History Forum / General / British History / September 2007

Recte:

Hilarious!

Once again Pogue Gans has been hoist with his own petar and doesn't even
realize it.

Par For The Course.

The fact-free gibberish Gans posts below is indicative of ONE way he makes
Most-Entertaining Egregious Errors -- as he continues to post gibberish FAR
beyond the pale of his assigned field of competence -- Chemistry.

First, Gans makes some fact-free, blanket "almost universal" [his language]
Ex Cathedra Statement about the Mediaeval Period and Mediaeval People.

Second, he runs with that red herring in his mouth to formulate ANOTHER Ex
Cathedra Statement applying the PREVIOUS UNPROVEN statement to Modern Times,
Modern People and to his Intellectual Opponents -- who are kicking his arse
and beating him senseless [rhetorically].

Since Pogue Gans has absolutely ZIP-POINT ZERO Military, Naval, Diplomatic
or Intelligence Experience, he fails to understand that tens of thousands of
strong interrogations and conversations are conducted and some yield up PAY
DIRT -- perhaps only a SMALL NUGGET -- others are unfruitful.

Then the rigorous, painstaking work of VERIFICATION, TRIANGULATION, ANALYSIS
and SYNTHESIS begins and continues until the Jigsaw Puzzle begins to shape
up and yield useful insights.

Although the Jigsaw Puzzle may never be finally completed -- often there is
simply not time for that, given practical and operational considerations --
with skillful intelligent, extremely hard-working people working on it --
people who have been given the requisite tools to do the job -- tools of the
sort authorized in the Patriot Act and other Legislation -- VERY USEFUL data
can be uncovered.

Occasionally, one digs up a BIG NUGGET -- as was the case with Khalid Sheikh
Mohammed, the Mastermind behind the 9/11 Attacks on the United States.

OF COURSE there are False Confessions and Disinformation Techniques
practiced by our enemies in the Global War On Terror.

Skillful, intelligent, well-trained interrogators know how to deal with
these phenomena and to counter them -- that's a vital part of their job --
and it is VERY demanding work.

Those are just a FEW of the important FACTS about these matters that Pogue
Gans chooses to ignore and/or dismiss.

He can get away with making such Grossly Simplistic, Inaccurate and
Uninformed Statements in the NYU college classroom -- because he has a
captive, callow, none-too-bright, audience who depend on him for grades and
recommendations -- but NOT here on USENET.

Aye, that's his Eternal Conundrum....

And Our Delightful Entertainment.

Hell, Gans is so dumb he can't even SPELL _INTERROGATORY_... Vide infra pro
risibus.

...Much less understand how INTERROGATIONS and other approved intelligence
sources and methods yield most useful results.

DSH

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

Veni, Vidi, Calcitravi Asinum

If one simply defines TORTURE down, as many naïve, unrealistic and
air-headed American "Liberals" do, then all SORTS of useful techniques
become "UNTHINKABLE".

They seek to make even anything that leads the detainee to FEEL
UNCOMFORTABLE or DISORIENTED as being PROHIBITED.

DSH

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

Exitus Acta Probat

Amusing...

DSH

Lux et Veritas et Libertas
--------------------------------------------------

Hillary flip-flops, contradicts Bill - & herself - in N.H. debate

BY IAN BISHOP and MICHAEL McAULIFF
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITERS

Thursday, September 27th 2007

Sen. Hillary Clinton fields question during Democratic debate yesterday in
New Hampshire, where she contradicted hubby Bill, as well as herself,
insisting she'd never OK torture of terror suspects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

HANOVER, N.H. - Sen. Hillary Clinton scored with a Democratic audience last
night by contradicting her husband's belief that a terrorist could be
tortured to foil an imminent plot - but what observers didn't know is she
was contradicting herself, too.

"It cannot be American policy, period," Clinton (D-N.Y.) told debate
moderator Tim Russert, who asked if there should be a presidential exemption
to allow the torture of a terror chieftain if authorities knew a bomb was
about to go off, but didn't know where it was.

When Russert revealed ex-President Bill Clinton advocated such a policy on a
recent NBC "Meet the Press" appearance, Hillary Clinton won huge applause
from the Dartmouth College audience with a deadpan comeback:

"Well, I'll talk to him later."

She may have to give herself that talk, too.

Last October, Clinton told the Daily News: "If we're going to be preparing
for the kind of improbable but possible eventuality, then it has to be done
within the rule of law."

She said then the "ticking time bomb" scenario represents a narrow exception
to her opposition to torture as morally wrong, ineffective and dangerous to
American soldiers.

"In the event we were ever confronted with having to interrogate a detainee
with knowledge of an imminent threat to millions of Americans, then the
decision to depart from standard international practices must be made by the
President, and the President must be held accountable," she said.

Clinton's campaign did not immediately respond to numerous requests for
comment on the eye-popping contradiction.

Her pirouette came during a debate at Dartmouth in which Democratic rivals
declared open season on Clinton - and Republican front-runner Rudy Giuliani,
too.

The ex-New York mayor came under fire for voicing his readiness to attack
Iran to keep it from developing nuclear weapons. Clinton was accused by some
of her rivals of playing into President Bush's hands by voting for an
anti-Iran Senate resolution.

"I think what Mayor Giuliani said was irresponsible, because we have not yet
come to that point," said Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), arguing there is a lot
of diplomacy to be done first.

"Rudy Giuliani doesn't know what the heck he's talking about," zinged Sen.
Joseph Biden (D-Del.). "He's the most uninformed person on American foreign
policy now running for President."

Giuliani's campaign declined to respond.

Former Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.) hit Clinton for voting yesterday to name
Iran's elite Republican Guard a sponsor of terrorism - which he said was the
first step to war with Iran and all too similar to the vote both cast for
the Iraq war. Cantankerous former Sen. Mike Gravel (D-Alaska) pointed at her
and said, "I am ashamed of you, Hillary."

Clinton defended her vote, saying it would let the U.S. "impose sanctions on
the primary leaders to try to begin to put some teeth into all this talk
about dealing with Iran." She said there was much to be done to try to
achieve a political solution before discussing military options.

Several times she refused to give answers, but she couldn't duck when
Russert threw her a curveball, asking if she would back the Yankees or
Chicago Cubs, her childhood home team, if they met in the World Series. So
she waffled.

"Well, I would probably have to alternate sides," she said.