Comments:US interrogation techniques received early approval, report suggests
This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.
Quick hints for new commentators:
- Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
- Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
- You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading
Bias report is Bias. This "article" reports noting on how the enhanced interrogation that SAVED Americans lives. And how 30 attacks in the US was stopped or only 3 top level terrorist where waterboarding with medical doctors right theere. And I'm sorry but when I think of torture I think of bones breaking lashing and leaving them alone in a cell.--KDP3 (talk) 00:09, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
- And How member of the Democratic Party supported this aka Miss.Nancy pelosi supported it.--KDP3 (talk) 00:13, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
- I was going to make a note of that, but the focus was on Rice et. al. and the early approval, not the efficacy of the program. Xavexgoem (talk) 04:45, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
- The fact 30 attacks were stopped. The program work.--66.229.26.39 07:26, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
- I was going to make a note of that, but the focus was on Rice et. al. and the early approval, not the efficacy of the program. Xavexgoem (talk) 04:45, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
- It is very clearly torture. Having your bones broken is not necessarily worse than being drown 100+ times. Your argument is more along the lines of "torturing terrorists is necessary in order to save lives"; some people might agree with it though. -Funicode (talk) 14:55, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Your English is totally awful.
The American government officials that approved these acts of torture should be tried and given appropriate sentences for their crimes. During WW2 Japenese soldiers tortured American POW's (to gather information about use of WMD's). These soldiers and THEIR SUPERIOR OFFICERS whom gave such orders were put to death.
- Big difference between cutting heads off and denailing then pouring water on peoples faces for only seconds. And FYI don't used a defense like that Japan killed millions and enslaved millions during ww2. And the only thing outcome that will come from these is a victory for the terrorist.--66.229.26.39 07:26, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
- Only seconds? Ends justifies the means, right?
- The whole concept of waterboarding is to make the subject truly believe they are in danger of drowning. It is torture, and if you don't believe me I suggest booking a flight to Cuba and asking to be subjected to it. It doesn't surprise me in the least that someone as heartless as Dick Cheney could try and justify this, but I feel that a far larger portion of the US public should be burning his effigy and calling for him, Rice, and others, to be put on trial for this and potentially face the death penalty. Yes, I think the death penalty itself is barbaric, but a trial of that nature is the message that needs to be sent. Torture is never excusable, no matter what Jack Bauer does on TV. --Brian McNeil / talk 08:39, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
- Brian If their is an other Terrorist attack and God forbid it But I will know the blame will be on thous who betrayed the very people that defended this nation after good old Clinton turn a blind eye to Terror after WTC bombing,US embassy bombings and Tell Pelosi who said "we need to do more" on the waterboarding subject to be on the block with Dick and Rice. And Don't bring up Cuba with me Brian. And don't be mad their is people like me that are still willing defend OUR nation any means possible.--KDP3 (talk) 11:07, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
- Puh-leez! Remember "Wag the dog"? Clinton was accused of trying to deflect attention from domestic affairs when he sanctioned cruise missile strikes to get Bin Laden. I have no problem is Pelosi goes down with the rest for approving torture, but fuck this "end justifies the means" bullshit. When you have to resort to that to defend your 'great nation', then it isn't really that 'great' anymore, and you've abandoned some of the core principles that allowed you to make the claim that it was 'great'. --Brian McNeil / talk 11:32, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
- Then leave MY great country and move to Iran they love the anti americans liberals like you.--66.229.26.39 04:39, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
- Fool! Apart from the gross grammar error in your statement you've failed to notice that I'm not in America - writ large on my Userpage. --Brian McNeil / talk 05:56, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
- Then leave MY great country and move to Iran they love the anti americans liberals like you.--66.229.26.39 04:39, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
- Puh-leez! Remember "Wag the dog"? Clinton was accused of trying to deflect attention from domestic affairs when he sanctioned cruise missile strikes to get Bin Laden. I have no problem is Pelosi goes down with the rest for approving torture, but fuck this "end justifies the means" bullshit. When you have to resort to that to defend your 'great nation', then it isn't really that 'great' anymore, and you've abandoned some of the core principles that allowed you to make the claim that it was 'great'. --Brian McNeil / talk 11:32, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
- Brian If their is an other Terrorist attack and God forbid it But I will know the blame will be on thous who betrayed the very people that defended this nation after good old Clinton turn a blind eye to Terror after WTC bombing,US embassy bombings and Tell Pelosi who said "we need to do more" on the waterboarding subject to be on the block with Dick and Rice. And Don't bring up Cuba with me Brian. And don't be mad their is people like me that are still willing defend OUR nation any means possible.--KDP3 (talk) 11:07, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
It is good you are sorry. It is not so nice the responisbility card is now played around, There is no openess about extrajuridicairy rendition etc. It will be hard to pinpoint single persons as instigators of this policy. As such it is interesting that internal memo's from 2002 already mention this excursion into torture methods. I guess that is what the problem is the choosen solution was for no of the party's as alien as should be. I don't think you should assume this form of torture is very limited. As soon as some form of torture is very limited it's effects are moderate. One danger of a such policy's is dehumanising the not often level standards of guards etc. even more. Someone who has serviced there would develop the wrong instincts to serve in any national institution afterwards.etc.etc.24.132.170.97 22:48, 24 April 2009 (UTC)