Merged Senate Report on CIA Torture Program

logger said:
I have no idea whether it works or not, I'm leaving it up to my government to decide the rare cases they need to do it, which is exactly what they are doing, hopefully it can be kept secret.

.
Click to expand...

It's strange that conservative trust the government with torture but little else.
 
logger said:
Do you have any evidence, you realize what kind of forum we are on?
Click to expand...

Oh, oh! I remember the this one!

We don't have to provide evidence because we can make an argument from common sense!

...or are you the only one who can ignore requests for evidence?
 
logger said:
This is where the left comes from, it is why they are on the wrong side of these arguments.
Click to expand...

At that time, they were helpless. That's what being a prisoner is. And don't forget, about 20% of them were innocent.

As for being on the wrong side, I have history, science, law, ethics, and logic on my side. What have you got?
 
Upchurch said:
At that time, they were helpless. That's what being a prisoner is. And don't forget, about 20% of them were innocent.
Click to expand...
Evidence?
As for being on the wrong side, I have history, science, law, ethics, and logic on my side. What have you got?
Click to expand...

Yes, you have all those things proving you wrong.
 
logger said:
BS, it just went more secret. But of course you believe him. lol
Click to expand...


Are you trying to say that the CIA should ignore the orders of the POTUS?

Or that the POTUS should say one thing for public consumption and give contradictory orders in private?

Because neither bodes well for the US.
 
logger, 20% of the detainees were innocent and had simply been in the wrong place at the wrong time. Others would have been guilty but ignorant footsoldiers. Both groups would talk but, knowing nothing of interest would have to invent something.
 
A few aspects of this report and what transpired during its creation have been brought up but have largely flown under the radar as of late -- that being 1) the amount of pages cited in the executive summary compared to the size of the report we get to see -- that is, the government isn't showing us all of the "math" they used to reach their conclusions but wanting us to believe and not question the version they've officially released (which is paradigmatic of all governments) & 2) the C.I.A. spied on the Senate Intelligence Community who were investigating what the C.I.A. had done.

Think about that for a moment.

The agency that is supposedly being overseen was spying on its overseers and then lied about it for a while before being prodded enough to fess up. No one was fired.1 And who was notified of this action? Was the Gang of Eight2 or the Gang of Four3 notified? Was the DNI notified? Was the National Security Council notified? Was POTUS notified? Or was the C.I.A. acting unilaterally? Who in the C.I.A. did the spying and who gave him or her the authorization to do the spying -- which naturally leads to the question of where the first authorization originated from. The answers to these questions that carry heavy implications are not forthcoming. So what is a person supposed to do in the mean time? Not think about it or contemplate likely answers to those various questions?

1 = At least publicly.
2 = the Senate majority and minority leaders, the House speaker and minority leader, and the chairman and ranking member of both the Senate and House Intelligence Committees.
3 = chairman and ranking member of both the Senate and House Intelligence Committees.
 
If I were in the pro torture camp and advising Cheney and his ilk, I would be encouraging them to keep their mouths shut, to stop bragging about their role in producing terrorists' confessions by means of "enhanced interrogation techniques" which in the view of any sane observer amount to torture. They may be called to testify under oath by defense lawyers, and their popular arguments will be irrelevant.

At some point, these bad guys are going to have their day in court, and unless the the trial judges, jailers/torturers, policy makers and witnesses are all willing to risk prosecution themselves by entering into a conspiracy with these politically motivated fools, they will have to consider throwing out confessions and evidence which is a product of illegal means. Fruit of the poisonous tree is a legal metaphor in the United States used to describe evidence that is obtained illegally, and not generally admissible in court.

Judges have a way of not being too interested in political CYA arguments that might have made sense to a bunch of sycophants years ago.
 
Last edited:
jimbob said:
logger, 20% of the detainees were innocent and had simply been in the wrong place at the wrong time. Others would have been guilty but ignorant footsoldiers. Both groups would talk but, knowing nothing of interest would have to invent something.
Click to expand...

It's war, there is always collateral damage, sure it's bad for the 20% but I'm sure even they'd agree their suffering was worth it if it keeps the USA safe!
 
logger said:
I have no idea whether it works or not, I'm leaving it up to my government to decide the rare cases they need to do it, which is exactly what they are doing, hopefully it can be kept secret.
Click to expand...
In other words, you have no problem believing things without evidence. Gotcha.

logger said:
I've said the choice is the militaries, so far it seems as though it is used rarely. You and I will never know, that's how it should be.
Click to expand...
In other words, you base your beliefs on things you admit you don't know, and are comfortable with your lack of knowledge. Gotcha.

logger said:
Do you have any evidence, you realize what kind of forum we are on?
Click to expand...
That's rich, given your response to my request for evidence.

logger said:
We trust and LIKE the military, it's one of a few things government does well.
Click to expand...
You think the military is infallible, flawless, and beyond reproach? Even when it kills innocent civilians, or in this case, uses torture? Your argument isn't just circular, it's spiraling down the toilet.
 
Last edited:
jimbob said:
logger, 20% of the detainees were innocent and had simply been in the wrong place at the wrong time. Others would have been guilty but ignorant footsoldiers. Both groups would talk but, knowing nothing of interest would have to invent something.
Click to expand...

Darat said:
It's war, there is always collateral damage, sure it's bad for the 20% but I'm sure even they'd agree their suffering was worth it if it keeps the USA safe!
Click to expand...

I'll just add that I in this example I was actually thinking of it from an amoral viewpoint. There is an awful lot of utterly spurious misinformation to confuse any agency working with the information. I'd argue that it is significantly more "contaminated" than from conventional interrogation techniques.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom