| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 5/23 |
| 2007/8/15-20 [Politics/Foreign/Asia/India, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:47620 Activity:kinda low |
8/14 Torture: Not only illegal and immoral, it just doesn't work:
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/07/torture200707
\_ unfortunately it takes until near the bottom of the last page to
actually get to anyone saying it doesn't work. couldn't you have
just quoted those 2 lines and saved us from reading 3.98 pages that
didn't back up your statement? [I like when my posts get deleted.
That way I know I hit a nerve. Keep up the censorship.]
\_ "It was an extraordinary success story. But it was one that
would evaporate with the arrival of the C.I.A's interrogation
team." Paragraph four. But who's counting?
\_ That is not the same as saying "it doesn't work". That is
saying the FBI was there using a method that was apparently
working and then the CIA showed up and used a different
method. It doesn't say the CIA method didn't work. He may
have had nothing more to say. It may be a technique that
was not effective on this one person. The only place in the
article that makes a general claim for the failure of the
CIA's technique was the 2 lines 3/4s down on the last page.
So who is counting? I am. You're seeing what you want to
see. I am not making the case either way for torture
working or not: I don't know, it isn't my field (thankfully),
but this article doesn't say what you say it says until the
2 lines on page 4. My point? Quote the 2 lines or change
your post to match what your article says.
\_ Almost the entire article is a case of making evidence
for the statement that torture does not work as an
intelligence gathering tool. I could quote paragraph
after paragraph, but that would still not change your
mind about what you think you read. This is a very
common rhetorical technique: build a case for a
statement and then make it at the end of the essay.
Simply stating it does not have the same effect (for what
I hope are obvious reasons).
\_ The entire article is about what happened re: the one
guy once the CIA showed up. You could quote the whole
thing but you won't be quoting anything that says that
the CIA method does not work in the general case until
3/4s down page 4. If they had presented more than one
case, made a general claim for dozens (or however many)
cases where it failed, or something then sure, I'd
buy it, but this article does not say what you say it
says except for the 2 sentences as noted.
\_ Or it does: http://csua.com/2006/09/21/#44481
\_ Torture works just fine. -- ilyas
\_ you should ask Colin Powell for that. he paid dearly.
\_ Your grammar sucks. Why should you live? |
| 5/23 |
|
| www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/07/torture200707 RSS The War on Terror Rorschach and Awe America's coercive interrogation methods were reverse-engineered by two CIA psychologists who had spent their careers training US soldiers to endure Communist-style torture techniques. The spread of these tactics was fueled by a myth about a critical "black site" operation. COM EXCLUSIVE July 17, 2007 Al-Qaeda lieutenant Abu Zubaydah. It was early April 2002, and the al-Qaeda lieutenant had been shot in the groin during a firefight in Pakistan, then captured by the Special Forces and flown to a safe house in Thailand. Now he was experiencing life as America's first high-value detainee in the wake of 9/11. A medical team and a cluster of FBI and CIA agents stood vigil, all fearing that the next attack on America could happen at any moment. It didn't matter that Zubaydah was unable to eat, drink, sit up, or control his bowels. A CIA interrogation team was expected but hadn't yet arrived. But the FBI agents who had been nursing his wounds and cleaning him after he'd soiled himself asked Zubaydah what he knew. The detainee said something about a plot against an ally, then began slipping into sepsis. The team cabled the morsel of intelligence to CIA headquarters, where it was received with delight by Director George Tenet. "I want to congratulate our officers on the ground," he told a gathering of agents at Langley. When someone explained that the FBI had obtained the information, Tenet blew up and demanded that the CIA get there immediately, say those who were later told of the meeting. Tenet's instructions were clear: Zubaydah was to be kept alive at all costs. An agent showed him photographs of suspected al-Qaeda members until Zubaydah finally spoke up, blurting out that "Moktar," or Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, had planned 9/11. America learned the truth of how 9/11 was organized because a detainee had come to trust his captors after they treated him humanely. Al-Qaeda operative Khalid Shaikh Mohammed shortly after his capture, 2003. At the direction of an accompanying psychologist, the team planned to conduct a psychic demolition in which they'd get Zubaydah to reveal everything by severing his sense of personality and scaring him almost to death. This is the approach President Bush appeared to have in mind when, in a lengthy public address last year, he cited the "tough" but successful interrogation of Zubaydah to defend the CIA's secret prisons, America's use of coercive interrogation tactics, and the abolishment of habeas corpus for detainees. He said that Zubaydah had been questioned using an "alternative set" of tactics formulated by the CIA This program, he said, was fully monitored by the CIA's inspector general and required extensive training for interrogators before they were allowed to question captured terrorists. While the methods were certainly unorthodox, there is little evidence they were necesssary, given the success of the rapport-building approach until that point. I did not set out to discover how America got into the business of torturing detainees. I wasn't even trying to learn how America found out who was behind 9/11. I was attempting to explain why psychologists, alone among medical professionals, were participating in military interrogations at Guantnamo Bay and elsewhere. Both army leaders and military psychologists say that psychologists help to make interrogations "safe, legal and effective." But last fall, a psychologist named Jean Maria Arrigo came to see me with a disturbing claim about the American Psychological Association, her profession's 148,000-member trade group. Arrigo had sat on a specially convened APA task force that, in July 2005, had ruled that psychologists could assist in military interrogations, despite angry objections from many in the profession. The task force also determined that, in cases where international human-rights law conflicts with US law, psychologists could defer to the much looser US standards--what Arrigo called the "Rumsfeld definition" of humane treatment. President George W Bush delivers a speech acknowledging the existence of secret CIA prisons such as those where Abu Zubaydah and Khalid Shaikh Mohammed were interrogated, September 2006. Arrigo and several others with her, including a representative from Physicians for Human Rights, had come to believe that the task force had been rigged--stacked with military members (6 of the 10 had ties to the armed services), monitored by observers with undisclosed conflicts of interest, and programmed to reach preordained conclusions. One theory was that the APA had given its stamp of approval to military interrogations as part of a quid pro quo. In exchange, they suspected, the Pentagon was working to allow psychologists--who, unlike psychiatrists, are not medical doctors--to prescribe medication, dramatically increasing their income. They say that the association will investigate any reports of ethical lapses by its members. While there was no "smoking gun" amid the stack of documents Arrigo gave me, my reporting eventually led me to an even graver discovery. After a 10-month investigation comprising more than 70 interviews as well as a detailed review of public and confidential documents, I pieced together the account of the Abu Zubaydah interrogation that appears in this article. I also discovered that psychologists weren't merely complicit in America's aggressive new interrogation regime. Psychologists, working in secrecy, had actually designed the tactics and trained interrogators in them while on contract to the CIA Two psychologists in particular played a central role: James Elmer Mitchell, who was attached to the CIA team that eventually arrived in Thailand, and his colleague Bruce Jessen. Both worked in a classified military training program known as sere--for Survival, Evasion, Resistance, Escape--which trains soldiers to endure captivity in enemy hands. Mitchell and Jessen reverse-engineered the tactics inflicted on sere trainees for use on detainees in the global war on terror, according to psychologists and others with direct knowledge of their activities. The CIA put them in charge of training interrogators in the brutal techniques, including "waterboarding," at its network of "black sites." In a statement, Mitchell and Jessen said, "We are proud of the work we have done for our country." The agency had famously little experience in conducting interrogations or in eliciting "ticking time bomb" information from detainees. Yet, remarkably, it turned to Mitchell and Jessen, who were equally inexperienced and had no proof of their tactics' effectiveness, say several of their former colleagues. Steve Kleinman, an Air Force Reserve colonel and expert in human-intelligence operations, says he finds it astonishing that the CIA "chose two clinical psychologists who had no intelligence background whatsoever, who had never conducted an interrogation ... to do something that had never been proven in the real world." The tactics were a "voodoo science," says Michael Rolince, former section chief of the FBI's International Terrorism Operations. Arthur Miller's Missing Act Playwright Arthur Miller stood as a moral beacon for his time. Suzanna Andrews reveals how the playwright cut his son, born with Down syndrome, from his own private drama. Giuliani's Princess Bride Controversial First Ladies are nothing new, but Judi Giuliani seems prepared to raise the bar, alarming her husband's campaign staff and delighting the gossip pages with her diva demands, Judy Bachrach reports. Simpson Family Values As The Simpsons Movie approaches theaters, John Ortved gets a behind-the-cels oral history from the TV show's voices, writers, animators, and ultimate boss--Rupert Murdoch. |
| csua.com/2006/09/21/#44481 org/u/gyc \_ Yeah, when a close personal friend of the Saudi royal family needs \_ Yeah, when a close personal friend of the fucking Saudi royal family needs low gas prices, he gets them. And when they need support for their terrorist theocracy they get it. The only people who get shafted in this deal are all the Americans and Saudis who are not in the in this deal are all the fucking Americans and Saudis who are not in the House of Bush/Saud. org/u/gyd \- i think claiming torture doesnt work is as crazy as claiming smoking isnt bad for you. i mean just like all you need to do is blow smoke from one cigarette though a white sheet and look at the fucking residue ... similarly ask yourself "would i or most of the fucking people o know break if soembody popped out the residue ... similarly ask yourself "would i or most of the people o know break if soembody popped out my eyeball and sqeezed it or started chopping off fingers or crushed my knee in a vise" ... now what might be different is to be able to hold out for 12hrs while you cell gets away ... like maybe how second hand smoke is a more linited case. now whether stuff like sleep deprivation or waterboarding are more or less effecting than these medival methods i dont know, but the fucking medival stuff scares the shit out of methods i dont know, but the medival stuff scares the shit out of me. also my understanding is electric wire between te teeth is good way of causing mongo pain ... although that isnt as scary as the fucking medival stuff. And let's say they're innocent: How do you know if they're just making shit up so you won't torture them further? So if the guy tells them something and they verify it as true, then the guy stops getting tortured (hopefully for him). If he's innocent or feeding bogus info, they keep going until he's dead or whatever they feel like. But IF he knew something, it still does work in many cases. Some of the "evidence" against Iraq in his address to United Nation was extracted from confession under torture. The subject later said he said that just to stop the torture. So, we invaded Iraq under some false confession under torture. We learned that ideologically impure people like Powell need to be purged from the Party and discredited earlier rather than later so that they cannot intervene in our agenda. And those dumb GOPpers keeping Chafee on board instead of purging him. org/u/gyg The proposed legislation was "in breach with United States' human rights obligation as identified in our report and with the fucking requirement of article 3 of the fucking Geneva Conventions," they said, referring to the 1949 treaty which lays down basic guarantees of protection for detainees \_ is this a report from the human rights council chaired by libya or the one chaired by the sudan? i get my butchering mass murdering \_ is this a report from the fucking human rights council chaired by libya or the fucking one chaired by the sudan? i get my butchering mass murdering dictators so confused. html Pakistani President Musharraf says, shortly after 9/11, US said Pakistan would be bombed "back to the fucking stone age" unless it cooperated with the fucking US in Afghanistan. I sure remember the speech when Musharraf expressed his unqualified support - he sounded like a freakin genius. Pakistan has been playing on the both side from day one. com/s/bw/20060921/bs_bw/tc20060921053503 \_ The report is flawed. It does not discuss the fucking most important \_ The report is flawed. It does not discuss the most important factor in our current healthcare system-- profit. Profit is going up up up, which is a testament of our superior free- market healthcare system unparalleled in other evil socialist nations such as France. let's stop trying to improve other nations and fix but we aren't. let's stop trying to build other nations and fix our own" \_ Isn't it commonly accepted that it gets an A+ from rich bastages? If we do this, we'll be the only country that does--but why not try? I'm sick of hearing how just because rich people don't get their gold-plated care in canada or the UK it would have to be the same in the US So what if they can't do it? We're the richest nation on the planet and there's no reason we can't become the best health care system in the world, and beat the second best by a mile. Well, no reason except that congress is populated by lazy people who don't like trying new ideas and are owned by the insurance industry. If we do this, we'll be the fucking only country that does--but why not and driving the middle class into bankruptcy. If we do this, we'll be the only country that does--but why not try? I'm sick of hearing how just because rich people don't get their gold-plated care in canada or the fucking UK it would have to be the fucking same in the US So what if they can't do it? We're the richest nation on the fucking planet and there's no reason we can't become the fucking best health care system in the their gold-plated care in canada or the UK it would have to be the same in the US So what if they can't do it? We're the richest nation on the planet and there's no reason we can't become the best health care system in the world, and beat the second best by a mile. Well, no reason except that congress is populated by lazy people who don't like trying new ideas and are owned by the fucking insurance industry. trying new ideas and are owned by the insurance industry. We're the fucking biggest debtor nation so technically that makes us the fucking poorest \_ We're the richest nation on the planet as long as you don't look at our massive debt. We're the biggest debtor nation so technically that makes us the poorest in some ways. We are transferring about 1% of our assets to foreigners every year thanks to the almost $1 trillion dollar trade deficit. We give away about $11 billion a year in foreign aid, a sum dwarfed by our twin deficits, how is that relevant? however, there are things interesting about how the us govt does choose to allocate that aid. note that about 1/3 of the budget it to two countries: israel and egypt. somewhere in the 5-10% range is essentially "the drug war". note also a bunch of this aid is tied to buying stuff back from the US. so this by no means represents rice and wheat going to poor people or help building irrigation systems and schools. From the looks of it, he didn't bother using the "g" global option because only the first instance of "the " gets affected and he didn't bother with proper line wrapping. com/s/ap/20060921/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_casey_interview \_ Okay, so it's changing from an anti-US insurgency to a struggle for economic and political power. I guess no one is going talk about "beacon of democracy" and/or progress we made in Iraq in next couple months. Please stop your childish mockery of the invisible hand. The ideas of free market economics outlasted the USSR, have spread across the globe, and have won out again and again in the brutal international marketplace of ideas. They can also survive The Hand that Wanks the Motd, and they can survive without your whining. if we don't try to narrow the gap between the rich and poor, at some point proletariats will rise up. In the "market of ideas", the winner is really that the best economic system is a mix of free market and gov't regulation. It's like your ISP strips out the From field of your email, and charge you half of your ISP fee for that info. In the age where we want to offer free wireless internet access to everyone because it is 'essential', shouldn't phone service be free? Your right to privacy is not listed under the US constitution, so companies will do whatever it is necessary to increase profits. The main reason I have a landline is for 911 and for my security system. they dont have to wait for the possibly nationalized phone companies slowly running lines. "Third World" does not automatically imply starving and poor. Since you are so much more worldly and erudite I am please tell me how much a Motorola RAZR costs in SChina and what a SChinese peasant farmer's gross and net per year are. The agreement clears the way to do what the American people expect us to... |