Comments for White House To Declassify Holy Grail Torture Report That Could Undercut Cheney »
Posted By tehranchik 7 months, 1 week ago in Political NewsGovernment officials familiar with the CIA’s early interrogations say the most powerful evidence of apparent excesses is contained in the “top secret” May 7, 2004, inspector general report, based on more than 100 interviews, a review of the videotapes and 38,000 pages of documents. The full report remains closely held, although White House officials have told political allies that they intend to declassify it for public release when the debate quiets over last month’s release of the Justice Department’s interrogation memos…
Although some useful information was produced, the report concluded that “it is difficult to determine conclusively whether interrogations have provided information critical to interdicting specific imminent attacks,” according to the Justice Department’s declassified summary of it.
Read Full Story at theplumline.whorunsgov.com »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 117
-
-
-
100%
hyperbola7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If the torturer is appointed by Bush, does that make it not torture?
Reply
If the torturer is appointed by Obama, does that make it not torture?
Obama Appoints Torturer as Afghanistan Commander
As President Obama taps Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal to run the Afghan war, do these revelations, divulged to Esquire at great personal risk by an elite Army interrogator two and a half years ago, imply the new commander's aiding and abetting of torture?
....Garlasco works for Human Rights Watch, a group that started in 1978 to monitor the Soviet Union and recently expanded its mission to include America's war on terrorism. With a partner named John Sifton, in the past year he has helped expose the secrets of CIA prisons and extraordinary renditions and discovered Captain Ian Fishback, the decorated West Point graduate whose account to the Senate Armed Services Committee last fall pushed the Congress to pass a historic and politically charged amendment banning torture. Now Garlasco is chasing after a fresh story of prisoner abuse committed by members of the United States military. ...
...But at the very same time the Army was cleaning up Abu Ghraib under scrutiny, Jeff arrived at an elite secret interrogation facility near Baghdad where nudity and hooding and stress positions were still routine, where ranking officers knew exactly what was going on and promised to protect the interrogators at all costs.... This was Camp Nama, the home of Task Force 121, ...
...It was a point of pride that the Red Cross would never be allowed in the door, Jeff says. This is important because it defied the Geneva Conventions, which require that the Red Cross have access to military prisons. "Once, somebody brought it up with the colonel. 'Will they ever be allowed in here?' And he said absolutely not. He had this directly from General McChrystal and the Pentagon that there's no way that the Red Cross could get in — they won't have access and they never will. This facility was completely closed off to anybody investigating, even Army investigators."... Given Task Force 121's history, that was a remarkable promise. Formed in the summer of 2003, it quickly became notorious. By August the CIA had already ordered its officers to avoid Camp Nama....
.... This means that a full-bird colonel and all his support staff knew exactly what was going on at Camp Nama. "Do you know where the colonel was getting his orders from?" he asks.
Jeff answers quickly, perhaps a little defiantly. "I believe it was a two-star general. I believe his name was General McChrystal...
http://www.propeller.com/story/2009/05/12/obama-ap...-
100%
Dionys7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"divulged to Esquire at great personal risk by an elite Army interrogator two and a half years ago, imply the new commander's aiding and abetting of torture?"
Reply
As we've learned from the GOP there's a big difference between implication and fact.-
100%
hyperbola7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well McChrystal was the commander in-line of the torture base and personnel of that same base have testified that he knew and did nothing about it, even after Abu Ghraib hit the fan. We should also remember that McChrystal was one of the biggest supporters of bushie's "mission accomplished" gig.
Reply
.... McChrystal happens to also be one of the military generals who also fiercely advocated the declaration of “Mission Accomplished.” In April 2003, McChrystal assessed that “major combat” was over in Iraq:
“I would anticipate that the major combat engagements are over,” Maj. Gen. Stanley McChrystal told reporters at a Pentagon briefing. He said U.S. forces are moving into a phase of “smaller, albeit sharper fights.”
Just two weeks after McChrystal’s comments, President Bush strutted aboard the U.S.S. Lincoln and — beneath the “Mission Accomplished” banner — declared, “Major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed.”....
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/15/mcchrystal/
-
-
100%
NoWayMan7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"If the torturer is appointed by Bush, does that make it not torture?
Reply
If the torturer is appointed by Obama, does that make it not torture?"
if, in either case, someone gets waterboarded, its torture. but to my knowledge, no one has been tortured under Obama.
and when all the torturing was going on, where did McChrystal get his orders from? (and no, I'm not comfortable with him in charge)
and who is Jeff? isn't quite clear. and Jeff isn't even clear about who gave what order. lots of hearsay.
NOW...
care to answer my first question or are you simply playing dodge ball?-
Neutral
tehranchik7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://www.propeller.com/story/2009/05/12/stanley-...
Reply -
Neutral
hyperbola7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
""""...to my knowledge, no one has been tortured under Obama. """"
Reply
Some of the secret blackholes without judicial oversight have been maintained and protected by the Obama administration. So, yes , technically you are right and it will still take some time to see whether torture has in fact been "banned" or simply been made more opaque. The precedent of the Obama administration defending the need for secret blackholes is not promising.
Obama's Mixed Message on Torture Policy
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/05/07-14
Let me accompany that with a question to you. It is more than clear that a number of people reported that McChrystal knew about torture at Camp Nama and not only did nothing to stop it, but in fact tried to prevent knowledge of what was going on from becoming public, even after Abu Ghraib (after all he was pretty much a direct conduit for passing information to Rumsfeld). It is also clear that McChrystal was involved in the Pat Tillman cover up (in fact, the Army investigators recommended punishment for that - the Pentagon ignored that).
A suitable person for Obama to appoint as commander in Afghanistan?-
Neutral
NoWayMan7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
LIKE I SAID...
Reply
I'm not comfortable with obama's choice. and many other people aren't as well. Pat tillman's father being one of them. and I've already let Obama know it.
SO THERE!!!!!!!
NOW...
more dodgeball or are you gonna answer the question?
or should we just cue the crickets....
-
-
-
-
-
33%
Endoscopy7 months, 1 week ago
-
100%
Dionys7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
And yet Reagan's DOJ prosecuted Texas sherriffs and their deputies for waterboarding people calling it torture. And yet the US has participated in prosecution of people during just about every war for waterboarding, calling it torture and characterizing them as war crimes.
Reply
Huh.-
50%
Endoscopy7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
That old nutiness about the war crimes being just tried for waterboarding is very silly. The Japanese for example were accused of a long list of atrocities. Go and find one that was only tried for waterboarding.
Reply
As for the sheriff I do not know what the law was then since it was changed after that but the current law makes it legal to waterboard.
-
-
92%
Will13137 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
YOUR TWISTED OPINION OF THE LAW.. doesn't make it so...
Reply
come over an let me waterboard you....
I'll donate 10,000 to your church.. if I can't get you to confess to having homo sex with Rush Limbaugh.. within 1 hour...
we'll video tape it and post the results right here on Propeller.. DEAL...or NO DEAL..-
35%
Hhussk7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
come over an let me waterboard you....
Reply
Will1313,
I've decided to entertain your offer.
Would you first, please post your resume and background, so the propeller public can see you are qualified to administer interrogation at a level of GS-13 or higher?
Second, are you willing to release your financial statements so that we can prove you will pay the "10,000" (dollars? pennies? ??) to a church?
No offense Will1313, but you are making the very mistake that many kids who idealize nihiliberalism make. The nihilibs basically think that life is like Hollywood, and therefore, believe in ridiculous notions such as:
"Will1313 is qualified to administer waterboarding."
And based on comments you have made on the past attacking homosexuals and women (et al.), I highly doubt your credibility.
...Feel free to try, though. Thanks in advance.-
82%
Will13137 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
thanks for weighing in...
Reply
i've decided to just tell you to STFU...
but I do have a friend that went thru the training in the marines...
do you really think the terrorists have training...
and I also did not guarantee HIS SURVIVAL..
you have NEVER seen me attack homosexuals.. NEVER.. or women..-
50%
Hhussk7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
i've decided to just tell you to STFU...
Reply
Haha, in lieu of having your ragged arguments shoved back in your face, I consider that a compliment.
but I do have a friend that went thru the training in the marines...
We all have friends. And this is what you think qualifies you to adminster interrogations?
do you really think the terrorists have training...
Oh, I'm certain they have training. I've written military documents on it in the early 90's. But I gurantee you that their "interrogators" do not get reprimanded, or even demoted and sent up on charges, when they accidentally kill a prisoner. And that's the point, you (and idiots like yourself) equate men and women who serve our country with terrorists.
and I also did not guarantee HIS SURVIVAL..
So, you literally ask a guy to submit to your interrogations and won't even gurantee his survival, while no waterboarding has ever led to death under U.S. administrations?
you have NEVER seen me attack homosexuals.. NEVER.. or women..
they are too busy having homosexual relationships be tax cheats also.. being a closeted gay takes up all their time..
~Will1313, "Sarah Palin's Lies and Half Truths about Drilling in ANWR" thread
Will1313, you are clearly an idiot.-
100%
Will13137 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
how is that disparaging homosexuals.. I was referring and you know it to the HYPOCRISY of your many of the republican persuasion..Tom Foley.. Ted Haggard.. Rush Limbaugh.. those types.. not gays in general.. BUT IN YOUR CHILDISH MIND.. well who knows.
Reply
I HAVE NEVER DISPARAGED HOMOSEXUALS FOR WHO THEY ARE.. OR WOMEN.. and I would believe that there are several homosexuals and women on propeller and in my real life that would back up that statement..
SO AGAIN IN THE WORDS OF SAINT RICHARD CHENEY.. GO F*CK YOURSELF...
and the waterboarding.. will be as REALISTIC AS POSSIBLE.. MY friend will be there to administer ..
arrive .. make sure money is there.. sign release papers. . get restraints.. hand and foot.. and stripped to your tidy whities.. duct taped to a board.. and let the fun begin.. after all it was HIM that keeps claiming it isn't torture.. 1 hour shouldn't be TOO much to withstand and his church would stand to make $10,000 ..
Hhussk .. you are clearly a childish *******.. -
Neutral
Will13137 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
. And that's the point, you (and idiots like yourself) equate men and women who serve our country with terrorists.
Reply
--
not the ones that SERVE.. the one's that authorize and encourage..
if it looks like a duck.. quacks.. well you get the idea..
in your simple mind WHAT MAKES US DIFFERENT WHEN WE USE THE SAME BEHAVIOR AS THE TERRORISTS.. ..oh because Jesus is on our side.. WHO WOULD JESUS TORTURE..
-
-
-
100%
quackpot7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hhussk
Reply
Since, according to Endo water boarding is legal it should be no problem to place a want ad for a qualified waterboarist in the local paper.
Since Will is raising the $10,000, I'll offer to pay a reasonable hourly rate for the qualified waterboardist of your choice.-
100%
Will13137 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
i have the money.. but i'd bet we can raise at least 10 times that amount in pledges right here on Propeller..
Reply
his church would benefit..
my friend is qualified.. he taught in SERE training.. ..
but since there is a time limit involved.. I don't guarantee Endoscopy's survival... .. and the proper release forms will have to be signed and duly notarized ...
we'll video tape the process and put a thread up right here on Propeller...
I can only imagine JamesMarcus WIR that week.. LOL -
-
100%
Hhussk7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Since, according to Endo water boarding is legal it should be no problem to place a want ad for a qualified waterboarist in the local paper.
Reply
Then please quit being a drama queen and just submit your ad in the paper. Get back with me when someone as ridiculous as the rest of you nihiliberals find a qualified person.
Next...
-
-
-
-
92%
NoWayMan7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
so if we find out that some al qaeda operatives are waterboarding american soldiers they've captured, those soldiers are not being tortured according to you?
Reply
see how you can't have it both ways? se how you've opened the door for our soldiers to be tortured under a legal framework and we can't say sh*t about it?
(I'm sure you don't see it, but just thought I'd ask)-
31%
Hhussk7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
so if we find out that some al qaeda operatives are waterboarding american soldiers they've captured, those soldiers are not being tortured according to you?
Reply
Are you referring to the part where they cut off the heads of our captured soldiers or drag them dead (and naked) through the streets as torture?
Can you give me a real example of an Al Qaeda terrorist who applied interrogation methods equal or greater to the levels applied by our CIA analysts? The only reason I ask you for this information is because you seem to suggest that our men and women in the intelligence community have no idea what they are doing.
And fundamentally, I believe your ideology is wrong. Our people have extensive backgrounds, checks and balances, and methods of correction to keep people in line. It seems you believe that the United States government and Al Qaeda are on equal terms in how they implement their policies.
Last I heard, Al Qaeda was a terrorist organization. Do you disagree?-
100%
NoWayMan7 months, 1 week ago
-
100%
Hhussk7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
of course al qaeda is a terrorist organization you fool.
Reply
If you truly understand that al qaeda is a terrorist organization, you wouldn't ask such a foolish question.
Observe the idiocy of your query. You ask if a U.S. soldier that is waterboarded by al qaeda is tortue. My first emotional and non logical response would be YES. Al Qeada is a terrorist group, has no training in interrogation, and ultimately DO NOT INTERROGATE. And therefore, their "waterboarding" technique is being administered in a manner completely different from waterboarding under U.S. authority.
This is why your question is flawed; fundamentally, you try to suggest that Al Qaeda and the U.S. are alike in how they administer their laws, policies, and even their justice.-
-
Neutral
NoWayMan7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"This is why your question is flawed; fundamentally, you try to suggest that Al Qaeda and the U.S. are alike in how they administer their laws, policies, and even their justice."
Reply
WRONG.
this is why your thinking is flawed:
torture is torture. it doens't matter who is doing it or why.
and if you think we have some moral high ground to torture just because you think we ar "right" and they are "wrong" well then, you're seriously f*cked up in the head. because as soon as yout torture, you've put yourself in the "wrong" column.
torture is for the weak and the lazy.
and when we torture a man 183 times, yes, the US and al qaeda look eerily the same.
YOU FOOL.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
77%
Charlson7 months, 1 week ago
-
-
83%
flyonthewallzz7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
That is a good question Tang.
Reply
Love him or hate him: it can not be denied that he is the secret document guy.
It seems like a strange game he is playing, If he wins he may be able to take down a couple of Democrats in congress, but they are from areas that will just elect another Democrat.
If there is proof of the ticking time bomb scenario, I find it hard to believe that the folks that know about it, would not have found a way to leak it by now.
If we are to believe what we read, the EIT program was stopped more than 4 years ago.-
-
75%
flyonthewallzz7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It is a destructive game he is playing.
Reply
Sure he could take out a democrat or two, and possibly clusterf*ck the administration a bit.
But for the sake of the guys that are serving this country in uniform, please check out the concept of how to fight and win a counter insurgency war.
I could say a bunch of stuff, but I would not expect you to believe me.-
-
75%
flyonthewallzz7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Perhaps:
Reply
But I know for a fact that you would not Clusterfck our troops to do so.
We are fighting a battle for "hearts and minds".
That is the objective and the path to victory.
Troops are billeting with the population, we are not fighting a conventional war.
We won that part of it a long time ago.-
-
83%
nostalgia7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Fly
Reply
2 points
They released the memos describing the interrogation techniques
That is one side of the story
There is contradictory information of whether they got useful information or not
In order for any of us to know the full truth, shouldn't we also see the memos about the information obtained and any attacks which may have been prevented?
"We are fighting a battle for "hearts and minds"."
So what is the point in releasing the new photos?
According to news reports after the first pictures from Abu Ghraib was the motivation for 48 captured suicide bombers to join the terrorists and receive training to become suicide bombers
Study offers glimpse into what it takes to be suicide bomber
Based on interrogations of 48 detainees, U.S. military says most foreign fighters are alienated young men who want to leave their mark.
The summary also contends that some Arab media reports and Internet coverage of alleged U.S atrocities in Iraq and the Abu Ghraib prison scandal were a major motivating factor.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/iraq/2004287...
So if more photos are released now, aren't we putting our troops in more danger - especially since "Troops are billeting with the population"
It will be difficult to protect these troops from suicide bombers-
88%
tanglang7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I agree that releasing more pictures would be devastating for our troops overseas. Al qeada and the taliban would use those photos as propaganda to help recruit more terrorists. Although I will say that the fact that the world knows that there are more pics is probably doing the same for our enemies.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
67%
sinophil497 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
tang - Which high ranking Democrat ordered the torture? I would completely agree that that democrat shoild be impeached or prosecuted.
Reply
I am sure some Democrats KNEW about the torture. Maybe they should have spoken to Bush against the torture (Remember this was all classified information). Maybe they were too timid. Fine, the electorate in their individual states can deal with them.
But please tell me which Democrat ORDERED the torture?
-
-
-
-
-
-
71%
m-simon7 months, 1 week ago
-
100%
Dionys7 months, 1 week ago
-
54%
Hhussk7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Too bad it doesn't distract from the real people in charge of implementing torture.
Reply
Nancy Pelosi was in a position to speak against waterboarding, but notedly was supportive. She received full disclosure.
Now, she is denying any knowledge.
Obviously, the only person trying to distract the truth is Nancy Pelosi. This is why Cheney has no fear of speaking to the press. Nor should he.-
80%
Charlson7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
See the blue ball? No, I mean the red ball. They are both balls so they're the same. Nope, Hhussk, your pointing fingers at others won't work. She was in no position to say anything about the classified information she was briefed on and I doubt they even told her the truth. No, she didn't formulate, pseudo-legalize, and implement the torture progrom of Cheney/Bush.
Reply -
88%
Dionys7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Nancy Pelosi was in a position to speak against waterboarding, but notedly was supportive. She received full disclosure.
Reply
Now, she is denying any knowledge."
So investigate her as well.
Last I checked there was no actual proof of her having "full disclosure," only the usual intimations and claims without proof from the right. But I'm all for the truth of the matter to come out across party lines. You? -
88%
Will13137 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Nancy Pelosi was in a position to speak against waterboarding
Reply
---
so you were present at those highly classified meetings.. .. what personal knowledge do you have to back up that statement..... pure conjecture.....
but
as Dionys.. says.. and I stand on that principal....
EVERONE WITH KNOWLEDGE.. EVERYONE THAT ENABLED.. EVERYONE THAT ORDERED THE USE OF.. EVERYONE NO EXCEPTIONS.. SHOULD BE PROSECUTED TO THE FULLEST EXTENT OF US AND INTERNATIONAL LAW.. EVERYONE.. WITHOUT EXCEPTION.. GOT IT..-
25%
Endoscopy7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There is will ranting foolishness again. Several House members and Senators have said on the record that ALL of the members of both houses were invited to briefings on the subject. Door keepers said all but one was supportive of the issue. Several also asked if harsher methods should be used. If Pelosie believe it was wrong she should have had people on the appropriate committee change the law about torture.
Reply-
100%
donald517 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Endo, only in a Faux Fox Facts world do your facts hold... the true un-American liar network for unpatriotic religious bigots like you!
Reply
"Supportive" can not be concluded from someone being briefed on what might be approved, if legal!
Pew proved you religious hypocrites for what you are - the more religious, the more likely to support torture! You total hypocrite! -
-
-
-
100%
flyonthewallzz7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Nancy is from the 8th Congressional District of California.
Reply
Taking her out: would not change the balance of power in the House.
I imagine the folks in San Fransisco would be happy to elect some body that ran on a, hard line, let them hang ticket. -
50%
sinophil497 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hhusk - Please note that the article talks about secret memos being DE-CLASSIFIED. If they had been CLASSIFIED up to now, that means they could not be released and it would be a felony to reveal classified information.
Reply
So how can you blame Pelosi for obeying the law?
More to the point, so what if she knew about torture and denied the knowledge, she had nothing to do with writing the secret memos, ordering the torture, rendering prisoners, ordering illegal wiretapping, or abrogating the Geneva Conventions.
BUSH DID ALL OF THOSE. Remember, Bush coronated himself as "The Decider." He was our president, our commander in chief, the one that God wanted to be president (Bush said so himself). Pelosi may have been a witness to these events, but she did not initiate, set in motion, order, demand, or request torture be performed.
Again, SO WHAT? Nice try to divert our attention away from Bush and Cheney.-
50%
nostalgia7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
'Please note that the article talks about secret memos being DE-CLASSIFIED. If they had been CLASSIFIED up to now, that means they could not be released and it would be a felony to reveal classified information."
Reply
That is the point
They declassified the memos which described the interrogation methods but have refused to declassify the information obtained
You are only getting one side of the story-
Neutral
sinophil497 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Probab ly no one will read this post so late, but I need to respond anyway.
Reply
You are arguing that the end justifies the means. That has always been such a fallacious argument. 2 wrongs do not make a right.
The same specious and ridiculous argument was put forward in Vietnam when some stupid US officer stated they had to destroy a village in order to save it.
Moreover, even those espousing torture have admitted they can not say that the same information could not have possibly been obatined by any other method.
FBI agent Ali Soufan proved highly effective in his interrogation of terrorist captives using trust, especially on the captive Zubaydah. However, after the CIA took over and kicked Soufan off the case, the information dried up fro Zubaydah.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
37%
simonsez7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
On 9/12, it was clear our intelligence capabilities were p!ss poor. Yeah, there were clues out there, but no entity could tell us what, where, when, who and how. We had no clue as to how many sleeper units were in the country what the next target might be LA or Chicago; bridges, nuclear plants, grid, what?
Reply
Three weeks later, military grade anthrax was moving through the mail system endangering thousands more lives. Who was doing it; where was it coming from?
The number one job of the President is to protect the American citizens from attack on our own soil. We apprehended three individuals who we knew were part of the plot from day one. He did what he had to do to get every shred of information he could out of these animals. He knew that a free ipod and a few brilliant speeches was not incentive enough to get them to spill the beans.
So ... thank you President Bush and Vice President Cheney for taking every step necessary to protect American lives. You saved the lives of some great Americans and a few p!ssants as well because now they want your blood.
Torture is when you're standing on the 101st floor debating whether to burn to death or jump.
Torture is when you're on the 75th floor telling your wife goodby and the floor collapses beneath your feet.
Torture is when you're flying over PA. and your wife tells you on the cell phone that your pilot intends to crash your plane into the White House and you have to muster the courage to stop him knowing you'll probably die in the process.
Torture is when you find out you just handled a letter filled with anthrax and you and your fellow employees may be dead in an hour or so.
To go against your President in favor of these three disgusting animals is below pond scum.-
86%
GWHayduke7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
-"So ... thank you President Bush and Vice President Cheney for taking every step necessary to protect American lives. You saved the lives of some great Americans and a few p!ssants as well because now they want your blood"-
Reply
Indeed!
Good job W administration for pursuing STAR WARS and the completely ineffective missile defense shield program!
All the while ignoring intelligence that indicated a terrorist strike or dirty bomb was FAR more likely than an ICBM being lobbed from Russia.
And while we're at it......thank you W administration for making the world a far more dangerus place by invading a country that had NOTHING to do with the 9/11 attack and posed NO THREAT to the US. Please dont bring up the illegal NFZ, Endo.
And you sure do know a lot about torture Simon. But you left out being bombed into oblivion by cluster bombs and 'SHOCK & AWE".
You also forgot the torture of completely disintegrating a country's infrastructure to the point that 6 years after the campaign many Iraqis still dont have continuous electricity or water supplies.
Or how about the torture of leaving your occupied country's borders undefended allowing the widespread infiltration and terrorist bombings?
All for what?
Being reactionary fools because we were outsmarted by a primitive group of terrorists?
That gives you the right to treat humans worse than we allow animals to be treated?
Because the Administration failed, you approve of their insane reaction? -
100%
skyking2p7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Simonsez
Reply
" The number one job of the President is to protect the American citizens from attack on our own soil. We apprehended three individuals who we knew were part of the plot from day one. He did what he had to do to get every shred of information he could out of these animals. He knew that a free ipod and a few brilliant speeches was not incentive enough to get them to spill the beans."
The number one job of the president is to preserve and protect the Constitution of the United States. In this your heroes bush and cheney failed us all. This is a nation of laws and bush/cheney to the shame of us all broke so many of our laws to "protect us" and lying to us about it that they made a mockery of the DOJ.
If there is another attack on this country I'm sure you will be the first in line to shout how it is Obama's fault but can we ever be sure that it wasn't caused by hate for this country by others because of this torture ? You reap what you sow.-
41%
simonsez7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Waterboarding terrorists is not part of the Constitution.
Reply
Wire tapping non-citizens outside the country calling into the country is not part of the Constitution.
In protecting the country Lincoln broke some rules and so did FDR. Bush and
Cheney did NOT pursue "enhanced interrogation" of these terrorists because they are "meanies" and like to hurt people. They needed to know quickly what these animals knew and they found out. They deserve the benefit of the doubt because they did it for the right reasons.
It's Obama's right to say no to future waterboarding ... I have no problem with that.
He just better hope he doesn't get backed into a corner some day.
Somebody will soon say "well torture doesn't work". That's BS and that's why every country in the world has used it at some time in the past for some reason.
. -
-
-
-
78%
Natureboy7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Blah, blah, blah.
Reply
Hitler used the Reichstag fire and the allied "terror raids" (as the Germans referred to them) to justify his inhuman actions. You are no different.
Newsflash - what the other guy did never justifies torture. Torture is not about the other guy, it is about the one who advocates it and the one who performs it - both sniveling, cowardly, disseased little maggots who get their nut off by inflicting pain on helpless prisoners. -
50%
sinophil497 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
simon - "...our intelligence capabilities were p!ss poor."
Reply
On the contrary, there was ample evidence that Hussein did not have WMD's. Those aluminum tubes supposedly for ultra-centrifuges were NOT weapons grade. The Pentagon used the interpretation of a military engineer who had no nuclear experience. When nuclear engineers in the Department of Energy examined the evidence, they immediately made the right conclusion.
That yellow cake uranium? A complete hoax by an expatriate Nigerian. Ambassador Joseph Wilson (who had been to Nigeria) found no evidence of sales of yellow cake to Iraq. The consortium of 5 nations (Nigeria, Spain, Germany, France, Japan) that owned the uranium mines reported no sales to our government. All such sales had to approved by ALL 5 nations to take place. Note that all 5 are our allies. Even British intelligence knew this was a hoax. When the IAEA got hold of the supposed bill of sale of the yellow cake, it took them less than a day to conclude it was a forgery.
Then the supposed meetings between Iraqi and al Qaeda officials in Prague to prove a conspiracy of terrorism - never happened. A total fabrication. I do not know who thought this up.
The intelligence services of Egypt, Syria, France, and Russia all were in touch with Iraqi intelligence and they reported no WMD's.
Hans Blix was the former Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency and then head of the UN Monitoring, Verification, and Inspection Commission. He was the world's most experienced WMD inspector. He found no evidence of WMD's. Cheney famously scolded Blix in public for being duped by Saddam.
So there was NO EVIDENCE OF WMD'S. PERIOD. To be sure, Saddam did have WMD's and did use them in his wars against the Kurds and against Iran. When the UN sanctions came down on him, he did destroy the WMD's, but feared exposing the truth because of the threat of attack by Iran.
To sum it up, there was NO EVIDENCE of WMD's. Bush and Cheney had already made their minds up to invade, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THERE WERE WMD'S OR NOT. They simply wanted evidence conjured up to add a false sense of justification for the invasion.
So, damn Bush and Cheney for letting Osama bin Laden (the real terrorist) get away to plot more terror against our country. Damn B for plunging our country into an immoral, useless, expensive, poorly managed war. Damn B for having 4200 of our brave troops die needlessly in Iraq. Damn B for the 600,000 innocent civilian deaths and 4 million refugees.
Damn B for destroying our international prestige and creating so many more enemies in the Muslim world. -
Neutral
NoWayMan7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"To go against your President in favor of these three disgusting animals is below pond scum."
Reply
see, this is (just one of the many places) where you have it dead wrong.
no one is choosing the "disgusting animals" over the US or our persident.
we're choosing to champion our sacred values instead of abandoning them out of fear, as you are so willing to do.
if we become the monster we castigate, we have lost.
why do you want america to lose?
-
-
47%
simonsez7 months, 1 week ago
-
-
50%
simonsez7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Probably, but I think I'm right. Typically, in wartime, conventional soldiers don't know much more than what their mission is or has been. They hurt him on purpose, maybe to make an example of him if he wouldn't agree to their propaganda.
Reply
We needed to know what these guys knew ...-
sonofreasonComment removed: Hard Banned
-
-
-
89%
Charlson7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What an asinine thing to say. Brutalized ... not tortured? According to the dictionary, torture is the infliction of severe physical pain as a means of punishment or coercion. To afflict with great physical or mental pain. I didn't know you could be brutalized without inflicting mental or physical pain. You must be an expert, huh?
Reply-
-
sonofreasonComment removed: Hard Banned2 Replies
-
-
0%
sinophil497 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
simon - Oh the North Vietnamese tortured him all right. They wanted to know information about military units and who the commanding officers were. McCain recited to them the defensive lineup of the Green Bay Packers.
Reply
Why do you think McCain has been so outspoken against torture all these years (up to the election campaign last year, sad to say). -
-
-
unome2Comment removed: Spam
-
33%
lloydm657 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Obama are you trashing Cheney for saying what he believes,or do you believe that revealing all our secrets will some how soothe the hostility of the terrorist,so he will go home to his family learn to love them more than he hates us.
Reply -
40%
Klarissa7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The release of more photographs show that Obama cares more about foreign countries, some of whom already hate us, than he does about the welfare of the United States.
Reply
I thought he was going to improve our image??
I wanted to send Obama a note on my opinion about this, but in order to do that I would have to give up a lot of personal information and be on his mailing list.
Now Obama is going to Nevada to save Harry Reid.
Next he is going on an "alas, woe is me", pity tour to foreign countries.
One of these days Obama will realize that he represents the personality of Americans. He is brown-nosing foreign countries that have said they hate Americans.
Since when does kow-towing to the school-yard bully achieve respect. -
-
67%
flyonthewallzz7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Klarissa I do not disagree with you.
Reply
I think it is valid to consider where the pressure is coming from.
I can not figure out if the ploy is incredibly clever or incredibly stupid.
I do know that it is destructive, and that appears to be the sole intent.
From my perspective it appears that Cheney is forcing the administrations hand in this.
His statements are equally infuriating to the enemy.
I believe it is fair to say that there have been 10's of thousands of people who have been detained and held by our forces. I think a percentage where innocent, and I think a percentage of them would consider there treatment abusive and would not hesitate to voice it.
Especially after our former Vice President publicly states nauseatingly that it was vital to the security of this country.
This is not the way to win in a counter insurgency.
-
-
-
56%
nostalgia7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This is about releasing the "inspector general report" not the actual memos
Reply
I thought the initial discussion was about releasing the actual CIA memos?
According to Gibbs at the press briefing today, they haven't decided if they are going to release anything -
-
60%
Klarissa7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
NEW YORK - In a letter addressed to a federal court today, the Department of Defense announced that it will make public by May 28 a "substantial number" of photos depicting the abuse of prisoners by U.S. personnel. The photos, which are being released in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union in 2004, include images from prisons in Iraq and Afghanistan at locations other than Abu Ghraib.
Reply
"These photographs provide visual proof that prisoner abuse by U.S. personnel was not aberrational but widespread, reaching far beyond the walls of Abu Ghraib," said Amrit Singh, staff attorney with the ACLU. "Their disclosure is critical for helping the public understand the scope and scale of prisoner abuse as well as for holding senior officials accountable for authorizing or permitting such abuse."
The letter follows a September 2008 ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit requiring disclosure of the photos and the court's subsequent refusal in March 2009 to rehear the case. The Defense Department has indicated that it will not ask the Supreme Court to review the Second Circuit's ruling.-
-
50%
donald517 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
we're negging the Un-American person who submitted the comments.
Reply
Libs and most Americans can accept the honesty and transparency of releasing the pictures... but you want to imply something hateful or wrong as you usually do !
You are a really poor example of an honest, open, thinking, scrupled American!
-
-
-
-
46%
Klarissa7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The $328,835 snapshots of an Air Force One backup plane buzzing lower Manhattan last week will not be shown to the public, the White House said yesterday.
Reply
"We have no plans to release them," an aide to President Obama told The Post, refusing to comment further.
The sole purpose of the secret photo-op, which sent thousands of New Yorkers running for cover, was to take new publicity shots of the presidential jet over the city.
"The photos . . . are classified -- that's ridiculous," Councilman Peter Vallone Jr., said.
The photos have not technically been "classified," a White House aide said, but they are being kept from public view.
New Yorkers said they could not understand how a president who shares intimate snapshots from the White House could justify keeping these secret.
"So we're not gonna see the fruits of this cruel joke?" said Frank Antonelli, 39, one of the Wall Street traders spooked by last week's flyover.
"I'm not surprised. Obama . . . wouldn't further all the bad publicity by putting out those pictures."
YORK POST is a registered trademark of NYP Holdings-
25%
sinophil497 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Oh, Klarissa, get off of this photo rant of yours. It means nothing other than a waste of taxpayer's money. So the whole incident is an embarrassment to Obama and he sees no value in these photos. There is no military value, no security risk to these photos.
Reply
They are now simply useless photos.
So Obama kills the release of the photos. Nothing sinister, nothing underhanded, nothing secret.
Just - useless.
-
-
-
100%
truthiness7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"yes your honor, I robbed that bank, but look at all these bills I paid."
Reply
-Wanda Sykes, 2009
it doesn't matter what your reason. it doesn't matter why you did it. it doesn't matter what orwelian newspeak you come up with to label it (enhanced interrogation my ass).
torture is a crime against humanity. when you have someone held prisoner, therefore helpless to do you harm, and you make them suffer in order to gain any objective, that is torture.
it is against our laws. it is against our treaties, which have the force of law according to the constitution, and it is immoral.
fck you for defending it. you are a criminal too.-
sonofreasonComment removed: Hard Banned1 Reply
-
-
100%
Wolfie20077 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
So if the memos Cheney is asking for will not show that the harsh interrogations were effective, then why not release them and prove Cheney is blowing smoke? It's obvious it was effective and as usual the Obama administration is playing politics, again.
Reply -
-
100%
FairNBalanced7 months, 1 week ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Whatever the verbal fencing over the meaning of the word "torture," there is a fundamental difference between simply inflicting pain on innocent people for the sheer pleasure of it-- which is what our terrorist enemies do-- and getting life-saving information out of the terrorists by whatever means are necessary.
Reply
The left has long confused physical parallels with moral parallels. But when a criminal shoots at a policeman and the policeman shoots back, physical equivalence is not moral equivalence. And what American intelligence agents have done to captured terrorists is not even physical equivalence.
If we have reached the point where we cannot be bothered to think beyond rhetoric or to make moral distinctions, then we have reached the point where our own survival in an increasingly dangerous world of nuclear proliferation can no longer be taken for granted. -
loading ...
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.