CIA admits to waterboarding inmates.

Eon

TeeHee
Banned
Joined
Dec 20, 2002
Messages
5,341
Best answers
0
BBC News said:
The CIA has for the first time publicly admitted using the controversial method of "waterboarding" on terror suspects.

CIA director Michael Hayden told Congress however that it had only been used on three people, and not at all for the past five years.

He said the technique had been used on high-profile al-Qaeda detainees including Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

Mr Hayden was speaking as National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell presented his annual threat assessment.

Waterboarding is an interrogation technique in which the detainee is put in fear of drowning.

Some critics describe it as torture and Congress has been debating banning its use by the CIA.

President Bush has threatened to veto such a bill.

Mr Hayden said the CIA had also used waterboarding against two other top al-Qaeda suspects, Abu Zubaydah and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri.

Catastrophe fears

He told Congress: "We used it against these three detainees because of the circumstances at the time. "There was the belief that additional catastrophic attacks against the homeland were inevitable. And we had limited knowledge about al-Qaeda and its workings.

"Those two realities have changed.

In his report, National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell focussed attention on al-Qaeda and its leadership based in the border area between Pakistan and Afghanistan.

"Al-Qaeda remains the pre-eminent threat against the United States, both here at home and abroad," he said.
Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7229169.stm
 
New Member
★ Black Lounger ★
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Apr 23, 2003
Messages
3,913
Best answers
0
hmmmm, putting the fear of death into people who knowingly kill or direct others to kill? personally I think its justified to some degree.

is it cruel? yes, but it isn't exactly being used on fluffy little bunnies here.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Oct 4, 2004
Messages
1,572
Best answers
0
Fear of death into people who they suspect of being murderers. Totally justified. If I suspect you of plotting a terrorist attack on Norway, I should definitely torture you to find out for sure.

Torture is no way of finding out whether someone is telling the truth or not if they're dedicated enough. Hell, if someone was waterboarding me, I'd probably tell them whatever they wanted to hear.
 
New Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2004
Messages
652
Best answers
0
Don't these psychos not fear death in the first place? I mean.. if they are blowing themselves up for their "72 virgins", then that has some balls.
 
New Member
★ Black Lounger ★
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Apr 23, 2003
Messages
3,913
Best answers
0
Fear of death into people who they suspect of being murderers. Totally justified. If I suspect you of plotting a terrorist attack on Norway, I should definitely torture you to find out for sure.

Torture is no way of finding out whether someone is telling the truth or not if they're dedicated enough. Hell, if someone was waterboarding me, I'd probably tell them whatever they wanted to hear.
oh we have all seen their training videos, oh yeah.... so innocent. you got me there.
 
The Duke of Juke
Retired Forum Staff
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
2,852
Best answers
0
I'd probably tell them whatever they wanted to hear.
We find this out repeatedly through history. The Spanish inquisition, Salem witch trials and during many other times. You torture a person, they tell you what you want to hear.
 
Active Member
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Oct 27, 2004
Messages
2,462
Best answers
0
It wouldn't be as bad if they just admitted they used torture instead of splitting hairs.

If someone knows something, and there a large chance he's a terrorist, and he's not talking, how do we get the information out of him?

But this is news to me. I always thought the CIA had admitted to this, but I know Bush was planing to veto this bill. If he decides to veto it, but loses, can he still issues a signing statement?
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Apr 14, 2005
Messages
4,022
Best answers
0
+educates self on the topic of waterboarding before posting+

Hm, can't say I'm surprised, really. This isn't the only form of torture the US has employed against people suspected of terrorist involvement, is it?
 
Active Member
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Nov 6, 2004
Messages
3,055
Best answers
0
I don't see it as being that bad, really. I mean, the only lasting effects are psychological (fear of drowning). Maybe some minor lung damage that would likely heal after a little while. Besides, they do far worse things to our troops (beheading, anyone?). I'm not using that as justification, I understand that some people flat out despise torture. But if it's for the greater good, I believe it's worth it. Plus, it's only the illusion of drowning. It's all done at the interrogator's discretion.
 
New Member
★ Black Lounger ★
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Apr 15, 2003
Messages
4,628
Best answers
0
Torture is unreliable, that's why I think its a waste of time. You can save a lot of hassle by investigating properly instead of pissing someone off until they tell you something which may not even be true in the first place. No leads is one thing, but false leads is a waste of money and time, doesn't help that its inhumane as well.
 
King of the Hello Kitty Fanclub
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Sep 6, 2004
Messages
1,675
Best answers
0
What the terrorists do isn't exactly humane either. Two wrongs don't make a right, but answers are better than no answers.
 
New Member
★ Black Lounger ★
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Apr 15, 2003
Messages
4,628
Best answers
0
Wrong answers are worse than no answers.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Oct 4, 2004
Messages
1,572
Best answers
0
My point was that the CIA have kidnapped innocent people, and put them through torture. If they knew these people were terrorists, it still wouldn't help them much to torture them. I feel like it's revenge more than it is finding vital information, and revenge is what they're doing. When you torture a terrorist, you're not being much better than him yourself - you've lowered yourself to his level.
 
King of the Hello Kitty Fanclub
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Sep 6, 2004
Messages
1,675
Best answers
0
My point was that the CIA have kidnapped innocent people, and put them through torture. If they knew these people were terrorists, it still wouldn't help them much to torture them. I feel like it's revenge more than it is finding vital information, and revenge is what they're doing. When you torture a terrorist, you're not being much better than him yourself - you've lowered yourself to his level.
How do you know if it helps or not? If the tortured guy reveals important information I think thats very helpful.

Wrong information is bad I agree, but I don't think it'd take too long to realise what information is inaccurate and return to whatever means needed to obtain the right information.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Oct 4, 2004
Messages
1,572
Best answers
0
...

Okay, so you have difficulty understanding the situation. That's okay, I'll try to clarify.

The US does not always capture terrorists (actually I think they do that around 50% of the time). By torturing innocent people, the US is lowering themselves to the terrorists' level. Terrorism + More Terrorism != Justice.

Information is not attained through torture any more than misinformation is, and they usually cancel each other out. What will you have achieved? More terrorism! The very thing you sought to vanquish.
 
New Member
★ Black Lounger ★
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Apr 23, 2003
Messages
3,913
Best answers
0
this just in, avenger is a terrorist.
 
King of the Hello Kitty Fanclub
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Sep 6, 2004
Messages
1,675
Best answers
0
...

Okay, so you have difficulty understanding the situation. That's okay, I'll try to clarify.

The US does not always capture terrorists (actually I think they do that around 50% of the time). By torturing innocent people, the US is lowering themselves to the terrorists' level. Terrorism + More Terrorism != Justice.

Information is not attained through torture any more than misinformation is, and they usually cancel each other out. What will you have achieved? More terrorism! The very thing you sought to vanquish.
Since you missed it the first time.

Original Quote in OP said:
CIA director Michael Hayden told Congress however that it had only been used on three people, and not at all for the past five years.
It's been used on 3 known terrorists, and I don't see that as a bad thing.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Oct 4, 2004
Messages
1,572
Best answers
0
Yes, because what the CIA director tells you is definitely trustworthy.
 
King of the Hello Kitty Fanclub
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Sep 6, 2004
Messages
1,675
Best answers
0
I'd trust him a lot more than I'd trust a random 17 year old from Norway.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Oct 4, 2004
Messages
1,572
Best answers
0
Yeah, spies are always trustworthy. They have no reasons what so ever for covering up torture.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top