Panetta Admits, Yes, Waterboarding Worked
 

Defense Secretary Panetta Admits Information from Waterboarding Led US to Bin Laden

“The real story was that in order to put the puzzle of intelligence together that led us to Bin Laden, there were a lot of pieces out there that were a part of that puzzle. Yes, some of it came from some of the tactics that were used at that time, interrogation tactics that were used. But the fact is we put together most of that intelligence without having to resort to that.”

<IFRAME height=315 src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/mXyufICYrW8" frameBorder=0 width=420 allowfullscreen></IFRAME>

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013...n-laden-video/

Translation: torture wasn't needed & we would've got OBL regardless,do to the fact torture didn't provide the info needed to catch OBL.
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.co...ure-to-get-bin

LOL

I guess you missed the interview.

That clip was edited just before he said basically ...."we would have got bin laden without the waterboarding."

In other words, it wasn't necessary!!

Of course it worked. Everyone knew that the notion we got nothing from it was a lie. They had to say that to support it being something the USA would be against moving forward.

Oh we water boarded the guy who gave us the info for Bin laden but thats not when he talked lol. Yeah right. But if they say that then Obama loses a lot of the credit for getting him.

Where's Captain Obvious when you need him, of course it works.

If it wasn't necessary, then why did they do it? You don't waterboad someone unless all else fails and yes it does work.

Ask Panetta, it was his comment.

Saying that the information didn't come from waterboarding has an obvious reason. Who has the most to gain from that lie? Obama. Otherwise it was Bush that got the information that led to Bin laden.

Zero dark 30 had a ton of the people who were in on this stuff leak out info. Face it sometimes waterboarding probably led to some really good information. Other times men can be hard and maybe torture didn't work. Not all men are hard men though, even in a war. Interrogators look for the ones they can break and break them they do.

No one wants to see that stuff but if you think CIA playing all friendly now you are crazy. They probably still waterboard lol.

A question.

Is there any part of the Constitution that forbids torture?

The Constitution doesn't apply to non americans. That is why the targetting of Americans by Obama is so controversial.

I'd say you could argue torture takes away your right to pursue happiness for sure. :) Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness pretty much can mean almost anything.

But when you don't follow the laws of the land you lose those protections in a big way.

It applies to all within US borders, everyone is protected by the law.

Well due process certainly does unless the president says you are a threat to the USA then we seem to take that away nowdays.

Why not just make the point you are trying to get at we are willing to listen.

Yeah, there's no precedent for that. Ask FDR.

I love the modern Right Wing in America. Jesus would approve of war, the Constitution says that corporations are people, torture is okay, and the 2nd amendment means you get to have your own SAM, if you can figure a way to get one. It's like their own little Wonderland.

And, has thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy! O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!' He chortled in his joy.

Neat strawman parade you've got going there.

http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/...rights-673567/

I notice you haven't had anything bad to say about our Federal Government's new "Trial by High Level Official" doctrine. But I'm not too worried. As soon as a Republican becomes president, I'm sure you'll start caring again.

BS no one says we should own machine guns or missiles. We say we should be able to own semi automatic sporting rifles, handguns, shotguns.

You are against torture but have no problem Obama putting Americans on a kill list?

“If you want government to intervene domestically, you’re a liberal. If you want government to intervene overseas, you’re a conservative. If you want government to intervene everywhere, you’re a moderate. If you don’t want government to intervene anywhere, you’re an extremist.”
― Joseph Sobran

You want to be a Constitutional originalist, right? Well, they were talking about everybody having a musket hanging over their mantle in case the government needed to raise an army. They weren't talking about semi automatic sporting rifles, handguns, shotguns, or anything else. It's like the Bible; People make it say whatever they want it to say. Same with torture. Cheney says its okay and the Right gets right in line behind him.

My point? It was a question.

Should police be limited to muskets as well? If not, why not?

As Jesse Ventura famously said:

"Give me Dick Cheney and a waterboard...

and within an hour I'll have Cheney confessing to the murder of Sharon Tate..."

The meant whatever the sidearms and rifles of the day are. They would probably say we should have whatever guns we want but I am being reasonable and saying we are fine with semi automatic handguns and rifles.

Firearms have evolved from flintlocks to automatic weapons and I thought you believed in evolution but I see you're even quoting the Bible now.

Oh come off it. Everyone knows waterboarding only mattered when Bush was in office!

We've already had examples of this, such as at Nuremberg and related post WWII trials.

Obama on Waterboarding

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/8TaDrHHNXzI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>