It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

CIA destroyed al-Qaida interrogation video

page: 3
9
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 12:09 PM
link   
reply to post by TruthWithin
 


Oh give me freakin break. What the heck is so rambo about wishing for both sides to lay down their weapons?

I see what you mean about having to stoop down to their level but you have to remember this is not like any other enemy we've ever been up against. On top of this they also fight dressed in civilian clothing so why even bring up geneva?

Apparently the do nothing approach and policies of previous Presidents didn't work and now you want to bury your head in the sand and return to this.
Yeah I know all about all the conspiracy theories, about all this being staged but we are at a point where there are now so many of these theories going around they've begun to contradict the others. Hate to start another one but maybe that's the plan.
When there's a web of confusion it's time to get back to basics, Al Quaeda kills!



DCP

posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 12:12 PM
link   
I guess it comes down to, do you thinkong the US Government got information out Abu Zubaydah by waterboarding him that saved American lives. I would say letting Americans die because you don't want to put Zubaydah under emotional or physical stress is sick. Odds are if you are reading this Zubaydah wants you to die, if you are against waterboarding you are still an infidel.

After a war the two sides really don't like each other so the winning side looks to punish the loosing side however they can. So you make people serve prison time for the doing the exact same thing your side did during the war.

a really lose metaphor would be if your significant other comes home and you guys have sex...you think it's cool. if your significant other decides to have sex with someone else, you are probably not going to like it. Same act by the same person but different responses: one is positive and the other would probably be negative



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 12:13 PM
link   
reply to post by jtma508
 


It's only the failures that make the news. The sucessful ops never see the light of day. Part of diplomacy is brinksmanship, and if the enemy isn't scared that you'll do just what you say, then they'll continue to ignore you.(i.e. carrot and stick).



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 01:21 PM
link   
as far as torture goes I know the Geneva Convention covers this but doesn't the
Geneva Convention only apply to fighting armies of recognized countries..

If the above is the case then we are not at war with an opposing country (yet)
but an organization and I think we should do to them what they would and have done to us.

As far as not meddling in other countries affairs goes didn't we try that
before WWI and then again before WWII and we ended up with Germany on the offensive during WWI and Germany and Japan on the attack in WWII so I am not sure what history tells you when you look at this but it tells me that isolationism does not work like everyone thinks... and our economy was piss poor during these times also so don't forget that either no economy no country.


Respectfully
GEO



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by BlueRaja
 


Untrue. We're always hearing about this plot foiled, that plot foiled, so-in-so in custody, etc. I don't think anyone can infer from my statement that I'm saying the CIA fails 100% of the time. But the fact remains that the intelligence community's track record of late has been suspect at best. And the consequences of acting on bad intelligence could be catastrophic. Surely you can see this from recent history.

And I don't see what any of this has to do with 'brinkmanship'. Brinkmanship is a provocative action. Who are trying to provoke?



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by NuclearPaul
If they waterboarded me, I'd probably admit to anything too...


Do you believe the CIA (or whomever) is naive enough to believe anything that comes out of the mouth of someone being interrogated (be they waterboarded or not)? They always verify the information given, as best they can. If they find someone is lying, the interrogation continues.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by niteboy82
So now, not only is Al Qaeda performing big nasties like 9/11, but they are also on solo missions, running around the US (and outside) popping off individual members of the CIA.


Roll you eyes and mock, but this demonstrates a profound degree of ignorance on your part. You don't believe the CIA has an interest in protecting their identities of their agents? It is not that revealing their identities will let al'Qaeda know who they are, but everyone will know who they are. Knowledge of their identity would impede their ability to operate effectively.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 01:57 PM
link   
reply to post by SaviorComplex
 


But again, you're assuming that THAT is the reason the tapes were destroyed (i.e., to protect the identities of agents). How can you possibly know that to be true? Cause they said so?



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by jtma508
 


I wasn't referring to the CIA with regards to brinksmanship, so much as trying to get other countries to get their act together voluntarily, rather than through force. You may hear about this plot foiled or such, but there's an awful lot of stuff you'll never hear about(nor would you want to), that is prevented, or otherwise accomplished.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by SaviorComplex
 


It's the same reason whenever there are pictures of SOF forces, you will in many cases see the faces blacked out or pixelated. This is a very good point.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 02:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5
...Personally, I think the best opportunity is one that we will never use, because it will tick off countries that are supposedly our allies. That solution would be to make the existing governments of those countries police their own radicals and pass the appropriate laws that disallow radical hate teachings (hate crimes). ...
[edit on 12/7/2007 by defcon5]


Do you realze what you are saying?
You bring up another issue that people equally gripe about here that has to do with why the rest of the world hates the US so much. I can already hear the outcry from your fellow sympathyzers if we force these countries to do what you suggest regarding hate crimes.
Do you see what I mean? There is no simple solution.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 02:30 PM
link   
Okay so this is just hogwash, You are telling me that the (Selfproclaimed) Most intelligent agency to collect secret intelligence has absolutly zero capability to mask the faces and voices of its agents to protect them rather than burning(Destroying) extremely useful evidence it claimed didn't exsist to begin with!?

Why say anything and pretend that nothing happened, rather than stirring the whole situation into a great big ludacris callamity!

This is just like the missing nuke, then live nukes being flown across country thing... Instead of alerting the public of something they never knew about to beggin with they tell everyone and ruin it for themselves.
When in turn they attempt to hide things and discredit what people already know, attempting to tell them they are "crazy"....

If that's not a Ash* Backwards situation I dont know what is....



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5
Wow…
What an uneducated point of view you have on things.

You forgot to add "In your opinion" to your statement. I'm sure you think everyone is uneducated who disagrees with you.


What a uneducated thing to say.



I suggest going back and learning something called history. Waterboarding is torture

Waterboarding is NOT torture. You do realize Wiki is not a valid source.
Just because Wiki says so, that does not make it true. Whoever wrote that article had a major bias.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 04:53 PM
link   


Sen. Edward Kennedy, a Massachusetts Democrat, charged a cover-up reminiscent of the Watergate scandal that drove President Richard Nixon from office in 1974.



"The past six years, the Bush administration has run roughshod over our ideals and the rule of law," Kennedy said in a speech on the Senate floor. "Now, when the new Democratic Congress is demanding answers, the administration is feverishly covering up its tracks."


My thoughts exactly



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 04:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Harlequin
so theres `outrage` when captured US personel are paraded on TV and hung drawn and quatered etc etc

but its fine for the US to do the same

HUH??

Please tell me you are not comparing waterboarding and someone getting hung & burned. Please show me where the US did such a thing. And yes, its ok to waterboard someone.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by sir_chancealot
Great! So you have no problem volunteering to let me waterboard you, right? After all, it's not really torture. No more uncomfortable than using harsh language, right?

Come on, please get a grip on reality.

Why on Earth would I want to be waterboarded?
Its not torture, but I did not say it was pleasant.

Using your logic, we should let everyone out of prison because I would not want to be locked up for life either. That would such & be uncomfortable.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by SimiusDei
While limited (repeat LIMITED) forms of torture may be a means of getting someone to talk who would not otherwise, EXTREME torture can make people say things that simply ARE NOT TRUE just so they can get OUT of the torture situation.

Yes, that is always a possibility but not a reason to stop trying. If a person does know something, he will be more likely to talk if under duress.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaviorComplex

You don't believe the CIA has an interest in protecting their identities of their agents? It is not that revealing their identities will let al'Qaeda know who they are, but everyone will know who they are.


This is an entirely feasible explanation for the destruction of the tapes. I'm not denying the possibility of torture, which is an inffective way of getting information (people will say anything under those conditions) but all possible motives should be examined.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by geocom
as far as torture goes I know the Geneva Convention covers this but doesn't the
Geneva Convention only apply to fighting armies of recognized countries..

If the above is the case then we are not at war with an opposing country (yet)
but an organization and I think we should do to them what they would and have done to us.

As far as not meddling in other countries affairs goes didn't we try that
before WWI and then again before WWII and we ended up with Germany on the offensive during WWI and Germany and Japan on the attack in WWII so I am not sure what history tells you when you look at this but it tells me that isolationism does not work like everyone thinks... and our economy was piss poor during these times also so don't forget that either no economy no country.


You made some excellent points and you are able to think for yourself instead of following the prescribed line.



posted on Dec, 7 2007 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Alxandro
 


Al Qaeda kills sure, so we're told, but not as many as your government does, everyday. That fellow texan of yours has caused one bloody fine mess. Is he a "do something President" jeez give me a break please. He's a no-good scumbag murderer, and hasn't done a single constructive thing since he fraudulently became president. He's scum plain and simple, get over it.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join