Approving 'alternative interrogation methods'
 

Here's what Condoleezza Rice approved regarding alternative interrogation methods:

"CIA memos released by President Barack Obama's administration last week revealed that Zubaydah was waterboarded at least 83 times and self-confessed 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammad 183 times. "

Full read:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8013759.stm

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."

Too bad the bastard survived.

if they did it a million times each and it saved one American life, then it is worth it and not a problem...the problem is now that we have the information from these guys, is that they are still alive.....

I don't follow. So what if they are alive? Dead, they are happy and a martyr. Alive, they are an example to the rest of the people.

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).

alive they are a security risk and an expense. they deserve to die, esp the one who was the master planner...JMO YMMV

This stuff barely qualifies as torture. I consider torture to be anything that causes physical bodily damage or draws blood. The stuff they do - water boarding, sleep deprivation, etc. - is used in military training. Heck, even ask a hospital intern about sleep deprivation. The thing to keep in mind is that torture, as lame as the current interpretation is, is not used against US citizens, but against our enemies. And yes, they are our enemies, who believe that there are no innocent people among us. The officials who ordered and approved these measures did so out of concern for US security and for protection of its citizens.

The Nazis argued like that aswell, doesn't that disturb you at all :eek:

The Right continues to ignore what is at the heart of this discussion. The issue is once again, total disregard for the system of checks and balances that make this democracy work. Wiretapping? Sure, get a court order. And why do we do that? Because absent that, a President is free to wiretap his politial enemies, dissenters, and the opposition parties all under the cover of some BS claim he can make. We are now finding out that is exactly what happened in the case of illegal wiretapping.

Torture? Fine, get a court order. Can't get a court order because it is illegal? Fine, pass a law and set out the circumstances in which it can be used and the check and balance of the judicial system against the executive. And all for the same reasons. Absent this, and another step down the road to fascism, a President can torture dissenters, members of the oppostion party and his political enemies, all under the guise of some BS story. What these people did was illegal, and they should be prosecuted liked anyone else. Those who did so in good faith will be found not guilty. Those who did it for the reason I suspect they did it, which was to substantiate a pre-determined reason for the invasion or Iraq, should go to jail.

We have two classes of people who were tortured here, Al Queda captives and Iraqi citizens. It is beng alleged that the Iraqis were tortured in order to ellict some sort of information on an Al Queda-Iraqi link, one which Bush and Cheney claimed existed when in fact they had absolutely no solid information that it did. These people were tortured solely for the purpose of advancing the politial position of two men who had instigated a Hitler-style invasion of a country that did not attack us, and badly needed an excuse for their war, a war that to this day no one knows why it was started. Anyone involved in that should be sent to prison, and in their case, once the evidence is heard, I think a jury will agree.

Which doesn't mean that the interrogations methods were necessary to get that information.

I wonder who made the decision to edit that part out of the memo that got released. That was foolish, even Bush-like.

bunk......

Exactly right.I'm not so sure about that, although prosecutions in court would be preferable to Congressional hearings. Congress can't be trusted with this issue. Both sides would turn it into a circus and we don't have time for that.On that one, I agree completely.

I guess great minds don't always think alike.

Our system of government? It is quite clear that was a core belief of the Bush admin.

Wouldn't you agree that a country should use whatever means necessary to protect its borders and its people, and that unconventional measures may be called for? You also left out my quote in that torture is not used against US citizens. I'm not so sure Nazis adhered to that idea.