Torture did NOT lead to finding Osama bin Laden

[DanG 1]

Quote

Can you name anyone, at least on this board, that would be pro-"poorly conducted interrogation methods"?

Read the thread about how various posters would have handled Bin Laden. There appear to be lots of people here who want to torture for torture's sake.

Quote

however, throwing out specific scenarios where it wouldn't work acknowledges that it can also be done correctly as well

That doesn't follow. Even a blind squirrel gets a nut every now and again. Why would you use a technique that is unlikely to produce good intel (although there is a chance that it might work, hoewever slight) when we have lots of experience and experise in very effective methods?

Quote

so you are just entering the discussion about risk tradeoff vs the more subjective discussion of basic right vs wrong (absolutist discussion that goes nowhere anyway)

There are two separate arguments: 1) it doesn't work reliably, 2) it is morally wrong. It is possible to argue both, and I do.

Quote

edit: and you still didn't acknowledge the possibility that some posters just randomly look for rushmc posts and then reply that he's wrong without reading them - it's a fantastic time saver

I also didn't acknowledge the fact that the sky is blue. I didn't think I had to.

- Dan G

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

and you still didn't acknowledge the possibility that some posters just randomly look for rushmc posts and then reply that he's wrong without reading them - it's a fantastic time saver

It would be, takes quite some time to decipher some of them. End result is generally the same though.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

I think SkyDekker was refering to rush's comment that no new information is asked for during waterboarding. Apparently marc saw some show about interrogation and now he's an expert.no, no expert, but it does make sense. Nice of you to make a stupid assumption

I understand his theory that you only ask questions that you know the answer to, and then punish lies with waterboarding. The problem with that strategy is if some of the information you think you know is wrong, or if the subject doesn't know the right answer, you're right back to forcing the subject to say what you want him to.No, that is not what I said either, 2 for 2

For instance, my sources have told me that 2+2=5. I have remwa in the waterboarding room, and ask him what 2+2 is. When he says 4, I subject him to torture. Then I ask him again. Maybe he says 4 again, maybe he takes a guess and says 3. I only stop waterboarding him when he says 5. According to rush, I've now proven to him that I know everything and he better answer truthfully. Obviously I've done no such thing. Since no new information is asked during torture, I'm not sure what I've gained, but I'm sure rushmc can explain what I'm supposed to do from there.

Again, stupid assumptions seem to now be a strength you have recently aquired

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Read the thread about how various posters would have handled Bin Laden. There appear to be lots of people here who want to torture for torture's sake.

meh - on an 'anonymous' website, there's always those that talk bigger than they really have the stomach for. I take those posts as just them expressing how upset they were about 9/11 combined with a refusal to communicate in anything much farther than grunts and barks.

Or, they are typing in front of women and want to impress them with how monkey like and manly they are.

It all comes down to women in the end.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

There are two separate arguments: 1) it doesn't work reliably, 2) it is morally wrong. It is possible to argue both, and I do.

1 - My point on that, is that it likely can and is conducted reliably since the development of the process would be designed to achieve the most reliable results of necessity. But that isn't really debatable with people that redefine the real process into something simplistic defined to win the opposite argument.

2 - the moral debate is subjective, I'm mostly in agreement with you, but that debate is much akin to throwing handfuls of sand into a strong wind regardless of your position. Lot's of effort resulting in maximum annoyance, but no real progress in the direction you want to go. Much like the first item, only much more clearly in the 'sand throwing' category.

blues

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rushmc 23]

On another note
Since so many here are being pricks about the interview I listened too, I decided to do a google on it since I could not find the transcript

Read for your self

Believe what you will

But to me, it makes sense

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=1660&bih=878&q=waterboarding+used+to+gain+cooperation&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[SkyDekker 1,465]

The first four links are:

conservativesforamerica.com
sistertoldjah.com
foxnews.com
modelmayhem.com

I rest my case.

[wmw999 2,460]

On point number 1, there's some evidence that the data produced isn't good. Not a lot, of course, because most people won't admit to torturing, especially for a scientific study.

I read a book a few years ago about torture in Brazil during the dictatorship. The majority of the torturees who talked said they'd say anything, and that they were generally fed information. (edited to add cite: A Ditadura Escancarada, by Elio Gaspari, São Paulo:Cia da Letras, 2002.

The torturers who talked were pretty much all lower level. The powers-that-be above them had a culture where more information was always better. So the lowers would produce more information, at the expense (natch) of the torturees. Since they had no real personal investment in the information being valid, they went for quantity, and left digging out the quality up to whoever got it.

I'm sure there are times when you can get good information from someone by torturing them. But there are also times when you can get it by just asking, or making them read SC for hours on end. And you never, ever know at the time you get it that the tortured information is accurate. You have to confirm it. If you got it via torture, you've probably wasted that resource; they're used up. If you got it via other means, then you can go back to the well again and again.

You want them to want to cooperate with you. Not out of fear if possible; that's never as good as a more positive reinforcement. Ask any behaviorist.

And "positive reinforcement" can consist of very minimal improvements. Since, however, people are hierarchical, if someone gets a benefit that others see as good, they'll probably want it. Whether it's cigarettes, sunlight, or the ability to walk around the cellblock nekkid.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[DanG 1]

Quote

Again, stupid assumptions seem to now be a strength you have recently aquired

If you'd say what you think clearly instead of relying on one-liners, leaving out all punctuation, and making oblique references to things not already in evidence, I wouldn't have to make so many assumptions.

- Dan G

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

I'm sure there are times when you can get good information from someone by torturing them. But there are also times when you can get it by just asking, or making them read SC for hours on end.

I could write on this bit for quite a while, but I'm satisfied to just quote it and let it stand on it's own merit.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rushmc 23]

Quote

The first four links are:

conservativesforamerica.com
sistertoldjah.com
foxnews.com
modelmayhem.com

I rest my case.

Given the fact that your case has been rested for a long time
Do the search your own way

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Again, stupid assumptions seem to now be a strength you have recently aquired

If you'd say what you think clearly instead of relying on one-liners, leaving out all punctuation, and making oblique references to things not already in evidence, I wouldn't have to make so many assumptions.

Dude, typing and writing are challenges for me.
Always have been
I could talk with you all day on this and be much more clear but that is not possible here

But once one starts getting pricky just because they dont agree the talking is over and the jousting begins

THIS is when the one liners begin


Putting words in people mouth for any reason is just being an ass

If someone is going to do that then they should expect the same in return


Dreamy's posts are a glaring example

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

But once one starts getting pricky just because they dont agree the talking is over and the jousting begins

THIS is when the one liners begin

Your first posting on this thread was a one liner. I know you put it on two lines, but it really is only one sentence.

[christelsabine 1]

Quote

Actually there was a very interesting interview I listened to who explained that those who do the questioning know that actionable info will really never be gained during the process. The questions asked are those the interrogators know the answer too

What they are after is cooperation.

He went on to explain that different cultures view being broken differently culture to culture.

In this case they are asked to hold out as long as they can, but once they give in, they are forgiven. Since they (in this case Muslims) know this, once they give in, they talk much more freely. He stated we are still getting new info today

He stated they need to learn the cultures of those they deal with to know how to bet use enhanced interrogation techs.


I am waiting for a book on this

Should be very interesting

In any event

I don’t think we really know what we think we know
This guy threw a whole new perspective on the tactic

Quote

On another note
Since so many here are being pricks about the interview I listened too, I decided to do a google on it since I could not find the transcript

Read for your self

Believe what you will

But to me, it makes sense

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=1660&bih=878&q=waterboarding+used+to+gain+cooperation&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=

Who is He?

Who is We?

Who is This guy?

What should one Read for yourself? Especially, where in your google link??

"But to me, it makes sense"

Yep. I believe that all your posts are making sense to you. But, rushmc, you're quite alone in the world with that.

Edited for typo

dudeist skydiver # 3105

[kallend 2,028]

Quote

Quote

Some people voluntarily choose to have their genitalia pierced.

Using rushmc "logic" that means sticking needles into the genitals of POWs is not torture.

Some people voluntarily choose to have their noses, navels and cheeks pierced.

Using rushmc "logic" that means sticking needles into the bodies of POWs is not torture.

Some people, those into S&M, voluntarily choose to be whipped.

Using rushmc "logic" that means whipping and beating POWs is acceptable.

Some people choose to have anal sex.

Using rushmc "logic" that means sodomizing POWs is acceptable and is not torture.

There's something seriously wrong with rushmc "logic".

so, then, just for debate purposes, then can we call the following "Kallend logic"?:

If the SERE team member can opt out of training by quitting = not torture

then, prisoners can opt out of torture by providing information = not torture

And if they have no information to give? Keep torturing them until they invent something.

Yep, that IS the way a great country would behave.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,028]

Quote

Quote

Quote

then, prisoners can opt out of torture by providing information = not torture

Which is exactly the problem. If they don't have information, they only way they can get it to stop is by making stuff up.

New information is not asked for during waterboarding

So according to Rehm's definition waterboarding is torture. OK.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 23]

But, rushmc, you're quite alone in the world with that.

I KNOW that is not true

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

So according to Rehm's definition waterboarding is torture. OK.

sure, put it in whatever definition bucket you'd like - that point isn't really pertinent to my musings

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

And if they have no information to give? Keep torturing them until they invent something.

Yep, that IS the way a great country would behave.

yup, and if the SERE team member has no other option in his life but that role, keep messing with him until he passes

{I wasn't justifying or refuting his position - was just showing you guys that your analogy pissing contest can be worked either way - so your efforts and postings are really juvenile}

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Amazon 7]

OH RUSH DARLIN

Here is one of your fellow travellers in all his splendor in the INABILITY to find something resembling a CLUE

WTF.... Santorum understand torture better than John McCAIN???????

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0511/55140.html

Quote

Rick Santorum said Tuesday that Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who was tortured as a prisoner of war in Vietnam, "doesn't understand how enhanced interrogation works."

really....




Really





REALLLY.. Dear Senator Insanitorum

you are indeed a stupid fuck who needs to be introduced to some PERSONAL experience in enhanced interrogation... HOLY FUCK you can't be thiss stupid...

[grimmie 186]

Santorum doesn't like McCain. But this was over the top of anything out of a politician's pie hole I have heard in a long time.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Santorum doesn't like McCain. But this was over the top of anything out of a politician's pie hole I have heard in a long time.

I think all the deniers.. need a crash course in what torture is and personally experience it... since they dont BELIEVE.

Clueless

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

The majority of the torturees who talked said they'd say anything, and that they were generally fed information.

which is what i've been saying - torture is used to get you to confess to whatever the torturer wants you to confess or admit to (or implicate others) not for genuine information...

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[livendive 8]

Quote

It is still a viable option.

Torture: induce extreme physical pain.

Enhanced Interrogation: induce extreme fear, harassment, sleep deprivation, etc.

IMHO.

When a woman is raped, what generally takes longer to heal, her body or her mind? Mental/emotional trauma can be FAR more injurious and longer lasting than phyical trauma, so why would it be ok when the latter is not?

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[tkhayes 348]

and the latest news from Robert Gates:
"Somebody" in Pakistan knew Osama bin Laden was hiding there..

How much does this guy make? His brilliance 'overwhelms' me....