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

131–140 of 579 posts

Re: US Senate Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program

#131

Post by tosser-001 »

mikeash wrote: post #101
tosser-001 wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

* I would never support the use of these techniques against soldiers of a legitimate state or other criminal actors. * The perpetrators of the 9-11 attacks to me represent a completely different sort of threat than has ever been encountered - which legitimized the use of torture (though to be honest, the sorts of techniques outlined in the report don't really sound like what I would classify as "torture"; i.e., the i…

What is different about the 9/11 attacks that legitimizes the use of torture, when you would not support it against soldiers or other criminals? Do keep in mind that 9/11 doesn't even register on the atrocity scale when compared to what's been done by "soldiers of a legitimate state." If you would endorse torture to prevent another 9/11, why wouldn't you also endorse torture to prevent, say, another Hiroshima?

> What is different about the 9/11 attacks that legitimizes the use of torture, when you would not support it against soldiers or other criminals?

They had demonstrated the practice of mass killings of innocent civilians and expressed the desire to continue to do so.

> If you would endorse torture to prevent another 9/11, why wouldn't you also endorse torture to prevent, say, another Hiroshima?

Well, setting aside the moral equivalency of 9/11 to Hiroshima, I suppose if there was reason to believe there was a nuclear threat and there was access to someone for whom it was legitimately believed could provide details which would prevent it, employing torture would be morally and ethically justified.

Re: US Senate Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program

#132

Post by Someone1234 »

willscott wrote: post #61
rdtsc wrote: post #25

> Interrogation techniques such as slaps and "wallings" (slamming detainees against a wall) were used in combination, frequently concurrent with sleep deprivation and nudity. Records do not support CIA representations that the CIA initially used an "an open, non-threatening approach," or that interrogations began with the "least coercive technique possible" and escalated to more coercive techniques only as necessary.…

The saving grace is that we have a country that was able to admit that it did this. For me, that's hope that we're still in a position to learn from our wrongs, and that the checks-and-balances are still somewhat in-tact.

Until the next 9/11 or Pearl Habour and then everyone just looks the other way for the next ten years.

Japanese internment is still rarely talked about and in some states rarely taught in schools(!).

Re: US Senate Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program

#133

Post by discardorama »

pessimist wrote: post #51

Dianne Feinstein deserves enormous credit. Fox News and Republicans are bashing her and by extension her party as traitorous as we speak. The argument that this report should be kept in secret because it endangers Americans' lives is abominable. As an American living abroad, I'm happy to see this released. Still, I wonder about some of the side-effects of this. Instead of arresting and interrogating terrorists we kil…

The report didn't endanger American lives; their actions did.

Re: US Senate Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program

#134

Post by icpmacdo »

user24 wrote: post #87
rdtsc wrote: post #25

> Interrogation techniques such as slaps and "wallings" (slamming detainees against a wall) were used in combination, frequently concurrent with sleep deprivation and nudity. Records do not support CIA representations that the CIA initially used an "an open, non-threatening approach," or that interrogations began with the "least coercive technique possible" and escalated to more coercive techniques only as necessary.…

>The list goes on. It sure does. > At DETENTION SITE COBALT, detainees were often held down, naked, on a tarp on the floor, with the tarp pulled up around them to form a makeshift tub, while cold or refrigerated water was poured on them. Others were hosed down repeatedly while they were shackled naked, in the standing sleep deprivation position. These same detainees were subsequently placed in rooms with temperatures…

JESUS FUCKING CHRIST the third point, there is a second half to it that shows what he tried to do to him self after being put through that

> Additional sessions of rectal feeding and hydration followed. In addition to his hunger strikes, Majid Klian engaged in acts of self-harm that included attempting to cut his wrist on two occasions, an attempt to chew into his arm at the inner elbow, an attempt to cut a vein in the top of his foot, and an attempt to cut into his skin at the elbow joint using a filed toothbrush.

Page 115

Re: US Senate Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program

#135

Post by pkinsky »

rdtsc wrote: post #25

> Interrogation techniques such as slaps and "wallings" (slamming detainees against a wall) were used in combination, frequently concurrent with sleep deprivation and nudity. Records do not support CIA representations that the CIA initially used an "an open, non-threatening approach," or that interrogations began with the "least coercive technique possible" and escalated to more coercive techniques only as necessary.…

> Anyone suggesting debating if rape is acceptable should be slapped on the head and considered an idiot

Meanwhile, jokes about prison rape are socially acceptable & the US government refuses to do much of anything to stop it.

Re: US Senate Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program

#136

Post by [deleted] »

rdtsc wrote: post #25

> Interrogation techniques such as slaps and "wallings" (slamming detainees against a wall) were used in combination, frequently concurrent with sleep deprivation and nudity. Records do not support CIA representations that the CIA initially used an "an open, non-threatening approach," or that interrogations began with the "least coercive technique possible" and escalated to more coercive techniques only as necessary.…

[deleted]

Re: US Senate Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program

#137

Post by cyorir »

exelius wrote: post #56
fnordfnordfnord wrote: post #17

Local and national news TV programs have been going on for days about how all of our embassies are on "High Alert" in anticipation of violence directed at them/us on the basis of what's in the report. I take that by itself as an admission that the government's conduct has been what should be considered unacceptable, and is probably only "lawful" in the most meaningless sense of the word (if at all).

Rightfully so. People should be upset. We let a sense of urgency take over our moral compass. Which was the completely wrong way to look at this conflict anyway: we had no need to be that urgent given that our resources were (and still are) effectively inexhaustible. We got bad intelligence, we made a lot of enemies, and we lost the moral high ground that the US had worked hard to rebuild after Vietnam. The failure h…

"we would have more friends in the region"

This seems to be thrown around a lot. You hear things like, "if we didn't go into Iraq/Afghanistan, we would have more friends in the region," "if we didn't prop up Mubarak or the Saudis or someone else, we would have more friends in the region," "if we gave more support to the Palestinians, we would have more friends in the region."

I think this is the wrong way to think about our policy. We currently have a set of "friends" in the region; Israel, Saudi, etc. The things we do will always upset a portion of the population, but you will also have some who support those actions (foreign policy has not all been a shambles, which is why we retain regional allies in spite of the things that have happened over the past two decades).

Changing your actions will never guarantee that you will make more friends, because in making some friends we would lose others. By catering to the progressive populations in the Middle East, you isolate the conservative populations, and vice versa. Rapprochement with Iran, as an example, may seem like a fine idea, but the mere prospect has Israel and the Saudis concerned. So changing policy cannot achieve "more friends." What we can do is choose who we want to be friends with carefully, and let that guide our policy.

Re: US Senate Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program

#138

Post by Cushman »

debacle wrote: post #49

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.

Are you familiar with Jane Elliott's "Blue eyes/brown eyes" experiment? It's a good kind of ultra-lite introduction to racism/discrimination if you've literally never come across the concept before. (Comes up a lot in Holocaust curriculum.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQAmdZvKf6M

Though I wonder if small children aren't closer to understanding this than most of us. They're such a jumble of implicit biases at the best of times... You know that thing you're so scared of, that only comes out when you turn off the lights? Some adults grow up and stop being scared, and some adults don't.

Re: US Senate Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program

#139

Post by jaimebuelta »

tosser-001 wrote: post #131
mikeash wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is different about the 9/11 attacks that legitimizes the use of torture, when you would not support it against soldiers or other criminals? Do keep in mind that 9/11 doesn't even register on the atrocity scale when compared to what's been done by "soldiers of a legitimate state." If you would endorse torture to prevent another 9/11, why wouldn't you also endorse torture to prevent, say, another Hiroshima?

> What is different about the 9/11 attacks that legitimizes the use of torture, when you would not support it against soldiers or other criminals? They had demonstrated the practice of mass killings of innocent civilians and expressed the desire to continue to do so. > If you would endorse torture to prevent another 9/11, why wouldn't you also endorse torture to prevent, say, another Hiroshima? Well, setting aside th…

Let me refresh one of the key point of the report (sorry about the caps)

TORTURE IS NOT EFFECTIVE

This is hardly news, it has been known for a long time. CIA knew it before 9/11

Post reply on HN