Live data from Hacker News

US Senate Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program

intelligence.senate.gov

541–550 of 579 posts

Re: US Senate Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program

#541
post #469
post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder when the UN will stand up and impose trade bans on the US for such deeds.

You think the US is alone in torture? This is child's play compared to what happens in China or Russia. You are mistaken if the US is the only one.

Cool, comparing the US to developing countries.

That's setting the bar low.

Re: US Senate Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program

#542

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first step is telling your representative(s) that you think torture is bad. They genuinely don't know if you approve of it or not, and they've got the CIA and associated lobby telling them how necessary it is and that if they try to stop it, they're hurting america and in fact they're basically terrorists themselves. Start by phoning your representative's office. Today. Tomorrow. The day after that. Every day, as…

Politics will not get us out of this mess, but it sure is an easy ride if that's the limitations of your efforts.

Given that effecting a change in government policy is what politics is, and that's the aim, what exactly would deal with this situation that isn't politics? You've got a snappy attitude, denigrating the idea of politics; do you have anything that isn't politics, or are you just a smug soundbite?

I'm sure all the previous people who used politics to change things did indeed find it an easy ride. Martin King basically phoned in his efforts, didn't he? And I recall Pankhurst effected her changes with a single stern letter to the London Times.

Re: US Senate Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program

#543

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With how many posts you've deleted or had killed, I can't really search your history at this point. Anyway, if you you have no interest in trying to convince people, why are you here discussing this? You're certainly giving every appearance of trying to convince people. You're putting forth arguments that look like they're intended to be convincing. In another comment, you mentioned environmental disaster as somethin…

I could ask you the same question. Do you think you're going to convince people who think terrorism is an existential threat that torture is not acceptable, no exceptions? I doubt it. Rather, you're here to express your sentiment on the subject. I'm just expressing mine. Anyway, at no point did I ever say we should torture anyone. In fact I said exactly the opposite in response to 'angibrowl. But at the end of the da…

I am here to convince people. I don't think the chances are good, but I give it a shot. I think that the massive fear of terrorism is the worst consequence of 9/11 in this country, and that it has caused us to damage ourselves far more than the terrorists themselves could ever hope to accomplish. I try to do my bit to roll back that opinion when the occasion arises.

There's a thin line between "this guy is a scumbag because he's part of al Qaeda" and "this guy is a scumbag because he's a Republican." This is why we have due process. Or rather, why we're supposed to have it, even though we've given up on it for al Qaeda, or for people we think are related.

Re: US Senate Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program

#544
post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And how shall we proceed?

The US is legally required by the Geneva Convention Against Torture, signed into US law by Ronald Reagan, to prosecute the torturers and their chain of command.

..but on the other hand, the US is not part of the ICC (it hasn't signed the 1998 Rome Statute of the ICC), and it also has this jolly federal law in place (2002): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Pr...

    The new law authorizes the use of military force to
    liberate any American or citizen of a U.S.-allied
    country being held by the court, which is located in
    The Hague. This provision, dubbed the "Hague invasion
    clause," has caused a strong reaction from U.S. allies
    around the world [...]
http://www.hrw.org/news/2002/08/03/us-hague-invasion-act-bec...

Re: US Senate Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program

#545
post #544

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US is legally required by the Geneva Convention Against Torture, signed into US law by Ronald Reagan, to prosecute the torturers and their chain of command.

..but on the other hand, the US is not part of the ICC (it hasn't signed the 1998 Rome Statute of the ICC), and it also has this jolly federal law in place (2002): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Pr... The new law authorizes the use of military force to liberate any American or citizen of a U.S.-allied country being held by the court, which is located in The Hague. This provision, dubbed the…

This is not entirely correct; the US is not a party to the Rome Statute, true, but it in fact Bill Clinton did sign the Rome Statute, but it was never submitted for ratification, and George W. Bush's administration sent a note purporting to retract the signature (as a means of avoid obligations that attach to signatories to treaties even prior to ratification under the Vienna Convention on Treaties, specifically, the obligation not to work to undermine the treaty's purpose.)

The US has engaged more positively (but without any moves toward ratification or even retracting the purported retraction of its signature) with the ICC under the Obama Administration.

Re: US Senate Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program

#546
post #544

Earlier quoted context omitted.

..but on the other hand, the US is not part of the ICC (it hasn't signed the 1998 Rome Statute of the ICC), and it also has this jolly federal law in place (2002): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Pr... The new law authorizes the use of military force to liberate any American or citizen of a U.S.-allied country being held by the court, which is located in The Hague. This provision, dubbed the…

This is not entirely correct; the US is not a party to the Rome Statute, true, but it in fact Bill Clinton did sign the Rome Statute, but it was never submitted for ratification, and George W. Bush's administration sent a note purporting to retract the signature (as a means of avoid obligations that attach to signatories to treaties even prior to ratification under the Vienna Convention on Treaties, specifically, the…

Thanks for providing these details. (I didn't even know that Bill Clinton did actually sign the statute, even though it was effectively retracted (if only via (GWB) sending a note purporting to retract the signature, as I take it.))

Re: US Senate Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program

#547

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The friends we've chosen in the region also don't help us" The recent OPEC decision declining to reduce production in the face of falling oil prices, thus screwing over Russia hard, means that Saudi Arabia is most certainly a useful US ally.

All allies are useful, even backstabbing frenemies like Saudi Arabia. But Saudi Arabia (or more specifically, the ruling regime in Saudi Arabia) needs us more than we need them these days. I mean, I realize the prime reason they fund Islamist terror groups is to cause regional instability that drives up the price of Saudi oil...

That's actually a terrible reason to fund armed groups. Al Qaeda's original mission was to replace the Saudi monarchy; there were many attacks in Saudi Arabia after 9/11, they weren't talked about much. So the Saudi monarchy is not interested in helping those kinds of groups.

Armed groups are often funded by wealthy individuals for a variety of reasons (Osama bin Laden being a famous example). Armed groups funded by the Saudi monarchy are in other countries, fighting the regime's enemies by proxy (eg. the Syrian and Iranian governments).

Re: US Senate Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program

#548

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first step is telling your representative(s) that you think torture is bad. They genuinely don't know if you approve of it or not, and they've got the CIA and associated lobby telling them how necessary it is and that if they try to stop it, they're hurting america and in fact they're basically terrorists themselves. Start by phoning your representative's office. Today. Tomorrow. The day after that. Every day, as…

Politics will not get us out of this mess, but it sure is an easy ride if that's the limitations of your efforts.

you tell me about politics

this that

you speak of rats.

---

geese. a world of peace

you stumble stammer

pound your fist

an’ i tell you there are no politics

you swear

tell me how much you care

---

you cheat the lunch counter man

out of a pack of cigarettes

an’ i tell you there are no politics

you tell me of goons’

graves. ginks an’ finks

an’ of what you’ve read

---

an’ how things should be

an’ what you’d do if . . .

an i say someone’s been

tamperin’ with your head

you jump

raise your voice

---

an’ gyrate yourself

t’ the tone of principles

your arm is raised

an’ i tell you there are no politics

in the afternoon you run

t’ keep appointments

---

with false lovers

an’ this leaves you

drained by nightfall

you ask me questions

an’ i say that every question

if it’s a truthful question

---

can be answered by askin’ it

you stomp

get mad

i say it’s got nothin’ t’ do with

gertrude stein

you turn your eyes

---

t’ the radio

an’ tell me what a

wasteland exists in television

you rant an’ rave

of poverty

your fingers crawl the walls

---

the screen door leaves black marks

across your nose

your breath remains on

window glass

bullfight posters hang crooked above your head

an’ the phone rings constantly

---

you tell me how much i’ve changed

as if that is all there is t’ say

out of the side of your mouth

while talkin’ on the wires

in a completely different

tone of voice

---

than you had a minute ago

when speakin’ t’ me about something else

i say what’s this about changes?

you say "let’s go get drunk"

light a cigarette

"an’ throw up on the world"

---

you go t’ your closet

mumblin’ about the phoniness of churches

an’ spastic national leaders

i say groovy but

also holy hollowness too

yes hollow holiness

---

an’ that some of my best friends

know people that go t’ church

you blow up

slam doors

say "can’t no one say nothin’ t’ you"

i say "what do You think?"

---

your face laughs

you say "oh yeeeeeaah?"

i’m gonna break up i say

an’ reach for your coat

‘neath piles of paper slogans

i say your house is dirty

---

you say you should talk

your hallway stinks as

we walk through it

your stairs tilt drastically

your railing’s rotted

an’ there’s blood at the

---

bottom of your steps

you say t’ meet bricks with bricks

i say t’ meet bricks with chalk

you tell me monster floor plans

an’ i tell you about a bookie shop

in boston givin’ odds on the presidential

---

race

i’m not gonna bet for a while i say

little children

shoot craps

in the alley garbage pot

you say "nothin’s perfect"

---

an’ i tell you again

there are no

politics

----

Bob Dylan - some other kinds of songs.

Re: US Senate Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program

#549
post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It took a long time for the torture to be officially recognised -- we've had a lot of denial until now. And even now there will be people who say that this was too much, but a little bit of torture is necessary. Just look at what people were saying a out water boarding - "it's not really torture". How many detainees are still held without trial?

We'd be less likely to use interrogation methods that went too far if the officer in charge was subjected to the same methods concurrently. Then the officer would be in the correct position to judge what was reasonable and what was not. Like Jubal was talking about on Firefly.

Jubal Early: You oughta be shot. Or stabbed, lose a leg. To be a surgeon, you know? Know what kind of pain you're dealing with. They make psychiatrists get psychoanalyzed before they can get certified, but they don't make a surgeon get cut on. That seem right to you?

Re: US Senate Report on CIA Detention and Interrogation Program

#550

First, I would like to comment on the fact that given the current state of surveillance, I think a re-evaluation of oversight processes needs to be done. If the CIA isn't properly reporting to the White House, the NSC, and is avoiding oversight by congress, then who the fuck is managing these things? On that same note, what kind of NSC would allow that kind of movement? One that really knows whats going on and approv…

Even if you ignore JFK, a good case can be made that the security agencies (probably FVEY?) currently seem to have at least de facto control basically anywhere they want. Exercising that control got a lot easier - and less obvious - as technology became available. Traditional informants and enforcers sometimes get noticed, but JOIN...WHERE user.id=foo across phone location data is very hard to discover.

The key part, I think, is that COINTELPRO ended in name only. Worse, as the use of the internet increased, the number of times I've had to consider "JTRIG-style disruption, paid corporate shill, or useful idiot" has increased dramatically.

While a "silent coup" is one possibility, I have been liking how Dan Geer's described[1] the high-level picture of our situation as a Cold Civil War. Cold wars are fought by proxy, and there has been a lot of pointer-chasing to trace in the modern political situation.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nT-TGvYOBpI ( http://geer.tinho.net/geer.blackhat.6viii14.txt )

Post reply on HN