• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EST 15:57
CET 21:57
KST 05:57
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
RSL Season 3 - Playoffs Preview0RSL Season 3 - RO16 Groups C & D Preview0RSL Season 3 - RO16 Groups A & B Preview2TL.net Map Contest #21: Winners12Intel X Team Liquid Seoul event: Showmatches and Meet the Pros10
Community News
RSL Season 3: RO16 results & RO8 bracket13Weekly Cups (Nov 10-16): Reynor, Solar lead Zerg surge2[TLMC] Fall/Winter 2025 Ladder Map Rotation14Weekly Cups (Nov 3-9): Clem Conquers in Canada4SC: Evo Complete - Ranked Ladder OPEN ALPHA15
StarCraft 2
General
Weekly Cups (Nov 10-16): Reynor, Solar lead Zerg surge SC: Evo Complete - Ranked Ladder OPEN ALPHA RSL Season 3: RO16 results & RO8 bracket RSL Season 3 - Playoffs Preview Mech is the composition that needs teleportation t
Tourneys
RSL Revival: Season 3 $5,000+ WardiTV 2025 Championship StarCraft Evolution League (SC Evo Biweekly) Constellation Cup - Main Event - Stellar Fest 2025 RSL Offline Finals Dates + Ticket Sales!
Strategy
Custom Maps
Map Editor closed ?
External Content
Mutation # 501 Price of Progress Mutation # 500 Fright night Mutation # 499 Chilling Adaptation Mutation # 498 Wheel of Misfortune|Cradle of Death
Brood War
General
2v2 maps which are SC2 style with teams together? Data analysis on 70 million replays BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ soO on: FanTaSy's Potential Return to StarCraft A cwal.gg Extension - Easily keep track of anyone
Tourneys
[BSL21] RO16 Tie Breaker - Group B - Sun 21:00 CET [BSL21] RO16 Tie Breaker - Group A - Sat 21:00 CET [Megathread] Daily Proleagues Small VOD Thread 2.0
Strategy
Current Meta Game Theory for Starcraft How to stay on top of macro? PvZ map balance
Other Games
General Games
Path of Exile Nintendo Switch Thread Should offensive tower rushing be viable in RTS games? Clair Obscur - Expedition 33 Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Deck construction bug Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
Mafia Game Mode Feedback/Ideas
Community
General
Russo-Ukrainian War Thread US Politics Mega-thread The Games Industry And ATVI Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine About SC2SEA.COM
Fan Clubs
White-Ra Fan Club The herO Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
[Manga] One Piece Movie Discussion! Anime Discussion Thread Korean Music Discussion
Sports
Formula 1 Discussion 2024 - 2026 Football Thread NBA General Discussion MLB/Baseball 2023 TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
The Health Impact of Joining…
TrAiDoS
Dyadica Evangelium — Chapt…
Hildegard
Saturation point
Uldridge
DnB/metal remix FFO Mick Go…
ImbaTosS
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 1527 users

US Politics Mega-thread - Page 3394

Forum Index > Closed
Post a Reply
Prev 1 3392 3393 3394 3395 3396 10093 Next
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.
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
March 18 2016 18:22 GMT
#67861
Biometrics of any form would be useful and I am sure they track them in a number of ways. The polygraph is likely just to make people nervous, like Kwark says.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
Reaps
Profile Joined June 2012
United Kingdom1280 Posts
March 18 2016 18:23 GMT
#67862
On March 19 2016 03:22 m4ini wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 19 2016 03:19 wei2coolman wrote:
At least from my understanding of how polygraphs are used in internal auditing for security, is comparing current results with established baselines.


But that's pointless too.

In the terrorist example, what if the person who was "recruited" believes he isn't a terrorist? A polygraph only reacts if you basically know you're wrong.

I don't think any terrorist considers himself a terrorist.

edit: this at least makes the polygraph "unreliable" at best.



They wouldn't ask that question though, they would be a lot more specific.
wei2coolman
Profile Joined November 2010
United States60033 Posts
March 18 2016 18:25 GMT
#67863
On March 19 2016 03:22 m4ini wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 19 2016 03:19 wei2coolman wrote:
At least from my understanding of how polygraphs are used in internal auditing for security, is comparing current results with established baselines.


But that's pointless too.

In the terrorist example, what if the person who was "recruited" believes he isn't a terrorist? A polygraph only reacts if you basically know you're wrong.

I don't think any terrorist considers himself a terrorist.

edit: this at least makes the polygraph "unreliable" at best.

Asking if he's a terrorist isn't the only question they ask.
They ask a huge variety of questions.

The problem is you guys are thinking of polygraphs as "yes or no" determinations of guilt, when they're more or less used as a determination of differences.
liftlift > tsm
m4ini
Profile Joined February 2014
4215 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-03-18 18:28:11
March 18 2016 18:25 GMT
#67864
On March 19 2016 03:23 Reaps wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 19 2016 03:22 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:19 wei2coolman wrote:
At least from my understanding of how polygraphs are used in internal auditing for security, is comparing current results with established baselines.


But that's pointless too.

In the terrorist example, what if the person who was "recruited" believes he isn't a terrorist? A polygraph only reacts if you basically know you're wrong.

I don't think any terrorist considers himself a terrorist.

edit: this at least makes the polygraph "unreliable" at best.



They wouldn't ask that question though, they would be a lot more specific.


The simple fact that Guantanamo Bay still exist shows that it's not as easy (or even possible).

The problem is you guys are thinking of polygraphs as "yes or no" determinations of guilt, when they're more or less used as a determination of differences.


No, i do have a decent grasp on how a polygraph works. It's about body reactions. I don't know if you're in the same boat, but every time i use public transport, and a ticket-controller goes through the train, i get a cold shower down my spine. Even if i have a ticket. It's something my body reacts to. You can force reactions by asking in a certain way (forceful), you can train to not react at all.
On track to MA1950A.
wei2coolman
Profile Joined November 2010
United States60033 Posts
March 18 2016 18:26 GMT
#67865
On March 19 2016 03:25 m4ini wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 19 2016 03:23 Reaps wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:22 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:19 wei2coolman wrote:
At least from my understanding of how polygraphs are used in internal auditing for security, is comparing current results with established baselines.


But that's pointless too.

In the terrorist example, what if the person who was "recruited" believes he isn't a terrorist? A polygraph only reacts if you basically know you're wrong.

I don't think any terrorist considers himself a terrorist.

edit: this at least makes the polygraph "unreliable" at best.



They wouldn't ask that question though, they would be a lot more specific.


The simple fact that Guantanamo Bay still exist shows that it's not as easy (or even possible).

Internal security audits with established baseline is vastly different than enemy combatants.

Not to mention, Guantanmo Bay is more of a holding cell, not "enhanced interrogation" site.
liftlift > tsm
Reaps
Profile Joined June 2012
United Kingdom1280 Posts
March 18 2016 18:26 GMT
#67866
On March 19 2016 03:25 m4ini wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 19 2016 03:23 Reaps wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:22 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:19 wei2coolman wrote:
At least from my understanding of how polygraphs are used in internal auditing for security, is comparing current results with established baselines.


But that's pointless too.

In the terrorist example, what if the person who was "recruited" believes he isn't a terrorist? A polygraph only reacts if you basically know you're wrong.

I don't think any terrorist considers himself a terrorist.

edit: this at least makes the polygraph "unreliable" at best.



They wouldn't ask that question though, they would be a lot more specific.


The simple fact that Guantanamo Bay still exist shows that it's not as easy (or even possible).



I'm not saying it is, i said 2 posts ago that the polygraph isn't 100% accurate but its for different reasons than you claimed.
m4ini
Profile Joined February 2014
4215 Posts
March 18 2016 18:29 GMT
#67867
On March 19 2016 03:26 wei2coolman wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 19 2016 03:25 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:23 Reaps wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:22 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:19 wei2coolman wrote:
At least from my understanding of how polygraphs are used in internal auditing for security, is comparing current results with established baselines.


But that's pointless too.

In the terrorist example, what if the person who was "recruited" believes he isn't a terrorist? A polygraph only reacts if you basically know you're wrong.

I don't think any terrorist considers himself a terrorist.

edit: this at least makes the polygraph "unreliable" at best.



They wouldn't ask that question though, they would be a lot more specific.


The simple fact that Guantanamo Bay still exist shows that it's not as easy (or even possible).

Internal security audits with established baseline is vastly different than enemy combatants.

Not to mention, Guantanmo Bay is more of a holding cell, not "enhanced interrogation" site.


You're taking the piss now, do you.
On track to MA1950A.
wei2coolman
Profile Joined November 2010
United States60033 Posts
March 18 2016 18:32 GMT
#67868
On March 19 2016 03:29 m4ini wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 19 2016 03:26 wei2coolman wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:25 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:23 Reaps wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:22 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:19 wei2coolman wrote:
At least from my understanding of how polygraphs are used in internal auditing for security, is comparing current results with established baselines.


But that's pointless too.

In the terrorist example, what if the person who was "recruited" believes he isn't a terrorist? A polygraph only reacts if you basically know you're wrong.

I don't think any terrorist considers himself a terrorist.

edit: this at least makes the polygraph "unreliable" at best.



They wouldn't ask that question though, they would be a lot more specific.


The simple fact that Guantanamo Bay still exist shows that it's not as easy (or even possible).

Internal security audits with established baseline is vastly different than enemy combatants.

Not to mention, Guantanmo Bay is more of a holding cell, not "enhanced interrogation" site.


You're taking the piss now, do you.

We have allies and blacksites for that.

I have no doubt US does enhanced interrogation, but in the current state of Guantanamo Bay, that is not it's current usage.
liftlift > tsm
m4ini
Profile Joined February 2014
4215 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-03-18 18:37:00
March 18 2016 18:35 GMT
#67869
On March 19 2016 03:32 wei2coolman wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 19 2016 03:29 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:26 wei2coolman wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:25 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:23 Reaps wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:22 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:19 wei2coolman wrote:
At least from my understanding of how polygraphs are used in internal auditing for security, is comparing current results with established baselines.


But that's pointless too.

In the terrorist example, what if the person who was "recruited" believes he isn't a terrorist? A polygraph only reacts if you basically know you're wrong.

I don't think any terrorist considers himself a terrorist.

edit: this at least makes the polygraph "unreliable" at best.



They wouldn't ask that question though, they would be a lot more specific.


The simple fact that Guantanamo Bay still exist shows that it's not as easy (or even possible).

Internal security audits with established baseline is vastly different than enemy combatants.

Not to mention, Guantanmo Bay is more of a holding cell, not "enhanced interrogation" site.


You're taking the piss now, do you.

We have allies and blacksites for that.

I have no doubt US does enhanced interrogation, but in the current state of Guantanamo Bay, that is not it's current usage.


So you apparently missed the huge worldwide outcry regarding guantanamo bay? The ICRC report? The reports of released detainees? Suicides? Waterboarding?

Nothing like that rings any bells?

edit: is your real name by chance Dick Cheney?
On track to MA1950A.
wei2coolman
Profile Joined November 2010
United States60033 Posts
March 18 2016 18:37 GMT
#67870
On March 19 2016 03:35 m4ini wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 19 2016 03:32 wei2coolman wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:29 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:26 wei2coolman wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:25 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:23 Reaps wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:22 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:19 wei2coolman wrote:
At least from my understanding of how polygraphs are used in internal auditing for security, is comparing current results with established baselines.


But that's pointless too.

In the terrorist example, what if the person who was "recruited" believes he isn't a terrorist? A polygraph only reacts if you basically know you're wrong.

I don't think any terrorist considers himself a terrorist.

edit: this at least makes the polygraph "unreliable" at best.



They wouldn't ask that question though, they would be a lot more specific.


The simple fact that Guantanamo Bay still exist shows that it's not as easy (or even possible).

Internal security audits with established baseline is vastly different than enemy combatants.

Not to mention, Guantanmo Bay is more of a holding cell, not "enhanced interrogation" site.


You're taking the piss now, do you.

We have allies and blacksites for that.

I have no doubt US does enhanced interrogation, but in the current state of Guantanamo Bay, that is not it's current usage.


So you apparently missed the huge worldwide outcry regarding guantanamo bay? The ICRC report? The reports of released detainees? Suicides? Waterboarding?

Nothing like that rings any bells?

edit: is your real name by chance Dick Cheney?

Talking about current usage, not past usage. Your argument was "still exists", talking about current usage.
liftlift > tsm
m4ini
Profile Joined February 2014
4215 Posts
March 18 2016 18:39 GMT
#67871
On March 19 2016 03:37 wei2coolman wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 19 2016 03:35 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:32 wei2coolman wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:29 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:26 wei2coolman wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:25 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:23 Reaps wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:22 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:19 wei2coolman wrote:
At least from my understanding of how polygraphs are used in internal auditing for security, is comparing current results with established baselines.


But that's pointless too.

In the terrorist example, what if the person who was "recruited" believes he isn't a terrorist? A polygraph only reacts if you basically know you're wrong.

I don't think any terrorist considers himself a terrorist.

edit: this at least makes the polygraph "unreliable" at best.



They wouldn't ask that question though, they would be a lot more specific.


The simple fact that Guantanamo Bay still exist shows that it's not as easy (or even possible).

Internal security audits with established baseline is vastly different than enemy combatants.

Not to mention, Guantanmo Bay is more of a holding cell, not "enhanced interrogation" site.


You're taking the piss now, do you.

We have allies and blacksites for that.

I have no doubt US does enhanced interrogation, but in the current state of Guantanamo Bay, that is not it's current usage.


So you apparently missed the huge worldwide outcry regarding guantanamo bay? The ICRC report? The reports of released detainees? Suicides? Waterboarding?

Nothing like that rings any bells?

edit: is your real name by chance Dick Cheney?

Talking about current usage, not past usage. Your argument was "still exists", talking about current usage.


So there isn't still 91 detainees in gitmo, and considering that it's proven that in gitmo torture was used.. How do you conclude the "no torture is happening" exactly?
On track to MA1950A.
{CC}StealthBlue
Profile Blog Joined January 2003
United States41117 Posts
March 18 2016 18:41 GMT
#67872
A record number of Americans believe global warming will pose a threat to their way of life, new polling data shows, amid strengthening public acceptance that rising temperatures are being driven by human activity.

“I think a shift in public opinion and consciousness has been underway for several years now,” Michael Mann, a prominent climate scientist at Pennsylvania State University, told the Guardian.

A spokesman for 350 Action, the political arm of climate activist group 350.org, said meanwhile that politicians who cast doubt on climate science would soon have to take such polling into account. Republicans, he said, “are going to be screwed if they don’t change their tune”.

Polling firm Gallup, which has been tracking public sentiment on the topic annually since 1997, found that 41% of US adults feel warming will pose a “serious threat” to them during their lifetimes. This is the highest level recorded by Gallup, a 4% increase on 2015.

A total of 64% of those polled said they worried about global warming a “great deal” or a “fair amount”, the highest level of recorded concern since 2008. Just 36% of Americans said they did not fret about it, or only worried a little.

The results show a solidifying belief that changes in the climate are under way, with 59% of people thinking so. A record 65% of Americans said global warming was down to greenhouse gases released by human activity – a 10% leap on last year.


Source
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam, this is bowling. There are rules."
KwarK
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States43275 Posts
March 18 2016 18:42 GMT
#67873
On March 19 2016 03:39 m4ini wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 19 2016 03:37 wei2coolman wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:35 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:32 wei2coolman wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:29 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:26 wei2coolman wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:25 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:23 Reaps wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:22 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:19 wei2coolman wrote:
At least from my understanding of how polygraphs are used in internal auditing for security, is comparing current results with established baselines.


But that's pointless too.

In the terrorist example, what if the person who was "recruited" believes he isn't a terrorist? A polygraph only reacts if you basically know you're wrong.

I don't think any terrorist considers himself a terrorist.

edit: this at least makes the polygraph "unreliable" at best.



They wouldn't ask that question though, they would be a lot more specific.


The simple fact that Guantanamo Bay still exist shows that it's not as easy (or even possible).

Internal security audits with established baseline is vastly different than enemy combatants.

Not to mention, Guantanmo Bay is more of a holding cell, not "enhanced interrogation" site.


You're taking the piss now, do you.

We have allies and blacksites for that.

I have no doubt US does enhanced interrogation, but in the current state of Guantanamo Bay, that is not it's current usage.


So you apparently missed the huge worldwide outcry regarding guantanamo bay? The ICRC report? The reports of released detainees? Suicides? Waterboarding?

Nothing like that rings any bells?

edit: is your real name by chance Dick Cheney?

Talking about current usage, not past usage. Your argument was "still exists", talking about current usage.


So there isn't still 91 detainees in gitmo, and considering that it's proven that in gitmo torture was used.. How do you conclude the "no torture is happening" exactly?

I believe his point was that by now they're happy they know all they're going to know about the current inmates and are just keeping them for lack of a better idea. Even if the current inmates did have something new to share that information would be a decade old at this point and irrelevant in a world in which ISIS, not Al Qaeda, is the threat.

His argument isn't that the US doesn't do torture, it's that it's not currently torturing the people held at Guantanamo which makes sense.
ModeratorThe angels have the phone box
oneofthem
Profile Blog Joined November 2005
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
March 18 2016 18:43 GMT
#67874
nothing that large scale is done to 'just make people nervous'.

the polygraph thing is not there to catch deep moles, it's for the amateurs that bumble their own leaking attempts.
We have fed the heart on fantasies, the heart's grown brutal from the fare, more substance in our enmities than in our love
wei2coolman
Profile Joined November 2010
United States60033 Posts
March 18 2016 18:44 GMT
#67875
On March 19 2016 03:42 KwarK wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 19 2016 03:39 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:37 wei2coolman wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:35 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:32 wei2coolman wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:29 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:26 wei2coolman wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:25 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:23 Reaps wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:22 m4ini wrote:
[quote]

But that's pointless too.

In the terrorist example, what if the person who was "recruited" believes he isn't a terrorist? A polygraph only reacts if you basically know you're wrong.

I don't think any terrorist considers himself a terrorist.

edit: this at least makes the polygraph "unreliable" at best.



They wouldn't ask that question though, they would be a lot more specific.


The simple fact that Guantanamo Bay still exist shows that it's not as easy (or even possible).

Internal security audits with established baseline is vastly different than enemy combatants.

Not to mention, Guantanmo Bay is more of a holding cell, not "enhanced interrogation" site.


You're taking the piss now, do you.

We have allies and blacksites for that.

I have no doubt US does enhanced interrogation, but in the current state of Guantanamo Bay, that is not it's current usage.


So you apparently missed the huge worldwide outcry regarding guantanamo bay? The ICRC report? The reports of released detainees? Suicides? Waterboarding?

Nothing like that rings any bells?

edit: is your real name by chance Dick Cheney?

Talking about current usage, not past usage. Your argument was "still exists", talking about current usage.


So there isn't still 91 detainees in gitmo, and considering that it's proven that in gitmo torture was used.. How do you conclude the "no torture is happening" exactly?

I believe his point was that by now they're happy they know all they're going to know about the current inmates and are just keeping them for lack of a better idea. Even if the current inmates did have something new to share that information would be a decade old at this point and irrelevant in a world in which ISIS, not Al Qaeda, is the threat.

His argument isn't that the US doesn't do torture, it's that it's not currently torturing the people held at Guantanamo which makes sense.

Yeah, pretty much this. All the recent reports and articles about Guantanmo have been "so... what do we do with the rest of these guys..."
liftlift > tsm
m4ini
Profile Joined February 2014
4215 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-03-18 18:46:08
March 18 2016 18:45 GMT
#67876
On March 19 2016 03:42 KwarK wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 19 2016 03:39 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:37 wei2coolman wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:35 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:32 wei2coolman wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:29 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:26 wei2coolman wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:25 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:23 Reaps wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:22 m4ini wrote:
[quote]

But that's pointless too.

In the terrorist example, what if the person who was "recruited" believes he isn't a terrorist? A polygraph only reacts if you basically know you're wrong.

I don't think any terrorist considers himself a terrorist.

edit: this at least makes the polygraph "unreliable" at best.



They wouldn't ask that question though, they would be a lot more specific.


The simple fact that Guantanamo Bay still exist shows that it's not as easy (or even possible).

Internal security audits with established baseline is vastly different than enemy combatants.

Not to mention, Guantanmo Bay is more of a holding cell, not "enhanced interrogation" site.


You're taking the piss now, do you.

We have allies and blacksites for that.

I have no doubt US does enhanced interrogation, but in the current state of Guantanamo Bay, that is not it's current usage.


So you apparently missed the huge worldwide outcry regarding guantanamo bay? The ICRC report? The reports of released detainees? Suicides? Waterboarding?

Nothing like that rings any bells?

edit: is your real name by chance Dick Cheney?

Talking about current usage, not past usage. Your argument was "still exists", talking about current usage.


So there isn't still 91 detainees in gitmo, and considering that it's proven that in gitmo torture was used.. How do you conclude the "no torture is happening" exactly?

I believe his point was that by now they're happy they know all they're going to know about the current inmates and are just keeping them for lack of a better idea. Even if the current inmates did have something new to share that information would be a decade old at this point and irrelevant in a world in which ISIS, not Al Qaeda, is the threat.

His argument isn't that the US doesn't do torture, it's that it's not currently torturing the people held at Guantanamo which makes sense.


I did see that he said "i'm convinced we do torture" (edit: cute btw to call it "enhanced interrogation")

That wasn't really the point though, it's about usage of polygraphs. They didn't use them. Instead, they used waterboarding and other (worse, to some) means.
On track to MA1950A.
wei2coolman
Profile Joined November 2010
United States60033 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-03-18 18:54:32
March 18 2016 18:49 GMT
#67877
On March 19 2016 03:45 m4ini wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 19 2016 03:42 KwarK wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:39 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:37 wei2coolman wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:35 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:32 wei2coolman wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:29 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:26 wei2coolman wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:25 m4ini wrote:
On March 19 2016 03:23 Reaps wrote:
[quote]


They wouldn't ask that question though, they would be a lot more specific.


The simple fact that Guantanamo Bay still exist shows that it's not as easy (or even possible).

Internal security audits with established baseline is vastly different than enemy combatants.

Not to mention, Guantanmo Bay is more of a holding cell, not "enhanced interrogation" site.


You're taking the piss now, do you.

We have allies and blacksites for that.

I have no doubt US does enhanced interrogation, but in the current state of Guantanamo Bay, that is not it's current usage.


So you apparently missed the huge worldwide outcry regarding guantanamo bay? The ICRC report? The reports of released detainees? Suicides? Waterboarding?

Nothing like that rings any bells?

edit: is your real name by chance Dick Cheney?

Talking about current usage, not past usage. Your argument was "still exists", talking about current usage.


So there isn't still 91 detainees in gitmo, and considering that it's proven that in gitmo torture was used.. How do you conclude the "no torture is happening" exactly?

I believe his point was that by now they're happy they know all they're going to know about the current inmates and are just keeping them for lack of a better idea. Even if the current inmates did have something new to share that information would be a decade old at this point and irrelevant in a world in which ISIS, not Al Qaeda, is the threat.

His argument isn't that the US doesn't do torture, it's that it's not currently torturing the people held at Guantanamo which makes sense.


I did see that he said "i'm convinced we do torture" (edit: cute btw to call it "enhanced interrogation")

That wasn't really the point though, it's about usage of polygraphs. They didn't use them. Instead, they used waterboarding and other (worse, to some) means.

I'm sure they used everything in their power, which probably included polygraphs, though I'm not sure how useful polygraph readings would be with a highly stressed subject after being sleep deprived, and water boarded.
liftlift > tsm
KwarK
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States43275 Posts
March 18 2016 18:52 GMT
#67878
On March 19 2016 03:43 oneofthem wrote:
nothing that large scale is done to 'just make people nervous'.

the polygraph thing is not there to catch deep moles, it's for the amateurs that bumble their own leaking attempts.

You're making an argument from an assumption of government competence? That if the government do it then surely they must have good reasons for doing it?
ModeratorThe angels have the phone box
oneofthem
Profile Blog Joined November 2005
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
March 18 2016 18:54 GMT
#67879
On March 19 2016 03:52 KwarK wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 19 2016 03:43 oneofthem wrote:
nothing that large scale is done to 'just make people nervous'.

the polygraph thing is not there to catch deep moles, it's for the amateurs that bumble their own leaking attempts.

You're making an argument from an assumption of government competence? That if the government do it then surely they must have good reasons for doing it?

uh yea. bureaucracy is stronk particularly when you are talking about having to use resources on it.
We have fed the heart on fantasies, the heart's grown brutal from the fare, more substance in our enmities than in our love
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
March 18 2016 18:55 GMT
#67880
On March 19 2016 03:52 KwarK wrote:
Show nested quote +
On March 19 2016 03:43 oneofthem wrote:
nothing that large scale is done to 'just make people nervous'.

the polygraph thing is not there to catch deep moles, it's for the amateurs that bumble their own leaking attempts.

You're making an argument from an assumption of government competence? That if the government do it then surely they must have good reasons for doing it?

Forget the machine, there is a lot of power just by forcing someone to put on a device and sit is a chair while you can move around the room.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
Prev 1 3392 3393 3394 3395 3396 10093 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
BSL 21
20:00
RO16 TieBreaker - Group B
StRyKeR vs Artosis
OyAji vs KameZerg
ZZZero.O356
LiquipediaDiscussion
IPSL
20:00
Ro16 Group C
StRyKeR vs OldBoy
Sziky vs Tarson
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
mouzHeroMarine 429
White-Ra 241
UpATreeSC 79
JuggernautJason38
Nina 6
StarCraft: Brood War
Calm 2577
ZZZero.O 356
Dota 2
LuMiX1
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor452
Other Games
Grubby5468
FrodaN2337
Mlord537
B2W.Neo515
XaKoH 442
RotterdaM258
Pyrionflax198
ArmadaUGS122
Organizations
Other Games
EGCTV1751
gamesdonequick865
StarCraft 2
angryscii 56
Other Games
BasetradeTV49
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 18 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Hupsaiya 41
• davetesta31
• Adnapsc2 3
• IndyKCrew
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• sooper7s
• Migwel
StarCraft: Brood War
• Airneanach47
• Pr0nogo 6
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
Dota 2
• Ler127
Other Games
• imaqtpie1360
• tFFMrPink 16
Upcoming Events
OSC
2h 3m
OSC
12h 3m
Wardi Open
15h 3m
Monday Night Weeklies
20h 3m
OSC
1d 2h
Wardi Open
1d 15h
Replay Cast
2 days
Wardi Open
2 days
Tenacious Turtle Tussle
3 days
The PondCast
3 days
[ Show More ]
Replay Cast
4 days
LAN Event
4 days
Replay Cast
5 days
Replay Cast
5 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Proleague 2025-11-21
Stellar Fest: Constellation Cup
Eternal Conflict S1

Ongoing

C-Race Season 1
IPSL Winter 2025-26
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 4
SOOP Univ League 2025
YSL S2
BSL Season 21
CSCL: Masked Kings S3
SLON Tour Season 2
META Madness #9
BLAST Rivals Fall 2025
IEM Chengdu 2025
PGL Masters Bucharest 2025
Thunderpick World Champ.
CS Asia Championships 2025
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2

Upcoming

BSL 21 Non-Korean Championship
Acropolis #4
IPSL Spring 2026
HSC XXVIII
RSL Offline Finals
WardiTV 2025
IEM Kraków 2026
BLAST Bounty Winter 2026
BLAST Bounty Winter 2026: Closed Qualifier
eXTREMESLAND 2025
ESL Impact League Season 8
SL Budapest Major 2025
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.