Torture Documents: What's The Deal And Who Cares? - Right Wing News (Conservative News and Views)

Excitable Andy

No mention of the torture memos appears right now on the Drudge Report (which provides news of a prank at Dominos pizza), Instapundit (which mentions the new DVD for the Lord of The Rings trilogy), Pajamas Media, or Michelle Malkin. They are reacting to the evidence of war crimes committed by the president of the United States the way they did at the time the crimes were committed.

If you look at the long list of links at Memeorandum, you'll see very few conservative blogs listed. Why? Because, for the most part, we really do not care if stone cold jihadis were made uncomfortable with hot and cold conditions, listening to Christina Aguilera music, sleep deprivation, and being exposed to women (only in the Muslim jihadi world are women considered torture.) Our concern is for the 3,000 men and women who lost their lives on September 11, 2001, a date that barely exists in Liberal World. Our concern is for people like Nick Berg. Our concern is in stopping Islamist attacks. Our concern is stopping the march of radical Islam. Not Gitmo detainees (heck, even France, after all the diaper nashing, is only willing to take one (1) if Obama ever actually closes the site)

Justice Department documents released yesterday offer the fullest account to date of Bush administration interrogation tactics, including previously unacknowledged strategies of slamming a prisoner into a wall and placing an insect near a detainee terrified of bugs.

The four memos, dated from 2002 to 2005, contain few redactions, despite a fierce battle within the highest ranks of the Obama White House about the benefits of releasing the information. Intelligence experts said the documents could ignite calls in Congress and among international courts for a fresh, independent investigation of detainee treatment.

The documents lay out in clinical, painstaking detail a series of practices intended to get prisoners to share intelligence about past wrongdoing and future attacks. The legalistic analysis under anti-torture laws and the Geneva Conventions is at odds with the severity of the strategies, which include 11-day limits on sleep deprivation as well as waterboarding and nude shackling.

Hey, you never know if they like that kind of thing till you ask. And, let's not forget, more civil liberties groups have waterboarded their own folks during demonstrations then were waterboarded by the U.S. And very little was blacked out, which leads to

Michael Hayden, who led the CIA under President George W. Bush, said CIA officers now will be more timid and allies will be more reluctant to share sensitive intelligence.

"If you want an intelligence service to work for you, they always work on the edge. That's just where they work," Hayden said. Now, he argued, foreign partners will be less likely to cooperate with the CIA because the release shows they "can't keep anything secret."

The thing is, all the diaper nashers and bed wetters on the Left care more about Islamic jihadis and hating Bush then they do for protecting the people and property of the United States of America. Remember all the talk about how exposing Valerie Plame's name would seriously harm our ability to gather intelligence overseas, despite her being an office jockey? That means nothing now, apparently, especially since more bed wetters, otherwise known as the ACLU, want more released

In response to litigation filed by the American Civil Liberties Unionunder the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), the Justice Department today released four secret memos used by the Bush administration to justify torture. The memos, produced by the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel (OLC), provided the legal framework for the CIA's use of waterboarding and other illegal interrogation methods that violate domestic and international law.

The ACLU has called for the Justice Department to appoint an independent prosecutor to investigate torture under the Bush administration.

Ah, so, we can blame future intelligence failures on the ACLU. The "A" stands for something, I'm not sure what.

Now, Obama has stated that most CIA operatives involved will not be prosecuted (how magnanimous of him!) and he will offer legal help if and when (put your money on "when") someone sues them. It's just amazing: the Left has no problem going after the very people who work to protect them from foreign enemies, yet want to treat the same foreign enemies with comfy chairs and soft cushions.

Crossed at Pirate's Cove

Comments (95)

Idiots. Every single 'torture' in the memos isn't torture at all--they're interrogation techniques.

No one knows what the actual tortures are because there's no one alive to complain.

Prisoners that we capture who are thought to have vital information that might require torture to obtain never get to places like Gitmo. They are questioned, tortured if necessary, and then killed and disposed of.

Posted by jack
2009-04-17 09:09:21

The left wants the detainees taken well care of and brought to court. Yet when it comes to the pirate issue it seems they want not only the pirates summarily executed, but their hometowns wiped out. I'm not saying that's necessarily bad but doesn't seem at all consistent with their *cough* values. Or maybe it is consistent? I don't know, I get confused when I try to figure their linear thinking.

Posted by NorthernCanuck
2009-04-17 09:09:32

Oh, 'idiots' refers to those like Andy who've got their panties in a wad--just so there's no confusion

Posted by jack
2009-04-17 09:10:49

Prisoners that we capture who are thought to have vital information that might require torture to obtain never get to places like Gitmo. They are questioned, tortured if necessary, and then killed and disposed of.
Posted by jack 2009-04-17 09:09:21

And you have proof of this accusation???

Posted by StanW
2009-04-17 09:15:54

The poll numbers are starting to drop so it's time to whip up a fresh batch of Bush hatred.

Never mind the economy is in the crapper and Obama is engaged in endless socialist power grabs...Bush put a bug next to a Muslim!!!11!!!

Posted by Mike_M
2009-04-17 09:17:58

It wasn't an 'accusation', Stan. I do not see it as a crime. It's simply one of the things that has to be done from time to time.

And no. I have nothing to offer as 'proof'. I simply have an understanding of the process.

Posted by jack
2009-04-17 09:43:26

They are questioned, tortured if necessary, and then killed and disposed of.
Posted by jack
2009-04-17 09:09:21

Unfortunately, I am going to have see some proof.

Posted by Dick_Nixon
2009-04-17 09:49:59

And no. I have nothing to offer as 'proof'. I simply have an understanding of the process.
Posted by jack 2009-04-17 09:43:26

You have no proof so you don't have JACK, jack. And understanding of a process that goes against the ROE? Spare me!

You may think you are saying something by portraying our soldiers as merciless killers, but unless you have proof, you need to STFU.

Torturing and murdering the enemy is what the terrorists do.

Posted by StanW
2009-04-17 09:50:09

I love this quote from whatever AP person wrote this:

"such grim tactics as slamming detainees against walls, waterboarding them and keeping them naked and cold for long periods."

They sure are trying hard to make things that don’t harm physically or mentally be considered "grim." For crying out loud...the make the detainees wear neck braces and the "walls" are not solid, when "slamming" them. Waterboardings been covered over and over and is no way torture. Probably why even the great obama cannot find it in himself to prosecute those CIA agents who used it. Naked and cold....torture? These things are comparable to tickling and pillow fights, when put up next to electrocution, pulling fingernails out, beating the heels of your feet, and mutilation...actual torture.

Posted by tblrk2006
2009-04-17 09:56:08

You may think you are saying something by portraying our soldiers as merciless killers, but unless you have proof, you need to STFU.
Torturing and murdering the enemy is what the terrorists do.
Posted by StanW
2009-04-17 09:50:09

I'm actually OK with it. I had a friend who died recently who fought in WW2. He told me about interrogating Germans captured. He told me about a buddy of his who was a circus strongman from Maryland, and how he would dislocate the arms of the Germans until they talked. Was he a terrorist, too? No, I'm not one for the idea that we need to fight a "cleaner" war than our enemies. We need to fight to win. Anything less is Hollywood induced bullshit dreamed up by people who probably never had to make those hard decisions, and who tell themselves that moral superiority is more important than winning a war.

Posted by sabiticus
2009-04-17 09:59:46

You may think you are saying something by portraying our soldiers as merciless killers,
Posted by StanW
2009-04-17 09:50:09

I'm going to be half devil's advocate and half naive: would there not be some elements, government sanctioned but not regular soldiers, that do carry out operations outside regular ROE?
I do realize I've perhaps watched too many movies. And in regards to my last statement: I found it fascinating to read first hand accounts of various special forces and their day to day activities in Afghanistan and Iraq. Lots of stuff I would not have at all suspected, and quite admirable. On the ground ambassadors that are sincere in wanting to help and good moral base, but packing somewhat more of a punch, when needed, than say a U.N. ambassador.

Posted by NorthernCanuck
2009-04-17 10:01:42

No, Stan, torture is what EVERYBODY does.

I'm not portraying our soldiers as 'merciless killers'--they're not. I'm not talking about our soldiers at all.

I'm talking about our intelligence community.

And again, try to understand, this is NOT an 'accusation'. I do not see this as a negative.

I am proud of those men and women who have the strength to do this type of thing for our country. I do not know that I could do what they do.

I know I will never know their names, I know they will never be awarded any medals or accorded any honors. And I know that so many people who they help to protect look upon even the suggestion that they exist as monstrous.

You, Stan, may find the idea monstrous--it sounds as if you do. But understand that sometimes torture, real torture, is needed to get the information that we must have to survive. And I'm glad that we have people who understand that.

Posted by jack
2009-04-17 10:11:19

I'm going to be half devil's advocate and half naive: would there not be some elements, government sanctioned but not regular soldiers, that do carry out operations outside regular ROE?

If you're talking about spies and "secret agent" types, they operate under their own set of rules, but they do have rules they have to follow and I doubt they have the power to arbitrarily execute people in the field or torture whomever they please.

If you're talking about black-ops assassin type guys you see in the movies with the power to do whatever they want, if they do exist there's no proof of it.

Posted by mightysamurai
2009-04-17 10:12:52

Posted by sabiticus 2009-04-17 09:59:46

Posted by NorthernCanuck 2009-04-17 10:01:42

Gentlemen, please do not misunderstand my position.

I am not about fighting some "kinder, gentler" war. Alls fair that keeps Americans alive and winning.

My issue is with Jack. He has posted here before, spouting off on a variety of subject that seem a little TOOOOO far right. In this case, he is trying to tell us that US Military personnel torture, murder, and hide bodies as SOP. I asked for proof and all he could say is "Because I said so".

I think Jack is a Liberal plant that comes on here and says what he thinkg Conservatives are all about, then takes his own posts back to his "fwends" as proof of the mean old Conservatives.

If I am wrong about him, I will apologize. If he has proof, let him show it. But the fact that the most anyone can make of US Torture are vague and unsubstantiated claims, and a few naked men with panties on their head, leads me to beleive that Jack's accusations are pure BS!

Posted by StanW
2009-04-17 10:13:33

Posted by StanW
2009-04-17 10:13:33

Funny, I got that kind of vibe from him, too. If that is the case, I say let him go back to his friends with my true thoughts on the matter! Let them be shocked and horrified. Let them know that better men than themselves stand prepared to do horrific things to protect their insulated little lives. Hell, a dose of reality would do these Leftist children some good.

Posted by sabiticus
2009-04-17 10:20:18

Prisoners that we capture who are thought to have vital information that might require torture to obtain never get to places like Gitmo. They are questioned, tortured if necessary, and then killed and disposed of.
Posted by jack
2009-04-17 09:09:21

Thats great. I wish they were all treated like that. Be a lot cheaper.

Posted by tblrk2006
2009-04-17 10:34:59

Too right wing?

I've openly said that I'm pagan. I've posted numerous things calling out people who are ragging on gays--for the wrong reasons(in my opinion). Jeez.

My views are pretty weird, I'll grant you--but 'too right wing' or a 'plant'?

When pressed, Stan, I identify politically as a 'Rational Anarchist' a la Heinlein in 'The Moon is A Harsh Mistress'. Practically, this means I vote for politicians whose stated policies or practices expand my freedom and liberty at the expense of governmental power. This usually results in my voting for Republicans--because, of the parties that can actually win, Republicans tend to come closer to where I stand. Of late Republicans have moved far too leftwards for my taste.

And, c-mon, people--'prove' something over the intarwebs?

What I think I know I get from conversations--not websites.

But, I'll say this--for you, Stan. I could be completely wrong. The US may have no torturers whatsoever. The hand-wringing and whining of Andy and his ilk may be all for naught because the worst we do is the nonsense in those memos or the silliness at Abu Ghraib. I could be wrong.

But, if I'm not, I want those who may do this service for the US to know that some of us understand, that some of us thank them for this thing they do. That they are not monsters, but patriots, patriots who take on a terrible burden to keep the rest of us safe.

Posted by jack
2009-04-17 10:36:47

Jack, I am willing to give you a chance to expand on your beliefs and positions here. Like I said, I have no problem being wrong in my initial assessment of you.

However, substantiation can be given. Your initial posts was "Prisoners that we capture who are thought to have vital information that might require torture to obtain never get to places like Gitmo. They are questioned, tortured if necessary, and then killed and disposed of." You stated this as FACT, not your opinion or your own idea of how things should be. If it is a fact, it should be followed with some proof. If it is your own opinion, then state that it is an opinion.

I wish our troops would take the fight more forcefully to the enemy and make the thought of opposing America unthinkable. However, the Left in this country has made that almost impossible to acheive. Servicemen are dead or crippled right now because we were far to gentle with savages that would do far worse to Americans when they are captured (as evidenced by all the al-Queda prison camps).

Continue to post. I will still be cautious about your words.

Posted by StanW
2009-04-17 10:46:36

Posted by jack
2009-04-17 10:11:19

Guten Tag Herr Moby.

Posted by Dick_Nixon
2009-04-17 10:53:55

"And no. I have nothing to offer as 'proof'. I simply have an understanding of the process."

Via what? First hand experience? Watching movies about the CIA? Some tall tales a buddy told you over a few beers?

You libertarian types see conspiracy behind every action, article, and omission. Excuse us for not trusting some baseless accusations that our government just executes prisoners in secret without anybody finding out about it.

Posted by Mike_M
2009-04-17 10:58:23

I've openly said that I'm pagan.

Funny how the first thing you leap to when accused of being "too right wing" to be real is a statement about religion. As far as I know, only Liberals think one has to be Christian to be Conservatives. I'm basically agnostic, myself... but if someone accused me of being "too right wing" to be real I wouldn't even think to mention that.

I identify politically as a 'Rational Anarchist' ... I vote for politicians whose stated policies or practices expand my freedom and liberty at the expense of governmental power.

Conservatives understand that some governmental power is necessary. We just want to keep it as local as possible, so the elected officials have to live under the laws they write, and are more directly answerable to the voters. Every single vote in a district of a few thousand voters is far more important than a single vote in a country of a hundred million voters.

All that being said, I don't think you're a Liberal plant. You probably do believe what you say. I object to your statement that prisoners "are questioned, tortured if necessary, and then killed and disposed of" without some damned convincing evidence. Saying "well, it probably happens" is meaningless.

Posted by CavalierX
2009-04-17 11:33:09

When pressed, Stan, I identify politically as a 'Rational Anarchist' a la Heinlein in 'The Moon is A Harsh Mistress'.

Heh...so you got your political views from a sci-fi novel? That's rich...

I do have one quick question for you:
You identify yourself as a "pagan" (or more correctly it should be "neo-pagan"). What sort of Paganism do you follow? Are you a Wiccan? Are you a follower of the Nordic gods? Are you into American Indian shamanish?
I'm just curious.

Posted by murray_the_miser
2009-04-17 11:51:11

Posted by murray_the_miser
2009-04-17 11:51:11

he hugs trees if you ask Nixon.

Posted by Dick_Nixon
2009-04-17 12:14:49

I have no doubt that the government, and even the military, sometimes does things in secret that the public at large would not necessarily approve of. But arbitrarily executing prisoners once they've given all the information they can? Yeah, don't think that's too likely. Even setting aside the human rights issue, it's just a lousy way to gain intelligence. It only ensures that future intelligence will be that much harder to get. Enemies will refuse to surrender in the field if they know they'll just be killed later on and captives will try to kill themselves before we can squeeze any info out of them.

Posted by mightysamurai
2009-04-17 12:29:40

Posted by mightysamurai
2009-04-17 12:29:40

I would bet that IF such executions take place it's not before someone with a high level of clearance authorizes it, like the head of CIA or even POTUS. It would definitely be done with accountability, no matter how classified the event.

Posted by bthewolf
2009-04-17 12:53:05

Sorry for the OT post guys, but I would like to ask you all to pray for my father(81 years young).
When my Mom got home last night she found him on the floor unconsious. They couldn't get to wake up for a few hours. They think he had a heart attack but are not sure. We are waiting for more test results to come back.

Posted by airfr8er
2009-04-17 13:08:59

Of course there is torture and death. Denial is futile.

http://74.125.95.132/search?q=...2&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk

Posted by Katahdin
2009-04-17 13:25:24

Posted by Katahdin
2009-04-17 13:25:24

WOW liberals calling a coercion torture, so you can claim, there is torture. Logic is alian to you isn't it?

Posted by bthewolf
2009-04-17 13:42:47

"such grim tactics as slamming detainees against walls, waterboarding them and keeping them naked and cold for long periods."

Someone told me this kind of treatment will csot you $200 in San Fran. $300 if you also want them to talk dirty and mean to you. Naked pyramids cost more.

/sarc off

Posted by AlexinCT
2009-04-17 13:45:00

Shut up, child.
No one cares what you think.

Sheesh. Why on earth would this troll think that a biased site like that would be proof of anything? Would he take it seriously if I posted a link to Stormfront.org? Of course not..

Posted by murray_the_miser
2009-04-17 13:45:53

Ah, but they care enough to answer.

Posted by Katahdin
2009-04-17 13:58:12

"Heh...so you got your political views from a sci-fi novel? That's rich..."

Yeah, like all those folks who're talking about John Galt lately---fools.

What/ They're not fools? Oh.

I use 'rational anarchist' because it fits well. It allows for the needed level of government while working toward a society comprised of sovereign individuals. Limited government--really limited government--one of the hallmarks of conservatism.

Heinlein used many of his stories to examine different philosophies. It's not unknown for that kinda thing to happen.

I mentioned that I was pagan for the same reason I often do. Many 'conservatives' see being pagan as a disqualifier. When I've mentioned it in the past on RWN I have gotten that reaction.

I think a lot of your opinions regarding torture are informed by leftist cant. I AM NOT saying that any of you are leftists--I am pointing out that most of our information regarding torture tends to come from a left leaning academia.

The reason you kill the person after you get the information you need is that it's a mercy at that point.

Enemies don't know what happens. Their fellow unlawful combatants disappear. Where do they go? No one's telling them.

And battlefield captures are not normally among those tortured--interrogated, certainly--hence the fuss over waterboarding and the like--but tortured? Not very often.

This is getting like the 'torture doesn't work' post from a while back. I was amazed to find thinking people, on this site, parroting the stuff that groups like Amnesty International try to sell.

One of the best is always 'they'll tell you whatever you want to hear just to get it to stop--so therefore it doesn't work'. And not one person takes the next step to understanding that the information is checked...if it's good...okay...if it's not...oh well....not death--more torture.

Finally, could you all read this again--

"But, I'll say this--for you, Stan. I could be completely wrong. The US may have no torturers whatsoever. The hand-wringing and whining of Andy and his ilk may be all for naught because the worst we do is the nonsense in those memos or the silliness at Abu Ghraib. I could be wrong.

But, if I'm not, I want those who may do this service for the US to know that some of us understand, that some of us thank them for this thing they do. That they are not monsters, but patriots, patriots who take on a terrible burden to keep the rest of us safe."

I accept that I might be wrong.....can you accept that I might be right?

Posted by jack
2009-04-17 13:59:40

Ah, but they care enough to answer.
Posted by Katahdin
2009-04-17 13:58:12

I think you are mistaking heaping much deserved ridicule with actually being taken seriously, troll boy.
Now go play in traffic or drink some anti-freeze, little boy.

Posted by murray_the_miser
2009-04-17 14:03:58

And enough time to spout petty insults forged in an infantile mind.

Posted by Katahdin
2009-04-17 14:08:55

Posted by Katahdin
2009-04-17 14:17:44

can you accept that I might be right?

Posted by jack
2009-04-17 13:59:40

maybe if you had some proof of summary executions after torture, herr moby.

I see Tom Wark has rejoined the thread. Tom, remember, what the priest did to you, it wasn't your fault.

Posted by Dick_Nixon
2009-04-17 14:19:06

I left out the part of jack possibly being in the astroturf business. My bad.

Posted by Dick_Nixon
2009-04-17 14:20:49

Bad and stupid.

Posted by Katahdin
2009-04-17 14:22:13

Nixon(I'd call you 'Dick', but that just seems like it'd be provoking), can you not understand that if I had proof I could post on the internet then EVERYONE would have that proof---and they'd've gotten it long before I started talking.

And it's like you all really don't get what I'm saying by that last point---that I am aware that my--and your--freedom is possibly protected by men and women who are willing to do things that those they protect might find monstrous. And that I--apparently alone--salute them for that.

Posted by jack
2009-04-17 14:24:39

Bad and stupid.
Posted by Katahdin
2009-04-17 14:22:13

how is the third rate wine blog doing these days?

Posted by Dick_Nixon
2009-04-17 14:25:21

Hey, folks, not to be a pain in the rear, but, let's tone down the personal attacks. You want to come after me as the post author, fine, but, let's get a wee bit more civil.

Posted by William_Teach
2009-04-17 14:28:27

And it's like you all really don't get what I'm saying by that last point---that I am aware that my--and your--freedom is possibly protected by men and women who are willing to do things that those they protect might find monstrous. And that I--apparently alone--salute them for that.
Posted by jack
2009-04-17 14:24:39

I don't know any military folks (and my brother is a serving officer) who summary execute people who have been tortured. You, apparently a moby, seem to be bringing this up enough to trigger a hit on a search engine (Rightwingnews conservative web site ok's summary executions after torture) for some weird reason. That is called astroturfing, and there has been an incredible amount of it done lately on conservative blogs. Maybe you should retract your statement, or do you have some sort of agenda? Axelrod, is that you again?

Posted by Dick_Nixon
2009-04-17 14:29:30

But, if I'm not, I want those who may do this service for the US to know that some of us understand, that some of us thank them for this thing they do. That they are not monsters, but patriots, patriots who take on a terrible burden to keep the rest of us safe."

murderers are patriots, yeah, this gomer is a moby. Teach, maybe you haven't encountered these folks. Go ask them over at instapundit and Ace of Spades HQ about astroturfers and the moby plague running around the blogosphere.

Posted by Dick_Nixon
2009-04-17 14:38:36

Of course there is torture and death. Denial is futile.

You realize that precisely NOWHERE in your link is there any evidence of regular acts of torture or an ongoing program of torture, don't you? The only actual examples of torture cited are historical examples from past wars (and most of them are examples of torture used by other countries) and isolated incidents like Abu Ghraib. The article offers no proof for its claim of "Afghans and Iraqis dying while in U.S. custody". Nor does CounterPunch offer any proof for its claim that "torture" and "assassination" are an integral part of US policy.

In fact, the conclusion of the article doesn't even condemn the use of "torture". It only warns of the consequences of using untrained individuals to interrogate captives.

So in the end, not only does your "article" prove nothing, it doesn't even agree with your argument in the first place.

Katahdin, no one has ever failed quite as hard as you just did.

Posted by mightysamurai
2009-04-17 14:42:43

Good for you, Katahdin. That kind of self-evaluation takes a lot of courage.

Posted by mightysamurai
2009-04-17 14:44:16

You going to answer my question or not, "jack"?

Posted by murray_the_miser
2009-04-17 14:48:54

katahdin reminds Nixon of Tom Wark aka WIno.

Posted by Dick_Nixon
2009-04-17 14:50:31

Maj. Anthony Milavic's 25-year Marine career included service as: an instructor in Communist Interrogation, Indoctrination, and Exploitation of Prisoners of War; a tactical interrogator in Vietnam and a strategic interrogator; the principal intelligence officer of a Marine squadron, regiment, and division equivalent in combat; and, a DIA briefer for the CJCS/SECDEF.

Hmmmmmm - I believe I will class the author as an expert.

Posted by Katahdin
2009-04-17 14:51:34

Hey, folks, not to be a pain in the rear, but, let's tone down the personal attacks. You want to come after me as the post author, fine, but, let's get a wee bit more civil.
Posted by William_Teach
2009-04-17 14:28:27

There is no "civil" when dealing with known trolls. As they are not legitimate members of a particular forum, they are not protected by the rules of the forum or by standards of decency that are the norm in polite discussion. They deserve what they get.

Posted by murray_the_miser
2009-04-17 14:53:29

Dick reminds Katahdin of a dick.

Posted by Katahdin
2009-04-17 14:54:02

Dick reminds Katahdin of a dick.
Posted by Katahdin
2009-04-17 14:54:02

and a rather large and impressive one at that Tom. How is the wine blog these days? Still look down at cops, firemen, and teachers because of their incomes?

Posted by Dick_Nixon
2009-04-17 14:55:43

And enough time to spout petty insults forged in an infantile mind.
Posted by Katahdin
2009-04-17 14:17:44

POT MEET KETTLE!!! that was too easy, BOY. come back when you have substance or PROOF. Until then you are a nothing but a 'useful idiot!'

Posted by bthewolf
2009-04-17 14:56:05

katahdin reminds Nixon of Tom Wark aka WIno.
Posted by Dick_Nixon
2009-04-17 14:50:31

Being a relative new comer to the forum, I've been here less than a year, I never ran afoul of "Wark/Wino". But this one does rather remind me of "Frankie" without the "M@rtha" tagline. The problem is that so does "the_road_to_60". They both share very similar posting styles. Are they the same person perhaps?

Posted by murray_the_miser
2009-04-17 14:56:53

The reason you kill the person after you get the information you need is that it's a mercy at that point.

Now THAT I definitely don't believe for a second.

I don't think there is any kind of useful interrogation technique that results in such grievous injuries that the only option at the end is a mercy killing. What are they doing, infecting people with the ebola virus?

Enemies don't know what happens. Their fellow unlawful combatants disappear. Where do they go? No one's telling them.

But apparently someone's telling you. Strange, eh?

This is getting like the 'torture doesn't work' post from a while back. I was amazed to find thinking people, on this site, parroting the stuff that groups like Amnesty International try to sell.

Oh nonsense. The fact is torture doesn't work, in the sense that it's unreliable. Sure, you can SOMETIMES get useful information out of torture, but it's just as likely you'll get useless information.

The problem with Amnesty International isn't that they're running around saying "torture doesn't work". It's that their definition of "torture" is so incredibly broad that even useful and reliable interrogation techniques (such as waterboarding) is considered torture. Waterboarding, as it is practiced by the United States, is not torture.

One of the best is always 'they'll tell you whatever you want to hear just to get it to stop--so therefore it doesn't work'. And not one person takes the next step to understanding that the information is checked...if it's good...okay...if it's not...oh well....not death--more torture.

As opposed to using a useful interrogation tactic that gets good information the first time.

I accept that I might be wrong.....can you accept that I might be right?

Sure...in the same sense that I accept that JFK conspiracy theorists "might" be right.

Posted by mightysamurai
2009-04-17 14:57:29

Posted by murray_the_miser
2009-04-17 14:56:53

compared to fwankie, wino was a real moron, believe it or not.

Posted by Dick_Nixon
2009-04-17 14:58:36

Dick reminds Katahdin of a dick.
Posted by Katahdin
2009-04-17 14:54:02

Speaking of infantile insults...

Posted by bthewolf
2009-04-17 14:59:28

Hmmmmmm - I believe I will class the author as an expert.

Appeal to authority fallacy. Things are not true simply because an expert says they are true.

And by the way, your expert never said the US has a regular program of torture and assassination.

Katahdin, I didn't think it was possible to fail any harder than you did the first time, but you have just proven me wrong. Truly you are an inspiration to failures everywhere.

Posted by mightysamurai
2009-04-17 15:05:19

This really upsets you all, doesn't it? You can't concieve of an instance where what I've outlined would be justified, can you?

I know some of you are thinking I'm nuts or a plant or whatever--but gods above, it saddens me that we've fallen to this point.

To make myself more of a geek, there is an excellent--and horrific-- story by Orson Scott Card called 'Kingsmeat' that illustrates my point.....and, sadly, yours as well.

Posted by jack
2009-04-17 15:05:34

it saddens me that we've fallen to this point.

Who is this "we" you are referring to?

Posted by Dick_Nixon
2009-04-17 15:08:58

To make myself more of a geek,

Finally a true statement.

Posted by Dick_Nixon
2009-04-17 15:10:22

Murray, when the author of the piece you're posting in response to asks you to tone it down, it's polite to listen.

And you want to know what 'type' of pagan I am? Well, none actually. 'Pagan' is the wrong word entirely. It's a useless blanket term. I don't think there IS a term for how I make my religious observances--not like Christian or Wiccan or Muslim or even Satanist. I looked for the names of the gods, tracked down older and older versions of what appears to be the same 'pantheon' all across the world. And am satisfied that I found names so old that they are not far removed from grunting proto-human noises. Like most who seek to go a direction other than that of the various cults of the One God, I've got very little to show for my efforts. Names. The much later and incredibly distorted descriptions of ritual that have come down to us(and precious little of that).

Why did you want to know?

Posted by jack
2009-04-17 15:23:31

". . . your expert never said the US has a regular program of torture and assassination. '

This straw dog of deflection is kinda fun in a laugh-at-the-amateur-night sort of way. A true statement which has nothing to do with the discussion at hand (except to deflect, of course).

The gap between "regular Program" and an amount of use of torture is a wide leap. The failure to leap it is indeed an inspiration to us all.

Posted by Katahdin
2009-04-17 15:24:04

"I accept that I might be wrong.....can you accept that I might be right?"

Sure you might be right. We also might be sending Gitmo prisoners to the planet Gleexflorb for anal probes via an intergalactic transporter we might have gotten from the Roswell aliens. Donald Rumsfeld might be in a bunker under Gitmo Hut #45 personally torturing prisoners for his own amusement...have you kept track of his whereabouts to say otherwise?

Posted by Mike_M
2009-04-17 15:27:33

"Who is this "we" you are referring to?"

Us, Dick. Americans. Conservatives. It's sad that we have come to the point where there is a line some of us will not cross to defend this country from it's enemies.

Posted by jack
2009-04-17 15:28:14

Conservatives.

Sure thing, herr moby.

Posted by Dick_Nixon
2009-04-17 15:29:33

And am satisfied that I found names so old that they are not far removed from grunting proto-human noises. Like most who seek to go a direction other than that of the various cults of the One God, I've got very little to show for my efforts. Names. The much later and incredibly distorted descriptions of ritual that have come down to us(and precious little of that).

Gosh, I lost that time it took to read this forever with nothing to show for it.

Posted by Dick_Nixon
2009-04-17 15:31:11

Oh, for gods sake, why is anyone talking to katahdin? It quoted 'counterpunch' as a viable source. Why not just quote Al Jazeera and be done with it...

Posted by jack
2009-04-17 15:34:00

What, no short sheeting. The most heinous of tortures.

Posted by mrmikey
2009-04-17 15:48:29

The gap between "regular Program" and an amount of use of torture is a wide leap. The failure to leap it is indeed an inspiration to us all.
Posted by Katahdin
2009-04-17 15:24:04

The leap between reality and delusion is but the gap of a sigle step, too bad you're on the delusional side of the divide.

Posted by bthewolf
2009-04-17 15:50:39

So, Dick, because I think torture is okay when used to defend this country and you don't I"M a leftist?

Perhaps that's what Stan meant when he said I sound tooo extreme?

Your opinion is the only valid stance one can hold and be a conservative? Mine is either too far out there--or fake?

Come on. Have 'we' gotten to the point where we're governed by an orthodoxy as narrow as the lefts?

Posted by jack
2009-04-17 15:52:32

Posted by mrmikey
2009-04-17 15:48:29

purple nurples, wedgies, or swirlies...

I went through worse just being a nerd in school, than the poor Gitmo detainees have since capture.

Posted by bthewolf
2009-04-17 15:53:13

This really upsets you all, doesn't it?

Yes, the idea that our soldiers are wantonly torturing and killing upsets us. The question is why doesn't it upset YOU?

Posted by mightysamurai
2009-04-17 15:57:16

So, Dick, because I think torture is okay when used to defend this country and you don't I"M a leftist?

You are ok with summary execution after torture, thankfully neither of which is being done by the US. And yes, you, your argument, and your views are fake.

Posted by Dick_Nixon
2009-04-17 15:59:24

Why did you want to know?

Context. Getting to know who/what we are dealing with. For instance most Wiccans I have met were rabid anti-Christian bigots. On the other hand many if not most followers of Ásatrú (the worship of the old Viking gods) are Neo-Nazis.

Posted by murray_the_miser
2009-04-17 16:01:13

Because I'm not talking about our soldiers wantonly torturing and killing, mightysamurai. I said, way up this thread, that I was referring to our intelligence community--NOT the rank and file.

And it is not 'wanton' at all.

Murray, Wiccans are anti-Christian bigots because they aspire to BE Christianity. Odinists(an Asatru subset) tend towards neo-nazish ideas.

Ah, Dick, I see, just because you don't agree with me, Dick, my points and opinions HAVE to be fake. I'll bet you voted for your first Republican after 9/11. Yes or no, Dick?

Posted by jack
2009-04-17 16:09:57

This straw dog of deflection is kinda fun in a laugh-at-the-amateur-night sort of way.

"Straw dog of deflection"? Your CounterPunch article asserts that the US regularly tortures and assassinates enemies. Your "expert" cites absolutely no proof of this claim.

In fact he doesn't even seem to be addressing the same claim that CounterPunch or you are making. He's not arguing that torture is standard or accepted practice, he's saying that certain interrogation methods are unreliable and therefore shouldn't be used.

The gap between "regular Program" and an amount of use of torture is a wide leap.

If you're claiming there is an "amount of torture" and not a regular campaign or program of torture, why did you cite an article claiming there is a regular program of torture and assassination?

The failure to leap

"Failure to leap"? Asking you to prove your own argument is a "failure to leap"? Have you considered that maybe your problem is you're too eager to leap?

You've already run afoul of the appeal to authority fallacy, now you've run headlong into the false generalization fallacy.

Posted by mightysamurai
2009-04-17 16:10:39

You've already run afoul of the appeal to authority fallacy, now you've run headlong into the false generalization fallacy.
Posted by mightysamurai
2009-04-17 16:10:39

I think he's just running head long into stupidity and trying to take us with him.

Posted by bthewolf
2009-04-17 16:21:07

I'll bet you voted for your first Republican after 9/11. Yes or no, Dick?
Posted by jack
2009-04-17 16:09:57

Actually, I worked for the Reagan campaign when I was in college in 1976. Go fuck yourself moby.

Posted by Dick_Nixon
2009-04-17 16:34:25

Who Cares?

People who think torture should not be a systemic part of our intelligence apparatus, that's who.

People like the two who ran for President last year, that's who.

Posted by D-Vega
2009-04-17 17:21:41

People like the two who ran for President last year, that's who.

Posted by D-Vega

thankfully we haven't tortured anyone, so it doesn't matter.

Posted by Dick_Nixon
2009-04-17 17:25:37

In a thread above, John Hawkins points ot that Sarah Palin had tomake a decision whether to abort , or give birth to, a Dwon s syndrome child. In the privacy of her conscience, and knowing that no one - not even her husband - would know if she terminated the pregnancy, she showed real moral courage, real adherence to her fith and principles, and let the pregnancy continue. It's admirable.

By contrast, Dick Cheney, John Yoo, Alberto Gonzalez, Dacvid Addington, Michael Hayden - and all the CIA folks who carried out their orders - chose....... to torture. The problem with that is not whether those tortured "deserved" it, and it is not whether information could not be obtained from them by other methods - the first might be ture buyt the 2d certainly is not. The problem is that those who elect to torture are morally the same as the the enemy we are fighting. If we are not better than that - if we are merely the same sort of deficient, cruel, inhumane moral midgets as al-Quaeda, what oint is ther is us winning the WoT?

It's just interesting that on the same day, in the same blog, we get a perfect example of what a principled and moral conservative is like - and examples of purported conservatives who ought to spend the rest of their lives in prison jumpsuits.

Posted by metatron
2009-04-17 17:34:52

By contrast, Dick Cheney, John Yoo, Alberto Gonzalez, Dacvid Addington, Michael Hayden - and all the CIA folks who carried out their orders - chose....... to torture.

Got any proof, or should we take you, MRB, at your word?

Posted by Dick_Nixon
2009-04-17 17:50:05

The problem is that those who elect to torture are morally the same as the the enemy we are fighting. If we are not better than that - if we are merely the same sort of deficient, cruel, inhumane moral midgets as al-Quaeda, what oint is ther is us winning the WoT?

Yeah Mr B, I remember Cheney and Gonzalez planning to fly two planes into the Dubai Towers, and then cutting a journalists head off with a rusty knife. You liberals are some dumb SOB's, you know that?

Posted by Dick_Nixon
2009-04-17 17:51:59

"Actually, I worked for the Reagan campaign when I was in college in 1976."

You did, Dick? Should I ask you to prove that, Dick? Because you sure don't sound like someone who's been around that long.

But I could be mistaken, Dick. If you were there, thanks.

Did you vote for Nixon, Dick? Or are you not that old?

"The problem is that those who elect to torture are morally the same as the the enemy we are fighting. If we are not better than that - if we are merely the same sort of deficient, cruel, inhumane moral midgets as al-Quaeda, what oint is ther is us winning the WoT?"

Why? Why is torturing someone to get information that will save lives the same as sawing off a man's head for the glory of your god? Tell me how those two things are equivalent, metatron.

Understand--I firmly believe that we should do whatever it takes to survive--with all the horrors that implies. AFTER we are safe, then we can fix things.

Posted by jack
2009-04-17 18:33:58

By contrast, Dick Cheney, John Yoo, Alberto Gonzalez, Dacvid Addington, Michael Hayden - and all the CIA folks who carried out their orders - chose....... to torture.

Silly child. Waterboarding is not torture.

and it is not whether information could not be obtained from them by other methods

Actually yeah, it is.

The problem is that those who elect to torture are morally the same as the the enemy we are fighting.

Yeah, right. Call me when we start lopping off heads and raping female captives to death.

Posted by mightysamurai
2009-04-17 19:10:14

That's one of the most morally contemptable things you have ever said, MrB. And I bet you wonder why we hate you...

Posted by murray_the_miser
2009-04-17 19:22:36

Posted by jack
2009-04-17 18:33:58

No offense, but I don't ahve to prove a fucking thing to you, Mr. Moby. And my invite to go fuck yourself still stands. You are no more a conservative, or a adult, than I am a brain surgeon. You probably just voted for Obama, you strike me as the type who would.

Posted by Dick_Nixon
2009-04-17 19:22:52

Should I ask you to prove that, Dick? Because you sure don't sound like someone who's been around that long.

And who died and made you pope around here, you f'n little liberal POS?

Posted by Dick_Nixon
2009-04-17 19:25:03

Posted by Dick_Nixon
2009-04-17 19:22:52

Okay, seriously, you're being way too overzealous with this. I disagree with Jack's opinion, but for the record, I don't think he's a moby. I recall reading him on other threads and he never gave the impression of being a moby.

Posted by mightysamurai
2009-04-17 20:18:39

Sam, he floats up today with some wild tale of summary execution of terrorists after their being tortured by US operatives, thanks said operatives, repeatedly, and offers no proof, justification, or evidence.

Sorry, but its the wide world of Moby's out in the blogosphere. I had to remove comments from my own blog due to them. And this joker fits the profile to a tee. Say the same thing over and over that liberals can use to paints conservatives n a bad light.

THis is not my blog true. However, I sure would hate it to go the way of instapundit and others and shut down the comments.

Posted by Dick_Nixon
2009-04-17 21:20:49

Dick, first, I'd like to say I've been here far longer than you--replying to things on RWN that is--you sound as if--if you're telling the truth--you might be a bit older than me. So I didn't just 'float up today'.

Then again, maybe you've been here a while--were you here before registration?

Second, my wife agrees with you. She thinks my stance is crazy--'too far' to give Stan his due. And I may be too far out there--I am a bit of an extremist(how's THAT for an oxymoron)--I STILL can't see the problem with the whole thing.

Except...

Third, I have to say that those who kicked me demanding proof are right--I should have had some kind of solid proof there or stated it as an opinion. I did not.

Posted by jack
2009-04-18 17:40:37

you sound as if--if you're telling the truth

Maybe you are the one lying.

Posted by Dick_Nixon
2009-04-18 20:31:01

Second, my wife agrees with you. She thinks my stance is crazy--'too far' to give Stan his due. And I may be too far out there--I am a bit of an extremist(how's THAT for an oxymoron)--I STILL can't see the problem with the whole thing.

You really don't see a problem with an "ends justify the means" mentality? And don't even try to deny it, because that is what you're talking about here. You said it yourself "I firmly believe that we should do whatever it takes to survive".

Also, you apparently assume that torture is the only way to do what's necessary to survive. As if there couldn't possibly be any non-torture options that work just as well.

Finally, if you really believe that American troops secretly torture captured terrorists and then discreetly "dispose" of them, wouldn't coming here and telling us about it defeat the purpose of keeping it secret in the first place?

Posted by mightysamurai
2009-04-18 21:57:25

Finally, if you really believe that American troops secretly torture captured terrorists and then discreetly "dispose" of them, wouldn't coming here and telling us about it defeat the purpose of keeping it secret in the first place?
Posted by mightysamurai
2009-04-18 21:57:25

He did say intelligence operatives of the US torture suspects then summary execute them, and thanksed them for doing it with no proof provided. If you know this guy Sam, and you say he is no moby, I'll take your word for it. But, Nixon has some serious issues with his statements and the fact he repeated them several times, almost as if he was loading up a google search.

Posted by Dick_Nixon
2009-04-19 12:49:42

"But, Nixon has some serious issues with his statements and the fact he repeated them several times, almost as if he was loading up a google search."

...or as if he'd been questioned on then several times. People do that during arguments and debates--they repeat and reiterate their stance.

Mightysamurai, I'm not sure it's an 'ends justify means' situation. It might be, but, if so Hiroshima and Nagasaki were as well, as was Dresden and numerous other sites in the history of war. Sometimes you have to do something so debilitating to the enemy that you bear a scar simply for the doing of it--and afterward, after your people are safe, you do what you can to fix it.

And I'm not saying that torture is the only way--it is one way--you don't go to torture unless other options haven't worked. It's not a first string option.

And, while it needs to be 'secret'--it also needs to be something terrorists wonder about and fear. So it doesn't hurt to say it out loud every now and again.

As to why I would say this...I'm not sure. Maybe it's that I think we'd be nearly done with the GWoT if we'd been fighting it like we fought WW2--with resolve and determination to win completely--rather than fighting in such a way as to minimize enemy casualties and PR disasters. We needed--and need to have the resolve to do what needs to be done to insure our survival---and if that means blowing up mosques full of children to kill the terrorists hiding among them then too damned bad for the kids. We'll mourn them when their parents aren't trying to kill us. And when we mourn them we'll make a point of detailing what monsters the terrorists were---hopefully we'll do a better job than we did with Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

But you take that scar--so you live to heal.

And I see far too many unwilling to go that far.

So I put that out there for those who ARE willing, to let them know that some understand and appreciate that sometimes staying alive requires extraordiary actions.

Posted by jack
2009-04-21 08:57:37

You must register, be approved and log in to post comments.