58% Favor Waterboarding of Plane Terrorist To Get Information

[Toome]

Maybe I'm missing something, but Abdulmutallab DID cooperate with authorities. He talked! It was only upon the advice of his lawyer that he finally clammed up.

If 58% do favor waterboarding in this instance, then it is certainly for sadistic pleasure rather than obtaining information. This guy's ready to talk.

 

[xsited1]

58% Favor Waterboarding of Plane Terrorist To Get Information

They should have a poll about waterboarding Obama and Napolitano. I bet it'd be at least 58% for.

 

[bodecea]

The point is, as they say in Arkansas, mute.

What terrorist worth his prayer rug is gonna crack under waterboarding now? Thanks to all the hue and cry about "torture" during the Bush years, the whole damn world knows it won't kill you. Hell, it won't even hurt you.

You might want to tell Sean Hannity that, so he can volunteer for Charity.

 

[chanel]

I'm not a fan of waterboarding. I don't believe anyone should be prosecuted for KSM, but I don't think we should continue now. Its too controversial. With that said, OTHER harsh interrogation methods have proven effective - like sleep depravation, standing, and noise, etc. The moonbats would like to outlaw those as well. In fact, I'm certain there are many on this board that would prefer if they plead the fifth with a tax payer funded lawyer present.

I don't often agree with rightwinger but he is right about weeding out cells. And unfortunately folks, we need the Patriot Act to do that.

 

[concept]

Deal with it. Americans disagree with liberals on this. (and a great many other things I believe)

Americans disagree with liberals?

nice freudian slip....

idiot.

Reading comprehension?

Try it sometime....

Moron.

 

[concept]

We're going to see some heavy goalpost movement now. Better be ready to duck. Especially since dear leader has come to the conclusion that the panty-waist bomber is AQ.




Will we see our lib friends accusing dear leader of fearmongering? Nope.

Will we see our lib friends accusing dear leader of creating a boogeyman? Oh HELL NO!

 

[concept]

The strategy of attack any country that has terrorists in it does not address the problem. Terrorist cells are a cancer. You don't kill the whole country to get at the cancerous cells. As much as the GOP hates it, the Obama doctrine of engaging the people of those nations to turn against the terrorists within is the only effective strategy. Once we put soldiers on the ground, the US becomes the enemy, not Al Qaeda

What fantasy you libs engage in.


What do you think went on in Iraq?
Why do you think the country turned against AQ there?


Sheesh man. Get with the program already.

 

[Toome]

I'm not a fan of waterboarding. I don't believe anyone should be prosecuted for KSM, but I don't think we should continue now. Its too controversial. With that said, OTHER harsh interrogation methods have proven effective - like sleep depravation, standing, and noise, etc. The moonbats would like to outlaw those as well. In fact, I'm certain there are many on this board that would prefer if they plead the fifth with a tax payer funded lawyer present.

I don't often agree with rightwinger but he is right about weeding out cells. And unfortunately folks, we need the Patriot Act to do that.

Professional interrogations are mentally exhausting for both parties. The difference is that you can always swap out interrogators to keep the pressure on. Nothing is accomplished with physical pain or stress.

Sleep deprivation, if done correctly, is not torture nor is it "harsh." Neither is time manipulation. All of these are useful tools in taking away the mental anchors an interrogatee uses to resist interrogation.

These al Qai'da flunkies are not professionally trained to resist interrogation. They are susceptible to good old fashioned interrogation techniques, and in some cases, fall apart quicker than a professional soldier would.

I don't buy Cheney's claim that these so-called harsh interrogation techniques were necessarily successful compared to standard techniques. I don't think a true comparison was ever made. I don't doubt that they obtained a lot of information through these interrogations, but that doesn't really mean that they were more successful.

For the record, I don't give a damn about a detainee's "human rights." It's not about humane treatment. It's all about obtaining information that is reliable and accurate. Beating the crap out of someone doesn't do that.

 

[rightwinger]

The strategy of attack any country that has terrorists in it does not address the problem. Terrorist cells are a cancer. You don't kill the whole country to get at the cancerous cells. As much as the GOP hates it, the Obama doctrine of engaging the people of those nations to turn against the terrorists within is the only effective strategy. Once we put soldiers on the ground, the US becomes the enemy, not Al Qaeda

What fantasy you libs engage in.


What do you think went on in Iraq?
Why do you think the country turned against AQ there?


Sheesh man. Get with the program already.

Get with the program moron

There was no Al Qaida in Iraq until we went in there. They moved in because WE were there. Once again showing that soldiers on the ground does not solve terrorism

 

[SFC Ollie]

58% Favor Waterboarding of Plane Terrorist To Get Information.

Shouldn't they be waterboarding CIA agents instead?

Christmas Kamikaze


"What the US official didn’t say was that the Feds often and purposely exclude terrorists from such lists. Joe Trento is an investigative journalist and the author of Unsafe at Any Altitude: Failed Terrorism Investigations, Scapegoating 9/11, and the Shocking Truth about Aviation Security Today. He reports, "At the Central Intelligence Agency and Defense Intelligence Agency certain names and aliases are kept from the airlines and off the no-fly list to protect intelligence assets who are suspected or known terrorists." Why? Because, as Mr. Trento explains in his book, "...American intelligence and counterterrorism officials ... deliberately [allow] suspected terrorist to fly among innocent passengers in the hope that a terrorist would lead them to collaborators or even a terrorist cell." The government that nicks your Neutrogena lest you blow up your flight merely winks at Terry Q. Terrorist’s boarding."

.

And I'd bet that the guys they want to follow will probably never strap a bomb to themselves. They are further up the ladder than that. Or do you believe that UBL would ever practice what he preaches?

 

[Contumacious]

58% Favor Waterboarding of Plane Terrorist To Get Information.

Shouldn't they be waterboarding CIA agents instead?

Christmas Kamikaze


"What the US official didn’t say was that the Feds often and purposely exclude terrorists from such lists. Joe Trento is an investigative journalist and the author of Unsafe at Any Altitude: Failed Terrorism Investigations, Scapegoating 9/11, and the Shocking Truth about Aviation Security Today. He reports, "At the Central Intelligence Agency and Defense Intelligence Agency certain names and aliases are kept from the airlines and off the no-fly list to protect intelligence assets who are suspected or known terrorists." Why? Because, as Mr. Trento explains in his book, "...American intelligence and counterterrorism officials ... deliberately [allow] suspected terrorist to fly among innocent passengers in the hope that a terrorist would lead them to collaborators or even a terrorist cell." The government that nicks your Neutrogena lest you blow up your flight merely winks at Terry Q. Terrorist’s boarding."

.

And I'd bet that the guys they want to follow will probably never strap a bomb to themselves. They are further up the ladder than that. Or do you believe that UBL would ever practice what he preaches?

It is our government's responsibility to protect our lives. They are not protecting our lives when they engage in a criminal foreign policy. Nor are they protecting our lives when they let suspected terrorists fly in order to see if they can catch bigger fish.

.

 

[concept]

The strategy of attack any country that has terrorists in it does not address the problem. Terrorist cells are a cancer. You don't kill the whole country to get at the cancerous cells. As much as the GOP hates it, the Obama doctrine of engaging the people of those nations to turn against the terrorists within is the only effective strategy. Once we put soldiers on the ground, the US becomes the enemy, not Al Qaeda

What fantasy you libs engage in.


What do you think went on in Iraq?
Why do you think the country turned against AQ there?


Sheesh man. Get with the program already.

Get with the program moron

There was no Al Qaida in Iraq until we went in there. They moved in because WE were there. Once again showing that soldiers on the ground does not solve terrorism

Wrong again.

I think I responded to you in another thread about this with links to AQ in Iraq and you disappeared. Why don't you go back and check.

 

[Political Junky]

58% Favor Waterboarding of Plane Terrorist To Get Information.

Shouldn't they be waterboarding CIA agents instead?

Christmas Kamikaze


"What the US official didn’t say was that the Feds often and purposely exclude terrorists from such lists. Joe Trento is an investigative journalist and the author of Unsafe at Any Altitude: Failed Terrorism Investigations, Scapegoating 9/11, and the Shocking Truth about Aviation Security Today. He reports, "At the Central Intelligence Agency and Defense Intelligence Agency certain names and aliases are kept from the airlines and off the no-fly list to protect intelligence assets who are suspected or known terrorists." Why? Because, as Mr. Trento explains in his book, "...American intelligence and counterterrorism officials ... deliberately [allow] suspected terrorist to fly among innocent passengers in the hope that a terrorist would lead them to collaborators or even a terrorist cell." The government that nicks your Neutrogena lest you blow up your flight merely winks at Terry Q. Terrorist’s boarding.".

Bullshit, Panetta isn't that smart. If he was, he'd support the NSA program of intercepting calls inside the US. Remember how the dems whined about terrorists outside the US calling inside the US saying that intercepting them was a violation of FISA? Whiny bastards, how many terrorists are running free because the NSA doesn't monitor them? All the Bush programs were stopped by Obama, and now the terrorists are trying more attacks.

Liberals were against citizens' calls being monitored.
Strange how cons are OK with their calls being monitored, but object to their medical information being computerized.