can't keep tainting our judgment based on what side of the aisle we're on.

    Did so and so do such and such?
    That's it. Now mete out justice.

    None of this; but what about....?
    Just call me Berd.
  19. #79  
    Quote Originally Posted by berdinkerdickle View Post
    Which is a total shame.
    We can't keep tainting our judgment based on what side of the aisle we're on.
    Quite right. And I think this is the point that many foreign nations have been trying to make over the past several years; Regardless of politics, religion and nationality, there are still universal truths regarding what is 'right' and what is 'wrong' and the US seems to have forgotten this...

    Alas, I am off topic again.
    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. #80  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    When the truth comes out, everyone will be implicated.
    And that is my point. If we're going to run Pelosi into the ground for knowing that the torture might occur, we're going to have to run many more into the ground for far worse...
    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.
Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions