CIA Destroys/Hides Evidence Of Wrongdoing - Harman Warns against - Merged

[retiredman]

you said that the democrats knew that the videos were going to be destroyed in 2002. that is incorrect.
your words:

"They knew about waterboardsing and the videos were going to be destroyed in 2002 and never said a word."

[red states rule]

you said that the democrats knew that the videos were going to be destroyed in 2002. that is incorrect.
your words:

"They knew about waterboardsing and the videos were going to be destroyed in 2002 and never said a word."

The Dems were told at the briefing the tapes would be destroyed - they were destroyed in 2005 (my error)

Waterboarding is a harsh interrogation technique that involves strapping down a prisoner, covering his mouth with plastic or cloth and pouring water over his face. The prisoner quickly begins to inhale water, causing the sensation of drowning.

The CIA is known to have waterboarded three prisoners — Abu Zubaydah, Khalid Sheik Muhammed, and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, whom the U.S. government says coordinated the 2002 attack on the USS Cole. The CIA has not used the technique since 2003, according to a government official familiar with the program. Hayden prohibited waterboarding in 2006. The U.S. military outlawed it the same year.

Hayden told CIA employees last week that the CIA taped the interrogations of two alleged terrorists in 2002. He said the harsh questioning was carried out only after being "reviewed and approved by the Department of Justice and by other elements of the Executive Branch." Hayden said Congress was notified in 2003 both of the tapes' existence and the agency's intent to destroy them.

The CIA destroyed the tapes in November of 2005. Exactly when Congress was notified of that and in what detail is in dispute.

The Justice Department and CIA's independent internal watchdog have begun a preliminary inquiry into the destruction of the tapes. The review will determine whether a full investigation is warranted, Attorney General Michael Mukasey said.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,316407,00.html


So why are the Dems whining about it now?

[Psychoblues]

It did not malfuction, PmP.

oops....it malfunctioned.....you read it.....now we have to eliminate you......

Did you ever get the feeling that many here don't want truth and are satisfied in their own ignorance?

[Psychoblues]

ALL of our troops and ALL of our percieved enemies are covered by the Geneva Conventions, rsr.

Terrorists are NOT covered under the Geneva convention

I understand libs like you enjoy smearing the troops, and portraying them as thugs and killers (like your elected leaders in DC)

While our perceived enemies sometimes don't abide gives us no excuse whatsoever to turn our backs on the agreements and values that we represent in that Convention.

Americans are not the animals that the Geneva Convention sought to eliminate from warfare in general. As we become those animals we lose both our values as United States citizens and as believable negotiators in the international trade that we so desparately need and seek.

Seriously, rsr, you can't be serious.

[red states rule]

ALL of our troops and ALL of our percieved enemies are covered by the Geneva Conventions, rsr.




While our perceived enemies sometimes don't abide gives us no excuse whatsoever to turn our backs on the agreements and values that we represent in that Convention.

Americans are not the animals that the Geneva Convention sought to eliminate from warfare in general. As we become those animals we lose both our values as United States citizens and as believable negotiators in the international trade that we so desparately need and seek.

Seriously, rsr, you can't be serious.

as usual you are full of it

from the GC


4.1.2 Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, provided that they fulfill all of the following conditions:
that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance (there are limited exceptions to this among countries who observe the 1977 Protocol I);
that of carrying arms openly;
that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Geneva_Convention


I understand the left was spent 4 years smearing the US military and painting our troops as cold blooded killers (John Murtha) and the terrorists are "freedom fighters" - it all they have left since their quest for defeat in Iraq has crashed and burned

[bullypulpit]

as usual you are full of it

from the GC


4.1.2 Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, provided that they fulfill all of the following conditions:
that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance (there are limited exceptions to this among countries who observe the 1977 Protocol I);
that of carrying arms openly;
that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Geneva_Convention


I understand the left was spent 4 years smearing the US military and painting our troops as cold blooded killers (John Murtha) and the terrorists are "freedom fighters" - it all they have left since their quest for defeat in Iraq has crashed and burned

Guess again. The SCOTUS ruled that Common Article 3 of the Geneva conventions apply to the GITMO detainees in <a href=http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/forumy/2006/06/hamdan-v-rumsfeld-supreme-court.php>Hamdan v. Rumsfeld</a>.

The whole issue of water-boarding as being torture is settled law. Japanese and German military personnel who use water-boarding on Allied POW's were convicted of war crimes. US personnel who engaged in the practice in Viet Nam were court martialed.

Water-boarding IS torture as defined in <a href=http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/h2catoc.htm>Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment</a>, Part 1, Article 1, Para. 1, defines torture as:

<blockquote>"...any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions."</blockquote>

While you're at it, pay particular attention to

<blockquote> * Article 2 - No Exceptional Circumstances Warranting Torture

* Article 3 - No State Party shall expel, return (”refouler”) or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture.

* Article 4 - Acts of Torture Are Criminal Offenses

* Article 10 - Education & Information Regarding Prohibition on Torture Provided in Training</blockquote>

Given that the United States IS a signatory to the Conventions, neither President Bush nor anyone in his cabinet or administration can make the determination that water-boarding is an acceptable practice.

* Article 16 - Each State to Prevent Acts of Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

[red states rule]

Guess again. The SCOTUS ruled that Common Article 3 of the Geneva conventions apply to the GITMO detainees in <a href=http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/forumy/2006/06/hamdan-v-rumsfeld-supreme-court.php>Hamdan v. Rumsfeld</a>.

The whole issue of water-boarding as being torture is settled law. Japanese and German military personnel who use water-boarding on Allied POW's were convicted of war crimes. US personnel who engaged in the practice in Viet Nam were court martialed.

Water-boarding IS torture as defined in <a href=http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/h2catoc.htm>Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment</a>, Part 1, Article 1, Para. 1, defines torture as:

<blockquote>"...any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions."</blockquote>

While you're at it, pay particular attention to

<blockquote> * Article 2 - No Exceptional Circumstances Warranting Torture

* Article 3 - No State Party shall expel, return (”refouler”) or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture.

* Article 4 - Acts of Torture Are Criminal Offenses

* Article 10 - Education & Information Regarding Prohibition on Torture Provided in Training</blockquote>

Given that the United States IS a signatory to the Conventions, neither President Bush nor anyone in his cabinet or administration can make the determination that water-boarding is an acceptable practice.

* Article 16 - Each State to Prevent Acts of Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

Bottom line is waterboarding has been used THREE TIMES and it SAVED LIVES and PREVENTED ATTACKS

If you Dems want to continue defending the rights of terrorists - go ahead. You are proving why you nuts can't be trusted with natioanl defense

[retiredman]

Bottom line is waterboarding has been used THREE TIMES and it SAVED LIVES and PREVENTED ATTACKS

If you Dems want to continue defending the rights of terrorists - go ahead. You are proving why you nuts can't be trusted with natioanl defense

bottom line: each time it was used it was illegal and unconstitutional

[PostmodernProphet]

Did you ever get the feeling that many here don't want truth and are satisfied in their own ignorance?

oh yes.....from some of the conservatives....and ALL of the liberals......

[red states rule]

bottom line: each time it was used it was illegal and unconstitutional

Did you miss or ignore this part of the article?

Waterboarding is a harsh interrogation technique that involves strapping down a prisoner, covering his mouth with plastic or cloth and pouring water over his face. The prisoner quickly begins to inhale water, causing the sensation of drowning.

The CIA is known to have waterboarded three prisoners — Abu Zubaydah, Khalid Sheik Muhammed, and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, whom the U.S. government says coordinated the 2002 attack on the USS Cole. The CIA has not used the technique since 2003, according to a government official familiar with the program. Hayden prohibited waterboarding in 2006. The U.S. military outlawed it the same year.


In those instances, information was obtained that stopped attacks and saved lives

So Dems continue to whine about the "rights" of terrorists - and something that has not been used in 4 years

[retiredman]

Did you miss or ignore this part of the article?

Waterboarding is a harsh interrogation technique that involves strapping down a prisoner, covering his mouth with plastic or cloth and pouring water over his face. The prisoner quickly begins to inhale water, causing the sensation of drowning.

The CIA is known to have waterboarded three prisoners — Abu Zubaydah, Khalid Sheik Muhammed, and Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, whom the U.S. government says coordinated the 2002 attack on the USS Cole. The CIA has not used the technique since 2003, according to a government official familiar with the program. Hayden prohibited waterboarding in 2006. The U.S. military outlawed it the same year.


In those instances, information was obtained that stopped attacks and saved lives

So Dems continue to whine about the "rights" of terrorists - and something that has not been used in 4 years

so you are perfectly OK with breaking the law and ignoring the constitution whenever you feel the situation warrants such?

[red states rule]

so you are perfectly OK with breaking the law and ignoring the constitution whenever you feel the situation warrants such?

Would you rather have succesful terrorists attacks and dead US troops?

Of course you would - it plays better on TV and at press confrences

[retiredman]

Would you rather have succesful terrorists attacks and dead US troops?

Of course you would - it plays better on TV and at press confrences

I would rather have most anything before I would rather have a trampled and ignored constitution of the united states. troops that take the field of battle swear first and foremost to uphold and defend the constitution. If we disregard it back home, then their sacrifice really IS for naught.

[red states rule]

I would rather have most anything before I would rather have a trampled and ignored constitution of the united states. troops that take the field of battle swear first and foremost to uphold and defend the constitution. If we disregard it back home, then their sacrifice really IS for naught.

So you would rather have successful attacks - and then blame Bush for it

[retiredman]

So you would rather have successful attacks - and then blame Bush for it

Let me get this straight:

you advocate pissing on the constitution of the united states? yes or no?