The TRUTH to Use in Response to the "Torture Worked" Morans:

[WinkyDink]

The revelation that intelligence gleaned from the CIA's so-called black sites helped kill bin Laden was seen as vindication for many intelligence officials who have been repeatedly investigated and criticized for their involvement in a program that involved the harshest interrogation methods in U.S. history.

"We got beat up for it, but those efforts led to this great day," said Marty Martin, a retired CIA officer who for years led the hunt for bin Laden.

Mohammed did not discuss al-Kuwaiti while being subjected to the simulated drowning technique known as waterboarding, former officials said. He acknowledged knowing him many months later under standard interrogation, they said, leaving it once again up for debate as to whether the harsh technique was a valuable tool or an unnecessarily violent tactic.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=13512344

[kentuck]

1. Thanks for the link.

I'm sure it will come in handy as the day progresses.

[Scuba]

2. More likely, it worked against us. He didn't blab during torture, only after more humane methods.

[demmiblue]

3. Bookmarked for later reading. n/t

[zeemike]

4. the real truth is that the end does NOT justify the means.

At least that is how it once was in this country...we used to criticize other systems and countries for saying that it did....and we held that moral high ground during ww2.
Dictators and totalitarians believe that the end justifies the means but back then we did not....but now we do I guess, even though our laws and constitution are against it completely.

[alc]

5. whether or not it worked in this or that case is a loosing argument

There have been times throughout history that it has led to information (yes, and misinformation). So if the argument is about whether it works, then it is "worth a shot" if nothing else has worked.

The argument needs to be whether it's right or wrong.

And, just because it's wrong (even illegal) doesn't mean it's not an option.
Most people will agree that homicide is wrong, but many homicides are determined to be justified. Sometimes because there are exceptions in the law for personal defense. Sometimes because the DA or jury looks at the circumstances and determines it was a reasonable action even if it did not fit nicely into the exceptions. It doesn't make homicide right in the "right vs wrong" argument.

A good leader may not have good alternatives and feel the need to do something that is wrong. He/she will admit it, explain the decision, and accept the consequences. Sending a SEAL team to kill an individual is probably wrong and many say illegal. But Obama thought that in OBL's case it was justified and I think most Americans agree regardless of OBL's status or international law.

[Bonobo]

6. You mean a "losing" argument.

Sorry for the correction but it is a pet peeve that I must indulge.

[wellst0nev0ter]

7. And It's A Pet Peeve Of Mine

To read pedants who feel they have to nitpick over every spelling and grammar error on internet postings.

[alc]

8. thanks. corrections are always good

matter how small and on the topic or on spelling. Hopefully I won't do it again since I usually remember after getting corrected in a public forum.

[Bonobo]

10. I appreciate you not being offended.

Unlike the hot-tempered poster above.

A wise person takes any opportunity to learn and improve.

No one is infallible, especially me.

[WinkyDink]

9. I wasn't making the larger argument, thank you. No CRAP torture is wrong. I was addressing the

lies out TODAY by BUSHCO and Friends.

[grahamhgreen]

11. How do people NOT know that torture is wrong?