It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by satchboogie2
reply to post by goldbomb444
When Obama guts the military, takes away our First & Second Amendment rights and allows us the "choice " to kill our future before it's even born (or after for that matter)....who or what is going to protect us then?
Originally posted by satchboogie2
I can not believe the ignorance that spills out of this website every minute of every day...unbelievable.
Maybe we should bake Mohammad some chocolate chip cookies! I'm sure that will get us the information we're after. How is something that lasts only up to 14 seconds, doesn't leave a mark, doesn't injure or kill the person and gets results...be called torture? We train our own service people using water boarding. Just because some bigmouth talker says it's torture we all throw common sense and the ability to reason out the window!?
When the first nuke goes off on American soil because the cookies didn't work, you morons will be stuck between a rock and Obama. Who are you going to blame then? George Bush?
Useful idiots...being lead by the nose to your own funeral.
So the CIA did indeed torture Abu Zubaida, the first al-Qaeda terrorist suspect to have been waterboarded. So says John Kiriakou, the first former CIA employee directly involved in the questioning of "high-value" al-Qaeda detainees to speak out publicly. He minced no words last week in calling the CIA's "enhanced interrogation techniques" what they are.
But did they work? Torture's defenders, including the wannabe tough guys who write Fox's "24," insist that the rough stuff gets results. "It was like flipping a switch," said Kiriakou about Abu Zubaida's response to being waterboarded. But the al-Qaeda operative's confessions -- descriptions of fantastic plots from a man who intelligence analysts were convinced was mentally ill -- probably didn't give the CIA any actionable intelligence. Of course, we may never know the whole truth, since the CIA destroyed the videotapes of Abu Zubaida's interrogation.
Actually, no. Even Hitler's notorious secret police, the Gestapo got most of their information from public tips, informers and interagency cooperation and not from torture.
In recent interviews with NEWSWEEK reporters, U.S. intelligence officers say they have little—if any—evidence that useful intelligence has been obtained using techniques generally understood to be torture. It is clear, for instance, that Al Qaeda operations chief Khalid Shaikh Mohammed (KSM) was subjected to harsh interrogation techniques, including waterboarding. His interrogators even threatened, à la Jack Bauer, to go after his family. (KSM reportedly shrugged off the threat to his family—he would meet them in heaven, he said.) KSM did reveal some names and plots. But they haven’t panned out as all that threatening: one such plot was a plan by an Al Qaeda operative to cut down the Brooklyn Bridge—with a blow torch. Intelligence officials could never be sure if KSM was holding back on more serious threats, or just didn’t know of any.
"I've kept my mouth shut about all this for seven years," Soufan says. But now, with the declassification of Justice memos and the public assertions by Cheney and others that "enhanced" techniques worked, Soufan feels compelled to speak out. "I was in the middle of this, and it's not true that these [aggressive] techniques were effective," he says. "We were able to get the information about Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in a couple of days. We didn't have to do any of this [torture].
No one has yet offered any validated evidence that torture produces reliable intelligence. While torture apologists frequently make the claim that torture saves lives, that assertion is directly contradicted by many Army, FBI, and CIA professionals who have actually interrogated al Qaeda captives. Exhibit A is the torture-extracted confession of Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, an al Qaeda captive who told the CIA in 2001, having been "rendered" to the tender mercies of Egypt, that Saddam Hussein had trained al Qaeda to use WMD. It appears that this confession was the only information upon which, in late 2002, the president, the vice president, and the secretary of state repeatedly claimed that "credible evidence" supported that claim, even though a now-declassified Defense Intelligence Agency report from February 2002 questioned the reliability of the confession because it was likely obtained under torture. In January 2004, al-Libi recanted his "confession," and a month later, the CIA recalled all intelligence reports based on his statements.
Originally posted by goldbomb444
reply to post by satchboogie2
You know, I am usually able to keep my cool on this website, and I have only said this to one other person until now.
F(u)ck you.
I hope that under the patriot act you are held and tortured for something you had nothing to do with. And I hope no one believes you as you're crying that you are innocent. Maybe only then you and the other ass holes that condone torture will wake up and realize why it should not be used.
[edit on 27-5-2009 by goldbomb444]
Originally posted by goldbomb444
So I ask you, what would you do if the situation I detailed did happen to you? (and don't believe for one second that this hasn't happened to innocent people.)
Mr. Arar, a Syrian-born Canadian, is the most well-known victim of the Bush administration’s notorious policy of extraordinary rendition, or the outsourcing of interrogations to foreign governments known to use torture. Former President George W. Bush and his aides stubbornly refused to admit the grave injustice done to Mr. Arar. President Obama must do better.
Mr. Arar was seized at Kennedy International Airport in 2002 as he tried to change planes on his way home to Canada from a family vacation. He was held in solitary confinement and subjected to harsh questioning before being sent to Syria. He was tortured there and imprisoned for nearly a year in an underground cell the size of a grave until the Syrians finally let him go.
Originally posted by satchboogie2
reply to post by goldbomb444
Oh, so F(u)ck me and now you want to have a civil conversation?
We're still a country of laws and there are still lawyers willing to defend the citizens and the Constitution. I'm sure mistakes have happened, but the truth will come out.
When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
Then they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
I did not protest;
I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews,
I did not speak out;
I was not a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out for me.
Originally posted by satchboogie2
But back to your query...
I would get legal help in fighting for my innocence.
We are still a nation of laws (I think).
I'm sure people have been wrongly accused. It seems to me people get wrongly accused all the time and most of it has nothing to do with the Patriot act.
How many people do you know that have been wrongly accused of terrorism?
Originally posted by satchboogie2
reply to post by jfj123
CIA Confirms What We All Already Know: Waterboarding Works
Ali Soufan, a former FBI counterterrorism agent and interrogator, testified that President George W. Bush and Justice Department lawyers were wrong when they said that waterboarding and other tactics used on one suspect provided some key pieces of intelligence about al-Qaida following the Sept. 11 attacks.
Testifying behind a screen to protect his identity, Soufan said the techniques touted by the Bush administration as perhaps its most effective weapon against terrorism were actually slow, ineffective and unreliable. He said that he and a CIA agent gleaned much if not all of the critical information from suspected al-Qaida chieftain Abu Zubaydah before the coercive techniques were initiated.
Soufan, now a private security consultant, also said it was outside contractors working for the CIA who used the coercive tactics, and that he and the CIA official working with him protested. But the tactics backfired, Soufan said, prompting Zubaydah to stop talking.
This is really going to piss them Lefties off — the CIA has confirmed that the waterboarding of Muslim terrorists Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Ramzi Binalshibh, and Abu Zubaydah saved Americans’ lives.
So answer me this: How exactly does waterboarding cost the lives of American soldiers?
Originally posted by satchboogie2
reply to post by jfj123
Again — waterboarding is NOT torture. It’s uncomfortable, it’s scary. But when it’s over, you take a deep breath, and then walk back to your Club Med cell in time for afternoon prayers and tea.
And, again, waterboarding WORKS.
So answer me this: How exactly does waterboarding cost the lives of American soldiers?