|
|
|
|
|
| Ex-CIA agent: Waterboarding 'saved lives'
Posted: 12/15/2007 6:20:55 PM |
I, for one, don't have the total story about the destroyed tapes, so I'm reserving judgment. I would urge others in this thread to do the same until "all" the facts come out.
Since the tapes were destroyed, all the facts will never come out, so waiting for them would be an exercise in futility. | |
|
| |
| Ex-CIA agent: Waterboarding 'saved lives'
Posted: 12/15/2007 6:34:23 PM | Msquared, what are you talking about? There's plenty of facts that can come out. Let the investigation take it's course, for crissakes?
Just found this on Newsweek's web page.....
In the summer of 2005, then CIA director Porter Goss met with then national intelligence director John Negroponte to discuss a highly sensitive matter: what to do about the existence of videotapes documenting the use of controversial interrogation methods, apparently including waterboarding, on two key Al Qaeda suspects. The tapes were eventually destroyed, and congressional investigators are now trying to piece together an extensive paper trail documenting how and why it happened.
One crucial document they'll surely want to examine: a memo written after the meeting between Goss and Negroponte, which records that Negroponte strongly advised against destroying the tapes, according to two people close to the investigation, who asked for anonymity when discussing a sensitive matter. The memo is so far the only known documentation that a senior intel official warned that the tapes should not be destroyed. Spokespeople for the CIA and the intel czar's office declined to comment, citing ongoing investigations.
Current and former U.S. officials familiar with the history of the tapes, who also asked for anonymity, told newsweek that Jose Rodriguez Jr., then chief of the CIA's espionage branch, the National Clandestine Service, decided on his own authority in late 2005 to destroy the tapes in order to protect the identity of undercover CIA officers. The officials said that Rodriguez and his close aides had been asking top agency managers for more than two years about what to do with the tapes, but felt they never got a straight answer.
The tapes were kept—and destroyed—at a secret location overseas. It is unknown whether Rodriguez knew about Negroponte's position. Goss believed he had an "understanding" with Clandestine Services that the tapes were to be preserved and was dismayed to learn that they had been destroyed, according to a source familiar with his views.
The fate of the congressional inquiries remains unclear. On Friday, the Justice Department asked the House intel panel to back off its request for documents and testimony on the grounds that it might interfere with its own probe. In addition, prominent criminal defense lawyer Robert Bennett confirmed that he is representing Rodriguez. Bennett told NEWSWEEK that his client had been "a dedicated and loyal public servant for 31 years" and "has done nothing wrong." But he warned that Rodriguez may refuse to cooperate with investigators if he concludes that the probes are a "witch hunt." "I don't want him to become a scapegoat." | |
|
| Ex-CIA agent: Waterboarding 'saved lives'
Posted: 12/15/2007 6:41:36 PM | | how do you know there was no torture in other conflicts? We live in the info age now and these things can't be kept secret like they were in the past | |
|
| Ex-CIA agent: Waterboarding 'saved lives'
Posted: 12/15/2007 7:06:57 PM |
Msquared, what are you talking about? There's plenty of facts that can come out.
The facts that were on the tapes, however, will not be coming out. | |
|
| Ex-CIA agent: Waterboarding 'saved lives'
Posted: 12/15/2007 7:19:24 PM |
I’ve heard some members of the CIA were concerned that this exact thing would happen so took out special insurance coverage to protect themselves financially and to pay legal expenses. I'd say that was very prescient and prudent on their part, knowing how thin-skinned and incompetent our politicians are.
Professional interrogators should have stood firm and refused to follow illegal (and ineffective) orders - that's the best type of insurance.
It's exactly the same game the politicians played with the CIA in the run up to the Iraq war. They decided on that war without even having prepared an NIE on it, then rushed one when a Congressmen brought that little fact to their attention.
Those same politicians then went and took all the grey areas out, and made it a slam dunk.
Military experts told them (after wargaming the situation in depth) that such an invasion needed more troops , and would turn the country into a potential quagmire even WITH those numbers of troops. They were not listened to.
When the reason for the invasion was proved to be wrong, they then blamed the CIA for it. 
They've decimated the CIA and other intelligence services.
A similar revolt is evident at the CIA. Professional intelligence officers are furious at the politicized leadership brought to the agency by ex-congressman Porter Goss and his retinue of former congressional staffers. Their mismanagement has peeled away a generation of senior management in the CIA's Directorate of Operations who have resigned, transferred or signaled their intention to quit when their current tours are up. Many of those who remain are trying to keep their heads down until the current wave of political jockeying and reorganization is over -- which is the last thing you would want at an effective intelligence agency.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/
content/article/2005/12/20/AR2005122000973.html
The same thing happened with Gitmo, and proclaiming they could do what they wanted to. That didn't stand up in the Supreme Court, so they backed down.
It's also the same with waterboarding, which was good - and now is bad.
One of the best examples of just how bad the situation is was when the Pentagon revolted against this administration's desire to use bunker busting nukes in the planning for an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities.
They simply refused the instructions to include it in their plans. 
There was a similar revolt at the Pentagon over the conduct of the Iraq war, and it lead to major changes in the way it was being fought.
These things should be seen as warning signals that this administration is quite dangerous, not to mention incompetent , when left to it's own devices. | |
|
| Ex-CIA agent: Waterboarding 'saved lives'
Posted: 12/15/2007 7:32:23 PM |
Professional interrogators should have stood firm and refused to follow illegal (and ineffective) orders - that's the best type of insurance.
Because they were "assured" at the time that their interrogation methods were legal. Some took out insurance because they knew from past practice our government has a tendency to shoot its messengers, run for cover when things go bad, and save their own skin when the political fallout is negative. The CIA is NOT the bad guy in the process, but some sniveling, spineless politicians are. | |
|
| |
| Ex-CIA agent: Waterboarding 'saved lives'
Posted: 12/15/2007 9:11:41 PM |
You may rest your head lightly on your pillow tonight, while the intel does what it needs to do to keep you safe.
Edited.
Never mind. I can see you have made up your mind, in spite of the facts. | |
|
| Ex-CIA agent: Waterboarding 'saved lives'
Posted: 12/15/2007 10:10:18 PM | use they were "assured" at the time that their interrogation methods were legal. Some took out insurance because they knew from past practice our government has a tendency to shoot its messengers, run for cover when things go bad, and save their own skin when the political fallout is negative. The CIA is NOT the bad guy in the process, but some sniveling, spineless politicians are.
Wow dude congratulations you just became a Nazi! From now on anything motown has to say goes right into the recycle bin for me. | |
|
| Ex-CIA agent: Waterboarding 'saved lives'
Posted: 12/16/2007 10:22:46 AM |
Professional interrogators should have stood firm and refused to follow illegal (and ineffective) orders - that's the best type of insurance.
So basically you are saying that when they are told what is and is not legal by their staff lawyers, they should ignore it and do what they think is right.
Is this how you would run an intelligence agency? Encourage people to ignore the lawyers? It wasn't you who raised nazi's, but the thin line between an organization which is authorized to break the law and one which spins out of countrol lies *precisely* in the careful adherence to regulations and legal interpretations passed down by the general council. | |
|
| Ex-CIA agent: Waterboarding 'saved lives'
Posted: 12/16/2007 10:27:54 AM |
So basically you are saying that when they are told what is and is not legal by their staff lawyers, they should ignore it and do what they think is right.
Is this how you would run an intelligence agency? Encourage people to ignore the lawyers?
I would hope that people who help to keep the public safe have enough common sense and decency to do the right thing, regardless of what others are telling them. Unfortunately, that often seems to not be the case. | |
|
| Ex-CIA agent: Waterboarding 'saved lives'
Posted: 12/16/2007 10:33:12 AM |
I would hope that people who help to keep the public safe have enough common sense and decency to do the right thing, regardless of what others are telling them. Unfortunately, that often seems to not be the case.
And if they believe the right thing was to be more aggressive in their questioning of someone they believed to know critical information? Is that a time to ignore the opinions of the lawyers? It seems to be what you are saying. | |
|
| Ex-CIA agent: Waterboarding 'saved lives'
Posted: 12/16/2007 10:44:50 AM | And if they believe the right thing was to be more aggressive in their questioning of someone they believed to know critical information?
Then they wouldn't have much common sense and decency, if their questioning involved torture.
It seems to be what you are saying.
Putting words in the mouths of others seems to be a common trait for those who are arguing the merits of torture. | |
|
| Ex-CIA agent: Waterboarding 'saved lives'
Posted: 12/16/2007 12:45:20 PM |
Is this how you would run an intelligence agency? Encourage people to ignore the lawyers? It wasn't you who raised nazi's, but the thin line between an organization which is authorized to break the law and one which spins out of countrol lies *precisely* in the careful adherence to regulations and legal interpretations passed down by the general council.
Actually, every single thing the Nazi's ever did was legal.
That was one of the arguments used by the Nazi leaders tried at Nuremberg, along with the "just following orders" one. It made no difference.
Nuremberg Principles
Principle II
The fact that internal law does not impose a penalty for an act which constitutes a crime under international law does not relieve the person who committed the act from responsibility under international law.
Principle IV
The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.
Sometimes common men have a better grasp of morality and ethics than nation states and their lawyers do. Slavery and racial discrimination were one legal too, and so was sexual discrimination. Laws, regulations, and legal interpretations are not necessarily moral, nor ethical. | |
|
| Ex-CIA agent: Waterboarding 'saved lives'
Posted: 12/16/2007 4:41:19 PM | | And so with that, it is not precedent that determines morality. So even if one were to cite a case where we prosecuted one of our own under the circumstances of 40 seconds (which I doubt anyone can will ever find) it wouldnt even matter. | |
|
| Ex-CIA agent: Waterboarding 'saved lives'
Posted: 12/16/2007 8:28:58 PM | There is not a country on the face of the earth that has not used a tactic that would be classified as "torture". Not one country can say they have not "tortured" anyone, waterboarding or not.
Why should the U.S. be any different? | |
|
| Ex-CIA agent: Waterboarding 'saved lives'
Posted: 12/16/2007 8:39:14 PM |
There is not a country on the face of the earth that has not used a tactic that would be classified as "torture". Not one country can say they have not "tortured" anyone, waterboarding or not.
By that logic, we all might as well steal whatever we want and hurt whoever we please, because so many others do so.
Yes, every country in the world has likely used such tactics. That does not excuse us if we continue to do this sort of thing. | |
|
| Ex-CIA agent: Waterboarding 'saved lives'
Posted: 12/17/2007 6:53:10 AM | I do think one of the reasons those tapes were destroyed was that a waterboarding session is not going to look "pretty". You have a strapped down prisoner, with cellophane wrapped over his head, and water being poured down his throat.
Questions are being yelled at him while this is done.
Anyone seeing such a tape would instantly realize it's torture. | |
|
| Ex-CIA agent: Waterboarding 'saved lives'
Posted: 12/17/2007 8:35:23 AM | montreal guy said: "Professional interrogators should have stood firm and refused to follow illegal (and ineffective) orders - that's the best type of insurance. "
---
my comment: I heard on network news (CBS, NBC, ABC?) a couple of days ago that the interrogations in question were very effective. | |
|
| Ex-CIA agent: Waterboarding 'saved lives'
Posted: 12/17/2007 8:42:00 AM | seaspot said: "There is not a country on the face of the earth that has not used a tactic that would be classified as "torture". Not one country can say they have not "tortured" anyone, waterboarding or not."
---
my comment: right on. In a war, the general purpose includes, as a primary objective, the KILLING of the "bad" guy.
All this superficial moral posturing about an arguable technique (waterboarding), and the political utilization of it, giving a propaganda victory to the adversary, gets me a little queasy. | |
|
| Ex-CIA agent: Waterboarding 'saved lives'
Posted: 12/17/2007 9:05:50 AM | seaspot said: "There is not a country on the face of the earth that has not used a tactic that would be classified as "torture". Not one country can say they have not "tortured" anyone, waterboarding or not."
Okay by that line of logic lets behead people,skin them alive,cut off hands.You know the "true american values".  | |
|
| Ex-CIA agent: Waterboarding 'saved lives'
Posted: 12/17/2007 9:06:31 AM | mpaul said:
giving a propaganda victory to the adversary, gets me a little queasy.
If that's the case, then the fact that our use of torture has been not only a huge propaganda tool but also a successful recruiting tool for the enemy should be enough to make you buy Pepto-Bismol by the case.
I am also still curious to see what evidence you have to substantiate the claim you made in msg 147:
who would best know if harsh techniques, including a periodic waterboarding, are effective: interrogators. And they say they ARE effective, and if they didn't, we would not be having this argument.
Which interrogators? You wouldn't be referring to Syrian interrogators, would you....? | |
|
| Ex-CIA agent: Waterboarding 'saved lives'
Posted: 12/17/2007 9:13:22 AM | What people will instantly feel watching it would be a feeling of uneasiness. Why? because its a natural feeling when one witnesses another under duress. But his feeling happens regardless of the circumstances. Someone people are placed on the operating table for a life saving procedure, but when the knife begins to cut it still sparks a human emotion, even though it is for saving a life. The only thing we actually realize is that we are finite, and that makes each of very uncomfortable.
What this debate has established is that there are three basic types of peope out there
1) The first being of the block, that views ANY level of duress as torture.
2) The second, that tortue is a necessity for nations to survive
3) the third, a belief that there is a threshold that when passed could constitutes torture.
The first two could be described as a penjulum, a swing to the extent of both ends. The first one, is a nice idea, if we lived in a world free and devoid of conflict. And this takes all 'sticks" off the table. Now we all know that people respond in one of two ways. People either ac or are persuaded not to act encouraged by a reward to do so or persuaded not to due to punishment. In this case, waterboarding is seen as a punishment. Let's use the scenerio of children and discipline. With some children only rewards are needed to elicit a specific behavior (the thought of a spanking causes them to think again). And others, need a slap on the behind. And then you have your problem child who responds to neither one (is sent to boot camp and is strightened out through someone constantly i n their face- this works as they are still impressionable)
From a practical point of view some coersion enables the goverment to reach two of the three above mentioned groups, the most sizable of the three.
The first is absolutely unrealistic. We live in a bite and scratch world of survivial. And morally speaking, when we commit a crime, we have no garuntee for total comfort. Our only pacts that we have made- is that extreme is torture.
My oppisition to being of the second group is that widespread use is that it does not adhere to any moral guidiance. It is a ultilitarian in nature and something I personally do not agree with | |
|
| Ex-CIA agent: Waterboarding 'saved lives'
Posted: 12/17/2007 9:24:54 AM | Merc said:
The first one, is a nice idea, if we lived in a world free and devoid of conflict.
And:
The first is absolutely unrealistic.
What are your qualifications to make such an "absolute" statement?
What do you know that Stuart Herrington (retired Military Intelligence interrogator and counterintelligence agent), Robert Baer (retired CIA operations officer with years of operational experience in the Middle East), and Malcolm Nance (counterterrorism specialist and former SERE instructor) do not know?
Why do you keep avoiding this simple question? If your argument were truly based on fact, vice emotion, you should have no trouble answering this question, right? | |
|
|
| Page 8 of 41
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41 |
|
Home
login 
