ACLU's Jameel Jaffer: CIA Probe Should Include Higher-Ups Video

Jameel Jaffer, a lawyer for the ACLU, says a "fair" investigation into the CIA's interrogation practices would include senior officials.

Save & Share:

jasonsadventure: where you shoot is not a part of the question, only that you do shoot and given just that and only that, there's a possibility he exsanguinates, goes into shock & sepsis, bile trauma, or any of a number of excruciating physical & unpredictable agonies. he would lay there writing in this agony for minutes or hours before dieing or receiving attention. now, while focusing solely on the experience of the rapist, this is different from torture how?

p00lman: Because if you are a victim or if you are defending a victim, you are not trying to "punish or coerce by inflicting excruciating pain." That's why self-defense is acceptable in a court of law. Are you really so dense that you have no grasp of the basic definition of torture?

p00lman: I mean, if the agonies are "unpredictable," then they're not deliberate and intentional, which is THE ENTIRE POINT OF TORTURE.

condeIIwatch: --"Which means that if you can't prove anything either way, then there's no justification for using torture."-- It also means that there is no justification for NOT using torture. However you were talking about threats.

p00lman: No. If torture is morally abhorent and there's no justification for it, then we are morally obligated not to use it. Since regular interrogation methods that uphold human rights are morally acceptable, they are the ones to use.

condeIIwatch: ---"However, no such situation has even existed in reality"--- So, we can reasonably assume that this statement is bullshit as you have provided no supporting evidence.

condeIIwatch: Only if you are able to prove that torture doesn't work. You have so far failed to do this. I wonder how talking nicely to a terrorist elicits usable information.

p00lman: Show me a situation in which torture helped save the lives of thousands.

condeIIwatch: And of course, you are currently suing your local police department for their use of torture against people who they have threatened with jail time.

condeIIwatch: Show me a situation where just talking nicely to a terrorist has helped save the lives of thousands.

p00lman: If neither is proven to be more tactically useful over the other, then the only basis on which to choose one or the other is morality.

p00lman: That doesn't make any sense, but okay.

p00lman: Still beating you at that one, pal. We've already established that neither can be proven to be more effective over the other. Thus, the basis on which to choose one's interrogation method is morality.

condeIIwatch: If there is proof of neither, then use the one that you think will work. You talk nicely to them. I'll make the threats. I do not find it morally objectionable to threaten someone who would behead you just for not sharing his ridiculous belief in superstition.

condeIIwatch: Read my last comment... "pal". I do not consider it to be even slightly morally objectionable to "threaten" a person who wouldn't think twice about slaughtering me for being and "infidel".

condeIIwatch: You appear to be adamant that threats are torture. Why are you not protesting your local police? Threats of jail time are an accepted form of police interrogation. Yet, this makes no sense to you?

condeIIwatch: *an* infidel.

jasonsadventure: again, you conveniently evaded the question namely, "focusing solely on the EXPERIENCE OF THE RAPIST, what is the difference? if you are not "so dense" why did you answer a question i did not ask? my question ignores the intent of the shooter and focuses on the effect on the rapist. if you can't, won't or get too agitated when your precepts are challenged, then abandon the discussion. but why not participate honestly, if you're going to participate at all

axiomiser: but refusing to explicitly condemn islamic terrorist actions is not merely being sympathetic to those of the islamic faith. CAIR are unindicted co-conspirators in an FBI terrorist funding case and were founded by a member of the muslim brotherhood. The FBI recently cut ties with CAIR - try again

p00lman: Holy shit, stupid. Get an education and open a dictionary. Torture is all about the intent of the person doing the torturing. If two people get in a car crash, they could both suffer tremendous injuries. BUT THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH TORTURE. We are talking about TORTURE. Not self defense. Not pain. Specifically, the intent to inflict pain in order to bring about a desired goal.

p00lman: I'm glad ot know where you stand, and that you would be willing to use their own tactics against them. Good thing you're not in the CIA.

p00lman: If you hold a power drill to someone's head, even if you don't intend to use it, you are torturing them. As soon as police start doing that, I'll protest their actions.

jasonsadventure: so ur "not-stupid," well-educated, dictionary-enlightened concept of torture does not involve a suffering victim? wrong - torture must involve suffering & given the vast penetrating gaze of your brilliance, how did you miss that shooting a rapist to protect your daughter is not "self" defense since ur defending someone who is "not yourself" hmm, ur wrong again and isn't it "holy-shit" clear that shooting a rapist is not an accident. wrong #3 wow, for someone not stupid how come ur so wrong?

condeIIwatch: I don't know about you "pal" but threatening to lock someone up for years scares me more. As soon as people start actually drilling their heads I'll protest their actions, until then they can "threaten" the murderous religious retards all they want.

jojostudrock: THANK YOU CIA FOR KEEPING ME SAFE!!!

Author: tpmtv; Uploaded: Aug 31, 2009; Duration: 1:51; Views: 1367

Tags: torture  cia  investigation  dick  cheney  vice  president  eric  holder  alcudia aclu wiki aclu facebook aclu facebook quiz aclu.org occlusion club penguin aclub aclui.dll occluded