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.

 

Waterboarding thwarted attack on Los Angeles

page: 2
6
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by pigwithoutawig
reply to post by platosallegory
 


Yea, you talk a good game plato but I would like to see if you change your mind if it was done to you or your family. It involves a little more than some water on his head.

If I was on the #ty end of the waterboarding and was infact planning or aiding in an attack,waterboarding would be the least of my concerns..If they are infact guilty,they would be willing to pay with there life to carry an attack out....There getting off easy...When another attack happens and you cant cry FALSE FLAG you will say why didnt they do anything...

WAR IS HELL,get over it..You cant have your cake and eat it to..My father was a pow in Nam and this is kiddy stuff that him and his buddys went through..He's still around..pains only temporary..




posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by guppy
reply to post by platosallegory
 


Amen. People kick and scream for the torture test no matter how many lives it saves. But if an attack occurs, they will kick and scream why intelligence agencies couldn't stop the attack. What a pack of morons.

This reminds me of Jimmy Carter. The idiot. He did the worse thing ever during his presidency to the intelligence community. Carter passed a bill that requires intelligence agencies have every "asset" pass a background check.

How stupid is that?


I am curious. You mention people wanting the torture techniques to be tested. If you think this torture is ok, would you be willing to submit yourself to this torture test? I bet you wouldnt.

I bet you wouldnt because deep down you know, what good torture does. I bet you wouldnt because you know that torture more often produces a person willing to say ANYTHING just to get them to stop torturing them.

I bet you wouldnt. I wouldnt either because I do understand that torture just doesnt work. It often produces people who will just say anything their captors want to hear, whether it be true or not.

besides, why would you trust what the tortures say anyway? They are essentially saying, yes we tortured them, but I swear it was for good reasons...

That is like when Charles Manson says, "I didnt kill anyone, my people did"

Just give me a break. Torture does more harm than good, and it IS used as a recruting tool for groups such as alquida. They see the stories and say hey I want to stop this torturing machine that is the US and then they strap a bomb to their chest.

Even If this torture stopped one guy, I garuntee you that is a one in a million thing. It has doen more harm than good. and you know it.

So, would you submit yourself to be tortured to see just how effective it really is? If not, why not. And don't say something like "Because I am not a terrorist" because that is NOT what I am asking... Answer the question it is a simple one.

[edit on 21-4-2009 by gimme_some_truth]



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 03:54 PM
link   
I'd like to see them release transcripts of these interagations. I wonder what they learned waterboarding a guy 183 times. I think he must have had to make up quite a bit of his answers, just to get them to stop.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 03:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth

Originally posted by guppy
reply to post by platosallegory
 


Amen. People kick and scream for the torture test no matter how many lives it saves. But if an attack occurs, they will kick and scream why intelligence agencies couldn't stop the attack. What a pack of morons.

This reminds me of Jimmy Carter. The idiot. He did the worse thing ever during his presidency to the intelligence community. Carter passed a bill that requires intelligence agencies have every "asset" pass a background check.

How stupid is that?


I am curious. You mention people wanting the torture techniques to be tested. If you think this torture is ok, would you be willing to submit yourself to this torture test? I bet you wouldnt.



Beyond that vomitous rhetoric, I bet that terrorists who plan to carry out terrorist attacks are willing, and have been, tortured.

I bet they are willing to go through the torture.

... or are they? It seems like some of them squeal mid-way though.

See, you have a good point: most people aren't willing to submit to torture.

Which is exactly why it works

It's #ing torture.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 03:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Logarock

Why would they tell the public before now?

Anyway watch some You Tube of dozens jumping to their death from the WTC and consider that something like this may have been thwarted with info gained from waterboarding.


Not to be contrary, but why WOULDN'T they?

It would make me feel a bit better about the use of torture if this were true. But I am willing to bet dollars to doughnuts it isn't.

First off, torture is NOT necessary. They HAVE DRUGS THAT WORK 100 TIMES BETTER YOU KNOW.

Second, physical torture is known to be inconclusive. It's mental torture that gets results, and mental torture takes a LOOOONG time to set up.

Third, these prisoners were held for how long? And their brain-dead organizations DIDN'T alter their plans? How valid can the knowledge of these folks be after two, three, eleven months off the map?

What the heck kind of terrorist organization would plan to fail? It strains reason to assume that they got anything meaningful in the way of tactically useful information from any of them, unless they got the information immediately after capture and then just kept torturing them for the heck of it.

But if you REALLY wanted to PROVE torture works, you most certainly WOULD advertise your successes and certainly not be too ashamed to admit to them later; success sells.

Their silence up to this point very strongly suggests that all they've done to these prisoners was 'motivate' them for posterity. Take that as you will.

In the end, drugs are faster, more effective, ACTUALLY safer, and ironically, more humane.

These people just wanted to torture them because they could get away with it. Because it gave them practical experience in something they didn't have before. The fact that they secretly rendition people, and torture them tells you that it's NOT what they are telling us it is. Why hide it otherwise? Afraid the terrorists might complain?

[edit on 21-4-2009 by Maxmars]



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 04:03 PM
link   
It's the same crap as saying there was a lot of evidence that made Iraq capable of wmd use.

I don't care who claims this so even the CIA needs proof.
(not a fabricated lie)

don't fall for it.


[edit on 21-4-2009 by Grey Magic]



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 04:10 PM
link   
Torture can be an effictive tool if used properly.

For example.

If we have in our custody someone who is known with 100% certaintly that he has info that could save lives and he will not talk. Then yes resorting to waterboarding or other pyscological torture should be used. If we know the gist of what is going on then the info given can be compared to our intelligance and we could know if he is giving accurate info or not. Kind of like at a crime scene. The police release info on a crime, but hold a few important details back so that any info given to them can be screened to see if the info is valid.

however

Plucking someone off the streets of Iraq or Afghanistan and torturing them would equate to torturing a private in the Army. Sure he is fighting, but he doesn't have any real info that is valuable. He is just doing what he is told.


For the most part though, I think that most of the claims of being tortured are false. Think about it. As a nation for the most part we frown on torture. The whole world knows this. What better way to discredit the Government then to tell the world that they were tortured? It makes us look bad and helps their agenda.

Does it happen? Of course it does. Is it happening as much as claimed? I really doubt it.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 04:11 PM
link   
Divide and conquer your enemy.


I suggest from here on out we just tickle our captives to death. to extract info.

Seriously Americans, don't be suckers..



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maxmars

Originally posted by Logarock

Why would they tell the public before now?

Anyway watch some You Tube of dozens jumping to their death from the WTC and consider that something like this may have been thwarted with info gained from waterboarding.


Not to be contrary, but why WOULDN'T they?

It would make me feel a bit better about the use of torture if this were true. But I am willing to bet dollars to doughnuts it isn't.

First off, torture is NOT necessary. They HAVE DRUGS THAT WORK 100 TIMES BETTER YOU KNOW.

Second, physical torture is known to be inconclusive. It's mental torture that gets results, and mental torture takes a LOOOONG time to set up.

[edit on 21-4-2009 by Maxmars]



Becouse even if the enemy realized they had a leak when several operations were exposed, they may not know where the leaking info was coming from. Causing this kind of uncertainly in any organization that wishes its plans to remain secret has large effect.

Just watching how they respond to a major info leak can revile many things.

You did make a good point however. The time element. Its not unusual for smart planners to realize in short order that everything has been compromised. Info about up coming or ongoing operations the prisoners may have know about would go stale soon. All the operations would be scraped and things shuffled.

HOWEVER! There still remains a lot of info in those heads about history, contacts, structure and even thought these guys are handled in such a way as to keep their knowledge limited, a small piece here, another piece there over time and the memory is jogged, develop into quit a mosaic. All good operatives are given a cover story but good interrogators have to break past that.

A man is boarded 183 times becouse his resistance indicated that he may be more than just a stubborn radical idealist but a man that knows his cover story is blown and is resisting giving up important info. He may end up giving up another prisoner as a man of high rank in the organization and so on. Or important cell or contact information And knowledge compounds.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by pigwithoutawig
I'd like to see them release transcripts of these interagations. I wonder what they learned waterboarding a guy 183 times. I think he must have had to make up quite a bit of his answers, just to get them to stop.


This is another liberal fabrication. 183 only sounds like alot when you don't know the facts.

Waterboarding last 20-40 seconds so if he was Waterborded 183 times that's like one to two hours of being waterboarded.

So your telling me putting water on a terrorist head 20-40 seconds at a time is torture?

That's silly.

Lets allow thousands of people to die in L.A. or elswhere becuse pouring water on someones head for the total of an hour or two is too much. Even though this guy helped plan to kill thousands of Americans and he wants to kill as many more as he can.

This is the definition of insanity.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 04:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Grey Magic
It's the same crap as saying there was a lot of evidence that made Iraq capable of wmd use.

I don't care who claims this so even the CIA needs proof.
(not a fabricated lie)

[edit on 21-4-2009 by Grey Magic]



The thing about WMD is that the american and world press was talking about this what 2 months before the invasion? You dont suppose that Saddam had time to get them out of country considering they had fingerprints all over them?

Just think about it.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by platosallegory
 


I don't know, let's try it on you and then you tell me. And how do you know so much about how they applied this torture. Oh right , the Gov't says it's so.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by yeti101
 



do you all honestly believe that this sort of torture was the extent of it? these locations? i don't.

this is the United States of America. If we can't abide by the laws of our country, much less those that we've agreed to internationally, what does that say about us? think hard about this.

i am of the opinion that many pardons were made that we are unaware of concerning torture, in particular in these black op programs, some of which i believe have nothing to do with national security. i also believe that george w. made some of these prior to leaving.

it is more than national security... it is our honor and justice in this world. i'm not a big proponent of the cia anyways. it's founding was satanic and it's a den hidden, dark conduct & black op torture programs. it's unfortunate that so many, i'm sure are upstanding citizens with high ideals. i applaud them.

imho, they create disasters so that they can go in a fix things. dismantle governments, start wars.. etc.

i also feel that a fair amount of dissention and "stoking" the fire on the internet is intelligence related.

are they really ferretting out the really bad guys? i don't think so.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by platosallegory
 



So your telling me putting water on a terrorist head...


If it was really as simple as you make it sound do you really think it would work? It's much more than water being put on their heads.


Waterboarding is a form of torture[1][2] that consists of immobilizing the victim on his or her back with the head inclined downwards, and then pouring water over the face and into the breathing passages. By forced suffocation and inhalation of water, the subject experiences drowning and is caused to believe they are about to die.[3] It is considered a form of torture by legal experts,[4][5] politicians, war veterans,[6][7] intelligence officials,[8] military judges,[9] and human rights organizations.[10][11] As early as the Spanish Inquisition it was used for interrogation purposes, to punish and intimidate, and to force confessions.[12]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterboarding


Edit: to fix quote



[edit on 21-4-2009 by rapinbatsisaltherage]



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 04:51 PM
link   
reply to post by yeti101
 


I never said anything about targeting Muslims only. And plucking people at random to torture is not right. But if you have a suspect who knows information that can save lives (10s, 100s, millions), would you not agree to get that information out of that person?

Turn the table the other way. A [nuclear/biological] attack is about to occur in your town where you family and friends live. The only person in custody who has information that can save the day refuses to cooperate. Why? Because he/she BELIEVE its the right thing to do. Your society is the ENEMY to him/her.

What if your family was kidnapped by known criminals who love to torture and kill their victims? For the next 24 hours, your family will be raped, tortured, and killed. Luckily, the police were able to catch one of the perps. What would you like the cops do?

Utopia is a great place to live in. But that only comes true when 100% of the people have the same views as everyone else. In simplistic terms of reality, there are 3 types of people:

- Sheep
- Wolves
- Shepherd Dogs

Wolves don't care about sheep. To them they are just a meal to savor.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 05:09 PM
link   
As to why it wasn't released before now: Need to know. They would have exposed a source of more possible information, they could have spooked the terrorists, and not been able to stop it, or just get them to launch the attack elsewhere. These operations are at least considered classified SECRET, and to unclassify info takes a while. Especially when it's something that the general public doesn't have a "need to know," anyway. This sounds to me more like some CIA agent that's pissed because of the negative coverage, so he went OTR and said "See, toldja so!"

As to the torturous nature of it- as I posted in the other thread, the interrogators are subjected to the same "tortures" they induce, just like police have to be pepper sprayed or tased. I know a sergeant first class, one of the most badass people you'll ever meet - fought in Iraq as infantry, was a Marine sniper, and had been blown up and shot so much he was forced to reclass into MI. "Imagine this -" he starts tapping someone's shoulder. Not hard, just tapping, about once per second "- for hours straight. You have no idea how quickly that will make you break. Just that simple thing," he explained to us in a lesson one day. That dispells the "The only form of torture that works is mental torture, and that takes a LOOONNGG time to set up."

I believe that the only way to effectively and efficiently get information from subjects that are unwilling to talk initially is to use "enhanced interrogation techniques," which is exactly what they are. It is not torture - torture is shoving bamboo shoots up fingernails and cutting off appendages. Torture is permanently scarring and disfiguring. Waterboarding is far from that. Same with anything else the US does.

And the reason we don't use the meds is because of their unreliability, and the fact they could possibly kill someone. I have a feeling this is a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't kind of scenario. We get the info using anything other than courtesy and mild manners, it's wrong. We use courtesy and play nice, and we don't get the info, we didn't do enough.

Make up your minds.

[edit on 21-4-2009 by Highground]



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by guppy
reply to post by yeti101
 
Turn the table the other way. A [nuclear/biological] attack is about to occur in your town where you family and friends live. The only person in custody who has information that can save the day refuses to cooperate. Why? Because he/she BELIEVE its the right thing to do. Your society is the ENEMY to him/her.

What if your family was kidnapped by known criminals who love to torture and kill their victims? For the next 24 hours, your family will be raped, tortured, and killed. Luckily, the police were able to catch one of the perps. What would you like the cops do?

Utopia is a great place to live in. But that only comes true when 100% of the people have the same views as everyone else. In simplistic terms of reality, there are 3 types of people:

- Sheep
- Wolves
- Shepherd Dogs

Wolves don't care about sheep. To them they are just a meal to savor.


then change the laws and constitution. it's that simple. thing is... all this "war on terror" justifies illegal conduct.

slowly our rights are being taken away on the basis of "national security."

if it's that bad, then change the constitution, bill of rights and law. instead, they sneak around and create things like the patriot act. have you all read it?

until then, it's illegal.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 05:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Highground
And the reason we don't use the meds is because of their unreliability, and the fact they could possibly kill someone. I have a feeling this is a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't kind of scenario. We get the info using anything other than courtesy and mild manners, it's wrong. We use courtesy and play nice, and we don't get the info, we didn't do enough.

Make up your minds.

[edit on 21-4-2009 by Highground]


how do you know they don't use meds and other techniques? read up on milabs, mkultra and of sort.

do you think ops like mkultra stopped?

they push the limit on torture and advanced technology at the expense of innocent people.

and to the agents who monitor these boards...

they got it under control....

good greif



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 05:34 PM
link   
All this anti torture talk. Think about it, if we were a religious people like most arab states, we would be screaming for an eye for an eye. They behead our people, we torture thiers. If we were like them we would behead the guy after we torture him into stating on camera that he is from a vile country that is engaged in an unjust war. Kinda like they did when they started beheading a bunch of people.

So we tortured the guys and we get info out of them. If thier families were so worried about them. Then why is it they didn't bother to worry when these people were being terrorists and killing soldiers or our innocent people? maybe they might not like thier people being tortured but we still don't cut off thier heads and put it up on the net so that people can watch it.

I do agree we should be 100% sure that they are bad guys, but still I doubt that all the people were beheaded by terrorists had background checks to be sure they were so called "bad guys" too before the terrorists removed thier heads slowly and painfully with a small knife.

Beheading someone in one quick chop is bad but not as painful as having your neck cut open (still alive and choking on your own blood as you cry adn try to breath, gurgling sounds comming from your now open neck, till they hit bone and your main arteries and you slowly loose consciousness as they hack away at your spinal cord.) Sounds horrible right?, Now we torture a man and he doesn't die. Almost the same thing, except he can and does heal from his injuries and without a doubt he lives to talk about it with his family. Where as the aforementioned headless man never sees his family again. Which would you prefer if you had a choice?

These terrorists beheaded people after they forced them to admit they were doing horrible things to the arab world. Yet we are forcing the tortured people into telling us when and where the next attack would be.

terorrists gain nothing from thier technique. Except the emotions of the public and an outcry against what is being done to protect our civil liberty.
We gain valuable information that saves hundreds and maybe thousands of lives.

Personally I feel that if they want to complain about torture and don't like it then they should get out of the terrorrist game.

The north vietnamese totured thier POWs and we complained and nothing happend in the world to change it. Yet when we do it they jump up all accross the world screaming that it isn't right. It's ilegal and should be stoped. I say let's get all the info we can from it, then when that info helps a country filling complaints against us or somewhere that they are marching and saying torture is wrong, then do not give them the info to save thier poeple. Let's see how fast they turn arround on toture.

If for you anti torture people out there. Let's say a man breaks into your home and threatens to kill your whole family, from grandma and grandpa to your baby. Now would you sit back and let that man kill them if you were holding a gun in your hands? Hopefully not, chances are it's kill or be killed. So now what if the death of one man like Hittler could have saved 1 million people during the 2nd world war should we have killed him? We tried several times and failed.

Now if torturing this one terrorist gives us the location of all the top terrorists in the world and we can stop them all. Would that not be a good reason for the torture?

So now why say we shouldn't torture these criminals for information if it can save lives. Even if it might not be your life, it's still a life that will be lost if we do nothing.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 05:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by miasria

Originally posted by Highground
And the reason we don't use the meds is because of their unreliability, and the fact they could possibly kill someone. I have a feeling this is a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't kind of scenario. We get the info using anything other than courtesy and mild manners, it's wrong. We use courtesy and play nice, and we don't get the info, we didn't do enough.

Make up your minds.

[edit on 21-4-2009 by Highground]


how do you know they don't use meds and other techniques? read up on milabs, mkultra and of sort.

do you think ops like mkultra stopped?

they push the limit on torture and advanced technology at the expense of innocent people.

and to the agents who monitor these boards...

they got it under control....

good greif


Perhaps I should have left "officially" in there, somewhere:

"And the reason we don't officially use the meds is because of their unreliability, and the fact they could possibly kill someone."

Fixt.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join