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

CIA black site detainee served as training prop to teach torture techniques

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 434 posts

Re: CIA black site detainee served as training prop to teach torture techniques

#381

Post by wolverine876 »

naniwaduni wrote: post #271
worik wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

War is not an extension of "diplomacy by other means". War is a crime. The war crimes I listed were a catastrophe for everybody connected.

The idea that war is a crime at the international scale is underpinned by the threat of war, just as the idea that murder is a crime at the personal scale is underpinned by the threat of murder. We fully intentionally put a lot of steps in between because it turns out that dying sucks a lot,[citation needed] but the fact that they stand between radical disruption of quality, er, quantity of life is what gives those s…

> war is not other means. It is the primal means of diplomacy from which all others spring forth.

Clausewitz, the leading scholar of war in modern history, called it 'the continuation of politics by other means', so it's not so easily discredited.

> the idea that murder is a crime at the personal scale is underpinned by the threat of murder

It may be partly underpinned by that threat, but my choice not to murder is not because of some threat, but because I very strongly don't want to murder people. That is the case for almost all humans, except the sociopaths. I don't follow HN's guidelines because I'm afraid of being banned, but because I want to treat people well and have a high-functioning community. People want to live peacefully, safely, see others prosper, etc.; conflict happens because we feel threatened.

The idea that people are fundamentally sociopaths seems like a popular assumption, and like many logical extremes, I think that is because of its logical clarity. It's a simple, easy theory to work from. But that's not how humans are.

In the international arena, most relationships are not underpinned by threat of violence. For example, the relationships between most European countries are not that way - that's one reason Russia's attack is so shocking. France and Germany are not fundamentally deterred from fighting because of the threat of violence - why the heck would they shoot each other? They want to trade, see each other prosper and live freely, and make money. Though certainly, lacking an effective international government, it is more anarchic and violent than life in democracies.

Re: CIA black site detainee served as training prop to teach torture techniques

#382

Post by monocasa »

refurb wrote: post #379
monocasa wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really, because my question showed the false dichotomy in how you're trying to frame it. When all other countries we'd consider the closest things to paragons of democracy we have signed it, it paints a pretty clear picture. That picture remains clear even when despotic regimes are about 50/50 on it. Pointing in the direction of a hypothetical doesn't really change that. > Charges against African despots? Well Eu…

That was a nice dodge of my counter-argument. By your own theory, since most “beacons of democracy” are a part of the UN, clearly they adhere to all decisions by that body? Of course they don’t. My point stands - if the ICC starts charging powerful members states citizens you’ll pretty quickly watch support crumble. That’s why the African countries are pulling out - it’s pretty clear how the court will be used and it…

You started off by calling someone a liar for misrepresenting the nature of the countries that are members.

I'd appreciate if you at least finished one argument before shifting to another.

Re: CIA black site detainee served as training prop to teach torture techniques

#383

Post by adfgadfgaery »

torturedreading wrote: post #70
Sharlin wrote: post #23

> “Ammar fabricated the information he provided when undergoing EITs,” it said. “He later admitted to his interrogators/debriefers that he was terrified and lied to get agency officers to stop the measures … Ammar also explained that he was afraid to tell a lie and was afraid to tell the truth because he did not know how either would be received.” Which is pretty much all you need to know about torture.

> Which is pretty much all you need to know about torture. When torture or "EIT" is used for a source of intelligence, using that sole point of data as proof is fraught with peril. Dropping JDAMs on a building fingered solely by a detainee is sure to get random bystanders killed. Running a raid, similarly, might well be a trap. However, when one corroborates this with other sources of data, it is a "valid" technique.…

To my knowledge, the American torture program has produced literally no novel information. Every piece of intelligence the CIA claimed was discovered with torture was, in fact, already known from other sources. We have done the experiment and found a success rate of 0%. Whatever you think you understand is wrong.

https://www.latimes.com/nation/la-fg-torture-report-20141210...

Re: CIA black site detainee served as training prop to teach torture techniques

#384

Post by libraryatnight »

halfnormalform wrote: post #343
cryptonector wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a very small step from this to disappearing and torturing dissidents at home. With The View calling for Tucker Carlson to be tried for treason by a military tribunal, I think we're approaching that point. Then when we get there and someone disappears (say, a colleague, a friend of a friend), some will think and even say "they must have done something". How do I know? Because that is what happened in Argentina du…

Excusing your whataboutism, it isn’t hard to argue he’s a foreign agent.

He seems more like an unscrupulous jackass than a foreign agent. Rachel Maddow seems just as ridiculous and stupid, but she seems far less dangerous and I'm not sure why that is. All the 24 hour news stations are FUD engines, but Fox and Carlson in particular have this urgency to everything they say - it's always the end of the world, an agenda, everyone is out to get you all the time. It's exhausting. That said he doesn't seem like a foreign agent, just a typical Fox News personality.

Re: CIA black site detainee served as training prop to teach torture techniques

#385

Post by madengr »

baxuz wrote: post #340
hguant wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think, while this might have been the perception up until a few weeks ago, the invasion of Ukraine has shown the world what a true "bully" on the international stage looks like. There will always be cloistered individuals who think that anyone who isn't "pure" (for an increasingly variable definition of pure) is evil. That opinion is absolutely fine to have until reality strikes. The bubble of people who post on HN…

The US has killed a whole lot more people and committed a whole lot more war crimes and crimes against humanity than the USSR did in the past 70 years. Possibly more than any other country in the world.

Why 70, so you can ignore the millions killed by Stalin and communism?

Re: CIA black site detainee served as training prop to teach torture techniques

#386

Post by refurb »

monocasa wrote: post #382
refurb wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was a nice dodge of my counter-argument. By your own theory, since most “beacons of democracy” are a part of the UN, clearly they adhere to all decisions by that body? Of course they don’t. My point stands - if the ICC starts charging powerful members states citizens you’ll pretty quickly watch support crumble. That’s why the African countries are pulling out - it’s pretty clear how the court will be used and it…

You started off by calling someone a liar for misrepresenting the nature of the countries that are members. I'd appreciate if you at least finished one argument before shifting to another.

Summarized:

- OP was dishonest by listing only a few countries that haven't signed on

- OP argument was "everyone else is doing it", which is not very convincing

- My argument is the ICC is no different than the UN or other international bodies, their authority comes from the most powerful members, so you can guarantee the most powerful members won't play nice when they're in the crosshairs (as evidenced by the current countries' citizens being prosecuted are all minor powers)

Re: CIA black site detainee served as training prop to teach torture techniques

#387

Post by throwawaycities »

refurb wrote: post #379
monocasa wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really, because my question showed the false dichotomy in how you're trying to frame it. When all other countries we'd consider the closest things to paragons of democracy we have signed it, it paints a pretty clear picture. That picture remains clear even when despotic regimes are about 50/50 on it. Pointing in the direction of a hypothetical doesn't really change that. > Charges against African despots? Well Eu…

That was a nice dodge of my counter-argument. By your own theory, since most “beacons of democracy” are a part of the UN, clearly they adhere to all decisions by that body? Of course they don’t. My point stands - if the ICC starts charging powerful members states citizens you’ll pretty quickly watch support crumble. That’s why the African countries are pulling out - it’s pretty clear how the court will be used and it…

> My point stands - if the ICC starts charging powerful members states citizens you’ll pretty quickly watch support crumble.

Not really, I just don’t think you understand of the Rome Statue and ICC jurisdiction works.

An aggressor State is subject to the ICC whether or not they are a signatory to the Rome Statute so long as the violations occur within a signatory State that has accepted jurisdiction of the ICC.

Russia was able to withdraw from the Rome Statue, but that’s only meaningful because they are a permanent member of the UN Security Council with veto power, that only applies to 5 countries, and none of them are African. Meaning African countries can be subject to ICC whether or not they are a signatory provided they are the aggressor and the crimes are committed within a country that is a signatory.

The US isn’t bowing out of something it thinks is a circus, the US was part of the negotiation process to create the ICC, the US is a major advocate of the ICC and other International Tribunals, the US just doesn’t want to be subject to their jurisdiction.

Re: CIA black site detainee served as training prop to teach torture techniques

#388

Post by rramadass »

From Orwell's "Notes on Nationalism"

Indifference to Reality - All nationalists have the power of not seeing resemblances between similar sets of facts. ... Actions are held to be good or bad, not on their own merits, but according to who does them, and there is almost no kind of outrage – torture, the use of hostages, forced labour, mass deportations, imprisonment without trial, forgery, assassination, the bombing of civilians – which does not change its moral colour when it is committed by ‘our’ side.

Re: CIA black site detainee served as training prop to teach torture techniques

#389

Post by lesuorac »

cryptonector wrote: post #325
lesuorac wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> With The View calling for Tucker Carlson to be tried for treason by a military tribunal Isn't that the exact opposite of disappearing? I think the examples you're looking for are DHS hotel/detention centers [1] and Chicago's hidden detention centers [2]. [1]: https://abcnews.go.com/Business/marriott-choice-hotels-serve... [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homan_Square_facility

> Isn't that the exact opposite of disappearing? Asking for a civilian to be tried for treason by a military tribunal for saying... the same things that a government official has said, but in a way that makes the government look bad, is the same thing as abandoning the rule of law. We've only ever done such things during the Civil War, and even then Lincoln only suspended Habeas Corpus in limited places as needed. An…

> Asking for a civilian to be tried for treason by a military tribunal for saying... the same things that a government official has said, but in a way that makes the government look bad, is the same thing as abandoning the rule of law.z

But that's not disappearing. Assuming the tribunal found him guilty and gave him X punishment everybody would know (Obviously assuming the tribunal found him not guilty then he wouldn't be punished anyways).

Disappearing would be when your neighbor that always lets his goats chew all of your grass tells the cia that you're a terrorist so they come (and nobody else knows where you went) and get in the middle of the night so you won't keep chasing his goats away.

Re: CIA black site detainee served as training prop to teach torture techniques

#390

Post by throwawaycities »

refurb wrote: post #386
monocasa wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You started off by calling someone a liar for misrepresenting the nature of the countries that are members. I'd appreciate if you at least finished one argument before shifting to another.

Summarized: - OP was dishonest by listing only a few countries that haven't signed on - OP argument was "everyone else is doing it", which is not very convincing - My argument is the ICC is no different than the UN or other international bodies, their authority comes from the most powerful members, so you can guarantee the most powerful members won't play nice when they're in the crosshairs (as evidenced by the curre…

> - OP was dishonest by listing only a few countries that haven't signed on

I don’t think you know the definition of dishonest. One final time I list a number of countries that aren’t signatories to the Rome Statute, I never stated or implied that was an exhaustive list.

>OP argument was "everyone else is doing it", which is not very convincing

That is dishonest because that was not my argument and obviously inconsistent with the fact that I gave a list of countries that “were not doing it”.

Lastly your argument fails in light of every other international body the US is a part of, every treaty the US is a part of, and every international law the US is subject to…the irony is that is my argument. Moreover, your argument is “the ICC is no different than the UN or other international bodies” and the US isn’t part of the ICC. because “powerful countries won’t play nice”. If you don’t see where your logic breaks down, try to answer why the US is a member to all the other international bodies you claim are “no different” than the ICC, and the US is part of those other bodies but not the ICC.

Post reply on HN