nerdgirl

The Secretary of Defense has ordered plans be drawn up for closure of Guantanamo Bay detention facility. Portugal has stated that it is willing to accept Guantanamo detainees. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

From world-changing to mundane, there are thousands of successful government programs. A few off the top of my head: Manhattan Project Eradication of smallpox, technically, a WHO program Creation of the internet – from the initial ARPA program that created it to the NSF program that expanded it Over the horizon radar The original GI bill Prevention of thalidomide exposure in the 1960s by the FDA Doppler radar … heck, the whole National Weather Service Uniform highway traffic signage. Whether you’re in Maine, Hawaii, or Wyoming, traffic signage is uniform. It wasn’t always that way. And it isn’t that way in all countries. Most mimic’d us. A National Traffic Board program achieved that. You do recognize that the US military is a government program, yes? Do you include that in your characterization as described above? VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Concur most heartily. Given the increases that the NIH saw during the Clinton Adminstration and during former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich's tenure and the increase in the NIAID budget post-2001, I would look to the NSF. Rep. Gingrich has commented publicly that he thinks the budget of the NSF should have been tripled or quadrupled then. Actually he has cited that as his greatest regret from his time as Speaker. That would be my recommendation as well. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Thanks for the book recommendation and all the historical context. I appreciated it. Curious: what do you think about the Treaty of Tripoli from President Washington's term (1796), that states: "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion ..." Now a treaty is not the same as the Constitution clearly. Curious historical footnote? Or reflection of the intentions of the Founding Fathers? VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

What do you do with those/perceptions? Use them as a means to build empathy or something else? How would you or others respond to statements like: I really feel there is a strong hate towards Islam these days and it may be because I am a Moslem. I really feel there is a strong hate towards blacks these days and it may be because I am a black. I really feel there is a strong hate towards immigrants these days and it may be because I am a immigrant. I really feel there is a strong hate towards Hispanics these days and it may be because I am a Hispanic. I really feel there is a strong hate towards fat people these days and it may be because I am a fat. I really feel there is a strong hate towards gays and lesbians these days and it may be because I am homosexual. I really feel there is a strong hate towards women these days and it may be because I am a woman. I really feel there is a strong hate towards autoworkers these days and it may be because I am an autoworker. I really feel there is a strong hate towards Arabs these days and it may be because I am an Arab. Concur heartily! VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

My opinion is that it’s evolving … & my conclusions/thoughts/recommendations are still evolving. Yes, it should be a point of concern. (Not hype, not over-reaction.) There is a shift in source of power. It used to be exclusively mass (of people) and stuff (horses, tanks, etc). In the 20th Century it was precision, speed (both literal and communications), stealth and tactical ISR … largely via material stuff. It’s not clear what will be deciding factor for ensuring advantage in the 21st century. We are shifting to a knowledge-based economy. The US is not going to return to being a predominantly agrarian nation but that does not mean the US should outsource all food production overseas. Similarly the US is not going to return to an economy or labor base that is predominantly manufacturing. That does not likewise eliminate the need for manufacturing capability within the US. I intentionally included the TAP case as a non-hypothetical, illustrative example of a specific security-related need for manufacturing secure microelectronics. Another example: a few years ago, the sole US manufacturer of the carbonaceous material used as absorbent in the canister for the M40-series Chemical-Biological Masks (“gas masks”) decided to stop manufacturing that material. They weren’t upgrading or even planning to offer another material (which would not automatically be compatible or meet requirements). The sole source is a German manufacturer. Now, Germany is not China. And the absorbent material is used by multiple NATO nations; the same canisters are NATO standard. Nonetheless, should the US depend on Germany for manufacture of a critical component of personal protection gear for soldiers and Marines? (The DoD didn’t think so.) As was noted, businesses exist for profit. Profit. Not national security – I don’t care what the voice-over on Lockheed Martin’s commercials during the Sunday morning news shows intones (or is it Boeing?). Profit was the motive for the sole US manufacturer of the carbon filter bed material to stop making it; it wasn’t profitable. The US and other leading states are shifting/have shifted to knowledge-based sectors for generation of competitive advantage. The vast majority of those are not manufacturing jobs. All service sector jobs are not equal. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Thirteen days on and the riots are still continuing. VOA Greek Protesters, Police Clash for 13th Day Times of India More protests likely in Greece today CNN Greek protests after shooting of second teen UK’s The Times New wave of riots expected as 100,000 face sack in Greece UK’s International Herald Tribune Violent protests flare again in central Athens A couple interesting analyses, altho’ much too short but provocative: The Athens Riots: Fallout from the Financial Crisis? “Indeed, in the weeks before the violence began, many Greeks had expressed outrage at the government's $35 billion in aid to the nation's lenders at a time when one out of five citizens lives below the poverty line. And so, nearly a week after they began, the Greek riots offer the first tangible sign since the West's financial meltdown of the potential social unrest percolating just below the surface.” Why Greece Is Wracked By Riots “The most aggressive rioters are believed to be anarchists, who trace their roots back to the resistance movement which took on Greece's military Junta between 1967 and 1974. Though democracy was restored to Greece in 1974, that earlier generation has continued to hold a fascination amongst the far-left fringe. Exarchia [the community/area where the first 15-yo was shot almost 2 weeks ago-nerdgirl] is close to the Polytechnic School of Athens, whose gates were crushed by the military to break up a student uprising in Nov. 1973. “The riots come as Greece's center-right government is struggling to cope with a plague of scandals and an economic slowdown that threaten its slim one-seat majority in Parliament. ‘For the past five years, Greek citizens have realized that they live in an insecure environment, both socially and financially,’ said center-left opposition leader George Papandreou. ‘We must address responsibly the deeper causes of these phenomena.’ “Greece has experienced steady economic growth over the past seven years, but is now bracing for the fallout from the worldwide financial crisis. Many are angry that the government is giving $35 billion in aid to Greek banks at a time when one out of five citizens lives below the poverty line.” VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Is the American industrial base shriveling or just evolving? “When Ronald Reagan took office in 1981, manufacturing made up nearly 25 percent of the economy, compared to 12 percent today. Today, one third of our manufactured goods come from overseas, versus a tenth in the 1970s. In the past eight years of the Bush administration, the U.S. share of global economic output dropped from 31 percent to 27 percent, while our merchandise trade deficit doubled to $800 billion. Those trends are driven by the erosion of domestic manufacturing and the auto industry is biggest component of that sector. “[Loren] Thompson [of the right-leaning Lexington Institute], who is no liberal, chides devotees to the Republican economic model that goes something like this: ‘deregulate everything and then stand back so the market can work its magic.’ That model has presided over decline of the U.S. shipbuilding, electronics and steel industries and it’s about to work its magic on the auto industry. ‘We are destroying the foundation of our economy, not to mention the arsenal of democracy. If America loses what’s left of its auto industry, or its aerospace industry, or its chemical industry, our superpower status will ebb away,’ Thompson writes.” More detailed policy wonk briefs here. One specific example: historically, the National Security Agency (NSA) had manufactured secure microelectronics needed for sensitive applications across the US Government. As the pace of semiconductor innovation and commercial development—including foreign-based advancements—accelerated, a new and more efficient mechanism was needed. The NSA’s approach/solution was creation of the Trusted Access Program (TAP) and certification of trusted foundries for acquisition of integrated circuits for the DoD and the Intelligence Community. Through the TAP, a mechanism to guarantee access to trusted microelectronics technologies for critical defense and security system needs now and into the future has been created. The TAP program was initiated in response to concerns about the security of offshore manufacturing facilities. Without government intervention, there would be no trusted foundries. The increasingly globalized nature of innovation, development, and the market that characterizes technologically-driven business complicates manufacturing further. So what’s wrong with Thompson’s analysis? Do you think we should be concerned about the decline in manufacturing infrastructure and capability? What’s the solution? (Or do you think there isn’t a problem to begin with?) VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

When I first saw a pic of Duncan, reminded me of another Chicagoan, Mark Hersam, who I know but neither have played basketball with nor had my hands around any of his body parts. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

There’s seems to be inter-changing in your verbiage among policy, absolutes (scientific or otherwise), and philosophical arguments … seems to be more acknowledged in the 2nd post today. Philosophical arguments can inform policy ... someone else can argue to what extent they 'should' .... Policy is not based on absolutes. Policy is not science either … creating policy is more like proverbial sausage-making. For example, no nuclear weapons state has ever gone to war with another nuclear weapons state. Under the right conditions, possession of nuclear weapons has been very stabilizing. It’s sort of the international version of the ‘everyone is a lot more polite when everyone is armed’ notion. Should the US pursue a *policy* of intentional nuclear proliferation because thus far possession of nuclear weapons has been stabilizing? Based on the line of reasoning in the argument you site above (& by some others, e.g., [frequentfaller]), the US should encourage Iran and all other states to pursue acquisition of nuclear weapons. After all it might be stabilizing. No one has ever proven it's not stabilizing. Every single case is not known, etc. I can provide a lot more evidence showing that nuclear weapons states don’t go to war with each other than can be shown to support torture. Why doesn’t the US actively or passively support Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapons? By the logic presented in those who make the argument for torture, given the “right conditions” that should ensure that Iran never goes to war with anyone, right? But most folks are opposed to Iran having nuclear weapons. Why? There’s no evidence to suggest it would be ineffective in keeping Iran from attacking Israel, as two nuclear weapons states have never gone to war with each other. Because policy is not made in a vacuum and because international affairs rarely function in a vacuum, no one with a clue (imo) is advocating a policy of the US arming Iran with nuclear weapons or even tacitly supporting their acquisition of offensive nuclear weapons capability. That’s the equivalent to the argument pursued suggested above w/r/t polcy on use of torture. Given Iranian rhetoric, ties to/support of terrorists groups, animosity to the US and to Israel, and US strategic interests, one has to use extraordinarily selective logic (one might go as far as calling it warped or non-logic) to advocate a policy of arming Iran with nuclear weapons. Similarly there are a host of security policy-based reasons to oppose torture [just in case anyone’s forgotten : (1) it’s ineffective; (2) it increases risk to US soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines, deployed US civilians and Americans abroad; (3) it’s counter to US strategic interests; (4) it’s not necessary for avert the ‘ticking-time bomb’ or ‘save-the-world’ scenario, it is likely to be counter-productive in those situations*; and (5) it may be al Qa’eda’s “greatest recruiting tool,”], some still suggest that it should be part of US policy. VR/Marg [*unless you are Jack Bauer on "24"] Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

If your definition of torture is then we are in agreement. Torture is not merely as you describe, "a tool in the tool box", the "tool" as you call it has been repeatedly shown (see the links throughout this thread): to be ineffective; to increase risk to US soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines, deployed US civilians and Americans abroad - more terrorists equals more risk; to be counter to US strategic interests; to not be necessary for the 'ticking-time bomb' scenario; and is al Qa'eda's "greatest recruiting tool," *why* do you want to pursue it? What are the "right" conditions? The methodology you are arguing for is counter to the goals you assert. What you are arguing for is making it more difficult for achieving US strategic goals. Why would you want to pursue that? VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Two different questions in there: transparency of federal monetary policy (the not telling anyone part) and inflationary pressures. The usual resistance to printing more money, as others have noted, is that general concensus of economic theory is that it leads to inflation. That theory has also been demonstrated experimentally. There are some who challenge it, not so much to argue that printing money doesn't cause inflation but that the simple casuality is over-simplification. Otoh, transparency, i.e., not doing things covertly, is important to maintain credibility in monetary policy. Such an action would be discovered and trust would be lost. That would be a very, very, very bad policy choice ... which unfortunately does not mean someone might not propose it ... Currently most analysts and the Federal Reserve Board (the "Fed") are more concerned with avoiding deflation. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

No. Be careful with this argument, it's leads quickly to some conclusions/implcations that I highly doubt you support. Legal detention under criminal jurisdiction is not torture. The people who detain legally before trial and who issue tickets that are 'fiscally detrimental' (police officers) and who detain legally after trial (local, State, and federal officers of the court and prison wardens/officers) are not torturers. just because you give it a politically correct name to sooth your soul doesn't mean it isn't a form of torture. Huh? What's the politically correct name I used? Really? "Police officer" is politically correct these days? You really think that the US criminal, civil, and military justice system is akin to torture? (Now I'm beginning to wonder if you're trolling?) /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Thanks for the honest answer -- as I'm reading it, you're talking about using your own intuition as guide. As far as the "comfy chair" scenario ... bringing in prayers rugs and figs has worked in at least one real-world "ticking time-bomb" scenario: "[Jack]Cloonan [32-year FBI veteran, whose experience included counterintelligence, counterterrorism, the Joint Terrorism Task Force] and a New York Police Department detective secured actionable intelligence from a suspect in the foiled millennium-bombing plot in just six hours on December 30, 1999 -- by following FBI procedure, and by encouraging a suspect to pray during his Ramadan fast. The suspect even agreed to place calls to his confederates, which led to their speedy arrests. ... and worked in one real world interrogation of an al Qa'eda member: L'Houssaine Kherchtou, aka "Joe the Moroccan," who was a member of the alQa'eda cell that bombed the US Embassy in Nairobi. He eventually became the US government's "star witness" in the criminal case: "Upon his return to Morocco, Kherchtou was, at the U.S. government's request, taken into custody and immediately brought to a Rabat safe house, where an array of FBI agents including Cloonan, and assistant U.S. attorneys led by Patrick Fitzgerald, were waiting. "The coming days, Cloonan said, were probably the most comfortable either he or Kherchtou has ever spent, utterly antithetical to tales from Abu Ghraib, Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan, and elsewhere involving shackles, beatings, weatherboardings, genital electric shocks, and menstrual smearing that have become ubiquitous in the past year. "'The setting was beautiful,' Cloonan recalled. 'It was this grand house with stables out back, gazelles bouncing in the background, palm trees, three-course meals -- I was probably more in danger of getting gout from all the rich food than anything else while I was there.' “'We advised [Kherchtou] of his rights. We told him he could have a lawyer anytime, and that he could pray at any time he wanted. We were letting the Moroccans sit in on this, and they were dumbfounded.'” "The agents and prosecutors did not anticipate ease in the task before them. Simply getting information out of a person can be a formidable challenge; persuading him or her to not only give up information but to go through a lengthy process in which he or she will repeat it again and again -- including in an open American court, with no assurance of plea bargain -- is even more daunting. But 10 days later, Kherchtou had not only revealed much but was New York bound, destined to become the prosecution's star witness in securing the convictions of four al-Qaeda terrorists. “'We spent a lot of time talking about his family, and how disillusioned he was based on the brothers' treatment of them, and from there he really began to open up,' Cloonan recalled. 'The critical moment was when Pat Fitzgerald told Joe, 'Here's the deal: You will come to the U.S. voluntarily; you will plead guilty to conspiracy to kill U.S. nationals abroad; your exposure is anywhere from zero to life, no promises." I instinctively reached for my briefcase, figuring it was over, but then I added something. I looked at him and I said, "Before you answer, I think you should go pray. After 10 days with us, I think you have a sense of who we are and what we're about -- you know you would not be treated this way by other folks. You may go to prison, but you have the chance to start your life over again, to get rid of this anxiety, to stop running. And I think you should do this for your wife and children."' “'So he went off to pray. Meanwhile, the colonel from the Moroccan internal service just looked at us like we were from Mars. But Joe came back and said, "OK."' "Kherchtou was brought to New York; anything in further interviews or proffer sessions deemed of immediate importance was shared with the CIA; four terrorists were convicted; a detailed public record providing detailed insight into al-Qaeda -- including the group's interest in using suicide-piloted planes as bombers -- was produced." Now, the impressive results of Jack Cloonan on stopping the millenium bombing and interrogating Kherchtou "Joe the Morrocan" may not be typical. I don't mean to represent them as such. They are, however, two verifiable, real-world (not hypothetical) cases showing how the 'comfy chair' method worked very successfully. (NB: Just to be explicit, I'm not advocating "comfy chair" methods as exclusive methods, just using these real-world cases to illustrate the problems with the argument). In the intelligence community, there is a concept called "mirror imaging," i.e., we assume that the enemy or who-ever one is spying on responds/thinks/behaves/reacts like us. It's problematic (to put it diplomatically). VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

No. Be careful with this argument, it's leads quickly to some conclusions/implcations that I highly doubt you support. Legal detention under criminal jurisdiction is not torture. The people who detain legally before trial and who issue tickets that are 'fiscally detrimental' (police officers) and who detain legally after trial (local, State, and federal officers of the court and prison wardens/officers) are not torturers. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Can you provide any evidence to support that? That's what has been repeatedly asked. The two links you provided this morning don't. What are the right conditions? How do you determine that? And that's the problem. By extentsion of the argument you and others employ, advocacy of Mike's [mnealtx] facetious/straw man ""bring in the comfy cushions" interrogation method is just as likely an effective mechanism as torture. Why does that not have as strong of an advocacy sector as those who want to employ torture? Why is that seen is silly or naive but torture is not? But what if it doesn't? What if all the evidence unequivocally indicates that it doesn't do that? That instead it's putting them at more risk, costing more, and harming US national interests ... why do you want to hang onto that? Why? I'm resistant to [quade]'s explanation. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

The problem with that scenario is that evidence gained by torture is inadmissible in court. Per the U.S. Constitution, as interpreted by Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito when asked during his Senate confirmation hearing on admissibility of evidence obtained through torture in a criminal prosecution: “… the Fifth Amendment prohibits compelled self- incrimination. And it's long been established that evidence that is obtained through torture is inadmissible in our courts. That's the governing principle.” When further questioned as to whether his answer meant it would not be constitutional to admit evidence gained through torture against a criminal defendant, Alito responded: “In all the contexts that I'm familiar with, that would be the answer.” UK courts have also ruled evidence obtained from inadmissible. More scholarly reference. Evidence obtained via torture is also not admissible via international law. The only potential exception (outside of places like China, Saudi Arabia, Iran, DPRK, etc … not law systems I advocate emulating) is the Military Commissions Act of 2006. It’s got a potential loophole that has yet to be tested. The Act explicitly excludes the use of statements obtained under torture but contains a ‘loophole’ allowing evidence obtained through “coercive interrogation” [which may or may not qualify as torture; it’s intentionally ambiguous, im-ever-h-but not legal scholar-o] as long as the statement is judged to be “reliable and possessing sufficient probative value.” The Commission rules place further limits on statements made under “coercive interrogation” after the passage of the Detainee Treatment Act in December 2005 -- evidence obtained *after* that date/after that law went into effect, regardless of where obtained, through the “use of cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment” [i.e., torture, altho’ not necessarily coercive interrogation] is also not admissable. So the argument that evidence obtained through torture after all the false confessions & 'gobbly-gook' is sifted might be an justification is highly problematic (to put it diplomatically). VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Did you read the articles to which you linked? The first unilaterraly asserts that torture is ineffective for interrogation: “Exactly. As an interrogation tool, torture is a bust. But when it comes to social control, nothing works quite like torture.” From the second, quoting Sen McCain's books: “McCain said: ‘I regret very much having done so. The information was of no real use to the Vietnamese, but the Code of Conduct for American Prisoners of War orders us to refrain from providing any information beyond our names, rank and serial number.’” How long into his detainment was that? How much other/useless information was ‘confessed’ to beforehand? In the article that you cited, Sen McCain explicitly is quoted (from one of his books) as saying what torture obtained was of “no real use.” That’s the best you can do? One article that says torture is an instrument of state terror. Are you agreeing with the author that the US is a terrorist state? That’s what the article you linked says. “Yet despite this body of knowledge, torture continues to be debated in the United States as if it were merely a morally questionable way to extract information, not an instrument of state terror. But there's a problem: No one claims that torture is an effective interrogation tool--least of all the people who practice it. Torture ‘doesn't work. There are better ways to deal with captives,’ CIA director Porter Goss told the Senate Intelligence Committee on February 16. And a recently declassified memo written by an FBI official in Guantánamo states that extreme coercion produced ‘nothing more than what FBI got using simple investigative techniques.’ The Army's own interrogation field manual states that force ‘can induce the source to say whatever he thinks the interrogator wants to hear.’” The other is quoting from the same man who's referenced in the subject line as calling torture al Qa'eda's "greatest recruiting tool" and speaking likely to folks like you "... you can't underestimate the damage that our treatment of prisoners, both at Abu Ghraib and other [facilities, has] ... harmed our national security interests.” More from Sen McCain “I would hope that we would understand, my friends, that life is not 24 and Jack Bauer. “Life is interrogation techniques which are humane and yet effective. And I just came back from visiting a prison in Iraq. The army general there said that techniques under the Army Field Manual are working and working effectively [i.e., no torture - nerdgirl], and he didn’t think they need to do anything else. “My friends, this is what America is all about. This is a defining issue and, clearly, we should be able, if we want to be commander in chief of the U.S. Armed Forces, to take a definite and positive position on, and that is, we will never allow torture to take place in the United States of America.” VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Actually the most explicit voices asserting the ineffectiveness and that torture is detrimental to US strategic interests are (1) professional military interrogators, (2) retired intelligence operatives (not analysts & not public affairs officers), & (3) former torture victims, including US POWs. In addition to all the other citations I’ve included: LTG Harry E. Soyster, USA (ret) and former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), i.e., the Defense Department's lead intelligence agency, & Commanding General of Army Intelligence and Security Command (INSCOM): “If they think these methods ["enhanced interrogation," i.e., torture] work, they're woefully misinformed. Torture is counterproductive on all fronts. It produces bad intelligence. It ruins the subject, makes them useless for further interrogation. And it damages our credibility around the world.” Human rights organizations tend to make normative arguments (morals, ethics). The military and intelligence community ops tend to be more interested in operational, tactical, and strategic advantage. On what do you base that assertion? Or a more likely scenario: as reams – literally, not figuratively – of false information is generated, finite US resources are devoted to chasing down false leads. Wasting time and wasting resources. This is not notional; this has been observed in the GWOT. How much time, energy, & expense is to be wasted following up on false confessions? It is just – if not more – reasonable & supported by evidence and experts that more information useful to save US lives would likely have been obtained if a detainee was NOT subjected to ‘enhanced interrogation.’ That’s your cost. Real costs. That’s not the only real example either: the 3rd terrorist suspect on whom the CIA Director has acknowledged “enhanced interrogation” techniques were used including waterboarding, Abd al Rahim al Nashiri. How accurate and useful was the information obtained from al Nashiri? Again from reading the Defenselink transcript, (i.e., the DoD, not an explicit "human rights organization"), al Nashiri asserts he made up a long list of al Qa’eda plots and attacks so his captors would stop torturing him, even telling interrogators that Osama bin Laden had a nuclear bomb. Al Nashiri, in all likelihood, had very useful information. What was lost & how many opportunities were wasted because ‘enhanced interrogation’ methods were used? When the signal to noise ratio becomes so low, it ceases to be effective for anything other than distracting US investigatory efforts. Such as whom? Is Prof Posner's (Univ of Chicago Law) comment as reported in a New Republic article the basis on which you make your argument? (Or are you playing devil’s advocate?) There are folks who challenge Prof Posner’s assertions. Traditional interrogation methods have been shown to work under extreme circumstances, e.g., the real-world “ticking time bomb scenario”: “[Jack] Cloonan [32-year FBI veteran, whose experience included counterintelligence, counterterrorism, the Joint Terrorism Task Force] and a New York Police Department detective secured actionable intelligence from a suspect in the foiled millennium-bombing plot in just six hours on December 30, 1999 -- by following FBI procedure, and by encouraging a suspect to pray during his Ramadan fast. The suspect even agreed to place calls to his confederates, which led to their speedy arrests.” In such a scenario, I would want the most effective interrogation method used, i.e., *not* torture. One might argue that pursuing torture should be criminal &/or reprehensible as it has less likely to achieve the goals we want – saving lives and preventing a catastrophe. Is that really ... really ... the argument on which you want to base advocacy of torture? Really? VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

On what basis do you think that there a proper or effective way of using torture? Why do you think that? What led you to that conclusion? On what do you base that assertion? Or is it just something you want to believe? I don’t know how to say it other than that. VR/Marg [Edit to add: Why am I seeing 4 copies of this post? Edit^2: Fixed ... I hope ...] Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

On this we agree, but I would not limit my options on how to reach these goals. If the "option" as you call it has been repeatedly shown to be ineffective (see the links in my OP); + more: LTC James Corum, USA (ret), formerly Army Command: “The torture of suspects [at Abu Ghraib] did not lead to any useful intelligence information being extracted" to increase risk to US soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines, deployed US civilians and Americans abroad - more terrorists equals more risk; to be counter to US strategic interests; and is al Qa'eda's "greatest recruiting tool," *why* do you want to pursue it? The methodology you are arguing for is counter to the goals you assert. What you are arguing for is making it more difficult for achieving US strategic goals. Why would you want to pursue that? Absolute condemnation of torture is one of those “reasons people love America” – we don’t lower the bar, in the past and in the future, America should establish and maintain the bar. Because someone else does something does not make it “right” or effective. The US should not try to emulate China, Somalia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, Sudan, or any other nation that employs torture. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

If you're really special ... or coming back into the US from tromping up (& down) Mt Blanc and around the Chamonix Valley in June 2001 ... you could have gotten those "stinky Tivas" cleaned. (Altho' I wouldn't recommend trying to attach crampons to Tivas ) At the time, the US was concerned about importation of foot-n-mouth. Got my dirty hiking boots cleaned and they did a very good job of it too as part of Ag inspection on return to US. Maybe that should become part of the standard TSA process, eh? (j/k) VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Yes. And? One could cite a number of other documents that are only pieces of paper, parchment, or vellum. Some matter (e.g., Magna Carta, The Constitution ... religious texts) and have consequences (e.g., the IRS tax code, State traffic codes), others less so (e.g., those unsolicited advertisement inserts shoved in my mailbox, unsolicited Comcast advertisements, etc). VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying