1984

[Sage 703]

I've been following the release of the torture memos with interest, but this nugget from today's Washington Post op-ed from a Bush administration official blows my freaking mind.

The job of the interrogator is to safely help the terrorist do his duty to Allah, so he then feels liberated to speak freely.

From the Post:
The writer, a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution, served in senior positions in the Pentagon and the White House from 2001 to 2009, most recently as chief speechwriter for President George W. Bush.

Yes, this quote is pulled from a larger article that makes many points - but sweet jesus.  This is pretty disgusting, Orwellian stuff.  I'm coming around to the idea of criminal prosecutions for those responsible, and I'm beginning to think it more likely.

Whole article in the Post is here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/20/AR2009042002818.html


EDIT - Fuller context below:

Critics claim that enhanced techniques do not produce good intelligence because people will say anything to get the techniques to stop. But the memos note that, "as Abu Zubaydah himself explained with respect to enhanced techniques, 'brothers who are captured and interrogated are permitted by Allah to provide information when they believe they have reached the limit of their ability to withhold it in the face of psychological and physical hardship." In other words, the terrorists are called by their faith to resist as far as they can -- and once they have done so, they are free to tell everything they know. This is because of their belief that "Islam will ultimately dominate the world and that this victory is inevitable." The job of the interrogator is to safely help the terrorist do his duty to Allah, so he then feels liberated to speak freely.

[manimtired]

oh hai!
http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=46949

[sweetcell]

"as Abu Zubaydah himself explained with respect to enhanced techniques, 'brothers who are captured and interrogated are permitted by Allah to provide information when they believe they have reached the limit of their ability to withhold it in the face of psychological and physical hardship." In other words, the terrorists are called by their faith to resist as far as they can -- and once they have done so, they are free to tell everything they know. This is because of their belief that "Islam will ultimately dominate the world and that this victory is inevitable." The job of the interrogator is to safely help the terrorist do his duty to Allah, so he then feels liberated to speak freely. [/i]

as far as i know, this is not official doctrine - it's one person's take.  i'm not certain they teach "resist as long as you, but when you cave do so fully" at terrorist school.  so to base an agency's policy on this anecdote seems... convenient.  and idiotic.

speaking of which:

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=46949

yeah, that doesn't sound like someone is trying to cover their asses AT ALL.  they knew it was wrong, they knew they'd need cover, and they knew that no one would ever be able to prove otherwise (i.e. disprove their claim that torture led to success).  at least, that view is just as valid as believing this story at face value.

[manimtired]

LOL@sweetcell.  I guess theyre covering "their asses" as much as the new administration is trying to play politics with all this. lol

[sonickteam2]

still seems mean to me.

[vansmack]

[sweetcell]

administration is trying to play politics with all this.

politicians, playing politics?  ai iz shoked.

[manimtired]

but i thought this was "change?"...maximum lolz.

[nkotb]

Whoever wins this LOLZ off, we lose

but i thought this was "change?"...maximum lolz.

administration is trying to play politics with all this.

politicians, playing politics?  ai iz shoked.

[manimtired]

nkotb with the lol!!!!!!

[manimtired]

now this conservative dishrag of a paper is reporting this...
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/22/us/politics/22blair.html?_r=1

wut da lol?

[Sage 703]

now this conservative dishrag of a paper is reporting this...
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/22/us/politics/22blair.html?_r=1

wut da lol?

The fact that it may have yielded some useful information doesn't justify it.  It also ignores the fact that there are other ways to glean information that could have been utilized.

Ultimately, this is about what values you prioritize as an American.  Personally, I don't want the United States affiliated or identified with the methods utilized as described in these memos, no matter what information they produce. 

Frankly, we're better than that.

[manimtired]

saving lives > pouring water on blindfolded people aka known terrorists (thats what the d'classed documents have made clear)..give me a fucking break dooood~~~

[manimtired]

also...please describe to me the methods in which you would use to get this info seeing as the CIA says these were the means that they used to obtain such information...i'm sure you have some ideas. also, how do you define "torture?"  don't link me to something..i want your definition. lol.

[sweetcell]

for someone who never puts forward an idea of his own, only links to other's content, and has never answered a question with anything other than "stfu lol"... you're in a very poor position to demand anything.

as john mccain has pointed out, one of the problems with torture is that it opens the door for the other side to use it.  do we want american soldiers that are captured to be treated humanly?  uh huh. 

and just because it's effective doesn't mean we should do it.  wanna be safe?  don't go outside.  do you want a government to impose safety on you by controlling your movements and telling you where to go?  people are very safe in an authoritarian regime, police states are very effective.

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."" - some crazy dead dude