13
   

Bush-era interrogation may have worked, Obama official says

 
 
Woiyo9
 
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 06:22 am
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Bush-era interrogation techniques that many view as torture may have yielded important information about terrorists, President Obama's national intelligence director said in an internal memo.
A memo attributed to Intelligence Director Dennis Blair addresses Bush-era interrogation techniques.

A memo attributed to Intelligence Director Dennis Blair addresses Bush-era interrogation techniques.
Click to view previous image
1 of 2
Click to view next image

"High-value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided a deeper understanding of the al Qaeda organization that was attacking this country," Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair said in a memo to personnel.

The memo, obtained by CNN late Tuesday, was sent around the time the administration released several memos from the previous administration detailing the use of terror interrogation techniques such as waterboarding, which simulates drowning.

Obama left open the possibility of criminal prosecution Tuesday for former Bush administration officials who drew up the legal basis for aggressive interrogation techniques many view as torture.

Obama said it will be up to Attorney General Eric Holder to decide whether or not to prosecute the former officials.

"With respect to those who formulated those legal decisions, I would say that is going to be more a decision for the attorney general within the parameter of various laws, and I don't want to prejudge that," Obama said during a meeting with Jordan's King Abdullah II at the White House.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/04/21/obama.memos/index.html

So Obama is not really making decisions based upon his oath to defend this Nation. His decisions are based totally on his responsibility to repay his campaign donors such as Move On.

Happy now?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 13 • Views: 6,168 • Replies: 124

 
djjd62
 
  3  
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 06:28 am
just because it worked doesn't make it right

H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 07:15 am
@Woiyo9,
Woiyo9 wrote:


So Obama is not really making decisions based upon his oath to defend this Nation.
His decisions are based totally on his responsibility to repay his campaign donors such as Move On.



PrezBO is an idiot and yes, he is re-paying organizations for votes they generated for him.
0 Replies
 
Woiyo9
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 07:16 am
@djjd62,
So I can see you agree with Obama and his minions.

Better to have dead Americans, then vigorously interrogate a terrorist.
H2O MAN
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 07:22 am


PrezBO is already campaigning for re-election.
He will do and say whatever it takes for him to stay in office no
matter how badly it damages this country and it's tax paying citizens.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  3  
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 07:30 am
Quote:
Happy now?


Yes, no one is above the law and torture aka "harsher interrogations" has always been against the GV of which we are a signature.
Woiyo9
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 07:40 am
@revel,
So then you must accept the consequences of dead Americans when we fail to connect the "dots" to satisfy your quest to be "liked" by our enemies. Do you agree?

I am purposely ignoring your reference the the GV since I do not believe waterboarding is torture.
engineer
 
  3  
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 07:51 am
@Woiyo9,
Woiyo9 wrote:

So I can see you agree with Obama and his minions.

Better to have dead Americans, then vigorously interrogate a terrorist.

How about we use standard interrogation techniques, get better results, save Americans and deny recruiting propaganda to our enemies? Isn't that an option here? Woiyo, are you really excusing (or actually promoting) a policy that allowed us to waterboard a person over 180 times in a month?
FreeDuck
 
  6  
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 07:54 am
@Woiyo9,
Woiyo9 wrote:

So Obama is not really making decisions based upon his oath to defend this Nation.

His oath is to protect the Constitution. We are a nation of laws. Torture is illegal.
FreeDuck
 
  4  
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 07:55 am
@Woiyo9,
Woiyo9 wrote:

So I can see you agree with Obama and his minions.

Better to have dead Americans, then vigorously interrogate a terrorist.

The official didn't say that torture saved any American lives. But if you think it's so great, how about if we allow our police to torture criminal suspects? It might save American lives.
0 Replies
 
engineer
 
  6  
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 08:20 am
@Woiyo9,
So here's an interesting paragraph

Quote:
A former U.S. Army psychiatrist, Maj. Charles Burney, told Army investigators in 2006 that interrogators at the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, detention facility were under "pressure" to produce evidence of ties between al Qaida and Iraq.
Story continues below

"While we were there a large part of the time we were focused on trying to establish a link between al Qaida and Iraq and we were not successful in establishing a link between al Qaida and Iraq," Burney told staff of the Army Inspector General. "The more frustrated people got in not being able to establish that link . . . there was more and more pressure to resort to measures that might produce more immediate results."


So we were using torture to "prove" an allegation we "knew" was true. Of course, we failed because it wasn't true, but that didn't stop the torture, it just meant we weren't doing it well enough.
0 Replies
 
Woiyo9
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 08:58 am
@engineer,
Define "Standard" techniques?

We already know that waterboarding The "Sheik" made him give up the information that stopped an attack in Calif.

Then you can explain which "Standard" technique would have gotten the SHeik to give up the same information.
Woiyo9
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 08:59 am
@FreeDuck,
Wrong. His Oath was to PRESERVE and PROTECT the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic.

The Constitution does not say "torture" is "illegal".
djjd62
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 09:07 am
@Woiyo9,
i've stated many times. i don't care much for any politician

i also have no problem with some interrogation techniques
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  2  
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 09:07 am
@Woiyo9,
I'm not wrong -- I said his oath is to the Constitution and not the nation. The Constitution has a prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment -- that would seem to include torture. Of course if you believe we have no constitutional protections from torture then feel free to argue that. Besides the constitution we are signatories to international treaties which prohibit torture. It's illegal, no matter how you slice it. And there is nothing wrong with having a government that adheres to the rule of law.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  2  
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 09:08 am
@Woiyo9,
Woiyo9 wrote:

We already know that waterboarding The "Sheik" made him give up the information that stopped an attack in Calif.

How do we know this? Feel free to share your sources.
djjd62
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 09:10 am
@Woiyo9,
just because you can do something doesn't mean you should
Woiyo9
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 10:33 am
@FreeDuck,
(CNSNews.com) - The Central Intelligence Agency told CNSNews.com today that it stands by the assertion made in a May 30, 2005 Justice Department memo that the use of “enhanced techniques” of interrogation on al Qaeda leader Khalid Sheik Mohammed (KSM) -- including the use of waterboarding -- caused KSM to reveal information that allowed the U.S. government to thwart a planned attack on Los Angeles.

Before he was waterboarded, when KSM was asked about planned attacks on the United States, he ominously told his CIA interrogators, “Soon, you will know.”

According to the previously classified May 30, 2005 Justice Department memo that was released by President Barack Obama last week, the thwarted attack -- which KSM called the “Second Wave”-- planned “ ‘to use East Asian operatives to crash a hijacked airliner into’ a building in Los Angeles.”


http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=46949
Woiyo9
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 10:33 am
@djjd62,
Remind yourself of that comment the next time you want to respond here.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  4  
Reply Wed 22 Apr, 2009 11:04 am
@Woiyo9,
Right. What a surprise that a memo whose sole purpose is to justify and legalize torture makes statements endorsing the efficacy of torture. You'll forgive me if I take it with a grain of salt.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Bush-era interrogation may have worked, Obama official says
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 08/05/2020 at 07:53:34