The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 65

Thread: AP sources: Report shows CIA interrogation methods

  1. #31
    Senior Member JDogger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    MRGV New Mexico
    Posts
    3,338

    Default

    [quote=TXduckdog;488871]Well for one....we're not at war with Iraq, Oh really? or Iraqi nationals that are in anyway supported by the Iraqi government. an installed puppet government If Iraqi nationals have joined Al Queda, then absolutely they are just another garden variety terrorist that needs to be helped expeditiously along to his virgins. What was the Al Queda presence in Iraq previous to our presense, do tell?

    Secondly, Your judgements about an occupying foreign army and false pretexts don't wash here and more importantly over there, just ask the hundreds of thousands Iraqi 'nationals' with ink stained fingers.
    OK, lets play 'what if ?' So Texas does indeed decide to secede. The feds do not want that to happen and send in troops to maintain control. The more militant secessionists, members of para-military right -wing militias, not supported by the rebelious Texas government, plant and detonate an IED that kills federal troops. Garden variety terrorists? Or freedom fighters resisting the occupation?

    Thirdly, a terrorist with a perception of 'national security'? Puh-leeze. I didn't say terrorist, I said Iraqi national. You changed my words to suit you own view.[/quote]

    But thank you, you answered my question. You do not see the contradiction....

    JD
    One cannot reason someone out of something they were not reasoned into. - Jonathan Swift

  2. #32
    Senior Member YardleyLabs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Yardley, PA
    Posts
    6,639

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by subroc View Post
    Jeff

    I searched for the punishment allowed by statute for such a heinous crime as threatening to kill a prisoner. I also asked above. The article didn't mention it and I couldn’t find it.

    How does your liberal sensibility weigh such a heinous deed? Is it a day of with pay and a reprimand, the equivalent of a traffic ticket for speeding (some type of fine), dishonorable discharge, some jail time or a felony of the highest order worthy of the highest punishment our society can hand out and disgrace of his/her military or civilian (cia) career for the individual performing the act?

    Lets assume there is no lower limit and the upper limit is 10 years in a federal prison.

    Just want to know where you stand
    I also searched unsuccessfully for the penalty information. I think my reaction would depend on the circumstances.

    My views on anti-torture laws are complex.

    First, I believe that if a law exists, then it should be followed by those acting for our government. I can understand how, in the heat of the battlefield, some lines might be crossed. However, when a person is completely under our control far behind the lines and we are not looking at the clock ticking on the bomb with five minutes to go (which pretty well describes all of the interrogations where we have had issues), I see no special justification for us to torture prisoners.

    I believe we are defined solely by our actions, not by who we are or how we justify what we do. I'm not prepared to have my morality defined by the immorality of al Quaeda or any other idiots thinking that they are doing God's work. I do not believe that evil justifies evil. Ultimately I believe we are engaged in a war about morality and we cannot win by adopting the morals of our opponents.

    Having said that, I am also my father's son. My father taught me that anyone who started a fight against a weaker opponent was a bully and that bullies are bad. As a consequence, I learned to only pick fights with people who could easily beat me up.

    After losing a lot of fights, a few teeth, and having a few stitches, I learned that the secret to fighting a bigger, stronger opponent was to fight dirty and fight to win (a lesson that makes me slow to judge "terrorists" including our own revolutionary ancestors). The difference is that I never asked anyone to pretend my methods were good because of the circumstances. I was perfectly happy to accept the consequences of my actions.

    In my mind, if the circumstances of the moment are such that a CIA interrogator believes that it is important to violate our laws on behavior, he should not complain if he is then prosecuted. I'll thank him for his services even as I lock the door to his cell. What I would not do is give him a free pass. If, by some miracle, his action actually saved thousands of innocent lives, I would probably bend a few lines. However, I would be pretty sceptical about such claims.

  3. #33
    Senior Member subroc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Dover, New Hampshire
    Posts
    2,112

    Default

    Well, no one can pin you down.

    I really didn't want to bring all the extraneous stuff into this particular question just an answer to how much punishment does this warrant.

    Since you did though, is this, in your view, torture?
    subroc

    Article [I.]
    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
    Article [II.]
    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

  4. #34
    Senior Member TXduckdog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Republic of Texas
    Posts
    632

    Default

    [QUOTE=JDogger;488993]
    Quote Originally Posted by TXduckdog View Post
    Well for one....we're not at war with Iraq, Oh really? or Iraqi nationals that are in anyway supported by the Iraqi government. an installed puppet government If Iraqi nationals have joined Al Queda, then absolutely they are just another garden variety terrorist that needs to be helped expeditiously along to his virgins. What was the Al Queda presence in Iraq previous to our presense, do tell?

    Secondly, Your judgements about an occupying foreign army and false pretexts don't wash here and more importantly over there, just ask the hundreds of thousands Iraqi 'nationals' with ink stained fingers.
    OK, lets play 'what if ?' So Texas does indeed decide to secede. The feds do not want that to happen and send in troops to maintain control. The more militant secessionists, members of para-military right -wing militias, not supported by the rebelious Texas government, plant and detonate an IED that kills federal troops. Garden variety terrorists? Or freedom fighters resisting the occupation?

    Thirdly, a terrorist with a perception of 'national security'? Puh-leeze. I didn't say terrorist, I said Iraqi national. You changed my words to suit you own view.[/quote]

    But thank you, you answered my question. You do not see the contradiction....

    JD
    By and large we're at war with "insurgents" who are members of or are backed by terrorist parties, primarily Al Queda.

    Hard to say what extent the presence of Al Queda prior to our involvement in overthrowing the Hussein regime. Certainly being financed and trained. They very quickly filled the vaccum left by the regime and have become the predominant threat.

    The Texas right wing militia killing federal troops.....terrorists.
    Train the dog, the ribbons will take care of themselves.

  5. #35
    Senior Member YardleyLabs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Yardley, PA
    Posts
    6,639

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by subroc View Post
    Well, no one can pin you down.

    I really didn't want to bring all the extraneous stuff into this particular question just an answer to how much punishment does this warrant.

    Since you did though, is this, in your view, torture?
    By this, I assume you mean simulated executions. If so, yes. With respect to penalites, I was not trying to be evasive. I think penalties have to fit the crime. If, for example, a "subject" died durind "harsh interrogation" or simulated execution, I believe the interrogator should face manslaughter charges with penalties in the 5-20 range depending on the specifics. If an interrogator implied a threat of possible death, had a gun fired in another room and said they had just executed another "subject", I would probably go with loss of job and all pension rights.

  6. #36
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Port St. Lucie, Fl
    Posts
    3,611

    Default

    Report: CIA used ‘inhumane’ tactics

    AG appoints prosecutor to look into claims of detainee abuses NBC News and news services


    updated 1:35 a.m. ET, Tues., Aug 25, 2009

    WASHINGTON - The Obama administration launched a criminal investigation Monday into harsh questioning of detainees during President George W. Bush's war on terrorism, revealing CIA interrogators' threats to kill one suspect's children and to force another to watch his mother sexually assaulted.

    The report also suggested some questioners knew they were crossing a line. "Ten years from now we're going to be sorry we're doing this (but) it has to be done," one unidentified CIA officer said in the report, predicting that interrogators would someday have to appear in court to answer for such tactics.

  7. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    2,802

    Default

    The Obama administration launched a criminal investigation Monday into harsh questioning of detainees during President George W. Bush's war on terrorism, revealing CIA interrogators' threats to kill one suspect's children and to force another to watch his mother sexually assaulted
    If this is true there is a reason we have gotten to this point.
    We are not allowed to water board or offer sweet and sour pork to prisnors
    Pete

  8. #38
    Senior Member Bob Gutermuth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Transchoptankia, DEMOCRATIC Peoples Republic of Maryland
    Posts
    3,065

    Default

    Next they will want OJ's dream team to defend those scumbags. Course the judges will throw the cases out since nobody mirandized them on the battlefield.
    Bob Gutermuth
    Canvasback Chesapeakes
    ROLL TIDE!

  9. #39
    Senior Member K G's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    southeast us
    Posts
    5,354

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Perry View Post
    Report: CIA used ‘inhumane’ tactics

    AG appoints prosecutor to look into claims of detainee abuses NBC News and news services


    updated 1:35 a.m. ET, Tues., Aug 25, 2009

    WASHINGTON - The Obama administration launched a criminal investigation Monday into harsh questioning of detainees during President George W. Bush's war on terrorism, revealing CIA interrogators' threats to kill one suspect's children and to force another to watch his mother sexually assaulted.

    The report also suggested some questioners knew they were crossing a line. "Ten years from now we're going to be sorry we're doing this (but) it has to be done," one unidentified CIA officer said in the report, predicting that interrogators would someday have to appear in court to answer for such tactics.

    This was after BHO had stated earlier this year that there would be NO criminal investigations. He's got to divert attention from his Health Care debacle and the Cap and Trade morass to follow....business as usual in Washington....

    kg
    I keep my PM box full. Use email to contact me: rockytopkg@aol.com.

  10. #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Detroit Lakes, MN
    Posts
    1,442

    Default

    Yeah, but please keep in mind that torture is so darn effective and that interrogation experts agree that there really are no other more effective options. Not to mention the fact that it is not at all beneath the principles of this great nation.

    I mean come on, Abu Zabuydah only had to be water boarded 83 times and Khalid Shaikh Muhammad only 183 times and every bit of information that they gave was factual and probably did not lead to any wasted investigations.

Similar Threads

  1. Cheney blasts probe of CIA interrogations
    By Roger Perry in forum POTUS Place - For those who talk Politics in the Gallery!
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 11-09-2009, 05:51 AM
  2. Cheney: Politics driving CIA terror probe
    By Roger Perry in forum POTUS Place - For those who talk Politics in the Gallery!
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 09-02-2009, 05:31 PM
  3. Sources: Cheney uncloaks Bush frustration
    By Roger Perry in forum POTUS Place - For those who talk Politics in the Gallery!
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-13-2009, 10:35 AM
  4. x-ray shows 11
    By yellow machine in forum RTF - Retriever Training Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-23-2008, 10:27 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •