9/11 dude learns to breathe under water

[snuffbox]

I'm not accusing you of torture, Jingus. Stop with that. You're not going to be able to put over a strawman argument when you're actually quoting my words.

When you fuel irarrtional anger/hate, it becomes increasingly easy to transfer that elsewhere. Thus, the nation allowed itself to be lead into thinking that leaving bin Laden alone in favor of starting wars elsewhere is a good thing. It also lends litself, politically, to focus upon Mexicans/gays/naughty music/women's rights/black people/etc in favor of any actual problems that confront people.

And, before you respond, no that wasn't an accusation that you do any of the above. I am describing the potential pratfalls of irrartional hate/anger among individuals as it relates to public policy decisions.

 

[ericmm]

To the first, I think to be defined as real torture that it should involve some degree of maiming.

So clearly you should just excuse yourself from all (all) conversations about and involving torture of any kind. Since you are grossly unqualified to discuss them. Such Spanish-Inquisition bullshit from you is disappointing.

I'd ask you if you're fine with shocks as well, since they don't leave any marks, or any other of the numerous ways humans have delightedly inflicted intense fear and pain on each other without leaving visible marks, but I really don't think you're qualified to discuss this anymore.

 

[Jingus]

I'm not accusing you of torture, Jingus. Stop with that. You're not going to be able to put over a strawman argument when you're actually quoting my words.

So then why were you talking about behavior? Behavior means real-life actions, not words lazily typed on the internet.

When you fuel irarrtional anger/hate, it becomes increasingly easy to transfer that elsewhere. Thus, the nation allowed itself to be lead into thinking that leaving bin Laden alone in favor of starting wars elsewhere is a good thing. It also lends litself, politically, to focus upon Mexicans/gays/naughty music/women's rights/black people/etc in favor of any actual problems that confront people.

I'm still not sure what your point is. Firstly, I don't think anger or hatred towards a guy who is proud of killing thousands of innocent civilians can possibly be defined as irrational. Secondly, I don't see what all the other stuff you're describing has to do with the discussion at hand.

So clearly you should just excuse yourself from all (all) conversations about and involving torture of any kind. Since you are grossly unqualified to discuss them. Such Spanish-Inquisition bullshit from you is disappointing.

Ah, the classic "stop talking, you're just wrong!" technique. C'mon Eric, has that ever worked once in all the years you've been arguing on message boards?

I'd ask you if you're fine with shocks as well, since they don't leave any marks, or any other of the numerous ways humans have delightedly inflicted intense fear and pain on each other without leaving visible marks, but I really don't think you're qualified to discuss this anymore.

Shocks DO leave a mark. Speaking as a guy who's been hit with a stungun before, the mark is pretty obvious and visible. So clearly you should just excuse yourself from all (all) conversations about and involving electricity of any kind. Since you are grossly unqualified to discuss them. Such I-Failed-Physics-Class bullshit from you is disappointing.

 

[snuffbox]

I'm not going to continue going over this with you. Have fun.

 

[ericmm]

Well 1) I don't think the marks last very long, so if we had been shocking KSM we could let him heal long before we showed him to teh world and 2) I'm willing to not discuss electric shocks ever again if you won't discuss what is and is not torture.

Snuff has it right though.

Forget about it.

 

[Sex Machine Gun]

The one man wrecking crew that is Jingus spits some "real talk" in yet another thread. Does this count as a McBeefing?

 

[Gary]

Only Czech and KOAB decides who get's McBeefed.

 

[Czech]

I think to be defined as real torture that it should involve some degree of maiming.

Imagining someone actually postulating this out loud is kind of funny, like someone's throwing it out at a brainstorming session in a conference room.

 

[Sex Machine Gun]

Which is probably what happened.

 

[Charlie]

I doubt this would ever happen, but someday I'd like to see some declassified info telling us how much tangible good the Bush administration's new policies did. Like, exactly how many attacks were thwarted or how many real-deal terrorists were captured through methods like waterboarding, warrantless wiretaps, racial profiling, and scanning the hell out of you before you can get on an airplane. Either none of these turned out to be useful and we shouldn't have been using them, or perhaps they really did give legitimate results and perhaps they should've told the public some of this in order to back up their questionable policies with factual results.

It's happening now. Obama is going to release some of the CIA memos on the interrogation of some high value Al-Qaeda targets. They haven't been released before because they were classified. In particular, the 5.30.05 DOJ memo on an interrogation of Khalid Sheik Muhammed details how the government was able to stop a terrorist plot to attack Los Angeles based upon the information they received from him. The plot was dubbed "Second Wave" and KSM informed that the operatives were to be East-Asians who were likely going to employ the same 9/11 tactics of hijacked aircraft.

None other than Dick Cheney is calling on Obama to release all of the memos on the interrogation techniques and the results obtained from them.

[quote author=bigolsmitty]Torture doesn't work. We got info from KSM and Abu Zabaydah through regular old interrogation, not torture.[/quote]

Incorrect. The information I referenced above was obtained from KSM specifically only through the use of water-boarding. All previous interrogation methods had proven useless against him.

You can't take only the bad and ignore the potentially inconvenient truth that harsh interrogation techniques can be quite effective and provide good intelligence. There's substantial evidence that they DO work. The debate isn't whether they're inefficient, it's over whether they're distasteful.

 

[snuffbox]

I read about that on a huge-govt/right-wing website, too, Ginger!

 

[bigolsmitty]

Bush Administration Fact Sheet: "Keeping America Safe From Attack"

In 2002, we broke up a plot by KSM to hijack an airplane and fly it into the tallest building on the West Coast. During a hearing at Guantanamo Bay two months ago, KSM stated that the intended target was the Library Tower in Los Angeles.

http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070523.html

KSM was captured in March 2003.
http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/rendition701/timeline/timeline_2.html

Unless they were able to travel through time to use the info gained from torture to disrupt an attack in the past, this didn't happen.

 

[Chazz]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30335592

 

[griffinmills]

Jack Baur

Jack Bauer.

Firefox even catches it as being misspelled!

 

[bigolsmitty]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30335592

"Torture worked! But... a) I wouldn't have approved it, b) we probably could have gotten the same info through regular interrogation, and c) I'm not going to give any actual instances of how it worked, and d) it's not worth continuing!"

That's a ringing endorsement!

My take on this is that DNI Blair is trying to reassure his new employees in the US intel community that he "has their back" and is going to stick up for them if anyone tries to punish them for what their higher ups told them was okay to do. I'm okay with this, I think the DOJ/Bush administrations officials who conceived the idea should be the target of investigations, not the intelligence officers who carried out the orders.

 

[Agent of Oblivion]

How do we feel about forced sleep deprivation?

 

[bigolsmitty]

I dunno, how do you feel about it? I know how the KGB and Tojo's Japan felt about--loved it!

 

[bigolsmitty]

Chazz,

It also seems odd that, as a supporter of torture, you would try to bolster the case for it by posting an article where the Director of National Intelligence says:

The bottom line is these techniques have hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security.

 

[Chazz]

I read that. I posted this article for the people,(not necessarily on this board), saying that torture 100% doesn't work. Obama's Director of National Intelligence saying that we'd "probably" would've gotten the same info through regular interrogation is not definitive proof that it isn't effective. I know I'm in the minority here, but if things like torture and warrantless wiretaps prevents even one terrorist attack on this country, than I'm all for it.

 

[bigolsmitty]

I read that. I posted this article for the people,(not necessarily on this board), saying that torture 100% doesn't work. Obama's Director of National Intelligence saying that we'd "probably" would've gotten the same info through regular interrogation is not definitive proof that it isn't effective.

It would seem to me that the burden of proof would seem to be on the torturers. That is, rather than saying, "you can't prove torture doesn't work!" (negative proof is generally pretty impossible to find) it would make more sense if torture fans would show some evidence that it has worked.

I can find a lot of quotes from intelligence officers, FBI Special Agents, and members of the military saying it doesn't work. And I can provide justifications as to why it doesn't. I just don't see a lot of (read: any) empirical evidence to suggest that it does.

 

[Gary]

Might I recommend this book to you Chazz.

 

[Jingus]

Actually, mentioning sleep dep is interesting. Much like waterboarding, it's a method which involves essentially no physical damage. Why has one got all the attention why the other hasn't? Is it because the mental image is so much more easy to grasp? A guy tied up, strapped to a board, being pseudodrowned: that's a fairly "sexy" image for journalists, bloggers, and anyone with a complaint to sink their teeth into. However, some dude who's just been awake for a long time? Hard to get people excited over that. Never mind that the mental effects from sleep deprivation might be even worse than waterboarding. I guess it's one of those things where if you can't reduce an issue to an attention-grabbing soundbyte headline on the television news, then nobody cares.

I know how the KGB and Tojo's Japan felt about--loved it!

But it wasn't their favorite child. They loved it in more of a "Well, we broke his legs and cut off his eyelids and dissolved his fingers in acid and murdered his entire family and he STILL won't talk... hell, I dunno, keep him awake for a long time or something, I'm outta ideas" sort of way.

 

[Perfxion]

Another way they did it during the first part of the Iraq War vol 2, was blasting "Saint Anger". Which should be a war crime in itself. Mental methods of torture are just as bad, as physical except they aren't as much of a headliner. I never seen any case were torturing someone to talk getting you any info. Most confessions are just people saying the shit you want to hear, not really the truth.

To paraphrase an excellent quote:
I don't care if someone was born in 1975, give me a few days to really torture someone and I can have them confess to the Kennedy Assassination. It can get me shit I want to hear without any real information because all I can get out of them is stuff I already know is true or lie. Its more or less a punishment before a crime can be committed by them.

The biggest problem with any thing falling under the greater realm of the Patriot Act is that it goes against the Constitution. Pretty much against the fabric of our foundation. Warrant less searches will not fly either.

 

[Charlie]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30335592

"Torture worked! But... a) I wouldn't have approved it, b) we probably could have gotten the same info through regular interrogation, and c) I'm not going to give any actual instances of how it worked, and d) it's not worth continuing!"

That's a ringing endorsement!

That's categorically not what he said.

His exact quote was:

“The information gained from these techniques was valuable in some instances, but there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means,” Admiral Blair said in a written statement issued last night

What we know is this.

1) the information obtained using the harsh interrogation ABSOLUTELY yielded valuable information.
2) Using other methods HYPOTHETICALLY might have yielded comparable results.

We know, per Blair's own remarks, that factually these interrogation methods worked in the past. That's significant. It is theoretical that standard interrogation techniques could have produced similar intelligence.

Also, a curious statement from that news story:

Admiral Blair’s assessment that the interrogation methods did produce important information was deleted from a condensed version of his memo released to the media last Thursday. Also deleted was a line in which he empathized with his predecessors who originally approved some of the harsh tactics after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

The White House redacted the portion of the memo which held Blair's remarks emphasizing that the interrogation methods worked.

This is what I find disconcerting about the entire torture debate. There is endless talk, much of it from the left, about wanting to discuss the issue and open a dialogue on the matter, yet many of those same individuals do not want to even remotely entertain the grim possibility that these interrogation methods are effective, when used "properly" and under special circumstances where standard methods have failed. IMO, that does need to be part of the debate.

 

[snuffbox]

It's America, Vyce. If you want to live by Iranian tactics, they'd be glad to take you.

 

[bigolsmitty]

Probably valuable information like that attack on LA you mentioned earlier!

I stand by my theory that he was just trying not to roil the intel officers that he's going to have to manage over the next few years.

 

[bigolsmitty]

This is what I find disconcerting about the entire torture debate. There is endless talk, much of it from the left, about wanting to discuss the issue and open a dialogue on the matter, yet many of those same individuals do not want to even remotely entertain the grim possibility that these interrogation methods are effective, when used "properly" and under special circumstances where standard methods have failed. IMO, that does need to be part of the debate.

I didn't notice this the first time b/c it was in quotes.

a) I find it "disconcerting" that what you find "disconcerting" about the torture debate isn't the actual torture.

b) Enlighten us. Tell us how to do torture "properly" and what "special circumstances" you want people tortured under.

 

[Sex Machine Gun]

Shepherd Smith drops F-bomb during Freedom Watch: We do not F%$&ing torture!!!

 

[Byron The Bulb]

Shep Smith- This is America, We Don't Torture

Twice in one day! Shepherd Smith probably won't be on Fox much longer.

 

[Gary]

I'm starting to think he wants that to happen. If that doesn't happen, then he'll either a.) commit suicide, or b.) go on a big tirade against the network on air.