Quantcast

Do you believe the CIA has the right to use any means of interrogation to get information from a person involved in terrorist activities, to protect the USA?

PartysOver 2009/08/25 12:16:35
You!
Add Photos & Videos
I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • The Frog Prince 2009/08/25 12:35:05
    None of the above
    The Frog Prince
    +14
    What ever it takes is what it takes with these lunatics. Armed combatants out of uniform are not protected by the Geneva Convention Accords. In fact, they can be shot on the spot which is what probably should have happened in the first place.

    These are not nice, humane human beings we are dealing with. They HATE you because of who you are and where you live. All this namby-pamby, thumb sucking crowd whining needs to cease and lets get on with wiping out vermin.

    That's my spin.

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Prairie Wind 2009/09/05 05:02:45 (edited)
    None of the above
    Prairie Wind
    +1
    It's long past being nice; get what we need or make an offer they can't refuse.
  • undiebee 2009/08/31 04:40:18
    I don't think the CIA should have any requirements on protecting America and ...
    undiebee
    +1
    What ever it takes as long as it isn't inhumane
  • Simplistic Reality 2009/08/27 13:27:25
    Undecided
    Simplistic Reality
    +2
    I'll put it like this. If it came down to saving your son, daughter, wife, or husbands life... or your entire family for that matter.... and you knew without a doubt this person you are with had the info to save your family.. would you do anything to get it? I probably would.
  • Prove to me 2009/08/26 23:36:44
    I don't think the CIA should have any requirements on protecting America and ...
    Prove to me
    +2
    When fighting Fire (Terrorist) the best method is Fire (whatever it takes). To prevent American deaths at the hand of Terrorist, anything goes, even if it is distasteful.
  • Mrs. maggot 2009/08/26 16:49:18
    None of the above
    Mrs. maggot
    +1
    Yes! They need to do what EVER it takes to keep America and Americans safe. You know what else? I don't think the general population needs to know matters of national security on a real time basis either!
  • Sassy22 2009/08/26 16:03:39
    I don't think the CIA should have any requirements on protecting America and ...
    Sassy22
    +1
    no requirements when protecting the American People from Terrorism of any kind!!
  • whitewulf--the unruly mobster 2009/08/26 15:16:18
  • Ukie 2009/08/26 13:15:04
    I don't think the CIA should have any requirements on protecting America and ...
    Ukie
    If they are a "known" terrorist....then absolutely YES!
  • Pravin 2009/08/26 11:10:46
    Undecided
    Pravin
    It doesn't matter what we think and what we don't think regarding the CIA's accountability to American citizens.

    But the fact remains that the CIA is controlled by a set of powerful people who intend to maintain a situation which's most suited to their requirement.

    As for the means, they'll use it even if we don't want them to because there's no one who wants to be put against a wall for having spoken about them.

    Even if not, they simply won't give a fig about the rules !!
  • RamblingVoices. 2009/08/26 11:10:00
    None of the above
    RamblingVoices.
    they should take whatever steps are required in the on going battle to stop this shit, it shouldnt even be questionable
  • Military 2009/08/26 09:28:01
    I don't think the CIA should have any requirements on protecting America and ...
    Military
    +1
    Lest we forget that the CIA were the first ones to go into AFG and secure our alliance with the northern alliance afgans which paved the way for us to overthrow the taliban and make our country safer. Lest we forget that they (field agents that is) arent even publically recognized when they are killed in action. Lest we forget that these brave men who risk their lives in the defense of our freedom do so while making less than 70,000$ a year. Not only that but they must almost completly have to change their tactics everytime a new admin takes office. It happened when clinton took over from bush senior. Now its happening again with obama. Do not enjoy your freedoms then have the gall to question how it came to be. Terrorists do not fall under the geneva conventions. By the way it was Reagan who made sure that terrorists do not get afforded the same rights as POWs. God bless his forsight.
  • Pravin Military 2009/08/26 11:25:21
    Pravin
    Ah my friend, here's an interesting fact for you. The Taliban were armed with Stinger jets in order to fight the Russians during the Afghan war.

    The same Taliban now equipped with American dollars and weaponry had all the time and money to think about screwing America (loyalty can be forgotten for that matter !!).

    After 9/11, America continued to pump Pakistan with money to fight the Taliban. Needless to say, the funds were diverted for causes otherwise.

    Had America stepped into the fray neglecting world protocol during the Afghan conflict and not armed the locals, the Taliban wouldn't be where they are today !!
  • Military Pravin 2009/08/26 12:31:04
    Military
    Stinger missiles not jets. The stingers had a life expectancy as do all stinger missiles for that matter. And there was no such thing as taliban in the 80's. And why not take the chance at getting some revenge on the soviets who fucked us in vietnam. By the way the northern part of AFG is still relatively quiet. Its the south pashtun areas that give us the most trouble. as for pakistan they are now reeping what they sowed.
  • Pravin Military 2009/08/26 12:33:05
    Pravin
    +1
    SORREEE for the Stingers !!

    The issue was not about the fighting them Russians, the intermediary Afghans were the problem. America armed and financed them but did not withdraw the remaining cash and guns.

    That's where the issue began :)
  • Military Pravin 2009/08/26 18:40:17 (edited)
    Military
    its easy to monday quarter back things like that. afganistan has always been a shit hole. ive alwasy said from the beginning that iraq is winnable but not so much for afg. these people are so fucked up its amazing. for example just the other day we had a guy bring in his wife who.had just had a baby but her placenta didnt come out. so the clown villege elder tied a rope around her plancenta with a heavy pad lock on the other end and made her walk around with it hangin out of her vagina hoping that gravity with the weight of the lock would pull it out can you believe that dude. the stone age era had more sense then these morons. anyways have a goodnight since Im 10 1/2 hours ahead of you.
  • rwayne72160 2009/08/26 07:11:53
    I don't think the CIA should have any requirements on protecting America and ...
    rwayne72160
    Sure, you don't think those crazy muslims are gonna just come out and tell the CIA what they're planning on bombing do you?
  • boomer 2009/08/26 04:31:53
    I think the CIA should have to answer to the American people.
    boomer
    when the CIA was first formed, many people believed America had just gotten its very own gestapo. Torture is not a power we want these people to have... they do black ops on a regular basis; if they're dealing with you they probably think you're going to blow something up, for now. But what happens when the situation gets to a point where our politicians start saying that everyone opposed to them is a terrorist? or the CIA gets misinformation because people say anything to get out of being torutred... and they come after you? and you really don't know anything... but they keep torturing you because well, that's the way it goes? Torture to me is very unamerican, it doesn't do a good job of representing the magnificence of the American people; it gets way more misinformation than it does information, and it can be used as a double-edged sword in the long run.
  • martin55 boomer 2009/08/26 07:21:17
    martin55
    I'm sure we could get the terrorists to stop blowing things up and chopping heads off of innocent people...you know, if we ask them nice enough!

    When we come out and say we want to be civil to the radical, kill-the-great-satan (USA & Brittain), evil, commie bastards...and by we I mean this administration & the media perpetuating it...I am sure that the terrorists are shaking in their boots. (Shaking cuz they are laughing so hard that the American leaders are so stupid & naive).
  • boomer martin55 2009/08/26 14:06:42
    boomer
    torturing them only gives them fuel to throw on their fire.

    what are you even talking with this second statement? who are the commie bastards everyone wants to kill, supposedly? if you honestly think that by torturing these people, they're going to stop and tell you all their plans, you listen to way too much propaganda. Turn off Rush and think for yourself for a little while will ya? we don't have to give them Constitutional rights... but torturing them only proves their point about our country, leads to much misinformation that slows us down and ultimately sabotages our efforts and wastes resources.
  • cathy 2009/08/26 04:24:53
    None of the above
    cathy
    I believe they need to do what ever it takes to get info to protect the us,sometimes its the only way to get the info.
  • dahacks 2009/08/26 03:51:53
    I don't think the CIA should have any requirements on protecting America and ...
    dahacks
    whatever it takes
  • Truly informed 2009/08/26 03:04:57
    I don't think the CIA should have any requirements on protecting America and ...
    Truly informed
    What are they going to do give them a lollipop and say please tell us where Bin Laden is? What a joke!
  • Hazel 2009/08/26 02:40:50
    None of the above
    Hazel
    +1
    These terrorists are not soldiers, they are terrorists. We should abide by the Geneva Accords when we capture soldiers on the battle field but these animals that will strap a bomb on a child, why do we have to make nice with them?? I think the CIA should do what's neccessary.
  • Philo-Publius 2009/08/26 02:26:59
    None of the above
    Philo-Publius
    What "terrorist activities"? No one wants to hurt us...
  • MARCY 2009/08/26 02:15:20
    None of the above
    MARCY
    I think the CIA should do whatever it takes to protect and avoid another terrorist attack,the people they are dealing with are terrorists capable of killing without any remorse or compassion,why do we have to be compassionate with them in order to fulfill the Geneva convention agenda.
    Terrorists blow up airplanes,buildings and they could even put a dirty bomb in any city in the USA,and people are busy worrying about what will the international community will say,that I think is what happen with the Lockerbie terrorist who was just pardon and is free without any remorse and can still do more damage,that is political correctness at work,criminals and terrorist's rights are more important than victims rights.
  • RebelStang 2009/08/26 01:56:44
    None of the above
    RebelStang
    +3
    The C.I.A. is Possibly, America'S 1st Line of Defense!
    In Forign Countries, Far Away, From Home!
    They Need to do Whatever is Needed, to Do Thier Job & Secure our Nation. What ever an American can think of or do. Won't be as bad as what the islamo's & others, will do!
    Like Cut-Off Your Head! We Don't Do That! & Won't!
    DEO VINDICE!
  • melly~thwarting Satan since... 2009/08/26 01:47:23
    I think the CIA should have to answer to the American people.
    melly~thwarting Satan since 1971
    +4
    We are bound by the terms of the Geneva Convention just like everyone else. We can't be a beacon of hope and freedom when we stoop to such deplorable levels of conduct.
  • martin55 melly~t... 2009/08/26 07:23:28
    martin55
    would you stand by your statement if your spouse or family member was be-headed on TV and you lost a limb or were crippled for life by a terrorist bomb?
  • melly~t... martin55 2009/08/26 08:04:51
    melly~thwarting Satan since 1971
    +1
    So, you want America to stand for nothing but low-life thugs-man-ship? I come from a military family, so I know what happens in war.

    Were those bombs planted by the US?
  • martin55 melly~t... 2009/08/27 05:28:00
    martin55
    moronic response
    conspiracy theorist
  • melly~t... martin55 2009/08/27 05:28:32
    melly~thwarting Satan since 1971
    Moronic response.
  • martin55 melly~t... 2009/08/26 07:26:30
    martin55
    Yes, bravo! Let's turn America into a doormat and allow anyone & everyone to walk all over us.

    You know...that's a great-sounding platitude and may make you feel humane and all, but in your heart-of-hearts, if one of those terrorists threatened your life or killed a loved one right in front of you for no reason...you'd be the 1st one in life to cut off their balls.
  • melly~t... martin55 2009/08/26 08:07:21
    melly~thwarting Satan since 1971
    +1
    America will never be a doormat. Seems to me you have no faith in us. Sad day for patriotism.

    If I am faced personally, obviously I would fight for my life, as anyone would. I have, in fact. That has nothing to do with torturing people. It is not a defense for lawlessness by the CIA.
  • martin55 melly~t... 2009/08/27 05:32:33
    martin55
    current leader leans away from patriotism...that is if apologizing, bowing down to other leaders, defending terrorists & putting down America & not sticking up for her when Chavez berated her would be classified as unpatriotic.

    I have faith in America.....and it is the good people with American values that I am talking about.
  • ChairmanOfThePessimist'sClub 2009/08/26 01:33:39
    I think the CIA should have to answer to the American people.
    ChairmanOfThePessimist'sClub
    +2
    But only to a certain degree. Obviously skinning someone alive is barbaric and makes us exactly the kinds of people we should be fighting to wipe out. But there's nothing wrong with terrorizing a terrorist to the point where he wishes he was dead temporarily. The fact that some people in this country are more concerned with the rights of terrorists than the victims of their plots is disgusting. The bottom line is, torturing a terrorist to save innocent lives is necessary and acceptable. And it's also far more lenient than the fate he probably deserves. People who commit acts of terror deserve the worst we can give them, as do the people who support them.
  • Bill Chairma... 2009/08/26 02:15:42
    Bill
    Just a thought bgraham.......ever wonder why those people in the MIddle East have been fighting each other for 5000 years. Maybe, just maybe it is because they are exactly alike. They have no problem torturing and mutilating each other in public. Those people are a very brutal society that have never tried political or philosophical solutions to their differences. If we choose to fight them the same way I am afraid we may be mired for who knows how long.
  • Chairma... Bill 2009/08/26 05:16:36
    ChairmanOfThePessimist'sClub
    +1
    Torture isn't a good way to fight terror, it's one potentially good way to prevent it. Claiming that they are the products of 5,000 years of violence insinuates that they understand only violence. If that's the case, then you've made another point in the case FOR torture. And they aren't all alike anymore than we are all alike. There are millions of people in that region who hate the violence and are glad someone is (was) finally standing up to it. The idea that some people in this country are more willing to defend the terrorists than the decent people in that region who want them gone is absurd and sickening. I know a lot of people think they're championing human rights by opposing torture, but it has the opposite effect. 3,000 people died on Sept. 11th, and if that day could have been prevented by giving a few terrorists the beating of a lifetime, I find it very hard to believe anyone on the same team would object.
  • Bill Chairma... 2009/08/26 23:20:10
    Bill
    Again being against torture is not supporting terrorist and you know it. What are the arguments against torture anyway? Civilized societies simply don't torture people for any reason. There is no real proof that torture has prevented another attack. The results have been that a few terrorit have told their interrogators something and it has not been proven to have prevented anything.
    As far as terrorist killing 3000 people on 9-11, there has been 4500 killed in Iraq. Has this been a terrorist act? Has torture in that country produced anything? Would you rather be captured by an enemy that we have not tortured their people or one that we have tortured their people? And I am not just talking about terrorist.
  • Chairma... Bill 2009/08/27 02:41:17
    ChairmanOfThePessimist'sClub
    Come on, the facts don't support your assertions. There is no definitive proof either way. Again, I ask how it is a better policy to assume on the basis of no facts that torture doesn't work than to assume on the same lack of evidence that it does? You realize that the best you can hope for with your idea of terrorist treatment is NOTHING -- no chance of gathering vital information, not even the slightest appearance of strength, and no difference whatsoever when it comes to how terrorists look at the United States. The fact that we don't torture their buddies won't make other terrorists around the world praise us for it or like us more because of it. They will continue to plot against us, only with brand new evidence that we are soft and unwise. Completely unwilling to do what is necessary to defeat them. I believe a big part of the problem we have in this country is spending our time making statements like:

    " Would you rather be captured by an enemy that we have not tortured their people or one that we have tortured their people? And I am not just talking about terrorist."

    Building our intelligence and defense policies on the basis of which methods our enemies would prefer that we use is both dangerous and dumb. Besides, I don't plan life around what I will do if I'm ever...

    Come on, the facts don't support your assertions. There is no definitive proof either way. Again, I ask how it is a better policy to assume on the basis of no facts that torture doesn't work than to assume on the same lack of evidence that it does? You realize that the best you can hope for with your idea of terrorist treatment is NOTHING -- no chance of gathering vital information, not even the slightest appearance of strength, and no difference whatsoever when it comes to how terrorists look at the United States. The fact that we don't torture their buddies won't make other terrorists around the world praise us for it or like us more because of it. They will continue to plot against us, only with brand new evidence that we are soft and unwise. Completely unwilling to do what is necessary to defeat them. I believe a big part of the problem we have in this country is spending our time making statements like:

    " Would you rather be captured by an enemy that we have not tortured their people or one that we have tortured their people? And I am not just talking about terrorist."

    Building our intelligence and defense policies on the basis of which methods our enemies would prefer that we use is both dangerous and dumb. Besides, I don't plan life around what I will do if I'm ever captured by our enemies. I plan life around defeating them. And I promise if a terrorist ever captures you, it won't make one bit of difference whether we tortured other terrorists or not. He will cut your head off and not think twice about it, unless we give ourselves a chance to gather information that can prevent it.

    You know if this was about other countries who had signed treaties like Geneva, we wouldn't even be talking about it. They would follow the rules of war and we would too. But these are people who cannot and will not be stopped using courts or treaties or stern talking-to's from the UN. The rules have changed and we have absolutely no chance of keeping up without changing too. They know a lot of us will defend their human rights, even in their complete absence of humanity, and they are finding anew way everyday of using it against us. Just because people aren't aware that the warped way they think lends support to terrorism, doesn't mean they aren't complicit.
    (more)
  • Bill Chairma... 2009/08/28 00:49:05
    Bill
    You know.....you just don't seem to get it. You are for torturing human beings and you cannot get past that . How do you feel about the Japanese torturing 1000's of our soldiers during WWII? That is what I am talking about.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 10 Next » Last »

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2013/05/18 10:13:52

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals