CIA Confirms: Waterboarding 9/11 Mastermind Led to Info that Aborted 9/11-Style Attac

[sealybobo]

Are you naive enough to believe that if we play nice with the fucking terrorists that they won't torture and kill Americans guilty of nothing but being Americans?

Why don't you ask Dan Perl

Go here to watch if you have the stomach for it.

THE DANIEL PEARL BEHEADING VIDEO

I haven't seen that video since 9-11. Amazing.

Ever hear two wrongs don't make a right?

And yes, we should not torture because that puts us on the side of richousness.

I just had a dozen thoughts on why/how you are wrong. Its pointless to explain it to you. Just know that you were wrong before Bush took office, and you are wrong now that he's gone. And it is amazing to me that someone who thinks like you was running this country. Just remember, Bush was really dumb. And Cheney is really evil. That's who you agree with.

But, why are you torturing them?

a. Because they torture us
b. Because we actually think they are holding some information that might make us safer

Based on how many people you tortured, I think you got off on it.

You know what? We knew you right wingers were wrong when Bush was torturing, and we had an election that confirms America does not approve of Dick Cheney or Bush or any of their policies, one being torture.

Again read the WSJ piece and tell me how horribly the fucking terrorists were treated.

this has absolutely nothing to do with politics but as usual you can't think outside of your GOP sucks and Democrats are wonderful paradigm.

The issue here is pragmatism and nothing more. If you had any degree of certainty that a bomb was going to be detonated in a school your child attends, and you had one of the men involved in custody you would rather let your children and the children of every other parent in that school die rather than pour water of the man's face?

Thats the lame old argument you guys have been using for years.

Of course I would torture if I had any degree of certainty.

Now you guys tortured thousands of Iraqi's and Afganistan's and eventually, a lot of them are going to be let go, and you got NOTHING from them, because you didn't have any certainty. You just tortured them all.

You guys are flat out wrong on this one.

 

[Skull Pilot]

No, I wouldn't let it get out that I was torturing.

Bush is ultimately the boss. So those Abu Grabe pictures are on his shoulders.

ESPECIALLY now that we know he gave the word to torture.

And, we tortured too many people and for sadistic reasons. We tortured foot soldiers.

PS. Do you want our soldiers tortured? What about that American woman who is in jail in Iran? You do know they are going to torture her, right?

On behalf of the family, friends and colleagues of Roxana Saberi, and the many American citizens who share our concerns, we urgently request a series of steps be taken in the case of Roxana Saberi, an independent journalist and dual citizen of the United States and Iran, who is being held in Evin Prison in Tehran, Iran.

We now ask that one or more international organizations that have responsibilities and rights under the Geneva Conventions be permitted access to Roxana immediately to ascertain her health and well-being and to determine the conditions under which she is held.

We now ask that the specific charges against Roxana Saberi be made public. If no charges are filed, we now urge her immediate release and ask that she be given permission to return to her home country, the United States.

Can you believe we have the balls to ask this? Should we release all the "terrorists" in Guantanimo?

I suspect we have gotten zero information from torture. In fact, I heard that befriending these prisoners gets you a lot more information than torturing them does.

Are you naive enough to believe that if we play nice with the fucking terrorists that they won't torture and kill Americans guilty of nothing but being Americans?

Why don't you ask Dan Perl

Go here to watch if you have the stomach for it.

THE DANIEL PEARL BEHEADING VIDEO

These are the fucking savages our troops are dealing with. You tell me how much respect and consideration they deserve.

So your point is we lower our moral standards to the terrorists? That's kind of morall relavism, isn't it?

better to be ruthless and save a life than be moral and watch a life extinguished.

 

[sealybobo]

I wouldn't expect a Murdoch outlet to say anything else.

Do you have info from a reliable source?

Then what you need to do is stick you head right back up your uninformed ass!

Sorry, I don't consider you to be a reliable source either. Maybe others do.

No one does.

 

[manu1959]

so we have sent a message to the crazies of this world that they worst things we used to do:

have dogs bark at you
pretend to drown you
strip you naked
keep you up late
play s+m games
put bugs on you

we will no longer do......

now we will feed you, clothe you, house you and ask you nice if you have any information.....then we will make you a us citizen.....

ya ....this should turn out well.....

 

[WillowTree]

Then what you need to do is stick you head right back up your uninformed ass!

Sorry, I don't consider you to be a reliable source either. Maybe others do.

No one does.

No one on the left does.. if they did I wouldn't admit to it..

 

[Skull Pilot]

I haven't seen that video since 9-11. Amazing.

Ever hear two wrongs don't make a right?

And yes, we should not torture because that puts us on the side of richousness.

I just had a dozen thoughts on why/how you are wrong. Its pointless to explain it to you. Just know that you were wrong before Bush took office, and you are wrong now that he's gone. And it is amazing to me that someone who thinks like you was running this country. Just remember, Bush was really dumb. And Cheney is really evil. That's who you agree with.

But, why are you torturing them?

a. Because they torture us
b. Because we actually think they are holding some information that might make us safer

Based on how many people you tortured, I think you got off on it.

You know what? We knew you right wingers were wrong when Bush was torturing, and we had an election that confirms America does not approve of Dick Cheney or Bush or any of their policies, one being torture.

Again read the WSJ piece and tell me how horribly the fucking terrorists were treated.

this has absolutely nothing to do with politics but as usual you can't think outside of your GOP sucks and Democrats are wonderful paradigm.

The issue here is pragmatism and nothing more. If you had any degree of certainty that a bomb was going to be detonated in a school your child attends, and you had one of the men involved in custody you would rather let your children and the children of every other parent in that school die rather than pour water of the man's face?

Thats the lame old argument you guys have been using for years.

Of course I would torture if I had any degree of certainty.

Now you guys tortured thousands of Iraqi's and Afganistan's and eventually, a lot of them are going to be let go, and you got NOTHING from them, because you didn't have any certainty. You just tortured them all.

You guys are flat out wrong on this one.

Thousands? You have a link proving that?

And it's not a lame argument. We live in a world where that scenario is more than plausible. you have forgotten 3000 dead on 9/11?

If we had actionable intelligence procured via waterboarding and managed to stop those planes from being hijacked, you would still be whining?

 

[sealybobo]

Are you naive enough to believe that if we play nice with the fucking terrorists that they won't torture and kill Americans guilty of nothing but being Americans?

Why don't you ask Dan Perl

Go here to watch if you have the stomach for it.

THE DANIEL PEARL BEHEADING VIDEO

These are the fucking savages our troops are dealing with. You tell me how much respect and consideration they deserve.

So your point is we lower our moral standards to the terrorists? That's kind of morall relavism, isn't it?

better to be ruthless and save a life than be moral and watch a life extinguished.

You're going to cost us lives. Abroad and eventually one of those people you tortured are going to want payback.

Do you people realize that we paid Iraqi and Afgan informants money to turn in terrorists? And they would turn in the villiage idiot for the $. In other words, we aren't holding any top Al Queda's.

PS. Top Al Queda are training over in Pakistan and you right winger are crying that Pakistan is a soverign nation.

So let me ask you the same question you asked me.


What if you knew with certainty that Al Queda was training in Pakistan and you could blow them up with predator drones. Would you take them out? It would save lives.

 

[WillowTree]

Again read the WSJ piece and tell me how horribly the fucking terrorists were treated.

this has absolutely nothing to do with politics but as usual you can't think outside of your GOP sucks and Democrats are wonderful paradigm.

The issue here is pragmatism and nothing more. If you had any degree of certainty that a bomb was going to be detonated in a school your child attends, and you had one of the men involved in custody you would rather let your children and the children of every other parent in that school die rather than pour water of the man's face?

Thats the lame old argument you guys have been using for years.

Of course I would torture if I had any degree of certainty.

Now you guys tortured thousands of Iraqi's and Afganistan's and eventually, a lot of them are going to be let go, and you got NOTHING from them, because you didn't have any certainty. You just tortured them all.

You guys are flat out wrong on this one.

Thousands? You have a link proving that?

And it's not a lame argument. We live in a world where that scenario is more than plausible. you have forgotten 3000 dead on 9/11?

If we had actionable intelligence procured via waterboarding and managed to stop those planes from being hijacked, you would still be whining?

lefties don't give a shit about the three thousand who died on 9-11. That's obvious.

 

[sealybobo]

Again read the WSJ piece and tell me how horribly the fucking terrorists were treated.

this has absolutely nothing to do with politics but as usual you can't think outside of your GOP sucks and Democrats are wonderful paradigm.

The issue here is pragmatism and nothing more. If you had any degree of certainty that a bomb was going to be detonated in a school your child attends, and you had one of the men involved in custody you would rather let your children and the children of every other parent in that school die rather than pour water of the man's face?

Thats the lame old argument you guys have been using for years.

Of course I would torture if I had any degree of certainty.

Now you guys tortured thousands of Iraqi's and Afganistan's and eventually, a lot of them are going to be let go, and you got NOTHING from them, because you didn't have any certainty. You just tortured them all.

You guys are flat out wrong on this one.

Thousands? You have a link proving that?

And it's not a lame argument. We live in a world where that scenario is more than plausible. you have forgotten 3000 dead on 9/11?

If we had actionable intelligence procured via waterboarding and managed to stop those planes from being hijacked, you would still be whining?

Glad you used those words actionable intelligence. So then you do approve of us bombing Al Queda in Pakistan?

Oh please tell me you do not approve. I would hate it if I found out you weren't a hypocrite. Please be a hypocrite

 

[manu1959]

Thats the lame old argument you guys have been using for years.

Of course I would torture if I had any degree of certainty.

Now you guys tortured thousands of Iraqi's and Afganistan's and eventually, a lot of them are going to be let go, and you got NOTHING from them, because you didn't have any certainty. You just tortured them all.

You guys are flat out wrong on this one.

Thousands? You have a link proving that?

And it's not a lame argument. We live in a world where that scenario is more than plausible. you have forgotten 3000 dead on 9/11?

If we had actionable intelligence procured via waterboarding and managed to stop those planes from being hijacked, you would still be whining?

Glad you used those words actionable intelligence. So then you do approve of us bombing Al Queda in Pakistan?

Oh please tell me you do not approve. I would hate it if I found out you weren't a hypocrite. Please be a hypocrite

interesting question....do you approve .....

 

[Skull Pilot]

So your point is we lower our moral standards to the terrorists? That's kind of morall relavism, isn't it?

better to be ruthless and save a life than be moral and watch a life extinguished.

You're going to cost us lives. Abroad and eventually one of those people you tortured are going to want payback.

Do you people realize that we paid Iraqi and Afgan informants money to turn in terrorists? And they would turn in the villiage idiot for the $. In other words, we aren't holding any top Al Queda's.

PS. Top Al Queda are training over in Pakistan and you right winger are crying that Pakistan is a soverign nation.

So let me ask you the same question you asked me.


What if you knew with certainty that Al Queda was training in Pakistan and you could blow them up with predator drones. Would you take them out? It would save lives.

See unlike you, i hold my convictions.

We should not be in Iraq or Afghanistan. We should be securing our borders, our air space and our seas here at home to the extent that is is impossible for an illegal immigrant, or a terrorist to enter. We should develop an impenetrable homeland defense not trying to convince a bunch of fucking savages that we are nice guys.

And to answer your question, short of stopping a nuclear launch, no I don't care if a bunch of sand rat towel heads are training in Pakistan. If we did as I suggest, they'd never have a shot at harming us here at home.

 

[DiveCon]

I heard that these two terrorists sang like songbirds after 5 minutes of being waterboarded.

Then why did they waterboard them each over 100 times?

read the WSJ piece and find out that a "waterboarding incident" usually lasted 20 seconds or less.

For Christ's sake I could hold my breath that long when I was 3 years old.

I wouldn't expect a Murdoch outlet to say anything else.

Do you have info from a reliable source?

seek out professional help for your paranoia of Murdoch

 

[PoliticalChic]

I would fight and die conservatives for control of this country.

Well Sealy, if there are enough of you perhaps we should bring the troops home from the middle east, discharge them, invite anyone else in the country so inclined, and ask the Headress of HS to get out of the way for about 3 months.

Saying that kind of fight and die for politics crap is exactly what galvanizes stupidity and leads to forms of trouble most of the participants never imagined.

Hey, is that the same Sealybobo who started the thread about the vicious lies told by Fox and Drudge about Senator Dodd and the A.I.G. bonuses?

And then the next day, the good Senator reversed himself and said, yeah, "I lied yesterday and I was the one responsible"?

And that left the Sealster hangin' out to dry? Oh, yeah. That was one and the same!

BTW, did he ever apologize for that?

 

[sealybobo]

Thats the lame old argument you guys have been using for years.

Of course I would torture if I had any degree of certainty.

Now you guys tortured thousands of Iraqi's and Afganistan's and eventually, a lot of them are going to be let go, and you got NOTHING from them, because you didn't have any certainty. You just tortured them all.

You guys are flat out wrong on this one.

Thousands? You have a link proving that?

And it's not a lame argument. We live in a world where that scenario is more than plausible. you have forgotten 3000 dead on 9/11?

If we had actionable intelligence procured via waterboarding and managed to stop those planes from being hijacked, you would still be whining?

lefties don't give a shit about the three thousand who died on 9-11. That's obvious.

It was your leader that forgot about 9-11 and ran off to Iraq for oil, stupid.

 

[sealybobo]

read the WSJ piece and find out that a "waterboarding incident" usually lasted 20 seconds or less.

For Christ's sake I could hold my breath that long when I was 3 years old.

I wouldn't expect a Murdoch outlet to say anything else.

Do you have info from a reliable source?

seek out professional help for your paranoia of Murdoch

Oh now it is paranoia that Rupurt has politicized Fox news and every other media he owns? Seek help for your denial, and stupidity.

 

[sealybobo]

better to be ruthless and save a life than be moral and watch a life extinguished.

You're going to cost us lives. Abroad and eventually one of those people you tortured are going to want payback.

Do you people realize that we paid Iraqi and Afgan informants money to turn in terrorists? And they would turn in the villiage idiot for the $. In other words, we aren't holding any top Al Queda's.

PS. Top Al Queda are training over in Pakistan and you right winger are crying that Pakistan is a soverign nation.

So let me ask you the same question you asked me.


What if you knew with certainty that Al Queda was training in Pakistan and you could blow them up with predator drones. Would you take them out? It would save lives.

See unlike you, i hold my convictions.

We should not be in Iraq or Afghanistan. We should be securing our borders, our air space and our seas here at home to the extent that is is impossible for an illegal immigrant, or a terrorist to enter. We should develop an impenetrable homeland defense not trying to convince a bunch of fucking savages that we are nice guys.

And to answer your question, short of stopping a nuclear launch, no I don't care if a bunch of sand rat towel heads are training in Pakistan. If we did as I suggest, they'd never have a shot at harming us here at home.

Shit, I can't argue with that, and neither would T. Jefferson.

 

[Iriemon]

Like the NYT?

Anything that corroborates it from a source that is not obviously biased toward conservative/Republicans as the Murdoch outlets obviously are.

Yeah, if I cited just the NYT for a opinionated proposition I'd expect you would question the veratcity, and I would understand why you'd do it. It has a rep for a left leaning bias.

In this case, you say they were only waterboarded 20 secs, and as you point out, anyone can hold their breath that lot. Yet this was supposedly enough to induce the alleged terrorists to provide information.

That just doesn't make sense. So, given the source, yeah I question it.

No, unlike you, i would try to find a source that refuted your claim.

you see, it's easy to avoid a discussion when you say "your source sucks"

What's that the "I know you are but what am I" school of debate?

Well then here you go, a source that refutes the Murdoch news outlet claim that "The Memos prove we didn't torture":

WASHINGTON — The Justice Department on Thursday made public detailed memos describing brutal interrogation techniques used by the Central Intelligence Agency, as President Obama sought to reassure the agency that the C.I.A. operatives involved would not be prosecuted.

In dozens of pages of dispassionate legal prose, the methods approved by the Bush administration for extracting information from senior operatives of Al Qaeda are spelled out in careful detail — like keeping detainees awake for up to 11 straight days, placing them in a dark, cramped box or putting insects into the box to exploit their fears.

The interrogation methods were authorized beginning in 2002, and some were used as late as 2005 in the C.I.A.’s secret overseas prisons. The techniques were among the Bush administration’s most closely guarded secrets, and the documents released Thursday afternoon were the most comprehensive public accounting to date of the program.

Some senior Obama administration officials, including Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., have labeled one of the 14 approved techniques, waterboarding, illegal torture. The United States prosecuted some Japanese interrogators at war crimes trials after World War II for waterboarding and other methods detailed in the memos.

...

Together, the four memos give an extraordinarily detailed account of the C.I.A.’s methods and the Justice Department’s long struggle, in the face of graphic descriptions of brutal tactics, to square them with international and domestic law. Passages describing forced nudity, the slamming of detainees into walls, prolonged sleep deprivation and the dousing of detainees with water as cold as 41 degrees alternate with elaborate legal arguments concerning the international Convention Against Torture.

The four legal opinions, released in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by the A.C.L.U., were written in 2002 and 2005 by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, the highest authority in interpreting the law in the executive branch.

...

The memos include what in effect are lengthy excerpts from the agency’s interrogation manual, laying out with precision how each method was to be used. Waterboarding, for example, involved strapping a prisoner to a gurney inclined at an angle of “10 to 15 degrees” and pouring water over a cloth covering his nose and mouth “from a height of approximately 6 to 18 inches” for no more than 40 seconds at a time.

But a footnote to a 2005 memo made it clear that the rules were not always followed. Waterboarding was used “with far greater frequency than initially indicated” and with “large volumes of water” rather than the small quantities in the rules, one memo says, citing a 2004 report by the C.I.A.’s inspector general.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/17/us/politics/17detain.html?hp

The memos sure "prove" that there was no torture as the Murdoch Street Journal asserts.

The fact that we prosecuted Japanese for torture for doing the same damn thing must just be a "historical anamoly" in thier eyes.

 

[sealybobo]

Thousands? You have a link proving that?

And it's not a lame argument. We live in a world where that scenario is more than plausible. you have forgotten 3000 dead on 9/11?

If we had actionable intelligence procured via waterboarding and managed to stop those planes from being hijacked, you would still be whining?

Glad you used those words actionable intelligence. So then you do approve of us bombing Al Queda in Pakistan?

Oh please tell me you do not approve. I would hate it if I found out you weren't a hypocrite. Please be a hypocrite

interesting question....do you approve .....

Of bombing inside Pakistan? Fuck yes.

 

[sealybobo]

Again read the WSJ piece and tell me how horribly the fucking terrorists were treated.

this has absolutely nothing to do with politics but as usual you can't think outside of your GOP sucks and Democrats are wonderful paradigm.

The issue here is pragmatism and nothing more. If you had any degree of certainty that a bomb was going to be detonated in a school your child attends, and you had one of the men involved in custody you would rather let your children and the children of every other parent in that school die rather than pour water of the man's face?

Thats the lame old argument you guys have been using for years.

Of course I would torture if I had any degree of certainty.

Now you guys tortured thousands of Iraqi's and Afganistan's and eventually, a lot of them are going to be let go, and you got NOTHING from them, because you didn't have any certainty. You just tortured them all.

You guys are flat out wrong on this one.

Thousands? You have a link proving that?

And it's not a lame argument. We live in a world where that scenario is more than plausible. you have forgotten 3000 dead on 9/11?

If we had actionable intelligence procured via waterboarding and managed to stop those planes from being hijacked, you would still be whining?

Do I need to prove we have thousands in prison or do I need to prove we tortured over 1000.

Thousands of Iraqis held by U.S. to go free
No charges expected against many detainees picked up in raids

Thousands of Iraqis held by U.S. to go free - Conflict in Iraq- msnbc.com

Claims of torture
Abdullah is suing two private U.S. security contractor firms that he said tortured him for a month while being detained at Abu Ghraib in 2003. A U.S. military spokesman confirmed Abdullah's detention at Bucca but did not provide details about his time at Abu Ghraib.

International law allows the capture and detention of people who are considered an "imperative" national security threat during times of war or conflict. However, human-rights groups like Amnesty International have argued that the United States violated detainees' legal rights by holding them without charge after Iraq was declared a sovereign nation in June 2004.

That argument largely became moot with the Jan. 1 agreement. The U.S. currently is referring up to 1,500 detainees cases to Iraqis each month for review.

 

[Iriemon]

Then what you need to do is stick you head right back up your uninformed ass!

Sorry, I don't consider you to be a reliable source either. Maybe others do.

well then return to yer indoctrination,, we're fine with that.

My opinion affirmed, thanks.