Torture Works - Now Shut The Fuck Up

Status
Not open for further replies.

hellblazer

New member
Sep 20, 2008
3,020
86
0
I'll even let you frame it as 'torture'...and you can chew on the fact that it stopped an airline attack on Los Angeles.

CIA Confirms: Waterboarding 9/11 Mastermind Led to Info that Aborted 9/11-Style Attack on Los Angeles
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
By Terence P. Jeffrey, Editor-in-Chief
46950.jpg

Khalid Sheik Mohammad, a top al Qaeda leader who divulged information -- after being waterboarded -- that allowed the U.S. government to stop a planned terrorist attack on Los Angeles.
(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.”

KSM was the mastermind of the first “hijacked-airliner” attacks on the United States, which struck the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Northern Virginia on Sept. 11, 2001.

After KSM was captured by the United States, he was not initially cooperative with CIA interrogators. Nor was another top al Qaeda leader named Zubaydah. KSM, Zubaydah, and a third terrorist named Nashiri were the only three persons ever subjected to waterboarding by the CIA. (Additional terrorist detainees were subjected to other “enhanced techniques” that included slapping, sleep deprivation, dietary limitations, and temporary confinement to small spaces -- but not to water-boarding.)

This was because the CIA imposed very tight restrictions on the use of waterboarding. “The ‘waterboard,’ which is the most intense of the CIA interrogation techniques, is subject to additional limits,” explained the May 30, 2005 Justice Department memo. “It may be used on a High Value Detainee only if the CIA has ‘credible intelligence that a terrorist attack is imminent’; ‘substantial and credible indicators that the subject has actionable intelligence that can prevent, disrupt or deny this attack’; and ‘[o]ther interrogation methods have failed to elicit this information within the perceived time limit for preventing the attack.’”

The quotations in this part of the Justice memo were taken from an Aug. 2, 2004 letter that CIA Acting General Counsel John A. Rizzo sent to the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel.

Before they were subjected to “enhanced techniques” of interrogation that included waterboarding, KSM and Zubaydah were not only uncooperative but also appeared contemptuous of the will of the American people to defend themselves.

“In particular, the CIA believes that it would have been unable to obtain critical information from numerous detainees, including KSM and Abu Zubaydah, without these enhanced techniques,” says the Justice Department memo. “Both KSM and Zubaydah had ‘expressed their belief that the general US population was ‘weak,’ lacked resilience, and would be unable to ‘do what was necessary’ to prevent the terrorists from succeeding in their goals.’ Indeed, before the CIA used enhanced techniques in its interrogation of KSM, KSM resisted giving any answers to questions about future attacks, simply noting, ‘Soon you will know.’”

After he was subjected to the “waterboard” technique, KSM became cooperative, providing intelligence that led to the capture of key al Qaeda allies and, eventually, the closing down of an East Asian terrorist cell that had been tasked with carrying out the 9/11-style attack on Los Angeles.

The May 30, 2005 Justice Department memo that details what happened in this regard was written by then-Principal Deputy Attorney General Steven G. Bradbury to John A. Rizzo, the senior deputy general counsel for the CIA.

“You have informed us that the interrogation of KSM—once enhanced techniques were employed—led to the discovery of a KSM plot, the ‘Second Wave,’ ‘to use East Asian operatives to crash a hijacked airliner into’ a building in Los Angeles,” says the memo.

“You have informed us that information obtained from KSM also led to the capture of Riduan bin Isomuddin, better known as Hambali, and the discover of the Guraba Cell, a 17-member Jemaah Islamiyah cell tasked with executing the ‘Second Wave,’” reads the memo. “More specifically, we understand that KSM admitted that he had [redaction] large sum of money to an al Qaeda associate [redaction] … Khan subsequently identified the associate (Zubair), who was then captured. Zubair, in turn, provided information that led to the arrest of Hambali. The information acquired from these captures allowed CIA interrogators to pose more specific questions to KSM, which led the CIA to Hambali’s brother, al Hadi. Using information obtained from multiple sources, al-Hadi was captured, and he subsequently identified the Garuba cell. With the aid of this additional information, interrogations of Hambali confirmed much of what was learned from KSM.”

A CIA spokesman confirmed to CNSNews.com today that the CIA stands by the factual assertions made here.

In the memo itself, the Justice Department’s Bradbury told the CIA’s Rossi: “Your office has informed us that the CIA believes that ‘the intelligence acquired from these interrogations has been a key reason why al Qa’ida has failed to launch a spectacular attack in the West since 11 September 2001.”
 


Of course it works.

The problem is with oversight and deciding who can do this to whom. If torture can be done to prevent a terrorist attack or other tragedy, I'm all in favor of it. If torture is being used to find out who stole the money from the bake sale fund, I have a problem.
 
its not a matter of whether or not it works its a problem of whether or not we should do something thats unconstitutional.

On that note strangely enough if you look through the history books when all the politicians and media has been lieing to us it's always been the CIA themselves that have been truthful and open to the american people, why they've always been ignored is another story.
 
of course it works. because we can always trust what the CIA tells us.
just because they're one of the world's most refined deceptionarial organizations doesn't mean we shouldn't trust them.
 
Dude I'd tell you my mom was a terrorist if you tortured me enough.

It doesn't work.
 
its not a matter of whether or not it works its a problem of whether or not we should do something thats unconstitutional.

On that note strangely enough if you look through the history books when all the politicians and media has been lieing to us it's always been the CIA themselves that have been truthful and open to the american people, why they've always been ignored is another story.

Whether it is unconstitutional is up for debate. Torture in this case wouldn't be a punishment, it would be an interrogation technique. Punishment would come after the trial.

...nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
As long as due process is followed, torture would seem to be ok according to that amendment...

And unreasonable would be a matter for the courts to decide...especially if probably cause was there.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
 
If Obama had ever been in the service, he would understand that when a document has "Top Secret" written on it, if the info gets out, there WILL BE damage to our national security. He went against the advice of his own CIA appointee and several past CIA heads to release this info. These techniques DID work. They saved many American lives.

I continue to be saddened by our beloved new president's actions.
 
I personally have no problem with torture. If you put yourself in a position to get tortured then there's probably good reason for it. Why should we care about the well being of people who don't care about ours in return?
 
As long as due process is followed, torture would seem to be ok according to that amendment...
"By due process of law" that statement is referring to a person being found guilty and sentenced by the courts. In other words it's constitutional for the government to seize a persons life (death penalty), liberty (put em in jail) and property (assets) if they are found guilty of breaking the law by a jury of their peers (the due process of law).

Due process of law - The right of all persons to receive the guarantees and safeguards of the law and the judicial process. It includes such constitutional requirements as adequate notice, assistance of counsel, and the rights to remain silent, to a speedy and public trial, to an impartial jury, and to confront and secure witnesses.

It's not saying its okay to torture or refuse rights to a speedy trial if you fill out the proper paperwork like you may be interpreting it.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, torture works like everybody is saying but what scares me is that when somebody puts you in a cage with german sheppard dipped in some yummy sauce, you'll say pretty much anything. So that's why torture should be only applied to people who are proven to know some shit.

Sometimes it's the guilty guy, usually not.
 
Funny thing is that how there could be another 911 terrorist attack when even the first one was inside job? :D
 
its odd how now under all this political pressure the CIA is pushing information in favor of torture working.

I remember watching a informational documentary on like the discovery channel back when i was young about the cia and it went through all the cool stuff about how the agents are trained, cool gadgets they make, how they keep things secure there all this cool shit. It was just a general documentary and they asked them what kind of interrogations they do (before torture was a heated topic) and they talked about how they get info out of suspects and stuff and they said very specifically that they don't do torture because it doesn't work. They said keeping a suspect in good health and good mental state is a lot better and faster way to get quality information out of them. It all made sense the way they explained it.
 
It's a typical "calming" piece. Lot's of people where pissed off and didn't approve of the waterboarding, then again it was the fucking government that just basically changed what was considered torture to cover their own asses.

Then the government decides that they aren't going to prosecute ANYONE in connection with waterboarding.

Now shortly there after a magical story surfaces that the waterboarding torture saved us from another inside (9/11 style) job!

You have to be a gullible mother fucking to take this as is, and not get angry.
 
its odd how now under all this political pressure the CIA is pushing information in favor of torture working.

It isn't odd at all. Governmental agencies have their own self-interest just like any other organization. They also have a whole slew of wide and varied viewpoints that people within those orgs share. People get promoted and demoted, and all of a sudden priorities change. That is good. It puts new ideas into the pipeline and only the better ideas tend to survive.

...they asked them what kind of interrogations they do (before torture was a heated topic) and they talked about how they get info out of suspects and stuff and they said very specifically that they don't do torture because it doesn't work. They said keeping a suspect in good health and good mental state is a lot better and faster way to get quality information out of them. It all made sense the way they explained it.

Torture will work on some people. Torture will not work on others. The key is to find the right leverage to get the information you're looking for, within the guidelines of what has been judged to be right.

I guarantee you, after working as a jailer myself, that coddling inmates in general does not reduce recidivism. The problem is that I don't see making things tough on inmates reducing it either. It just makes them work harder at not getting caught.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.