EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Apr 21, 2009 18:51:00 GMT -5
|
|
SoCalHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
No es bueno
Posts: 1,313
|
Post by SoCalHoya on Apr 21, 2009 19:14:59 GMT -5
|
|
The Stig
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,844
|
Post by The Stig on Apr 21, 2009 19:33:53 GMT -5
The KGB, the GIGN and the CIA are all trying to prove that they are the best at catching criminals. The Secretary General of the UN decides to give them a test. He releases a rabbit into a forest and each of them has to catch it. The CIA goes in. They place animal informants throughout the forest. They question all plant and mineral witnesses. After three months of extensive investigations they conclude that rabbits do not exist. The GIGN goes in. After two weeks with no leads they burn the forest, killing everything in it, including the rabbit, and make no apologies: the rabbit had it coming. The KGB goes in. They come out two hours later with a badly beaten bear. The bear is yelling: "Okay! Okay! I'm a rabbit! I'm a rabbit!"
------
Stalin hosts a meeting with a delegation of six Georgians. After the Georgians leave he can't find his cigar, so he calls up Beria and says, "Comrade Beria, find which one of those Georgians stole my cigar!" Beria immediately runs off after the Georgian delegation. A few minutes later, Stalin finds his cigar under a pile of papers. He calls up Beria again and tells him to call off the investigation. Beria replies, "Too late, Comrade Stalin! Two of the Georgians have already confessed that they stole your cigar, another one died during the interrogation, and another one jumped out the window to his death to get away from us."
|
|
Bando
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I've got some regrets!
Posts: 2,431
|
Post by Bando on Apr 21, 2009 19:53:42 GMT -5
I think Marc Thiessen is a monster. The moral depravity needed to assert torture as helpful to its victims simply boggles my mind. This is DPRK/Jonestown type thinking.
|
|
The Stig
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,844
|
Post by The Stig on Apr 21, 2009 20:16:22 GMT -5
I think Marc Thiessen is a monster. The moral depravity needed to assert torture as helpful to its victims simply boggles my mind. This is DPRK/Jonestown type thinking. Yeah, this line was a real gem: "The job of the interrogator is to safely help the terrorist do his duty to Allah, so he then feels liberated to speak freely." You can tell that this guy wrote Bush's speeches!
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,462
|
Post by TC on Apr 21, 2009 20:18:12 GMT -5
I think I'd rather read Tiffani-Amber Thiessen's take on enhanced interrogation.
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Apr 21, 2009 20:24:06 GMT -5
I agree with president Obama's national intelligence director, who says the techniques produced valuable information.
|
|
The Stig
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,844
|
Post by The Stig on Apr 21, 2009 20:29:24 GMT -5
I agree with president Obama's national intelligence director, who says the techniques produced valuable information. Link? Not doubting you, just curious.
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Apr 21, 2009 20:43:15 GMT -5
I agree with president Obama's national intelligence director, who says the techniques produced valuable information. Link? Not doubting you, just curious. Can't link right now (dumb iPod) but I think it's in the NYT.
|
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506
|
Post by theexorcist on Apr 21, 2009 21:25:32 GMT -5
www.nytimes.com/2009/04/22/us/politics/22intel.html?hpIn an indication of the crosscurrents he has faced in dealing with the issue, his own national intelligence director told his staff last week that the now-banned interrogation methods had produced valuable information, contrary to the White House view that they had not been effective. “High value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided a deeper understanding of the Al Qaeda organization that was attacking this country,” Dennis C. Blair, the intelligence director, wrote to his staff last Thursday as the previously secret memos were publicly released. EDIT: Below is Blair's defense www.nytimes.com/2009/04/16/us/politics/16text-blair.htmlI will say that the most powerful part of Blair's statement is the "sunny day in April". On 9/11, there were rumors going around that the Capitol, White House and State Department all had been hit with bombs and were burning. What seems abysmal when the terrorism threat has receded was seen by many in a different light only a few years ago. It's also worth mentioning, as rebuttal to the Slate piece, that the focus is on much more intelligence than the Library Tower incident.
|
|
Bando
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I've got some regrets!
Posts: 2,431
|
Post by Bando on Apr 22, 2009 10:06:42 GMT -5
There was a second part to Blair's statement:
"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. 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."
|
|
rosslynhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,595
|
Post by rosslynhoya on Apr 22, 2009 10:27:22 GMT -5
There was a second part to Blair's statement: "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. 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." So the Director of National Intelligence says one thing last week to his staff and then after a sit-down chat with the Supreme Leader, he decides to tell the New York Times that he believes the complete opposite? The Party line outweighs all other interests. Denny Blair has proved he's as much of a partisan hack as Doug Feith ever was.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Apr 22, 2009 15:39:19 GMT -5
Now that we know we gathered vital information using the enhanced techniques and our President has identified what those techniques were and has outlawed them, I, for one, will hold him responsible if we have another attack on our country. And, I hope everyone else will do likewise. Niavete, or worse, reigns in the White House.
|
|
|
Post by Coast2CoastHoya on Apr 22, 2009 15:40:10 GMT -5
There was a second part to Blair's statement: "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. 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." So the Director of National Intelligence says one thing last week to his staff and then after a sit-down chat with the Supreme Leader, he decides to tell the New York Times that he believes the complete opposite? The Party line outweighs all other interests. Denny Blair has proved he's as much of a partisan hack as Doug Feith ever was. I don't see the two statements as inconsistent. The second qualifies the first. Do you have any evidence to support your assertion, or is that just bald, partisan speculation?
|
|
Cambridge
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Canes Pugnaces
Posts: 5,304
|
Post by Cambridge on Apr 22, 2009 16:18:06 GMT -5
Now that we know we gathered vital information using the enhanced techniques and our President has identified what those techniques were and has outlawed them, I, for one, will hold him responsible if we have another attack on our country. And, I hope everyone else will do likewise. Niavete, or worse, reigns in the White House. That is airtight logic. Absolutely, airtight.
|
|
Bando
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I've got some regrets!
Posts: 2,431
|
Post by Bando on Apr 22, 2009 16:19:03 GMT -5
Now that we know we gathered vital information using the enhanced techniques and our President has identified what those techniques were and has outlawed them, I, for one, will hold him responsible if we have another attack on our country. And, I hope everyone else will do likewise. Niavete, or worse, reigns in the White House. You know what, you go ahead and do that. For my part, I'll keep this post in mind the next time you ever try to lecture me about morality. I simply don't understand such twisted sense of morality where not torturing someone (use whatever euphemism you see fit) is somehow a deficiency. The barbarians not only are inside the gate, it turns out we're the barbarians.
|
|
Cambridge
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Canes Pugnaces
Posts: 5,304
|
Post by Cambridge on Apr 22, 2009 16:21:17 GMT -5
Now that we know we gathered vital information using the enhanced techniques and our President has identified what those techniques were and has outlawed them, I, for one, will hold him responsible if we have another attack on our country. And, I hope everyone else will do likewise. Niavete, or worse, reigns in the White House. You know what, you go ahead and do that. For my part, I'll keep this post in mind the next time you ever try to lecture me about morality. I simply don't understand such twisted sense of morality where not torturing someone (use whatever euphemism you see fit) is somehow a deficiency. The barbarians not only are inside the gate, it turns out we're the barbarians. And those barbarians include Catholics. Oh, wait, I suppose the Spanish Inquisition wasn't that long ago. Habits fade, but never fully die I suppose.
|
|
Cambridge
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Canes Pugnaces
Posts: 5,304
|
Post by Cambridge on Apr 22, 2009 16:29:24 GMT -5
Pope Benedict XVI, in a September 6, 2007, address, said, "I reiterate that the prohibition against torture cannot be contravened under any circumstances."
So...are you compromising your views vis-a-vis those of the Church on the sanctity of life for practical reasons?
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Apr 22, 2009 16:46:29 GMT -5
I think you have to recognize that there are many, a great many as a matter of fact, who do not consider aggressive interrogation and torture to be synonymous.
Some of you have seemed to reach the conclusion that these tactics are torture and that's all there is to it. I don't think that's a settled debate, to be honest, even if some would like it to be so. (fair enough if it's settled for you in your own mind)
I only bring this up because of ridiculous -- though granted tongue-in-cheek -- references to things like the Spanish Inquisition.
There is a question of degree and my opinion, as well as that of many others, is that these tactics, for the most part, are on the safe side of that line.
I will definitely respect the opinions of those who disagree with that, yes, including John McCain, but I don't think the meme is quite as established as you think it is or would like it to be.
There is a slippery slope argument to be made, to be sure. I don't dispute that too much, though I would say that, from what I have learned anyway, there was a fair amount of restraint applied to the use of these techniques, and possibly for just that reason.
On the other hand, there is also an "uphill stuggle" argument to be made now with the decisions coming from the White House, with reports of CIA officers in the field worried about doing anything to get information for fear of recrimination.
This is not as cut and dried as "you support torture, you are a monster, you have no morals." It may be comfortable to think that, but I think it's really not a tremendously strong position.
|
|
Bando
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I've got some regrets!
Posts: 2,431
|
Post by Bando on Apr 22, 2009 17:02:05 GMT -5
I think you have to recognize that there are many, a great many as a matter of fact, who do not consider aggressive interrogation and torture to be synonymous. Some of you have seemed to reach the conclusion that these tactics are torture and that's all there is to it. I don't think that's a settled debate, to be honest, even if some would like it to be so. (fair enough if it's settled for you in your own mind) I only bring this up because of ridiculous -- though granted tongue-in-cheek -- references to things like the Spanish Inquisition. There is a question of degree and my opinion, as well as that of many others, is that these tactics, for the most part, are on the safe side of that line. I will definitely respect the opinions of those who disagree with that, yes, including John McCain, but I don't think the meme is quite as established as you think it is or would like it to be. There is a slippery slope argument to be made, to be sure. I don't dispute that too much, though I would say that, from what I have learned anyway, there was a fair amount of restraint applied to the use of these techniques, and possibly for just that reason. On the other hand, there is also an "uphill stuggle" argument to be made now with the decisions coming from the White House, with reports of CIA officers in the field worried about doing anything to get information for fear of recrimination. This is not as cut and dried as "you support torture, you are a monster, you have no morals." It may be comfortable to think that, but I think it's really not a tremendously strong position. Ok, but waterboarding was used in the Spanish Inquisition, hence the reference. Locking someone in a box with their greatest fear is lifted directly from the pages of 1984. We were freaking attaching electrodes to people at Abu Ghiraib. Deliberately inflicting pain on a restrained captive is torture, there's no gray area here. Just like you can't be a little bit pregnant, you can't be a restrained torturer. Really, Boz, which of these techniques would be fine if used on American POWs?
|
|