|
Famethrowa posted:
Fox and Friends has you covered -->https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhDJOEHWuDQ
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 23:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 05:46 |
|
|
As a strict Originalist when it comes to the constitution, nothing could be more important than repudiating enlightenment values.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 23:46
|
|
|
Instead of disbanding the CIA, why not aim for a more achievable target? Name and remove torture participants. It is somewhat overlooked that the people who did this are largely still with the agency. They've promoted up, they should now be in management positions. One reason it's certain this will happen again is that people who did it will be quite literally running the place. Not that I think that will happen, but it is one concrete step people could call for.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 23:48
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I think the issue that you may be missing is that the reason evidence obtained through torture is not admissible in court is because it isn't actually evidence. edit: Setting admissibility standards on what evidence is correct seems innately problematic because it requires us to know the correct outcome ahead of time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 23:49
|
|
|
Kazak_Hstan posted:Instead of disbanding the CIA, why not aim for a more achievable target? Name and remove torture participants. It is somewhat overlooked that the people who did this are largely still with the agency. They've promoted up, they should now be in management positions. One reason it's certain this will happen again is that people who did it will be quite literally running the place. Can't do that, would compromise national security.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 23:50
|
|
|
twodot posted:This is just denying reality. Torture coerced confessions are evidence. They are bad evidence that is frequently wrong, and we should assume they are wrong, but even if we had some corroborating fact telling us one was right, we still shouldn't admit them in court, because torture is immoral, and the exclusionary rule is there to influence law enforcement policies, not because it could be wrong. It's pretty well documented that torturing people doesn't produce actionably accurate information, it produces whatever the torturer wants to hear so that the torture will stop. The best you can achieve with torture is confirming your pre-existng bias, and if you want to do that there are much cheaper ways to do it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 23:52
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:It's pretty well documented that torturing people doesn't produce actionably accurate information, it produces whatever the torturer wants to hear so that the torture will stop. edit: I mean imagine that we created a perfect lie detector, we would still not allow people to torture confessions out of people.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2014 23:55
|
|
|
twodot posted:Right I agree torture is bad/stupid. We were talking about whether or not things people say after they are tortured qualifies as evidence, and why such evidence wouldn't be admitted at trial (it is because the exclusionary rule is attempting to force law enforcement to act morally/within the law, not because the exclusionary rule is attempting to make law enforcement use effective policies). My point is more that if the justification for holding them is that we have evidence, but it wouldn't be prosecutable, possibly 'we tortured him until he said he did it so we'd stop' isn't really the best example of 'we all know he did it but we can't bring it to court'
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 00:00
|
|
|
Kazak_Hstan posted:Instead of disbanding the CIA, why not aim for a more achievable target? Name and remove torture participants. It is somewhat overlooked that the people who did this are largely still with the agency. They've promoted up, they should now be in management positions. One reason it's certain this will happen again is that people who did it will be quite literally running the place. I mean we already know the names of the two "psychologists" who designed the protocols, the methods, the facilities and even let the torture themselves. What exactly are we going to do with that information? Also, according to the senate report aren't the vast majority of actual torturers ex-CIA torture contractors instead of CIA employees? Free enterprise 
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 00:03
|
|
|
The CIA in relation to other intelligence agencies has been notoriously poor at things like tradecraft. For instance, the CIA got its start airdropping Russian emigres back into the USSR, which is hilarious because the Soviets always had people watching both the runways and the emigres so it just ended up with a lot of people getting killed. Their main claim to fame is having exhorbitant amounts of money, at least back in the day. It wouldn't be a huge loss to lose the organization.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 00:12
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:My point is more that if the justification for holding them is that we have evidence, but it wouldn't be prosecutable, possibly 'we tortured him until he said he did it so we'd stop' isn't really the best example of 'we all know he did it but we can't bring it to court'
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 00:25
|
|
|
twodot posted:I think you are reading more into my post than what I said. The people who perform torture presumably believe it does produce useful information (again, I'm assuming they aren't super villains who torture for no reason), so information produced via torture is, I suspect, a prime component of their inadmissible evidence. This is a bad reason to hold someone indefinitely without trial, but there simply doesn't exist any good reason to hold someone indefinitely without trial, so that doesn't seem remarkable. (Similarly my other example of "Oh a guy told us you did something bad, but we can't/won't find him for cross examination" is a bad reason) Torture coerced confessions do not become evidence just because the person doing the torturing really thinks it works.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 00:54
|
|
|
Who says crime doesn't pay? (Edit: you may know him as CIA Officer 1, but you can call him Matthew) Trabisnikof fucked around with this message at 01:13 on Dec 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 00:54
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Who says crime doesn't pay? "'I have never witnessed torture, but by all accounts it is terrible. However, I have seen the house that it bought, and it is terrific."
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 01:07
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Who says crime doesn't pay? Question: Will freelance torture work enable me to buy a house like this or do I have to do it though official channels?
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 01:13
|
|
|
NoEyedSquareGuy posted:Question: Will freelance torture work enable me to buy a house like this or do I have to do it though official channels? Yeah, that's got me thinking, if I were in his position, how much turpitude would a million dollars buy? How about several million? I'm concluding we can't let there be so much profit in their work.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 01:20
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:(Edit: you may know him as CIA Officer 1, but you can call him Matthew) He has horrible taste Edit: I mean that place looks like it was designed by Grandma Walton and Tobias Funke. So, yeah, torturer Iowa Snow King fucked around with this message at 01:48 on Dec 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 01:34
|
|
|
What I don't understand is why the CIA was paying these huge sums of money, like what could possibly justify it in their mind to spend that much money on someone who's job just seemed like middle management skills.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 02:45
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:What I don't understand is why the CIA was paying these huge sums of money, like what could possibly justify it in their mind to spend that much money on someone who's job just seemed like middle management skills. When you think there is one person in the world that can do a thing, you tend to pay a large sum of money for that thing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 02:46
|
|
|
Jack Gladney posted:The CIA tortured 40,000 Vietnamese civilians to death between 1965 and 1972. That is loving crazy to me and I had no idea. This, I had never head of the program either. hobbesmaster posted:When you think there is one person in the world that can do a thing, you tend to pay a large sum of money for that thing. What was that thing though it seemed like he was just a lovely torturer and interogator
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 02:55
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:What I don't understand is why the CIA was paying these huge sums of money, like what could possibly justify it in their mind to spend that much money on someone who's job just seemed like middle management skills. I think the CIA officials finding a way to feed money to themselves was just normal blatant corruption. Like what else could you expect managing an unlimited budget no one outside will ever be allowed to audit?
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 02:58
|
|
|
tentative8e8op posted:I think the CIA officials finding a way to feed money to themselves was just normal blatant corruption. Like what else could you expect managing an unlimited budget no one outside will ever be allowed to audit? Yeah it's likely this. They have infinite money, either from the government or selling drugs.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 03:34
|
|
|
I wish I knew what was going on behind closed doors in Washington. On the one hand Obama issued the EO to ban "EIT" almost as soon as he took office and so he thinks it is a Very Bad Thing, on the other hand he doesn't want to hold anyone accountable. Is he just too good of buddies with Brennan? Is he scared of his legacy getting tarnished by the ensuing shitstorm hearings and trials would cause? Is he worried his precious drone program would come under similar fire? I mean those are legit concerns (I guess?) but drat.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 04:13
|
|
|
My Rhythmic Crotch posted:I wish I knew what was going on behind closed doors in Washington. On the one hand Obama issued the EO to ban "EIT" almost as soon as he took office and so he thinks it is a Very Bad Thing, on the other hand he doesn't want to hold anyone accountable. Is he just too good of buddies with Brennan? Is he scared of his legacy getting tarnished by the ensuing shitstorm hearings and trials would cause? Is he worried his precious drone program would come under similar fire? I mean those are legit concerns (I guess?) but drat. http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/12/22/torture-truth quote:The 1975 Church Committee report, which was conducted following revelations of, among other things, covert operations to assassinate foreign leaders, was, until now, the best-known public airing of C.I.A. practices. According to Loch K. Johnson, a professor of political science at the University of Georgia, who was a special assistant to Senator Frank Church, its findings were broadly accepted across the political spectrum. “No one challenged it,” he said. By contrast, the new report, even before it was released, came under attack from Republicans, including Dick Cheney, who, although he hadn’t read it, called it “full of crap.” Senator Mitch McConnell, the incoming majority leader, castigated it as “ideologically motivated and distorted.” John Cornyn, the second-highest-ranking Republican in the Senate, argued that C.I.A. officers should not be criticized but, rather, “thanked.”
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 04:25
|
|
|
Booourns posted:Torture coerced confessions do not become evidence just because the person doing the torturing really thinks it works. edit: Alternately, can you conceive of the concept of bad evidence? Can you imagine a piece of evidence which might cause you to believe a wrong conclusion? twodot fucked around with this message at 04:34 on Dec 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 04:30
|
|
|
Darth Walrus posted:Most countries need intelligence agencies, especially countries as big and powerful as the States. The question is whether the CIA is so irreparably broken that you should just burn the whole thing down and start again. It's actually ironic that in recent times the Pentagon has tried to get into the on the ground human intelligence gathering that should traditionally be the CIA's bread and butter while the CIA has focused nearly entirely on the whole killing humans thing. The Way of the Knife was an interesting little read, if you want to read mostly stories about the pissing match between the CIA and DoD/Pentagon, some weird characters that got involved with the CIA during the past few years and a little bit about the CIA's decline into the current drone focused state.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 04:39
|
|
|
I think I remember seeing a snippet from the torture report saying that torture was used to get incorrect intelligence that was used to justify the Iraq war. Anyone know the details on that? Edit: It's this, right? 
Dr. Arbitrary fucked around with this message at 05:25 on Dec 16, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 05:22
|
|
|
 I love this poo poo
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 05:49
|
|
|
 Thanks Obama
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2014 12:07
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/12/torture-report-poll_n_6316126.html 45 percent of Americans not only believe that torture was effective, but believe we should use more of it in the future.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 01:37
|
|
|
Rodnik posted:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/12/torture-report-poll_n_6316126.html 11% of Americans are cool with anal rape and 30% are cool with threatening to rape their family members. Not a rape culture, though!
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 02:47
|
|
|
Rand alPaul posted:11% of Americans are cool with anal rape and 30% are cool with threatening to rape their family members. Hey hey, chill out with that "rape culture" stuff you're gonna start to sound like a Tumblr SJW.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 02:48
|
|
|
Rand alPaul posted:11% of Americans are cool with anal rape and 30% are cool with threatening to rape their family members. Whats the overlap between those two groups?
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 02:57
|
|
|
Rand alPaul posted:11% of Americans are cool with anal rape and 30% are cool with threatening to rape their family members. 11% are cool with raping someone by pumping Greek salad into their rear end until their bowels rupture. I suspect the percentage who are OK with plain ol' vanilla rape (not rape involving vanilla... I hope) is significantly higher. I mean, consider all those tasteless jokes about prison rape.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 02:59
|
|
|
twodot posted:I think you are reading more into my post than what I said. The people who perform torture presumably believe it does produce useful information (again, I'm assuming they aren't super villains who torture for no reason), so information produced via torture is, I suspect, a prime component of their inadmissible evidence. This is a bad reason to hold someone indefinitely without trial, but there simply doesn't exist any good reason to hold someone indefinitely without trial, so that doesn't seem remarkable. (Similarly my other example of "Oh a guy told us you did something bad, but we can't/won't find him for cross examination" is a bad reason) Per the report, at least one guy was tortured to play hours screams to his family to get information from them
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 03:18
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:What was that thing though it seemed like he was just a lovely torturer and interogator He was the only one who could get the detainees to admit that bin Laden and Saddam Hussein were working together on secret WMD projects in Iraqi trucks and hidden GI Joe style mountain fortresses in Afghanistan, and also sleeping with each other.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 03:20
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:Per the report, at least one guy was tortured to play hours screams to his family to get information from them Please tell me it was somebody's teenage son who got scooped up off of a soccer field or something.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 03:21
|
|
|
Jack Gladney posted:Please tell me it was somebody's teenage son who got scooped up off of a soccer field or something. Worse - the guy was 'intellectually challenged'. So they literally kidnapped and tortured someone's little brother with Down's Syndrome to get some extra leverage over his family. The poor bastard probably didn't have the slightest idea what was happening to him other than it being painful and scary. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 03:24
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:Per the report, at least one guy was tortured to play hours screams to his family to get information from them
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 03:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 05:46 |
|
|
And it turns out that the family we sent tapes of their screaming retarded son being tortured got them to confess about that ticking bomb and saved all those people and the torturers got medals and we threw a parade. Remember?
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2014 03:30
|
|
