O'Reilly: 'It's Bull' That Torture Doesn't Work

O'Reilly: 'It's Bull' That Torture Doesn't Work

thinkprogress.org

Last night, in an interview with Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY), Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly praised the Bush administration “for doing a good job protecting Americans after 9/11″ and attributed its success to its “aggressive manner” of protection, including “Guantanamo, water boarding three times, and other things.” (Recall, in 2005, O’Reilly declared he would “order the execution” of everyone at Guantanamo if he could.)

O’Reilly then questioned Clinton’s opposition to torture, insisting that if the U.S. had “an al Qaeda big shot” in custody, he would “dunk him into water” — i.e., waterboard him. When told that torture does not produce “high quality” information, O’Reilly cried, “That’s bull!

Watch it:”

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
Canada puts U.S. on torture watchlist!
Torture Still Doesn't Work
Arrest Bush - Bush Confesses to Waterboarding. Call D.C. Cops!
ABUSE CRISIS- ACLU - Bush Authorized Torture

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
How does ATS feel about Cathy O'Brien
How many here believe Cathy O'brien's Story?

[edit on 3-5-2008 by ChadAndrewATS]

[edit on 3-5-2008 by ChadAndrewATS]

Here we have a case of 2 people playing "Good Cop/Bad Cop" without anyone to interrogate (beside each other). Bill O'Reilly acts out with aggression to seem like he's some sort of fascist-dictator, who wants to root out all suspected-terrorists by torturing their allies & the terrorists, themselves, yet... he's sitting across from 1 of the most well-known child-rapists & occultists in America: Hillary Clinton, is improvising with Bill O'Reilly by pretending as if she believes every suspected-terrorist deserves to be treated with dignity & respect, unless they're "found guilty".

Here's the truth about these two:

1. Their shills for the New World Order.
2. They support fascists.
3. They're both paid by the rulers of the fiat-government to mislead the public.
4. They agree with each other, even though they seem to be opponents on TV.
5. Both of them have been accused of- (and condemned) & for either sexual-harassment or rape.

If you don't believe they're fascists or sexual-deviants, who love torturing innocent people, at least you still have time to find the truth about them for yourself:

HILLARY CLINTON SEX SCANDAL!...


It's people like Hillary & Bill O'Reilly, who permit torture & sexual-abuse to be conducted, on a daily basis. They don't want to end terrorism. They like it because their money comes from war-profiteers. All of the big wars in places like the middle-eastern countries & Europe (especially the war against our civil-liberties in America) are funded & prolonged by the fiat-world government, which promotes torture; satanic ritual-abuse & massacres:

Clinton Fein Torture Exhibition Promotion
(Note: This video/exhibition is not produced or publicly promoted by Hillary Clinton, even though torturing sex-slaves is one of her & her associates' hobbies & interests):

Clinton Fein's latest exhibition, Torture, scheduled to open at Toomey Tourell Gallery in San Francisco in January 2007 is a shocking and defiant exploration of America's approach to torture under the Bush administration. A series of staged and digitally manipulated photographic images recreate the infamous torture scenes from Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, transforming the diffuse, muted and low-resolution images into large-scale, vivid, powerful and frightening reproductions. (See www.clintonfein.com... )

Google Video Link

thinkprogress.org
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 3-5-2008 by ChadAndrewATS]

Hi Chad, good post.

One thing on the Hillary Clinton abuse video though, is it just my eyes or is the audio out of sinc, or not matching the mouth movements of the woman speaking in the video?

I'm not saying that the video is not genuine, but it looks like words have been dubbed over the top. If there was a clearer video it may clear that up.

I just know there are many videos out there about Bush that are obviously fake, with some fancy editing having been done.

CX.

Dibs on O'Reilly's waterboarding. I'm gonna see if he can beat Blakes breath holding on Oprah. What a fathead. Let's see... a six ft 3ft plypanel center mounted on a spindle with a big barrel of water at the other end.
Yep, that ought to do it.

[edit on 5/3/2008 by jpm1602]

reply to post by CX

I know what you mean. Thanks for your message. I will try to find better-quality videos with that woman:

Cathy O'Brien on Mind Control

In this interview, Cathy O'Brien, a CIA MK ULTRA mind control victim, talks about her experiences.

thesenatorhillary.blogspot.com...
www.tedgunderson.com...
www.free10dvds.com...
www.scribd.com...

The sick-bastards (like Hillary Clinton's husband), know a lot more about mind-control experiments than they have admitted, in public. They have both worked (and may still work) for the CIA, which was founded by members of the satanic "Order of Death" cult, and other torture-endorsing organizations.

President Clinton admits to mind control experiments


JFK George Bush Sr C.I.A. CIA Link Conspiracy

Google Video Link

reply to post by jpm1602

haha I got dibs on being in the front-row of the audience that watches you do that to Bill O'Reilly.

[edit on 3-5-2008 by ChadAndrewATS]

He's got a point.
Torture does work.
Sad but true.

Chad, I'll work on getting Emeril in that day doing italian delicassies with plenty to go around. Maybe O will even give out free cars. The possibilities.

Originally posted by Shazam The Unbowed
He's got a point.
Torture does work.
Sad but true.

The thing i have difficulty understanding , and which is why i say i'm on the fence with torture, is this.

I know there are studies that have said that torture does not work. It is said that if you inflict enough pain on a person, they will tell you anything.

However can anyone truthfully say that interrogation techniques of a more forcefull nature, have never revealed factual evidence that has helped save the lives of others?

I'm sure that many who are tortured for information give false info. There are those that may be totaly innocent that make up info just to stop thier torture.

Then again i'm sure that many genuine bad guys who are tortured, who just want it over and done with, and sing like a bird about the real facts. Like it or not this has happened.

Lets say just for discussions sake, and conspiracy theories about who carried it out aside too, that there was intel that said there was definately going to be another 9/11. They had the guy in custody who knew every detail of the planned attack. There was just a short amount of time to get the details that could save thousands of people, maybe millions.

Would you still say that torture is wrong if it prevents another catastrophy?

Would you moan when the next place gets destroyed and not enough was done to stop it..as long as it did'nt involve torture?

Would your opinions be different if it was your kids in the middle of the next target? I'm saying yes it would, but i can't talk for others so i'll ask you instead.

Please don't get me wrong, i'm not advocating the use of torture at all. I'm merely asking for opinions on something that in my eyes, is such a grey area.

I think there are times when torture works, and times when it does'nt. The difficulty comes in deciding when is the right time.

The level of torture is a major issue here too. Some will see waterboarding as fine, yet maybe having body parts chopped off barbaric.

Is there any different from a bad cop gaining a confession by threats to the suspect? Still gets the same result, whether it be by emotional or physical "torture".

CX.

Does the American constitution allow torture?? This issue is kinda confusing. Everything so blury for me

Originally posted by Ownification
Does the American constitution allow torture?? This issue is kinda confusing. Everything so blury for me

I thought we all came under the Geneva Convention?

Genava Convention relating to POW's

Enough reading there in that link to pick holes in everything we've done i think.

Another point, as we are supposedly in a "War" On Terror, does that then make detainees POW's?

If so do rules such as this not aply to them too?

1. Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.

To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:

(a) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;

(b) Taking of hostages;

(c) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;

(d) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.

Just a snippet of the link there, but surely we come under these rules?

Don't we?

CX.

reply to post by Shazam The Unbowed

Yes torture works in the way that the man you torture will at the end admit that he is wearing little womens panties, even if he is not. Torture is only good for one thing, and that is to express the sadistic tendencies of human race. Animals do not torture each other - we, the superior species do that. Now what does that tell you of our superiority?

reply to post by Souljah
I guess you have never watched a cat "play" a mouse to death, sometimes for hours.

For me, it is sometimes torture to endure reading the all opinion no facts or personal experience based respouting of rhetoric on some of these threads.

Call it what you will, if the actual motive for forcing someone into detention and forcing that person to reveal what they know without any permanent physical damage; it's tried and true.

I maintain that it is not possible to effect this without a lasting mental alteration on the "detainee"

Originally posted by kerontehe
I guess you have never watched a cat "play" a mouse to death, sometimes for hours.

Are you comparing a play of a cat with mouse to human torture techniques? Are you aware of how many ways we have tortured each other in the history? There are entire museums of torture and torture devices, which have been especially made for this kind of purpose. If you compare that, to a cat playing with the mouse a little bit, then I guess there is something wrong with your perception. Cats like to play. Even with their food. And yes, they shall kill the mouse sooner or later, and then eat it. Will a human eat another human, which he or she tortures? See, another hole in your theory. In any case, we - the human race - have taken all these words to another level. No animal has ever been even near us and what we do to ourselves and nature around us. We are definetly not the inferior species - just those most violent ones.

Torture is a complicated issue. I think it does work sometimes and I would say that certain situations, it would be morally the correct thing to do. If for example, torturing one person would without a doubt yield info that would save many people. I know that if I had to choose between giving up info that I know or seeing a loved one die, I would give up the info.

The bad part though is that it is not fool proof. If you want a confession, you can torture a confession out of someone. Weather it is true or not. It is also very likely to be abused by those in power. It is also against the Geneva Convention, which we signed.

So, on principal we should not torture prisoners because we said that it is wrong and we signed a treaty stating that we wouldn't do it. Even though, it could be useful in certain situations.

reply to post by Karlhungis

I understand where you are getting at. But I also think that most cases of torture, which have occured around the world in past centuries were not even near that noble moral reason to allow torture. For example, if things would get personal - like if you would have caught a man who has raped your daughter or something like that - then I think every man would start considering a pair of pliers and a blowtorch and this guy alone for a few weeks. But that is not the issue here. It is saying, that torture does work! All I wanted to say, that in the end, everybody shall admit that he is guilty, even if he is not. And that is not a very good result, because then you have 100 men admitting to onc crime - so which one really did it?


[edit on 4/5/08 by Souljah]

reply to post by Souljah


I agree with you 100%.

The thing is, what is the administration looking for with their torture? They want confessions out of everyone. They are getting it. They don't care about civil rights. They are getting what they want. Weather it is someone confessing to being Al Qeada or if it is giving up legit intel. They have the resources to follow up on the false leads and the real ones. All the while, pissing on the constitution, the geneva convention and our world image.

I just re-read that and it doesn't make as much sense as I was hoping. Sorry, it is getting late. Hopefully some of what I am trying to say is getting across.

'Torture' works only if the person being tortured has been convinced that irreparable harm will be done to him if he does not say something real soon. If you told him right from the start that you constitution does not allow you to kill him or in any way permanently maim/injure and or traumatize him few would talk and even fewer will say something that might in fact 'save lives' or do something equally dramatic. As it is few of these average insurgent types knows anything beyond a few people who they spent some time with or where a weapon cache might be.

I won't however confuse the ineffectiveness of torture with the very useful intelligence that can be gained from a uniformed soldier fighting for another country. The fact that the absolute vast majority of 'terrorist' in US custody is perfectly innocent of anything remotely terrorist speaks volumes as to why it's simply immoral to use physical torture on them.

And do we honestly need to believe that Hillary Clinton does that to small kids not to vote for her? Can't we concentrate on the fact that she will further undermine the Us economy resulting in millions of frustrated, angry powerless men of whom a significant proportion will start hitting their wives and children for occasionally pointing out their failure to support their families and shortcomings in general?

Lets keep our eyes on the important easily verifiable facts?

Stellar

Nope - not perception - observed fact. Cats, dolphins, orcas; I have personally observed all of these torturing other animals and not always eating them afterward. Just refuting your assertion that animals do not torture other animals.

And yes humans sometimes consume other humans, though in most cases they do not assume that the "long pig" is actually human. Different tribes, race, etc.

Yes homo sapiens have a long and inventive history of committing atrocities on each other and seem to find a fascination and even a celebration of sorts in the depths of depravity.

The op is whether torture works or not. My personal experience is that yes it does. The value or accuracy of the information gained through interrogation techniques is dependent upon the skill of the interrogators.

The question of whether detention and interrogation should be allowed at all must first be answered.

If the answer is yes, then it becomes a question of allowable and mutually agreed upon limits of techniques and procedures. What is allowable is much different if you are answering as the detainee or the detainor.

In practice, the rules of interrogation are much like the differences in strategy and tactics. It is akin to trying to establish rules of engagement in a knife fight. When you are one of the participants, it ceases to be a philosophical question very quickly.

I will readily admit that my perception is different as I have personally experienced detention and interrogation on more than one occasion and in three different countries. Hence my observation also that it is not possible to use these techniques without a resulting permanent mental change in all the participants. It is still torture even if all the Geneva Conventions are strictly adhered to. If you feel any of these actions are justified by your mission goals, then the only meaningful question is whether your mission is justifiable.

That would require a different thread and op imho.

Here's why we shouldn't choose to torture.

Because we're the good guys.
Because we're the good guys.
Because we're the good guys.

Yes, even if people die because of it. Sometimes, it's time to take the moral highroad. The ends do NOT excuse the means.

When I lived in Los Angeles, there were certain neighborhoods where people kept these decorative bars over their windows and doors.

I'd rather leave my doors unlocked and lose everything than have to live in a cage.

reply to post by kerontehe

Torture is just one of the many beautiful phrases invented by mankind. Like genocide. Or necrophilia. And I think we can find many, that stick to mankind, and describe us for who we really are; animal species, which do not deserve to live on this planet. And you can not compare animals playing with their food to one man torturing another man for information. Period.

And no matter how much lipstick you put on this torture debate, it is still a pig. You can try and justify torture on many levels and call it just interrogation technique. It is just one of many signs, which show us where mankind is going and how deep in our own feces we really are. I guess it comes as no surprise, to observe what a man can do to a man or a woman just to extract information. After all the world wars, all the witches burned, all the indians killed, all the beheadings, all the stonings and everything else beautiful which fills our history of mankind, I am really not surprised that torture actually works.