Thursday, May 21, 2009

Darth Vader strikes again

Guess you have to vigorously defend torturing and rendering people to other countries for torture once you go down that dark path. Reminds me of the end of the latest Batman movie, in which the narrator says that the people of Gotham don't need a hero, they need a protector, willing to be the villian and take the blame.

17 comments:

Anonymous said...

I think without the use of torture we would have seen another attack between 9/11 and now. Say what you will about Bush/ Cheney, but I think they kept us safe. I don't think they went about it the right way, but the simple fact that we have not had another attack shows that the end justifies the means.

I fear what will happen now with Obama being too soft.

Anonymous said...

I don't get why they can't keep the prison open for terrorists but dump the torture tactics. I don't want them here on US soil.

Mell Kuhn said...

Posting of the dark path, or even dumping torture; I can’t tell if you think that extracting death-preventing information from the enemy is wrong or you do you think there are fairytale endings?

Perhaps the term ‘the enemy’ is not clear.

Abbreviated said...

Leavenworth has no medical facility on base. If housed there they would have to be taken off base for any medical procedures. This would be a security risk.

Dick Cheney is doing the job of the press. Someone has to make BO accountable & the press sure isn't doing that job.

Anonymous said...

Couldn't Cheney go away for a little while at least? Please? W has been quiet. Can't we have at least a year without them. You don't hear from Quayle.

Anonymous said...

Dunking someone in water, making them listen to rap, etc is nothing compared to the murder of 3,000 innocent people in NY.

I would bet if you had some family that was captured by an oppossing force and they water boarded them then it would make a difference in what you say about the procedure, I know I would.
I always thought that people in this country wanted our government to set the bar on human treatment of people and create a democratic way of treating people. Well the bad has come out and we have opened the door to what we fought for so many years. Now before Chaney can let us straighten things out you want to keep the door open. If we continue down this road we will never be able to go back.
I prefer to be the bigger and better country and to right the wrongs by the guidlines of the G convintion and to keep humanity around. Besides if one of our gets the same treatment do you have any any ideal of the mental effect it has on someone. I would think it would be even worse than what some of our soldiers came home with from Nom!!! what do you think????

Wes said...

Apparently Mell and the other supporters of torture here forgot (or maybe just don't know) that torture is against the law, both US and International. The results of torture do not prevent death, it has been proven that the info obtained during these "Patriotic" torture sessions is not valid. It has also been proven that information received from non-torture techniques is much more trust worthy. Look it up people.

The term "enemy" should also include those who break the law, even if they are people who work for our government. They are enemies of our freedom, our way of life, and our thirst for progression, just like the terrorists.

Did anyone else see the "Mancow" waterboarding clip. It's funny that he blew the whole Republican argument out of the water (no pun intended) when he said it was definitely torture. Guess it's not just "dunking somebody in the water" like many would have you believe.

Anonymous said...

"Besides if one of our gets the same treatment do you have any any ideal of the mental effect it has on someone. I would think it would be even worse than what some of our soldiers came home with from Nom!!! what do you think????"

Don't you think that our people are tortured much worse when captured than the way we have treated prisoners? Do you remember Daniel Pearl?

Joweto,

Yes, we know what waterboarding is, and it is not dunking someone in water. But how can you say it doesn't help and that all the information gained is invalid when we haven't been attacked again since 9/11? That has to count for something, right?!

And it isn't against the law if the person(s) who make the laws gives you the okay to do it.

It has saved countless lives, and there is no way to argue against that.

If you are getting your information from Mancow, you need to look elsewhere.

Anonymous said...

In the Spring of 2002, immediately following Abu Zubaydah’s capture, top US Government officials including Dick Cheney, Colin Powell, George Tenet, Condoleeza Rice, Donald Rumsfeld, and John Ashcroft discussed at length whether or not the CIA could legally use harsh techniques against Abu Zubaydah. Condoleeza Rice specifically mentioned the SERE program during the meeting stating “I recall being told that U.S. military personnel were subjected to training to certain physical and psychological interrogation techniques…” In addition, in 2002 and 2003, several Democratic congressional leaders were briefed on the proposed “enhanced interrogation techniques.” These congressional leaders included Nancy Pelosi, the future Speaker of the House, and Representative Jane Harman. Congressional officials have stated that the attitude in the briefings ranged from “quiet acquiescence, if not downright support.” Senator Bob Graham, who CIA records claim was present at the briefings, has stated that he was not briefed on waterboarding in 2002 and that CIA attendance records clash with his personal journal. Harman was the only congressional leader to object to the tactics being proposed. It is of note that in a 2007 report by investigator Dick Marty on secret CIA prisons, the phrase “enhanced interrogations” was stated to be a euphemism for “torture.” The documents show that top U.S. Officials were intimately involved in the discussion and approval of the harsher interrogation techniques used on Abu Zubaydah. Condoleeza Rice ultimately told the CIA the harsher interrogation tactics were acceptable,and Dick Cheney stated "I signed off on it; so did others."

Some of the people that these Enhanced Techniques were used on include:

Abu Zubaydah, who, according to Wikipedia:

*Quickly rose from very low level mujahedin to third or fourth man in al Qaeda
*Served as Usama Bin Laden’s senior lieutenant
*Managed a network of training camps
*Was instrumental in the training of operatives for al Qaeda, the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, and other terrorist elements inside Pakistan and Afghanistan
*Acted as the Deputy Camp Commander for al Qaeda training camp in Afghanistan, personally approving entry and graduation of all trainees during 1999-2000
*Approved all individuals going in and out of Afghanistan to the training camps from 1996-1999
No one went in and out of Peshawar, Pakistan without his knowledge and approval
*Acted as al Qaeda’s coordinator of external contacts and foreign communications
*Acted as al Qaeda’s counter-intelligence officer and had been trusted to find spies within the organization
*Was involved in every major terrorist operation carried out by al Qaeda
*Was a planner for the Millennium plot to attack U.S. and Israeli targets during the Millennium celebrations in Jordan
*Served as a planner for the Paris Embassy plot in 2001
*Was one of the planners of 9/11 (which is enough by itself to justify any amount of torture in my book)
*Engaged in planning future terrorist attacks against U.S. interests
*Wrote al Qaeda’s manual on resistance techniques

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the instigator and prime organizer of the September 11, 2001 attacks, among MANY other things.

If you feel sorry for these men, then you have your priorities mixed up IMHO.

Wes said...

Joweto,

Yes, we know what waterboarding is, and it is not dunking someone in water. But how can you say it doesn't help and that all the information gained is invalid when we haven't been attacked again since 9/11? That has to count for something, right?!
I say it because it's true. Click here to view a Pentagon document that the Washington Post uncovered. Do you want more?

I didn't say "it doesn't help," I said it's illegal. Why do you think that information obtained through coercion is against the law in this country? Because information gained through coercion (or torture) is not valid information.

The Geneva Convention bans ANY mistreatment of prisoners. But the US under Bush and Cheney employed a "torture lite" policy under what they felt were justifiable circumstances, nonetheless, it is still illegal under US and international law. You can't use immoral methods in a "moral" cause, do you see the fault in that? What makes me sick is that the so-called "party of Christians" (GOP) thinks that it's OK to torture, and have created reasons why it's OK. Only one problem, the Bible. There is absolutely no part of the Bible that can be twisted into remotely supporting torture. Oh wait, Jesus overturned some tables at temple...get real! See Romans 3:8 for one example of what it says...

So you want me to believe that we have not been attacked again since 9-11 because we broke the law and tortured? Get real! Our torturing has been used as a recruiting tool for the terrorists. We waterboarded Khalid Sheik Mohammed 183 times and other "suspects" at least 83 times. The question now becomes: After which waterboarding did Khalid S. Mohammed confess, and what terrible event did he protect us from? Why doesn't the Bush Admin tell us the answer to this? It's safe to assume that the waterboarding didn't work. We abased ourselves for nothing.

And it isn't against the law if the person(s) who make the laws gives you the okay to do it.

It has saved countless lives, and there is no way to argue against that.

If you are getting your information from Mancow, you need to look elsewhere.
Yes, it is against the law if you are ordered to do something. Illegal is illegal. Hypo situation. Your boss tells you to lie to a customer in order to make a sale. You do so. The customer brings a lawsuit against you and your company. You say, "My boss told me to do it." You will be held liable and the company you work for will too. I would love to see you trying to use that defense in any court of law.

Again, what did the torture prevent again? Please cite a source and name an event that was stopped. If you are going to say the LA attacks, please don't. That was debunked in 2006.

You missed my point. It was funny because Mancow is a Limbaugh wannabe and he went against his "base" and said that it was definately torture. Do you see the humor or do I need to use smaller words?

Anonymous said...

You missed this part:

In 2002 and 2003, several Democratic congressional leaders were briefed on the proposed “enhanced interrogation techniques.” These congressional leaders included Nancy Pelosi, the future Speaker of the House, and Representative Jane Harman. Congressional officials have stated that the attitude in the briefings ranged from “quiet acquiescence, if not downright support.”

And there is a small little difference in your boss at the local Wendy's and THE LEADER OF THE FREE WORLD! If your orders come from the POTUS, you best follow them.

Again, I say.. NO ATTACK SINCE 9/11!!!!! or should I use smaller words?

Wes said...

No need for smaller words... You may want to use logic and be rational though.

The reason why we have not been attacked since 9-11 is not because of illegal torture. There is no disputing this. End of story.

I could care less who knew about it, they all must be called to the carpet and held accountable. You seem to think that I only called out the GOP, rightfully so. I mentioned Bush and Cheney because they were the ones responsible for our breaking of the law. If the Dems did something illegal as well, punish them too. I have a problem with the GOP trying to justify the illegal activity over the past few months, that's all.

You're exactly right, if the POTUS tells you to do something illegal, you do it only if you want to keep your job. If you decide to do something illegal at his direction, then both of you should be held accountable. There are laws against following illegal orders too. There is no defense or protection in the "just following orders" tactic both here and internationally.

Under the law, the manager at Wendy's and the POTUS are equal. Sorry to push your buttons...

Kudos to Anon at 6:46PM. You make sense.

Jack Bauer said...

When it comes to terrorists, The ends justify the means.

Anonymous said...

They used the waterboard when Clinton was pres. and when Johnson was in they would throw the first one from the copper to make rest talk; which was quite effective. Then when Truman was the man we took no prisoners at all and that ended, that. Look it up people!

Anonymous said...

How about dropping the bombs on Japan? Kinda puts waterboarding to shame don't it. But I don't hear you liberals whining about that. You know why? Because it saved lives. Plain and simple. Just like waterboarding.

Anonymous said...

Some very interesting reading. Especially if Obama puts terrorists in prison in the US.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2009/0526093cia1.html

Anonymous said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=QJygJQNQHkw&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww %2Eibbetsonusa%2Ecom%2F%23 Torture%5Fand%5 FGitmo&feature=player_embedded

Copy this and then take the spaces out. It's hilarious. And fitting the subject of the thread.