White House Responds to GOP Criticism: Releasing Memos on Enhanced Interrogation Policies Doesn’t Make Us Less Safe — the Policies Do

“I don’t think and the president doesn’t believe it’s the existence of enhanced interrogation techniques in memos that has made us less safe,” Gibbs said. “It’s the use of those techniques in the view of the world that has made us less safe. And that’s precisely why the president moved swiftly to end” their use on the second day of his presidency.
—-
Is this Gibbs perhaps the most stupid press secretary in the history of the republic, eclipsing even Scott McClellan for sheer imbecility? When you expose what’s in the memos to “THE VIEW OF THE WORLD” in a context of sensationalistic reporting that will inevitably inflame Islamic radicals and their sympathizers, of COURSE you make us all less safe. DUH!
Of course I do not impute Gibbs’ stupidity in any way to his boss, the president. Sometimes having a useful idiot at the podium who says nothing but stupid things is a very smart way of not having to address unwanted questions.

While we don’t know exactly what works and what doesn’t history since the 70′s showed numerous attacks against Americans all all over the place. Planes, military baraks,disco’s embassies, citizens tossed from cruise ships, were all targetted on a too frequent basis.
Its been quite for several years now, at least for most of us and I for one appreciate it. I hope they don’t stop what has apparently has worked.

Ok, Gibbs has got to go. Enough is enough it is getting embarrassing.

Exactly! It isn’t the memo’s themselves that make us less safe but the FACT THAT THOSE TECHNIQUES in the memos were used makes us less safe.

Nancy Pelosi had an opportunity to speak up about those techniques in 2002 when she was given a virtual tour of the detention centers and enhanced interrogation techniques, including waterboarding.
She did not object.

Is this Gibbs perhaps the most stupid press secretary in the history of the republic, eclipsing even Scott McClellan for sheer imbecility? When you expose what’s in the memos to “THE VIEW OF THE WORLD” in a context of sensationalistic reporting that will inevitably inflame Islamic radicals and their sympathizers, of COURSE you make us all less safe. DUH!
**************************************
Absurd! this is a weak argument. What was revealed was already known. They are are alrewady inflamed, much like some posters here.

These are people that behead people and put the tapes of it on the internet. Do you think they are really offended that their buddy had to see some insects?

MayBee:”I don’t believe for one second the “world” cares if we sleep deprive a terrorist we capture to get information.”
They do. And don’t play word games – the documented techniques used are identical to ones that are listed as “crimes against humanity” and “torture” in the current Khmer Rouge case trials in Cambodia. There have also been documented deaths resulting from the ‘enhanced interrogation’ techniques (blood clots formed from beating of the legs that caused a stroke when the prisoner was left hanging on a wall for a day was one documented case).
If you want to justify torture, fine. But be intellectually intelligent enough to know what is being debated. If waterboarding is not stopped, it results in death. How is that “simulated” drowning?

Does anyone really believe that the animal that beheaded Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl, Khaled Sheikh Mohamed,suffered permanent physical or psychological damage after having water poured on his face??
America is less safe because Obama was elected thereby allowing Nancy Pelosi to run the country.

Thinking- do you remember what Imran Khan did with the false Newsweek report that a Koran had been flushed?
Do you remember what happened when Denmark published some cartoons of Allah?
Bond is on some pretty firm footing when he fears the ability to get anger inflamed in some quarters.
****************************************
Oh please don’t tell me now that we should give up our freedom of expression now.
Don’t tell me that the GOP is on firm ground when they they tell me that I can’t tell a joke, or flush a Bible, or Koran.
On top of that is it the same as confessing ones sins?

Most people of this nation lack the will and intestinal fortitude to fight to win .

Sigmonde:”Of the three that were water boarded, how many drowned? I doubt our policy has been “drown them if they don’t talk”.”
None of them have died. If you want to argue that because they didn’t die it’s not torture, or they they deserve torture, fine. But don’t play games and try to make it any better than forcing their head into a toilet for 2 minutes until they inhale water, gag, vomit, and almost pass out. And historically, from the Japanese in WWII to the Khmer Rouge right now, it is explicitly and clearly defined as torture.

“And historically, from the Japanese in WWII to the Khmer Rouge right now, it is explicitly and clearly defined as torture.
Comparing the millions tortured and killed by Japan and Khmer Rouge to the three terrorists water boarded under supervised conditions is a total reach.
Still waiting for your evidence.

If waterboarding isn’t torture, then why don’t the regular police just use it in normal criminal investigations?
You know, like on Law & Order?
Don’t worry, they’ll only do it to alleged criminals.
That ok with you?

Our military uses waterboarding for SERE training. Torture?

Every single post on this page reads as though it was distributed as a press release by the Obama Administration itself. Unbelievable what has happened to our mainstream media… the complete evacuation of even a semblance of integrity.

R Mutt:”If waterboarding isn’t torture, then why don’t the regular police just use it in normal criminal investigations?”
Some tried a bit of water boarding-lite in Texas in 1983 (Texas Sheriff James Parker and company). They were convicted and sentence to 4 years in prison.

Sigmonde:”"Japanese guards were prosecuted after WWII for this EXACT same act – there’s nothing fancy about it, and the fact that their subjects typically lived did not make it less torture.”
How would you know if their subjects “typically” lived? What does that mean?”
WWII wasn’t that long ago, we have records and survivors. I don’t see a point continuously answering your increasing erratic questions – DO YOU HAVE A POINT? Are you claiming the documented cases of people tried and convicted for waterboarding as torture are fabrications?

MayBee:”None were prosecuted for this act. They were prosecuted for a list of acts. The Japanese were horrible to their prisoners.”
So you are claiming the records regarding the prosecution and conviction of Yukio Asano are a fabrication (15 years hard labor for the waterboarding charge)? Can you provide some evidence of that please?
The Japanese were horrible to their prisoners, and waterboarding was part of that.

Are you claiming the documented cases of people tried and convicted for waterboarding as torture are fabrications?”
No. I am asking you how you would know that subjects water boarded by the Japanese typically lived. How many typically died?

In September 2002, four members of Congress met in secret for a first look at a unique CIA program designed to wring vital information from reticent terrorism suspects in U.S. custody. For more than an hour, the bipartisan group, which included current House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), was given a virtual tour of the CIA’s overseas detention sites and the harsh techniques interrogators had devised to try to make their prisoners talk.
Among the techniques described, said two officials present, was waterboarding, a practice that years later would be condemned as torture by Democrats and some Republicans on Capitol Hill. But on that day, no objections were raised. Instead, at least two lawmakers in the room asked the CIA to push harder, two U.S. officials said.

Bottom Line; If we were beating the hell out of prisoners for jollies that would be immoral. Useing sleep deprevation or water boarding on a terrorist you have reason to believe has information on an impending attack that could possibly cost thousands of lives is completely Moral. It would be immoral to let hundreds or thousands of innocent people to die because you didn’t do it. How can someones moral compass be so far out of wack that they can’t understand the difference. This coming from a president that supports abortion and refused to vote more than once for a requirement to give medical aid to children who survived the procedure. Liberals should save their lectures on morality until they have some morality. kill the innocent unborn fine with them. Inconvience a terrorist, never they may take you to court.

For more than an hour, the bipartisan group, which included current House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), was given a virtual tour of the CIA’s overseas detention sites and the harsh techniques interrogators had devised to try to make their prisoners talk.
***************************************
So?

Sigmond:”Show us the evidence that our policies or techniques used are the same.”
I did – waterboarding is a clearly defined technique.
“Comparing the millions tortured and killed by Japan and Khmer Rouge to the three terrorists water boarded under supervised conditions is a total reach.”
I did not even make that implication. I compared it to a guard who was convicted of water boarding and sentenced to 15 years. Also to the currently underway trial of a Khmer Rouge jailer. The conviction of the Sheriff in Texas in 1983 was in reply to a different post and not meant as supporting evidence.
“No. I am asking you how you would know that subjects water boarded by the Japanese typically lived. How many typically died?”
Make your own argument. I stated that waterboarding has traditionally been considered torture, specifically:
“the documented techniques used are identical to ones that are listed as “crimes against humanity” and “torture” in the current Khmer Rouge case trials in Cambodia.” 10:21:04 PM
The discussion clearly focused on waterboarding following that. I have made my points and provided numerous pieces of supporting evidence. Feel free to make your own refuting argument or parallel comment and please do provide factual evidence and references to applicable cases. Thanks.

Phillip V.:” If we were beating the hell out of prisoners for jollies that would be immoral. ”
It does appear that the Army agrees, they have ruled at lest some of the beating deaths of detainees as homicides and did some token investigation.

So wha? Do you think I care what these less than people think?
==========
You might not care. A lot of people here obviously do, what with the talk about how much “less safe” we are because of our interrogation techniques.
Kit Bond also cares what they think, because when they are inflamed they do things like kill people and behead journalists.

“It does appear that the Army agrees…”
They certainly do. No American soldier hhas been accused of waterboarding anyone; the Army Field Manual prohibits iit. As surprising as it may be to some, there is no desire on the part of our professional military personnel to torture people–these interrogations for intelligence purposes are strictly the purview of the CIA.
Regardless whether anything done at Abu Ghraib can be described as “torture,” there has never been any dispute that what was done was unlawful, and the perpetrators were duly prosecuted.

You might not care. A lot of people here obviously do, what with the talk about how much “less safe” we are because of our interrogation techniques.
Kit Bond also cares what they think, because when they are inflamed they do things like kill people and behead journalists
****************************************
So we are back to appeasing the Terrorist? Don’t attack me, I’ll be nice?

So we are back to appeasing the Terrorist? Don’t attack me, I’ll be nice?
========
Isn’t that what a lot of people here want? Where else does the “these interrogation tactics make us less safe” arguments lead?
But no, I don’t think Bond’s MO is to want to appease the terrorists. It’s more about not giving them information they’ll use if it isn’t necessary to do so.

Thinking: Gibbs said “”It’s the use of those techniques in the view of the world that has made us less safe.’
=========
Do you agree with that? The interrogation techniques make us less safe?

“That argument has been rejected every time it has been raised to justify everything from Communism to genocide…”
Point well taken, but I think I made it clear in context that I was talking specifically about what one does with prisoners in wartime. I don’t know many Americans who would condone waterboarding a prisoner for sport; waterboarding him when it stands a good chance of saving civilian lives is quite another matter indeed.

Don’t attack me, I’ll be nice?
=====================================
Isn’t that how one leads by example with humility?

“If they did that to someone picked up for looking suspicious near a broken window, is there any question about whether it would be torture?”
Whether or not it’s torture, it would certainly be unlawful, and no one disputes that. And I know of no one, including myself, who consented to being waterboarded during SERE. I accepted it as part of my duty. So, I suppose, did Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

“These tactics were not used against the Nazis in WWII.”
I beg to differ. To cite one example, six Nazi POW’s were tortured until they confessed to murdering an informant among them, and were thereafter summarily hanged.
George Tenet, who would certainly be in a position to know, says that these tactics were unequivocally effective with the three Al Qaeda, and he states emphatically that they saved many, many American civilian lives.

“Liberals should save their lectures on morality until they have some morality. kill the innocent unborn fine with them. Inconvience a terrorist, never they may take you to court.”
Right-wingers should save their lectures on morality until THEY have some morality.
Starting and supporting mismanaged wars that kill thousands and thousands of civilians, preventing gun control resulting in the deaths of thousands, trying to save money by reducing safety standards that results in higher fatalities. etc etc etc etc
-And now you want to justify torturing people.
That’s why I’m not taking any lessons in morality from you.
It is not at all ‘fine’ with us that there are abortions, but we simply cannot legislate to punish the living to protect someone who hasn’t even been born if the mother does not wish to. You will never be able to justify it in law. The unborn will never litigate against the living. If you want to consider it a sin and even have religious penance for it that can be the choice of your church.

According to Alexander Cockburn (caveat emptor), Alexander Cockburn adds: “In U.S. camps, [German] POWs were starved to the point of collapse, performed 20 million man-days of work on army posts and 10 million man-days for contract employers. Some were assigned to work for the Chemical Warfare Center at Edgewood Arsenal in Maryland.”

jhw:These tactics were not used against the Nazis in WWII. They were deemed ineffective as well as immoral. Why do they suddenly work better now?
=========
So you are making the argument they make us “less safe” because you imagine we didn’t get good information.
But you don’t know that, while those doing the interrogations would. I also don’t think that’s the argument Gibbs is making, because he talks about “the view of the world”.
I’m not sure we really know what was used against the Nazis, are you? Do you think they were ever beaten when captured? Shot? I suspect them may have been.
And…SERE. Torture?

frieda:”what good will it do to release the notes now.????”
The government needs to be accountable to the citizens that empower it. Releasing this information also sends a clear message that the US is dropping the practice, a message that has value as we have a real chance to start winning a few of the battles for hearts and minds with our new president.

MayBee:”So you are making the argument they make us “less safe” because you imagine we didn’t get good information.”
There has been no evidence that we received good information, you seem to be blindly believing we did because the government said so. I have read of many successful interrogations based on forming a rapport with the prisoner, everything from the terrorist caught coming in via Seattle to the Nazi who liked to play chess. John McCain is on record against torture because he says it doesn’t work. Why do you imagine it works?

Why do you imagine it works?
================
Because unless you believe CIA agents water board, sleep deprive, and stress position terrorist for jollies, it is plausible they did what was in the best interest of the US. Which is, get information.

MayBee:”do you think if CIA agents caught Osama Bin Laden’s second hand man tomorrow, and knew he’d been with OBL within hours, President Obama would ensure he was not sleep deprived nor subject to stress positions?”
First, variations of those techniques are allowed in the Army Field Manual and are not explicitly considered torture. Second, you appear to be implying that good information could be beaten out of his second in command (haven’t we caught or killed several of those already) – I guess you just have a better understanding of the situation than John McCain.

Because unless you believe CIA agents water board, sleep deprive, and stress position terrorist for jollies, it is plausible they did what was in the best interest of the US. Which is, get information.
****************************************
Well that is supposition. I can use the same argument that I have seen here; how do you know that we have gotten good information?

(for example, if it was found that bank X was looking shaky, that bank would have a run and collapse the next day).
=======================================
You mean like what happened with Chuck Schumer and Countrywide?

how do you know that we have gotten good information
===========
Oh, I don’t know. I don’t think I know the half of it.
I just don’t believe we did these techniques for jollies.
I also don’t buy the argument that these techniques make us less safe because of “the view of the world”, as Gibbs said.
Finally, I don’t believe President Obama would, if he deemed it necessary, disapprove of techniques we do in SERE training to get information.
I think the whole “torture” argument got ridiculously skewed because so many hated the Iraq war, and disliked Bush.
I also think too many are completely forgiving of things that supposedly motivate terrorists without thinking positively for one second what might motivate our President.

MayBee:”I do believe the CIA agents in the room had a better understanding of the situation than John McCain.”
I do not, and have seen no historical examples (the tv show 24 does not count) nor released information to support that opinion.
And I replied to your SERE comment quite a while ago, 11:17:04 PM.

What all of you need to understand is the terrible position the Bush/Cheney administration left Obama or any other President given their decision to use torture techniques. The policy/moral/legal issues here are tremendously complex. It is simply plain silly for someone to say releasing these memos will let Al Queda to “train” against U.S. techniques “disclosed” in the memos. You think they don’t know what they are already? A very delicate balance was needed here and Obama has struck it. There is no way that he could allow prosecution of our CIA agents for actions they took to protect the country after 9/11. It is like the situation with the economy. The problem Bush left him was enormous. Bush left a $5 Trillion Deficit from his 8 years in office and an economic recession of historic proportions. He left a 2009 budget deficit of another trillion dollars when he left (that’s right, the 2009 budget was Bush’s responsibility and even if McCain or any other person was elected we would have run these deficits). There are dual, and difficult issues here. We don’t want to increase the deficits Bush left us, but we have to increase deficits to prevent a financial meltdown. You people think this is easy to reconcile. The Republicans say do nothing, cut the budget, stop spending, but I can assure you its easy to say but do they want responsibility for 25% unemployment? Paul Krugman says Nationalize the Banks! But do you want to be responsible for changing the very structure of the American financial system Paul?
We are lucky we have someone as thoughtful and smart as Obama as President who is acting calmly to face these difficult issues. Forget about blaming Bush or whoever, but the fact is Obama has to deal with more serious issues than any President has had to face since Roosevelt.

thinking:i also believe that clearing the air doe not make us less safe, especially considering the information was already out there.
=========
I agree with much of what you said.
Although I’m not sure that clearing the air, when it comes to classified information in a time of ongoing operations, is completely necessary.

Although I’m not sure that clearing the air, when it comes to classified information in a time of ongoing operations, is completely necessary.
****************************************
This information has been debated for months and months, no one denied it, everyone either supported it or not publicly, from Bush on down. There was no secret.

Sen. Kit Bond (R-Mo) is a hack. He flip-flops from day to day to say something negative about Obama. Thank goodness he is retiring. Now we have to keep Roy Blunt from getting his Senate seat.

This is all about politics – not keeping our country safe – for the GOP.

Gibb’s rejoinder was pretty lame. If it’s the policies, not the documents on the past, that make us less safe, why did the Obama administration reserve it’s loophole to fall back on exactly such “harsh interrogation” under certain limited circumstances? It’s either right, or wrong. You either reserve the right to conduct harsh interrogations, or you completely cut out that option. Obama’s current rules don’t completely cut out that option.
Pelosi and Rockefeller were present in a meeting where these procedures were briefed. According to the WaPo, Pelosi’s comment was were these measures harsh enough? The principle Democrats knew about these procedures.
Interrogators will probably stand down. They will believe the next administration could do exactly the same thing to the current administration, and they will be on the hook again to answer for obeying the orders of their CiC.
The only circumstances under which a professional interrogator today will obey orders for a “harsh” or even rigorous interrogation should be where he or she has the written orders specifically detailing those measures (no vagueness or wiggle room). It must have the signatures of the Attorney General, the President, the House Speaker, and a Supreme Court Justice.
This is political leadership hanging gov. workers out to dry for their own decisions, nothing more.
Republicans probably will now demand that any memos Obama receives from his Justice Dept. be made available for Congressional Republicans to review for appropriateness. They probably will demand to see whatever controversial advice Obama is getting in written memos for review.
Obama just made much more problematic the withdrawal from Iraq. Now, bombers have the excuse of retribution for what is contained in these memos. It will make the transfer of security responsibilities more difficult. It will result in greater loss of life.
Why do this at this particular time? To divert attention and get everyone engrossed in thinking and talking about these memos instead of what Obama is doing TODAY. By waving these memos around, Obama succeeds in getting Bush even more negative attention, while whatever he’s doing now goes unexamined.
Major Democrats were briefed on these procedures and have not been called on the carpet about it. They did nothing to disapprove, and in fact wondered out loud if the measures were “enough”.
Everything the Obama administration does now is subject to being revealed by the next administration.

By justifying torture, the Bush administration along with ANYONE else in the government who supported the policy has justified and made valid any future similar acts around the world. Many countries have, and will use the same justification to do whatever they want. Nazi’s, Chinese Communists, N. Korea, Serbia, Russia, and religious dictatorships.
Similar to the Bush/Cheney ‘we will attack any country if we think they mean us harm’ rationalization.

Ooooh…
Bugs, slapping, throwing a terrorist against a wall, sleep deprivation.
How horrible…
If Obama thinks this is torture what will he use? I think listening to his lectures might work.
Or maybe being forced to look at his goofy grin for a few hours.

Read the memos, please…there are 2 important facts in them that aren’t addressed in the Times article-
1) Our own AirForce personnel have been subject to the exact SAME interrogation techniques for years…over 20,000 so far have gone through the SERE program and it is still ongoing today…why isn’t anyone accusing the USG of ‘torturing’ our own soldiers? Ever watch the movie ‘GI Jane’?
2) Hambali, who planned the Bali bombings, was aprehended as a result of intel ‘take’ from using these interrogation methods on KSM. Without a doubt, Hambali would have planned and executed more attacks if he wasn’t caught.This saved lives, period.
The President has tied his own hands when the next attack comes (and it will).
One other set of facts you will not read in any news report is that the Clinton admin regularly sent terrorist suspects to countries like Egypt (who really torture..the pain kind) for years under the Clinton rendition program.
If you doubt, go to cspan and watch the hearings with Micheal Scheuer..he ran the program under Clinton at the CIA.

Will we all feel better about ourselves if we catch a terrorist that knows of an impending attack (like 9/11) and we do nothing because we feel morally superior to our enemy?
Will the president then come out and say we did the right thing, despite the deaths of thousands of innocents in less than an hour and a half?
The President has the audacity to hope that that moment never comes.
If we had captured KSM on 9/10 and he wouldn’t talk, does anyone believe the Bush admin would not have been blamed for not getting the 9/11 attack plan out of him?

North Korea and Iran are just posturing in order to save face. They’ve both probably dismantled their nuclear programs already. I wouldn’t be surprised if Iran committed some of its oil revenue to help fund Obama’s healthcare reserve fund.

Chris…All you ultra left-wing extremist need to know is that Chavez-Castro etc…are only using Obama..They have no intention of giving up what they have built over 50 years..Castro proved this by appointing his brother Raul to take over and Chavez by having his opposition arrested and jailed. As far as the memo goes, if you were an sworn enemy of the United States would you not take this memo and play it for all it is worth…Sure you would…just as some have done with the current Homeland Security memo..

Patriot, you are living in a dreamworld if you think any of those countries are interested in any justification or validation of the measures they take to stay in power from U.S. behavior.
They don’t CARE what the world thinks. Nothing we do gives them the green light. They give themselves the green light, regardless of Bush torture memos or what Obama does.
No one supports torture. It is abhorrent. But let’s try a little moral consistency in applying our outrage here, and knock off the sanctimony about the horrors of torture. We know it’s horrible.
Lost of things in the real world are horrible, sad to say.

It is quite noble of Mr. Obama’s Intelligence Director, Dennis Blair, to declare that we are now “safe.” That would seem to end the discussion about whether Mr. Bush’s policies made us safer: all now agree that they did.

What is most sickening is the right wing reaction is not outrage that we tortured people but outrage that the American people might find out the legal arguments justifying torture and actual techniques used.
Obama has been a mixed bag so far on transparency but this is step in the right direction.

It shows a lack of progressive leadership. Looking at the big picture the thought is – did focusing on the past and releasing this information help the country unite? Who were the benefactors? It makes the current administration seem obsessively stuck in a retro mode.

Hyena gives good advice–Hayden and Mukasey (ie. people in the know) very effectively refute the reasons provided by the Obama administration to support this decision. Seems like the only positive here is that the memos clearly refute the allegations of “torture” despite what the critics say. If some folks are offended by the interrogation techniques used on the mastermind behind 9/11, techniques used in order obtain information to save American lives, those folks shouldn’t be involved in national security decisions. Unfortunately, our President and many other leaders are those folks.

In 1984, Winston Smith finally breaks when O’Brien threatens to put a cage on his face that contains rats, with the assumption that the rats would be let loose to chew on Winston’s face. O’Brien knows that Winston has a fear of rats. Winston cracks before they let the rats out.
The CIA knew Zubaydah had a fear of insects. So they asked for permission to introduce one into his “confinement box”. (how sterile) Bybee/Yoo said “OK, as long as it’s not a stinging insect.”
You folks defending these tactics and criticizing the release of these memos – are you proud that our government was justifying the use of tactics that were utilized by Big Brother?
And please, don’t tell me about what “they” do. This isn’t a you do it/we do it game here. We’re the United States of American. We are not supposed to do stuff like this under any circumstances. That this torture was planned and “justified” by DOJ attorneys makes it that much worse – these weren’t heat-of-the-moment activities.

“Seems like the only positive here is that the memos clearly refute the allegations of “torture” despite what the critics say.”
If you don’t think what is described in those memos is torture than you are a pretty sick individual. And no, I don’t care who the target is – our nation is better than this. Just because these were bad dudes doesn’t mean we should have planned and justified torturing them. It’s beneath us as a nation.

“I understand people standing on principle, and I respect that, but the implications on policy and the welfare of fellow citizens has to be considered”
Should we submit ourselves to constant surveillance in an effort to protect ourselves?
What principles are you willing to trade for the veneer of security?

‘instersing’ that many here who seem to support torture are inclined to believe anything the Bush & Co. said re: what ‘valuable’ information was gained.
After all, Bush was right about Iraq’s WMD’s, he ‘got’ Bin Laden ‘dead or alive’, Bush finished the war in Afghanistan, mission accomplished, his fast action and concern for New Orleans, he really fixed the economy, never spied on innocent Americans, and never tortured anyone.
Almost forgot, Bush ‘kept us safe’ if you don’t count Sept 11th.

If more surveillance of terrorist suspects can prevent another 9/11, I’m all for it.
If more aggressive interrogation of terrorist suspects can prevent a chemical or biological weapon from being deployed against an American city, I’m all for it.
If President Obama has to authorize the CIA to go to work on a terrorist with a pair of pliers and a blowtorch in order to prevent a nuclear detonation in Washington DC, I’m all for it.
I suspect my principles are a bit different relative to yours.

OGLiberal – I agree with some of your points, other than the one about lots of evidence that torture (I say aggressive interrogation) doesn’t work. Hayden and Mukasey address this belief in their column. Not being in the intelligence business, I defer to the experts to decide what type of interrogation is necessary in order to gather critical intelligence to protect the country. If traditional methods will work, then by all means they should be used. If traditional methods are not sufficient, then I believe the intelligence experts should have the latitude to decide on more aggressive techniques. You bring up the ticking time bomb…I’m curious what you believe should be allowed in that scenario.

Numerous people, including the former President, Vice President, CIA directors, and congressmen have described how interrogations of terrorists have led to the capture of others, disrupted plots, and saved lives. Either all of these people are lying, and the Democrat members of the House and Senate intelligence committees are finding it in the goodness of their hearts to not expose the lies, or there is truth to the claims. Just because some attacks happened doesn’t mean none were prevented.

“Numerous people, including the former President, Vice President, CIA directors, and congressmen have described how interrogations of terrorists have led to the capture of others, disrupted plots, and saved lives.”
As far the the former president and vice-president go, their word holds little weight in my eyes…and the latter has got to be worried about his own legal situation so of course he’s going to say we had to do this. The other folks – I’m might be willing to listen to their claims. I don’t doubt that these interrogations led to the capture of others. But I don’t put capturing other suspects in the ticking time bomb category unless that suspect was days away from pulling off an attack….and I don’t think that was the case. Most of these guys – KSM, Bin al Shibh, etc. – were in hiding and on the run. Given time and a good interrogator(s), almost any person being interrogated will break, even without torture. How imminent were these plots that were allegedly disrupted? My guess is, not very.
Here’s a little story. I don’t know how accurate it is but I think it’s appropriate here. It was included in Peter Lance’s book, “1,000 Years For Revenge.” When Ramzi Yousef was on the run after the first WTC bombing, police in the Phillipines arrested one of his buddies. Now, I would have fully expected the police in the Phillipines to rough the guy up – it’s the Phillipines, not the US – and they did. In fact, they were shocked he survived the beatings. But he still wouldn’t reveal anything. He only started singing when one of the interrogators pretended to be a Mossad agent and informed him that he was taking him back to Israel. All of the physical abuse did nothing, didn’t break the guy. It was a non-violent, non-physical ruse that got the guy to talk. It apparently worked in that scenario and it’s the same type method police detectives in the US use everyday.
Beating people and locking them in small boxes and waterboarding them is not only illegal and wrong…it’s lazy. Historically, our government has criticized other nations for engaging in these practices…and rightfully so. We can do better and get the job done without torturing people.

Let’s face it–America became less safe on Nov 4th, 2008.

If Gitmo was really so bad, then why did Michael Moore go there to prove that the Detainees got better Healthcare than most Americans (if you can really believe Mr Moore ???)???
Looks like Liberals just “jump from one side of the fence” to the other whenever it suites them to do so……… When Michael Moore wants to make a point about how bad the American Healthcare System is, then Gitmo is ‘More than Fair’ to Detainees, otherwise it is a ‘House of Torture’ (as the Liberals look the other way and shuffle their feet).

I cannot believe all the blame America we are so terrible posts on here. The forms of what is being called torture is laughable compared to what would be done to you in another country. What kind of interrogation techniques do you think IRAN,CHINA,RUSSIA,N.KOREA have? Do you really think if we are nice and have the moral high ground that anyone gives a RIP! Some people are so naive.I could care less what John Mccain says in this day and age if someone possibly knows of a terrorist attack and we have good reason to think they have information that could save lives then waterboard thier *** away.

Monica,
If experts on torture and victims of torture have repeatedly said it doesn’t yield accurate or credible information, that should be good enough for us. Those who have been tortured have said that they would say anything, lie, ‘turn in” innocents, agree with anything their torturer said to get it to stop.
Not to mention it made us look like the bad guys, not a way to win the hearts and minds of the people. And winning the hearts and minds is the real way to keep our troops safer. If people trust us to be the ‘good guys’ they will assist with truthful information. Not to mention the whole idea of the many innocents who were caught up in the net of arrested men when a bounty was put on any ‘insurgent’ turned in. Whose dumb idea was that, to give out huge bounties in a country where everyone is poor and many out of a job?
Telling the truth about the past is what is needed in any situation where the laws have been broken, where our human decency has been forgotten. As a Christian I find it amazing that many who call themselves Christians don’t see the hypocrisy of okaying torture. Killing in self-defense or in defending your country is one thing, the whole kill or be killed comes into play but to start a pre-emptive war, to torture people knowing it yields unreliable information is totally wrong.
And to those who think torture is going to yield important information, please think about this. If a man is arrested who is part of a plot, wouldn’t the others involved change their plans, knowing the arrested guy might give them away. What kind of dummies would go ahead with their plan exactly when one of their guys is locked up? If I learned anything from years of Mission Impossible and even watching Stalag 13, plotters don’t continue the same plan if one member is arrested! Think! Otherwise we just look like a bunch of mean dummies.

You can just hear Obama’s speech after the NEXT 9/11-style attack-
“Yes, we had a captive that knew the operation was taking place, but we do not waterboard terrorists, even though thousands of Americans died today.Words mean something.We stand by our principles”
Tell that to the thousands of families that will have lost their loved ones.
Suppose we had captured KSM on 9/10?
Was it worth doing this to stop it?
We did do it to KSM (after), and it stopped another attack by Hambali, who killed hundreds in Bali in 2002.
He would have done it again if not stopped.

I may be wrong as I don’t have any children, but these so-called torture tactics sound like basic child-rearing techniques.
dietary manipulation = do what i say or you’re going to bed without dinner, you don’t get a snack, etc.
forced nudity = take of your clothes and get into the tub
facial and abdominal slaps = spankings
use of confined or “stress positions” for suspects = timeout in the corner
mind games, playing on fears = if you don’t behave, santa won’t bring presents, the police will take you away, the bogey man will get you
I think it would be fair to say that based on the assumption that these things constitute torture, that most parents also are practioners of torture.
We better alert the human rights groups and Spain so they can prosecute the evil American parents that are torturing their children.

Then afterwards Bush’s policies killed how many innocent Iraqis? 100k? More?
- Above comment is another from the Peanut Gallery.
100k – Is that the number that really died because of Bush, or the number of all Iraqi deaths from all other sources, including Sectarian Strife (which was already there before the invasion & had been for Centuries) as the Liberals (and their Poly Tanks) exaggerate the numbers at every turn, with every opportunity.
How many did Hussein kill — ~ 2 Million or more.
How many more would Hussein have killed during the same time period, and would there be a fledging democracy taking hold!!!
– News Flash – THE SURGE WORKED.

OGLiberal wrote: “He only started singing when one of the interrogators pretended to be a Mossad agent and informed him that he was taking him back to Israel. All of the physical abuse did nothing, didn’t break the guy. It was a non-violent, non-physical ruse that got the guy to talk.”
You make our point!
Have you any idea what the terrorist believed was going to happen to him if he was taken to Israel? THAT is why he talked. He believed he was going to REALLY be tortured and eventually killed. Regardless of the accuracy of the stories, for decades Palestinians have told of horrific torture by the Israelis. Muslims around the world hear these stories and BELIEVE these stories to be true.
The following is an except from a report by Palestinian journalist, Khalid Amayre, in his article “My Personal Experience with the Israeli Occupation:”
“The place where the interrogation took place was crowded with Palestinians being tortured. I would hear people screaming. I personally know at least six people who died of torture in one year. One of them, Abdul Samad Herezat, was a personal friend of mine. He died as a result of the ‘the shaking technique.’
“The Israelis used a variety of torture methods against Palestinian inmates, including hooding, savage beating, electric shocks, sleep deprivation, suffocation, and many other forms of physical and psychological pressure. Israeli doctors would help administer the torture. Sometimes, they would bring an inmate’s wife or sister and threaten to rape her in front of him. They would not rape the woman, but only threaten to do so in order to extract confessions from the inmate.”
If the terrorists believe they will never be tortured then how do you extract the information needed to prevent further terrorist attacks?

For terrorists – who are basically tribal – kindness is weakness.
We could try the time tested “scolding techniques.” First we make them listen to “We are the world” for a really long time – say, a whole hour in a row. Then, we sit down with them and give them a real “scolding” for being “big meanies.”
That’ll get ‘em.