Should they have released the CIA files?

[Madtown HD Junkie]

Should they have released the CIA files?

sound off!

[cybok0]

Some things should be kept a secret.

[vurbano]

stupid move.

[HDRoberts]

It's good the government has been open with us.

[stevenl]

We should put those who authorized the torture on trial.

[vurbano]

We should put Obama on trial.

[msmith198025]

I vote no.

I am not "for" some of the things these organizations do, but I also think that at times they are necessary. If they can help keep us safe, then....

[vurbano]

The techniques worked. Lets see how safe we are under the messiah.

[HDRoberts]

The techniques worked.

Evidence?

[stevenl]

I vote no.

I am not "for" some of the things these organizations do, but I also think that at times they are necessary. If they can help keep us safe, then....

So the results outweigh the means? I guess if we had to suspend the constitution and end the bill of rights to prevent 1 bus bombing in london its worth it? Where do we draw the line. Do we really want to sacrifice everything we are.. All that we stand for. Because we are scared of a group of ragheads? Talk about losing our 'traditional values' (which by the way are not hotdogs)

[msmith198025]

So the results outweigh the means?
In the cases I assume we are talking about here? Yes, IMHO they do


I guess if we had to suspend the constitution and end the bill of rights to prevent 1 bus bombing in london its worth it? Different situation than what was presented in this thread, and no.


Where do we draw the line. Do we really want to sacrifice everything we are.. All that we stand for. Because we are scared of a group of ragheads? Talk about losing our 'traditional values' (which by the way are not hotdogs)

Good question, and I do not think we are sacrificing everything we are. We are however trying to protect that from people who would love nothing more than to kill every last one of us.

Could some of these situations have been handled better? Probably.
Were these actions justified in many of them? IMO, absolutely.

[vurbano]

Evidence?
Obama refuses to release that evidence because it works against him. But we havent been attacked since 9/11

[Carl]

We should put those who authorized the torture on trial.

I won't go that far, but they should be released.

[stevenl]

In the cases I assume we are talking about here? Yes, IMHO they do

Different situation than what was presented in this thread, and no.



Good question, and I do not think we are sacrificing everything we are. We are however trying to protect that from people who would love nothing more than to kill every last one of us.

Could some of these situations have been handled better? Probably.
Were these actions justified in many of them? IMO, absolutely.


If one innocent person was tortured the cost was to high.

[fallout2600]

No, we should have kept them secret. All it does is clarify the dissent other people have for America. After all, this wasn't new "news".

I say release the other memos so the public can decide whether the torture was justified or not. Come on Obama, bring the transparency!!!

[fallout2600]

We should put those who authorized the torture on trial.

Sorry, but your Messiah already said that was NOT going to happen.

[vurbano]

If one innocent person was tortured the cost was to high.

none were.

[vurbano]

Sorry, but your Messiah already said that was NOT going to happen.
Another Obama lie.

[stevenl]

none were.

Really? Just like no innocent person has ever been put on death row either.. Or even put to death...

Or no innocent person was ever sent to gitmo..

[stevenl]

Sorry, but your Messiah already said that was NOT going to happen.

If I recall it was the AG who said that. And Obama said "It would be up to the AG to do" But Obama did say he did not want any of the 'front line' people to be prosecuted.

[HDRoberts]

But we havent been attacked since 9/11

That is not evidence. The ancient Aztecs believed their gods would stop sustaining the universe if they did not practice human sacrifice. Does the fact that the sun did, in fact, come up the next day prove that human sacrifice was needed?

Actually, there have been terrorist attacks since 9/11, just not in the US. Did torture stop Madrid or London?

[fallout2600]

Ah, delegate the decision to Holder now....ok....so you think Holder would make that decision without the president's blessing? I doubt it.

[msmith198025]

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=46949

The CIA said it worked

[fallout2600]

Hopefully they keep the memos coming...

[stevenl]

Ah, delegate the decision to Holder now....ok....so you think Holder would make that decision without the president's blessing? I doubt it.

Yes. Why not? I dont expect the AG to bow to the presidents every order. There needs to be a seperation of power.

[fallout2600]

Concerning this issue specifically, Obama will call the shots.

[vurbano]

Really? really. No one was tortured. They were subjected to advance interrogation techniques that were not defined as torture at that time under the law.

[vurbano]

That is not evidence. its better than evidence, its a real tangible result.

[Bob Haller]

looks like bush apointees will be proscuted for approving torture.

i would love to see this.:)

[msmith198025]

looks like bush apointees will be proscuted for approving torture.

i would love to see this.:)

Bob, I get the feeling you would love to see it mainly because they were Bush appointees, and that is sad.
If this is not the case, I apologize, but why else mention it.


IF (and that remains to be seen in this case) someone breaks the law, I would want the punished for doing that, and doing that only. Not because of some belief that they had, or who they worked for.

[vurbano]

Bob, I get the feeling you would love to see it mainly because they were Bush appointees, and that is sad.
If this is not the case, I apologize, but why else mention it.


IF (and that remains to be seen in this case) someone breaks the law, I would want the punished for doing that, and doing that only. Not because of some belief that they had, or who they worked for.

What law in place at that time was broken? None

[msmith198025]

What law in place at that time was broken? None

Oh, I agree. Which would have been my follow up question. At that time, they were operating within the interpretation of the law, or interpretation that was given based on federal and international laws. Of course laws can be twisted, but I agree

[stevenl]

really. No one was tortured. They were subjected to advance interrogation techniques that were not defined as torture at that time under the law.

Torture is torture no matter the name.

and I dont recall it being removed from being illegal.

[msmith198025]

and I dont recall it being removed from being illegal.
Personal opinion aside, was it defined as torture under federal or international law at the time? And if so, which one, and what were we following.

[vurbano]

Torture is torture no matter the name.

and I dont recall it being removed from being illegal.
Wrong. Under the current law of the US at that time, the 1984 Convention Against Torture signed by Reagan in 1988 and ratified by Congress in 1994 waterboarding was not torture. Secretary of state Rice has pointed this out several times. And BTW in the US you cannot change the law and then go back and prosecute people for acts that occured before that change.

[stevenl]

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Investigation/story?id=1356870


I guess we can severly punish one of our soldiers for doing it but not the president...