Torture: Still doesn't work

[Winehole23]

TBH both sides of this issue are ridiculously Partisan.

I find the current outrage over something everyone has known for years was going on to be pathetically humorous.You blithely dismiss torture administered by US officers as old news. The torture itself may be old news, but the Senate report on it is not.

What do you think of the report, CC? Do you agree with what our government did?

[Yonivore]

lol
Senate Democrats say... lol

[ChumpDumper]

Senate Democrats say... lolCIA documents say....

[Yonivore]

CIA documents cherry-picked, from tens of millions of documents, by a group of Democrat witch hunters say....
Fixed.

[ChumpDumper]

What problem do you have with the actual documents?

Are you saying the CIA is lying in them?

[Yonivore]

What problem do you have with the actual documents?

Are you saying the CIA is lying in them?
They're taken out of context and the agency wasn't interviewed in order to put any of what the Senate committee decided to reference in their report in context.

That's my problem.

The Senate Intelligence Committee Democrats had a preconceived conclusion and they only referenced documents that supported that conclusion.

that's another problem.

[ChumpDumper]

They're taken out of context and the agency wasn't interviewed in order to put any of what the Senate committee decided to reference in their report in context.

That's my problem.

The Senate Intelligence Committee Democrats had a preconceived conclusion and they only referenced documents that supported that conclusion.

that's another problem.So your problem is the CIA didn't get a chance to lie about what was in the documents.

OK.

[Yonivore]

So your problem is the CIA didn't get a chance to lie about what was in the documents.

OK.
No, my problem is the Senate committee spent 5 years and millions of my dollars chasing a conclusion they had reached before starting.

[ChumpDumper]

No, my problem is the Senate committee spent 5 years and millions of my dollars chasing a conclusion they had reached before starting.Well, the CIA can lie about it now all they want.

[Yonivore]

Well, the CIA can lie about it now all they want.
It looks like we've reached agreement, at least, on the motives of the Senate Intelligence Committee's Democrats. Thanks Chump.

[ChumpDumper]

It looks like we've reached agreement, at least, on the motives of the Senate Intelligence Committee's Democrats. Thanks Chump.And on the documents.

They stand perfectly fine on their own.

Thanks yoni.

[Yonivore]

And on the documents.

They stand perfectly fine on their own.

Thanks yoni.
Well, we don't really know that because the Senate Democrats only referenced a minute fraction of the available documents.

[ChumpDumper]

Well, we don't really know that because the Senate Democrats only referenced a minute fraction of the available documents.Have they finished translating the WMD documents yet, yoni?

[CosmicCowboy]

Lets all agree we made those fuckers miserable whether it is actually defined as torture or not. Big fucking deal.

Fucking Monday Morning quarterbacks want to kill the terrorists with kindness now.

[ChumpDumper]

Lets all agree we made those fuckers miserable whether it is actually defined as torture or not. Big fucking deal.

Fucking Monday Morning quarterbacks want to kill the terrorists with kindness now.A lot of them weren't even terrorists.

And your straw man is duly noted.

[CosmicCowboy]

A lot of them weren't even terrorists.

And your straw man is duly noted.

Your fake moral outrage is hilarious.

[ChumpDumper]

Your fake moral outrage is hilarious.It's just opposition to torture.

Pretty consistent.

[Yonivore]

Have they finished translating the WMD documents yet, yoni?

http://blogs.vso.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Moving-the-goalposts-300x2402.jpg

[ChumpDumper]

http://blogs.vso.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Moving-the-goalposts-300x2402.jpgYes, you do move them all the time. You did during the WMD argument too.

[CosmicCowboy]

It's just opposition to torture.

Pretty consistent.

There is no moral high ground to occupy here. There is no history of Politically Correct behavior. It's a tough world out there. Those same Muslim fucks would have returned the favor in triplicate given the opportunity.

[Spurminator]

There is no moral high ground to occupy here. There is no history of Politically Correct behavior. It's a tough world out there. Those same Muslim fucks would have returned the favor in triplicate given the opportunity.

So you're okay with being the same as these Muslim fucks? What makes us better, then? Jesus?

[ChumpDumper]

There is no moral high ground to occupy here. There is no history of Politically Correct behavior. It's a tough world out there. Those same Muslim fucks would have returned the favor in triplicate given the opportunity.Well, you don't want to be any better than them.

That's your choice.

If you want to occupy the moral low ground with terrorists, you are welcome to it. I choose differently.

[CosmicCowboy]

So you're okay with being the same as these Muslim fucks? What makes us better, then? Jesus?

Good question. What makes you think you are better? After all, we are a country that is here now because we essentially exterminated the previous occupants of the continent.

[Spurminator]

Good question. What makes you think you are better? After all, we are a country that is here now because we essentially exterminated the previous occupants of the continent.

I didn't have any say in that.

[CosmicCowboy]

The terrorists aren't going to likie us no matter how nice we are to them.

If we aren't gonna play to win then don't play at all.

[Yonivore]

So you're okay with being the same as these Muslim fucks?
Nothing the CIA did even approaches the depths of depravity of which the terrorists have proven capable and willing.


What makes us better, then? Jesus?
Well, let see, how are we different? Hmmm...

Oh! Here's a couple of examples.

We don't attack schools and massacre students by the hundreds...after forcing those children to watch us decapitate their teacher and set her on fire.

We don't record their decapitations on video and broadcast it on the internet.

We don't kidnap young girls and sell them and then issue fatwas that condone all manner of cruel and brutal acts to be committed against them.

There's a few differences...

[Spurminator]

Nothing the CIA did even approaches the depths of depravity of which the terrorists have proven capable and willing.

Well, let see, how are we different? Hmmm...

Oh! Here's a couple of examples.

We don't attack schools and massacre students by the hundreds...after forcing those children to watch us decapitate their teacher and set her on fire.

We don't record their decapitations on video and broadcast it on the internet.

We don't kidnap young girls and sell them and then issue fatwas that condone all manner of cruel and brutal acts to be committed against them.

There's a few differences...

Calm down, Sean, I was asking a question about a specific point of view, not giving an opinion of how we rank against third world countries. I'm glad you got your opportunity to remind us what a good 'Murican you are though.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

There is no moral high ground to occupy here. There is no history of Politically Correct behavior. It's a tough world out there. Those same Muslim fucks would have returned the favor in triplicate given the opportunity.

Only if you don't think sexual torture is wrong. We get that you don't think there is anything wrong with it but this isn't about you, dimwit. You don't get to outline morality for anyone else.

[Yonivore]

Calm down, Sean, I was asking a question about a specific point of view, not giving an opinion of how we rank against third world countries. I'm glad you got your opportunity to remind us what a good 'Murican you are though.
You asked what made us better. I gave you three examples.

[Spurminator]

You asked what made us better. I gave you three examples.

I would have chosen something like our freedom of speech, our religious freedom, our inventors, our artistry, our economic opportunities, our options for entertainment... You know, stuff that isn't just right above the absolute lowest bar possible.

[CosmicCowboy]

I didn't have any say in that.

You think you have a say in what we do now? :lol

[Spurminator]

You think you have a say in what we do now? :lol

:) I knew that was coming.

It's not much, but public opposition requires individual opposition.

[Yonivore]

:) I knew that was coming.

It's not much, but public opposition requires individual opposition.
It should also require a requisite knowledge of the events you oppose.

[Spurminator]

It should also require a requisite knowledge of the events you oppose.

What knowledge am I missing? We all have the same information, you've just been given different opinions about it.

[Yonivore]

What knowledge am I missing? We all have the same information, you've just been given different opinions about it.
What did the Department of Justice say was the reason the enhanced interrogation techniques, designed by the CIA and vetted by them, did not constitute torture?

Or, what are the specific differences between waterboarding, as designed and implemented by the CIA, and waterboarding, as designed and implemented by the Japanese in WWII?

Let's start with those bits of knowledge.

[ChumpDumper]

What did the Department of Justice say was the reason the enhanced interrogation techniques, designed by the CIA and vetted by them, did not constitute torture?

Or, what are the specific differences between waterboarding, as designed and implemented by the CIA, and waterboarding, as designed and implemented by the Japanese in WWII?

Let's start with those bits of knowledge.How is it different from the waterboarding done by Americans in Vietnam?

[Yonivore]

How is it different from the waterboarding done by Americans in Vietnam?
Ah, the question is mine. How is it different?

If you and Spurminator don't know the answer to that and the question about how the DOJ drew the line, then neither of you have the requisite knowledge to declare what was done to terrorists, post 9/11, constituted torture.

[Spurminator]

If you and Spurminator don't know the answer to that and the question about how the DOJ drew the line, then neither of you have the requisite knowledge to declare what was done to terrorists, post 9/11, constituted torture.

I'm not on either side of the "what is/isn't torture" argument, because it's semantical.

But to humor you, the DOJ argued that torture is defined as a technique that involves extreme pain or prolonged mental harm, and that that cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment is not torture.

My position, like many who oppose the methods detailed in the report, is that we shouldn't even be resorting to cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment, and we especially shouldn't be threatening families and inflicting this stuff on innocent people.

[Yonivore]

I think you're missing the whole point. I'm not on either side of the "what is/isn't torture" argument, because it's semantical.

To humor you, the DOJ argued that torture is defined as a technique that involves extreme pain or prolonged mental harm, and that that cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment is not torture.

My position, like many who oppose the methods detailed in the report, is that we shouldn't even be resorting to cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment, and we especially shouldn't be threatening families and inflicting this stuff on innocent people.
I don't recall any of the EITs allowing for use on innocent people or families.

But, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't think the EITs constituted torture and I believe they were warranted, justified, and effective.

[Yonivore]

I am curious, Spurminator, just to what extent would you be willing to go to try an extract intelligence from someone you strongly believed had information about pending terrorist attacks or knew the location of someone that had knowledge of pending terror attacks.

In other words, if you could have gotten to these guys...


Taliban have released more images of terrorists who attacked on school (http://www.pakprimetime.com/2014/12/17/taliban-have-released-more-images-of-terrorists-who-attacked-on-school/)

http://www.pakprimetime.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Taliban-have-released-more-images-of-terrorists-who-attacked-on-school1.jpg

...before they self-detonated after murdering over 130 schoolchildren, what would you be willing to do to find the person they called and asked, "We've killed all the children, now what do we do?"

Or, better yet, what would you be willing to that person, once you found him, to try to discover if there were plans to attack and kill more innocent children?

I think it's a legitimate question...and, perfectly analogous to what you and I would have done to KSM or Abu Zehbaydah had we had the opportunity.

I agree with what was done to those two and I would be in agreement with doing the same to the terrorists from the school massacre, as well.

What would you have done with KSM and Abu? With these guys? I'm curious.

[CosmicCowboy]

Personally, i think if you are going to fight then fight to win using every means available to you. Losing "honorably" is for losers.

[Th'Pusher]

Personally, i think if you are going to fight then fight to win using every means available to you. Losing "honorably" is for losers.
So raping women and children to demoralize the enemy; That's :tu in CC's playbook?

[CosmicCowboy]

So raping women and children to demoralize the enemy; That's :tu in CC's playbook?

Good god that was a straw man jump of monumental proportions.

Typical stupid response from the Pusher, though.

[Th'Pusher]

Good god that was a straw man jump of monumental proportions.

Typical stupid response from the Pusher, though.
How is that a strawman jump? You said every means available to win?

[CosmicCowboy]

How is that a strawman jump? You said every means available to win?

Well, dumbfuck, it starts with your incredibly flawed premise that raping women and children would demoralize the enemy.

But then again, that is just how stupid you really are.

[ChumpDumper]

Ah, the question is mine. How is it different?

If you and Spurminator don't know the answer to that and the question about how the DOJ drew the line, then neither of you have the requisite knowledge to declare what was done to terrorists, post 9/11, constituted torture.It's different, but still torture.

I know how the DOJ tried to draw the line, but they failed.

[ChumpDumper]

Personally, i think if you are going to fight then fight to win using every means available to you. Losing "honorably" is for losers.The US would never lose this war. There was no reason to resort to torture.

[CosmicCowboy]

The US would never lose this war. There was no reason to resort to torture.

Of course we will lose this war.

We aren't ever gonna win against these evil bastards playing nice.

[Spurminator]

I am curious, Spurminator, just to what extent would you be willing to go to try an extract intelligence from someone you strongly believed had information about pending terrorist attacks or knew the location of someone that had knowledge of pending terror attacks.

In other words, if you could have gotten to these guys...


Taliban have released more images of terrorists who attacked on school (http://www.pakprimetime.com/2014/12/17/taliban-have-released-more-images-of-terrorists-who-attacked-on-school/)

http://www.pakprimetime.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Taliban-have-released-more-images-of-terrorists-who-attacked-on-school1.jpg

...before they self-detonated after murdering over 130 schoolchildren, what would you be willing to do to find the person they called and asked, "We've killed all the children, now what do we do?"

Or, better yet, what would you be willing to that person, once you found him, to try to discover if there were plans to attack and kill more innocent children?

I think it's a legitimate question...and, perfectly analogous to what you and I would have done to KSM or Abu Zehbaydah had we had the opportunity.

I agree with what was done to those two and I would be in agreement with doing the same to the terrorists from the school massacre, as well.

What would you have done with KSM and Abu? With these guys? I'm curious.


I think the whole idea that we can reliably and consistently extract information like this is flawed. It fails more often than it succeeds, and the ideal approach is to build up our image and relationships in these regions so we are able to get intel from the willing. There may not have been anything we could do about the tragedy at that school, but it's an opportunity for us to magnify who the real bad guys are, as long as we don't fuck it up and make ourselves look worse.

[CosmicCowboy]

I think the whole idea that we can reliably and consistently extract information like this is flawed. It fails more often than it succeeds, and the ideal approach is to build up our image and relationships in these regions so we are able to get intel from the willing. There may not have been anything we could do about the tragedy at that school, but it's an opportunity for us to magnify who the real bad guys are, as long as we don't fuck it up and make ourselves look worse.

But you are looking at it like a spoiled American who came from a culture of free will and choice. These third world cultures are WAY down the Mazlow curve and don't think like you do.

They respect power, not kumbaya touchy feely platitudes. Go in there and fuck up these bastards and kill their wives, kids, aunts, uncles and girlfriends to the very last one. Hearts and minds? :lol the only way to win with these bastards is to exterminate them like vermin.

[Yonivore]

I think the whole idea that we can reliably and consistently extract information like this is flawed. It fails more often than it succeeds,...
It succeeded when it needed to.


...and the ideal approach is to build up our image and relationships in these regions so we are able to get intel from the willing.
What has done more harm than good (with respect to your ideal approach) is that we tend to leave those that cooperate exposed...

Obama administration to blame for jailing of hero Bin Laden doctor, says Pakistani report (http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/05/31/us-to-blame-for-jailing-hero-bin-laden-doctor-says-pakistani-report/)


There may not have been anything we could do about the tragedy at that school, but it's an opportunity for us to magnify who the real bad guys are, as long as we don't fuck it up and make ourselves look worse.
I'm not talking about having been able to do anything about the terror attack described in the article. I'm asking you what you would have done with the terrorists (if you had been able to capture them before they self-detonated) or with the person they called and asked for further instructions? Chances are this group has plans to execute further atrocities. What would you do with anyone you were able to capture who you believed might have information about those future attacks?

[Spurminator]

It succeeded when it needed to.

So has my approach.


What has done more harm than good (with respect to your ideal approach) is that we tend to leave those that cooperate exposed...

Obama administration to blame for jailing of hero Bin Laden doctor, says Pakistani report (http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/05/31/us-to-blame-for-jailing-hero-bin-laden-doctor-says-pakistani-report/)

"Tend" would imply this is common. It's not, and you don't abandon the whole approach because of mistakes in execution, you improve the execution.


I'm not talking about having been able to do anything about the terror attack described in the article. I'm asking you what you would have done with the terrorists (if you had been able to capture them before they self-detonated) or with the person they called and asked for further instructions? Chances are this group has plans to execute further atrocities. What would you do with anyone you were able to capture who you believed might have information about those future attacks?

I don't know that we should be getting involved beyond basic assistance and supporting their intelligence efforts to prevent another attack. They need to secure their schools better.

[CosmicCowboy]

I don't know that we should be getting involved beyond basic assistance and supporting their intelligence efforts to prevent another attack. They need to secure their schools better.

We need to tell the good guys to identify the Fazlulla and Khurrasi villages where these animals came from, give us GPS coordinates and send in the B52's from Diego Garcia. Rolling Thunder. Blow the fuck out of everything big enough to die.

THAT will win some hearts and minds.

[Yonivore]

So has my approach.
Actually, it didn't. That's why the CIA asked for and received permission to use the Enhanced Interrogation Techniques. Your techniques weren't working fast enough.


[/U][/B]"Tend" would imply this is common. It's not, and you don't abandon the whole approach because of mistakes in execution, you improve the execution.
I could say the same about EITs


I don't know that we should be getting involved beyond basic assistance and supporting their intelligence efforts to prevent another attack. They need to secure their schools better.
It was an analogy to try an elicit a response from you on what you would do if you had KSM or Abu Zehbaydah in custody and believed them to have information that could lead to the discovery of further plots to kill thousands of Americans.

[ChumpDumper]

Of course we will lose this war. No, the US will never be a caliphate.


We aren't ever gonna win against these evil bastards playing nice.It has been shown torturing didn't work either.

[ChumpDumper]

It succeeded when it needed to.Except it didn't.

[Yonivore]

Except it didn't.
Except it did. President Obama said so.

[Th'Pusher]

Except it did. President Obama said so.
Democrats are liars yoni. You know that

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Couple of things are being ignored here.

First as to the issue as to why the CIA was not 'consulted' in the manner they claim to have wanted: they were obstructing the discovery of evidence for years. There is a bumped WH thread from a couple of months ago outlining that and is reason why it took so long to compile.

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=229975

Second, the CIA has been very careful to avoid ever saying that the torture was the cause of the intelligence but rather claim that the entire investigation process did. It sidesteps the issue of what actually got the info and gives Yoni and other minions something to wave their hands at. When you actually look at what part of the interrogation worked and didn't the picture becomes clear that torture was unnecessary and in instances counterproductive.

[Yonivore]

Couple of things are being ignored here.

First as to the issue as to why the CIA was not 'consulted' in the manner they claim to have wanted: they were obstructing the discovery of evidence for years. There is a bumped WH thread from a couple of months ago outlining that and is reason why it took so long to compile.

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=229975
Well, that's not a reason. Just subpoena the staff if they won't comply with requests for records. There's not an agency in the Obama administration that isn't stonewalling requests for documents; from Fast and Furious to the IRS scandal.


Second, the CIA has been very careful to avoid ever saying that the torture was the cause of the intelligence but rather claim that the entire investigation process did. It sidesteps the issue of what actually got the info and gives Yoni and other minions something to wave their hands at. When you actually look at what part of the interrogation worked and didn't the picture becomes clear that torture was unnecessary and in instances counterproductive.
That's not true either. From the current CIA Director to the former Chief of Clandestine Services, they all declare EITs resulted in actionable intelligence that thwarted terrorist attacks and ultimately led to the location of Osama bin Laden.

Again, I think you ignore context. At the time the EITs were employed, it was believed follow on attacks were imminent. The usual methods of interrogation which take time to develop were seen as ineffective in such a circumstance. The decision was made to design and seek approval for harsher techniques that, ultimately, led to the actionable intelligence that was used to stop terrorist attacks. No one's claimed the other methods aren't effective, just that they would not have worked in the compressed time frame under which the CIA was operating.

[velik_m]

Personally, i think if you are going to fight then fight to win using every means available to you. Losing "honorably" is for losers.

Given the economic and military power of USA, winning the wars should be, and is, easy for America using only "clean" methods, winning the peace however is far more tricky and using stuff like torture just makes it harder for your country.

[ElNono]

Personally, i think if you are going to fight then fight to win using every means available to you. Losing "honorably" is for losers.

Define 'win'?

[CosmicCowboy]

Define 'win'?

With ISIS, for example "win" = exterminate because that is the only way you stop them.

I'm not stupid enough to think we are going to win anything in that shithole part of the world.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Well, that's not a reason. Just subpoena the staff if they won't comply with requests for records. There's not an agency in the Obama administration that isn't stonewalling requests for documents; from Fast and Furious to the IRS scandal.


That's not true either. From the current CIA Director to the former Chief of Clandestine Services, they all declare EITs resulted in actionable intelligence that thwarted terrorist attacks and ultimately led to the location of Osama bin Laden.

Again, I think you ignore context. At the time the EITs were employed, it was believed follow on attacks were imminent. The usual methods of interrogation which take time to develop were seen as ineffective in such a circumstance. The decision was made to design and seek approval for harsher techniques that, ultimately, led to the actionable intelligence that was used to stop terrorist attacks. No one's claimed the other methods aren't effective, just that they would not have worked in the compressed time frame under which the CIA was operating.

They are one of the top counter intelligence organizations in the world and were not complying with the investigation. Quit being obtuse. The liaison they put in charge of 'cooperating' was outright hostile and obstructive. Cops are much the same way when investigated and say the same shit after the fact.

There is always a new attack so that excuse is shit. Read the exact quotes in their interviews and their counter reports. They never say the techniques worked. They say interrogations using them were successful. They don't say that the techniques themselves do. It is an important distinction and one that does not dispute the senate report which outlines the use and result of each technique. Also, you ignore the false leads and other counter productive outcomes.

And yeah the CIA certainly is trying to pass the buck to the AG and POTUS office. You really are naive.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

With ISIS, for example "win" = exterminate because that is the only way you stop them.

I'm not stupid enough to think we are going to win anything in that shithole part of the world.

When bluster meets stupidity: the CC way.

[CosmicCowboy]

When bluster meets stupidity: the CC way.

With fuzzy it's just stupid meeting stupid.

Anyone that believes they can convert and rehabilitate vicious, violent, religious fanatics is living in an alternate universe.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

With fuzzy it's just stupid meeting stupid.

Anyone that believes they can convert and rehabilitate vicious, violent, religious fanatics is living in an alternate universe.

Anyone that believes that all people within an organization are the same and are nonredeemable are naive and self righteous. Are you familiar with the economics and living conditions in the middle east?

[CosmicCowboy]

:lol @ Fuzzbrains naive and self righteous bullshit.

[Winehole23]

Merry Christmas from the NSA:



The reports show violations including communications from people in the U.S. being “inadvertently targeted or collected” by the agency. Some of the violations resemble the disclosures of NSA programs by Edward Snowden.

The report cites incidents of “poorly constructed data queries” that targeted Americans, improper handling of data and information used improperly.

Some incidents showed how a U.S. Army sergeant used an NSA system to “target his wife,” which led to a reduction in rank and further punishment.


But while those incidents may be the most disconcerting, actually looking through a report will show dozens upon dozens of less sexy, but nevertheless important bureaucratic and technical issues with the operations of the tools the NSA uses for surveillance. The most recent report (https://www.nsa.gov/public_info/_files/IOB/FY2013_1Q_IOB_Report.pdf) (pdf) is for the fourth quarter of 2012. By this time, the NSA has had years to hammer out all sorts of problems with its system. Yet, the quarterly report contains 20 pages of brief descriptions of mistakes. Most are not of sinister intent, like the sergeant who targeted his wife, but many of them are from database queries that have not been properly handled or a due to a failure of oversight over who is supposed to have access to what, where. And several of the entries in just this one report are completely redacted. How much worse do those entries have to be that we’re not allowed to see a single word about what happened?


Should we care about this? Recall the case of Khalid El-Masri (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_El-Masri), the German-Lebanese man mistakenly arrested and tortured by the CIA in a black site in Afghanistan. This cascade of bureaucratic mistakes doesn’t have to be of ill intent to cause some serious harm to somebody. When the NSA extends its data gathering to people two or three steps away from its target, the next El-Masri could be any of us, entirely because of some analyst’s error.

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/12/26/nsa-releases-report-internal-abuses-christmas-eve/

[TeyshaBlue]

With fuzzy it's just stupid meeting stupid.

Anyone that believes they can convert and rehabilitate vicious, violent, religious fanatics is living in an alternate universe.
We can engage an enemy without nuclear weapons....we can engage an enemy without toture.

[boutons_deux]

We can engage an enemy without nuclear weapons....we can engage an enemy without toture.

... yeah, the US FAILED wonderfully in Afghanistan, Iraq, and has totally destabilized the Middle East, gave the planet ISIS. Thanks, Repugs!

As I said years ago, it's THEIR countries, they will, they have out-waited the US (while wasting 1000s of US military lives and US $Ts).

eg, The Taliban are now taking over regions in Afghanistan the the US had "secured".

The Unspeakable in Afghanistan

2014 marks the deadliest year in Afghanistan for civilians, fighters, and foreigners. The situation has reached a new low as the myth of the Afghan state continues. Thirteen years into America’s longest war, the international community argues that Afghanistan is growing stronger, despite nearly all indicators suggesting otherwise.

The Taliban and other insurgent groups continue to gain traction and have pulled increasing parts of the country under their control.

Throughout the provinces, and even in some of the major cities, the Taliban have begun collecting taxes and are working to secure key roadways.

Kabul—a city that has been called the most fortified city on earth—has been on edge due to multiple suicide bombings.

The attacks on various targets, ranging from high schools to houses for foreign workers, the military, and even the office of Kabul’s police chief have clearly communicated the ability of anti-government forces to strike at will.

http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/28132-the-unspeakable-in-afghanistan

"can engage" ! yes, ENGAGE WITHOUT VICTORY (to enrich 99%'s wealth transfer to the MIC) :lol

Meanwhile, our, oops, BigOil's friend Saudi Arabia:
Saudi Women To Be Tried In Terrorism Court After Defying Driving Ban (http://thinkprogress.org/world/2014/12/26/3606993/saudi-women-to-be-tried-in-terrorism-court-after-defying-driving-ban/)Two Saudi women jailed for defying the nation’s ban on women driving were sent to antiterrorism court (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/26/world/middleeast/saudi-antiterrorism-court-to-try-women-held-for-driving.html?action=click&contentCollection=Middle%20East&region=Footer&module=MoreInSection&pgtype=article) Thursday.

Loujain al-Hathloul, 25, was arrested along with a journalist, 33-year-old Maysa al-Amoudi, when she tried to drive into Saudi Arabia from the United Arab Emirates earlier in
December.

But the two will not be tried for driving, which is not officially banned by law (though the state does not issue licenses to women and Saudi clerics have explicitly forbidden it).

Instead, the Specialized Criminal Court will scrutinize their social media posts under a law ostensibly intended to fight cybercrime. The court has been used not only to try terrorism cases but also to dole out lengthy sentences to political dissidents and human rights workers

http://thinkprogress.org/world/2014/12/26/3606993/saudi-women-to-be-tried-in-terrorism-court-after-defying-driving-ban/

And of course OBL said he hit WTC as pushback for US boots occupying, defiling sacred Saudi sands (to protect BigOil).

[TeyshaBlue]

Take your bullshit spit takes and moon bat blogs somewhere else.

[Winehole23]

blast from the past:


Yoni says anal rape is not torture if he uses his small dick.

[RandomGuy]

No, what is sufficient, is that the techniques have yet to be taken to court. Why is that?


Would they care if I did? The people subjected to the techniques weren't tourists randomly pulled out of a line and "tortured."


I didn't dodge it, I ignored it. Is this talking about SERE training and our use of waterboarding on trainees? Or, is it now being alleged we waterboarded our soldiers to extract information or punish them, somehow? Because, that would be a bigger deal than waterboarding KSM. I ignored it because, whatever you were posing about didn't seem to be new and, therefore, since it wasn't new, I assumed it was some rehashing of previously known information (such as that waterboarding is part of SERE training).

"I didn't dodge it, I ignored it."

uuuuh, whut? LOL

So you require a court to hear something before you are capable of making an ethical determination. Pretty fucking weak sauce, IMO, but I suppose that is an answer of sorts. As for why, I am not sure what you are getting at. You will need to elaborate a bit to get a fair answer.

Q (Randomguy) I guess if a foreign government detained you, and showed you a letter saying some procedure was not torture, you wouldn't complain?
A: (Yonivore) Would they care if I did? The people subjected to the techniques weren't tourists randomly pulled out of a line and "tortured."

Not really a fair honest answer, to ask a question in response. Either we can use reason and empathy to make ethical determinations, or we have no moral compass at all. The question remains, since you advocate this here, is "If a foreign government did this repeatedly to you, and showed you a memo one of their lawyers wrote saying its legal, would you find that acceptable justification?"

I could also ask, if you were forcibly subjected to this a few dozen times by someone CONVINCED you knew something they wanted to know, would you find it to reasoanably fit a definition of torture?

Lastly, you still aren't honestly answering the last question either. If your previous "answers" have included dishonest or logically flawed red herrings, such as "its used on trainees", then you have not really answered it.

Perhaps I should be more specific.

Would you find the repeated involuntary use of this tactic, to purposefully force one or more of our servicemembers to reveal militarily valuable information acceptable or morally justified? If not, why?

[Yonivore]

"I didn't dodge it, I ignored it."

uuuuh, whut? LOL

So you require a court to hear something before you are capable of making an ethical determination. Pretty fucking weak sauce, IMO, but I suppose that is an answer of sorts. As for why, I am not sure what you are getting at. You will need to elaborate a bit to get a fair answer.
I've made my ethical determination the techniques do not constitute torture, were warranted, legitimate, and effective. Your bias is not allowing you to understand my position, vis-a-vis a legal determination. While I believe the Bush administration did due diligence in developing a regimen of harsh interrogation techniques that were not torture, you claim the opposite. The way to settle the argument is not by shouting each other down on the internet or fostering a narrative in the media. It is by dragging the techniques into a court of law and having them examined and found to be either torture or not torture. That hasn't happened. And, until it does, you have nothing more than the blathering of a bunch of Bush haters that have dragged this out for over a decade without being willing to actually have the argument settled in court. I believe that's because they know it'll be discovered the techniques were, in fact, not torture.


Q (Randomguy) I guess if a foreign government detained you, and showed you a letter saying some procedure was not torture, you wouldn't complain?
A: (Yonivore) Would they care if I did? The people subjected to the techniques weren't tourists randomly pulled out of a line and "tortured."

Not really a fair honest answer, to ask a question in response. Either we can use reason and empathy to make ethical determinations, or we have no moral compass at all. The question remains, since you advocate this here, is "If a foreign government did this repeatedly to you, and showed you a memo one of their lawyers wrote saying its legal, would you find that acceptable justification?"
I think the more appropriate question is, where is your proof the techniques constituted torture?


I could also ask, if you were forcibly subjected to this a few dozen times by someone CONVINCED you knew something they wanted to know, would you find it to reasoanably fit a definition of torture?
Again, are the techniques torture? And, it would also depend on what they were CONVINCED I knew. Was I in the leadership of an organization that had just murdered 3,000 people and, for all we knew, were in the process of executing a follow on attack?


Lastly, you still aren't honestly answering the last question either. If your previous "answers" have included dishonest or logically flawed red herrings, such as "its used on trainees", then you have not really answered it.

Perhaps I should be more specific.

Would you find the repeated involuntary use of this tactic, to purposefully force one or more of our servicemembers to reveal militarily valuable information acceptable or morally justified? If not, why?
Again, if only our enemies would engage in such due diligence when deciding on how to interrogate our servicemen.

[RandomGuy]

I've made my ethical determination the techniques do not constitute torture, were warranted, legitimate, and effective. Your bias is not allowing you to understand my position, vis-a-vis a legal determination. While I believe the Bush administration did due diligence in developing a regimen of harsh interrogation techniques that were not torture, you claim the opposite. The way to settle the argument is not by shouting each other down on the internet or fostering a narrative in the media. It is by dragging the techniques into a court of law and having them examined and found to be either torture or not torture. That hasn't happened. And, until it does, you have nothing more than the blathering of a bunch of Bush haters that have dragged this out for over a decade without being willing to actually have the argument settled in court. I believe that's because they know it'll be discovered the techniques were, in fact, not torture.


I think the more appropriate question is, where is your proof the techniques constituted torture?


Again, are the techniques torture? And, it would also depend on what they were CONVINCED I knew. Was I in the leadership of an organization that had just murdered 3,000 people and, for all we knew, were in the process of executing a follow on attack?


Again, if only our enemies would engage in such due diligence when deciding on how to interrogate our servicemen.

Um, yeah.

I"ll have to get back to this. Quite frankly, the level of sophistry and sheer bloody-minded lack of ethics you display seriously here make me a bit too disgusted to respond at the moment.

In the meantime, keep dissembling. It makes your arguments look shittier. I'll give you a day to find a shred of decency, and maybe answer the questions I have posed in an intellectually honest way, after that I am pissed enough that I will start treating you like Cosmored, and string together my honest questions, and your evasive dishonesty.

I will assert you cannot under just about any commonly accepted view of ethics determine that the kinds of waterboarding is ethical. I think that if you elaborated a bit on that, you would be forced to see it, or at the very least provide an amusing bit of mental gymnastics.

Until then:
How do you decide what is ethical, Yonivore? What are your guiding principles or precepts?

[Yonivore]

Um, yeah.

I"ll have to get back to this. Quite frankly, the level of sophistry and sheer bloody-minded lack of ethics you display seriously here make me a bit too disgusted to respond at the moment.
:lmao What are you, a Columbia student?


In the meantime, keep dissembling. It makes your arguments look shittier. I'll give you a day to find a shred of decency, and maybe answer the questions I have posed in an intellectually honest way, after that I am pissed enough that I will start treating you like Cosmored, and string together my honest questions, and your evasive dishonesty.
My argument has not changed. Do what you want.


I will assert you cannot under just about any commonly accepted view of ethics determine that the kinds of waterboarding is ethical. I think that if you elaborated a bit on that, you would be forced to see it, or at the very least provide an amusing bit of mental gymnastics.
There's a difference between ethics and law. But, even so, I'm not questioning the ethics of the techniques just claiming they were legal, warranted, and effective. I can't help that it bothers you.


Until then:
How do you decide what is ethical, Yonivore? What are your guiding principles or precepts?
How do you decide what's legal, RandomGuy? And, the gum wrapper definition of ethical behavior is "doing the right thing even when you don't think anyone is watching." The CIA knew people were watching and they did the right thing.

[RandomGuy]

:lmao What are you, a Columbia student?


My argument has not changed. Do what you want.


There's a difference between ethics and law. But, even so, I'm not questioning the ethics of the techniques just claiming they were legal, warranted, and effective. I can't help that it bothers you.


How do you decide what's legal, RandomGuy? And, the gum wrapper definition of ethical behavior is "doing the right thing even when you don't think anyone is watching." The CIA knew people were watching and they did the right thing.

So, you are going to double down then, and keep dissembling. Gotcha, then you get the Cosmored treatment.

You can't fucking answer a straight question, Cosmored can't answer a straight question.

When pressed to give an answer that might not present your case in a good light, or point out a weakness, you can't fucking admit it.
When pressed to give an answer that might not present Cosmoreds case in a good light, or point out a weakness, Cosmored can't fucking admit it.

It should bother you, were you not likely something of a sociopath, that there are some disturbing parallels in your thought processes with Cosmored.

[RandomGuy]

Until then:
How do you decide what is ethical, Yonivore? What are your guiding principles or precepts?






How do you decide what's legal, RandomGuy? And, the gum wrapper definition of ethical behavior is "doing the right thing even when you don't think anyone is watching." The CIA knew people were watching and they did the right thing.

Again, not an answer.

Answer my question, fairly asked, and asked first.

How do you decide what is ethical, Yonivore? What are your guiding principles or precepts?

If you prefer:

How do YOU determine what "the right thing" is?

Note:


I've made my ethical determination the techniques do not constitute torture, were warranted, legitimate, and effective. Your bias is not allowing you to understand my position, vis-a-vis a legal determination. While I believe the Bush administration did due diligence in developing a regimen of harsh interrogation techniques that were not torture, you claim the opposite.

You can't claim it is my bias keeping me from understanding your shitty opinion, if you refuse to tell me how you arrived at your shitty opinion.

[Winehole23]

US Senate outlaws torture:



The Senate voted overwhelmingly Tuesday morning to permanently ban so-called “enhanced interrogation techniques” such as waterboarding, “rectal feeding” and hooding, in an effort stop what was widely seen as torture.


The 78-21 vote showed bipartisan support for the amendment of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which would ban the entire U.S. government — including the previously exempt CIA — from using torture on prisoners, according to The Hill (http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/245117-senate-votes-to-permanently-ban-use-of-torture).

Instead, the government would only be able to use what is in the Army Filed Manual, and would be required to update the manual every three years to make sure it is compliant with U.S. and international law.

Should the amendment clear Congress, it would make an executive order issued by Barack Obama in 2009 a law.

http://philadelphia.suntimes.com/national-world-news/7/72/1304713/senate-votes-ban-u-s-use-torture

[RandomGuy]

With ISIS, for example "win" = exterminate because that is the only way you stop them.

I'm not stupid enough to think we are going to win anything in that shithole part of the world.

It is a war of ideas. You win by making the idea discredited.

One thing this country tends to do poorly is idea warfare. We seem to have lost the knack for it.

[RandomGuy]

US Senate outlaws torture:

http://philadelphia.suntimes.com/national-world-news/7/72/1304713/senate-votes-ban-u-s-use-torture

zmeF2rzsZSU

Some of the "plots" the CIA claims to have disrupted using information from torture included a plot to make a nuclear weapon by refining uranium by "swinging a bucket around on a rope".

FWIW... Helen Mirren reading the torture report, almost makes it sound interesting.

Torture still doesn't work, despite what Yonivore wants to think.

[boutons_deux]

zmeF2rzsZSU
FWIW... Helen Mirren reading the torture report, almost makes it sound interesting.

Torture still doesn't work, despite what Yonivore wants to think.

Scalia referencing at TV show proving torture works is irrefutable proof he's judicial garbage. Thanks, Repugs!

America is a better place for Repugs filling judgeships with judicial, ideological, religious, extremist, whoring garbage.

[Winehole23]

Alvin Bernard “Buzzy” Krongard, who was the CIA’s executive director from 2001 to 2004 — the number-three (https://www.cia.gov/about-cia/leadership) position at the agency — was asked on a BBC news program (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-33764758) if he thought waterboarding and putting a detainee in painful stress positions amounted to torture.

“Well, let’s put it this way, it is meant to make him as uncomfortable as possible,” he said. “So I assume for, without getting into semantics, that’s torture. I’m comfortable with saying that.”


He added: “We were told by legal authorities that we could torture people.”

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/08/05/new-campaign-rebut-torture-allegations-undermined-former-official-admits-obvious/

[Winehole23]

mistaken identity, 13 years at Gitmo. false imprisonment based on bad information in a legal black hole doesn't count as torture, but maybe is worse:


The Guantánamo parole board on Thursday approved the release of a Yemeni “forever prisoner,” dismissing U.S. intelligence that imprisoned the man for 13 years at the Navy base in Cuba as “discredited.”


The so-called Periodic Review Board heard the case of Mustafa al Shamiri, 37, on Dec. 1. His story captured the world’s attention (http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/guantanamo/article47338200.html) because he was a victim of mistaken identity. Intelligence analysts wrongly cast him as a captive of consequence, an al-Qaida facilitator or courier, rather than a run-of-the-mill jihadist — because his name was similar to actual extremists.

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/guantanamo/article55801630.html

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/guantanamo/article55801630.html#storylink=cpy

[RandomGuy]

When bluster meets stupidity: the CC way.

No need to be that unkind. CC can be reasoned with around the edges. :D

[RandomGuy]

mistaken identity, 13 years at Gitmo. false imprisonment based on bad information in a legal black hole doesn't count as torture, but maybe is worse:

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/guantanamo/article55801630.html

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/guantanamo/article55801630.html#storylink=cpy


Shame.

It always shocks me that some are so glib about the "Terrorists" at Gitmo.

My country should not stand for indefinite detention without trial.

[boutons_deux]

My country should not stand for indefinite detention without trial.

American rights only apply to American citizens. They aren't human rights. non-Americans are second class humans. God Himself said so.

[RandomGuy]

Years later. Still doesn't work.

Doesn't stop Trump from saying it does though.

[Winehole23]

another way torture is counterproductive is that it's screwing up military commissions against Khalid Shaikh Mohammad and his co-defendants Walid bin Attash, Mustafa al-Hawsawi, Ramzi Binalshibh, and Ammar al-Baluchi (aka Ali Abdul Aziz Ali) -- 14 years later.


https://www.lawfareblog.com/military-commission-judge-bars-government-using-defendants-statements-fbi-clean-teams-911-case

[Spurtacular]

Torture still doesn't work, despite what Yonivore wants to think.

:lol Today's bold-faced liar.

[RandomGuy]

:lol Today's bold-faced liar.

Figured out how publicly-traded companies aren't the government?

:rollin

[Chucho]

Figured out how publicly-traded companies aren't the government?

:rollin

:rollin

[Winehole23]

lawsuit against US contractors in Iraq moves forward.
.
if torture works, one would think the contractors would have come away at least with a few more false confessions


The case, brought under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) and federal question jurisdiction, brings claims arising from violations of U.S. and international law, including torture; cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment; war crimes; assault and battery; sexual assault and battery; intentional infliction of emotional distress; negligent hiring and supervision; and negligent infliction of emotional distress. Through this action, the clients seek compensatory and punitive damages.


Our clients are Iraqis civilians who were ultimately released without ever being charged with a crime. They all continue to suffer from physical and mental injuries caused by the torture and other abuse they endured. Here’s a brief description of the acts to which they were subjected at the hands of CACI employees and certain government co-conspirators:


Suhail Najim Abdullah Al Shimari was detained from 2003 until 2008, during which he was held at the Abu Ghraib “hard site” for about two months. While he was there, CACI and its co-conspirators tortured him in various ways: he was subjected to electric shocks, deprived of food, threatened by dogs, and kept naked while forced to engage in physical activities to the point of exhaustion.


Taha Yaseen Arraq Rashid was detained from 2003 until 2005, during which he was imprisoned at the Abu Ghraib “hard site” for about three months. While he was detained there, CACI and its co-conspirators tortured Mr. Rashid by placing him in stress positions for extended periods of time; humiliating him; depriving him of oxygen, food, and water; shooting him in the head with a taser gun; and by beating him so severely that he suffered broken limbs and vision loss. Mr. Rashid was forcibly subjected to sexual acts by a female as he was cuffed and shackled to cell bars. He was also forced to witness the rape of a female prisoner.



Asa’ad Hamza Hanfoosh Zuba’e was imprisoned at Abu Ghraib from 2003 until 2004. CACI and its co-conspirators tortured him while he was detained there by subjecting him to extremely hot and cold water, beating his genitals with a stick, and detaining him in a solitary cell in conditions of sensory deprivation for almost a full year.


Salah Hasan Nusaif Al-Ejaili, an Al Jazeera journalist, was imprisoned at the Abu Ghraib “hard site” for approximately four months. While he was there, CACI and its co-conspirators stripped him and kept him naked, threatened him with dogs, deprived him of food, beat him, and kept him in a solitary cell in conditions of sensory deprivation.
https://ccrjustice.org/home/what-we-do/our-cases/al-shimari-v-caci-et-al

[boutons_deux]

https://ccrjustice.org/home/what-we-do/our-cases/al-shimari-v-caci-et-al

God's own Christian America! Fuck yeah!

[Winehole23]

US torture victim Gul Rahman's family sues to recover his body. The military contractors who designed the torture techniques used on him have settled the lawsuit against them.


the settlement left unresolved the mystery of what happened to Gul Rahman’s remains. Internal CIA investigations (https://www.thetorturedatabase.org/files/foia_subsite/cia_25_29.x.pdf) produced for the lawsuit recorded that the CIA ordered a freezer (https://www.thetorturedatabase.org/files/foia_subsite/cia_17_29.m_0.pdf) to preserve the body for an autopsy, and summarized an autopsy report that listed the likely cause of death as hypothermia. No records relating to the disposition of Rahman’s remains have been released.


The Geneva Conventions and other international treaties require that prisoners who die in custody in wartime be buried in marked graves, that the graves’ locations be recorded in a registry, and that their families be notified and allowed access to the gravesites when hostilities end.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/apr/18/gul-rahman-cia-black-site-torture-family-demands-body

[boutons_deux]

"an autopsy report that listed the likely cause of death as hypothermia"

they bothered with an autopsy?

God's very own Christ-loving USA froze GR to death?

[Winehole23]

the hostilities never ended, I guess.

[boutons_deux]

the hostilities never ended, I guess.

It's A Business, with Repugs privatizing their crimes to criminal contractors staffed by sadists, murderers, all sickos.

[Winehole23]

For the first time, open testimony about US torture.


Mr. Khan gained attention with the release of a 2014 study of the C.I.A. program by the Senate Intelligence Committee that said, after he refused to eat, his captors “infused” a puree of his lunch through his anus. The C.I.A. called it rectal refeeding. Mr. Khan called it rape.


The C.I.A. pumped water up the rectum of prisoners who would not follow a command to drink. Mr. Khan said this was done to him with “green garden hoses. They connected one end to the faucet, put the other in my rectum and they turned on the water.” He said he lost control of his bowels after those episodes and, to this day, has hemorrhoids.


He spoke about failed and sadistic responses to his hunger strikes and other acts of rebellion. Medics would roughly insert a feeding tube up his nose and down the back of his throat. He would try to bite it off and, in at least one instance, he said, a C.I.A. officer used a plunger to force food inside his stomach, a technique that caused stomach cramps and diarrhea.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/28/us/politics/guantanamo-detainee-torture.html

[Winehole23]

He received beatings while nude and spent long stretches in chains — at times shackled to a wall and crouching “like a dog,” he said, or with his arms extended high above his head and chained to a beam inside his cell. He was kept in darkness and dragged, hooded and shackled, his head slamming into floors, walls and stairs as he was moved between cells.


Before the C.I.A. moved him from one prison to another, he said, a medic inserted an enema and then put him in a diaper held in place by duct tape so he would not need a bathroom break during flights. Guards moving him would hood him, aside from the time he had his face duct taped.


While held in a Muslim country, he said, his captors allowed him to pray. But at times the Americans did not.

[Winehole23]

Soon after his capture in Pakistan in March 2003, Mr. Khan said, he cooperated with his captors, telling them everything he knew, with the hope of release. “Instead, the more I cooperated, the more I was tortured,” he said.

[Winehole23]

Mr. Khan gained attention with the release of a 2014 study of the C.I.A. program by the Senate Intelligence Committee that said, after he refused to eat, his captors “infused” a puree of his lunch through his anus. The C.I.A. called it rectal refeeding. Mr. Khan called it rape.


The C.I.A. pumped water up the rectum of prisoners who would not follow a command to drink. Mr. Khan said this was done to him with “green garden hoses. They connected one end to the faucet, put the other in my rectum and they turned on the water.” He said he lost control of his bowels after those episodes and, to this day, has hemorrhoids.


He spoke about failed and sadistic responses to his hunger strikes and other acts of rebellion. Medics would roughly insert a feeding tube up his nose and down the back of his throat. He would try to bite it off and, in at least one instance, he said, a C.I.A. officer used a plunger to force food inside his stomach, a technique that caused stomach cramps and diarrhea.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/28/us/politics/guantanamo-detainee-torture.html

[Thread]

Soon after his capture in Pakistan in March 2003, Mr. Khan said, he cooperated with his captors, telling them everything he knew, with the hope of release. “Instead, the more I cooperated, the more I was tortured,” he said."

"Uh, yes, uh, Dale is your name?"

I nod.

"Well, sure I can do that, but it'll be extra."

"How much extra?"

...

[boutons_deux]

https://cbsnews1.cbsistatic.com/hub/i/2006/09/06/d4663019-a642-11e2-a3f0-029118418759/image1976441x.jpg


Bush: 'We Don't Torture'




https://www.cbsnews.com/news/bush-we-dont-torture/

[RandomGuy]

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/28/us/politics/guantanamo-detainee-torture.html

ish. Not in my name.

[Winehole23]

ish. Not in my name.It's on all our heads. This is who we are.

"Not in my name" doesn't dispel the crime or our responsibility for it. Most people complacently tolerated it because the victims were swarthy Asian men without access to the media or due process who our government declared to be terrorists. Out of sight, out of mind.

Others, like our friend Dale, get a kick out it. The pro-torture crew used to be more vocal.

[RandomGuy]

It's on all our heads. This is who we are.

"Not in my name" doesn't dispel the crime or our responsibility for it. Most people complacently tolerated it because the victims were swarthy Asian men without access to the media or due process who our government declared to be terrorists. Out of sight, out of mind.

Others, like our friend Dale, get a kick out it. The pro-torture crew used to be more vocal.

(sighs heavily) Yeah, I know it doesnt dispel responsibility. I meant it more in the vein of "this should never be done in our name".

[Winehole23]

For cooperation with the government, he's likely to be released early next year.

1454178461132722182

[DMC]

(sighs heavily) Yeah, I know it doesnt dispel responsibility. I meant it more in the vein of "this should never be done in our name".

If you get any more feminine and concerned you might actually morph into a vagina.

[ChumpDumper]

DMC's trans obsession continues....

[Winehole23]

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/28/us/politics/guantanamo-detainee-torture.html



Mr. Khan gained attention with the release of a 2014 study of the C.I.A. program by the Senate Intelligence Committee that said, after he refused to eat, his captors “infused” a puree of his lunch through his anus. The C.I.A. called it rectal refeeding. Mr. Khan called it rape.


The C.I.A. pumped water up the rectum of prisoners who would not follow a command to drink. Mr. Khan said this was done to him with “green garden hoses. They connected one end to the faucet, put the other in my rectum and they turned on the water.” He said he lost control of his bowels after those episodes and, to this day, has hemorrhoids.


He spoke about failed and sadistic responses to his hunger strikes and other acts of rebellion. Medics would roughly insert a feeding tube up his nose and down the back of his throat. He would try to bite it off and, in at least one instance, he said, a C.I.A. officer used a plunger to force food inside his stomach, a technique that caused stomach cramps and diarrhea.DMC liked this. Ostensible rump of the vocally dedicated pro-torture crew.

Yonivore would be proud.

[Winehole23]

If you get any more feminine and concerned you might actually morph into a vagina.Please tell us, sir, what is your number one issue?