Former interrogator rebukes Cheney's claim on torture

[Trinity]

"Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

Nick, Star, others... Read the book "Blowback." (Amazon.com: Blowback, Second Edition: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire (American Empire Project): Chalmers Johnson: Books)

It discusses in great detail the *exact* US action and the corresponding response.

We like to portray America as the "Innocent", but we've had 5 decades of US policing the world... and in that time, we were sometimes on the wrong side -- especially when it comes to the Middle East and oil.

There is no justification for the terrorist attacks, but if you believe it was without "reason", you need to go back to school and read up on history.

With Gitmo, Abu Graib, etc. we have given an entirely new generation of people to hate.

I don't subscibe to the portrayal of America as the "Innocent." I truly believe that many times, we were on the wrong side in history and in that region of the world.

I did not support the Bush Administration on many policies and actions. I certainly don't think they did everything right. And in some cases could have made issues worse with their policy. But to say that U.S. Policy gives anyone a reason to be a terrorist is just wrong.

Understanding how our policies can contribute to making a problem worse is just smart. Of course I understand that. Renewing our damaged relationships in the world, renewing our reputation and reestablishing our moral authority...all good things. I believe President Obama is right to do it even if I don't always agree with the way he does it.

Here is where I take issue. National Security and Defense. There are many things we can do that will help us mend fences with non-extremists. We can change policy and our actions to understand their worldview and be respectful of it.

But here is what you can't do...You cannot reason with a Terrorist. You cannot talk sense to the irrational. You can not satisfy with words or actions someone who simply hates you and everything you are. Your attempts will be futile.

For the extremists who become terrorists willing to sacrifice their lives to kill innocent people, their hate is so profound and irrational nothing we do will improve relations with them. There will always be something about us that they hate because they didn't become terrorists because of interrogation abuse. They became Terrorists because of Hate.

The penalty for terrorists acts that kill thousands of innocent people is death. To assert there is some rational logic in a Terrorist being justifiably angered by the National Security and Defense response to his terrorist attack and to assert we are therefore creating terrorists is ridiculous.

 

[mikeyh9in]

Exactly, we cannot undo what as been done, but we can certainly act on the principles that America was founded on... people are innocent until proven guilty, we do not torture, we respect the sovereignty of lawful nations.

The Muslim world loves to point out our hypocrisy... "We say we do not torture"... just listen to Cheney justifying torture. We invade Iraq without cause. We have 250+ detainees at Gitmo, admitedly without enough evidence to convict them of their crimes.

The true test of a man's principles and convictions is what he will do if he thinks he will never be caught. We look like hypocrites to the rest of the world -- we betrayed the sacred principles of our founding fathers because we wanted revenge.

I don't subscibe to the portrayal of America as the "Innocent." I truly believe that many times, we were on the wrong side in history and in that region of the world.

I did not support the Bush Administration on many policies and actions. I certainly don't think they did everything right. And in some cases could have made issues worse with their policy. But to say that U.S. Policy gives anyone a reason to be a terrorist is just wrong.

Understanding how our policies can contribute to making a problem worse is just smart. Of course I understand that. Renewing our damaged relationships in the world, renewing our reputation and reestablishing our moral authority...all good things. I believe President Obama is right to do it even if I don't always agree with the way he does it.

Here is where I take issue. National Security and Defense. There are many things we can do that will help us mend fences with non-extremists. We can change policy and our actions to understand their worldview and be respectful of it.

But here is what you can't do...You cannot reason with a Terrorist. You cannot talk sense to the irrational. You can not satisfy with words or actions someone who simply hates you and everything you are. Your attempts will be futile.

For the extremists who become terrorists willing to sacrifice their lives to kill innocent people, their hate is so profound and irrational nothing we do will improve relations with them. There will always be something about us that they hate because they didn't become terrorists because of interrogation abuse. They became Terrorists because of Hate.

The penalty for terrorists acts that kill thousands of innocent people is death. To assert there is some rational logic in a Terrorist being justifiably angered by the National Security and Defense response to his terrorist attack and to assert we are therefore creating terrorists is ridiculous.

 

[houtx48]

somebody needs to tell Chaney that he is no longer has any power and is not doing the party any favors by running his mouth. needs to be more like zippy w. and stfu

 

[B_VinylBoy]

somebody needs to tell Chaney that he is no longer has any power and is not doing the party any favors by running his mouth. needs to be more like zippy w. and stfu

And someone needs to tell Trinity that unless (s)he knows the meaning of the word "rhetorical", (s)he shouldn't even try to instruct someone on what a rhetorical question is.

It amazes me how (s)he's STILL trying to push her distorted opinion as a fact around here. As if (s)he interviewed everyone and did her own, unbiased investigation. When all (s)he does copies/pastes pundit blogs from conservative sites and repeats their bullet points to the level of ad nauseam.

 

[Trinity]

Exactly, we cannot undo what as been done, but we can certainly act on the principles that America was founded on... people are innocent until proven guilty, we do not torture, we respect the sovereignty of lawful nations.

The Muslim world loves to point out our hypocrisy... "We say we do not torture"... just listen to Cheney justifying torture. We invade Iraq without cause. We have 250+ detainees at Gitmo, admitedly without enough evidence to convict them of their crimes.

The true test of a man's principles and convictions is what he will do if he thinks he will never be caught. We look like hypocrites to the rest of the world -- we betrayed the sacred principles of our founding fathers because we wanted revenge.

I believe the sacred principles of our founding father's are entact and will continue to be upheld, albeit under a new paradigm. They wrote the constitution broadly because they were wise enough to know that they could not imagine or anticipate how the world would change in the future and issues and problems we would face.

Obama's favorite President, Lincoln saw the need to suspend habeas corpus.

President Lincoln acted in the face of an armed rebellion within the United States – the U.S. Civil War. President Bush’s action was a response to the Global War on Terrorism, considered to have been triggered by the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in New York City and the Pentagon. Both presidents, however, could cite "Invasion" or the much broader term "public Safety" as constitutional triggers for their actions.
President Lincoln suspended habeas corpus unilaterally, while President Bush’s suspension of habeas corpus was approved by Congress through the Military Commissions Act.
President Lincoln's action suspended the habeas corpus rights of U.S. citizens. The Military Commissions Act of 2006, signed by President Bush, stipulates that the right of habeas corpus should be denied only to aliens "detained by the United States."
Both suspensions of habeas corpus applied only to persons held in military prisons and tried before military courts. The habeas corpus rights of persons tried in civilian courts were not affected.
Certainly the suspension -- even if temporary or limited -- of any right or freedom granted by the U.S. Constitution is a momentous act that should be carried out in only in the face of dire and unanticipated of circumstances. Circumstances like civil wars and terrorist attacks are certainly both dire and unanticipated. But whether one or both, or neither warranted the suspension of the right of writs of habeas corpus remains open for debate.
Bush and Lincoln both Suspended Habeas Corpus
​

Terrorism changes the rules because a non-uniformed enemy is bound by no rules or morality, follows no laws and seeks not to fight on the battlefield but to commit terror against the innocent through clandestine means. For some, the situation is a moral dilemna that imprisons those bound by the rule of law and morality to fight not just with one hand tied, but blind and using the other hand to whip themselves because their own values and principles are used as a weapon against them.

For others, the right of self preservation when attacked by an enemy who abides by no rule of law or morality is not secondary to the rights of terrorists and that new understanding does not invalidate moral authority.

 

[Industrialsize]

I believe the sacred principles of our founding father's are entact and will continue to be upheld, albeit under a new paradigm. They wrote the constitution broadly because they were wise enough to know that they could not imagine or anticipate how the world would change in the future and issues and problems we would face.

Obama's favorite President, Lincoln saw the need to suspend habeas corpus.

President Lincoln acted in the face of an armed rebellion within the United States – the U.S. Civil War. President Bush’s action was a response to the Global War on Terrorism, considered to have been triggered by the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in New York City and the Pentagon. Both presidents, however, could cite "Invasion" or the much broader term "public Safety" as constitutional triggers for their actions.
President Lincoln suspended habeas corpus unilaterally, while President Bush’s suspension of habeas corpus was approved by Congress through the Military Commissions Act.
President Lincoln's action suspended the habeas corpus rights of U.S. citizens. The Military Commissions Act of 2006, signed by President Bush, stipulates that the right of habeas corpus should be denied only to aliens "detained by the United States."
Both suspensions of habeas corpus applied only to persons held in military prisons and tried before military courts. The habeas corpus rights of persons tried in civilian courts were not affected.
Certainly the suspension -- even if temporary or limited -- of any right or freedom granted by the U.S. Constitution is a momentous act that should be carried out in only in the face of dire and unanticipated of circumstances. Circumstances like civil wars and terrorist attacks are certainly both dire and unanticipated. But whether one or both, or neither warranted the suspension of the right of writs of habeas corpus remains open for debate.
Bush and Lincoln both Suspended Habeas Corpus
​

Terrorism changes the rules because a non-uniformed enemy is bound by no rules or morality, follows no laws and seeks not to fight on the battlefield but to commit terror against the innocent through clandestine means. For some, the situation is a moral dilemna that imprisons those bound by the rule of law and morality to fight not just with one hand tied, but blind and using the other hand to whip themselves because their own values and principles are used as a weapon against them.

For others, the right of self preservation when attacked by an enemy who abides by no rule of law or morality is not secondary to the rights of terrorists and that new understanding does not invalidate moral authority.

Sounds like twisted "torture apologist" logic....

 

[faceking]

Sounds like twisted "torture apologist" logic....

ya'll ain't so sharp is ya now?

 

[houtx48]

i like your new avatar queen but i don't think it's a mind you want to blow.