Friday February 17, 2012

Obama open to torture prosecution; Cheney says U.S. gained info from interrogations

World ( 87 )

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

Back to top

Order by Time Order by Popularity

87 Comments

Login to comment

  • 0

    adaydream

    How come dick cheney is the only person in the administration that says any information was gained? < :-)

  • 0

    skipthesong

    Prove him wrong. I want to see what they got. Unlike you, let's see the actual evidence.

    Would Obama or you gone on such a quest if those tortured were not Muslims? I don't think so.

  • 0

    LostinNagoya

    Cheney again enchanting the audience of lie-believers. How it comes that after 7 years of abusing interrogations, the Bush adm didn´t find Ossama´s whereabouts?

    So, what US gained with these obnoxious interrogations?

  • 0

    plasticmonkey

    Of course old Dick would say info was gained. He had a hand in approving waterboarding.

  • 0

    GJDailleult

    Cheney also saw reports saying Iraq had WMDs. He has a real ability to "see things".

  • 0

    skipthesong

    Of course old Dick would say info was gained. He had a hand in approving waterboarding." Doesn't matter. Put that info out and prove him wrong. What is everyone afraid of - finding out that it did.

    I'd like to know why everyone is sooooo concerned about a guy who had a hand in killing 3000+ people who had simulated drownings. I wish my friends from CF just simply had a simulated death, a simulated falling from 80 stories up.

    Yeah, but we must be so concerned about this guy.

    Obama is only concerned about torture because the guys being tortured are Muslims. He wouldn't peep a word if it were some Europeans or Latin Americans I bet.

  • 0

    adaydream

    dick cheney is the only person that has come forward and said that there was any evidence. his track record has proven that he's a liar. skipthesong, prove he's right. Where are others in the administration even that says that evidence was gathered?

    Maybe another 200 torture sessions will get something after all. Think so? < :-)

  • 0

    skipthesong

    skipthesong, prove he's right" Well, now how the hell am I supposed to do that if they don't release the memos?

    Where are others in the administration even that says that evidence was gathered?" They are probably hanging out with O's admin who said he shouldn't release the memos.

  • 0

    adaydream

    skipthesong believe what you like.

    I think we used torture at Gitmo and other places.

    I don't think we gained anything.

    I think we broke international law and the Genevia Convention.

    I think like before, dick cheney is lieing his ass off. Just like after george bush admitted that there were no WMD, dick cheney continued running around to American Leagon halls claiming he saw the evidence and ...... < :-)

  • 0

    SuperLib

    I'm kind of curious to see the results myself....

  • 0

    JoeBigs

    Oh Dick is trying to save whatever is left of his legacy. He will go down in history as one of the worst persons to have ever held the title of Vice President.

  • 0

    TexasAggie

    Cheney said he has formally asked the CIA to declassify the memos.

    Unfortunately, that will never happen. It doesn't fit Obama's "plan".

  • 0

    teleprompter

    Cheney also saw reports saying Iraq had WMDs. He has a real ability to "see things"

    And 550 tons of uranium yellowcake, i.e. the very stuff of WMDs, were safely removed from liberated Iraq in 2008. In fact, a Canadian company bought it for further processing - into nuclear fuel.

    Thanks for doing your part :)

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25546334/

  • 0

    bushlover

    I think I think I think. Good for you adaydream. Others think that they'd like to see the declassified information when it's ready. You believe the crying wolf thing may have been a lie but because you think too much, and that includes conspiracies I suppose, but have no problem in giving a chance to be proven wrong because your beliefs and conspiracies fit your agenda of anti-Bush Administration.

  • 0

    skipthesong

    why can't we see the memos? Why are we only going back to Bush, why not clinton, or before?

  • 0

    skipthesong

    Oh Dick is trying to save whatever is left of his legacy. He will go down in history as one of the worst persons to have ever held the title of Vice President."

    Yo, that's besides the point. Are you willing to just simply take a party's word for it? If you didn't then, why now?

    Open the memos up. Any refusal to do so indicates something is not right. I am not defending Dick, but I want to know what those actions achieved. If they didn't achieve anything fine. Open them up.

  • 0

    teleprompter

    Dick Cheney, vindicated:

    "...The Central Intelligence Agency told CNSNews.com today that it stands by the assertion made in a May 30, 2005 Justice Department memo that the use of "enhanced techniques" of interrogation on al Qaeda leader Khalid Sheik Mohammed (KSM) -- including the use of waterboarding -- caused KSM to reveal information that allowed the U.S. government to thwart a planned attack on Los Angeles."

    http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=46949

  • 0

    smithinjapan

    "However, a senior intelligence official said Tuesday the CIA has received no such requests from the former vice president."

    There you have it, kiddies, bottom line. Dick is lying through his teeth yet AGAIN, and this time the naysayers just refuse to see it as they cling to the more or less sunk ship that was the bush regime. Cheney never actually asked for the documents to be released, but says he did (after the fact) so as to salvage some last desperate scraps of his legacy.

    Cheney was, and still is, nothing but a big, fat liar. It doesn't matter how desperately teleprompter and TexasAggie come on here to defend what everyone knows, and to finally decry the opinions of those on here because some of us are 'foreigners' (ie. not Americans in Japan).

    I can't wait for the thread in which Obama says he may open the possibility of prosecution for those who allowed torture. Should be a fun thread!

  • 0

    smithinjapan

    teleprompter: "...The Central Intelligence Agency told CNSNews.com today that it stands by the assertion made in a May 30..."

    I notice the big word 'assertion' in there. Should we define that for you? I'll give you a hint; it does NOT mean fact!

  • 0

    teleprompter

    Khalid Mohammed, after enhanced interrogation techniques, ratted out a fellow Islmaofascist named Hambali.

    Hambali coordinated the first Bali nightclub bombing on October 12, 2002. 202 killed, 89 of the dead were Australian.

  • 0

    teleprompter

    Some of us come here with facts and links. Others like to play word games.

    The documents related to the information Khalid Mohammed eventually provided his 'torturers' with are available online. Looks like the ACLU or someone made them availbale:

    http://luxmedia.vo.llnwd.net/o10/clients/aclu/olc_05302005_bradbury.pdf

  • 0

    teleprompter

    "Poll finds broad approval of terrorist torture"

    "Most in U.S., Britain, France, S. Korea say torture justified in rare instances"

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10345320/

  • 0

    GJDailleult

    teleprompter - Uranium is not a weapon, it is a chemical used in weapons. Cheney said there were weapons. And I thought the point of enhanced interrogation techniques was to get information before a terrorist attack. Not much good after the attack.

    Anyways, either Cheney is right and they got valuable information, or he is just making stuff up because he knows the documents will never be declassified. Believe whatever you want, but it wouldn't be the first time he made stuff up.

  • 0

    elbudamexicano

    I hate that dick, Cheney but, do I feel sorry for these scum from alqaeda?? Hell no! These loosers at the ACLU will go crying for these terrorists scum bags, yelling about their human rights etc..what about the human rights of all those who were massacred on 9/11?? Dick maybe a fat old bast@rd but at least he knows a thing or to about how to treat these terrorists, so is it wrong to torture, no!! Do we have any choice, NO! Obama is smart but he should not be playing these political games when we are still stuck in Iraq and Afganistan thanks to that idiot Bush.

  • 0

    skipthesong

    So we are now reduced to populist opinion to define our laws? Our morality?"

    where the hell have you been? We either follow them or we go completely against them, never, ever in the middle.

    Anyways, either Cheney is right and they got valuable information, or he is just making stuff up because he knows the documents will never be declassified. Believe whatever you want, but it wouldn't be the first time he made stuff up."

    All politician make things up. It is up to us to do the homework, they rely on the stupidity of the American public not to do so.. "Director of National Intelligence Dennis C. Blair confirmed a story reported in the New York Times that he informed President Obama in a private memo that the harsh interrogation tactics did indeed yield valuable information from terror suspects. "

    All, I'd be happy if you shoot Dick, kill him, what ever, but I want to see those memos on what was gained.

  • 0

    SuperLib

    Torture isn't an easy topic. I think people are against it up until the point where they think innocent lives can be saved. Once you reach that point then I think most people privately support it.

  • 0

    skipthesong

    Do you mean that we either follow popular opinion or we go completely against it? I hope that we follow laws and that our laws are based upon our morality. In this case - it appears to me that everything that could be done to skirt the law was done, and morality be dammed."

    I meant that politicians never seem to find the middle ground. The make up laws as they go along. Try running for office in you local city, even say for example, running for a small town of less than 10,000 people. Look at the "MOST" recent election laws..

    I can tell you this, we definitely don't use the majority rule, minority rights implied any longer.

    it appears to me that everything that could be done to skirt the law was done, and morality be dammed." You may be right, but there are times when laws need to be broken (a cop racing to catch someone for example). It may also appear that way because you may have a hatred for Bush. I found myself on that level before.

  • 0

    Madverts

    Be damned with national security, there's our EGO's to protect, and a radical agenda to follow.

    I hate Bush.

    Obama is a disaster.

  • 0

    goodDonkey

    I really hope the right spends a lot of time defending DICK on this thread. It is really the most humorous reading these days. Please, by all means, fill this thread up with comments that are positive about DICK. JT will make room.

  • 0

    Madverts

    Heh, old Dick never stepped out of the murky shadows during his time as VP, then again, with an 8% approval rating, who would?

    Kinda wierd to see him now in the limelight critisizing the Obama administation afte a mere 90 odd days in office, after eight years of lies, mis-information and mis-administration.

    Even Bush has the class to be a cut above.

  • 0

    skipthesong

    I really hope the right spends a lot of time defending DICK on this thread."

    Who's defending Dick? Aren't you at least a little curious about what was obtained from those interrogations? Trust me, I am sure something came out of them. Shoot Dick but let's get the info - please.

    Or, if you don't care and only care about a terrorist getting a simulation of what he has caused many, than disregard my post.

  • 0

    skipthesong

    Why is it ok to water board Dick, but not a terrorist?

  • 0

    Madverts

    "Why is it ok to water board Dick, but not a terrorist?"

    Perhaps because Dick agrees with it?

    "Aren't you at least a little curious about what was obtained from those interrogations? Trust me, I am sure something came out of them."

    Perhaps. But most experts say information given as a result of torturing somebody is dubious to start with.

    But to hell with the experts! When has cheney ever been Wrong?

  • 0

    TexasAggie

    Dick Cheney is correct. Why didn't Obama declassify everything? Who needs secure communications, anyway? In Obamatopia aren't we trying to get along with everybody now? How are they going to trust us if we go around talking behind their backs?

  • 0

    TexasAggie

    This administration is cherry-picking the information they release so that it makes them look good.

    Americans should be given the rest of the information showing how many attacks were prevented and how many lives were saved by the "torture" of the international leftist's beloved "freedom fighters" who were held in the interest of national security.

    Until that happens, Obama will remain the greatest divider of the American people that we have had in decades.

  • 0

    skipthesong

    Perhaps. But most experts say information given as a result of torturing somebody is dubious to start with." and that doesn't happen with niceties either? "Tell me what you know, and I'll let you free?"

  • 0

    goodDonkey

    I do not blame AP or JT for not adding that the methods of interrogation were released due to a lawsuit in which the plaintiff won against the U.S.. Obama was following the orders of the court. Don't get me wrong I am not so naive that I do not recognize that Obama, through the Justice Department, could not have continued appealing up to and including the Supreme Court. They chose not to and if the right says it was a political decision I would not debate that issue. It is obvious many of you are clueless that the release was due to a court decision. Maybe if some of you spent more time learning by reading all of the news instead of posting your old, sad opinions you would not look so foolish.

    Why should the Justice Department now release more information? If DICK wants it released let him file a lawsuit. Instead of bitching on here, why don't those who want the material released file a lawsuit? I have no sympathy for those who want to allege that these means of torture were effective but Obama will not release the proof.

    Those of us with fully functional brains have learned that torture is not the best way to derive information from suspects/known terrorists. Any information collected is suspect and unreliable. I agree with Bill Clinton who said the law should be clear as to allow no terror. He also stated that if an emergency arises and people are in imminent danger then an agent may chose to break the law. The government then has an obligation to protect such an act from prosecution.

    However, unlike the WMD's the proof must be there. Otherwise individuals must be prosecuted. I do not want one member of our U.S. forces waterboarded or subjected to any other torture. We can't justify oposing it being used on our service members if we are conducting it. This is not rocket science. That is why the Geneva Convention was convened and torture was determined to be unacceptable.

    In the military I was taught: Name, Rank and Serial Number. That is the way it should be.

  • 0

    Madverts

    "and that doesn't happen with niceties either?"

    Obviously not, but according to top US commanders or retired generals:

    "It doesn't matter what they do, it’s what we do. We don't lower ourselves to the level of this terrible enemy we are fighting. It's about what our standards are." - General Soyster

    "The rules are the same, and should be the same. All the Machiavellian work that has been done to get around those rules is detestable, and I can't believe we are doing that as an official policy in the United States of America." - General Otstott

    But what do activist Generals know, huh?

  • 0

    skipthesong

    "It doesn't matter what they do, it’s what we do. We don't lower ourselves to the level of this terrible enemy we are fighting. It's about what our standards are." - General Soyster

    You mean we never, ever tortured any one caught on the battle field? And, sorry, but I don't count simulated drowning torture. Maybe if they held the guy upside down above a tall building like the ones he killed did, then maybe I'd agree with you.

    Machiavelli is cool!

  • 0

    skipthesong

    We are at the moment all arguing about torture, yet we are trying to make friends with the very people are have without a doubt tortured their prisoners.

  • 0

    Madverts

    I just don't believe in that kind of revenge, skip. I know you're not like they frothy beaked radicals here lusting for blood, but I simply don't think we should be openly descending to the level of the terrorits, and certainly not openly. And whilst some of the people at gitmo were obviously guilty of terrorism, others who were also present and held in captivity at Guantanamo Bay without trial and allegedly tortued, clearly were not.

  • 0

    Madverts

    Sorry that didn't make sense. Too many openly's.

  • 0

    skipthesong

    simply don't think we should be openly descending to the level of the terrorits" I don't want that either, but what are we supposed to do? You do understand that we do need that info and from what I understand, the people doing it are a bit more trained at getting that info than you or I and I think they know how to get the truth out.

    And whilst some of the people at gitmo were obviously guilty of terrorism, others who were also present and held in captivity at Guantanamo Bay without trial and allegedly tortued, clearly were not." Now, there is legitimate issue.

  • 0

    Madverts

    "we do need that info"

    Do we need it so badly that we're going to detain, indefinitely, suspects and torture them?

    Sorry mate, I don't like it when any government starts behaving in this manner.

  • 0

    Madverts

    likeitis,

    Heh, you replied to the boy's "proof"....I didn't think anybody did that anymore after the years and years of debunking he's received.

  • 0

    smithinjapan

    skipthesong: "We are at the moment all arguing about torture, yet we are trying to make friends with the very people are have without a doubt tortured their prisoners."

    Your comment is part of the reason this is all coming to like and being debated. Are you saying you want to be like '...the very people (who) have without a doubt tortured their prisoners'? You want to be like 'the terrorists'? Or do you want to put a stop to terrorism and lead by positive and moral example? No one is saying 'they are better than we are' so there's no need to say 'they're not better than we are' and act just like them.

  • 0

    teleprompter

    My post of 1:01 offers link to a PDF of the formerly top secret docs.

    Cheney is right.

    Case closed.

  • 0

    Madverts

    "Cheney is right.

    Case closed."

    You have no idea what information was gathered but he was "right"? I presume he'll also be "right" when Americans are tortured abroad and the events at gitmo used as some sort of justification by jihadists....

  • 0

    teleprompter

    "The memos cite conduct that is indisputably torture: “severe beatings to the genitals, head, and other parts of the body with metal pipes and various other items; removal of teeth with pliers; kicking in the face and ribs; breaking of bones and ribs and dislocation of fingers; cutting a figure into the victim’s forehead; hanging the victim and beating him; extreme limitations of food and water; and subjection to games of ‘Russian roulette.’ "

    Gitmo?

    ' The part I redacted: “…The memos cite conduct that is indisputably torture from a court case involving Serbs abusing Muslims in Bosnia.” '

    http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YTRhM2E2MTE0NjQ3MzYwNWM2ODJjMTgwNWQwMmVkYzc=

    Ah yes, our European betters...

  • 0

    skipthesong

    I presume he'll also be "right" when Americans are tortured abroad and the events at gitmo used as some sort of justification by jihadists...."

    You are not going to try to tell us that Americans were/are never tortured and that Gitmo is the reason they will.

  • 0

    Madverts

    "You are not going to try to tell us that Americans were/are never tortured and that Gitmo is the reason they will"

    No, I'm saying that at some point someone will use that argument.

  • 0

    likeitis

    Teleprompter, you lost your chance.

    The memos cite conduct that is indisputably torture from a court case involving Serbs abusing Muslims in Bosnia.” '

    Holding up a few Serbs as an example of over-all typical European behavior and attitude is like holding up Rodney King as an example of typical American behavior and attitude.

    Nobody but the Serbs are defending those Serbs.

    EPIC FAIL. Again.

  • 0

    Badsey

    G.W. Bush: Pardons the Clinton felony

    Obama: attacks the ex-president and his cabinet.

    I don't think in a court of law this will go far. If another terrorist attack happens this prosecution will quickly end. +still have not taken care of G-Mo inmates +now you have a pirate issue.

    Letting these records open is good however. -I believe people need to see that and somewhat justify was is being done and what needs to be done (that is real change -not just ObamaChange)

  • 0

    likeitis

    Badsey: G.W. Bush: Pardons the Clinton felony

    Which one would that be? You think some things might be more forgiveable than others? Or, do you reckon a president and his cabinet should have a free pass no matter what?

  • 0

    teleprompter

    [Yawn] Link to a PDF of the formerly Top Secret memo is in my 1:01 post.

    Cheney is right. The 'torture' - waterboarding - was effective and wholly warranted. It was used on 3 Islamofascist detainees. One case was a 'ticking bomb' scenario. The other 2 cases provided valuable info, one that brought convictions in the Bali nightclub bombing. There is a direct quote from the CIA saying the methods used can be cited as the reason Al Qaida failed to pull off another 9-11.

  • 0

    skipthesong

    smitty: Or do you want to put a stop to terrorism and lead by positive and moral example? "

    You are telling me that by not tortuing those who refuse to give stratetic intel and being overly nice to them is going to end terrorism against us?

    moral example can be defined in many ways. Isn't a moral good thing to kill in the name of Allah, according to the "true believers"?

  • 0

    skipthesong

    Oh and smitty, stop trying to paint me as some one who is jumping for joy about torture. I personally wish it wasn't even invented, but again, when in a fight....

    You my friend, right? I'd kill or maim someone to prevent them from hurting you. You know that right?

  • 0

    SezWho2

    teleprompter,

    The CIA would never lie, would it? And especially it would never lie when the lie was self-serving, right? And we don't really know who the CIA is, do we? Were we talking to a janitor? to the the Director? And what are we to make of Conservative News Service?

    Those questions being asked, yes, it is still possible that valuable information was gained through torture. Here, however, we don't really know what information we're talking about. Furthermore, it seems to me that most experts still say that torture is a low percentage tool and, as pointed out in the article, we can hardly do a do-over and see what kind of information could have been extracted by less medieval means.

    Human beings being who they are, we will never eliminate torture. But, thanks to Cheney, we at least do know who the torturers are among us. Don't think that they wouldn't torture anyone else at any time.

  • 0

    smithinjapan

    skip: I never painted you as someone who enjoys torture, so don't overreact and say I'm doing so.

    "You are telling me that by not tortuing those who refuse to give stratetic intel and being overly nice to them is going to end terrorism against us?"

    I never said it would, but resorting to their tactics makes you (as in a person who does so) as bad as they are. What's more, resorting to their methods of doing things certainly won't stop what they do.

  • 0

    JoeBigs

    Will Dick ever give it up? Dick has been claiming that you can get those evil doers to answer questions when you force them to submit to torture. Dick says we got allot from torturing all those men and he is glad we did it! We or was it he, got allot from the torture!

    I am Dick, believe me we got allot from putting men in all those positions.....Giggidy, giggidy, gig-gi-dy!

    I sometimes wonder why he loved having men tortured? Hm

  • 0

    teleprompter

    "The CIA would never lie, would it? And especially it would never lie when the lie was self-serving, right? And we don't really know who the CIA is, do we? Were we talking to a janitor? to the the Director?"

    Oops! In our mad rush to refute what these memos show and to keep alive the myth that Cheney was behind all of this, if not actively involved in the 'torture', we seem to have forgotten who authorized their release, haven't we.

  • 0

    sharky1

    Way to go Obama...next thing you know, no one will want to work for the government for fear they might be prosecuted for something after the fact.

  • 0

    SezWho2

    Oops! In our mad rush to refute what these memos show and to keep alive the myth that Cheney was behind all of this, if not actively involved in the 'torture', we seem to have forgotten who authorized their release, haven't we.

    I don't think I was the one who madly rushed to find a conservative news outlet quoting an unnamed CIA source who confirmed that CIA torture under the Bush administration averted a calamitous attack on LA.

    I rather think in our mad rush to defend torture, we seem to have forgotten that anyone can say anything about anything when they don't have to be named and don't have to supply facts.

  • 0

    timorborder

    Pretty interesting debate. Here is my two cent's worth.

    If it is possible, I think that President Obama is both right and wrong on this topic. Under the previous administration, the US did loose its moral compass. Torturing and renditioning people around the globe did little for America's standing. To win the war on terrorism, the US and the West has to capture the hearts and minds of the Muslim heartland. Waterboarding people (and other practices that are just as bad or worse) does little to achieve this.

    On the other hand, Obama talking about prosecuting people is wrong. The people who worked for the previous administration as flunkies (Department of Justice) did so in the belief that they were doing the right thing. They were also following the orders of the elected leadership at that time (President Bush and friends). To try and turn back the clock and now prosecute people for what was essentially correct public service at the time is fundamentally wrong. Moreover, what happens the next time the Republicans gain the Whitehouse. Would Obama's current appointees also be up for prosecution. If anybody should be prosecuted, it should be those who gave the orders (Bush and Co.) This is not going to happen either because they have already received a Presidential pardon for their actions in office.

    Now turning to the Dickster, I generally wouldn't trust him to lay straight in bed. However, I think his arguments about intelligence being gained have to be put into perspective. Although the US was caught with its pants firmly around its ankles before 911, playing the heavy with prisoners who have been captured has probably given the US some forensic information after the event. Given Cheney's history of splitting sometimes very fine hairs, perhaps this is what he is talking about.

  • 0

    thundercat

    Well sharky1, you can't really be prosecuted before the fact, can you?

  • 0

    Taka313

    dick says torture saves lives.

    Just like dick said warrantless wiretapping saves lives.

    Just like dick said suppression of habeas corpus saves lives.

    Just like dick said extraordinary rendition saves lives.

    Anyone else notice that dick spends a lot of time justifying activities that are against the law by saying they save lives?

    So yeah...I agree with texasaggie for a change. Let's declassify all the records. Let's find out how successful torture has been. And when torture was approved, and by whom. Then...we'll take action on those findings. I have a sneaking feeling that he, along with dick, are bluffing with an 8 high. The more those books get opened, the more criminal activity will be discovered and the more blatant profiteering will be discovered. So...yeah, let's let the truth set us free.

    Taka

  • 0

    SuperLib

    timborder: To win the war on terrorism, the US and the West has to capture the hearts and minds of the Muslim heartland. Waterboarding people (and other practices that are just as bad or worse) does little to achieve this.

    I never really thought of it as winning hearts and minds in the Muslim world. Let's be real...the people there have their own governments to deal with and probably laugh at the West when the whole "waterboarding" issue is made into a firestorm given the abuse they get from their own governments. Mostly what's happening is done to placate our allies in Europe and elsewhere and for other Americans who don't support waterboarding.

    Personally, I'd like to see the evidence gained from waterboarding. If it provides good enough evidence than I might support it, especially on people like the ones it was already used on. The question in my mind is if it can be controlled or not. My guess it that it probably can't, and that's the big concern I have.

  • 0

    adaydream

    Then there are all the people that were court-martialed for carrying out the orders given to them.

    I was just listening to Col. Karpinski and she was speaking about how these techniques were brought to Iraq from Gitmo and she never saw any of these techniques. She was not part of the military intellegence team that brought the torture treatment to Iraq or was not even aware that they were being used.

    The Whitehouse and the Pentagon said it was a few bad apples when they actually authorized the treatment.

    Another case where george bush was silent and allowed others go down, based on their orders.

    george bush and his gang are all traitors to the American people. he's even slimier than I have expressed before. < :-)

  • 0

    Taka313

    Thundercat,

    Well sharky1, you can't really be prosecuted before the fact, can you?

    Actually, yeah, you can. Hell, prosecution before the fact is the bush doctrine, in a nutshell. ;-)

    Taka

  • 0

    teleprompter

    Another rookie mistake. Real leaders inspire trust. Obama is a disaster:

    "Sad to say, it's slow roll time at Langley after the release of interrogation memos that, in the words of one veteran officer, "hit the agency like a car bomb in the driveway." President Obama promised CIA officers that they won't be prosecuted for carrying out lawful orders, but the people on the firing line don't believe him. They think the memos have opened a new season of investigation and retribution."

    "The lesson for younger officers is obvious: Keep your head down. Duck the assignments that carry political risk. Stay away from a counterterrorism program that has become a career hazard."

    from David Ignatius, in the Washington Post

  • 0

    apecNetworks

    There are severe foreign policy problems when a Govt. approves the use of torture as a legitimate form of gathering intelligence:

    1)it signifies to what level a govt. will go to gather info.

    2)for the US, the use of torture is in direct conflict w/ the US Constitution.

    3)the use of torture weakens the moral discipline needed to judge right from wrong in the heat of battle.

    4)although in history, torture have been used, it is best to officially abstain due to the repercussions during times of conflict - wars can and have degenerated into literal slaughters and butchering.

    5)when a govt. states torture as an acceptable form of conduct, it is the military personnel who will suffer from reciprocal acts of torture.

    There is a need to keep wars/conflicts under some semblance of laws or human civilization will cease to exist.

  • 0

    teleprompter

    Obama's Attorney General Janet Napolitano is openly blaming Canada for letting the 9-11 perps into America.

    So if Canada is worried about more of them,uh,innocent terrorists getting waterboarded for 20 seconds they had really better do something about their porous borders.

  • 0

    teleprompter

    Obama says warrantless wiretapping saves lives. In fact, he has expanded the program. Where, exactly, is the change you can believe in?

    Obama says suppression of habeas corpus saves lives. Even Helen Thomas has called him out on this. But how cruel, he just ignores her. What a meanie!

    Obama says extraordinary rendition saves lives.Clinton said the same thing. In fact, it started with Clinton. Guess it is only 'wrong' when it's a Republican administration.

  • 0

    shackleberry

    TORTURE TERRORISTS! Loose lips Save Lives!

  • 0

    LostinNagoya

    JoeBigs

    I sometimes wonder why he (Dick Cheney)loved having men tortured?

    Because he is an evil man, a liar and a lie-supporter. Just remember how fiercely he defended the WMD lie, even having the inside knowledge from CIA that such weapons didn´t exist. He is a man that would show his evil personality in whatever situation. If he were a doctor, surely by now he would have been prosecuted for malpractice, for instance. The world is just unlucky to have had him as the 2nd leader of powerful US.

Back to top

Login to leave a comment

OR

Follow us

Facebook
Twitter

More in World

View all

View all