Approving 'alternative interrogation methods' - Page 3 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

cmbdiesel · #31 04-23-2009, 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

Dueling newspapers: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/23/us/politics/23detain.html?hp
Quote, "Even President Obama’s new director of national intelligence, Dennis C. Blair, wrote in a memorandum to his staff last week that “high value information came from interrogations in which these methods were used,” an assertion left out when the memorandum was edited for public release. By contrast, Mr. Obama and most of his top aides have argued that the use of those methods betrayed American values — and anyway, produced unreliable information. Those are a convenient pair of opinions, of course: the moral balancing would be far trickier if the C.I.A. methods were demonstrated to have been crucial in disrupting major plots."

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?

Botnst · #32 04-23-2009, 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmbdiesel

Did you read the article? ...

Yes.

aklim · #33 04-23-2009, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vronsky

Whatever that 'high value information' might be and how many major plots its has disrupted, it didn't incriminate Zubaydah (in GTB since 2002) because he hasn't been charged yet, despite the 83 'waterboarding' sessions (and God knows what else).

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?

JollyRoger · #34 04-23-2009, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

Yes.

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

aklim · #35 04-23-2009, 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmbdiesel

“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."

And the "anything for security" folks out there, what would Ben Franklin say?

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.

Txjake · #36 04-23-2009, 11:49 AM

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.......

raymr · #37 04-23-2009, 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vronsky

Let me get this straight:
torture is bad, ...except for non US citizens,
is that what you are saying ?

BTW, the Nazis regarded their enemy Jews as 'racial foreign', in other words 'non-citizens' aswell. Perhaps read up sometime on the 'Nuremburg Laws'.

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?

aklim · #38 04-23-2009, 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Txjake

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.......

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.

JollyRoger · #39 04-23-2009, 12:17 PM

Why yes, in fact we are.

cmbdiesel · #40 04-23-2009, 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

"Even President Obama’s new director of national intelligence, Dennis C. Blair, wrote in a memorandum to his staff last week that “high value information came from interrogations in which these methods were used,” an assertion left out when the memorandum was edited for public release. By contrast, Mr. Obama and most of his top aides have argued that the use of those methods betrayed American values — and anyway, produced unreliable information."

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?

Botnst · #41 04-23-2009, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmbdiesel

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.

JollyRoger · #42 04-23-2009, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

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?

Botnst · #43 04-23-2009, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JollyRoger

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.

cmbdiesel · #44 04-23-2009, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

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

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.

Botnst · #45 04-23-2009, 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmbdiesel

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.