CIA accused of torture

Keith

Moderator
Jordan is now having some real issues but at least they've actively come out against IS. However, they have people openly going about in Amman recruiting for IS and when interviewed, they have a totally nihilistic view of life. They care not for conventions, alternative viewpoints in emancipation of any description - they seem quite happy to murder and behead their way to martyrdom.

To turn the other cheek to these assholes is to get it sliced off. When will we stop putting ourselves down in this way? My local MP is a total apologist for radical Muslims. When asked a question about IS, he retorted that what they were doing is no different to Christians in the Crusades, and he expects us to vote for him next year?

What he says is historically accurate but completely out of context. We have moved on since those times - IS Jihad has not.

Unfortunately, it would appear that radical Islam has many friends amongst us, who would speak for them, apologise for them and make click clucking noises when appropriate force is discussed to counter them. These so called "progressives" might want to consider that for all their touchy feely new world compassion, their heads will still mingle in the sand with everyone else's when the sh1t hits the fan.
 
This says it all
 

Attachments

  • terror911.jpg
    terror911.jpg
    109.4 KB · Views: 220

Doug S.

The protoplasm may be 72, but the spirit is 32!
Lifetime Supporter
Really now, we should feel bad for keeping someone in handcuffs for a day or two while ISIS shows videos of themselves cutting off the heads of innocent Americans?

I agree with that! To think that ISIS thinks it's OK to behead someone to make their point and yet they will scream bloody murder because somebody waterboarded someone they admire is ludicrous...although they will never see it that way. If we were really an "...eye for an eye" type of country, we'd build a guillotine and go after every one of those bastards down at Gitmo...but, then, ISIS would celebrate because our actions sent the "victims" to Nirvana, or where-ever it is they think heaven is.

As for Gee-Dub....well, guys, I've always said he should be tried as a war criminal...but it was never over this "torture" issue, it was because he sent so many of our young men to their unfortunate ends based on not only "bad intelligence", but also "no intelligence"...meaning that IMHO his primary motive was to redeem his father's sullied name when he did not capture Saddam Hussein in "Desert Storm". But, hey, I've never been one to look a gift horse in the mouth, so if this torture issue gets him what he deserves, well, LET'S PARTY!!

Yeah....yeah...yeah, I know, most of the conservative contingent here on the forum won't like that attitude...but he does not deserve what little respect I feel he has left among us Americans. He was a buffoon, IMHO, whose brain was probably so addled by all the alcohol and cocaine from his draft-dodging "National Guard" days (if what I've read is true, he never actually reported for a single day of "National Guard" duty) that his decision making skills were minimal, at best. IMHO he deserves to go down in history as one of our worst presidents EVER.

Your opinion may vary, of course...and usually does.

Doug
 

Doug S.

The protoplasm may be 72, but the spirit is 32!
Lifetime Supporter
This says it all

Now, Al...there's the "Lib-tard" word...

..and just as I thought we were past the insults and doing so well at being cordial and respecting each other's right to express an opinion.

...I'm just sayin'.......:idea:

Now for the good news....I totally agree with the "Tough Shit" philosophy....and I agree with David's philosophy about how to deal with ISIS....turn the sand on which they tread into glass with buckets of light. It's what they ALL deserve, if you think about it...by giving up their lives for the jihad they gain everlasting acceptance into whatever their perception of "heaven" is...but I wonder, do we really want to reward them that way?

Truly, I struggle with it, too...I want revenge just like the next guy, would love to see our military light up one of their cities the way they did New York on 9/11...but do two wrongs make a right? IMHO it would if we could make sure that we took out only those who are a threat and not women and children, although true revenge-seekers would say they took out women and children here so we should do the same to them.

It's a real conundrum and it has nothing to do with political ideology, it has to do with that age old struggle of good vs evil. Right now ISIS is the EVIL party...but the U.S. has done a pretty good job of appointing ourselves as the "bully of the world" when other countries don't agree with what we think is right. Look at all the mid-east crap we engaged in as well as Afghanistan...regional skirmishes in which we had no business interfering other than our desire to force people to do what we thought was right.

So...the question in my mind is...how EVIL do we want the world to view the U.S.? That's a question in which the answer has no political boundaries, it's all about morals and spirituality.

Doug

Doug
 
Last edited:

Larry L.

Lifetime Supporter
...the U.S. has done a pretty good job of appointing ourselves as the "bully of the world"...

Yeeeeeeeeeeup. That's all we are...all we've ever been, and all we'll ever be, right, Doug? Yeeeeeeew betcha...well, aside from the times we've rebuilt countries that have waged war on us, 'have launched/provided massive relief operations 'round the world after natural disasters, 'provided BAZILLIONS of dollars in foreign aid annually all over the world, and...


Look at all the mid-east crap we engaged in as well as Afghanistan...regional skirmishes in which we had no business interfering other than our desire to force people to do what we thought was right.

Really? Seriously? That's THEE reason we've been "engaged" over there? There have been no other factors involved? Ever? At any time?


So...the question in my mind is...how EVIL do we want the world to view the U.S.?

"The world"? The whole "world"? You mean places like China? Iran? N. Korea? Russia? Syria? We have to behave in ways satisfactory to them so we don't appear "evil" to them?

You have to be kidding. There will ALWAYS be people who see us as "evil" no matter what we do - or DON'T do - no matter what reality may actually be. Take yourself for instance...
 

Doug S.

The protoplasm may be 72, but the spirit is 32!
Lifetime Supporter
Yeeeeeeeeeeup. That's all we are...all we've ever been, and all we'll ever be, right, Doug? Yeeeeeeew betcha...well, aside from the times we've rebuilt countries that have waged war on us, 'have launched/provided massive relief operations 'round the world after natural disasters, 'provided BAZILLIONS of dollars in foreign aid annually all over the world, and...

I agree, Larry, the U.S.A. does have the capacity to do good things and history has recorded many instances of exactly the sort of things you mentioned. In fact, there are times when I think the U.S. is TOO good for our own good...we send tons of $$ to countries who seem to be our enemies, ostensibly is an effort to buy their allegiances. I'm not sure I think we're doing the right thing there...they probably use the $$ we send them to finance our enemies, but at least we have a good heart.

Really? Seriously? That's THEE reason we've been "engaged" over there? There have been no other factors involved? Ever? At any time?

Yeah...gotta say we are capable of equal degrees of evil as we are good, sort of like yin/yang...for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction...that sort of thing. Many in our country might view that as using our resources with good intentions, but IMHO the end results don't always seem to justify the means. Take Afghanistan, for example...we lost how many lives there and what did we gain? Has the world beaten a path to our door to thank us for ridding the world of OBL??? I know we've patted ourselves on the back for that one quite a few times, but are we really perceived that way by the rest of the world? I doubt it...rather, I think that the world in general thinks we stirred the pot because we had a bigger stirring stick and thought we could use the power to make the insurgents in Afghanistan change their tactics and behaviors. Didn't work...but we sure spent a lot of $$ that could have done a lot of good had we kept the $$ here in the US, and also wasted a lot of lives over there, and I'm not talking about only those who died, there is a huge contingent of returning war veterans who have varying degrees of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder because of the things they experienced in a war we had no business getting into.

"The world"? The whole "world"? You mean places like China? Iran? N. Korea? Russia? Syria? We have to behave in ways satisfactory to them so we don't appear "evil" to them?

I don't mean the unfortunate countries against whom we wage war without having used the legislative process to actually declare war...but take a look at what we have (not) learned from the Vietnam conflict. Are we viewed in a positive light by others? Probably not. Most assuredly not by some. We got Saddam Hussein in Iraq...so what, did it make any difference? They are about to be over-run by ISIS right now. If you think we should expect the countries you mentioned, against whom we have committed acts with tragic consequences, to think of us as anything other than EVIL, then you really do live in a different reality than most of us.

You have to be kidding. There will ALWAYS be people who see us as "evil" no matter what we do - or DON'T do - no matter what reality may actually be. Take yourself for instance...

You're right about the first part...there WILL always be people who view us as EVIL and there probably cannot be anything done about that. But think about those other countries who had no stake in the acts of aggression into which we have entered...how do you think they view us, and particularly now they know that we tortured those detainees at Gitmo WITH the blessing of our POTUS (isn't that what this thread is about???), I doubt they would have a positive view of us because we HAVE stuck our noses into things where we had no business, other than to flex our muscles and hope the world would think of our actions as good. As for the last part, I don't view us as all EVIL, as you implied, but I do recognize that we have our good side and out bad side, as does any individual or country or organization, and to deny that would be like sticking our heads into the sand. We HAVE committed evil acts (and the endorsement by our president of the use of torture was a HUGE act of evil), there can be no rational disagreement with that.

In the end, perhaps history will remember the "reign" of the US well, but in all truth history doesn't really remember any country's (or other entity, such as religions) actions as good, it only remembers the EVIL actions. Individuals, yes...that's what the Nobel prizes are all about, doing good things. This year it was the people who selfishly went to west Africa to fight ebola, many of whom (and not all of whom were Americans) lost their lives for their efforts. We honor war heros, but do we honor war, itself? Not!! We may believe we accomplished good by going to war (the defeat of the Nazis is one good example), but I can tell you with absolute certainty that my father, who was a highly decorated WWII fighter pilot, did not view war in a positive light.

We should use our money for good....not EVIL...but that's a less on we have yet to learn (and we're not alone in that boat).

Doug
 
I agree with that! To think that ISIS thinks it's OK to behead someone to make their point and yet they will scream bloody murder because somebody waterboarded someone they admire is ludicrous...although they will never see it that way. If we were really an "...eye for an eye" type of country, we'd build a guillotine and go after every one of those bastards down at Gitmo...but, then, ISIS would celebrate because our actions sent the "victims" to Nirvana, or where-ever it is they think heaven is.

As for Gee-Dub....well, guys, I've always said he should be tried as a war criminal...but it was never over this "torture" issue, it was because he sent so many of our young men to their unfortunate ends based on not only "bad intelligence", but also "no intelligence"...meaning that IMHO his primary motive was to redeem his father's sullied name when he did not capture Saddam Hussein in "Desert Storm". But, hey, I've never been one to look a gift horse in the mouth, so if this torture issue gets him what he deserves, well, LET'S PARTY!!

Yeah....yeah...yeah, I know, most of the conservative contingent here on the forum won't like that attitude...but he does not deserve what little respect I feel he has left among us Americans. He was a buffoon, IMHO, whose brain was probably so addled by all the alcohol and cocaine from his draft-dodging "National Guard" days (if what I've read is true, he never actually reported for a single day of "National Guard" duty) that his decision making skills were minimal, at best. IMHO he deserves to go down in history as one of our worst presidents EVER.

Your opinion may vary, of course...and usually does.

Doug

A war criminal, really? How about "drone boy"?
 

Doug S.

The protoplasm may be 72, but the spirit is 32!
Lifetime Supporter
Drone boy? If you're talking about BOB, he did not get the US into the war in Afghanistan and certainly did not endorse the torturous actions against the detainees, but he sure did get us out of Afghanistan like he promised when he ran for the office...and as soon as he took office he stopped the torture down in Gitmo (that is what this thread is about, right?).

Doug
 

Howard Jones

Supporter
I should have said that after we pack up all our stuff and leave the Middle east because those people are never going to stop killing each other no matter how many times we try to explain market democracies and freedom of religion to them.

We, and I mean the western democracies and our allies, should be completely clear to the Muslim world about this. Do as you will inside your own borders. We refuse to get involved in your internal affairs. We will not react if you decide to kill a 100 million of your own because they are the wrong type of Muslim. Go ahead.....go for it. Our moralities will not be applied to you. You go ahead and set your own standards as they apply to you own people. Go ahead and kill to your hearts content. If you choose to be barbarians then you will not be allowed to possess WMD's. Any attempt to do so will result in a declaration of war on your country.

We will also declare total war on whoever brings that radical shit into the West. No tactical raid to capture anybody or careful drone strikes to minimize casualties, just a complete elimination of the government that allows a terrorist to plan/launch a strike on us. No trials just a completely blown away capital without warning. You guys what to play with each other without restraint then expect the same from us if you spread that way of life around outside your world.

If you want to sell your products in the rest of the world. Then do so. If you do, then you're freely agreeing to join in our system. If you attempt to manipulate critical resources after making commitments with the non Muslim world then we will ONLY take our interests into consideration when we react.

Now reread post #19
 

Doug S.

The protoplasm may be 72, but the spirit is 32!
Lifetime Supporter
I agree, Howard. The U.S. should leave others to fight their own civil wars for themselves.

As for post #19...I like the idea, except that we might need to involve the United Nations because we may not know from which country the terrorists emanated. Hell, we might not even know if the person who dials the number to set off the dirty bomb is associated with any OTHER country...ever seen the movie "Source Code"? It's about an American who sets off a dirty bomb...with a whole bunch of science fiction type stuff included that is a bit unbelievable, but the issue is what if we don't know who to attack?

As for the United Nations...my opinion is that for the most part they are about as useless as a screen door on a submarine.

I do like the idea of letting the Middle Eastern countries self-destruct...but, you're right, they have been at war with each other since before recorded history and will be at war with each other long after we're all gone. We can't stop that...and we're foolish to dedicate American troops and dollars to the effort...unless your intention is to "Wag the dog" to stimulate the economy if you are a president who hasn't made such good financial choices (like the bailout of Wall Street without making sure there was some way to force the recipients to repay the $$ that they accepted...but, that's another issue for a different thread and IIRC I think we've already beaten that horse to death).

Cheers, Howard!!!!

Doug
 
Drone boy? If you're talking about BOB, he did not get the US into the war in Afghanistan and certainly did not endorse the torturous actions against the detainees, but he sure did get us out of Afghanistan like he promised when he ran for the office...and as soon as he took office he stopped the torture down in Gitmo (that is what this thread is about, right?).

Doug

The "torture" against detainees has gotten us useful info to prevent future attacks. I believe we are still in Afghanistan, and running out of Iraq didn't work out really great. I imagine we are still getting info from Gitmo. He didn't say he would stop the "torture" at Gitmo, he said he would close it, still open for business. He has released high profile terrorist to go back and do what they do best. Voting for him once was a mistake, twice was idiotic.
 

Doug S.

The protoplasm may be 72, but the spirit is 32!
Lifetime Supporter
Let's see...you say that the tortures of the detainees yielded useful information...who said that? Gee-Dub.....well, his veracity is quite questionable, IMHO, because he has a vested interest in appearing to not be as inept as he actually was. I do have a bit more confidence in Cheney (that'll pretty much surprise most of y'all, b/c of my dislike for the Bush administration, but Cheney just has a away of speaking that makes you believe he's telling the truth....probably as he is lieing his ass off), who has claimed the same thing. As for still being in Afghanistan...my understanding is that no combat troop boots are there, only certain advisors and ancillary personnel (those needed to maintain American items that remain and that we don't want to abandon yet). As for getting info from Gitmo, you have more confidence that I have...I sincerely suspect that if those detainees are as bad-ass as they are represented, they had already formulated a common plan to deceive us rather than give us truthful information. He did stop the torture, but, yes, Gitmo is still open...or so I believe. Those "high profile" terrorists that were released...maybe they were, maybe they weren't...who says they were and do they have a personal agenda that might make the information suspect? As for the voting issue...obviously, Al, the majority of the voting public would have difficulty agreeing with your opinion. Compared to the idiot he replaced, BOB is a genius.

BTW--I believe we should have put every one of the Gitmo detainees on trial as war criminals in military courts and executed each and every one of them found guilty. To send them back may not have been the best of choices...but if it got some of our soldiers who were captive back, it at least saved a few American lives. From what I recall it was not a 1 for 1 sort of exchange...but if your son was one of those who was returned, would you care?

Doug
 

Larry L.

Lifetime Supporter
Let's see...you say that the tortures of the detainees yielded useful information...who said that? Gee-Dub.....well, his veracity is quite questionable...

Of COURSE "Dub's" veracity is questionable - TO YOU and the rest of the far left.

BUT - he isn't the only one who's said the very same thing, IS he. I give you George Tenet, Porter Goss, and Michael Hayden, who rebutted the Senate report. THEY actually ran the CIA for 12 years or so (from 1997 to 2009?). Not to mention the guy who designed the program, James Mitchell I think his name is? And then there's John Yoo, the former Justice Department attorney who gave the legal rationale for enhanced interrogation, who said/says water boarding falls short of torture.

Now, WHOM SHOULD WE BELIEVE about whether EIs were effective or not/torture or not? FEINSTEIN and her lib pals on the investigative committee who didn't even bother to interview/question anyone in the CIA who was involved in the situation? The people who told us we could KEEP our doctor...we could KEEP our plan...Benghazi was caused by a VIDEO...there's not a SMIDGEON of corruption in the IRS...the NSA is NOT spying on the American people, etc. etc., etc.? OR ANY/ALL OF THE 5 GUYS NAMED ABOVE????????

'Not really too difficult for any rational person to figure out which way to go there, is it...
 
Last edited:

Doug S.

The protoplasm may be 72, but the spirit is 32!
Lifetime Supporter
I dunno, Larry....I kinda like the guy who said he'd get us out of Iraq and Afghanistan...and then did it.

I kinda like the guy who made GM pay back their bailout windfall...compared to the guy who gave our hard earned dollars to Wall Street and then didn't even try to get them to pay it back, much less put into place any requirement that they do it.

I kinda like the guy who made BP pay through the nose for cleanup when one of their oil wells in the Gulf of Mexico started spewing oil and screwing up the environment...compared to the guy who let Exxon decide how much was enough when one of their tankers being captained by a drunk ran aground in Prince Williams Sound and put an entire local culture out of business.

Yeah...you can quote whoever you want, but when you look at the accomplishments of the two individuals under discussion here, I think it's easy for any rational person to see who has done the better job.

I still for the life of me can't figure out why you're so obsessed with the "...You can keep your doctor..." type stuff, but that's OK, it is what it is. As for the IRS, it's been one of the most corrupt government agencies in existence for a long time, nothing new on the horizon with our present POTUS. And the NSA...do you really believe that they were not spying on the American people when Gee-Dub was POTUS? As for the 5 guys named above, I freely admit that I know nothing about them...but that doesn't mean that I should believe them just because there are 5 of them, or because you say they are believable. Tell me why I should believe anything they said...just because somebody ran the CIA for 12 years doesn't make them believable to me, the CIA has been a cluster phuk for so many years that it makes them more unbelievable than believable. Ever heard a lawyer tell the truth? Probably not, if they are talking, they are lying or hiding something, whether they have embraced the left or the right politically.

My assertion is still the same...this isn't a political issue as much as it is an issue of good vs. evil, and your beloved Gee-Dub was guilty of SO many transgressions that it's difficult for many to think of him as anything but evil.

I will say this about him...being a mountain biker I do respect him for his accomplishments in that arena, and being a fan of good art I am pleasantly surprised by his skill with a brush...but none of that takes away from the incredibly evil acts he committed. I actually have a higher opinion of Nixon than of Gee-Dub...at least Nixon was arrogant enough to say "Screw the American people, I'm going to do what I want to" and then eviscerate anyone who crossed him. Gee-Dub was just floundering in waters over his head...and some of those waters surrounded Cuba, where Gitmo is located and where Gee-Dub endorsed and encouraged acts of torture (that is what this thread is about, not "you can keep your doctor"), plain and simple. He deserves to be tried as a war criminal.

Doug
 

Larry L.

Lifetime Supporter
You've stated your 'case'. I've stated mine. THE READER can decide for himself/herself where the truth most likely lies and whom is more worthy of believing.

BTW: Your "Gee-Dub endorsed and encouraged acts of torture...He deserves to be tried as a war criminal" comment is waaaaaaaaaaaaaay out of line. If GWB ought to be tried as a war criminal for that (given all the FACTS behind it), why shouldn't BHO face trial on the SAME CHARGE because he authorized DRONE STRIKES that have killed, not "tortured" - K-I-L-L-E-D - civilians?

'Vacation time for me. 'Need to drop th' ole blood pressure...............

(Edit: And, for the record, I FULLY SUPPORT OBAMA'S DRONE STRIKES! That decision is about the O-N-L-Y one he HAS made that I fully support!!! [War sometimes makes strange bed fellows, dunnit?])
 
Last edited:

Doug S.

The protoplasm may be 72, but the spirit is 32!
Lifetime Supporter
I support drone strikes in general, too, Larry. Anything that removes the possibility that we would lose a pilot sounds like a great idea to me, considering that my dad was shot down three times over Europe during WWII, captured once by the Nazis and escaped...if he were still alive, I think he'd share our viewpoint on this issue!

Cheers!

Doug
 

Larry L.

Lifetime Supporter
THANK YOU for that, Doug.

As a 'Vet' myself, I SALUTE your late dad, sir. :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:
 

Pete McCluskey.

Lifetime Supporter
I think Feinstein is a traitor. Of course no one has declared war so those particular rules don't apply.
I thought how sad that the head of the CIA has to apologise publicly to a bunch of arseholes who would happily behead him and show it on YouTube.
Harden up you left wing apologist's you are a laughing stock and are helping the fucking terrorists who love your weak kneed hand wringing attitude, and laugh at you and would like to behead you.
 
Back
Top