skip to main |
skip to sidebar
HuffPo reports.
In his statement, McCain said he understood “the urgency that drove the decision” to resort to torture as a method of interrogation after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. “But as I have argued many times, the methods we employ to keep our nation safe must be as right and just as the values we aspire to live up to and promote in the world.”
He continued: “I believe Gina Haspel is a patriot who loves our country and has devoted her professional life to its service and defense. However, Ms. Haspel’s role in overseeing the use of torture by Americans is disturbing. Her refusal to acknowledge torture’s immorality is disqualifying. I believe the Senate should exercise its duty of advice and consent and reject this nomination.”
ADDED:
Here's the key discussion of
morality:
Kamala Harris: So one question I have not heard you answer is, do you believe that the previous interrogation techniques were immoral?
Haspel: Senator, I believe that CIA officers to whom you refer—
Harris: It’s a yes or no answer. Do you believe the previous interrogation techniques were immoral? I’m not asking do you believe they were legal; I’m asking do you believe they were immoral?
Haspel: Senator, I believe that CIA—
Harris: It’s a yes or no answer.
Haspel: —did extraordinary work to prevent another attack on this country given the legal tools we were asked to use.
Harris: Please answer yes or no. Do you believe in hindsight that those techniques were immoral?
Haspel: Senator, what I believe sitting here today is that I support the higher moral standard we have decided to hold ourselves to.
Harris: Can you please answer the question?
Haspel: Senator, I think I’ve answered the request, the question.
Harris: No, you have not. Do you believe the previous techniques, now armed with hindsight, do you believe they were immoral? Yes or no?
Haspel: Senator, I believe that we should hold ourselves to the moral standard outlined in the Army field manual.
Harris: Okay, so I understand that you have not answered the question, but I’m going to move on.
पोस्ट्स
१८१ टिप्पण्या:
OK. Now I know she's the right woman for the job. Thanks, John!
But I urge him to leave the Senate forthwith. Since he's a patriot who puts country and party above ego, I'm sure he will.
Jeez is this guy still there.
Go die among friends rather than inflicting yourself on enemies.
Sad
McCain voted to approve Brennan so I think his reason to not vote for Haspel is just an excuse.
McCain is a patriot and we all respect him for that. But he's wrong here.
I'm sorry to see a man who spent so much time and effort helping this country exit the public stage on a sour note. He should have kept quiet. And, of course, he's been used by the Dems and media here.
All Haspel did was follow lawful orders given to her by the President. The President decided - and NO Dems objected at the time - that enhanced interrogation was necessary to keep this country safe and save American lives. It worked.
I hope every Dem Senator who votes against her and is up for re-election loses. Senate votes matter.
It's time for McCain to disappear quietly into the good night.....
Maverick for maverick's sake?
Play the tape of flight 77 cockpit to tower.
The fact that leftwinger hearts bleed for terrorists is quite immoral.
McCain is a patriot and we all respect him for that.
He's a grandstander. Patriot is one of the moves.
rh for the win.
Is Kamala Harris just too stupid to run for president? Elizabeth Warren already has the moral preening side of the street locked up.
I've got two questions for Harris.
1. Was it immoral for the President of the United States to get blow jobs in the Oval Office from an intern young enough to be his daughter?
2. Was it immoral for the President of the United States to give billions to our sworn enemy knowing full well that the money would be used to kill Americans and spread terror around the world.
Let's talk about morality more often!
The responses to Harros’ questions were worthy of a SCOTUS nominee.
'member when during lead up to Obama's election the left painted McCain as Hitler? Good times.
Now he's just chummy and awesome.
Harris: Did it feel good to beat your wife? Yes or No.
Haspel: I never beat my wife
Harris: You didn't answer my question... Did it feel good to beat your wife? Yes or No.
Haspel: I don't have a wife.
Harris: You failed to answer my question which proves you enjoyed beating your wife.
John, don’t go away mad. Just go away.
I've got two questions for Harris.
I've got a better one.
Was it immoral for you to sleep your way to the top?
Reading the transcipt, I understand Harris' frustration at not receiving a yes or no answer, and Haspel's answers sound evasive. Still, Haspel played it correctly. Yes or no was a trap.
Wait, so Brennan was OK for CIA chief, but not underling Gina?
You'd almost think these Dems have political motives or something.
Terrorists don't waterboard, they burn you alive in a cage or slice your head off on camera.
Leftists stand shoulder to shoulder with terrorists.
I don't want my government to give me free universal government controlled healthcare, (I can pay my own way, thank you) I want my government to protect me from non-human scum terrorists.
The moral question is what does it make you when you do it.
Well you have to look.
Yeah, I really liked McCain in 2000 when he ran against Bush. But, the Commentariat here is right - he needs to fade away and stop embarrassing himself.
As for Kamala Harris, an aggressive, Leftist attorney.
Immoral corruptocrats care more about the sensitivity of terrorists.
Trump called McCain out on his grandstanding in Viet Nam and McCain has been jacked up with anger ever since. How dare you call grandstanding grandstanding.
"I'm sorry, Senator, but this is not a yes-or-no question. It is a very complex question, because there is a conflict here between two evils. First, the rights of even despicable terrorists not to be tortured. Second, the rights of completely innocent Americans not to be burned alive, slowly, in something like the World Trade Center. In a case where my judgment tells me that water-boarding might save those innocent Americans, I would have a difficult and complex moral decision to more. Apparently, you would not - you would be willing to let innocent Americans be burned alive, slowly, rather than ever hurt one despicable terrorist. Or maybe you would skew your judgment in order to avoid that conflict, and pretend that there never could be such a situation. I do think that is immoral."
Lets just advertise to the world that we are a bunch of push over paper tiger pussies. Perhaps we can use the advanced interrogation technique called "American Idol."
Let's discuss the immorality of knowing that the person who you are questioning has the information that will save thousands of innocent lives and yet you decided that you just will not inconvenience that subject to save those people.
How is it moral to put ONE life above the lives of many others. When you can save many for one and time is of the essence and you do NOT....you are culpable in those deaths.
We are talking about waterboarding, which is not pleasant, but it is not the same as being broken on a rack, impaled in an Iron Maiden, or permanently maimed for life. Even IF the subject is harmed....trading one for many IS the moral thing to do.
RH has it right. McCain is a narcissistic grandstanding asshole.....OK I added all of those adjectives myself :-) but you get the idea.
I watched that exchange. We’re talking about waterboarding, right? Haspel should have just said “Yes, we were interrogating a terrorist.”
As for McCain, my opinion of him has been slipping for years. rh has him pegged.
Sorry, that's **decision to make**
Yeah, I really liked McCain in 2000 when he ran against Bush.
I never liked McCain and always felt that he was a bullshit artist.
I voted for Palin.
McCain’s support from those who voted for him is evaporating. I think he should come out of the closet before he dies and become a full-on Dem partisan. I suspect the only reason he ever called himself a Republican was because the Dems had become so anti-military.
BTW, I bought McCain’s book about his fathers ago but threw it away recently. He doesn’t deserve their company.
Doesn’t McCain have to physically be in the Senate to vote? When’s the last time we’ve seen him?
Funny that Harris thought the “yes or no” schtick had some deep and incisive meaning. She’s watched too many legal dramas. One of the burdens of the half-bright is that they can’t understand (or even admit to) what might lie beyond their own cognitive ability. The atheists of thinking.
Sometimes you must do what is required.
Does Meade regret beating up Althouse? Yes or No.
Reading the transcipt, I understand Harris' frustration at not receiving a yes or no answer, and Haspel's answers sound evasive
Reading the transcript doesn't do justice to Harris' pleasant and well mannered disposition.
McCain and the other Democrats are doing their best to pretend that Haspel was closely involved with waterboarding. She wasn’t; that’s a lie. But if it wasn’t for lies the Democrats would have nothing to believe in at all.
Pretty high level discussion of morality, huh? I'm sure that Haspel and given it much thought, and in the right context could be useful in helping us get our own understanding of tough moral issue. Questioning by a incipient Presidential candidate at a public Senate hearing is not that context.
I do respect McCain's viewpoint though I do not agree. He has earned the right to it.
More important than McCain is Kamala, who is on the ascent.
I do think she'll be the Dem nominee in 2020 - mostly by default. She checks all the Dem boxes (minority, female, lawyer, good fundraiser). She also benefits from not having all the Hillary baggage. We need to start scrutinizing and exposing her as a rich, San Francisco leftist.
I like that: rich, San Francisco, Leftist.
That's right, David. I respect McCain's principled position. But I disagree. And if I were in the Senate, I'd be voting to confirm.
20 more days, then go brain cancer go!
Obviously she didn't answer the question.
David Begley said...
McCain is a patriot and we all respect him for that.
No. Not all of us.
It's quite interesting that Sen. Manchin has become more of a Republican than Sen. McCain.
But we should be easy on John. He has nothing left to play for except a front-page obit in the NYT.
I have a vague recollection of McCain dropping a bomb or two on a flight deck. Is that true?
Senator McCain is a good man. Overall, I think he's been a good senator and someone who loves his country. I've never thought he was a clear, orderly, and deep thinker and fear cancer only makes this condition worse.
When we, as a country, were first debating whether or not water boarding was torture, McCain insisted that it was and that it should be outlawed. He also insisted that the law provide no exception for 'ticking bomb circumstances' -- where interrogators reasonably believed water boarding would yield information that would save lives that were in immediate danger. So far, that's a reasonable, principled, position. Then, McCain demonstrated his lack of clear thinking by going on to say that the law didn't need such an exception because the people on the front line could be relied upon to 'do the right thing' and water board anyway -- if that's what it took to save lives!
He said that no line of command would hold such people responsible for doing so. Even if a line of command did, no President and no Congress would allow people who had acted in our nation's best interest (by water boarding someone if 'needed') to be punished. Right! In other words, he wanted Congress to be able to say to the world it was against 'torture' in all cases and situations and leave the tough calls up to the people on the front lines.
And now? Now, he's punishing someone for waterboarding back when we thought it both LEGAL and essential to gathering life saving information. The only charitable thing I can say is I really hope this is the result of his brain being addled by cancer.
For his next trick, McCain will deny Trump a Republican vote in the Senate by not retiring by the end of the month.
Much more on that later, I'm sure.
McCain admits he gave the dossier to Comey. That frankly looks personal and spiteful.
I believe Haspel just took over as chief at a station where waterboarding had been done in the past?
So she did not really have any more to do with it than the CIA's other 20-30,000 employees at the time.
This was official U.S. Government policy and employees other than those responsible for the policy should not be harassed about it.
That said, it was torture, the United States Government should not countenance torture, and in this case it was not just immoral, but worse, it was stupid.
For an Act Utilitarian torture can be moral if you think it will lead to the greatest good for the greatest number of people. Some religious zealots seem to find torture acceptable too; and there are likely more flavors of moral philosophy under which it can be acceptable too. This makes the issue hard to deal with on a yes or no basis.
It is fair IMHO for Senator Harris to ask Ms Haspel what her personal views are,since they will matter if she is confirmed.
On a side note, the boundaries of what counts as torture are legally defined,so something really close to the line may seem moral to people even when pulling out fingernails doesn’t.
"pretend that Haspel was closely involved with waterboarding."
Close enough.
Anyone truly interested in this should read James Mitchell's book "Enhanced Interrogation."
McCain voted for Brennan. McCain is a vindictive old man. That will be his legacy.
The Cracker Emcee Rampant said...
Funny that Harris thought the “yes or no” schtick had some deep and incisive meaning. She’s watched too many legal dramas. One of the burdens of the half-bright is that they can’t understand (or even admit to) what might lie beyond their own cognitive ability. The atheists of thinking.
She's one of the dumbest people I've ever seen, who ever had any claim to being any sort of trial lawyer. But in her case, we have to remember that the rules of congressional hearings are such that members of the House and Senate are given little inconsequential blocks of time to do their questioning. It is generally far too little to do any good cross-exam. It only leads to grandstanding by the questioner.
Somebody who is actually good at it, because he was in fact a very good prosecutor, is the soon-to-be-retired Rep. Trey Gowdy.
And one reason that Watergate turned into such a good hearing with the Senate Judiciary Committee was because they turned over a lot of the questioning to the Committee's staff counsel, with far less time limiting.
I'm a twice wounded Vietnam veteran, and I don't consider myself to be a hero, but someone who was called up (drafted) and I went without reservation, and served to be best of my ability. I detest John McCain, and I don't care what anybody else thinks of my statement about him.
Ken B said...
McCain admits he gave the dossier to Comey. That frankly looks personal and spiteful.
What's wrong with a bit of personal spite? If I were McCain, every day that I was forced to think of Trump, I'd be thinking of Trump's ripoff of the Al Franken joke about preferring people who weren't captured.
The most cruel of all malignancies is glioblastoma involving the cerebral cortex. Executive cognition is impaired and slowly destroyed. Sense of self and cognition disappearing w/o awareness.
This is a time for sympathy not vindictiveness.
This is the neoplasm talking.
"Do you believe the previous interrogation techniques were immoral?"
Immoral: Not conforming to accepted standards of morality.
The answer was an easy "No": The interrogation techniques conformed to accepted standards of morality given the law, the use of waterboarding in SERE training (consent is never a defense to "torture"), the limited use to which it was put interrogating known terrorists and the results obtained.
Most of McCain's life has been failing to live up to the level of his father and grandfather.
Can't fault him for that. It was a very high bar.
But he didn't seem much to even try. He would say he wasn't a class A pilot, that he wasn't one of the brave people in the Hanoi Hilton, and he wasn't good to his wife when he returned.
So to really look at his life we have to see that he got into Annapolis because of his lineage, graduated 894 of 899 in his class, didn't work hard to make the Navy a career, ran around on his wife until he dumped her for someone younger and richer, got elected to Congress and involved with Charlie Keating, and ran unsuccessfully for President.
For him to be seen as some paragon of morality, is pretty rich.
But hey, anything to throw at Trump these day is going to be thrown.
ceowens said...
"I have a vague recollection of McCain dropping a bomb or two on a flight deck. Is that true?"
No.
"At about 10:50 (local time) on 29 July, while preparing for the second strike of the day, an unguided 5.0 in (127.0 mm) Mk-32 "Zuni" rocket, one of four contained in an LAU-10 underwing rocket pod mounted on an F-4B Phantom II (believed to be aircraft No. 110 from VF-11[1]), accidentally fired due to an electrical power surge during the switch from external to internal power. The surge, and a missing rocket safety pin, which would have prevented the fail surge, as well as a decision to plug in the "pigtail" system early to increase the number of takeoffs from the carrier, allowed the rocket to launch.
The rocket flew across the flight deck, striking a wing-mounted external fuel tank on an A-4E Skyhawk awaiting launch,[1] aircraft No. 405 from VA-46, piloted by Lieutenant Commander Fred D. White.[2][13] The Zuni rocket's warhead safety mechanism prevented it from detonating, but the impact tore the tank off the wing and ignited the resulting spray of escaping JP-5 fuel, causing an instantaneous conflagration. Within seconds, other external fuel tanks on White's aircraft overheated and ruptured, releasing more jet fuel to feed the flames, which began spreading along the flight deck.
The impact of the rocket had also dislodged two of the 1000-lb AN-M65 bombs, which fell to the deck, and lay in the pool of burning fuel between White's aircraft and that of Lieutenant Commander John McCain. Damage Control Team No. 8 swung into action immediately, and Chief Gerald Farrier, recognizing the risk, and without the benefit of protective clothing, immediately smothered the bombs with a PKP fire extinguisher in an effort to delay the fuel fire spreading for long enough to allow the pilots to escape. The pilots, still strapped into their aircraft, were immediately aware that a disaster was unfolding, but only some were able to escape in time. McCain, pilot of A-4 Skyhawk side No. 416, next to White's, was among the first to notice the flames, and escaped by scrambling down the nose of his A-4 and jumping off the refueling probe shortly before the explosions began."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1967_USS_Forrestal_fire
Her nomination is not going to drain the swamp.
McCain knows she is Gestapo. He knows she has an arm-band.
And now? Now, he's punishing someone for waterboarding back when we thought it both LEGAL and essential to gathering life saving information.
Someone should ask McCain if it was immoral to bomb Hanoi during Vietnam.
I realize the rules of war allowed it and his superiors ordered it, but as someone who actually carried out the act, he is now solely responsible for its consequences due to our present period of revisionist history.
And before he answers, we should remind him he wanted to "Bomb, bomb, bomb. Bomb, bomb Iran."
Shorter McCain: You know if Gina had just said we should turn people over to other governments to do our dirty work, or instead of capturing people like KSM, we drop daisy cutters on them -- and their neighbors and families and children -- blowing everyone into unrecognizable bits, well that would just be a "war is hell" kind of thing and we'd all agree.
But to actually inflict pain on the person directly responsible for those people jumping to their deaths from 105 stories above Manhattan? Well, that's just going too far.
For as long as I can remember Democrats have hammering into my head, "Don't impose your morality on us."
What morals you b talkin' about, Kamela?
Churchill's quote: from one of the postings below this "Sometimes doing your best is not good enough. Sometimes you must do what is required." seems relevant here. It also encapsulates much of my personal philosophy.
Melania's Be Best. That is a nice goal. It is also pretty vague and squishy.
However sometimes you have to do what is LESS than "BEST" in your mind or even less than what is deemed the highest moral standards, in order to do the best thing.
The thing that is required is not always what you want to do, what you would like to do. It may not even be BEST for you, but if it is best for the big picture, then you do what is REQUIRED. If waterboarding your enemy is required to do get the best result.....well.....
Nuclear and chemical weapons are immoral (Congress funds both of them).
Extrapolate from that. Is torture any more immoral than creating WMD?
I think not, Senator. Both define an Imperialist regime, which is not just immoral, it is Pope certified immoral.
Senator Kamala Harris' line of questioning was extremely unfair. When we had a serious debate about whether or not waterboarding was torture or not, and even if not, whether waterboarding is ever justified, many acknowledged that the 'morality' of waterboarding depended on the circumstances. The classic example was a terrorist has been captured that has information about a bomb that's about go off in an American city. Is it 'moral' to waterboard to find out where the bomb is (and the information necessary to deactivate it)? Most people would say that's NOT a 'yes or no question'.
It's not a yes or no question because our view of whether waterboarding would be moral or not depends on a lot of factors -- what type of bomb is it, how many lives are at risk, how certain are we the terrorist has the knowledge we seek, how confident are we that waterboarding will produce life saving information, etc.? Our personal views of whether or not waterboarding is torture would enter into the question. Some might want to know what other crimes the terrorist has committed.
Dragging random people off the street and waterboarding them for the thrill of it is always immoral. In most practical applications, the correct answer is, it depends. It is grossly unfair of the Senator to pretend otherwise.
Let me see if I have this right. Pouring water up a terrorist’s nose is worse than turning his entire family into a smoking crater with an MQ-9 Reaper like Obama.
"Jeez is this guy still there."
i really doubt that he's the one sending the messages, i believe it's just his family using his name.
I also believe that his family will announce his resignation on may 29; one day before the limit for special election.... 'cause that's the way they are
I agree with President Mom Jeans: let McCain hang on until 12:01am on June 1st. Then the Governor gets to appoint a true Republican to McCain's seat and we don't have to go through that stupid special election crap.
You can both respect someone's service to their country at one point in their life and at a different point think he's nothing but a spiteful, bitter old man pissed off he lost the Presidency and blames Sarah Palin for it.
McCain is just doing what he has done since the Charlie Keating affair—punching his friends in the nose to the applause of his enemies. The man is really something. Don’t try to be his friend. He’ll kick you in the balls every time.
Actually I think wateroarding (to no long term harmful effect) three confederates of the crazy OBL was plenty moral. They didn’t gouge out an eye, they didn’t cut off a finger, they dunked them in the horse trough until they said which way the bad guys went. And Brennan told ‘em to do it.
McCain and Harris make me sick.
Let me be the first to wave goodbye to the Democrats as they head off into the sunset. It was nice of them to visit, but now that they are going home we can get back to work.
SayAahh, my girlfriend died of a glioblastoma. One day she was making pasta, and went to the cupboard to retrieve the strainer. I could tell she was having a hard time remembering what she was doing there, and I said: "What are you looking for?", and she replied: "The dog sled." That is not what is happening to McCain. He is acting like an asshole, a bitter asshole. McCain does not seem confused at all.
rwnutjob said...
Let me see if I have this right. Pouring water up a terrorist’s nose is worse than turning his entire family into a smoking crater with an MQ-9 Reaper like Obama.
Well said.
Although I think that Secretary Kerry bought some carbon offsets for the smoke.
Are there any lawyers or legislators who never do that yes-or-no gimmick when questioning witnesses?
That gimmick is insulting to people's intelligence.
McCain was a ace. He destroyed five navy planes in his career. He left his wife when she was fighting cancer. He is a grandstanding ass who only survived in the Navy because of daddy. And he may well have cause the accident on the carrier due to a wet-start of his aircraft. And I read an article - can't find it now, that had pilots on board the carrier relating his actions after and stated he left with the press very soon after the accident. He was not liked.
Here is another take on McCain: http://articles.latimes.com/2008/oct/06/nation/na-aviator6
Gk1 said... "Is Kamala Harris just too stupid to run for president?"
“Kamala Harris is still the dumbest lawyer I ever dealt with in court.” - Attorney Robert Barnes on Twitter
Harris: It’s a yes or no answer.
Haspel: Ye-o
Harris got her sound bite. If she runs against Trump he will hammer her for bring soft on terrorists.
McCain has a unique perspective. Like Obama he’s against waterboarding the high command of terrorists. But he has no problem creating chaos in other countries that get our soldiers killed and civilians killed. Iraq, Libya, etc. This is the problems that weak minded fools cause.
And Obama can kill hundreds of civilians as “collateral damage” in drone strikes but waterboarding KSM is beyond the pale?
That fuck is still getting three hits and a cot in the Cuban sun. Gimme a break. McCain has no problem with soldiers getting water boarded as party of training. It’s either torture or it’s not. Weak minded fool
Bomb Bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran.
SayAahh says: The most cruel of all malignancies is glioblastoma involving the cerebral cortex. Executive cognition is impaired and slowly destroyed. Sense of self and cognition disappearing w/o awareness.
This is a time for sympathy not vindictiveness.
We have family members who are suffering from Dementia and pre Alzheimer syndrome. I agree with the sympathy. Their actions and weird personality changes are part of their illness.
HOWEVER, McCain is also ill, incompetent, and should be treated as such. If your Demented Grandmother was driving a Greyhound bus full of other people, wouldn't you insist that she stop driving and put a competent person into the driver's seat?
If McCain or his family had any decency or 'morality' they would remove him from his position for the sake of others. It isn't as if his demented condition is only affecting himself. It is affecting the entire country.
The MORAL thing to do would be to retire, gracefully exit stage left. He won't and they won't because he is a grandstanding asshole and they are enablers.
Etienne said... "Nuclear and chemical weapons are immoral (Congress funds both of them)."
The United States began destroying its chemical weapons stockpile in the 1980's on Johnston Atoll in the Pacific. The US joined the Chemical Weapons Convention in 1993 and began destruction of all its remaining chemical weapons stores. This process is still underway and more than 90% has been destroyed to date. All of its stores will be gone by 2023. The US has no active chemical weapons stockpile or production, I don't believe.
I've got two questions for Harris.
Me too.
1. Was it immoral for Oabama to rely on intelligence gathered by waterboarding when he OKed the raid on Osama?
2. Can you answer the first question: yes or no, please?
MountainMan said...This process is still underway and more than 90% has been destroyed to date...The US has no active chemical weapons stockpile or production...
Using your math, I'd say we had 10% in storage, which is probably enough to gas all the Jews in Europe.
"He is a grandstanding ass who only survived in the Navy because of daddy. "
now now now; that's simply incorrect.
it was NOT only 'because of daddy', Gramps had a LOT to do with it too
When McCain was a military pilot, he dropped bombs on buildings and people.
Was that moral?
Yes or no.
My favorite thing is when naked political opportunist preen about morality. That's my favorite.
My second favorite thing is when bitter, vengeful politicians use their last days on this Earth to throw a spanner in the works of their despised advisories obviously not for any greater good, but just for one last big middle finger.
Mike Sylwester said...
Are there any lawyers or legislators who never do that yes-or-no gimmick when questioning witnesses?
Well Mike I have done it. Not like Harris; but of course I've never been time-limited like that in a deposition and the only times (very, very rare) when I've rushed a cross-exam was when I knew that something like a courtroom lunch break or the end of a trial day was coming up in just minutes.
It is one think to demand a definite affirmative answer, for further questioning. And another matter to robotically demand "Yes" or "No" as an answer.
Again, smart witnesses in front of Congressional committees know that they can talk their way through a hostile member's time with long answers.
Kamala Harris may check all the boxes for the Dem POTUS nomination, but she consistently comes across very poorly in Senate hearings.
She seems shrill, controlling and highly unimaginative. She is likely to do poorly in debates.
"That is not what is happening to McCain. He is acting like an asshole, a bitter asshole. McCain does not seem confused at all."
you mean: the person sending the messages labeled as from McCain doesn't seem confused at all.
When was the last time mcCain was seen in public?
Brain cancer can produce pathological words and actions.
"Ms. Harris, I believe it is irrelevant what I believe because that is not the test I was asked to apply. What I believe is moral you may very well think immoral. And Visa Versa. That is why we have laws that we apply and to which we are accountable. That is why we have policies and procedures to follow like the Army Field manual. So, no, Ms. Harris. I will not answer your question."
America urges Senator McCain to die already.
To paraphrase that old joke about how bullshit can get you to the top but can't keep you there Kamala can sleep her way to the top of california politics but that can't keep her there.
I hate questions like that. I also run into problems with literalness. Example:
Wife has a pain in her left shoulder (most likely from last night team practice).
Wife: My left shoulder hurts. Am I going to die?
Me: Yes.
Wife: Shut up and go away.
Me: What did I say?
It is immoral. It's also immoral to let people die so others can preen over how moral they are. Adults understand there are often no good choices.
I find the torture debate to be so tiresome. The moralizing Left tends to speak in categorical or absolute terms, which is very irritating. Don’t tell me torture never works. Of course it works in some cases if the person actually has the information you want. You torture them, they spill the beans, then you test the information to see if it’s reliable. And don’t tell me it’s never okay to inflict physical or psychological pain in interrogations. The morality question turns not just on the efficacy of the technique but also the degree of pain inflicted. Why is waterboarding considered “torture,” and therefore morally on the same side as breaking bones, but threatening a suspect with a lifetime of prison ass poundings isn’t? Which sort of pain is worse?
I am not a fan of waterboarding nor do I like prosecutors using extreme pressure tactics to coerce cooperation, which as Alan Dershowitz notes, can lead suspects to “compose.” I actually find the prosecution tactic to be a bit worse because it’s done in the context of domestic criminal prosecutions rather than intelligence gathering on the battlefield. “Composed” testimony from a cooperating witness can and does lead to false convictions. The main purpose of intelligence gathering isn’t incarceration or criminal punishment.
But the Left likes to grandstand about waterboarding because it’s what the evil Bush administration did until Obama closed that shameful chapter of our history.
Chuck at 9:44 AM
I have done it. Not like Harris; but of course I've never been time-limited like that in a deposition and the only times (very, very rare) when I've rushed a cross-exam was when I knew that something like a courtroom lunch break or the end of a trial day was coming up in just minutes.
I imagine that if I had been there watching, I would have found it to be insulting to my intelligence.
Does Meade regret beating up Althouse? Yes or No.
I beat up my wife this morning.
I was out of bed at 5:30, she woke up around six.
(For the record, my wife usually beats me up.)
Torture as a means of extracting information essential to thwarting a terrorist attack may be one of the few morally defensible elements of modern warfare, especially when compared to Obama's favorite warfighting technique, the drone strike.
That the guilty should suffer so that the innocent should be spared is an accepted moral precept, thus we have prisons. Whether those sentenced are guilty in the absolute sense is unknowable, the same applies to the innocent, we can only reasonably surmise from the available evidence. Anyone who insists otherwise opens an epistemological can of worms which calls into question everything, including himself. A drone strike is morally defensible if the target is an enemy commander whose death will prevent the suffering of the innocent, it is much less so if the cause of enemy commander's demise, typically the detonation of a Hellfire missile, also entails the death of an innocent child. Whether the death of the enemy commander will indeed prevent the suffering of the innocent is always uncertain. Competent commanders always have deputies who presumably can execute plans in an extremity. Therefore those who fight terrorism by what amounts to assassination must be aware that their tactics are not likely to circumvent any existing plan or ongoing enemy operation. This basic flaw mitigates strongly against the morality of the drone strike tactic.
Torture can accomplish the same goal as the drone strike, but without the risk of causing the death or disfigurement of the innocent. Firstly, one must reasonably conclude that the prisoner about to be tortured has the vital information and is deliberately withholding it. Secondly, one must carry out the torture in such a way that the prisoner's life is not unreasonably imperiled, nor is the torture likely to permanently maim or injure the prisoner. Interrogators considering the use of torture must be reasonably certain that the required information can be obtained soon enough to be used proactively. Lastly, the torture must not under reasonably predictable conditions inflict suffering on the innocent. Waterboarding as a means of interrogation under duress is generally free of the most egregious aspects of torture. There is no bloodletting or scarring, no physical injury or crippling. Waterboarding is terrifying. It triggers purely the instinctive reactions to drowning without actually drowning the victim. As a means of effective torture, it is the most humane form known. (Death by drone strike is also humane in that it is at least sudden.) It is obviously more defensible in a moral sense than any form of airborne attack, including so-called surgical drone strikes. Interrogation under the duress of torture can reveal information vital to the prevention of an enemy attack — When is it to take place? — Where? — What is the weapon to be used? — How can it be defused? Etcetera. Assassination by aerial attack or a drone strike can only disrupt the chain of command. Such an operation can offer no hope of preventing an existing operation from being executed.
Your child/grandchild is abducted, but the one of the three kidnappers was caught in the commission of the crime. You know that in the majority of these cases, the kidnap victim is killed within a few hours, often after being sexually abused. Would you approve of the police using "enhanced interrogation" to get information out of the captured kidnapper?
Now multiply the gravity and urgency of that situation by 5000+. That is the question that the CIA has to deal with. So Senators, before you ask them that question, please answer for yourself.
Is it moral for California Democrats to waste billions of dollars on a train project that never will be completed?
Yes or no.
Using your math, I'd say we had 10% in storage, which is probably enough to gas all the Jews in Europe.
You're obviously not a strategic thinker, Etienne. Ten percent of the U.S. Cold War chemical weapons stockpile is enough to gas ALL the Jews in the world if they were herded into conveniently located death camps. OTOH, the Department of Homeland Security could do in the Joos with just the pistol ammo they have on hand, assuming the Israelites stand in line. They could make sure of the job by putting 246 bullets into each one. If that seems extreme the pat-down dudes and bitches of Homeland's TSA branch could get rid of the Yids all by themselves.
typo correction: It triggers the purely instinctive reactions to drowning without actually drowning the victim.
McCullough said: "McCain has no problem with soldiers getting water boarded as party of training. It’s either torture or it’s not."
Two very close family members have been waterboarded by the US Army as a part of their SERE survival training. They don't consider it torture. Pfft.
If I were McCain, every day that I was forced to think of Trump, I'd be thinking of Trump's ripoff of the Al Franken joke about preferring people who weren't captured.
You do it anyway. For incidents, real or imaginary, 24/7/365 continuously since, at least, the first debate.
“America urges Senator McCain to die already.”
You don’t speak for all Americans.
“Kamala Harris is still the dumbest lawyer I ever dealt with in court.” - Attorney Robert Barnes on Twitter
Even a parrot can be trained to do what Ms. Harris does.
You must answer yes or no!
Is all your thinking so binary? How sad for you.
She seems shrill, controlling and highly unimaginative. She is likely to do poorly in debates.
She may very well be the nominee if the Ds are not smart, which seems likely.
She is Hillary without the charm and the record.
At least Obama had charm, even if he was nasty under the skin.
Fuck John McCain. Fuck Kamala Harris.
Fuck all the people who bitch about the people who protect them. Fuck the people who rip on their defenders that give them the freedom to smell their own farts and pretend they are morally superior.
Fuck the people who do not deserve the freedom others gave them.
“Fuck John McCain. Fuck Kamala Harris.
Fuck all the people who bitch about the people who protect them. Fuck the people who rip on their defenders that give them the freedom to smell their own farts and pretend they are morally superior.
Fuck the people who do not deserve the freedom others gave them.”
Go fuck yourself.
Instead of non-invasive interrogation techniques, they should carry out sodomy sessions, which were effective deterrents in the Libyan war.
McCain went along to get along, or normalized, the wars in Libya, Syria, and Ukraine. Did he contribute to Obama's premature evacuation of Iraq, the progress of ISIS, and restarting the war in Iraq under Obama's administration?
I look forward to reading his obit.
John McCain
Kamala Harris
Who is the bigger whore?
"All Haspel did was follow lawful orders given to her by the President. The President decided - and NO Dems objected at the time - that enhanced interrogation was necessary to keep this country safe and save American lives. It worked."
They were not lawful orders, as torture violates both US law and international law. Any in Congress who approved (or went along with) this are complicit, whatever their party. The torture did not keep our country safe, as we it was never in danger to begin with. Most of the people tortured were hapless victims rounded up in dragnets, and we have no evidence most of them were ever involved in any terrorist activities, (including the ones who died under our torture).
And...even if torture were legal, does following orders to commit torture absolve the individual from his or her culpability in a vile endeavor? No. That's why they didn't accept the "just following orders" excuse from Nazis on trial at Nuremberg.
"Terrorists don't waterboard, they burn you alive in a cage or slice your head off on camera."
And we assassinate our victims en masse from afar, by drone bombing or helicoptor machine-gunning.
Robert Cook
Most of the people tortured were hapless victims rounded up in dragnets
The number of people who were waterboarded was something like three (3).
Perhaps you are referring to people subjected to other treatment that you consider to be torture.
I'm not sure what exactly you mean by Most of the people tortured were hapless victims. You might elaborate that accusation.
I flew A-4 Skyhawks in the Marine Corps and went through the same SERE training as did McCain, albeit a few years later. The SERE training was conducted by some salty Navy Chiefs who delighted in putting the jarhead loootenants through unholy hell. I can tell you three things about that experience:
- waterboarding isn’t torture
- the training was undeniably necessary for those of us shipping out to the South China Sea
- I wouldn’t go through it again for $1 million"...........although if the number got up to 8 significant digits, I’d reconsider the point
- and if I ever find that Chief who slid a fucking snake into that hot metal box I was locked in, I’ll wring his fucking neck right in front of his fucking grandkids
- Krumhorn
Robert Cook at 11:50
we assassinate our victims en masse
The words assassinate and en masse do not go together well.
Mike Sylvester @ 11:54am:
You're mistaken, as you have obviously been conned by the government's lies. There were many people tortured in many places, some directly by us, some by other nations to whom we outsourced the job. Some people died during their torture, and many suffered terrible.
"The words assassinate and en masse do not go together well."
Okay. We slaughter them...when they're attending funerals or weddings, or just walking around the streets of their towns.
LLR Chuck: "That's right, David. I respect McCain's principled position."
LOL
McCain voted, joyfully, happily, for commie Brennan because obama.
McCain will not vote for Haspel because trump.
Yep. Those are precisely the sorts of "principles" one would expect our Bowe Bergdahl republican to respect.
Robert Cook at 12:02 PM
There were many people tortured in many places, some directly by us, some by other nations to whom we outsourced the job.
According to the Wikipedia article about Extraordinary Renditions, there were about 150 such cases during the years 2001-2005.
I am not aware of any finding that most of them were hapless victims rounded up in dragnets.
Maybe most of them actually were involved in terrorist activities. Are you sure that's not possible?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition
Most of the people tortured were hapless victims rounded up in dragnets,
There's no evidence of this, it's a far left fantasy created to deflect the negative repercussions of their choices. Remember this the next time he demands others produce evidence or otherwise pretends his opinions are based on fact.
Cookie, all I had to do was see your source "Counterpunch."
You are a charter member of the "America was never great" club.
Have a nice day.
One of Trumps greatest insights was precisely how much McCain hates republicans and loves dems and how disgusted the republican base was with McCain.
If you sense that LLR Chuck fits that description as well, there is plenty of evidence to support that supposition.
I would guess that the number of Extraordinary Renditions where the person was "rounded up in a dragnet" was ZERO.
Mike Sylvester, Cookie and "elaborate" would get us here all day with leftist mythology.
He is a nice guy compared to the trolls here but he is in lala land.
Mike Sylverster:
"First came Guantánamo Bay, where men and boys captured during the early days of Bush’s anti-Islamist crusade, many of them sold for hefty bounties, were sent for interrogation. Bush called these people the “worst of the worst.” However, according to Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, who was chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin Powell, Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld all knew that the majority of GITMO detainees were innocent butrefused to release them, largely for political reasons."
This is old news.
Also:
"As the war on terror expanded to include countries that had absolutely nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks,people resisting US invasion and occupation, as well as innocent men, women and children, were imprisoned and abused. The most notorious of these torture prisons was Abu Ghraib near Baghdad, Iraq, where prolonged vicious beatings, sexual humiliation and death threats were common, and where men, at least one boy and, allegedly, numerous women were raped by their jailers."
Did we try all the people subjected to torture in prisons we maintained? Did we establish that it was factually true that these people were terrorists? No. And what does that mean? If we invade another country, are people who resist us terrorists, or are they people defending their own land against invaders? Would you be a "terrorist" if the Chinese or the Russians invaded America and you went out into the streets with a firearm to try to fend them off?
We just use the word "terrorist" to make anyone we kill or abuse automatically guilty of some offense against the U.S. in order justify our crimes.
"Maybe most of them actually were involved in terrorist activities. Are you sure that's not possible?"
How would we know? None of them were ever tried, no evidence was ever put forth.
Plus, we're not talking about just people who underwent extraordinary rendition. There were the hundreds at Gitmo, the countless at Abu Ghraib and many other black sites we're don't have the details about.
The larger point is: it is illegal--as well as simply abhorrent--to torture even people who are guilty of crimes alleged against them.
Inga said...
“America urges Senator McCain to die already.”
You don’t speak for all Americans.
McCain does need to hold out until the end of the month.
Then he can stop betraying the people who elected him.
Robert Cook said...
"The words assassinate and en masse do not go together well."
“Okay. We slaughter them...when they're attending funerals or weddings, or just walking around the streets of their towns.“
We haven’t slaughtered near as many people as you socialists have.
Robert Cook supports the murder of over 100000000 people by the state. Thinks the US is the problem.
The world would be better off without socialists.
“The larger point is: it is illegal--as well as simply abhorrent--to torture even people who are guilty of crimes alleged against them.“
A socialist calls other people abhorrent.
Cute.
Some people choose to spend their last days gracefully.
And then there's John McCain.
This is the neoplasm talking.
That doesn't explain him being an asshole the rest of the time.
Noted Conspiracy Theorist Robert Cook:
"...Bush’s anti-Islamist crusade..."
LOL
One of the sad things about McCain's ungraceful end is that Sarah Palin came down here and campaigned for him, which might have gotten him over the hump enough to defeat Kelli Ward by supporting the Wall and lying about his plans, like repeal Obamacare.
Then he turns on her and slimes her like everyone else who has supported him in the past.
I suppose you could assume it was the glioblastoma talking but I don't think so.
Robert Cook at 12:40 PM
... according to Col. Lawrence Wilkerson ... Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld all knew that the majority of GITMO detainees were innocent but refused to release them, largely for political reasons
That's Wilkerson's opinion. Maybe it's correct, maybe not.
Were a majority of GITMO detainees tortured?
You seem to be conflating various sets of people:
* People who were tortured
* People subjected to Extraordinary Rendition
* Hapless people who were rounded up in dragnets
* GITMO detainees.
There are some overlaps in these sets of people, but your accusations here are rather sloppy.
Robert Cook at 12:46 PM
The larger point is: it is illegal--as well as simply abhorrent--to torture even people who are guilty of crimes alleged against them.
I always opposed waterboarding and other such extraordinary interrogation methods.
However, these actions should be kept in proper perspective.
* The number of such cases should not be exaggerated
* Various cases should not be conflated
* The methods, in general, did not physically harm the subjects
* Not all of the subjects were hapless victims
* Many people really were involved in terrorist networks and activities
* In general, legal justification (perhaps wrong) controlled the measures
The controversy should be discussed factually, objectively and carefully.
"McCain is a patriot "
people keep saying this - on what evidence?
Kamala Harris and John McCain claim to believe that allowing terrorists and/or insurgents to blow up Americans is moral while taking legal, if drastic, steps to prevent them from doing so is not. Simple as that.
Both are full of shit. Simple as that.
Qualifications don’t matter. The burning question is: Does she share the purported morality of two morally narcissistic political hacks?
Interrogation must involve some level of discomfort. The level of discomfort is what's at issue. Should it be merely unpleasant or downright painful -- or somewhere in between? If "somewhere in between," where on the continuum should you place it? Waterboarding is painful but inflicts no physical harm. The choice could be made to keep the subject awake for sustained periods, days on end. This inflicts no physical harm and involves no body contact or penetration. But it is reputedly agonizing to the subject. If that is forbidden, why not try sustained tickling, also reputedly agonizing. Or, the choice could be made to give the subject pizza and cigarettes, all that he desires of each. You probably won't get any useful information from the subject but at least you'll be able to tell Democrat members of Congress that there were no moral outrages committed in the interests of national security and saving American lives.
A Chicago cop once slammed me up against a brick wall when I smarted off to him in answer to a question he asked. It hurt! I sang like a canary after that. So, you see, torture does work.
Most people agree that torture is immoral. The disagreement is on what is torture.
McCain hates Trump. That is 100 percent why he is against anything Trump does or says.
He is pitiful.
"Interrogation must involve some level of discomfort."
There are unusual situations when other measures work. Detectives often use false sympathy and so on.
It doesn't usually work with terrorists but there was an FBI agent who worked on the Cole bombing and was able to get a confession from the lead terrorist because he was a better Quran scholar than the terrorist.
That is very rare.
I get the feeling that Kamala Harris would happily hand somebody over to Torquemada if there was anything in it for her.
How does John McCain square this with his vote to confirm John Brennan as the CIA Director?
Harris' line of questioning was so puerile it reminded me of the old joke:
Have you stopped beating your wife? Answer Yes or No.
If I were Haspel I would have said so. Maybe even asked Harris if she had still tortured puppies--Yes or No?
She should have asked Cameltoe Harris how many dicks did she suck to get to wear she is today. Maybe she can give classes to Navy Seals when they are waterboard about how you can swallow a lot without choking.
Gina Haspel has served her nation honorably.
So naturally we are probably about 15 minutes away from LLR Chuck to insult her service and spout a few more democrat talking points.
Chuck is against torturing terrorists.
He is however in favor of titty twisting Fox News Anchors.
He is just not a very consistent fellow.
Blogger WIX327 said...
How does John McCain square this with his vote to confirm John Brennan as the CIA Director?
Because shut up ! He doesn't have to do anything but die and leave a trail of crap.
I guess a retired general blew off about McCain on Charles Payne's Fox Business show this morning.
Payne was apologizing on facebook. I'm just glad to see Payne back on Fox.
Even if I don't watch TV.
lp: "He is just not a very consistent fellow."
Nonsense.
If you are a dem/lefty/terrrorist LLR Chuck is quite consistent on not ruffling your feathers.
If you are a conservative however, all bets are off.
Simple.
If anything, Haspel looks over-qualified.
Is there anyone who doubts that if terrorists were threatening her constituents Kamala Harris would be pounding the table to demand that the agency use waterboarding? And I mean DEMAND.
Harris needs to answer the question, "Is it immoral to defend the US and its citizens from terrorist attacks, using all legal means?"
Bush’s anti-Islamist crusade..."
Look, Islam has been at war with Western Civilization for the last 1,400 years. They have conquered many Christian lands and imposed Islam upon them. ( Egypt was once the world's largest Christian nation) Islam still claims Spain as its own, even though the Spanish threw them back out over 500 years ago. The crusades were a defensive war, meant to reclaim once Christian lands conquered by Islam and to prevent further loses. They never came anywhere close to Saudi Arabia, or ever posed a serious threat to the existence of Islam. If Charles Martel had failed Christianity would probably no longer exist.
I expect the leader of Western Civilization to lead the opposition to Islam.
Good comment, Gahrie.
The Knights of Malta stopped the Ottomans in 1565.
They are also known as The Knights Hospitallers and there are branches in Britain, or were when the British had guts.
I've been in their caverns in Malta.
Serious Ottoman assaults occurred between 1551 and 1644. The most famous, the Great Siege, took place in 1565. An attacking Turkish force of 180 warships carrying almost 30,000 men was repelled by 600 knights and some 6000 soldiers and volunteers led by the intrepid Grand Master Jean de la Valette. Assistance eventually arrived from Europe. Only about 15,000 attackers survived to return to Turkey, while very few of the defenders went uninjured.
Her proper answer: Since you and your constituents have such delicate sensibilities, 'if a dirty bomb was in San Franscisco, I would defer to your judgment, Senator. Would it be immoral then for me tonwaterboard someone?'
I am bloody tired of LLR McCain, who like Chuck, never has a good word for Republicans...wait a moment...withering condemnation of Republicans and Trump...adulation for Dems...uneven and unclear sense of logic...older racist attitudes...Chuck...should I be calling you 'Senator'?
Torture made John McCain sing like a canary. So, you can't say it doesn't work.
McCain is such an asshole. He's 81 and probably doesn't have more than 1 year to live, so...instead of spending all his time with his family or his God, he'll spend it in bitter, meaningless political disputes.
So he can Grandstand and be the center of attention. And get nice press from the New York times. Pathetic.
I watched a little bit of Haspel's testimony...it was creepy and chilling. She is obviously aware of the illegality and amorality of what she has been involved in. She's the face of why the CIA should be abolished. Of course she'll be confirmed to be head of the agency.
"Serious Ottoman assaults occurred between 1551 and 1644."
Many of the Ottoman soldiers were in fact Christian boys from the Balkans who'd been forcibly taken - while young boys - converted to Islam and made into soldiers for the Grand Turk.
There's a book "The Great Siege" which is quite good and covers not only Malta but the other campaigns.
Peeps forget that Muslims and Christians were at war from 600 AD to 1800 AD and the Muslims were the aggressors.
"...he'll spend it in bitter, meaningless political disputes."
It's hardly meaningless. This is a public display of just how lawless we have become and how depraved we are.
Its rather laughable that a warmonger who supported bombing, making war, and killing wars that killed and maimed thousands (including women and Kids) should get all weepy over waterboarding a handful of terrorists
McCain laughed as he sang "Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Iran" - which if he'd had his way would've killed thousands.
But we can't have a the first female CIA Director because waterboarding is "immoral"
LOL!
McCain has ALWAYS been a grandstanding LIAR.
He said he'd get rid of Obamacare. He NEVER said only if...blah blah blah.
He voted for Brennan who was part of the same CIA group as the current nominee. Torture has nothing to do with it. He just wants cheers from the NYT and to hurt Trump.
He didn't turn over the Dossier to the FBI because it was his "Duty". What BS! Why didn't he turn it over to Trump?
McCain = Fucking liar. Just build the dang fence.
“Kamala Harris may check all the boxes for the Dem POTUS nomination, but she consistently comes across very poorly in Senate hearings.
She seems shrill, controlling and highly unimaginative. She is likely to do poorly in debates.”
I fail to see the disqualifying elements.
This is a yes or no question, Am I a sniveling idiot grandstanding to look morally better than you? Yes, Yes you are
" how lawless we have become and how depraved we are."
Speak for yourself, Cookie.
Your hero Stalin must be a comfort to you.
Nice to know that Harris thinks that "It's a yes or now question" is a good line of inquiry. She might not like it so much applied to herself.
Here's her answer:
1: Terrorists have no legitimate protection from the Geneva Accords. It is entirely legal to torture them for information
2: Water-boarding is not serious torture
3: It is morally good to do anything we can to terrorists that helps us prevent their comrades from harming other innocent human beings
4: Gina has nothing to be ashamed of, other than if she went too light on some terrorist, and decent Americans were harmed as a result
5: McCain is an imbecile for being unable to tell the difference between the NV torturing American soldiers (violation of the Geneva Conventions), and the US torturing unlawful combatant terrorists (good thing to do).
I hope he didn't have anyone he loved as one of the people who burned to death in the Twin Towers. But those who burned to death suffered far more than any of the terrorists did.
The US Gov't has a moral obligation to keep that from happening again. It has no moral obligation to the terrorists, or to their supporters.
Do you swallow? Yes or no?
Yes but I doubt she has much experience with water.
Remember when the left called McCain "Hitler"? good times. now these folks are his friends.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा