SwiftVets.com

[joe_madeup]

Some liberal associates are making increasing noises about the CIA turning suspected terrorists over to 3rd countries who torture them. (Implication is that the U.S. wants them tortured... "outsourcing of torture" they call it.)

Where (online) can I get up to speed quickly on this issue?

[Anker-Klanker]

Sorry, Joe, I can't help. But I will volunteer the opinion that is virtually impossible to prove a "Not," which in this case, means it is probably not true. It is true, I believe, that the US in the past (including under Clinton) has interrogated terror suspects in foreign countries, but I defy anyone to prove that the US sanctioned torture. But of course to the Liberals their definition of torture includes playing the wrong kind of music at the wrong volume level.

But the Left and the MSM continually feed off this kind of thing.

PS: there's a pretty good and relevant article on powerlineblog today about this very subject.

[joe_madeup]

It's hard to fathom much from the Powerline article. But I gather that some of these "other countries" have given us assurances that they don't practice torture. And, for all I or anybody else knows, we could be talking about re-patriation of nationals here? (which is proper)

The Powerline article's focus is the U.N.'s recent demands about Gitmo. That's not my question here - but seems like an interesting topic in its own right. Powerline says the U.S. actually has been trying to release Gitmo prisoners, and the questions about where to release them TO are surprisingly thorny!

[Me#1You#10]

[joe_madeup]

I said ASSOCIATES not friends

Thank you for the excellent points.

[Anker-Klanker]

Kate/Joe: I've seen way too much of this in the recent past. To the request of them showing:

[dcornutt]

They are "still" looking for those secret prisons that the CIA is using to torture people in.

In fact, the UN org has condemed the US for having them..when they have yet to prove that they even exist.

The evidence provided at the US's "trial"? News papers articles, "media reports" and "unnammed sources".

Take a look at the how this works in one fine example:
While we are in the middle of serious and tense negociations over Iran ..media reports that the US is planning to drop tactical nukes on Iran. Says the story was confirmed through several former this and that and unnammed sources. WH denies it and suggests that they are continuing to work hard through diplomatic channels.

Media continues to drive the story...blogs are ablaze. The media then contacts foreign govs..to ask them what they think about the US planning to use Nukes. UK "Straw" says....that's "absurd". It's insane. It's the first I've heard of it..etc. Each country expresses their "outrage" ..etc..and the story goes on and on...with the WH issuing daily statements of denial trying to get their diplomacy back on track.

The media then reports...these denials as if it were a coverup..or somehow refusing to answer the questions.

Same thing happens every week just the same way. Just take a look at the whole NSA/phone records...etc..story. It's still going. I heard Bellsouth is going after USA Today to print a retraction.

[BuffaloJack]

This whole CIA secret prisons thing smacks of conspiracy theory BS.
One nutbar makes up a story; another repeats it; some MSM reporter wanna-be puts it on page 12; another repeats it with some creativity and pretty soon the UN wants to investigate and every Liberal out there is shouting "See I told you the CIA was doing this".

I'm not gonna believe it until I see concrete REAL evidence.
These Liberal Losers are just pissed that the government is cracking down on leaks and keeping intelligence a secret. The "What do you have to hide" crowd can't understand the need for secrecy in time of war and will make up anything that they can't understand.
_________________
Swift Boats - Qui Nhon (12/69-4/70), Cat Lo (4/70-5/70), Vung Tau (5/70-12/71)

[MrJapan]