HuffPo And NY TImes….. Arbitrarily Killing American Citizens Is Better Than Enhanced Interrogation!!!


No, of course they didn’t say that.  But , that is what they’ve implied.  Read here this is what HuffPo’s front page is/was.   They are taking Romney to task about saying he’d increase the techniques available to the US military today when interrogating prisoners. 

This is fine for discussion.  It should be discussed. 

Contrast this to Obama’s killing of American citizens without due process.  I want to know how anyone can morally justify this?  I want to know how anyone can legally justify this?

I want to know how any piece of shit media can blather about Romney without discussing Obama’s hit list. 

This entry was posted in News and politics. Bookmark the permalink.

33 Responses to HuffPo And NY TImes….. Arbitrarily Killing American Citizens Is Better Than Enhanced Interrogation!!!

  1. DirkH says:

    You gotta understand them. Sulzberger and Huffington fear that someday they will be asked about their treasonous activities.

  2. Tony Duncan says:


    I agree with you about this. It is blatantly unconsitutional, a serious extension of executive power, and dangerous as hell.

    • suyts says:

      Thanks Tony,

      It’s a strange thing. There were a couple blogs in which I was surprised by the reaction I got for stating exactly the same thing you just did. It is something which can’t be done, regardless of the political party of the CIC. There are totalitarians on both sides.

  3. gator69 says:

    Gen Casey said that the 12 murdered and 31 wounded at Ft Hood were a better result than losing our diversity in the armed forces. The mooj are winning, because we are surrendering.

  4. ThePhDScientist says:

    Enhanced Interrogation! LoL. Are you afraid to call it what it really is – torture

    Did you think it would weaken your case if you titled your post “Arbitrarily killing American citizens is better than torture?”

    • Jason Calley says:

      This may be a first, but yes, we agree. So called “enhanced interrogation” should be (and is, at my house) called torture. Likewise, “arbitrary killing” is called murder.

      One can reasonably argue whether the US Constitution is even a controlling document today. Certainly, de jure, it is. On the other hand de facto, it is not — and has not been for a long time. The US Constitution is as dead as the Roman Republic; it was never officially renounced, but no one in power today sees it as a limit. In fact, most people who have sworn an oath to uphold it do not even know what it says.

      Still, regardless of the status of the Constitution, I believe in natural rights, pretty much as Jefferson laid them out. Torture is wrong. Murder is wrong. Kidnapping and rape are wrong. These things are wrong even if the person doing them wears a funny uniform or a special hat.

      I would point out that the general order — the VERY first — given by the then-new General Washington was that prisoners not be tortured or mistreated. I have not found any convincing reason to believe that the current crop of enthusiasts for “enhanced interrogation” are wiser or somehow more knowledgeable about American principles than George Washington.

    • gator69 says:

      Call it torture if it makes you feel better about yourself, or your party, but I am all for water boarding when it saves innocent lives. How’s your nephew PhD Cheerleader.

      • ThePhDScientist says:

        Well i’m not surprised that the religious zealots on the right feel that way. But the educated adults were talking…

        • kim2ooo says:

          ThePhDScientist says:
          September 28, 2012 at 7:55 am

          But the educated adults were talking…
          True! One more reason you shouldn’t try to post while the intelligent are conversing.

        • suyts says:

          “Well i’m not surprised that the religious zealots on the right feel that way….”

          Ph, I know you don’t pay attention much, and I don’t know everyone’s religious affiliation, but, Jason can not be described as left leaning, nor can Tony be described as a “religious zealot on the right”. This thread has demonstrated the false equivalence you’ve made, Mr. Science.

        • philjourdan says:


        • gator69 says:

          PhD Cheerleader interrupted us… and he keeps forgetting to update us on his nephew! Maybe he is too busy writing Dinesh a thankyou card, for saving Obama’s nephew’s life.

      • ThePhDScientist says:

        See Gator there’s this thing called science. I know you’ve heard of it in passing – even if you don’t really believe in it. And what the science tells us is torture actually doesn’t produce good reliable intelligence.

        • kim2ooo says:

          The use of enhanced interrogation techniques on Khalid Sheikh Muhammad (“KSM”) led to the discovery of a plot, the “Second Wave,” to use East Asian operatives to crash a hijacked airliner into the Library Tower in Los Angeles. Information from KSM led to
          the capture of many of the operatives planning the attack.
          • The use of enhanced interrogation techniques on Abu Zubaydah furnished detailed information regarding a! Qaeda’s organizational structure, key operatives, and modus operandi, and identified KSM as the mastermind of the September 11 attacks.

          Information from Zubaydah also helped in the planning and execution of the operation in which KSM was captured.

          • Former CIA Director George Tenet, who served under Presidents Clinton and Bush,stated in a television interview in April 2007: “I know that this program has saved lives. 1know we’ve disrupted plots. I know this program alone is worth more than the FBI, the
          Central Intelligence Agency, and the National Security Agency put together have been able to tell us.”

          • Former CIA Director Hayden has stated that as late as 2006, fully half of the government’s knowledge about the structure and activities of al Qaeda came from those interrogations.

          • On April 16, 2009, President Obama’s own Director of National Intelligence. Dennis Blair, wrote: “High value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided a deeper understanding of the al-Qaeda organization that was attacking this country.

        • gator69 says:

          “See Gator there’s this thing called science.”

          Maybe you should study it sometime, instead of leftist propaganda. You are a fraud just like your heroes

        • ThePhDScientist says:

          It’s not so simple
          Khalid Sheik Muhammed (KSM) did not talk, according to the AP, when he was tortured, but rather months later when he was questioned using humane interrogation techniques.
          When asked on “Morning Joe” if KSM had provided information on the courier due to torture, John Brennan, the President’s Counter Terrorism advisor said, “not to my knowledge.” Brennan was later asked on FOX News if KSM and al-Libi had provided the initial information about the courier. “If only it were that simple,” he said.

          KSM did not tell us everything he knew
          KSM and al-Libi almost certainly concealed a great deal of information about the courier who ultimately led US forces to Bin Laden. Indeed, Bin Laden was killed in the town where Al Libi used to live. Al Libi’s role was to prepare safe houses for Al Qaeda leaders like Bin Laden, and the courier has been described repeatedly as “a confidant of Khalid Sheik Muhammed.” Yet all CIA interrogators were able to learn was a nickname for him. As compared to what they could have learned, this is not very impressive.

          Interrogators say that using torture does not make a detainee reveal the whole truth later
          Some will argue that it was only thanks to the waterboarding that KSM and al-Libi were willing to talk at all. This notion is rejected by the more than 75 interrogators, questioners and debriefers with the military, the FBI and the CIA who I have spoken to in depth about this subject since the revelations of abuse at Abu Ghraib. I have yet to speak to a professional interrogator who believes that torture is an effective means of questioning suspected terrorists.
          Jack Cloonan who served on the FBI’s Osama Bin Laden unit for 6 years told me that during an interrogation (or what the FBI calls an interview) the goal was to, “work towards the objective of getting this person to cross the threshold and become, in effect, a traitor to their own cause.”
          According to Cloonan, “the Al Qaeda people that I dealt with were all very sophisticated in terms of their language skills and understanding of what was at stake.” Cloonan said that it essentially became a question of whether he could offer the detainee enough of what he wanted (protection for his family, more lenient sentencing/incarceration etc.) to convince him to talk. “They struggled,” he said, “with whether or not I was being truthful and I was going to honor everything I said.”
          If you gave the detainee any reason not to trust you, there is no negotiation, Cloonan explained. The detainee won’t be willing to bargain with giving up his knowledge in exchange for something the interrogator can provide. He simply won’t trust you. Torture, Cloonan says, shatters any possibility for trust. “It changes the dynamic,” Cloonan said. “And once you have gone down that path, in my experience there is no going back.”

        • gator69 says:

          Yes, the human rights folks will be fair and balanced, and completely familiar with interrogation techniques and success rates. You are a dolt. I told you to stay away from leftists propaganda. I’ll go straight to the horse’s mouth, and leave the asses for you…

          “Former CIA operative John Kiriakou in 2007 told CNN’s “American Morning” that the waterboarding of Al Qaeda’s Abu Zubayda indirectly led to the arrest of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed:
          The former agent, who said he participated in the Abu Zubayda interrogation but not his waterboarding, said the CIA decided to waterboard the al Qaeda operative only after he was “wholly uncooperative” for weeks and refused to answer questions. All that changed — and Zubayda reportedly had a divine revelation — after 30 to 35 seconds of waterboarding, Kiriakou said he learned from the CIA agents who performed the technique. The terror suspect, who is being held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, reportedly gave up information that indirectly led to the the [sic] 2003 raid in Pakistan yielding the arrest of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, an alleged planner of the September 11, 2001, attacks, Kiriakou said.”

          How is the nephew cheerleader?

      • gator69 says:

        So how is the nephew? You keep dodging that issue. No talking points for that one cheerleader?

    • kim2ooo says:

      “safe, legal, and effective” – would kinda rule out torture – now wouldn’t it?

      • ThePhDScientist says:

        safe and effective? is that akin to saying tripling the number of cars on the road won’t increase greenhouse gases and actually has no effect on the environment?

      • ThePhDScientist says:

        I do have a hard time following ideological conservative fantasy. I get so confused by the folks on this site. On the one hand we’ve got these amateur scientists destined to save the world from the global warming conspiracy! The truth seekers that will reveal the true science! But, most of them don’t believe in evolution – goes against their fanciful believes of how they were “created“…

        • gator69 says:

          So, did someone finally disprove Natural Variability? When did this happen? Was there a surprise paper published this AM? Or are you full of leftist BS once again?

        • suyts says:

          Ph, didn’t you just get your behind handed to you the last time your asserted something similar to this blog being only “amateur scientists”?

          At any rate, if there’s something stated here you can disagree with, feel free to present your case.

          As to your posit about how people here view evolution, I can only say from the comments I’ve read here, the thoughts about evolution are across the board. Though I don’t recall making any posts asserting one way or the other. How is it you can come to know about their beliefs when the blog owner doesn’t know whether or not the majority believes or doesn’t believe in evolution, much less the micro or macro thoughts of it?

    • DirkH says:

      ThePhDScientist says:
      September 28, 2012 at 5:57 am
      “Enhanced Interrogation! LoL. Are you afraid to call it what it really is – torture

      Did you think it would weaken your case if you titled your post “Arbitrarily killing American citizens is better than torture?””

      If waterboarding were a sexual preference, we would have LGBT groups demanding it be tought in schools.

      They didn’t lose eyes, limbs, hadn’t any bones broken to let them grow together crooked again like they do in Iran…

      If that’s torture I’d much prefer it to the Iranian methods. In Germany, we break all the bones of the victims of that method that get asylum here AGAIN to let them grow together straight again. We use narcotics, though.

    • suyts says:

      Ph, you’ve discussed one part of the post. The kill list? American citizens? Have you anything to say on those issues or does your party loyalty allow you to see past the other moral questions like the Times and HuffPo?

      As pointed out by others, I’d say waterboarding and playing loud crappy music isn’t the same as kneecapping. It isn’t the same as shoving bamboo up in someone’s finger and toenails. It isn’t the same as placing someone in an iron maiden or putting someone on the rack. But, I do understand people’s angst about us employing the techniques called “enhanced interrogation techniques”. But, what I don’t understand is how one could oppose “enhanced interrogation techniques” but support a kill list in which US citizens can be arbitrarily killed without due process. Perhaps you can explain.

      • ThePhDScientist says:

        Haha Suyts you’re so full of crap. You do know that? When you’re trying to bash Muslims you show pictures of blown up buses and talk about that part of the world as if they ALL want to kill us.

        Then you turn around and act like these people on the list are innocent US citizens (never mind they’re living in Yemen and parading around with Al Qaeda). The lengths to which you’ll go to advance your conservative ideology and bash Obama borders on hysterical! You’re a walking contradiction only reporting news that suits you and your purpose!

      • suyts says:

        The possibility of an American citizen being targeted on American soil has not been ruled out by this administration.

        I really don’t view this as a political question. Nor do I confine these questions within the scope of our “war on terror”. These are moral questions for this nation which should be openly discussed. You’re accusing me of the very thing I’m pointing out about HuffPo and the NY Times. It really can’t be both ways.

        At some point in time, in some manner, the US will move beyond this conflict with extremist Islamists. But, the precedence of the kill list will remain, as will the interrogation techniques.

        People can’t claim some moral high-ground by being opposed to interrogation/torture techniques and then be in favor of the president’s killing without due process or perhaps you don’t see the dichotomous morality?

        • ThePhDScientist says:

          I agree these are questions that do deserve honest, respectable debate.

          But again in your incessant, fanciful conservative world where everyone in the “mainstream media” is against conservatives you accuse the HuffPo and NYT of some liberal bias. A bias that has been shown multiple times to not be present.

          One of the articles that sticks out to me about the kill list was this one I read in the NYT? Does this sound to you like the NYT is promoting the kill list?

          Try checking the conservative hysteria mentality of “everyone is against us” at the door and you’d sound a lot more respectable.

  5. kim2ooo says:

    For those who would actually like to read the recommendations.

    Click to access romney-campaign-interrogation-policy.pdf

    [ I wonder why Mr, CHARLIE SAVAGE titled it as “policy” …actually, no I don’t wonder ]

    There are TWO recommendations and THREE available options.

    [‘The first option is that Governor Romney could pledge that upon taking office, he will
    rescind and replace President Obama’ s Executive Order restricting government interrogators to
    the Army Field Manual. Consistent with the authority reserved for the President under the
    Military Commissions Act, he could commit his Administration to authorizing (classified)
    enhanced interrogation techniques against high-value detainees that are safe, legal, and effective
    in generating intelligence to save American lives. But because President Obama’s release of the
    OLC memos has reduced the number of available techniques that meet these criteria, Governor
    Romney should not commit in advance to a timetable for implementing this plan; it may well
    take time to identify potential techniques and analyze their effectiveness and legality.

    The second, more cautious option is for Governor Romney to pledge only that upon taking
    office, he will conduct a comprehensive review of interrogation policy under Presidents Bush
    and Obama. He could promise that if this process leads to the identification of techniques that
    would constitute a viable and legal enhanced interrogation program, he will rescind the Obama
    Executive Order and approve such a program. The advantage of this option is that it presents the
    Governor as open-minded and empirically driven. The disadvantage is that it may show
    insufficient zeal for doing whatever it takes to protect America. ‘]

    The THIRD option is , of course, none of the above – a combination of the above.

  6. philjourdan says:

    suyts says:
    September 28, 2012 at 8:56 am

    Ph, I know you don’t pay attention much, and I don’t know everyone’s religious affiliation,

    Indeed, while he constantly rails against me and accuses me of all sorts of religious misdeeds, I have never stated my affiliation, nor discussed my beliefs here (or on any wordpress blog). For a very simple reason. I avoid religion religiously! I see no purpose in debating beliefs, only facts.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s