Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

CIA rendition flights from rustic North Carolina called to account by citizens

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 182 posts

Re: CIA rendition flights from rustic North Carolina called to account by citizens

#151

Post by oldsklgdfth »

pc86 wrote: post #150
oldsklgdfth wrote: post #147

This may seem like a naive question, but what is the point of rendition flights? Just to get around constitutional rights? Seems like with all that money and effort you could just do it here. EDIT: I don't condone torture. I think it's sad the way we treat each other.

Yes, "just" to get around constitutional rights. The constitution applies to everyone within the United States, citizen or otherwise. Removing them from US soil simplifies the equation somewhat.

So they are violating the law of the "land", by literally going to different land.

This sounds a lot like corporate/beaurocratic cover-your-ass policy that is there so you don't get fired.

It just seems to me that someone like the CIA could torture in some basement in area-51 and they would still be untouchable.

In a weird way this kinda speaks a bit to the power of the constitution or the respect that it holds. Even if you are basically violating it.

Re: CIA rendition flights from rustic North Carolina called to account by citizens

#152

Post by oldsklgdfth »

pc86 wrote: post #150
oldsklgdfth wrote: post #147

This may seem like a naive question, but what is the point of rendition flights? Just to get around constitutional rights? Seems like with all that money and effort you could just do it here. EDIT: I don't condone torture. I think it's sad the way we treat each other.

Yes, "just" to get around constitutional rights. The constitution applies to everyone within the United States, citizen or otherwise. Removing them from US soil simplifies the equation somewhat.

I guess a follow-up question is if there are laws against rendition. Is this just a legal loop hole for torture?

Re: CIA rendition flights from rustic North Carolina called to account by citizens

#153

Post by rdtsc »

jVinc wrote: post #139
rdtsc wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Obama administration basically stopped trying to capture people alive to interrogate them and instead just sent drone based missiles to just kill anyone suspected of terrorism. Not only that but after receiving a Nobel Peace Prize he proceeded to engage in drone warfare. Just in 2016 he dropped more then 20k bombs, in countries which we were not even at war with. Many in Africa. It was surprising how little flak he…

"It was surprising how little flak he got for it." Indeed. The very same democrats who mock Trump supporters for not denouncing him when he said "Grab them by the pussy" did not denounce Obama when he literally sent automated killer robots to kill people in foreign countries not even at war with the united states. In a two party system, you ignore bad things and back your guy, because what is the alternative? Backing…

> In a two party system, you ignore bad things and back your guy,

True, agreed. They could still stand up for what's right. Criticizing your party doesn't mean automatically endorsing the other party.

But I was also talking about the mainstream media and the coverage it got there as well.

> The very same democrats who mock Trump supporters for not denouncing him when he said "Grab them by the pussy" did not denounce Obama

Or look at the recent "shithole" controversy. Trump said "shithole" (which was terrible, of course) and they talked about it for weeks. Forgot which reporter was even crying on screen about it. That's fine, it's good to be critical and scrutinize those in power. But Obama was dropping bombs on pretty much the same countries and everything was relatively quiet, not many tears from reporters there. Democracy Now was covering and other articles here and there. It's because Obama was polite, composed and projected a professional image.

Re: CIA rendition flights from rustic North Carolina called to account by citizens

#154

Post by stordoff »

oldsklgdfth wrote: post #151
pc86 wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, "just" to get around constitutional rights. The constitution applies to everyone within the United States, citizen or otherwise. Removing them from US soil simplifies the equation somewhat.

So they are violating the law of the "land", by literally going to different land. This sounds a lot like corporate/beaurocratic cover-your-ass policy that is there so you don't get fired. It just seems to me that someone like the CIA could torture in some basement in area-51 and they would still be untouchable. In a weird way this kinda speaks a bit to the power of the constitution or the respect that it holds. Even…

I wonder if it's more logistical than legal - extraordinary rendition, by its nature, already exists outside of the law. It is, however, easier to hide someone outside of the country (from legal representatives etc.) and deny their existence, it's easier to hide the facilities, and it's easier to find skilled and willing practitioners of torture in a country which practices it more widely (boy, that's a fun thought :/).

It's also face-saving to some extent - it lets the leadership say "We do not torture" accurately and with a straight face, and I believe it's _slightly_ less risky legally (knowing torture is likely rather than actively ordering).

That said, I've no doubt some government agency could use torture with impunity on US soil though (especially when you consider local police forces have come somewhat close to doing exactly that. See, e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Police_Department#Homa... ).

Re: CIA rendition flights from rustic North Carolina called to account by citizens

#155

Post by lightbyte »

baud147258 wrote: post #142
dandare wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Anyone remember how he promised to close Guantanamo? A European here, I was under the impression he sincerely tried to close Guantanamo but failed because of GOP controlled house and senate. Could he have done more?

European here too. I thought another problem with closing Guantanamo was what to do with the prisoners.

If I'm remembering correctly, that was actually the main problem. Most, if not all, are being held based on evidence or intelligence that would not fly in a typical American trial.

If they closed Gitmo and brought the detainees to the US for trial, almost all would have to be released.

I'm not necessarily saying that is a bad things, surely some (or even all) do not deserve to be held and should be released, but all it takes is one coming back and committing a terrorist act (could you even blame them after being illegally held and tortured for years?) for the worst PR nightmare a politician could even imagine rains down on them.

Re: CIA rendition flights from rustic North Carolina called to account by citizens

#156

Post by stordoff »

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #14

Which is worse: torture or killing? It seems that with all the attention that torture got, the Obama administration basically stopped trying to capture people alive to interrogate them and instead just sent drone based missiles to just kill anyone suspected of terrorism.

I don't think it's a dichotomy - even if torture were heavily used, I don't that would prevent the drone strikes (and then there's the weird arguments of how many would you kill vs. how many would you torture). Realistically, the answer should be _neither_.

However, if you had to choose, I'd probably say torture is worse. Even a slow death is likely to be quick, and has an end, compared with a torturer who is actively trying to keep you alive so you can endure more.

Re: CIA rendition flights from rustic North Carolina called to account by citizens

#157

Post by stordoff »

matte_black wrote: post #57
paganel wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Torture doesn't provide any valuable intelligence results for those doing the torturing, we're not living in "24", the TV series. I know for sure that if I were to be tortured I'd be ready to recognize even the killing of the biblical character Abel if those doing the torturing would ask that from me, and I guess I'm not the only person so predisposed.

That’s a myth, if you’re looking for objective verifiable facts you can get some useful information. Also, if you have enough statistical data on torture methods, you can have a probability that a person doesn’t know something based on how long they’ve been actively tortured.

> you can have a probability that a person doesn’t know something based on how long they’ve been actively tortured

That almost seems worse - torturing someone to make sure they don't know anything is akin to punishing someone to make sure they are innocent.

Re: CIA rendition flights from rustic North Carolina called to account by citizens

#158

Post by ImSkeptical »

mcguire wrote: post #82
ImSkeptical wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope my scenario has never happened, but nothing about it is implausible. The point though is to illustrate that there are moments where pragmatism must trump laws and values. If you look, there are many times throughout history where such tradeoffs have been made. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/torture/ The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy lists a real life example along the lines of my hypothetical one. In…

Where do you draw the line? If torture is acceptable in some circumstances, why isn't it in others? If torturing a car thief is ok, why not in a random stop-and-frisk?

Lines have to be drawn frequently. It's okay to use a tazer or even a gun in some circumstances, others, not. With the torture case, we'd have to see that the benefit vastly exceeds the harm, and that reasonable measures were exhausted first. Beating a car thief to save the life of a child strikes me as a case where reasonable measures were exhausted and where the benefit vastly exceeds the harm.

Re: CIA rendition flights from rustic North Carolina called to account by citizens

#159

Post by ImSkeptical »

maxxxxx wrote: post #87
ImSkeptical wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're confusing my position, and the contents of my comments, with something else.

I think I understand your position. In the scenario you describe any kind of violence/torture needs to be done quickly to avert the situation. Otherwise it's too late. If the CIA renditions were based on something similar they shouldn't fly people to questionable countries but instead interrogate themselves quickly because times is of essence. Everything else would be irresponsible.

The scenario I'm describing doesn't involve any sort of violence or torture, which again, makes me think you're missing my point or conflating my position with something else.

Re: CIA rendition flights from rustic North Carolina called to account by citizens

#160

Post by pc86 »

oldsklgdfth wrote: post #152
pc86 wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, "just" to get around constitutional rights. The constitution applies to everyone within the United States, citizen or otherwise. Removing them from US soil simplifies the equation somewhat.

I guess a follow-up question is if there are laws against rendition. Is this just a legal loop hole for torture?

Honestly I don't know the legalities around the actual act of rendition. But even if it's illegal, it's much easier to hide that one flight than it is to hide someone being tortured within the United States. Plus, if someone is in a basement in Queens and they escape, they're in Queens. If someone escapes a basement in the middle of Poland, who cares?
Post reply on HN