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.

 

Bush Administration is Right - Yet Again!

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 10:05 AM
link   
Bush Administration is Right - Yet Again!
All those reasons people have for voting for Obama were based upon media planted lies.

The Real CIA News
online.wsj.com...


Whoever advised people to be skeptical of what they read in the papers must have had in mind this week's coverage of the documents about CIA interrogations. Now that we've had a chance to read the reports, it's clear the real story isn't the few cases of abuse played up by the media. The news is that the program was thoughtfully developed, carefully circumscribed, briefed to Congress, and yielded information crucial to disrupting al Qaeda.

In other words, it worked—at least until politics got in the way.

That's the essential judgment offered by former CIA Inspector General John Helgerson in his 2004 report. Some mild criticism aside, the report says the CIA "invested immense time and effort to implement the [program] quickly, effectively, and within the law"; that the agency "generally provided good guidance and support"; and that agency personnel largely "followed guidance and procedures and documented their activities well." So where's the scandal?

***

Mr. Helgerson describes how the CIA collaborated with the Pentagon, the Justice Department and even outside experts to develop specific guidelines for 10 enhanced interrogation techniques, including waterboarding, that passed legal muster. The enhanced interrogation techniques (EITs) "would be used on 'an as needed basis' and all would not necessarily be used. Further, the EITs were expected to be used 'in some sort of escalating fashion' . . ." The agency had psychologists evaluate al Qaeda operative Abu Zubaydah, to ensure he would not suffer physical or long-term mental harm.



The outrage here isn't that government officials used sometimes rough interrogation methods to break our enemies. The outrage is that, years later, when the political winds have shifted and there hasn't been another attack, our politicians would punish the men and women who did their best to protect Americans in a time of peril.


[edit on 27-8-2009 by Pathos]




posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 10:43 AM
link   
I thought that Al Qaeda didn't exist?

How do you prevent an attack from an imaginary enemy?

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

So what exactly was the Bush administration right about? That torturing people will make them say whatever you want them to?

Would someone mind clearing this up for me, I'm very confused.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 10:48 AM
link   
I don't get the thought about all this has prevented another attack. Did the US use "aggressive interrogation techniques" on the Japanese after Pearl Harbor?

If there had been numerous attacks within a short span and after these techniques were implemented, there was no more, I would say they worked. But when you have a one off event, that is all it is, a one off event. I am pretty sure if you had sustained the status quo, nothing else would have happened.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 11:09 AM
link   
People, including Dick Cheney, talk as though the reason we don't torture is that it doesn't work. And if it is shown to work, then it's OK to use. But that's not why we don't torture, people! Have you totally forgotten your own humanity? We don't torture because it's cruel and inhumane. It's only secondary that it doesn't work.

Even if Bush and company were right and they DID get good information from using torture (which I have yet to see proof of), it's still cruel and inhumane, which, in my book, is nothing to be proud of.

The CIA lost. Hopefully, we won't have to go through this dark story ever again, where America, land of the free and home of the brave, resorts to physical and mental torment and intimidation to get what they want. It's disgusting, shameful and embarrassing.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 11:15 AM
link   
I am surprised that anybody has the nerve to say Bush was right. I personally don't think Bush was right on anything and as time has told so far he was way wrong on most things he did. And time will keep telling that he was wrong.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 11:16 AM
link   
When you extend the meaning of torture to include "second hand smoke", then you can classify anything as torture. Just shows you how idiotic the torture claims are.

www.cnsnews.com...


The IG's office described this smoke-blowing as one of several "unauthorized or undocumented techniques" it discovered had been used in isolated incidents by CIA employees interrogating high-level al-Qaida terrorists.



Obama is an epic failure, so it's time once again to attack Bush.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 11:21 AM
link   
Torture Memos Belie Cheney's Claim



Well, yesterday, those memos were released, along with the CIA inspector general's report. And, surprise surprise, they don't begin to show what Cheney said they did.

The memos, from 2004 and 2005, do say that some detainees, particularly Khaled Sheikh Mohammed, gave up useful information during debriefing sessions. But nowhere do they suggest that that information was gleaned through torture.

Indeed, as Spencer Ackerman of the Washington Independent shows, most of the evidence suggests they came through traditional interrogation techniques. As Spencer puts it: "Cheney's public account of these documents have conflated the difference between information acquired from detainees, which the documents present, and information acquired from detainees through the enhanced interrogation program, which they don't."


Cheney is a lying pig.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 11:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Pathos
 


I hate this crap. Please pathos, explain how the 'quoted text' with ZERO input from you constitutes Bush being right? Again?

I won't go into my reasonings since some have already touched on the valid points below. What I hate is when someone posts on something like this and doesn't add ANY of their own reasoning to back it up. Then they just bail and never reply again.

Well, it's early still so maybe pathos will still reply. When you do, please give us your reasons for your statement because the quoted text is a very WEAK reason.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 11:45 AM
link   
www.cia.gov...


The CIA referred allegations of abuse to the Department of Justice for potential prosecution. This Agency made no excuses for behavior, however rare, that went beyond the formal guidelines on counterterrorism. The Department of Justice has had the complete IG report since 2004. Its career prosecutors have examined that document—and other incidents from Iraq and Afghanistan—for legal accountability. They worked carefully and thoroughly, sometimes taking years to decide if prosecution was warranted or not. In one case, the Department obtained a criminal conviction of a CIA contractor. In other instances, after Justice chose not to pursue action in court, the Agency took disciplinary steps of its own.


Even the CIA knew when Bush was having people do things that were wrong and then using the justice department to cover it up and make it disappear. The CIA even punished people when the justice department wouldn't. So even the CIA knew Bush was wrong yet again!



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 12:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


I understand your point BH, but I personally don't care what methods were used if it achieved actionable information that stopped terror attacks. It's the old "ends justifies the means" debate. We are just on opposite sides of that debate. I could care less that terrorist themselves were terrorized.

I have stated in other threads that the Obama Administration should release the info gathered during the interrogations if they believe them to be false or useless. I think it is telling that no one talks about the info gathered, that leads me to think that it must have been good info.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 12:11 PM
link   
Who said it wouldn't of been effective without the torture?

And the problem is here is that it is breaking international law.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 12:13 PM
link   
reply to post by RRconservative
 
Well done sir. You've managed to side step any actual discussion of whether or not the released memos indicate that the Bush administration's policies were effective or not, by setting up a straw man argument about what is being called torture. Except no one is buying your bullsh*t!

Noone on this thread, or any other for that matter, has claimed that second hand smoke is torture. So what exactly does your post prove? Of course, other than the fact that you don't want to talk about ACTUAL torture; i.e., extreme periods of: prolonged isolation, prolonged sleep deprivation, sensory deprivation, extremely painful "stress positions," forced nudity combined with sexual humiliation, cultural humiliation (such as desecration of holy scriptures), subjection to extreme heat and cold including that which induces hypothermia, exploitation of phobias, and last but certainly not least, simulation of the experience of death by drowning, i.e., waterboarding!

There is no question as to whether or not these things constitute torture in the eyes of the rest of the civilized world. For that matter we hung Japaneses officers after WWII for waterboarding then turned around and authorized its use. And ffor the record, simply having an attorney write an opinion that these things are not torture, in their mind, should not give any administration carte blanche to do as they please without regard for international law.

As a veteran I find this despicable. That type of behavior only increases the odds that our captured personnel (military and civilian) will be subjected to similar treatment. Use of such methods has been shown time and again to produce unreliable intelligence, and moreover, it lowers America in the eyes of the world.

Sell your soul to corporate greed if you must, but I prefer the soul of my country not be sullied by the likes of those willing to justify any means to reach the ends they seek. Peace

-AAH



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 12:21 PM
link   
looks like someone was just looking for stars and flags. start a thread and abandon it to sit back and see what happens well not wasting time on this see ya



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by kommunist
I thought that Al Qaeda didn't exist?

How do you prevent an attack from an imaginary enemy?

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

So what exactly was the Bush administration right about? That torturing people will make them say whatever you want them to?

Would someone mind clearing this up for me, I'm very confused.


i love sarcasm...only all the field agents know that torture does not work, but in the politics of bush and cheney, that is not what they wanted to hear. cheney being intelligent as he is, probably knew this, but he knowingly let his sadistic side rule. an old man ruining young mens lives, and history keeps repeating.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by notsoobvious
looks like someone was just looking for stars and flags. start a thread and abandon it to sit back and see what happens well not wasting time on this see ya

After posting the article and comment, I took off to attend a job interview. My apology for not getting back sooner, but a life event needed my attention.


Originally posted by JBA2848
I am surprised that anybody has the nerve to say Bush was right. I personally don't think Bush was right on anything and as time has told so far he was way wrong on most things he did. And time will keep telling that he was wrong.

I think Bush was right. Even though the majority disagrees with him, I personally believe Bush did the right thing. What drove everyone crazy was that he went into Iraq, and then there was no weapons of mass destruction found. When I view the "War on Iraq", I think it was a justified war to have. It was just too late. Similar to Obama's war on Afghanistan. It should have been solved years ago. They are both justified in their actions against Iraq and Afghanistan, but they happened too late in the process.


Originally posted by dariousg
reply to post by Pathos
 


I hate this crap. Please pathos, explain how the 'quoted text' with ZERO input from you constitutes Bush being right? Again?

I won't go into my reasonings since some have already touched on the valid points below. What I hate is when someone posts on something like this and doesn't add ANY of their own reasoning to back it up. Then they just bail and never reply again.

Well, it's early still so maybe pathos will still reply. When you do, please give us your reasons for your statement because the quoted text is a very WEAK reason.

Good. I hope you do hate this stuff. Where I was going with this thread is exactly where we are now. Bush originally told everyone that water-boarding was an effective tool, which provided critical intelligence that saved live. According to this new CIA report, Bush was correct in his assessment. Around the time of it's implementation, the media was going nuts by glorifying the use of water-boarding. Even though the technique was inhumane, Bush's original stand on the issue was correct. It did work.

At the current moment, the CIA is being investigated. Smells like Nancy Pelosi wants to discredit the CIA, so she can win her seat back next year. Oops. Looks like its about to backfire. Remember she also told everyone she was lied to, but this report clearly states that 'everyone' knew and agreed to the use of water-boarding.

Bush was right.

[edit on 27-8-2009 by Pathos]



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 03:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by pavil
I understand your point BH, but I personally don't care what methods were used if it achieved actionable information that stopped terror attacks.


That's the difference between you and me. And as yet, there is no evidence whatsoever that information received under torture did stop anything.



I think it is telling that no one talks about the info gathered, that leads me to think that it must have been good info.


And it leads me to think that it was worthless. If they had gained good information, don't you think they'd be singing about it from the rooftops?



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by RRconservative
When you extend the meaning of torture to include "second hand smoke", then you can classify anything as torture. Just shows you how idiotic the torture claims are.

www.cnsnews.com...


The IG's office described this smoke-blowing as one of several "unauthorized or undocumented techniques" it discovered had been used in isolated incidents by CIA employees interrogating high-level al-Qaida terrorists.



Obama is an epic failure, so it's time once again to attack Bush.


Hey mate, I'll be out in LA in a bit, I will be glad to water board you on film and get your synopsis afterwards if you wanna walk the walk?

We could post it up here?

I have some time, a good lawyer (if one exist) and an HD cam.



[edit on 27-8-2009 by mental modulator]



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 04:26 PM
link   
reply to post by mental modulator
 
I'll gladly fly to LA for the event and volunteer my legal advise. My undergrad was in broadcast production, so I may be of some use with the camera as well



posted on Aug, 28 2009 @ 10:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by pavil
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


I understand your point BH, but I personally don't care what methods were used if it achieved actionable information that stopped terror attacks. It's the old "ends justifies the means" debate. We are just on opposite sides of that debate. I could care less that terrorist themselves were terrorized.

I have stated in other threads that the Obama Administration should release the info gathered during the interrogations if they believe them to be false or useless. I think it is telling that no one talks about the info gathered, that leads me to think that it must have been good info.



And in many cases their innocent family members and children? Yes, children as well. You see, it's this attitude that is wrong. I understand that you HOPE that the information gleened is valid. The problem is when we put ourselves above other people based on the fact that we feel our beliefs are better than theirs. Is terrorism good? Nope. But then, many in the world view the government of the U.S. the biggest terrorists on the block.

The biggest problem though isn't about who is tortured. It is the simple fact that many (MOST) will say whatever they feel the torturers WANT them to hear in order to stop it. Torture DOES NOT WORK!

No, I'm not a bleeding heart liberal or anything like that. I feel that I am mostly conservative with a HUMAN twist.




top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join