Europe is at War

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by nailer

After 9/11 I remember Condoleezza Rice telling us that they never expected terrorists to use airplanes in such a manner. Given the effect of the divine wind on our Pacific fleets I was appalled by this admission of incompetence.

They had at least 6 years of warning about Al Qaeda's intent to use airplanes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bojinka_plot

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

(T)he briefing document stated that bin Laden said he wanted to attack the United States directly and was expected to plan patiently. It spoke of an unconfirmed warning from 1998 that planes might be hijacked to win the release of imprisoned extremists and noted suspicious surveillance of federal buildings in New York. It noted that 70 investigations were underway in the United States. The closest it came to what actually took place was "CIA and the FBI are investigating a call to our Embassy in the UAE in May saying that a group of Bin Ladin supporters was in the US planning attacks with explosives."

Show me evidence that the Belgian evidence was any more precise than yer boy, Dubya, had.

Wow. Doubling down on politicizing the Belgian bombing. I'll give you this much: What you lack in discretion you make up for with incredibly poor taste and judgement.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by whell

I'll give you this much: What you lack in discretion you make up for with incredibly poor taste and judgement.

There you go again.

[Mr. Lin]

Originally Posted by Dondilion

Brussels the capital of the EU is supposed to be safe.

I see your point, however:

Originally Posted by Rajoo

Seriously how do you identify and stop a suicide bomber?

True, and I would add: Why would anyone think any major European city is currently safe from this sort of thing?

[whell]

Originally Posted by Boreas

There you go again.

Pffft. Post-whoring again, are you?

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

They had at least 6 years of warning about Al Qaeda's intent to use airplanes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bojinka_plot

Well, since you brought it up, from your link:

"According to journalists Marites Vitug and Glenda Gloria, authors of the book Under the Crescent Moon, agents hit Murad with a chair and club of wood when he did not talk. They forced water into his mouth, and crushed out lit cigarettes on his genitals. Murad's ribs were completely cracked. Agents were surprised that he survived. According to an investigator, he finally confessed out of fear of Jews after an agent masquerading as a member of the Mossad told him that he was being sent to Israel."

Wow, and here we've been told that those type of interrogation methods never work.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by whell

Well, since you brought it up, from your link:

"According to journalists Marites Vitug and Glenda Gloria, authors of the book Under the Crescent Moon, agents hit Murad with a chair and club of wood when he did not talk. They forced water into his mouth, and crushed out lit cigarettes on his genitals. Murad's ribs were completely cracked. Agents were surprised that he survived. According to an investigator, he finally confessed out of fear of Jews after an agent masquerading as a member of the Mossad told him that he was being sent to Israel."

Wow, and here we've been told that those type of interrogation methods never work.

So, you're for torture then? Figures.

And we've not been told that they never work.

[whell]

Originally Posted by Boreas

So, you're for torture then? Figures.

And we've not been told that they never work.

Sure we have:

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/cia...ective-n264621

https://www.newscientist.com/article...till-doing-it/

http://theweek.com/articles/441396/w...finitive-guide

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by whell

Sure we have:

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/cia...ective-n264621

https://www.newscientist.com/article...till-doing-it/

http://theweek.com/articles/441396/w...finitive-guide

I take your refusal to answer my question as an admission. Some Catholic Torquemada would be proud.

As for torture which, in your words, never works, what those articles maintain is that torture is a highly unreliable way of gaining accurate and actionable information. That's quite a different statement than maintaining that it "never" works.

And, of course, this depends on what one means by "works". One of the criticisms of torture is that it's a very effective means of getting the information you want. In other words, if you want a torture victim to tell you that Saddam Hussein was behind 9-11, all you have to do is let him know that's the "information" you're looking for.

[whell]

Originally Posted by Boreas

I take your refusal to answer my question as an admission. Some Catholic Torquemada would be proud.

As for torture which, in your words, never works, what those articles maintain is that torture is a highly unreliable way of gaining accurate and actionable information. That's quite a different statement than maintaining that it "never" works.

And, of course, this depends on what one means by "works". One of the criticisms of torture is that it's a very effective means of getting the information you want. In other words, if you want a torture victim to tell you that Saddam Hussein was behind 9-11, all you have to do is let him know that's the "information" you're looking for.

Must you be so obtuse? They're not "my words". They're the words of hyper-partisan tools like your hero Harry Ried. In his comments on the Senate Report mentioned in my prior post that your other hero DiFi commissioned:

Not only is torture wrong but it doesn’t work,” said Reid. He said torture “got us nothing except a bad name”.

Now, you might take issue with the conclusions of that report, but I don't see you doin that. Sounds more like you agree with it when you observe that it's value is getting someone to say what you want them to say rather than providing useful info. In the context of the original article I posted, where the aggressive interrogation technics appear to have yielded actionable intelligence that might have been useful to the Belgians, your comments are meaningless.

As for your suggestion that my failure to answer your question amounts to tacit approval, all I can say is: you're hilarious. I thought sophomoric debate tactics were beneath you, but there you are!