Obama brushes top Senior Intell. Officials pleas to the side

[editec]

Who could we have tortured to prevent 9-11?

 

[FistyTheBadger]

Who could we have tortured to prevent 9-11?

From what I remember, we already had enough relevant information beforehand to prevent the Attacks, but due to a combination of ego-driven and overprotective lack of communication between departments like the CIA and the FBI, those who could do something about it couldn't connect the dots in time, and what dots they did have that connected seemed to those in charge to be common misinformation that they got every day, and so they didn't think to follow up on it.

 

[editec]

Who could we have tortured to prevent 9-11?

From what I remember, we already had enough relevant information beforehand to prevent the Attacks, but due to a combination of ego-driven and overprotective lack of communication between departments like the CIA and the FBI, those who could do something about it couldn't connect the dots in time, and what dots they did have that connected seemed to those in charge to be common misinformation that they got every day, and so they didn't think to follow up on it.

Yeah that is my understanding, too.

In other words, assuming we'd had an effective intelligence community, it is possible we might have prevented 9-11 without torture.

And more to the point, we have no reason to believe that torturing anyone could have prevented 9-11, either, do we?

 

[dilloduck]

Who could we have tortured to prevent 9-11?

From what I remember, we already had enough relevant information beforehand to prevent the Attacks, but due to a combination of ego-driven and overprotective lack of communication between departments like the CIA and the FBI, those who could do something about it couldn't connect the dots in time, and what dots they did have that connected seemed to those in charge to be common misinformation that they got every day, and so they didn't think to follow up on it.

Yeah that is my understanding, too.

In other words, assuming we'd had an effective intelligence community, it is possible we might have prevented 9-11 without torture.

And more to the point, we have no reason to believe that torturing anyone could have prevented 9-11, either, do we?

IF there was enough actionable intel even calling a suspect in for questioning may have been enough to foil the attempt.

 

[FistyTheBadger]

Who could we have tortured to prevent 9-11?

From what I remember, we already had enough relevant information beforehand to prevent the Attacks, but due to a combination of ego-driven and overprotective lack of communication between departments like the CIA and the FBI, those who could do something about it couldn't connect the dots in time, and what dots they did have that connected seemed to those in charge to be common misinformation that they got every day, and so they didn't think to follow up on it.

Yeah that is my understanding, too.

In other words, assuming we'd had an effective intelligence community, it is possible we might have prevented 9-11 without torture.

And more to the point, we have no reason to believe that torturing anyone could have prevented 9-11, either, do we?

Would you allow another attack like 9-11 that could have been prevented with torture just to teach everybody a lesson that we should have had a better intelligence system, instead of use what we can to stop terrorism?

 

[editec]

From what I remember, we already had enough relevant information beforehand to prevent the Attacks, but due to a combination of ego-driven and overprotective lack of communication between departments like the CIA and the FBI, those who could do something about it couldn't connect the dots in time, and what dots they did have that connected seemed to those in charge to be common misinformation that they got every day, and so they didn't think to follow up on it.

Yeah that is my understanding, too.

In other words, assuming we'd had an effective intelligence community, it is possible we might have prevented 9-11 without torture.

And more to the point, we have no reason to believe that torturing anyone could have prevented 9-11, either, do we?

Would you allow another attack like 9-11 that could have been prevented with torture just to teach everybody a lesson that we should have had a better intelligence system, instead of use what we can to stop terrorism?

Would you torture people if you weren't completely positive that they had any information that might prevent such an event?

And if you were absolutely positive that this person had that information, how could you know that, but not already know enough to prevent the disaster?

 

[FistyTheBadger]

Yeah that is my understanding, too.

In other words, assuming we'd had an effective intelligence community, it is possible we might have prevented 9-11 without torture.

And more to the point, we have no reason to believe that torturing anyone could have prevented 9-11, either, do we?

Would you allow another attack like 9-11 that could have been prevented with torture just to teach everybody a lesson that we should have had a better intelligence system, instead of use what we can to stop terrorism?

Would you torture people if you weren't completely positive that they had any information that might prevent such an event?

And if you were absolutely positive that this person had that information, how could you know that, but not already know enough to prevent the disaster?

Leads do not imply what information might come from them. This is basic law enforcement/criminology/forensics.

 

[editec]

Would you allow another attack like 9-11 that could have been prevented with torture just to teach everybody a lesson that we should have had a better intelligence system, instead of use what we can to stop terrorism?

Would you torture people if you weren't completely positive that they had any information that might prevent such an event?

And if you were absolutely positive that this person had that information, how could you know that, but not already know enough to prevent the disaster?

Leads do not imply what information might come from them. This is basic law enforcement/criminology/forensics.

And is torture, in your mind, one of the basics of law enforcement/criminalogy/forensics too?

If so then I presume that you also have no problem when the cops kick down your door and torture you until you confess whatever crime they want you to confess to, too, right?

Be careful what slippery slopes you tread on, Fisty.

 

[FistyTheBadger]

Would you torture people if you weren't completely positive that they had any information that might prevent such an event?

And if you were absolutely positive that this person had that information, how could you know that, but not already know enough to prevent the disaster?

Leads do not imply what information might come from them. This is basic law enforcement/criminology/forensics.

And is torture, in your mind, one of the basics of law enforcement/criminalogy/forensics too?

If so then I presume that you also have no problem when the cops kick down your door and torture you until you confess whatever crime they want you to confess to, too, right?

Be careful what slippery slopes you tread on, Fisty.

Thanks for creating an opinion for me.

 

[rayboyusmc]

Point of interest. I heard (trying to confirm) that of the 248 still held at Gitmo, only 8% are considered terrorists by the US government.

Many of those in Gitmo were turned in by neighbors for a $5000.00 reward. Since the average annual income in Afghanistan is $500.00, could mean some were just pissed off at old enemies.

 

[JimH52]

Why did our rules on torture change under Bush? Maybe, because he had ignored the warnings about terrorist using airplanes to attack the US? He did, you know.

So we abandoned years of military standards to allow torture. Obama didn't weaken the US by bringing back the military definition of torture. He only began to restore America's moral standing in the world. Breath easily, Uncle Fester is gone.

 

[Annie]

Why did our rules on torture change under Bush? Maybe, because he had ignored the warnings about terrorist using airplanes to attack the US? He did, you know.

So we abandoned years of military standards to allow torture. Obama didn't weaken the US by bringing back the military definition of torture. He only began to restore America's moral standing in the world. Breath easily, Uncle Fester is gone.

What do you think happened under rendition? When did that begin? Hint: the new head of the CIA was deeply involved in that policy decision.

 

[rayboyusmc]

What do you think happened under rendition? When did that begin? Hint: the new head of the CIA was deeply involved in that policy decision.

Before you condemen him and Clinton, please give examples of who was renditioned to what country. It isn't against the law to use rendition to send a prisoner to another country if they don't torture.

Second, if they broke the law, they were wrong also. One thing Cllinton didn't do is openly create an American system of torture like the Bush/Cheney group did and openly say it had to be done.

I also don't know of any circumstances where they held people forever with no charges. They actually prosecuted the Blind Sheik for the first Twin Towers attack and put him in prison.

AND THE STUPID THING IS THAT THE EXPERTS SAY IT DOESN'T FUCKING WORK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Annie]

What do you think happened under rendition? When did that begin? Hint: the new head of the CIA was deeply involved in that policy decision.

Before you condemen him and Clinton, please give examples of who was renditioned to what country. It isn't against the law to use rendition to send a prisoner to another country if they don't torture.

Second, if they broke the law, they were wrong also. One thing Cllinton didn't do is openly create an American system of torture like the Bush/Cheney group did and openly say it had to be done.

I also don't know of any circumstances where they held people forever with no charges. They actually prosecuted the Blind Sheik for the first Twin Towers attack and put him in prison.

AND THE STUPID THING IS THAT THE EXPERTS SAY IT DOESN'T FUCKING WORK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

First off, regardless of the shouting and swearing, I never said it did. Your defense of Clinton is that he hid it?

As for use, try this. Don't care for the site? See some of the mainstream writers, ACLU, etc that have cited the WSJ article: CIA-Backed Team Used Brutal Means To Break Up Terrorist Cell in Albania By ANDREW HIGGINS and CHRISTOPHER COOPER - Google Search