Cheney: Waterboarding works (YouTube)

[one...two...tree 2,762]

This whole idea that there is some secret information that is distributed widely that we can simply pluck from the enemy is absurd and is a ruse. The Bush Administration knows it and everyone who's inside the intelligence community knows it.

Terrorists don't act alone. They work in cells or organizations, which have leaders,

people that plan attacks, people that engineer explosives, people that raise funding.

They live somewhere and have the support of those around them.

It's absurd to think that a terrorist - ANY terrorist - has no useful information.

And the fact is that most of all the detainees have absolutely no affiliation with what we consider high level terrorists organizations like Al-Qaeda. Grabbing Iraqi's randomly off the street, locking them up for years and subjected them to torture in hopes of getting important information that could thwart a possible terrorist attack like 9/11 is laughable....laughable...seriously.

[Niels Bohr 72]

[웃 910]

Danno, it shouldn't be that hard to find an expert interrogator with years of experience to state whether coercion is an effective means to get reliable information. Try Googling it.

Dude, if you don't torture them, they're not gonna tell you jack.

Come on.... it's like 2+2=4, common sense.

They might tell you stuff even if they think you're going to torture them. If they

know you can't torture them, they'll just laugh in your face. I know I would.

The information you get is unreliable

The information is reliable---with a post-torture lie detector test to confirm that the information was not made up (our CIA is smart enough to run the info through lie detection software, I am assuming)

Edited December 19, 2008 by Confucian

[mawilson 2,133]

And the fact is that most of all the detainees have absolutely no affiliation with what we consider high level terrorists organizations like Al-Qaeda. Grabbing Iraqi's randomly off the street, locking them up for years and subjected them to torture in hopes of getting important information that could thwart a possible terrorist attack like 9/11 is laughable....laughable...seriously.

Do you seriously believe that Guantanamo is full of random innocent Iraqis grabbed off the street?

If you do... you need help.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

And the fact is that most of all the detainees have absolutely no affiliation with what we consider high level terrorists organizations like Al-Qaeda. Grabbing Iraqi's randomly off the street, locking them up for years and subjected them to torture in hopes of getting important information that could thwart a possible terrorist attack like 9/11 is laughable....laughable...seriously.

Do you seriously believe that Guantanamo is full of random innocent Iraqis grabbed off the street?

If you do... you need help.

The point of course is that we don't know and with the suspension of habeas corpus and the release of so many people without charge should at least raise some reasonable questions. So essentially you have to take on trust that the government only detained the guilty otherwise that its justifiable if a few innocents get caught in the mix.

It undermines our whole philosophy of justice.

Edited December 19, 2008 by Paul Daniels

[desert_fox 32]

In Viet-Nam days, they would have Charlie in a copter. You asked a question and if you didnt like the answer, you just threw him out at 2000 feet. Their buddies after seeing that would tell you what you wanted to know.\

[one...two...tree 2,762]

And the fact is that most of all the detainees have absolutely no affiliation with what we consider high level terrorists organizations like Al-Qaeda. Grabbing Iraqi's randomly off the street, locking them up for years and subjected them to torture in hopes of getting important information that could thwart a possible terrorist attack like 9/11 is laughable....laughable...seriously.

Do you seriously believe that Guantanamo is full of random innocent Iraqis grabbed off the street?

If you do... you need help.

I can only go by what has been reported and according to reliable sources, many of the detainees were literally picked up off the streets...because someone fingered them. That's why it's laughable. This was how the Bush Administration wanted it handled which is why it is so bungled. Read the reports. Look at how many have been released. Read up on who was picked up, where, why and when. This will go down in history as an embarrassment to U.S. history of intelligence.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Here's just one source:

Report: More than Half of Gitmo Detainees Not Accused of Hostile Acts

A new and statistical report, authored and released by Seton Hall Law Professor Mark Denbeaux and attorney Joshua Denbeaux, counsel to two of the detainees at Guantanamo, contains the first objective analysis of the background of those held at Guantanamo. The report is based entirely on data supplied by the Defense Department, and is intended to provide "a more detailed picture of who the Guantanamo detainees are, how they ended up there, and the purported bases for their enemy combatant designation."

The report, available here (pdf), finds that fewer than half of the 517 detainees whose histories were reviewed have been accused of hostile acts. These are the findings:

1. Fifty-five percent (55%) of the detainees are not determined to have committed any hostile acts against the United States or its coalition allies. 2. Only 8% of the detainees were characterized as al Qaeda fighters. Of the remaining detainees, 40% have no definitive connection with al Qaeda at all and 18% are have no definitive affiliation with either al Qaeda or the Taliban.

3. The Government has detained numerous persons based on mere affiliations with a large number of groups that in fact, are not on the Department of Homeland Security terrorist watchlist. Moreover, the nexus between such a detainee and such organizations varies considerably. Eight percent are detained because they are deemed "fighters for;" 30% considered "members of;" a large majority - 60% -- are detained merely because they are "associated with" a group or groups the Government asserts are terrorist organizations. For 2% of the prisoners their nexus to any terrorist group is unidentified.

4. Only 5% of the detainees were captured by United States forces. 86% of the detainees were arrested by either Pakistan or the Northern Alliance and turned over to United States custody. This 86% of the detainees captured by Pakistan or the Northern Alliance were handed over to the United States at a time in which the United States offered large bounties for capture of suspected enemies.

5. Finally, the population of persons deemed not to be enemy combatants - mostly Uighers - are in fact accused of more serious allegations than a great many persons still deemed to be enemy combatants.

If 92% of the detainees were not fighters, and 55% committed no hostile act, why were they designated as enemy combatants in the first place? And why are they still being held? This is the Government's definition of "enemy combatant" as used in the Combatant Status Review hearings:

[A]n individual who was part of or supporting the Taliban or al Qaeda forces, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners. This includes any person who committed a belligerent act or has directly supported hostilities in aid of enemy forces.

Also consider that only 5% of the detainees were captured by U.S. Forces. What was the source of the information used to designate the other 95% as enemy combatants? Pakistan and the Northern Alliance. There is no indication that the U.S. ever verified, or could verify, the information. Factor in how many were seized by bounty hunters and how many were conscripted against their will . The U.S. placed advertisements in both Afghanistan and Pakistan offering large amounts of money to those who turned over "enemy combatants." The report contains this one as an example:

Get wealth and power beyond your dreams....You can receive millions of dollars helping the anti-Taliban forces catch al-Qaida and Taliban murders. This is enough money to take care of your family, your village, your tribe for the rest of your life. Pay for livestock and doctors and school books and housing for all your people.

Finally, consider that very few if any of the Guantanamo detainees have turned out to be higher-ups in the Taliban or al-Qaeda. While there are al-Qaeda connections for a small number of the detainees (for example, 11 out of the more than 500 had met Osama bin Laden) even fewer of the Taliban detainees had high-level connections.

The Taliban detainees seem to be people not responsible for actually running the country. Many of the detainees held at Guantanamo were involved with the Taliban unwillingly as conscripts or otherwise. General conscription was the rule, not the exception, in Taliban controlled Afghanistan. "All the warlords had used boy soldiers, some as young as 12 years old, and many were orphans with no hope of having a family, or education, or a job, except soldiering."

Among the criteria used to justify enemy combatant designation are these:

Possession of rifles;

Use of a guest house;

Possession of Casio watches; and

Wearing of olive drab clothing.

It appears that the majority of those detained at Guantanamo share these traits:

1. Muslims,

2. in Afghanistan,

3. associated with unidentified individuals and/or groups,

4. possessed Kalishnikov rifles,

5. stayed in guest houses,

6. captured in Pakistan,

7. by bounty hunters.

The President continues to tell us that those held at Guantanamo are the "worst of the worst." This report tells a different story.

We got the small fry. And we put them in a black hole.

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2006/02/08/744/57892

[mawilson 2,133]

1. Fifty-five percent (55%) of the detainees are not determined to have committed any hostile acts against the United States or its coalition allies. 2. Only 8% of the detainees were characterized as al Qaeda fighters. Of the remaining detainees, 40% have no definitive connection with al Qaeda at all and 18% are have no definitive affiliation with either al Qaeda or the Taliban.

Only 55%? So the other 45% HAVE committed hostile acts against the US?

Yeah Steven, they are a-ok, we should just let them go.

Wise up. Who cares if they are affiliated with Al Qaeda, the Taliban or some other terrorist group?

Terrorists are terrorists.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

If they are criminals they should be charged as such. If there are no charges they should be let go.

[William33 110]

If they are criminals they should be charged as such. If there are no charges they should be let go.

As you know, it's not that simple. Most of these people could not be tried or convicted in a US Federal court with the scum lawyers out there. Most information (evidence) is not releasable to the public, or US intelligence sources and methods would be compromised. The evidence was thin in most cases, yet something needed to be done to:

1.) Attempt to flush out Bin Laden

2.) Discover future attempts at terrorism in the US

3.) Identify others that may have useful intel

Extraordinary rendition gone wrong, definitely. However, after the 9/11 intelligence debacle, a knee jerk response ensued.

The USA was caught "flatfooted" on 9/11 and this was the Bush Administrations approach at shutting in down. A bumbling success, I might add.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It is that simple - isn't that the purpose of closed door tribunals? To protect sensitive information?

The question remains why so many were let go with no charges - even under those conditions.

[William33 110]

It is that simple - isn't that the purpose of closed door tribunals? To protect sensitive information?

The question remains why so many were let go with no charges - even under those conditions.

Closed doors tribunals? Who in the world would support that? That is why the majority were cut-loose, after their value as a terrorist or provider of intel was assessed.

[mawilson 2,133]

If they are criminals they should be charged as such. If there are no charges they should be let go.

I am ok with that.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Here's just one source:

Report: More than Half of Gitmo Detainees Not Accused of Hostile Acts

A new and statistical report, authored and released by Seton Hall Law Professor Mark Denbeaux and attorney Joshua Denbeaux, counsel to two of the detainees at Guantanamo, contains the first objective analysis of the background of those held at Guantanamo. The report is based entirely on data supplied by the Defense Department, and is intended to provide "a more detailed picture of who the Guantanamo detainees are, how they ended up there, and the purported bases for their enemy combatant designation."

The report, available here (pdf), finds that fewer than half of the 517 detainees whose histories were reviewed have been accused of hostile acts. These are the findings:

1. Fifty-five percent (55%) of the detainees are not determined to have committed any hostile acts against the United States or its coalition allies. 2. Only 8% of the detainees were characterized as al Qaeda fighters. Of the remaining detainees, 40% have no definitive connection with al Qaeda at all and 18% are have no definitive affiliation with either al Qaeda or the Taliban.

3. The Government has detained numerous persons based on mere affiliations with a large number of groups that in fact, are not on the Department of Homeland Security terrorist watchlist. Moreover, the nexus between such a detainee and such organizations varies considerably. Eight percent are detained because they are deemed "fighters for;" 30% considered "members of;" a large majority - 60% -- are detained merely because they are "associated with" a group or groups the Government asserts are terrorist organizations. For 2% of the prisoners their nexus to any terrorist group is unidentified.

4. Only 5% of the detainees were captured by United States forces. 86% of the detainees were arrested by either Pakistan or the Northern Alliance and turned over to United States custody. This 86% of the detainees captured by Pakistan or the Northern Alliance were handed over to the United States at a time in which the United States offered large bounties for capture of suspected enemies.

5. Finally, the population of persons deemed not to be enemy combatants - mostly Uighers - are in fact accused of more serious allegations than a great many persons still deemed to be enemy combatants.

If 92% of the detainees were not fighters, and 55% committed no hostile act, why were they designated as enemy combatants in the first place? And why are they still being held? This is the Government's definition of "enemy combatant" as used in the Combatant Status Review hearings:

[A]n individual who was part of or supporting the Taliban or al Qaeda forces, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners. This includes any person who committed a belligerent act or has directly supported hostilities in aid of enemy forces.

Also consider that only 5% of the detainees were captured by U.S. Forces. What was the source of the information used to designate the other 95% as enemy combatants? Pakistan and the Northern Alliance. There is no indication that the U.S. ever verified, or could verify, the information. Factor in how many were seized by bounty hunters and how many were conscripted against their will . The U.S. placed advertisements in both Afghanistan and Pakistan offering large amounts of money to those who turned over "enemy combatants." The report contains this one as an example:

Get wealth and power beyond your dreams....You can receive millions of dollars helping the anti-Taliban forces catch al-Qaida and Taliban murders. This is enough money to take care of your family, your village, your tribe for the rest of your life. Pay for livestock and doctors and school books and housing for all your people.

Finally, consider that very few if any of the Guantanamo detainees have turned out to be higher-ups in the Taliban or al-Qaeda. While there are al-Qaeda connections for a small number of the detainees (for example, 11 out of the more than 500 had met Osama bin Laden) even fewer of the Taliban detainees had high-level connections.

The Taliban detainees seem to be people not responsible for actually running the country. Many of the detainees held at Guantanamo were involved with the Taliban unwillingly as conscripts or otherwise. General conscription was the rule, not the exception, in Taliban controlled Afghanistan. "All the warlords had used boy soldiers, some as young as 12 years old, and many were orphans with no hope of having a family, or education, or a job, except soldiering."

Among the criteria used to justify enemy combatant designation are these:

Possession of rifles;

Use of a guest house;

Possession of Casio watches; and

Wearing of olive drab clothing.

It appears that the majority of those detained at Guantanamo share these traits:

1. Muslims,

2. in Afghanistan,

3. associated with unidentified individuals and/or groups,

4. possessed Kalishnikov rifles,

5. stayed in guest houses,

6. captured in Pakistan,

7. by bounty hunters.

The President continues to tell us that those held at Guantanamo are the "worst of the worst." This report tells a different story.

We got the small fry. And we put them in a black hole.

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2006/02/08/744/57892

Why in the He!! do you invest so much of your day in BS?