Skip to main content

Now a few words from the CIA (real words; actor interpretations)



Yes, American citizens can differ on this issue. But I will not equivocate on my own position: the practices described in this video exceed the acceptable interrogation tactics of a civilized nation, and whether or not they may have been effective in some instances does not justify them.
Labels:

Comments

Anonymous said…
There is no document at the CIA that claims even one tortured at any of the black sites actually stopped terrorism. Cheney continues to make the claim, but neither the CIA Inspector General, the Red Cross, of Carl Levins report could find even ONE time where the tortured gave up any information. One high level target was yapping his ass off, but when the goons squad came and started torturing him, he clammed up. Right Dick Head you stopped terrorism. YOU dick head created terrorism. We know from Jane Mayers book, and from Mike Isikoff that the guvment delivered millions to Afganis and Iraqis who would point to someone involved in terrorism. One war lord whose wife and child died in childbirth turned in the Obstetrican. The guy was tortured for years and finally was let go when Obama took office. Another 80 year quadriplegic chained to the floor was picked because he was "sitting" near where a bomb went off. These neo con, christian crusader ignored the rule of law, hired Pinochet goons to do their dirty work. The only bunch coming out of this with any credibility is the FBI, who refused to engage in torture, because "they" knew it was unlawful.
August 25, 2009 at 8:29 PM
Hube said…
That's fine that you won't equivocate, Steve; however, it still doesn't persuade me given your past (IMO) rationalizations for much more horrific acts like Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
August 25, 2009 at 8:48 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...
44 comments
Read more

Libertarian National Committee Deathwatch Part 1

As the LNC continues to lurch towards collapse, with the latest news of mass layoffs at HQ, I've decided to begin tracking those things leading the national party to irrelevance, even as state and local parties gain power. As news, rumors and rhetoric break out, I shall chronicle them in this ongoing series at Delaware Libertarian. Organizations approaching failure have a number of characteristics. One of the most striking is renunciation of their purpose and effort to reinvent themselves as a "me-too" provider of services in the marketplace. In this, the LNC has been on a collision course with destiny for a while now. Recently, for example, it hired Republican Party web site developer TerraEclipse to redesign the LNC web site . Terra created a web site very similar to those of the clients it brags most about -- far-right Republican conservatives like Tom McClintock and BJ Lawson. A quick look at the web site they built for the LNC is instructive. The tagline on the ...
22 comments
Read more

Soda tax debate reveals fundamental progressive assertions about your lack of individual rights and the "responsiblities" of the State

I thought it would be at least amusing to use the Delawareliberal comments as sub-headings regarding each category of what is wrong with the proposed tax on sodas and juice drinks. But there are so many different little strands of each comment that it would be impossible to pull them all out. So, instead, I'm going to let you read them in more or less the order they appeared, and note the assumptions. pandora: I’m perfectly okay with taxing sodas and juice drinks. Mainly because they’re total crap, and one of the main reasons our country’s children are overweight. They are also dirt cheap. Assumptions here: (1) Because "I" am perfectly okay with a new tax it should be imposed on everybody; (2) it is the government's responsibility to keep children from being obese; (3) the cheapness of the product to be taxed justifies charging people more for it. John Manifold: Soda fattens your kids [and you and your husband], shortens their lives, costs more than water [a...
31 comments
Read more