Torture and the CIA
Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests
Registered Users: None |
 |
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
David 
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: Torture and the CIA |  |
|
Report reveals the extent of the CIA's torture programs under Bush:
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/dec/09/cia-torture-report-released
| Quote: | “During the brutal interrogations, the CIA was often unaware the information was fabricated.” She told the Senate the torture program was “morally, legally and administratively misguided” and “far more brutal than people were led to believe”.
The report reveals that use of torture in secret prisons run by the CIA across the world was even more extreme than previously exposed, and included “rectal rehydration” and “rectal feeding”, sleep deprivation lasting almost a week and threats to the families of the detainees.
The “lunch tray” for one detainee, which contained hummus, pasta with sauce, nuts and raisins, “was ‘pureed’ and rectally infused”, the report says. One detainee whose rectal examination was conducted with “excessive force” was later diagnosed with chronic hemorrhoids, anal fissures and rectal prolapse. Investigators also documented death threats made to detainees. And CIA interrogators, the committee charged, told detainees they would hurt detainees’ children and “sexually assault” or “cut a [detainee’s] mother’s throat”.
At least one prisoner died as a result of hypothermia after being held in a stress position on cold concrete for hours. At least 17 detainees were tortured without the approval from CIA headquarters that ex-director George Tenet assured the DOJ would occur. And at least 26 of the CIA’s estimated 119 detainees, the committee found, were “wrongfully held.” |
Some more detail on some of the torture methods used:
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/dec/09/cia-torture-methods-waterboarding-sleep-deprivation
Not our problem, though, right? Take a look at the map in the middle of the article—it seems our government was one of many that 'facilitated' torture. We were at least somewhat complicit in this.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
 |
1061
Joined: 06 Sep 2013
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Just what would you have done Differently David?
We were at war, I remember Bali. |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | | Just what would you have done Differently David? |
Hmm. Let's see. Not tortured people?
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
1061
Joined: 06 Sep 2013
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| If person "A" kidnapped your son and you knew person "B" had information as to where your son was how would you approach person B? |
|
|
|
|
Wokko 
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Torture is notoriously unreliable in obtaining information. People just say anything they think their tormentors want to hear in order to make the pain stop.
I would suggest that the information sought in these cases was nothing so immediate either 1061. I would actually support using such methods in cases like "Where have you hidden the bomb that is about to kill a few thousand people", but I highly doubt that prisoners held for years, even weeks would have such immediate intelligence. |
|
|
|
|
1061
Joined: 06 Sep 2013
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Wokko wrote: | Torture is notoriously unreliable in obtaining information. People just say anything they think their tormentors want to hear in order to make the pain stop.
I would suggest that the information sought in these cases was nothing so immediate either 1061. I would actually support using such methods in cases like "Where have you hidden the bomb that is about to kill a few thousand people", but I highly doubt that prisoners held for years, even weeks would have such immediate intelligence. |
Yet torture is continued in many areas and has proven to be effective in getting people to speak and give out information sought by the torturers.
From the criminal world to national spy agencies.
So I would suggest if torture did not work then the time and effort would not be wasted. |
|
|
|
|
sixpoints
Joined: 27 Sep 2010
Location: Lulie Street
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| 1061 wrote: | Just what would you have done Differently David?
We were at war, I remember Bali. |
So being done wrong (and yes Bali was a shocking act of wrongdoing), means despicable acts (like torture) in response are justified.
Keep this going.....
I'm sure ISIL think that the bombing of Iraq and subsequent killing of civilians was a shocking act of wrongdoing too. I'm sure they think they are at also at war. So is it then OK for them to use their version of despicable acts (like beheadings) in response?
We call their acts evil, but our sides acts are justifable somehow.
Yours in confusion. |
|
|
|
|
1061
Joined: 06 Sep 2013
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Just what would you have done Differently? |
|
|
|
|
3.14159 
Joined: 12 Sep 2009
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| wrote: | | If person "A" kidnapped your son and you knew person "B" had information as to where your son was how would you approach person B? |
The topic of this thread isn't about how David would react to a domestic kidnapping case.
You seem to be suggesting he'd soon change his tune if only he was on the receiving end.
This is about a government organisation that is using torture as an arm of foreign policy so stop with the emotive and misleading analogies and attempted thread derailment.
That's a low act and a low comment which ever way you look at it!
~
| wrote: | | If person "A" kidnapped your son and you knew person "B" had information as to where your son was how would you approach person B? |
What if your CIA intelligence* was wrong** person B had no idea what person A was up too***?
*such as it is
** gained from some poor schmuck (under torture possibly)?
*** if person A was actually up to anything in the first place.
The ends do not justify the means.
If the West want's to occupy the moral high-ground they (we) must earn it by ...
oh I don't know, banning torture perhaps?
Last edited by 3.14159 on Wed Dec 10, 2014 1:17 pm; edited 7 times in total |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| 1061 wrote: | | Just what would you have done Differently? |
1) Abided by international law when interrogating suspects.
2) Operated within the bounds of the legal system (i.e. warrants, charges, appeal system)
3) Not tortured people.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Wokko
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
FM 34-52 Intelligence Interrogation, the United States Army field manual, explains that torture "is a poor technique that yields unreliable results, may damage subsequent collection efforts, and can induce the source to say what he thinks the interrogator wants to hear." Not only is torture ineffective at gathering reliable information, but it also increases the difficulty of gathering information from a source in the future.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effectiveness_of_torture_for_interrogation
I also add it takes quite a lack of empathy to take a stance for torture in anything but the most urgent and immediate cases and as a last resort due to its general ineffectiveness. |
|
|
|
|
swoop42 
Whatcha gonna do when he comes for you?
Joined: 02 Aug 2008
Location: The 18
|
| Post subject: | |
|
On a side note I've often wondered if Bin Laden is really dead.
I've never understood why you would kill the figure head of a terrorist network if you had the option of capture and interrogation.
_________________
He's mad. He's bad. He's MaynHARD! |
|
|
|
|
1061
Joined: 06 Sep 2013
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| 3.14159 wrote: | | wrote: | | If person "A" kidnapped your son and you knew person "B" had information as to where your son was how would you approach person B? |
The topic of this thread isn't about how David would react to a domestic kidnapping case.
You seem to be suggesting he'd soon change his tune if only he was on the receiving end.
This is about a government organisation that is using torture as an arm of foreign policy so stop with the emotive and misleading analogies and attempted thread derailment.
That's a low act and a low comment which ever way you look at it!
~
| wrote: | | If person "A" kidnapped your son and you knew person "B" had information as to where your son was how would you approach person B? |
What if your CIA intelligence* was wrong** person B had no idea what person A was up too***?
*such as it is
** gained from some poor schmuck (under torture possibly)?
*** if person A was actually up to anything in the first place.
The ends do not justify the means.
If the West want's to occupy the moral high-ground they (we) must earn it by ...
oh I don't know, banning torture perhaps? |
It's a pity the same moderating standards are not applied to you as they are me!
I see David did reply for whatever reason after you did so he doesn't need your help. Thanks for that personal attack anyway 3. |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I don't mind such hypotheticals, but I agree with 3: it's a poor analogy. How an individual might wish to react and how a democratically elected government is permitted to react are two entirely separate issues.
It's sort of like asking "do you support the right to bear firearms?" and then following it up with "would you wish you had a gun in a situation where you were being attacked in the street by a gang of thugs?"—the first answer being "no", the second answer being "yes, quite possibly" and the first answer, upon reflection, still being a quite emphatic "no". The principle that (in my view) "making guns legal is harmful to society" overrides the individual case. So it goes for torture, except that I'm not sure I can think of any instance where torture would be justified. Even in Wokko's example, it requires a framework within which torture is seen as an appropriate fallback option when other attempts at extracting information have failed. I don't think I could support such a paradigm.
To return to your hypothetical, I completely oppose vigilantism and I would hope that, in such a situation, I would seek police assistance rather than trying to take matters into my own hands (which, I imagine, tends to backfire more often than not anyway). So, no, I do not have fantasies about being Liam Neeson.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Wokko
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
It's hard to put across my exact feelings on the issue David, I'm not exactly a proponent even as a last resort, because I don't think such cases actually exist and would just be a wedge to allow what we're seeing today. I was speaking purely philosophically, in that if you have a captive accomplice who is unwilling to divulge information that, if obtained very quickly would lead to saving lives then I can, with a heavy heart agree that torture in this case would be acceptable.
By torture I mean inflicting physical pain with as little damage as possible to extract a singular important piece of intelligence, not the extended psychologically devastating practices we're hearing about from the CIA. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
