Did you read the article? Maybe just the first paragraph? I think the most important thing to take away from Adm. Blairs statement is this -

“The information gained from these techniques was valuable in some instances, but there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means,” Admiral Blair said in a written statement issued last night. “The bottom line is these techniques have hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security."

This is the second time I have posted this exact quote, but the "anything for security" people just won't see it, because it cripples their case. Just as they won't touch the legality issue. And the "anything for security" folks out there, what would Ben Franklin say?

Yes.

So what if he has been charged? What would you rather have? Him being charged after something has gone down or stopping it BEFORE it happens? Lets talk about you instead. Would you rather have the criminals plan and execute something where your family gets killed and then charge them or stop the plot against you but the criminals are not charged?

Still waiting for your link on this supposed "appellate court".

Screw our image. If I lose my job should I take out loans from loan sharks just to keep up my image of driving a new car every year and having expensive clothes, etc, etc?

While we are at it, why not ask WWJD? Did Ben have to deal with such an issue in his time? When Ol Ben has airplanes crashing into his skyscrapers, I'll be interested to hear what he has to say.

image schmage....we need to protect our country those who say otherwise have no real concept of an unconventional war and suppressing the enemy.

including Admiral Blair.......

My parents both grew up in Germany during the Nazi regime. The goal of the Nazis was global domination by blond-haired, blue-eyed people. Why are you even bringing this up? Are you suggesting a similar fate here because we harshly interrogate known terrorists?

Roughly translated, there is a Cantonese saying that goes "Want to look good. Don't want your life". It loses something in the translation but I think the meaning is evident.

Why yes, in fact we are.

So, your stating that you read the article, I would be justified in saying that you deliberately posted an inaccurate and misleading statement, claiming that there was a contrast between Adm. Blair's position and the position of the Obama administration, vis a vis the methods used being proper and beneficial for our country?

I quoted EXACTLY what was written in the article. I posted a link to the article. Draw your own conclusions. As will I.

Still waiting for the little linkee thingee on your assertion that torture was approved and supervised by an appellate court.... Or did you just make that up?

No, I wont get it for you. If you were less an XXX I'd do it.

But I'll help others: I read it in an op/ed piece on CNN's website. You go look.

Accept my apologies. I did not follow your link, as I had just read a piece from the NYTimes which was the same topic, but a news story as opposed to a analysis. (extremely similar web location) My comments to you were aimed incorrectly, and should have targeted the author of the analysis - Scott Shane.

The article I read -
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/22/us/politics/22blair.html?bl&ex=1240545600&en=ab4559dbcc4ddb83&ei=5087%0A
- is more straight reporting, and I feel shows more accurately Adm Blair's position.

Very generous of you, I mean it.

The whole controversy is evolving as bits and pieces dribble forth. I expect that over the enxt week or so we will see lots of people playing "duck-and-cover" as shoes drop as though from a centipede.

It should provide great moments of drama and entertainment.