|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
With today’s release of what is being shorthanded as the “torture report” (in reality, an executive summary less than one-tenth the size of the full classified document), America now has the printed consensus behind President Barack Obama’s August admission (for lack of a better word): “We tortured some folks.”
“While the Office of Legal Counsel found otherwise between 2002 and 2007, it is my personal conclusion that, under any common meaning of the term, CIA detainees were tortured,” said Sen. Diane Feinstein, D-Calif., chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
But, as noted in today’s release, the Bush OLC knew they were doing legal gymnastics. White House lawyers specifically asked the Attorney General for “a formal declination of prosecution, in advance” for anyone the US oversaw who employed the techniques we now all understand to be torture. They knew in advance that the acts that were illegal, so they asked — in advance — for a blanket amnesty.
They knew it was illegal then, so what does that mean today?
As is implied by Feinstein’s use of those dates, and was likely inferred by most who heard the president this summer, the summary of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence torture report is looking backward (something Obama pooh-poohed in his earliest days in office), with the assumption that after 2007, or at least after the 2009 handover at the White House, everything changed.
But it is the reference to the OLC findings — in the summary and in Feinstein’s statement — that sort of strips the insulation off that convenient construct.
The post-9/11 torture program is dated to a September 17, 2001, Memorandum of Notification (MON, aka the “Gloves Come Off” finding) — notably a day after Vice President Dick Cheney’s TV appearance with Tim Russert, where Cheney and Russert blithely concurred it was time for the US to embrace the “dark side” — which was used as cover and as the foundation for subsequent findings by the Bush Administration’s legal team.
But that 2001 finding doesn’t have an expiration date, and there is no evidence of an Obama-era finding that directly controverts the Gloves Come Off memorandum. In fact, there is evidence that the Obama administration continues to operate under that finding (or did until at least 2012).
The finding that authorized the torture program also authorized drone strikes without notable process or oversight. Just three days into office, Obama OK’d a strike inside Pakistan that reportedly killed 11 civilians, and over the course of 2009, the CIA — Obama’s CIA — conducted 52 drone strikes, killing hundreds.
Source
|
CIA Personnel ‘Choking Up’ During Waterboarding
The waterboarding eventually induced "involuntary leg, chest and arm spasms." According to CIA records, “it seems the collective opinion that we should not go much further.” Several on the team were “profoundly affected,” “some to the point of tears and choking up.”
Humus, Pasta, Nuts and Raisins Rectally Infused
Several detainees, including Zubaydah, Marwan al-Jabbur, and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, underwent "rectal rehydration" or "rectal fluid resuscitation" -- and detainee Majid Klian's “lunch tray," made up of hummus, pasta with sauce, raisins and nuts, was "pureed" and rectally infused.
According to CIA medical officers, rectal infusions were partially used as a behavior control: "While IV infusion is safe and effective," an officer noted, "we were impressed with the ancillary effectiveness of rectal infusion."
Source
Good lord, The people defending this kind of stuff because they think it was 'effective' are acting kind of disgusting. I can get the angle of not wanting this information out because of the ammunition it provides against US interests (although I disagree) but the people coming out defending torture truly disturb me.
|
I'm really surprised they didn't include the "food up your ass" treatment in one of oneofthem's awesome healthcare brochures.
|
dont forget the tropical weather. they dont have that in the middle east
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
torture doesn't look good no matter the context, forced feeding like that may violate the prisoner's deeply held dignity beliefs and whatnot, i suppose.
nevertheless, the torture program was stopped and not all of it was occuring in gitmo. it is pretty much standard CIA practice to have their torture houses overseas, and sometimes contracted to foreign affiliates.
it's highly dubious in effectiveness. they need to think harder about propaganda.
|
On December 10 2014 09:13 oneofthem wrote: torture doesn't look good no matter the context, forced feeding like that may violate the prisoner's deeply held dignity beliefs and whatnot, i suppose.
nevertheless, the torture program was stopped and not all of it was occuring in gitmo. it is pretty much standard CIA practice to have their torture houses overseas, and sometimes contracted to foreign affiliates.
it's highly dubious in effectiveness. they need to think harder about propaganda.
Irrelevant. Is that jonny or oneofthem posting?
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
it is relevant insofar as describing gitmo's function. they have stopped the torturing but are stuck in limbo with respect to closing down the camp.
|
On December 10 2014 07:40 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2014 07:24 Danglars wrote:All kinds of ex-CIA heads and agents have fired back at the biased, incomplete report. No interviews, for one. The Hill has some of the criticism and a website of angered agents. The biggest point of contention seems to be how much useful intelligence was gained and how fast the more brutal techniques were employed. Yeah, John McCain is such an evil American basher, screw his biased speech! Not sure why you quoted, but McCain is one of the few Senate Republicans that doesn't even get a raised eyebrow for going against a RNC or conservative position. Him and Graham got famous in the Bush years for doing it, and doing it very vocally (compared to an equally bad Collins). So like ... business as usual.
|
On December 10 2014 09:52 oneofthem wrote: it is relevant insofar as describing gitmo's function. they have stopped the torturing but are stuck in limbo with respect to closing down the camp.
And the torture would start again if there were 1) another terrorist attack on US soil or 2) they thought they found someone planning an attack on US soil and had no other way to access the information. The very fact of its extra-legal location and protocols is what is offensive, not that it's detaining some real terrorists amongst its residents.
|
On December 10 2014 07:37 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2014 07:24 Danglars wrote:All kinds of ex-CIA heads and agents have fired back at the biased, incomplete report. No interviews, for one. The Hill has some of the criticism and a website of angered agents. The biggest point of contention seems to be how much useful intelligence was gained and how fast the more brutal techniques were employed. 'They were employed' is the only bit of it that im interested in. I don't care how useful it was or wasn't. The fact that is happened at all is what matters. I'm sure (almost) every dictator, murderer, horror doctor, whatever that has done terrible crimes thought their reason was valid and worth the cost. Our standards and morals are whats sets us above the "evil men" and no amount of justification will stop us from being just as bad when we do these things. Well, I guess we fundamentally disagree.
On December 10 2014 07:36 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2014 07:24 Danglars wrote:All kinds of ex-CIA heads and agents have fired back at the biased, incomplete report. No interviews, for one. The Hill has some of the criticism and a website of angered agents. The biggest point of contention seems to be how much useful intelligence was gained and how fast the more brutal techniques were employed. Thats weird. People who are now in the line of sight of the Justice department as perjurers and torturers would like to defend themselves. But Danglers is right, they should be given their time in court. What are they, a random black guy or something? I applaud your brave stance to hear the other side.
Let me caution you though ... I don't know if you have proof that any of these accused CIA agents robbed a convenience store, assaulted the clerk, charged an officer, and grappled with his gun. Then, skin color aside, they might end up dead in a self defense shooting. But since I haven't heard the story, I'll have to assume you'll listen through to their stories of justifiable torture (hehehe) and lives saved ... in the interests of fairness.
|
On December 10 2014 09:58 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2014 09:52 oneofthem wrote: it is relevant insofar as describing gitmo's function. they have stopped the torturing but are stuck in limbo with respect to closing down the camp. And the torture would start again if there were 1) another terrorist attack on US soil or 2) they thought they found someone planning an attack on US soil and had no other way to access the information. The very fact of its extra-legal location and protocols is what is offensive, not that it's detaining some real terrorists amongst its residents. that and the lack of remorse being shown, and the fact they hacked the committee investigating and the list gos on and on.
Heck can people even be sure it actually stopped? It happened in secret locations outside the US where no one has oversight, do we have anything to go on other then their word? (which incase you don't get it is worthless)
|
On December 10 2014 10:01 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2014 07:37 Gorsameth wrote:On December 10 2014 07:24 Danglars wrote:All kinds of ex-CIA heads and agents have fired back at the biased, incomplete report. No interviews, for one. The Hill has some of the criticism and a website of angered agents. The biggest point of contention seems to be how much useful intelligence was gained and how fast the more brutal techniques were employed. 'They were employed' is the only bit of it that im interested in. I don't care how useful it was or wasn't. The fact that is happened at all is what matters. I'm sure (almost) every dictator, murderer, horror doctor, whatever that has done terrible crimes thought their reason was valid and worth the cost. Our standards and morals are whats sets us above the "evil men" and no amount of justification will stop us from being just as bad when we do these things. Well, I guess we fundamentally disagree. Yes if you believe torture is justifiable then we do disagree, so does most of humanity but hey their only filthy arabs right? barely even human.
|
On December 10 2014 10:01 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2014 07:37 Gorsameth wrote:On December 10 2014 07:24 Danglars wrote:All kinds of ex-CIA heads and agents have fired back at the biased, incomplete report. No interviews, for one. The Hill has some of the criticism and a website of angered agents. The biggest point of contention seems to be how much useful intelligence was gained and how fast the more brutal techniques were employed. 'They were employed' is the only bit of it that im interested in. I don't care how useful it was or wasn't. The fact that is happened at all is what matters. I'm sure (almost) every dictator, murderer, horror doctor, whatever that has done terrible crimes thought their reason was valid and worth the cost. Our standards and morals are whats sets us above the "evil men" and no amount of justification will stop us from being just as bad when we do these things. Well, I guess we fundamentally disagree. Show nested quote +On December 10 2014 07:36 Sub40APM wrote:On December 10 2014 07:24 Danglars wrote:All kinds of ex-CIA heads and agents have fired back at the biased, incomplete report. No interviews, for one. The Hill has some of the criticism and a website of angered agents. The biggest point of contention seems to be how much useful intelligence was gained and how fast the more brutal techniques were employed. Thats weird. People who are now in the line of sight of the Justice department as perjurers and torturers would like to defend themselves. But Danglers is right, they should be given their time in court. What are they, a random black guy or something? I applaud your brave stance to hear the other side. Let me caution you though ... I don't know if you have proof that any of these accused CIA agents robbed a convenience store, assaulted the clerk, charged an officer, and grappled with his gun. Then, skin color aside, they might end up dead in a self defense shooting. But since I haven't heard the story, I'll have to assume you'll listen through to their stories of justifiable torture (hehehe) and lives saved ... in the interests of fairness.
I can tell you that there are CIA and NSA agents who are doing far more reprehensible things than robbing a convenience store.
Subtle character assassination by Dangles. Mike Brown is a known cigar thief.
|
On December 10 2014 09:54 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2014 07:40 Nyxisto wrote:On December 10 2014 07:24 Danglars wrote:All kinds of ex-CIA heads and agents have fired back at the biased, incomplete report. No interviews, for one. The Hill has some of the criticism and a website of angered agents. The biggest point of contention seems to be how much useful intelligence was gained and how fast the more brutal techniques were employed. Yeah, John McCain is such an evil American basher, screw his biased speech! Not sure why you quoted, but McCain is one of the few Senate Republicans that doesn't even get a raised eyebrow for going against a RNC or conservative position. Him and Graham got famous in the Bush years for doing it, and doing it very vocally (compared to an equally bad Collins). So like ... business as usual. RNC-Danglers position: fisting for freedom, its the only way to be safe
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On December 10 2014 09:58 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2014 09:52 oneofthem wrote: it is relevant insofar as describing gitmo's function. they have stopped the torturing but are stuck in limbo with respect to closing down the camp. And the torture would start again if there were 1) another terrorist attack on US soil or 2) they thought they found someone planning an attack on US soil and had no other way to access the information. The very fact of its extra-legal location and protocols is what is offensive, not that it's detaining some real terrorists amongst its residents. extra-legal is misleading with respect to gitmo, fairer with respect to foreign subsidiary places. they follow a different, military commission rule, not the civil code. there is some legitimate argument here about necessity of different rules given immediacy of threat and so on requiring responses.
the part about torture starting again is not argued for. will need to know the various justifications or motivations for torture. it's likely a mixed bag given the very lack of control at that time. i do think we have more control in place than just after 9/11.
|
On December 10 2014 10:07 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2014 09:58 IgnE wrote:On December 10 2014 09:52 oneofthem wrote: it is relevant insofar as describing gitmo's function. they have stopped the torturing but are stuck in limbo with respect to closing down the camp. And the torture would start again if there were 1) another terrorist attack on US soil or 2) they thought they found someone planning an attack on US soil and had no other way to access the information. The very fact of its extra-legal location and protocols is what is offensive, not that it's detaining some real terrorists amongst its residents. extra-legal is misleading with respect to gitmo, fairer with respect to foreign subsidiary places. they follow a different, military commission rule, not the civil code. there is some legitimate argument here about necessity of different rules given immediacy of threat and so on requiring responses. the part about torture starting again is not argued for. will need to know the various justifications or motivations for torture. it's likely a mixed bag given the very lack of control at that time. i do think we have more control in place than just after 9/11.
Considering that we are listening in on the world's conversations, yes we have achieved almost complete control. The stasi would be proud.
|
On December 10 2014 10:09 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2014 10:07 oneofthem wrote:On December 10 2014 09:58 IgnE wrote:On December 10 2014 09:52 oneofthem wrote: it is relevant insofar as describing gitmo's function. they have stopped the torturing but are stuck in limbo with respect to closing down the camp. And the torture would start again if there were 1) another terrorist attack on US soil or 2) they thought they found someone planning an attack on US soil and had no other way to access the information. The very fact of its extra-legal location and protocols is what is offensive, not that it's detaining some real terrorists amongst its residents. extra-legal is misleading with respect to gitmo, fairer with respect to foreign subsidiary places. they follow a different, military commission rule, not the civil code. there is some legitimate argument here about necessity of different rules given immediacy of threat and so on requiring responses. the part about torture starting again is not argued for. will need to know the various justifications or motivations for torture. it's likely a mixed bag given the very lack of control at that time. i do think we have more control in place than just after 9/11. Considering that we are listening in on the world's conversations, yes we have achieved almost complete control. The stasi would be proud. no + Show Spoiler +
User was temp banned for this post.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On December 10 2014 10:09 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2014 10:07 oneofthem wrote:On December 10 2014 09:58 IgnE wrote:On December 10 2014 09:52 oneofthem wrote: it is relevant insofar as describing gitmo's function. they have stopped the torturing but are stuck in limbo with respect to closing down the camp. And the torture would start again if there were 1) another terrorist attack on US soil or 2) they thought they found someone planning an attack on US soil and had no other way to access the information. The very fact of its extra-legal location and protocols is what is offensive, not that it's detaining some real terrorists amongst its residents. extra-legal is misleading with respect to gitmo, fairer with respect to foreign subsidiary places. they follow a different, military commission rule, not the civil code. there is some legitimate argument here about necessity of different rules given immediacy of threat and so on requiring responses. the part about torture starting again is not argued for. will need to know the various justifications or motivations for torture. it's likely a mixed bag given the very lack of control at that time. i do think we have more control in place than just after 9/11. Considering that we are listening in on the world's conversations, yes we have achieved almost complete control. The stasi would be proud. cute, but going blind is not an option in this world.
|
On December 10 2014 09:25 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2014 09:13 oneofthem wrote: torture doesn't look good no matter the context, forced feeding like that may violate the prisoner's deeply held dignity beliefs and whatnot, i suppose.
nevertheless, the torture program was stopped and not all of it was occuring in gitmo. it is pretty much standard CIA practice to have their torture houses overseas, and sometimes contracted to foreign affiliates.
it's highly dubious in effectiveness. they need to think harder about propaganda. Irrelevant. Is that jonny or oneofthem posting? Actually, it is quite relevant in the context of transferring prisoners out of Gitmo and repatriating them, some of whom will be tortured in their home countries and mistreated far worse than they were in U.S. custody. That doesn't justify any of this or make it okay, but it raises a question of whether the U.S. is serving human rights best by sending these prisoners to places that will abuse their human rights but simply out of American sight.
|
On December 10 2014 10:04 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2014 10:01 Danglars wrote:On December 10 2014 07:37 Gorsameth wrote:On December 10 2014 07:24 Danglars wrote:All kinds of ex-CIA heads and agents have fired back at the biased, incomplete report. No interviews, for one. The Hill has some of the criticism and a website of angered agents. The biggest point of contention seems to be how much useful intelligence was gained and how fast the more brutal techniques were employed. 'They were employed' is the only bit of it that im interested in. I don't care how useful it was or wasn't. The fact that is happened at all is what matters. I'm sure (almost) every dictator, murderer, horror doctor, whatever that has done terrible crimes thought their reason was valid and worth the cost. Our standards and morals are whats sets us above the "evil men" and no amount of justification will stop us from being just as bad when we do these things. Well, I guess we fundamentally disagree. Yes if you believe torture is justifiable then we do disagree, so does most of humanity but hey their only filthy arabs right? barely even human.
Yeah being a supporter of torture puts one in some poor company. Chiefly, most of the people we fight against.
"But, but, but, when we tortured it was for a good reason, and it worked! (even if I only have hearsay that suggests so)" is not going to get much traction with most people with a conscious
I could see this line of reasoning being written into a "V for Vendetta" type script but it seems ridiculous to hear it being presented by intelligent people on television and elsewhere.
|
|
|
|