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

US Senate Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program

intelligence.senate.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 579 posts

Re: US Senate Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program

#41

Post by DevX101 »

Loughla wrote: post #10

Why do they insist on saying 'enhanced interrogation technique' instead of torture? Even when it obviously means torture: "Another senior CIA officer stated that COBALT was itself an enhanced interrogation technique." When talking about a physical place. That is so blatant word replacement that I find it hard to take it seriously.

"You can't be afraid of words that speak the truth. I don't like words that hide the truth. I don't like words that conceal reality. I don't like euphemisms or euphemistic language. And American english is loaded with euphemisms. Because Americans have a lot of trouble dealing with reality. Americans have trouble facing the truth, so they invent a kind of a soft language to protect themselves from it. And it gets worse with every generation. For some reason it just keeps getting worse." - George Carlin

Here's an amusing and insightful video of Carlin dissecting the language behind Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vuEQixrBKCc

The U.S. military seems particularly prone to this habit of using euphemisms to mask reality.

Re: US Senate Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program

#44

Post by maxerickson »

Loughla wrote: post #10

Why do they insist on saying 'enhanced interrogation technique' instead of torture? Even when it obviously means torture: "Another senior CIA officer stated that COBALT was itself an enhanced interrogation technique." When talking about a physical place. That is so blatant word replacement that I find it hard to take it seriously.

One reason to do it is to just set aside the language debate and get on with talking about the actions taken.

So "These things you did are wrong, I don't care what you want to call them or who said they were legal." The legal debate has important implications for lots of people, but the fine details of it aren't very interesting to the moral debate.

Re: US Senate Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program

#45

Post by ceejayoz »

phkahler wrote: post #22
lotharbot wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the first paragraph makes it clear: "On April 3, 2014, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence voted to send the Findings and Conclusions and the Executive Summary of its final Study on the CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program to the President for declassification and subsequent public release"... EDIT: also the fact that it's stamped "Unclassified" everywhere. If it was stamped as still classified and had b…

Wait what? >>EDIT: also the fact that it's stamped "Unclassified" everywhere. If it was stamped as still classified and had been leaked, anyone with a clearance would risk losing it by reading the file. So a person with clearance can't read a leaked classified document? I'm confused, more explanation please ;-) This IS sounding vaguely familiar in some way, but I don't get it. EDIT: Thanks for all the replies. Also,…

> So a person with clearance can't read a leaked classified document?

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/01/us-military-blo...

> “Additionally, classified information is not automatically declassified simply because of unauthorized disclosure,” Wollman continued.

> “Classified information is prohibited from specific unclassified networks, even if the information has already been published in unclassified media that are available to the general public, such as online news organizations.”

Re: US Senate Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program

#46

Post by spoonman1 »

phkahler wrote: post #22
lotharbot wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the first paragraph makes it clear: "On April 3, 2014, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence voted to send the Findings and Conclusions and the Executive Summary of its final Study on the CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program to the President for declassification and subsequent public release"... EDIT: also the fact that it's stamped "Unclassified" everywhere. If it was stamped as still classified and had b…

Wait what? >>EDIT: also the fact that it's stamped "Unclassified" everywhere. If it was stamped as still classified and had been leaked, anyone with a clearance would risk losing it by reading the file. So a person with clearance can't read a leaked classified document? I'm confused, more explanation please ;-) This IS sounding vaguely familiar in some way, but I don't get it. EDIT: Thanks for all the replies. Also,…

In order to legally view a classified document you must possess two things: 1) the appropriate classification level (or above) and 2) a need to know

Re: US Senate Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program

#47

Post by spacefight »

Loughla wrote: post #10

Why do they insist on saying 'enhanced interrogation technique' instead of torture? Even when it obviously means torture: "Another senior CIA officer stated that COBALT was itself an enhanced interrogation technique." When talking about a physical place. That is so blatant word replacement that I find it hard to take it seriously.

It's because they stick to their narrative. PR speak.

Re: US Senate Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program

#48

Post by ceejayoz »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #40

> Moreover, CIA officers told U.S. ambassadors not to discuss the CIA program with State Department officials, preventing the ambassadors from seeking guidance on the policy implications of establishing CIA detention facilities in the countries in which they served. (#8) I was not aware the CIA could order an ambassador from seeking the guidance of its superiors...

The documents were likely classified in such a manner that the ambassador would have need-to-know clearance to read it but not the folks they wished to consult with.

Re: US Senate Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program

#49

Post by debacle »

Fellow parents, how do you teach or plan to teach your kids about this? I was discussing this with my son last night, but I really couldn't explain to him the prejudice and fear that people use to justify these types of acts, or the "otherness" that the perpetrators try to construct around the victims in the media. It's just not something he's experienced yet. There's no way to put it into context.

Re: US Senate Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program

#50

Post by lotharbot »

phkahler wrote: post #22
lotharbot wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the first paragraph makes it clear: "On April 3, 2014, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence voted to send the Findings and Conclusions and the Executive Summary of its final Study on the CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program to the President for declassification and subsequent public release"... EDIT: also the fact that it's stamped "Unclassified" everywhere. If it was stamped as still classified and had b…

Wait what? >>EDIT: also the fact that it's stamped "Unclassified" everywhere. If it was stamped as still classified and had been leaked, anyone with a clearance would risk losing it by reading the file. So a person with clearance can't read a leaked classified document? I'm confused, more explanation please ;-) This IS sounding vaguely familiar in some way, but I don't get it. EDIT: Thanks for all the replies. Also,…

If you have a clearance you're expected to follow proper protocols in accessing classified information. Reading something via a leak is not the proper protocol.

Think of it as analogous to being given a "gift" that you know is stolen. Even though you didn't steal it, you know it actually belongs to someone else, so you shouldn't accept it.

Post reply on HN