Torture report

[johnboy]

Just caught Feinstein (sp?) on CNN giving the CIA a public, pants down spanking on national tv and could only think, WTF! How on earth will this help America in their war against terror?

This is crazy shit!

[Thumper]

Between she and our fucking, POS excuse for a President, more harm has been done to this country than anyone can imagine. And there seems to be no end to the stupidity.

[BarryBobPosthole]

Well, I'm sure there's a political aspect of it and that's sad if that is the primary deal here. I, for one, think the truth should always be told and that this shit needed to have come out years ago. You don't hide this shit from your own citizens and not from the world at large either. Don't think that the people we're so afraid of pissing off don't know in detail what we've done along with the embellishments provided by those who went through it. why do you think there's people who are so adamant about shutting Guantanamo? Its because those are the people we did most of that shit to that's why and we don't want to see them out in the world talking about it.
'I told you so's thoutgh don't mean much and this is just another congressional investigation that has gone on too long to have any meaningful impact and is politically motivated. That's just my opinion. Maybe though getting it into the open will make it harder next time to do this immoral shit to people in the name of protecting our 'goodness', which is horse shit if you ask me. Keep in mind, the report also says they found that the torture produced no meaningful intelligence that saved American lives anywhere. So that is a pretty weak excuse to begin with. You just have to plain old harbor deep disrespect to view another human being's worth simple as a source of intelligence. That's not how we should do things. Again in my opinion.



BKB

[Chicken Dinner]

I read an Op-ed piece over the weekend from a retired CIA guy who said he personally briefed her on everything they did. He also recounted a bit of the history of the public and private comments of folks like Feinstein who started out saying we had to prevent another attack on American soil no matter what the cost and have now changed their story. Believe who you want, but they all make me sick.

[Thumper]

So, do you think there should be NO secrets kept? Should EVERYTHING be out in the open? Where do you draw the line? How about weapons? Should we only build weapons that "don't hurt people"? Should the words "Top Secret, Secret and Confidential" be stricken from our vocabulary? I'll guarandamntee you our enemies cross the line tenfold compared to what we do ... it's an eye for an eye world out there or you lose. Where did you go to school? Berkeley? ;)


the report also says they found that the torture produced no meaningful intelligence that saved American lives anywhere

Doubt that, but how about the "fear" of torture? Grab the pliers and threaten to pull my teeth out one by one and I'm liable to tell you anything you want to know. :D

[johnboy]

I would never defend 'torture' (however you define that) but as an observer of all things American, I believe that a PUBLIC flogging of the very people that are supposed to protect you from the ravening terrorist hordes out there is just plain stupid. Who says that you have to air all your dirty laundry in public? From my non-American perspective, the reading of this report on national tv is a purely political exercise designed to further divide your country. If I was an American, I'd be pissed off.

[Thumper]

I'm an American ... and I'm pissed off!

[BarryBobPosthole]

You guys have never met a double standard you didn't like is what it looks like to me. And the only people doing any flogging are the ones who are critical of everything anyone on that side of the house does. Feinstein wasn't the only one getting briefed.

And its so obvious what this is that it isn't funny. This is a pre-emptive shot at the soon-to-be-released investigation report by Trey Gowdy commission on Benghazi, who coincidently is investigating whether the CIA misled the throbbing heart of the American public and them too.

and no Thumper obviously there are intelligence secrets we need to keep secret and to compare this to a state secret is even worse. So you think we ought to do this shit secretly is what you're saying. We should have secret offshore cneters where prisoners can be tortured way out of the bounds of the international laws we've agreed to. and you compare THAT to weapoins secrets? Give me a large fucking break.

BKB

[Thumper]

Sounds good to me. Fuck 'em! ;)

[Captain]

This is one of the dumbest thing this POS POTUS we have has ever done. NOTHING not one single thing good can possibly come from releasing this information. It's the idiots leading the stupid...
And anyone that thinks releasing this information is good, but we don't need to look into the lies of Hillary and Obummer about Benghazi is a two faced Bitch

[Thumper]

I think Cappy's fingers get tangled up when he gets pissed off. ;)

[Buckrub]

Anybody that kills even one Marine needs a 12v strapped to his balls.

And that's MY opinion.

[Thumper]

I've been steaming on this since yesterday and haven't even watched the news, so I'm not positive what all happened yesterday/last night. But one thing Posty said that REALLY irks me (and I assume this came from "news sources") is that ....


the report also says they found that the torture produced no meaningful intelligence that saved American lives anywhere

I don't know where that came from, but I know for a FACT ... from the horse's mouth so to speak ... that is TOTAL, 100% bullshit!

You all know my military background, I actually regret I didn't stick with it ... but that's spilled milk. I DID stay in touch with old contacts though as I tend to make and keep life-long friendships. While maintaining those friendships, I made new (fresher/younger) friends in the related industry. I'm sure you recall all my Thailand trips and meeting with some of these "old friends". Some were military people (both US and foreign), some were Embassy people, some were CIA and some Special Forces/SEAL's. It's the kind of people I like to hang with and I have some VERY close friendships within those ranks. Many are now "retired" and some are dead ... but through those friendships and connections, I've made friends with the newer/younger replacements ... both foreign and domestic.

I'm not going into detail ... for one I can't ... for another, I simply won't ... but I get a bit "ruffled" with the attacks on our Intel agencies. It's a dog eat dog world and I'm sorry, no matter how you look at it, when you play against a team who has to follow NO rules whatsoever and you have to follow the rule book to the "tee" ... you ain't gonna win the game. The problem with "this" game is the losers don't go home ... they die.

You may remember how often I started going overseas after 9/11 ... it was because I was VERY interested in what was going on in the world. I even tried to get back into the military (believe it or not) ... but I was "too old". So, I lived vicariously through my old contacts/friends. Most of these trips were with my VERY close SEAL buddy. I spent a LOT of time in Northern Thailand and that was where the first "Black Site" was established. I've been there. The CIA had clandestine "prisons" set up in various countries and used what's called "Extraordinary Rendition" to capture prisoners. They'd normally turn them over to foreign "prisons" for detainment and interrogation (under CIA supervision). This caused a few problems as some of these places (and personnel) tended to get a bit "rough" with what the CIA calls "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques" ... it borders on torture ... or maybe IS torture depending on one's definition. BUT ... we don't behead people! A beheading sometimes isn't what most people envision. It's not instant and trust me, I've seen quite a few of them (you can find the videos if you look hard enough). Many are done by amateurs with dull knives ... it ain't pretty and it ain't instant death. Damn, I got off on a tangent. To end the "mistakes" by foreign personnel, the CIA set up it's own "Black Sites" (as mentioned above). I will state as an absolute fact, these sites provided information that saved COUNTLESS American lives. I have no clue what's being said on the news channels these past couple days, but if they say anything different, somebody is lying through their teeth.

I could go on and on about these Black Sites ... they're much like the sites I was involved with in Laos ... different goals, same principles. Laos was a Secret War run by the CIA. They had their own bogus airline (Air America) just as they had to do for these "Black Sites". The CIA set up a bogus airline to transport these suspects/prisoners so that they could not be traced. (forgot the airline, Amnesty something or other if I remember correctly). George Bush pretty much admitted to a lot of this stuff a few years back, but to spill the beans the way this POS President is doing, ... well .... don't get me started. These things just have to be done if we want to keep this country as the country we know and love. Sorry, it's just a fact of life. Nice guys usually finish last.

I could go on forever on this subject, but it's already a Thump post and I have an appointment at 8:30, so I'm out'ta here. Thanks for letting me vent a little ... I needed it.

[Chicken Dinner]

Maybe it's time to watch this again:

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=World+Trade+Center+Falling&Form=VQFRVP#view=detail&mid=AC6E68647D9F413BB079AC6E68647D9F413BB079

Or, this:

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=video+of+isis+beheads+american+journalist&FORM=VIRE7#view=detail&mid=667CA7A274FA09FEB2BB667CA7A274FA09FEB2BB

[BarryBobPosthole]

A: This POS president didn't spill any beans, this was an ongoing congressional investigation that was carried out by a bipartisan committee since 2009.
B: One of the findings of the committee is that the CIA misled the Congress. I guess you find this okay, Jim, since they are in 'intelligence'. I don't think it's okay.
C: You can replay all the film you want to of airplanes crashing into buildings. It still doesn't make secret prisons and illegal detentions and illegal torture and more palatable or any more right. Two wrongs do not make a right.
D: You can hate on Obama and Feinstien all you want. The truth of the matter is this shit happened. If you're okay with it, that's your prerogative. But don't come crying when this or anything else happens to an American overseas somewhere. These actions probably have improved recruiting for our enemies.

So there. Believe what you want. But I am in total agreement with John McCain, who actually lived through some of this same torture at the hands of North Vietnamese 'Intelligence'. It wasn't right for them to do it and it wasn't right for us to do it. We're no better than them if this is what we do.

BKB

Here is his statement in full if you're interested in anything but blather.

"Mr. President, I rise in support of the release — the long-delayed release — of the Senate Intelligence Committee's summarized, unclassified review of the so-called 'enhanced interrogation techniques' that were employed by the previous administration to extract information from captured terrorists. It is a thorough and thoughtful study of practices that I believe not only failed their purpose — to secure actionable intelligence to prevent further attacks on the U.S. and our allies — but actually damaged our security interests, as well as our reputation as a force for good in the world.

"I believe the American people have a right — indeed, a responsibility — to know what was done in their name; how these practices did or did not serve our interests; and how they comported with our most important values.

"I commend Chairman Feinstein and her staff for their diligence in seeking a truthful accounting of policies I hope we will never resort to again. I thank them for persevering against persistent opposition from many members of the intelligence community, from officials in two administrations, and from some of our colleagues.

"The truth is sometimes a hard pill to swallow. It sometimes causes us difficulties at home and abroad. It is sometimes used by our enemies in attempts to hurt us. But the American people are entitled to it, nonetheless.

"They must know when the values that define our nation are intentionally disregarded by our security policies, even those policies that are conducted in secret. They must be able to make informed judgments about whether those policies and the personnel who supported them were justified in compromising our values; whether they served a greater good; or whether, as I believe, they stained our national honor, did much harm and little practical good.

"What were the policies? What was their purpose? Did they achieve it? Did they make us safer? Less safe? Or did they make no difference? What did they gain us? What did they cost us? The American people need the answers to these questions. Yes, some things must be kept from public disclosure to protect clandestine operations, sources and methods, but not the answers to these questions.

"By providing them, the Committee has empowered the American people to come to their own decisions about whether we should have employed such practices in the past and whether we should consider permitting them in the future. This report strengthens self-government and, ultimately, I believe, America's security and stature in the world. I thank the Committee for that valuable public service.

"I have long believed some of these practices amounted to torture, as a reasonable person would define it, especially, but not only the practice of waterboarding, which is a mock execution and an exquisite form of torture. Its use was shameful and unnecessary; and, contrary to assertions made by some of its defenders and as the Committee's report makes clear, it produced little useful intelligence to help us track down the perpetrators of 9/11 or prevent new attacks and atrocities.

"I know from personal experience that the abuse of prisoners will produce more bad than good intelligence. I know that victims of torture will offer intentionally misleading information if they think their captors will believe it. I know they will say whatever they think their torturers want them to say if they believe it will stop their suffering. Most of all, I know the use of torture compromises that which most distinguishes us from our enemies, our belief that all people, even captured enemies, possess basic human rights, which are protected by international conventions the U.S. not only joined, but for the most part authored.

"I know, too, that bad things happen in war. I know in war good people can feel obliged for good reasons to do things they would normally object to and recoil from.

"I understand the reasons that governed the decision to resort to these interrogation methods, and I know that those who approved them and those who used them were dedicated to securing justice for the victims of terrorist attacks and to protecting Americans from further harm. I know their responsibilities were grave and urgent, and the strain of their duty was onerous.

"I respect their dedication and appreciate their dilemma. But I dispute wholeheartedly that it was right for them to use these methods, which this report makes clear were neither in the best interests of justice nor our security nor the ideals we have sacrificed so much blood and treasure to defend.

"The knowledge of torture's dubious efficacy and my moral objections to the abuse of prisoners motivated my sponsorship of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, which prohibits 'cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment' of captured combatants, whether they wear a nation's uniform or not, and which passed the Senate by a vote of 90-9.

"Subsequently, I successfully offered amendments to the Military Commissions Act of 2006, which, among other things, prevented the attempt to weaken Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, and broadened definitions in the War Crimes Act to make the future use of waterboarding and other 'enhanced interrogation techniques' punishable as war crimes.

"There was considerable misinformation disseminated then about what was and wasn't achieved using these methods in an effort to discourage support for the legislation. There was a good amount of misinformation used in 2011 to credit the use of these methods with the death of Osama bin Laden. And there is, I fear, misinformation being used today to prevent the release of this report, disputing its findings and warning about the security consequences of their public disclosure.

"Will the report's release cause outrage that leads to violence in some parts of the Muslim world? Yes, I suppose that's possible, perhaps likely. Sadly, violence needs little incentive in some quarters of the world today. But that doesn't mean we will be telling the world something it will be shocked to learn. The entire world already knows that we water-boarded prisoners. It knows we subjected prisoners to various other types of degrading treatment. It knows we used black sites, secret prisons. Those practices haven't been a secret for a decade.

"Terrorists might use the report's re-identification of the practices as an excuse to attack Americans, but they hardly need an excuse for that. That has been their life's calling for a while now.

"What might come as a surprise, not just to our enemies, but to many Americans, is how little these practices did to aid our efforts to bring 9/11 culprits to justice and to find and prevent terrorist attacks today and tomorrow. That could be a real surprise, since it contradicts the many assurances provided by intelligence officials on the record and in private that enhanced interrogation techniques were indispensable in the war against terrorism. And I suspect the objection of those same officials to the release of this report is really focused on that disclosure – torture's ineffectiveness – because we gave up much in the expectation that torture would make us safer. Too much.

"Obviously, we need intelligence to defeat our enemies, but we need reliable intelligence. Torture produces more misleading information than actionable intelligence. And what the advocates of harsh and cruel interrogation methods have never established is that we couldn't have gathered as good or more reliable intelligence from using humane methods.

"The most important lead we got in the search for bin Laden came from using conventional interrogation methods. I think it is an insult to the many intelligence officers who have acquired good intelligence without hurting or degrading prisoners to assert we can't win this war without such methods. Yes, we can and we will.

"But in the end, torture's failure to serve its intended purpose isn't the main reason to oppose its use. I have often said, and will always maintain, that this question isn't about our enemies; it's about us. It's about who we were, who we are and who we aspire to be. It's about how we represent ourselves to the world.

"We have made our way in this often dangerous and cruel world, not by just strictly pursuing our geopolitical interests, but by exemplifying our political values, and influencing other nations to embrace them. When we fight to defend our security we fight also for an idea, not for a tribe or a twisted interpretation of an ancient religion or for a king, but for an idea that all men are endowed by the Creator with inalienable rights. How much safer the world would be if all nations believed the same. How much more dangerous it can become when we forget it ourselves even momentarily.

"Our enemies act without conscience. We must not. This executive summary of the Committee's report makes clear that acting without conscience isn't necessary, it isn't even helpful, in winning this strange and long war we're fighting. We should be grateful to have that truth affirmed.

"Now, let us reassert the contrary proposition: that is it essential to our success in this war that we ask those who fight it for us to remember at all times that they are defending a sacred ideal of how nations should be governed and conduct their relations with others — even our enemies.

"Those of us who give them this duty are obliged by history, by our nation's highest ideals and the many terrible sacrifices made to protect them, by our respect for human dignity to make clear we need not risk our national honor to prevail in this or any war. We need only remember in the worst of times, through the chaos and terror of war, when facing cruelty, suffering and loss, that we are always Americans, and different, stronger, and better than those who would destroy us.

"Thank you."

[LJ3]

I have a sincere respect and appreciation for McCain's opinion. Personally, I don't think a POW could ever hope to have an unbiased opinion about it, not would I expect them to have one.

My opinion: Warfare has changed. It doesn't remotely resemble our wars or battles of the past. The battlefields, enemies, weapons, reasons, tactics, personnel are now starkly different than they used to be. Basing our strategy on that is doing our country a disservice. To me, presentation dictates response more often than not. If your weapon is terror, you should expect reciprocity. We should torture the fuck out of suspected terrorists and torture known terrorists to death, eventually.

[BarryBobPosthole]

Thn I guess we do live under sharia law then if that's what you think we should do.

Maybe we should do it in the name of God. That'd make it better wouldn't it?

BKB

[LJ3]

Hehehe... No Sharia Law for me, thanks. And God has nuttin' to do with it either. But if there's a 1% chance we could get actionable information related to terrorism against us from a prisoner of war, do whatever is needed to get it out of them.

I think the premise that we somehow lower ourselves, or become what our enemies is flawed. I'm not sure I could articulate it very well other than that. Torture is a casualty of war and we put ourselves at a disadvantage to consider ourselves above any tactic needed to get information that could protect US citizens.

Do you think Muslim terrorists would consider themselves as lowly as american infidels if they adhered to the Geneva Convention?

[BarryBobPosthole]

Len we can't control what the muslims do, we can only control what we do.

If you think all bets are off in times of war as to what is immoral and what is not then you are entitled to your opinion.

When did we as a nation cross this line though? Fuck, we WROTE most of the rules in the Geneva convention.

BKB

[DeputyDog]

Barry, that line was crossed 70 years ago when we fire-bombed the living hell out of the civilian population of Japan. People bitch about the A-bombs, but the incendiaries killed 10 times what the two atomic bombs did.

[BarryBobPosthole]

Well, then I guess all bets are off then. As long as we do it 'in secret' and lie to the American people about it, I guess its okay as long as its done by the CIA and not the KGB or British Intelliogence or anyone else.

BKB

[LJ3]

I guess that's the difference between our opinions. I don't see physical torture as a moral issue. I see it as a war issue.

I dunno, I fear Bucky agrees with me so I may have to jettison my opinion pretty soon :)

[BarryBobPosthole]

Hahahaha....I'm sure he does. I can just see him now glaring at me and saying to me 'You can't handle the truth!'

This explains why so many people were so disinterested when a certain president sold weapons to our enemies (terrorists, by the way) in secret via the CIA when it was expressly forbidden by the congress. an executive action nobody seemed to take issue with.

BKB

[Chicken Dinner]

Serious questions/comments:

1. What "enhanced interrogation methods" listed in the report do you consider to be torture? I've read it and I don't see anything that I would consider to be torture based on how I understand it.

2. Feinstein and her ilk can claim they were lied to all they want. Others who were present are just as adamant that they were fully informed. Maybe one side is telling the truth and the other one isn't. But, I know all politicians to be liars. So, if I have to choose one or the other, I choose the politicians.

3. The report says we got no actionable intelligence. Those who know, and some I know personally and know to be honest, claim otherwise. I chose not to believe the politicians who I know to be liars.

The bottom line is that our professional intelligence community was put under immense pressure by our politicians, the same ones who are crying foul now, to produce results. Did they go right up to what they knew to be the line? Yes. Did some of them probably cross it? Maybe.

If the politicians now want to redraw the line or make the line clearer, no problem. Just don't go wailing and gnashing your teeth about how wrong all of this was after the fact.

[Buckrub]

They didn't do enough. They let five go, who rebegan morr atrocities.

These weren't bystanders. ....

Oh never mind....

[LJ3]

Bucky has posthole's whisky fingers!!

[Buckrub]

I'd trade whole bodies....less the brain of course.

[Buckrub]

On the report, I believe it is so seriously bs that it is beneath sentiment men to bother discussing it.

[Chicken Dinner]

This Op-ed in the WSJ from former FBI Director under Clinton and Bush is the best response I've seen. While I would encourage you to read the whole thing, the closing below sums pretty much sums up how I feel:

http://www.wsj.com/news/article_email/louis-j-freeh-senate-democrats-and-9-11-amnesia-1418259652-lMyQjAxMTI0NDE4MTMxMDEwWj


Did the CIA’s enhanced interrogation program develop sufficient leads to connect the dots to Osama bin Laden’s redoubt in Abbottabad, Pakistan, or serve to fulfill the executive and congressional mandate to prevent another 9/11? That is a fair operational and analytical question for the report by the Senate Intelligence Committee’s Democratic majority to raise and argue. Likewise, it can and should be debated whether America should ever again use such methods to prevent terrorist attacks. What is decidedly unfair is to belatedly attack the brave and dedicated men and women and their leaders at the CIA who had the nation’s highest political and legal authorizations for this program.

[Hombre]

The US will never outright win a war again. In my opinion we no longer have the stomach for war. I would liken it to thinking that the higher moral ground is to stand in a straight line and shoot back and forth at each other, but wars aren't won on higher moral ground. I'm not sure what the answer is but I do believe that going into a war half pregnant is a sure way to lose. Generally when the US engages in war it is in an area that has seen conflict for many years, and the people in these conflicts have seen and done things to win that we would consider unthinkable. We live nice lives with relatively low risk and that's great. If we send our men and women off to war for reasons we believe necessary then they should be given all the tools necessary to protect themselves and win. Being sent to a war told to engage in activities to take others lives, and having them try and take mine, but being given rules on how I can do that, especially when the other side isn't following the same rules, seems silly to me.

[BarryBobPosthole]

Well, like I said, y'all are welcome to your own beliefs. Mine are still the same as they were before this mess with 9/11. I don't believe that it is ever justified to treat another human being with the level of disrespect and misery that torture brings to get information. We've seen what the results of that kind of thinking has produced in history and there's no free pass for us to lower our morals to that level just because we are victims of something in our nation. I think we ought to be ashamed of ourselves for secret prisons and holding prisoners of war indefinitely with no charges whatsoever against them. and no, we don't want to bring them on shore to the US because that might taint us for real so we keep them in dark places where we think they are hidden from sight.

And no, I am not naive to the 'new thinking' about war either. The 'tit for tat' thinking that the only way we can win a war is to stoop to the levels of our enemies. If you want to think that fine. But don't tread any moral high ground any more with me about high American ideals. Torture and imprisonment without any kind of due process goes against the very grain of our written constitution. We trample on the very inalienable rights that we sanctimoniously invoke for ourselves but deny others.

So go for it.

BKB

[Buckrub]

The constitution is for citizens.

If your pollyanna thinking prevails, we will not exist to be able to argue it.

[Buckrub]

When we fail to correctly observe reality, it marches on oblivious.

[Chicken Dinner]

In what other war have we provided due process to POWs, charged them with a crime, tried them in domestic criminal courts or released them prior to the cessation of hostilities?

[Thumper]

Put lipstick on a pig and you still have a pig. War is war ... no way to make it pretty. Declared or not (heck, Vietnam wasn't even a declared war), we're at war. Where do you draw the line as to what is torture anydamnway? We can drop napalm on a village during wartime. We can spray the stuff into bunkers, caves and tunnels, as well as vehicles, convoys, small bases and structures ... it's a gel that sticks to people and burns at 5000 degrees. Is that torture or a weapon? The list is endless ... I honestly don't know where the line is drawn. How is war EVER considered moral? All you "Berkely graduates" can cry all you want ... reality is reality.

What baffles me is the crap that I'm hearing on tv lately. It seems to depend on whom is doing the talking and what network is hosting the discussion ... some say we never obtained any useful info from our "torture" and others spout off a pile of intel we obtained which saved countless American lives. I tend to lean toward the latter.

[Chicken Dinner]

I think my quote from Louis Freeh was spot on. It's fine to argue whether the Intel we got was effective or whether we should engage in these sorts of tactics in the future. However, they were approved by all three levels of our government. So, don't question their legality after the fact.

[Buckrub]

I continue to be baffled at the staggering dichotomy in American thinking on all fronts.

[BarryBobPosthole]

Sorry you feel that way.

And don't ever call me a fucking traitor again.

BKB

[BarryBobPosthole]

And you know? You can stick Goodhunting up your ass too while you're at it.
BKB

[Chicken Dinner]

Jim, that's crossing the line.

[Thumper]

Sorry you feel that way.

And don't ever call me a fucking traitor again.

BKB

Ha ha! Awww, cool your jets and don't get your panties in a wad. Coincidentally someone just sent that to me in an email this morning and I posted it as we were headed out the door to lunch. The "traitor" part bothered me too and is a stupid, over the top b/s email thing, but I didn't have time to screw around with doing the ol' photoshop job and blacking it out. The whole thing fits this post to a tee, other than the last word. That part of it is stupid and uncalled for ... like most goofy things passed around the internet. Take a chill pill.

[Thumper]

Awww crap! I tried to edit it and accidentally deleted the whole thing!

How's this? Better?

4104

[Buckrub]

Me?m
I didn't do that did I?

??

[Thumper]

No, you get a pass this time. I was too busy to do a quick edit and shit in P-holes Wheaties I guess.

[Captain]

Well the "poster" does say more along the lines of how I believe. Perhaps the last word was a bit strong but I don't see where Posty should have taken it as directed at him?
Posthole is like many here a cornerstone of this place and my friend and somehow I hope he was kidding. There is no question that NOTHING good can come from releasing this report and one of the stupidious things I've ever seen done.
And judging what was done THEN by what standards you want to apply NOW is crazy. If they want the rules changed fine, change them but don't fault people for doing way was acceptable at that time.

[Hombre]

4111

[johnboy]

Kinda sorry I started this thread but after listening to that idiot Feinstein on the tube I was so amazed that anybody would actually do anything as stupid as what she was doing that I had to comment. It just seemed to me to be a deliberate attempt to further divide the American people for purely political reasons and from what has happened on this site, I think I was right.

Time to move on, IMHO.

[Captain]

Kinda sorry I started this thread but after listening to that idiot Feinstein on the tube I was so amazed that anybody would actually do anything as stupid as what she was doing that I had to comment. It just seemed to me to be a deliberate attempt to further divide the American people for purely political reasons and from what has happened on this site, I think I was right. Time to move on, IMHO.

You were dead right on all points. There was/is/and never will be a reason to release such information. It was stupid in the highest order.