democrats set to release CIA "torture" report today

[Elephant Tipper 430]

I heard Rush Limbaugh say that exact thing on the radio today. Too bad it's not true: CIA records indicate that: (1) the CIA had extensive reporting on [bin Laden courier] Abu Ahmad al-Kuwaiti (variant Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti), the UBL facilitator whose identification and tracking led to the identification of UBL's compound and the operation that resulted in UBL's death, prior to and independent of information from CIA detainees; (2) the most accurate information on Abu Ahmad al-Kuwaiti obtained from a CIA detainee was provided by a CIA detainee who had not yet been subjected to the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques; and (3) CIA detainees who were subjected to the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques withheld and fabricated information about Abu Ahmad al-Kuwaiti.

Your statements are misleading because you conveniently leave out the remaining facts. Jose' Rodriguez, the head of the water-boarding program, along with ALL CIA DIRECTORS refute your statements and confirm that the water-boarding techniques did in fact give clarity to the information they gathered, otherwise, the person you cite would have been meaningless.

http://www.foxnews.com/transcript/2012/05/01/ex-cia-official-defends-enhanced-interrogation-we-were-very-concerned-new-attacks-after-9/

HANNITY: So, you don't think we would have gotten bin Laden without the techniques leading to intelligence?

RODRIGUEZ: The reason why is because there is a clear trail. There was someone that we captured, a facilitator that we captured in 2004 that told us about bin Laden's courier and gave us a pseudo name, Akhmeid Al-Kuwaiti.

HANNITY: And that was what led to bin Laden in Pakistan.

RODRIGUEZ: And eventually we got the true name of Al-Kuwaiti.

Too long to c&p: http://theweek.com/article/index/243389/how-the-cia-really-caught-bin-ladens-trail

[AUUSN 823]

I heard Rush Limbaugh say that exact thing on the radio today. Too bad it's not true: CIA records indicate that: (1) the CIA had extensive reporting on [bin Laden courier] Abu Ahmad al-Kuwaiti (variant Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti), the UBL facilitator whose identification and tracking led to the identification of UBL's compound and the operation that resulted in UBL's death, prior to and independent of information from CIA detainees; (2) the most accurate information on Abu Ahmad al-Kuwaiti obtained from a CIA detainee was provided by a CIA detainee who had not yet been subjected to the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques; and (3) CIA detainees who were subjected to the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques withheld and fabricated information about Abu Ahmad al-Kuwaiti.

Your statements are misleading because you conveniently leave out the remaining facts. Jose' Rodriguez, the head of the water-boarding program, along with ALL CIA DIRECTORS refute your statements and confirm that the water-boarding techniques did in fact give clarity to the information they gathered, otherwise, the person you cite would have been meaningless.

http://www.foxnews.c...ttacks-after-9/

HANNITY: So, you don't think we would have gotten bin Laden without the techniques leading to intelligence?

RODRIGUEZ: The reason why is because there is a clear trail. There was someone that we captured, a facilitator that we captured in 2004 that told us about bin Laden's courier and gave us a pseudo name, Akhmeid Al-Kuwaiti.

HANNITY: And that was what led to bin Laden in Pakistan.

RODRIGUEZ: And eventually we got the true name of Al-Kuwaiti.

Too long to c&p: http://theweek.com/a...in-ladens-trail

Umm, so Rodriguez sates we got a name from waterboarding. T INFORMATION about Al-Kuwaiti: (2) the most accurate information on Abu Ahmad al-Kuwaiti obtained from a CIA detainee was provided by a CIA detainee who had not yet been subjected to the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques

[AUClassof19 0]

This is just a politically charged attempt to kill all Republican credibility right in time for the new senators and congressmen to take office. This is very ill advised and should not have been published. I fear for our troops overseas and anyone at our embassies in the middle east because we know there will be retaliation.

[Elephant Tipper 430]

Question........how many here think releasing this report was a good thing........yes or no. I for sure say no.

Those former CIA directors (Woolsey & Hayden) whom I heard speak today say this Democrat diatribe is damaging to America. One former intelligence officer, Gary Berntsen, stated that the list of Representatives and Senators who were briefed about enhanced interrogations should be released as well if the Dems want to really be transparent.

[AUClassof19 0]

I think the world is well aware of what we were doing well before this report came out. Oh an Proud Tiger this Soldier was ordered to do this! Who goes to jail, they do! Who walked? His Flag Officers! How about that for a disgrace!

That's exactly what our government sanctioned from the highest levels AUUSN. According to Obama it was really the rogue IRS officials who ordered it, or didn't you know ?

Btw, thanks for telling us something we didn't know.

Releasing this report now wouldn't be another liberal political ploy would it? Look, they've had ALL the info in this report since 2006. That means they sat on it for 8 years until the month before losing control of the Senate to the republicans. Blame it on Bush and the republicans as a swan song even though NOT ONE of them objected or even lodged a formal complaint about it when it was initially reported.

I agree 100%

[AUUSN 823]

Question........how many here think releasing this report was a good thing........yes or no. I for sure say no.

Those former CIA directors (Woolsey & Hayden) whom I heard speak today say this Democrat diatribe is damaging to America. One former intelligence officer, Gary Berntsen, stated that the list of Representatives and Senators who were briefed about enhanced interrogations should be released as well if the Dems want to really be transparent.

I concur. Release all of the Congressional briefings (properly redacted for security reasons).

[Elephant Tipper 430]

I heard Rush Limbaugh say that exact thing on the radio today. Too bad it's not true: CIA records indicate that: (1) the CIA had extensive reporting on [bin Laden courier] Abu Ahmad al-Kuwaiti (variant Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti), the UBL facilitator whose identification and tracking led to the identification of UBL's compound and the operation that resulted in UBL's death, prior to and independent of information from CIA detainees; (2) the most accurate information on Abu Ahmad al-Kuwaiti obtained from a CIA detainee was provided by a CIA detainee who had not yet been subjected to the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques; and (3) CIA detainees who were subjected to the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques withheld and fabricated information about Abu Ahmad al-Kuwaiti.

Your statements are misleading because you conveniently leave out the remaining facts. Jose' Rodriguez, the head of the water-boarding program, along with ALL CIA DIRECTORS refute your statements and confirm that the water-boarding techniques did in fact give clarity to the information they gathered, otherwise, the person you cite would have been meaningless.

http://www.foxnews.c...ttacks-after-9/

HANNITY: So, you don't think we would have gotten bin Laden without the techniques leading to intelligence?

RODRIGUEZ: The reason why is because there is a clear trail. There was someone that we captured, a facilitator that we captured in 2004 that told us about bin Laden's courier and gave us a pseudo name, Akhmeid Al-Kuwaiti.

HANNITY: And that was what led to bin Laden in Pakistan.

RODRIGUEZ: And eventually we got the true name of Al-Kuwaiti.

Too long to c&p: http://theweek.com/a...in-ladens-trail

Umm, so Rodriguez sates we got a name from waterboarding. T INFORMATION about Al-Kuwaiti: (2) the most accurate information on Abu Ahmad al-Kuwaiti obtained from a CIA detainee was provided by a CIA detainee who had not yet been subjected to the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques

Just having a name from the ONE source you mention was insufficient to proceed. The water boarding of others, namely KSM and Zubaydah, confirmed the name, otherwise the one you mention would have been useless. And it wasn't that they actually stated al Kuwaiti's name, it was how they responded to the name of al Kuwaiti in the interrogation as a result of the water boarding Their response was regarded as disingenuous and misleading which is what caused them to pursue al Kuwaiti's identity further. READ THE LINKS I posted.

[Elephant Tipper 430]

Question........how many here think releasing this report was a good thing........yes or no. I for sure say no.

Those former CIA directors (Woolsey & Hayden) whom I heard speak today say this Democrat diatribe is damaging to America. One former intelligence officer, Gary Berntsen, stated that the list of Representatives and Senators who were briefed about enhanced interrogations should be released as well if the Dems want to really be transparent.

I concur. Release all of the Congressional briefings (properly redacted for security reasons).

ditto

[icanthearyou 4,462]

I think the world is well aware of what we were doing well before this report came out. Oh an Proud Tiger this Soldier was ordered to do this! Who goes to jail, they do! Who walked? His Flag Officers! How about that for a disgrace!

That's exactly what our government sanctioned from the highest levels AUUSN. According to Obama it was really the rogue IRS officials who ordered it, or didn't you know ?

Btw, thanks for telling us something we didn't know.

Releasing this report now wouldn't be another liberal political ploy would it? Look, they've had ALL the info in this report since 2006. That means they sat on it for 8 years until the month before losing control of the Senate to the republicans. Blame it on Bush and the republicans as a swan song even though NOT ONE of them objected or even lodged a formal complaint about it when it was initially reported.

I agree 100%

Really? Perhaps Democrats do not begin to scream SCANDAL! until after they investigate. You two don't see the investigation itself as formal complaint or objection? I have not read the entire report yet but, from what I have read, there is no, "blame it on Bush". Everything I have read, so far, lays it at the feet of the CIA. Just another deceptive, disingenuous and downright stupid post from Blue.

I would be very careful agreeing Blue. He has no integrity.

[AUUSN 823]

I am against torture. Sorry if that puts me out of favor with most here. I will however never hesitate to put a bullet into an enemy on the battlefield in accordance with the law of war. Our enemy today will likely not wear a uniform. Does that lessen their treatment once removed from the battlefield?

[Elephant Tipper 430]

I am against torture. Sorry if that puts me out of favor with most here. I will however never hesitate to put a bullet into an enemy on the battlefield in accordance with the law of war. Our enemy today will likely not wear a uniform. Does that lessen their treatment once removed from the battlefield?

My understanding is that our enemies are not removed from the battlefield, or are they? Instead, they are bombed into smithereens, or, as you would do, shoot them. Is that better ? Really ? My question is sincere because if we kill them we may deprive ourselves of beneficial info.

No one has ever argued for grotesque and deforming torture such as what Senator McCain endured, but that is what the Dems would have the public imagine is happening (aside from the Abu Ghraib anomaly) . From what I've read, only three individuals have been water boarded. Haven't a clue about those deprived of sleep or exposed to other forms of torture but it's stated that those methods are effective if done properly and no permanent harm is endured. If we don't get the results, then no, I wouldn't favor doing such but the statements by ALL Directors of the CIA verify that these techniques actually work.

The issue I hear repeatedly in interviews with former intelligence officers is that we are no longer gathering intelligence from individuals to any degree. If we shoot them all then we definitely won't get info from them.

The issue I think most people have with our "enhanced interrogation" methods is that it may be humiliation without purpose, such as Abu Ghraib, (which was not ever sanctioned and was not used by the perpetrators to garner intel). The idea of water-boarding, et cetera, is distasteful but so is killing another human being and I'm not averse to either so long as it protects our nation's interests.

[cooltigger21 0]

The democrats couldn't wait to join in on "war fever" but later they worked tirelessly, for political purposes, to undermine the war effort. They called our soldiers in the field rapists, accused them of breaking into peoples homes in the middle of the night and everything else you could imagine. When America succeeds they fail. When America fails they succeed. That is their only purpose in anything.

They put this out to deliberately harm our intelligence gathering apparatus. Nobody will trust us now because some politician with an agenda will make them and their actions public, thereby putting them at risk of legal or physical harm. It weakens our ability to defend ourselves and that is the entire purpose behind it. Nobody was tortured in any way in the gathering of information. These people have been treated better than a citizen of this country in prison for a crime like burglary is treated. They hid behind women and children and deliberately place them in harms way in order to protect themselves. When they do that they forfeit any right to not be killed or hurt in any way possible.

If it takes a little humiliation or sleep deprivation or waterboarding to save American lives then I'm fine with it. I shed not one tear over any of it. Handcuffing our intelligence people is what led to not knowing what was coming on 9/11 and not being prepared for it. It's not a pretty thing and there are things the American Public doesn't need to know.

[Strychnine 1,802]

I am against torture. Sorry if that puts me out of favor with most here. I will however never hesitate to put a bullet into an enemy on the battlefield in accordance with the law of war. Our enemy today will likely not wear a uniform. Does that lessen their treatment once removed from the battlefield?

My understanding is that our enemies are not removed from the battlefield, or are they? Instead, they are bombed into smithereens, or, as you would do, shoot them. Is that better ? Really ? My question is sincere because if we kill them we may deprive ourselves of beneficial info.

No one has ever argued for grotesque and deforming torture such as what Senator McCain endured, but that is what the Dems would have the public imagine is happening (aside from the Abu Ghraib anomaly) . From what I've read, only three individuals have been water boarded. Haven't a clue about those deprived of sleep or exposed to other forms of torture but it's stated that those methods are effective if done properly and no permanent harm is endured. If we don't get the results, then no, I wouldn't favor doing such but the statements by ALL Directors of the CIA verify that these techniques actually work.

The issue I hear repeatedly in interviews with former intelligence officers is that we are no longer gathering intelligence from individuals to any degree. If we shoot them all then we definitely won't get info from them.

The issue I think most people have with our "enhanced interrogation" methods is that it may be humiliation without purpose, such as Abu Ghraib, (which was not ever sanctioned and was not used by the perpetrators to garner intel). The idea of water-boarding, et cetera, is distasteful but so is killing another human being and I'm not averse to either so long as it protects our nation's interests.

Torture is torture, whether it is performed on three people, twenty people, one hundred people, or eight thousand. Torture is the kind of immoral thing that the United States is supposed to stand against. It separates us from people like the Nazi's, or the Soviet Union under Lenin and Stalin specifically. More importantly, it is supposed to be something that is banned by law. Water-boarding is torture. It is not only distasteful, it is torture. Sleep deprivation and stress positions are also torture. All three would be classified as torture by the United Nations Convention Against Torture.

I can understand the urgent need for information in what some would call "desperate times", but torture is a line of moral principle that should never be crossed by any country that claims to support human rights. That there are still American citizens that are alright with their government having officially sanctioned torture is something I find truly disturbing.

[Texan4Auburn 1,626]

If it saves American lives then let's do it. One American life is worth more than all of these worthless POS put together.

If that American has the right income level, the right political leanings, the right religion, and the right health insurance.

I think those are very important things to talk about when discussing the worth and saving American lives.

I use the past threads on this board dealing with several issues regarding services as exhibit A to why just being an American doesn't make your life worth anything.

[AUUSN 823]

If it takes a little humiliation or sleep deprivation or waterboarding to save American lives then I'm fine with it.

Are purposely being flippant? There was A LOT more than just a little sleep deprivation and waterboarding going on.

[cooltigger21 0]

If it saves American lives then let's do it. One American life is worth more than all of these worthless POS put together.

If that American has the right income level, the right political leanings, the right religion, and the right health insurance.

I think those are very important things to talk about when discussing the worth and saving American lives.

I use the past threads on this board dealing with several issues regarding services as exhibit A to why just being an American doesn't make your life worth anything.

Spare me the drivel I've heard that way too many times and it's beside the point.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Texan4Auburn.....total BS and irrevelant.

[AUDub 11,147]

I wonder if we'll ever see the full report.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

So we waterboarded and tortured a few friggin terrorists. Ask the 911 families. especially the ones who saw their loved ones falling from the towers what they think. Ask the families who lost police and firefighters on 911. Ask the families of those beheaded by evil bastards. I bet they would have gladly cheered while the waterbording and torture was going on.

But interestingly enough it's OK to kill them with drones and airstrikes where we don't get any chance to interrogate them.

[alexava 6,973]

I have no problems using whatever it takes to get info as long as I know the bastard has it. I wouldnt just run around detaining and torturing people to see what i could find. i would have to be sure and have some strong indicators i had the right bad guy. These things should not be public. We civilians or our enemies need not know.

One thing i am finding some irony is the reason for some republicans not wanting the release of this info. They claim it would cause retaliation and put american lives at risk. These same people have claimed these terrorist have always hated us through no fault of our own and want to kill us anyway.

[AUUSN 823]

Convention against Torture and Other Cruel,

Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Article 2

1. Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative,

judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under

its jurisdiction.

2. No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a

threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency,

may be invoked as a justification of torture.

3. An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be

invoked as a justification of torture.

Signed by the U.S. under President Reagan 1984

[Strychnine 1,802]

I have no problems using whatever it takes to get info as long as I know the bastard has it. I wouldnt just run around detaining and torturing people to see what i could find. i would have to be sure and have some strong indicators i had the right bad guy. These things should not be public. We civilians or our enemies need not know.

One thing i am finding some irony is the reason for some republicans not wanting the release of this info. They claim it would cause retaliation and put american lives at risk. These same people have claimed these terrorist have always hated us through no fault of our own and want to kill us anyway.

In that scenario, the people have effectively lost control of their government. When the government, or its agents, can engage in secret torture with official sanction, without the people having the "need" to know the scope or extent, a truly dangerous and terrible precedent would have been set. For an American, the ends should never justify the means when it comes to the issue of torture. If we are willing to do it, we can condemn no one else for them doing it.

[AUUSN 823]

So we waterboarded and tortured a few friggin terrorists. Ask the 911 families. especially the ones who saw their loved ones falling from the towers what they think. Ask the families who lost police and firefighters on 911. Ask the families of those beheaded by evil bastards. I bet they would have gladly cheered while the waterbording and torture was going on.

But interestingly enough it's OK to kill them with drones and airstrikes where we don't get any chance to interrogate them.

Terrorist today, American citizens tomorrow...

[cooltigger21 0]

I have no problems using whatever it takes to get info as long as I know the bastard has it. I wouldnt just run around detaining and torturing people to see what i could find. i would have to be sure and have some strong indicators i had the right bad guy. These things should not be public. We civilians or our enemies need not know.

One thing i am finding some irony is the reason for some republicans not wanting the release of this info. They claim it would cause retaliation and put american lives at risk. These same people have claimed these terrorist have always hated us through no fault of our own and want to kill us anyway.

It will put lives at risk but it will simply be for revenge against these particular individuals for their part in this. They do hate us simply because we are us and they can't hate us or want to be rid of us any more.

I have no problems using whatever it takes to get info as long as I know the bastard has it. I wouldnt just run around detaining and torturing people to see what i could find. i would have to be sure and have some strong indicators i had the right bad guy. These things should not be public. We civilians or our enemies need not know.

One thing i am finding some irony is the reason for some republicans not wanting the release of this info. They claim it would cause retaliation and put american lives at risk. These same people have claimed these terrorist have always hated us through no fault of our own and want to kill us anyway.

In that scenario, the people have effectively lost control of their government. When the government, or its agents, can engage in secret torture with official sanction, without the people having the "need" to know the scope or extent, a truly dangerous and terrible precedent would have been set. For an American, the ends should never justify the means when it comes to the issue of torture. If we are willing to do it, we can condemn no one else for them doing it.

We didn't torture anybody.

[Elephant Tipper 430]

I am against torture. Sorry if that puts me out of favor with most here. I will however never hesitate to put a bullet into an enemy on the battlefield in accordance with the law of war. Our enemy today will likely not wear a uniform. Does that lessen their treatment once removed from the battlefield?

My understanding is that our enemies are not removed from the battlefield, or are they? Instead, they are bombed into smithereens, or, as you would do, shoot them. Is that better ? Really ? My question is sincere because if we kill them we may deprive ourselves of beneficial info.

No one has ever argued for grotesque and deforming torture such as what Senator McCain endured, but that is what the Dems would have the public imagine is happening (aside from the Abu Ghraib anomaly) . From what I've read, only three individuals have been water boarded. Haven't a clue about those deprived of sleep or exposed to other forms of torture but it's stated that those methods are effective if done properly and no permanent harm is endured. If we don't get the results, then no, I wouldn't favor doing such but the statements by ALL Directors of the CIA verify that these techniques actually work.

The issue I hear repeatedly in interviews with former intelligence officers is that we are no longer gathering intelligence from individuals to any degree. If we shoot them all then we definitely won't get info from them.

The issue I think most people have with our "enhanced interrogation" methods is that it may be humiliation without purpose, such as Abu Ghraib, (which was not ever sanctioned and was not used by the perpetrators to garner intel). The idea of water-boarding, et cetera, is distasteful but so is killing another human being and I'm not averse to either so long as it protects our nation's interests.

Torture is torture, whether it is performed on three people, twenty people, one hundred people, or eight thousand. Torture is the kind of immoral thing that the United States is supposed to stand against. It separates us from people like the Nazi's, or the Soviet Union under Lenin and Stalin specifically. More importantly, it is supposed to be something that is banned by law. Water-boarding is torture. It is not only distasteful, it is torture. Sleep deprivation and stress positions are also torture. All three would be classified as torture by the United Nations Convention Against Torture.

I can understand the urgent need for information in what some would call "desperate times", but torture is a line of moral principle that should never be crossed by any country that claims to support human rights. That there are still American citizens that are alright with their government having officially sanctioned torture is something I find truly disturbing.

You are now elected President for 24 hours. You have been told by the CIA that they have a suspect in custody with info about the method and exact time that 3,000 people are to be killed in the next few hours, only he isn't willing to talk. What do you do ? Time is ticking. Tell us what to do Mr. President.

This isn't a rhetorical question. What would you do ?

Convention against Torture and Other Cruel,

Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Article 2

1. Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative,

judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under

its jurisdiction.

2. No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a

threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency,

may be invoked as a justification of torture.

3. An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be

invoked as a justification of torture.

Signed by the U.S. under President Reagan 1984

What's the definition of "torture" ?