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 Official: No Proof Harsh Techniques Stopped Terror Attacks

page: 3
9
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 01:36 PM
link   
Well - call me stupid (please don't) but I didn't even realize its illegal internationally because it HASN'T been prosecuted yet...

Then the CIA official it didn't help at all.

Obama saying it happened in the past prevents it from being prosecuted.

If you break the law you better make damn sure something good comes out of it - which did not happen here.




posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 01:39 PM
link   
I feel that torture was used for entertainment purposes. Kinda a theater of the macabre.

Most of the broom and mop handles probably found their way up someone's backside. Children included.



posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by crmanager

Define torture...that is the ONLY arguement for now.


I disagree. That question is secondary to whether our definition of torture is even relevant to those we expect to uphold the Constitution - on our behalf!

Apparently, the approach of the administration (then and now) is that there is some kind of game to be played with words and childish extreme examples. The people seem to have responded by saying, "No, we are interested in the facts, NOT what you intend to do with them in your political circus."

But we keep having to endure this sophistic tap dance about what people are willing to internalize about the process, through the magic of verbiage.... and boy, do these lawyers know their wordsmithing!

If America wants to know exactly WHO decided what, when, and to what effect, we SHOULD be able to ask the question without having to undergo a Political side show of stipulations and speculations.

This 2004 declaration reveals further information regarding the manipulation of public sentiment, reticence to stand by the principles and simply defend their 'honest' actions, and a significant disrespect for the principles of a government of the people.

These damn ideological elitists seem to think every American is a rube, incapable of making a decision, then they conceal the information to make the point true! As if it were we who had to live up to their expectation and not vice-versa. I suspect the reason foreigners are so prone to think of Americans as arrogant buffoons is because it's the way our 'representatives' want us to be considered. - sorry off-topic...

[edit on 26-4-2009 by Maxmars]



posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 02:10 PM
link   
Interesting how the left is spinning this one line. Too bad not too many of them will actually read the whole article.

Here's a review and comment on the 5 year old report the left and this thread is trumpeting about.

CIA Inspector General Report Is No Smoking Gun


McClatchy has a story up today with the headline “CIA Official: no proof harsh techniques stopped terror attacks.” The story notes that “The CIA inspector general in 2004 found that there was no conclusive proof that waterboarding or other harsh interrogation techniques helped the Bush administration thwart any "specific imminent attacks," according to recently declassified Justice Department memos.”

Critics are jumping on this as the smoking gun that proves those who claim the program stopped attacks are wrong. Not so fast.

In fact, the 2004 IG memo concluded as a general matter that the program had produced valuable intelligence, although the IG report prefaced this conclusion by stating that it was difficult precisely to assess or measure the value of the program and that “it is difficult to determine conclusively whether interrogations provided information critical to interdicting specific imminent attacks.” The Justice Department memos released by the Obama administration quoted or paraphrased these statements from the IG report.

The IG report was not intended to be a comprehensive inquiry into the value and effectiveness of the program. That is why, the following year, in 2005, the CIA was asked to provide an assessment of the value and effectiveness of the program. They later produced something called the “Effectiveness Memo” which lays out specifically how the program helped stop attacks and saved lives. This is one of the documents that Vice President Cheney has asked be declassified.

For more balanced reporting, I recommend this piece by Stuart Taylor of National Journal. In it he quotes several former CIA directors and directors of national intelligence who state definitively that the program stopped attacks and saved lives.



posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 03:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Ferris.Bueller.II
 



For more balanced reporting, I recommend this piece by Stuart Taylor of National Journal. In it he quotes several former CIA directors and directors of national intelligence who state definitively that the program stopped attacks and saved lives.


Were these not the same 'former' CIA officials who railed against releasing the documentation?

And, isn't there any distinction between preventing imminent attacks, which is what was proposed by these people, and 'valuable intelligence'? Or do we not want to get into what that means?



posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maxmars


For more balanced reporting, I recommend this piece by Stuart Taylor of National Journal. In it he quotes several former CIA directors and directors of national intelligence who state definitively that the program stopped attacks and saved lives.


Were these not the same 'former' CIA officials who railed against releasing the documentation?


Were they? If so, that was probably due to the documents being classified. But seeing as Obama has declassified them, they probably feel the whole story should be told, rather than Obama's censored version.


And, isn't there any distinction between preventing imminent attacks, which is what was proposed by these people, and 'valuable intelligence'? Or do we not want to get into what that means?


Well, what is it you need to learn? Seeing as you tend to veer to the left, I'd say the most important lesson for you to learn is that 'valuable intelligence' is required to 'prevent imminent attacks', and 'valuable intelligence' takes work and effort to acquire. That's the major kernel of knowledge I've noticed missing from a lot of leftists. They tend to have this idea that intelligence just falls into your lap with no effort, like on TV and in movies. And it's always exactly the information you need.

I'm just waiting to hear Obama & the left's excuse(s) for when a major attack happens that could've been averted if the CIA, FBI, and DoD had been allowed to do their jobs.

[edit on 4/26/09 by Ferris.Bueller.II]



posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 06:43 PM
link   
Left


That makes it complete. I've now been labeled as everything under the sun!


Frankly, I simply want to know the truth. Without the ideology behind it.

Somehow, that is always greeted as a challenge, rather than an obligation.

Think of me what you will, but facts speak for themselves.



posted on Apr, 26 2009 @ 07:54 PM
link   
Wow, this has by far been my most successful thread and with the topic I am pleased. I will say it again torture is torture and its wrong at all levels, local, state, federal and international. I myself have never been tortured but at the same time I, being a human being feel for any other human being that has been tortured. To say it helps is crazy, bush and co. have destroyed our nations image and deserve to be prosecuted.

[edit on 26-4-2009 by iamjesusphish]



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join