Obama releases the "Torture Memos"

[Diemen]

You haven't been paying attention.

Whether it works or not is should be irrelevant. It's barbaric and we as a country are should be better than that.

 

[INDY500]

Can you show me a quote?

i oppose torture for a variety of reasons that i've outlined over the years in here, and one of those reasons is the fact that torture doesn't work because it gives you bad information. what's invalid about that position?
--Irvine511
pg 2 of this thread

torture doesn't work. we know this.
--Irvine511
pg 3

This would be nice if torture were proven to provide reliable intelligence. It hasn't. In fact, if anything has been proven it's that torture provides extremely unreliable intelligence.
--Diemen
pg 8

I'm sure I could find more.

 

[Irvine511]

the fact that torture doesn't work ...

The debate over the effectiveness of subjecting detainees to psychological and physical pressure is in some ways irresolvable, because it is impossible to know whether less coercive methods would have achieved the same result. But for defenders of waterboarding, the evidence is clear: Mohammed cooperated, and to an extraordinary extent, only when his spirit was broken in the month after his capture March 1, 2003, as the inspector general's report and other documents released this week indicate.

Over a few weeks, he was subjected to an escalating series of coercive methods, culminating in 7 1/2 days of sleep deprivation, while diapered and shackled, and 183 instances of waterboarding. After the month-long torment, he was never waterboarded again.

"What do you think changed KSM's mind?" one former senior intelligence official said this week after being asked about the effect of waterboarding. "Of course it began with that."

Mohammed, in statements to the International Committee of the Red Cross, said some of the information he provided was untrue.

"During the harshest period of my interrogation I gave a lot of false information in order to satisfy what I believed the interrogators wished to hear in order to make the ill-treatment stop. I later told interrogators that their methods were stupid and counterproductive. I'm sure that the false information I was forced to invent in order to make the ill-treatment stop wasted a lot of their time," he said.

Critics say waterboarding and other harsh methods are unacceptable regardless of their results, and those with detailed knowledge of the CIA's program say the existing assessments offer no scientific basis to draw conclusions about effectiveness.

"Democratic societies don't use torture under any circumstances. It is illegal and immoral," said Tom Parker, policy director for counterterrorism and human rights at Amnesty International. "This is a fool's argument in any event. There is no way to prove or disprove the counterfactual."

John L. Helgerson, the former CIA inspector general who investigated the agency's detention and interrogation program, said his work did not put him in "a position to reach definitive conclusions about the effectiveness of particular interrogation methods."

"Certain of the techniques seemed to have little effect, whereas waterboarding and sleep deprivation were the two most powerful techniques and elicited a lot of information," he said in an interview. "But we didn't have the time or resources to do a careful, systematic analysis of the use of particular techniques with particular individuals and independently confirm the quality of the information that came out."

is just one of many, many arguments against it.

of course a "senior intelligence official" is going to point to the correlation between 183 instances of torture -- 183!!! yeah, that's real effective -- as having some sort of efficacy in order to justify the orders he followed through. prove to me that it didn't work? no, the onus is on you to prove that it did work.

if it's any comfort, INDY, i think the investigation should be focused on Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld.

 

[BVS]

I'm sure I could find more.

Much different from saying it NEVER works.

Surely we're nuanced enough to understand the difference.

Telling a girl at the bar "you're father must have been a thief because he stole the stars and put them in your eyes", doesn't work, but you'll always be able to find the anomaly where someone fell for it if tried enough...

 

[Irvine511]

but INDY is still basing his "gotcha" on a really, really poor WaPo article with the most misleading headline i can remember.

it doesn't say that KSM became an asset "because of" the torture, only "after" the torture. it could say "in spite of" the torture.

it's wildly misleading. now, let's see the people who freaked out about the NYT article on McCain's affair with a lobbyist hold the WaPo to the same standards of "liberal media bias!" hysteria.

 

[toscano]

Torture is ok as long as it doesn't happen to an American caught doing something untoward, or not, in one of these barbaric 3rd world countries that allow it.

 

[INDY500]

Breitbart.tv ? Krauthammer on CIA Torture Debate: Cheney is Winning

 

[BVS]

Krauthammer and INDY, the crux was never that it NEVER worked.

Wake up.

 

[Salome]

they could also use psychics
surely some useful information should come from them also
torture these psychics if you must

 

[loudnoises]

torture doesn't work so why do we keep doing it?

does anyone remember the american politician who tried to claim waterboarding wasn't torture? and volunteered to undergo it to prove this (although he never did)... i can't remember his name for the life of me!

 

[financeguy]

Breitbart.tv � Krauthammer on CIA Torture Debate: Cheney is Winning

Krauthammer is a fanatic, an extremist, and, by any reasonable definition of the term, an enabler of terrorism. I've previously exposed his racist genocide supporting statements on here. Most of the people in Gitmo are less actively dangerous.

For example, the following statement - written in the context of speculating about the possible consequences of an attack on Iran - is, in my opinion, apart from being despicable in its utter disregard for human life, openly racist:

Many Mahdi will die, but they live to die

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/14/AR2006091401413.html

If a person in Germany or Austria publicly said the kinds of things that Krauthammer has said about Iranians, about Jews, they would run the risk of arrest.

Krauthammer should be exposed every time he rears his head. The man's a nasty bigot, end of story.

 

[INDY500]

Ex-CIA Chiefs Decry Holder Interrogator Probe in Letter to Obama
Seven former directors of the Central Intelligence Agency on Friday urged President Obama to reverse Attorney General Eric Holder's decision to hold a criminal investigation of CIA interrogators who used enhanced techniques on detainees.

The directors, whose tenures span back as far as 35 years, wrote a letter to the president saying the cases have already been investigated by the CIA and career prosecutors, and to reconsider those decisions makes it difficult for agents to believe they can safely follow legal guidance.

"Attorney General Holder's decision to re-open the criminal investigation creates an atmosphere of continuous jeopardy for those whose cases the Department of Justice had previously declined to prosecute," they wrote.

"Those men and women who undertake difficult intelligence assignments in the aftermath of an attack such as September 11 must believe there is permanence in the legal rules that govern their actions," the seven added.

The letter was signed by former directors Michael Hayden, Porter Goss, George Tenet, John Deutch, R. James Woolsey, William Webster and James R. Schlesinger.

The directors also warned that if the investigations are opened up, they fear that the assistance given to the United States by foreign intelligence agencies may jeopardize future cooperation.

So Mr. President, what is "job one." Our national defense or the appeasement of the political Left?

 

[Irvine511]

So Mr. President, what is "job one." Our national defense or the appeasement of the political Left?

first, i think the Justice Department should go after Dick Fucking Cheney, and "lawyers" like Yoo and Gonzales.

torture weakens our national defense, and it kills our soul as a country.

you know, there are people on the Left who think that the USA is actually a pretty amazing, great place with fantastic ideals, and we get upset when we see things like TORTURE destroying that. to us, our greatness isn't measured in GDP or how accurate our cool bombs are or clearing the way for wildly exploitative cowboy capitalism while 45,000 die per year due to the unaffordability of health insurance.

we're great because of how much we have traditionally empowered the individual, and that includes the fact that we do not torture. and, as ever, it doesn't work. 183 waterboarding attempts should tell you that.

 

[Diemen]

Neuroscience:Torture Doesn't Work and Here's Why | Newsweek Voices - Sharon Begley | Newsweek.com

Extreme pain and stress can actually impair a person's ability to tell the truth.

But, but, Cheney says it works! I don't know who to believe.

 

[INDY500]

It "doesn't work" and "it kills our soul as a country" are two entirely different and mutually exclusive arguments against the Bush policies of harsh interrogation, i.e. torture.

You have to choose denizens of the far-Left, which is it?

 

[BVS]

Have you ever taken a test where the answer is d. all of the above?

I'm sure you have, because sometimes when the answers don't contradict each other there can be more than one.

It's mind blowing, I know... but it's true.

 

[Vincent Vega]

I honestly fail to see how they are mutually exclusive.

 

[INDY500]

I honestly fail to see how they are mutually exclusive.

Because if it NEVER works there is simply no reason, excuse or justification for its use beyond sadistic pleasure. Today, tomorrow or 5 years ago. However, if it works in specific cases when needed under exceptional circumstances then there truly is an argument. The importance of protecting human rights vs the duty to prevent the possible mass-murder of innocent civilians whom you've been entrusted to protect.

Choosing either good or evil is not the same as being forced to choose between the lesser of two evils.

 

[Vincent Vega]

Where does it exclude your second quote, "it kills our soul as a country"? And no, under these specific circumstances, being to extract information within the shortest amount of time, it doesn't work. But it's very effective in breaking people, families and entire communities, making them have to deal with the consequences for years and generations to come. Torture is not the lesser of two evils. It is simply wrong.

 

[Diemen]

It "doesn't work" and "it kills our soul as a country" are two entirely different and mutually exclusive arguments

Please explain to me how they are mutually exclusive, because I fail to see it, and, in fact, find the two to be extremely compatible arguments.

 

[Diemen]

Because if it NEVER works there is simply no reason, excuse or justification for its use beyond sadistic pleasure. Today, tomorrow or 5 years ago.

First off, I don't believe anyone here has ever said that torture never works, so, way to paste false arguments onto us lefties. Secondly, someone can be under the mistaken impression that it works, or even believe that is an effective method, which may assuage any fears that they're being sadistic. But, if something is so ineffective, or requires 183 waterboards to get even the smallest amount of actionable intelligence out, then yes, sadism certainly does come into play.

However, if it works in specific cases when needed under exceptional circumstances then there truly is an argument. The importance of protecting human rights vs the duty to prevent the possible mass-murder of innocent civilians whom you've been entrusted to protect.

So you're okay with torture if there's the slightest chance you may, at some point, get information that may save a life? Even though torture has proven to be an extremely unreliable and inefficient way of getting information? Even if you may need to waterboard someone 183 times and even then not get the information you need?

Wow, thanks for clearing that up.

 

[Irvine511]

Because if it NEVER works there is simply no reason, excuse or justification for its use beyond sadistic pleasure. Today, tomorrow or 5 years ago. However, if it works in specific cases when needed under exceptional circumstances then there truly is an argument. The importance of protecting human rights vs the duty to prevent the possible mass-murder of innocent civilians whom you've been entrusted to protect.

Choosing either good or evil is not the same as being forced to choose between the lesser of two evils.

please show us the situation where we had to torture someone to prevent the mass-murder of innocent civilians.

thanks.

 

[Irvine511]

also, what stories like this Denver possible plot should tell us is that good intelligence is gotten through effective police work, not through torture.

 

[Diemen]

please show us the situation where we had to torture someone to prevent the mass-murder of innocent civilians.

thanks.

I just kind of assumed that "24" was a recreation of actual events. Are you trying to tell me it's not?

 

[Irvine511]

I just kind of assumed that "24" was a recreation of actual events. Are you trying to tell me it's not?

it is not a reality show, unfortunately.

 

[INDY500]

also, what stories like this Denver possible plot should tell us is that good intelligence is gotten through effective police work, not through torture.

Bet they were aided by provisions of the Patriot Act and other terror-fighting programs started under the Bush Administration (all of which were fought and labeled as "Constitution shredding" by those on the far-Left).

But, much like the worthiness of targeted harsh interrogation, that is only common sense speculation on my part.

 

[Irvine511]

Bet they were aided by provisions of the Patriot Act and other terror-fighting programs started under the Bush Administration (all of which were fought and labeled as "Constitution shredding" by those on the far-Left).

But, much like the worthiness of targeted harsh interrogation, that is only common sense speculation on my part.

so we're in agreement on torture, then?

especially given how i've demonstrated that part of Colin Powell's humiliating presentation was because he was given bad information gained through torture?

you also understand that it's possible to look at some aspects of the Patriot Act and agree, and look at other aspects and realize that it could indeed be "constitution shredding" -- i.e., rendition, etc. we can look at things and make judgments and not dismiss things wholesale.

 

[Vincent Vega]

Irvine, you know you can't take a balanced view on anything in this world and say, "Well, some aspects I agree with, but others are entirely contrary to my beliefs."
You are either against everything, or you are for everything. There is no in between.

 

[financeguy]

The torture memos show how illegal wars turn even the nicest people badThe deceit, the slaughter, the atrocity, the abuse of human rights. Today, Hannah Arendt's banality of evil is everywhere

The torture memos show how illegal wars turn even the nicest people bad | Simon Jenkins | Comment is free | The Guardian

 

[Canadiens1131]

Happy Halloween, Iraq-style!