Former VP Speech

[das]

Oh really, did we stop maintaining critical military and political alliances, or stopped ensuring the IC and DHS had every possible tool? The only thing the new administration said was that they could not use torture. Don't try and make it seem their hands are tied. It is not.

That's actually part of the point...not much has changed between the Bush administration's anti-terror strategies and those of the the current administration. Military commissions, not releasing abuse photos, the current DNI explicitly stating that "high value information" came from enhanced interrogation[1], vigorous protection of NSA monitoring programs within the US in conjunction with US telecom operators, indefinite detention of certain detainees without trial, expanded TSA searches -- it's all on the table.

The little secret not many realize is that there are overarching national security interests that transcend politics and presidential administrations.

[1] Allowing for the possibility that high value information can be obtained via EIT and disagreeing with certain practice(s) are not mutually exclusive.

 

[Sully]

Current administration wants to turn us into the USSA.

Previous administration paying homage to the American Enterprise Institute.

All of this is sad.

 

[Clux4]

That's actually part of the point...not much has changed between the Bush administration's anti-terror strategies and those of the the current administration. Military commissions, not releasing abuse photos, the current DNI explicitly stating that "high value information" came from enhanced interrogation[1], vigorous protection of NSA monitoring programs within the US in conjunction with US telecom operators, indefinite detention of certain detainees without trial, expanded TSA searches -- it's all on the table.

I never argued that anything has significantly changed. In fact, if you go back to the previous page, you will see the example I made. So for Cheney to claim that Obama's move is hampering our ability to do anything or protect America is a BIG lie. Here are the points I am making:

1. The Bush 43 administration did not do anything out of the ordinary after 9/11 that would not have been done by any other administration except maybe rush into Iraq. We took measures and resumed operations smartly.
The events of 9/11 were unfortunate and not as a result of the guy or the party running the country. Al Gore could have been in office and it would have happened. Intelligence analysis is an art not a science; even the best country in the world gets it wrongs sometimes.

2. That Cheney's claims that Obama is making our country unsafe is just bogus and unfounded. I think I have stated my point above. The party is taking a lot of beating for the past 8 years and someone needs to jump on the grenade and he is doing just that.

 

[das]

I never argued that anything has significantly changed. In fact, if you go back to the previous page, you will see the example I made.

I'm not disagreeing with that point. I was simply quoting you and expanding upon it in my reply.

 

[red_ryder]

Burning someone's testicles and a$$hole would probably have long term effects, but thanks for playing anyways you sicktard .

Not if you apply conductive jelly to the electrodes, first...

but is waterboarding torture? Of course it is. Just because it's not prying off someone's fingernails with pliers doesn't mean it's not also extremely unpleasant. You don't have to maim someone to torture them. That being said, it's a pretty harmless way to torture someone, not "painful" in so many words, and doesn't leave any lasting harm at least. So if we have to torture people, it's a fairly ethical way to do it.

The question really is, does it work? I don't know, if it doesn't then there's no point, is there? I'll leave that decision up to the people with experience in interrogation.

According to Merriam-Webster:

1 a: anguish of body or mind : agony b: something that causes agony or pain

 

[Random8145]

According to Merriam-Webster:

1 a: anguish of body or mind : agony b: something that causes agony or pain

Well that proves it folks, MARRIAGE IS TORTURE

Waterboarding I understand is excruciating, and if done by untrained people for too long, can result in lung damage and brain damage and so forth.

But when done by trained professionals, with a doctor present, it does no mental or physical damage, but (according to its advocates) is very effective in extracting information.

I wouldn't call it "torture."

A lot of people say to advocates of waterboarding, "Well since you're so gung-ho waterboarding, why don't you get waterboarded, and then tell if it's torture!?"

Well for one thing, no advocate is "gung-ho" on waterboarding, and second, no one is going to get waterboarded and come out saying, "Wow, that was refreshing!" OF COURSE it will be excruciating, that's the point, but when done by experts on hardened terrorists, it breaks them down to give information (or so we're told).

In the case of the Bush Administration, it was done to three terrorists (one the mastermind of 9/11 who boasted about cutting off someone's head) at a time when the administration wasn't sure if there was another attack on the horizon within hours or not, and done in a controlled manner.

 

[HercDriver]

Plenty of experts say torture is ineffective.

• Gen. Petraeus: “Some may argue that we would be more effective if we sanctioned torture or other expedient methods to obtain information from the enemy. That would be wrong. Beyond the basic fact that such actions are illegal, history shows that they also are frequently neither useful nor necessary. Certainly, extreme physical action can make someone ‘talk;’ however, what the individual says may be of questionable value.” [Gen. David Petraeus, Letter to Multi-National Force-Iraq, 5/10/07]

• FBI warns military interrogators: Enhanced techniques are ‘of questionable effectiveness.’ [FBI memo, 5/30/03]

• Army JAG: ‘I don’t think [torture] is all that effective.’[Major General Thomas Romig, former Army JAG, 11/19/07]

• Special Ops Interrogator: ‘Enhanced’ interrogation causes detainees to ‘shut up.’[Matthew Alexander, leader of a Special Operations interrogation team in Iraq, 12/8/08]

• FBI Special Agent Jack Cloonan: “It is my belief, based on a 27 year career as a Special Agent and interviews with hundreds of subjects in custodial settings, including members of al Qaeda, that the use of coercive interrogation techniques is not effective. The alternative approach, sometimes referred to as ‘rapport building’ is more effective, efficient and reliable. Scientists, psychiatrists, psychologists, law enforcement and intelligence agents, all of whom have studied both approaches, have came to the same conclusion. The CIA’s own training manual advises its agents that heavy-handed techniques can impair a subject’s ability to accurately recall information and, at worst, produce apathy and complete withdrawal.” [FBI special agent Jack Cloonan, testimony to Congress 6/10/08]

• Military’s Joint Personnel Recovery Agency [JPRA]: “The [Dec. 2001] memo [to the Department of Defense General Counsel] cautioned, however, that while ‘[p]hyisical deprivations can and do work in altering the prisoners’ mental state to the point where they will say things they normally would not say,” use of physical deprivations has “several major downfalls.’ JPRA warned that physical deprivations were ‘not as effective’ a means of getting information as psychological pressures, that information gained from their use was ‘less reliable,’ and that their use ‘tends to increase resistance postures when deprivations are removed.’” [Senate Armed Services Report on Detainee Treatment and Abuse, Nov. 2008, p.38]

• Army psychologist: “It was stressed to me time and time again that psychological investigations have proven that harsh interrogations do not work. At best it will get you information that a prisoner thinks you want to hear to make the interrogation stop, but that information is strongly likely to be false.” [MAJ Paul Burney, Army’s Behavior Science Consulting Team psychologist, statement to Committee, 8/21/07. Senate Armed Services Report, p.78]

• Army psychologist: “Experts in the field of interrogation indicate the most effective interrogation strategy is a rapport-building approach. Interrogation techniques that rely on physical or adverse consequences are likely to garner inaccurate information and create an increased level of resistance…There is no evidence that the level of fear or discomfort evoked by a given technique has any consistent correlation to the volume or quality of information obtained.” [Maj. Burney, BSCT Psychiatrist, Oct. 2002 memo to JTF-170. Senate Armed Services Report, p.83]

• FBI to Gitmo Commander: “Many of [JTF-GTMO's] methods are considered coercive by Federal Law Enforcement and UCMJ standards. Not only this, but reports from those knowledgeable about the use of these coercive techniques are highly skeptical as to their effectiveness and reliability.” [Nov. 22, 2002 memo to MG Geoffrey Miller, who commanded JTF Gitmo. Senate Armed Services Report, p.115]

• SERE specialist: “According to his testimony, ‘history has shown us that physical pressures are not effective for compelling an individual to give information or to do something’ and are not effective for gaining accurate, actionable intelligence.” [Terrence Russell, JPRA’s manager for research and development and a SERE specialist, testimony to Committee, 8/3/07. Senate Armed Services Report, p.209]

• FBI Director Robert Meuller: Enhanced techniques haven’t prevented any attacks. [Vanity Fair, 12/16/08]

Torture is illegal. To ask if it works is like a shoplifter saying "Call it what you will, but look at all this great stuff I got!"

Richard Cheney does not give a flying fuck about his approval ratings, (they've gone up 9 points the past month though!) or how history will judge him..... He's not in "campaign mode". You wouldn't think POTUS would still be either.
The man is not infallible, but I'd give the Bush NSC team, including Cheney, pretty high marks for preventing another attack since 9/11.

Not sure what Dick Cheney thinks or cares about; however it is probably frustrating after being w/so much power for so long to be a private citizen and to see so much of the work you've done repudiated. He is a boon to the Obama administration; it is handy to have someone step forward from the previous administration to remind people just how bad it was.

I'm guessing with what his daughter said on CNN that the current administration "...was suggesting that perhaps we would even be prosecuting former members of the Bush administration" both she and her father are worried about him going to jail. Heck, she's had 12 appearances over 10 days defending her dad; guess there isn't anyone else out there the GOP can find (like an actual politician) who will do the dirty work.

 

[red_ryder]

Well that proves it folks, MARRIAGE IS TORTURE

Waterboarding I understand is excruciating, and if done by untrained people for too long, can result in lung damage and brain damage and so forth.

But when done by trained professionals, with a doctor present, it does no mental or physical damage, but (according to its advocates) is very effective in extracting information.

I wouldn't call it "torture."

A lot of people say to advocates of waterboarding, "Well since you're so gung-ho waterboarding, why don't you get waterboarded, and then tell if it's torture!?"

Well for one thing, no advocate is "gung-ho" on waterboarding, and second, no one is going to get waterboarded and come out saying, "Wow, that was refreshing!" OF COURSE it will be excruciating, that's the point, but when done by experts on hardened terrorists, it breaks them down to give information (or so we're told).

In the case of the Bush Administration, it was done to three terrorists (one the mastermind of 9/11 who boasted about cutting off someone's head) at a time when the administration wasn't sure if there was another attack on the horizon within hours or not, and done in a controlled manner.

Cool. But, why wouldn't you call it torture? And why not? That is, how do you define it then? This is what I'm trying to peg down.

 

[robav8r]

What individuals are you talking about? Who cares where you have been, GITMO, Afghanistan, Iraq? Where you personally involved in the interrogation process? Did you collaborate the actionable intelligence you received from these guys?

No, but my sister and others i've worked with have. And the "actionable intelligence" they capitalized on was shocking to say the least. You're right, know one cares where i've been . . . but until you've been somewhere other than your keyboard and have actually deployed to places and done things where "actionable intelligence" affects your job on a daily basis, I would recommend you put a sock in it.

Definitely not an expert on torture or interrogation techniques, but I am a fervent supporter of those that tried (and continue to try) to give us every benefit on the battle field.

If you find yourself in a fair fight, you didn't plan
your mission properly.
- COL David Hackworth, US Army

 

[picklesuit]

If I stick an electrode up your ass and hang the other on your testicles to give you some shock treatment, is that torture? Has no long term physical effects, so it must be ok.

Some of us are into that. Don't judge me!

 

[Clux4]

No, but my sister and others i've worked with have. And the "actionable intelligence" they capitalized on was shocking to say the least. You're right, know one cares where i've been . . . but until you've been somewhere other than your keyboard and have actually deployed to places and done things where "actionable intelligence" affects your job on a daily basis, I would recommend you put a sock in it.

You assume a lot for someone that only knows me by my screename.

 

[Flash]

But when done by trained professionals, with a doctor present, it does no mental or physical damage, but (according to its advocates) is very effective in extracting information.

I wouldn't call it "torture."......it was done to three terrorists (one the mastermind of 9/11 who boasted about cutting off someone's head) at a time when the administration wasn't sure if there was another attack on the horizon within hours or not, and done in a controlled manner.

With the exception of SERE personnel, who did not take part in the interrogations, no one had done waterboarding in the US so how the hell is someone supposed to be an expert on it?! And I don't care if you had the best docs in the world monitoring it, torture is torture no matter how you do it or who is watching.

As for the argument that we did not know when the next attack was, possibly just hours away, it is completely absurd. By the time the three men, that we know of, we waterboarded they had been in captivity for some time and the immediate 'actionable' intelligence that they had was dated. Not only that, how do we know that waterboarding these guys would even work? Or that it did?

No, but my sister and others i've worked with have. And the "actionable intelligence" they capitalized on was shocking to say the least......until you've been somewhere other than your keyboard and have actually deployed to places and done things where "actionable intelligence" affects your job on a daily basis, I would recommend you put a sock in it.

And there are plenty on this board who have been and still are in the same position as your sister and others you know. Don't presume too much.

 

[Mumbles]

? Gen. Petraeus: ?Some may argue that we would be more effective if we sanctioned torture or other expedient methods to obtain information from the enemy. That would be wrong. Beyond the basic fact that such actions are illegal, history shows that they also are frequently neither useful nor necessary. Certainly, extreme physical action can make someone ?talk;? however, what the individual says may be of questionable value.? [Gen. David Petraeus, Letter to Multi-National Force-Iraq, 5/10/07]

? FBI warns military interrogators: Enhanced techniques are ?of questionable effectiveness.? [FBI memo, 5/30/03]

? Army JAG: ?I don?t think [torture] is all that effective.?[Major General Thomas Romig, former Army JAG, 11/19/07]

? Special Ops Interrogator: ?Enhanced? interrogation causes detainees to ?shut up.?[Matthew Alexander, leader of a Special Operations interrogation team in Iraq, 12/8/08]

? FBI Special Agent Jack Cloonan: ?It is my belief, based on a 27 year career as a Special Agent and interviews with hundreds of subjects in custodial settings, including members of al Qaeda, that the use of coercive interrogation techniques is not effective. The alternative approach, sometimes referred to as ?rapport building? is more effective, efficient and reliable. Scientists, psychiatrists, psychologists, law enforcement and intelligence agents, all of whom have studied both approaches, have came to the same conclusion. The CIA?s own training manual advises its agents that heavy-handed techniques can impair a subject?s ability to accurately recall information and, at worst, produce apathy and complete withdrawal.? [FBI special agent Jack Cloonan, testimony to Congress 6/10/08]

? Military?s Joint Personnel Recovery Agency [JPRA]: ?The [Dec. 2001] memo [to the Department of Defense General Counsel] cautioned, however, that while ?[p]hyisical deprivations can and do work in altering the prisoners? mental state to the point where they will say things they normally would not say,? use of physical deprivations has ?several major downfalls.? JPRA warned that physical deprivations were ?not as effective? a means of getting information as psychological pressures, that information gained from their use was ?less reliable,? and that their use ?tends to increase resistance postures when deprivations are removed.?? [Senate Armed Services Report on Detainee Treatment and Abuse, Nov. 2008, p.38]

? Army psychologist: ?It was stressed to me time and time again that psychological investigations have proven that harsh interrogations do not work. At best it will get you information that a prisoner thinks you want to hear to make the interrogation stop, but that information is strongly likely to be false.? [MAJ Paul Burney, Army?s Behavior Science Consulting Team psychologist, statement to Committee, 8/21/07. Senate Armed Services Report, p.78]

? Army psychologist: ?Experts in the field of interrogation indicate the most effective interrogation strategy is a rapport-building approach. Interrogation techniques that rely on physical or adverse consequences are likely to garner inaccurate information and create an increased level of resistance?There is no evidence that the level of fear or discomfort evoked by a given technique has any consistent correlation to the volume or quality of information obtained.? [Maj. Burney, BSCT Psychiatrist, Oct. 2002 memo to JTF-170. Senate Armed Services Report, p.83]

? FBI to Gitmo Commander: ?Many of [JTF-GTMO's] methods are considered coercive by Federal Law Enforcement and UCMJ standards. Not only this, but reports from those knowledgeable about the use of these coercive techniques are highly skeptical as to their effectiveness and reliability.? [Nov. 22, 2002 memo to MG Geoffrey Miller, who commanded JTF Gitmo. Senate Armed Services Report, p.115]

? SERE specialist: ?According to his testimony, ?history has shown us that physical pressures are not effective for compelling an individual to give information or to do something? and are not effective for gaining accurate, actionable intelligence.? [Terrence Russell, JPRA?s manager for research and development and a SERE specialist, testimony to Committee, 8/3/07. Senate Armed Services Report, p.209]

? FBI Director Robert Meuller: Enhanced techniques haven?t prevented any attacks. [Vanity Fair, 12/16/08]

Torture is illegal. To ask if it works is like a shoplifter saying "Call it what you will, but look at all this great stuff I got!"

Not sure what Dick Cheney thinks or cares about; however it is probably frustrating after being w/so much power for so long to be a private citizen and to see so much of the work you've done repudiated. He is a boon to the Obama administration; it is handy to have someone step forward from the previous administration to remind people just how bad it was.

I'm guessing with what his daughter said on CNN that the current administration "...was suggesting that perhaps we would even be prosecuting former members of the Bush administration" both she and her father are worried about him going to jail. Heck, she's had 12 appearances over 10 days defending her dad; guess there isn't anyone else out there the GOP can find (like an actual politician) who will do the dirty work.

Truer words have yet to be spoken on this thread....I'm talking the very last paragraph.

 

[robav8r]

And there are plenty on this board who have been and still are in the same position as your sister and others you know. Don't presume too much.

Not "presuming" anything Flash, I know.

 

[robav8r]

You assume a lot for someone that only knows me by my screename.

Then "sack up" and update your profile. You want me, and others on this board to engage you in a topic that many of us feel passionate about. Tell us who you are, and why we should give you credibility. My profile is updated and accurate. Absolutely nothing to hide. How about you . . . . ?