House ignores OptiBoard poll, passes ban on CIA waterboarding

**rinselberg** · 12-14-2007, 11:52 AM

Defying the sentiments expressed by the latest poll numbers on OptiBoard, the House of Representatives approved a new Intelligence Authorization bill (H.R .2082) that bans the Central Intelligence Agency from using waterboarding, mock executions and other harsh interrogation methods to interrogate terror suspects.

The bill, introduced by Pete Hoekstra, a Republican from Michigan, passed by a vote of 222 to 199, moving it forward to the Senate.

Earlier this week the White House issued a statement suggesting that the President may veto the bill if it arrives at his desk in its present form. The statement, expressing the consensus of the President's closest advisors, highlights 11 points of disagreement with the bill, the details of which are largely classified as secret and withheld from public disclosure.

The bill would break new ground in terms of legislative oversight of intelligence activities, with a provision that would "freeze" 70 percent of the budget authorizations, preventing the money from being used until House and Senate committees are briefed about a recent Israeli air attack against an alleged nuclear development site located in Syria (September 6).

High profile OptiBoard poster rinselberg has worked for a number of U.S. aerospace and defense contractors, and has programmed computers that process optical camera data from military aircraft and satellites.

**chip anderson** · 12-14-2007, 11:59 AM

Kind of scarry as far left as a lot of Optiboard is, appearently the House is a whole lot further.

**Grubendol** · 12-14-2007, 01:39 PM

chip, I have to say, speaking as one of the furthest left here, I have the exact opposite impression of the Optiboard. It's mostly right, or at the most moderate. This place is VERY far from being left leaning.

**For-Life** · 12-14-2007, 01:42 PM

Originally Posted by chip anderson

Kind of scarry as far left as a lot of Optiboard is, appearently the House is a whole lot further.

OB is left??????????:drop:

I have always found OB very right winged.

Great victory for Americans and the World today. Stood up for the basic rights of mankind and turned away something that many western nations have criticized for years.

**Grubendol** · 12-14-2007, 01:46 PM

Originally Posted by For-Life

OB is left??????????:drop:

I have always found OB very right winged.

Great victory for Americans and the World today. Stood up for the basic rights of mankind and turned away something that many western nations have criticized for years.

*here here*

(even if they will cave to GW's veto anyway)

**rinselberg** · 12-14-2007, 01:55 PM

OptiBoard generally ranges from "moderate" to "right wing" ...

That's the Left Coast and Canada for you.

I don't think that the Senate will leave this bill unscathed before it gets to the President.

**AdmiralKnight** · 12-14-2007, 01:56 PM

Of course they passed it. They can't be seen as condoning torture... or "the terrorists have won". But do you really think it'll make a difference? I'm quite sure the CIA does a lot of things that are illegal. It doesn't stop them from doing it, and this won't stop them from using these techniques.

**chip anderson** · 12-14-2007, 02:15 PM

But now they have to go back to using terpentine enemas and pint jars of chiggers. This takes a lot longer to get information, but the House hasn't outlawed it yet.

Chip

**HarryChiling** · 12-14-2007, 02:43 PM

My mom's meat loaf can be substituted for waterboading and probably get faster results. The public isn't supposed to know about the torture that goes on, so even with a bill against it the military has to do what the military has to do, IMHO.

**AdmiralKnight** · 12-14-2007, 02:43 PM

Or they'll just keep on doing what they've been doing. I'm quite sure the CIA does worse than waterboarding to get their information. I wouldn't be suprised if that included killing people. A lot of their dealings are still classified, even to the house, and congress. This is going to change nothing, except now the reprisentitives can feel good about themselves for being of "high moral standards".

**HarryChiling** · 12-14-2007, 02:47 PM

Originally Posted by AdmiralKnight

Or they'll just keep on doing what they've been doing. I'm quite sure the CIA does worse than waterboarding to get their information. I wouldn't be suprised if that included killing people. A lot of their dealings are still classified, even to the house, and congress. This is going to change nothing, except now the reprisentitives can feel good about themselves for being of high moral standards.

That about sums it up for me.

**chip anderson** · 12-14-2007, 02:52 PM

Is it more moral for an elected official of the United States to protect the rights of terroist non-citizens over health and safety of it's citizens.

Was Joshua Immoral or only from a Cannanite's point of view?

Chip

**rinselberg** · 12-14-2007, 03:31 PM

To get around any new restrictions, the CIA may do more "outsourcing" or renditions of terror suspects. Let the Paks, Egyptians, etc. have at 'em and "phone" us with the results.

Current events for $1000 ...

What do you call it when the CIA renditions an al Qaida suspect?

"A Night In Tunisia"

**Grubendol** · 12-14-2007, 04:16 PM

Originally Posted by rinselberg

To get around any new restrictions, the CIA may do more "outsourcing" or renditions of terror suspects. Let the Paks, Egyptians, etc. have at 'em and "phone" us with the results.

Current events for $1000 ...

What do you call it when the CIA renditions an al Qaida suspect?

"A Night In Tunisia"

What is "Illegal" Alex.

Torturing has never provided accurate and actionable information. All it does is make the torturer feel like he's got a bigger phallus and the victim's family want to cut that phallus off all the more.

**Steve Machol** · 12-14-2007, 06:13 PM

Chip believes that anyone who is for protecting and restoring the Bill of Rights and upholding the values this Country is supposed to represent is 'left-wing'. I believe he's right - extremely so in fact (pun intended.) :)

**Lulubelle** · 12-14-2007, 06:52 PM

My mom's meat loaf can be substituted for waterboading and probably get faster results.

Harry;

You better hope your mom isn't an Optiboard lurker or you're in BiG TROUBLE!

**rinselberg** · 12-14-2007, 07:42 PM

Good point there from Lulubelle ...

Originally Posted by Grubendol

Torturing has never provided accurate and actionable information ...

I totally agree -- except for that one word "never".

By all reports, the CIA waterboarded just three detainees (among hundreds) in the wake of the 9-11 attacks. Two (if not all three) were known, high ranking al-Qaida members -- "household names" for those of us who follow this kind of news. (I can't spell the names without looking them up.) These men didn't deny that they were exactly who the CIA thought that they were. There wasn't any doubt about their identities. They didn't plead innocence. They simply refused to cooperate -- until they were waterboarded.

I refer any readers, once again, to statements that surfaced in interviews recently with former CIA director George Tenet and retired CIA counter-terrorism officer John Kiriakou, who observed one of the waterboardings.

Tenet was the first one to "connect the dots" about 9-11.

Unfortunately for him and countless others, the last "dot" was when he was notified that the Twin Towers and Pentagon had just been attacked.

Former CIA Director George Tenet said the "aggressive interrogations" of top al-Qaida leaders brought the U.S. more valuable information about planned terror plots than all of the government's other intelligence gathering efforts ...

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/...6/120537.shtml

A leader of the CIA team that captured the first major al Qaeda figure, Abu Zubaydah, says subjecting him to waterboarding was torture but necessary.

In the first public comment by any CIA officer involved in handling high-value al Qaeda targets, John Kiriakou, now retired, said the technique broke Zubaydah in less than 35 seconds ...

"The ... information [that Zubaydah] provided disrupted a number of attacks, maybe dozens of attacks ..."

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=3978231&page=1

The only reason that I say that CIA waterboarding should not be formally outlawed by Congress (or flatly declared out of bounds by the President) is that I interpret what I just referenced (above) as two credible statements that waterboarding produced timely, actionable intelligence that disrupted al-Qaida terror plots after other, more polite interrogation methods were tried and failed.

I think Grubendol has it wrong here.

Waterboarding and other extreme interrogation methods should be a last resort, reserved for extraordinary circumstances: like a known, ranking al-Qaida operative, stubborn and uncooperative, with a high probability of information that is urgently needed -- and time is of the essence. Potentially actionable intelligence is useless if "the bomb goes off first". And there are times when reality actually resembles the ticking time-bomb scenarios familiar to so many followers of the fictional, episodic TV series "24".

The CIA is known to have waterboarded three prisoners but has not used the technique since 2003, according to a government official familiar with the program ...

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/...n3621016.shtml

As to the credibility of John Kiriakou, I also refer any readers to a recent op-ed that he coauthored on the topic of Afghanistan: I think it's fair to say that he is not a "yes man" or a dyed-in-the-wool George W. Bush or Dick Cheney groupie or anything quite like that.

Again, I cite the interviews with George Tenet and John Kiriakou (referenced above) as credible evidence that the CIA has been getting it right.

**chip anderson** · 12-14-2007, 08:23 PM

Where in the "Bill of Rights" does it say these "Rights" extend to non-citizens and enemies of the United States?
And don't tell me about the courts attempting to re-write the Consitution.

**Steve Machol** · 12-14-2007, 09:52 PM

Originally Posted by chip anderson

Where in the "Bill of Rights" does it say these "Rights" extend to non-citizens and enemies of the United States?
And don't tell me about the courts attempting to re-write the Consitution.

And where did I say that? The Military Commissions Act of 2006 suspends Habeas Corpus for anyone - US Citizen or not - that any 'authority' established by the President or Secretary of Defense declares an 'unlawful
enemy combatant'. And it allows no judicial review.

Elliot D. Cohen: Bush's Chilling New Definition of "Unlawful Enemy Combatant"

According to this Act, an "unlawful enemy combatant" is to be defined as: "an individual engaged in hostilities against the United States who is not a lawful enemy combatant." This basically means that if a person is not a soldier in the service of a foreign government, but is nevertheless engaging in "hostilities" against the United States, then this person is an unlawful enemy combatant. Notice that this definition does not require that such a person be an "alien," which accordingly leaves open the possibility that this designation could also be applied to an American citizen.

From the Act:

`(1) UNLAWFUL ENEMY COMBATANT- (A) The term `unlawful enemy combatant' means--

`(i) a person who has engaged in hostilities or who has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States or its co-belligerents who is not a lawful enemy combatant (including a person who is part of the Taliban, al Qaeda, or associated forces); or

`(ii) a person who, before, on, or after the date of the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, has been determined to be an unlawful enemy combatant by a Combatant Status Review Tribunal or another competent tribunal established under the authority of the President or the Secretary of Defense.

This should be alarming to anyone who cares about protecting all of their rights (and not just the 2nd Amendment which would be rather useless without the others anyway.)

P.S. What makes this even worse is that the Democratic Congress doesn't have the guts to stand up to this Administration and even attempt to restore our rights. Disgusting!

**chip anderson** · 12-14-2007, 11:14 PM

If they had any guts they wouldn't be Democrats.
The last Democrat with same was Harry Truman.

**Steve Machol** · 12-15-2007, 12:59 AM

Yeah, too bad they don't have guts like those brave Warriors - G.W. Bush and Dick Cheney who valiantly led our men into battle in Vietnam while those chickens Kerry and Murtha hid at home while others did the fighting.

I got that right, didn't I?

**karen** · 12-15-2007, 08:33 AM

I didn't vote in the poll ( I just stay out of some of those things now) but I do admit that I consider OB more "left" than"right" although I think that may be because I am pretty far over on the right side so that makes most of you "left" in relation to me......and it's all about me, right? (that pun wasn't intended but it is cute)

I will say that I think waterboarding is horrible but so is strapping a bomb to yourself and blowing up a bunch of innocent bystanders. Since in my lifetime I am not likely to be interrogated it makes it easier for me to say it might be a necessary evil if it gets information that can save people.

War is a dirty game. And I am sure that in every one we have fought things have gone on that we did not know about and might have been better off not knowing about. The CIA does secret stuff, isn't that kind of their job?.

**chip anderson** · 12-15-2007, 09:06 AM

If Democrat Heroes

I wonder why Democrats go to such great lenghts to see that the absentee votes of servicemen deployed and domesticly are excluded by one mean or another from vote counts.

And no they were not counted in Florida last presidential election.

Chip

**Steve Machol** · 12-15-2007, 11:57 AM

Originally Posted by chip anderson

If Democrat Heroes

I wonder why Democrats go to such great lenghts to see that the absentee votes of servicemen deployed and domesticly are excluded by one mean or another from vote counts.

And no they were not counted in Florida last presidential election.

Chip

Probably because you are flat out wrong. :)

And once again I notice you avoid answering my questions directly and instead try to change the subject. That is the response of someone who knows he's wrong. :)

**shanbaum** · 12-15-2007, 12:57 PM

Originally Posted by rinselberg

As to John Kiriakou, I also refer any readers to a recent op-ed that he coauthored on the topic of Afghanistan: I think it's fair to say that he is not a "yes man" or a dyed-in-the-wool George W. Bush or Dick Cheney groupie or anything quite like that.

Couple of things about John Kiriakou: first, I saw him on the Today show, when he said that he thought that valuable intelligence had been obtained from waterboarding Abu Zubayda. However, he also said that he thought that the technique should not be used today, as it is no longer necessary; intelligence services have developed better sources of obtaining information.

Second, Keith Olbermann made a really interesting observation about Abu Zubayda, and the effectiveness of torture in producing accurate information. He pointed out that Kiriakou had said that after withstanding 35 seconds of the procedure, Zubayda told Kiriakou that Allah had appeared to him and told him to be cooperative. Isn't it quite clear that Zubayda was lying when he said that? Or do you believe him?