Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5
Reply To Thread

So apparently it is blue moon...Follow

#1 Dec 09 2014 at 5:25 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
***
1,323 posts
because I seem to be in agreement with Feinstein. It is a good thing it was released. People already hate us. It is kinda hard to make it worse than it already is.

Apart from the obvious, me agreeing with Feinstein is on par with me agreeing with Gbaji; a weird and disconcerting experience.

Also, I m pissed because the old country participated in this ****. More specifically, we participated and got jack **** ( politicians pocketed the money, and even symbolic visas were not waived ).

So yeah, blue moon.
____________________________
Your soul was made of fists.

Jar the Sam
#2 Dec 09 2014 at 7:00 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
I'm not sure what to be more surprised at. You claiming to not be in virtual political lockstep with someone like Feinstein, or that you think it's 2005.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#3 Dec 09 2014 at 7:03 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
***
1,323 posts
gbaji wrote:
I'm not sure what to be more surprised at. You claiming to not be in virtual political lockstep with someone like Feinstein, or that you think it's 2005.


Interesting, I take it you are claiming that it is all old news? Or that it didn't matter since 2005? Or that everything changed since 9/11? I can never really tell with you.
____________________________
Your soul was made of fists.

Jar the Sam
#4 Dec 09 2014 at 7:22 PM Rating: Good
Well, Dick believes it saved American lives so it must be true.

Edited, Dec 9th 2014 8:22pm by Omegavegeta
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#5 Dec 09 2014 at 8:13 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
angrymnk wrote:
gbaji wrote:
I'm not sure what to be more surprised at. You claiming to not be in virtual political lockstep with someone like Feinstein, or that you think it's 2005.


Interesting, I take it you are claiming that it is all old news?


Far moreso than anything the Left has dismissed as old news over the last few years.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#6 Dec 09 2014 at 8:20 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Omegavegeta wrote:
Well, Dick believes it saved American lives so it must be true.


It is telling how the language is cherry picked in the Democrat written synopsis of the report. Like, for example, that enhanced interrogation can't be shown to have prevented a single terrorist attack, while conveniently forgetting that it very directly lead to what is arguably the most hyped foreign policy act by the Obama administration (OBL killing). They also use language like "which couldn't have been obtained via other means", which is basically code for "we got useful information, but we don't like how we got it, so we'll just assume that we could have come up with it anyway".

And, at the risk of repeating myself, I've seen nothing in that report of a report that I haven't heard liberals talking about for nearly 10 years. So yeah, it really is old news. Get back to me when they discover the use of some new technique we hadn't heard of before, or used some different methods to rendition people, or otherwise found something "new" to talk about. This thing? It's the equivalent of saying "Hey guys! Remember those things the CIA did that we didn't like and told you about 10 years ago? Well? Let's make sure we remember that they did that stuff. Cause it's important that we remember it. And talk about it. And associate it heavily with a GOP controlled White House in the run up to the next presidential election.

Edited, Dec 9th 2014 6:21pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#7 Dec 09 2014 at 8:29 PM Rating: Excellent
****
4,158 posts
Yeah. I'm with Gbaji. It's old news.
Doesn't make it any less reprehensible tho. Bush, Cheney, Yoo, Blair and the rest should all be facing war crime charges like many have been saying for years.

Anyone who now continues to defend the torturers and enablers of the torture should take a long hard look at themselves and try to understand the collective madness that they were party to in the hope of not falling into the same pattern of wilful stupidity again.

I m not gonna hold my breath tho'.
____________________________
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.

#8 Dec 09 2014 at 8:35 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
1,323 posts
gbaji wrote:
angrymnk wrote:
gbaji wrote:
I'm not sure what to be more surprised at. You claiming to not be in virtual political lockstep with someone like Feinstein, or that you think it's 2005.


Interesting, I take it you are claiming that it is all old news?


Far moreso than anything the Left has dismissed as old news over the last few years.


Ahh, I see what you are saying. The world knew, but the average Joe Shmoe didn't. So this report is mainly aimed for an American audience.
____________________________
Your soul was made of fists.

Jar the Sam
#9 Dec 09 2014 at 8:37 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
that it very directly lead to what is arguably the most hyped foreign policy act by the Obama administration (OBL killing).

Well, except no.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#10 Dec 09 2014 at 8:51 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
***
1,323 posts
You know why I posted this? Not because of gems mentioned by the rest propaganda machine ( broom rape, freezing temps, extreme sleep deprivation, rectal feeding ), but because of little pieces like this one:

"Strongly urge that any speculative language as to the legality of given activities or, more precisely, judgment calls as to their legality vis-a-vis operational guidelines for this activity agreed upon and vetted at the most senior levels of the agency, be refrained from in written traffic (email or cable traffic). Such language is not helpful." Jose Rodriguez, CTC

Source. Pdf

The management knew it was not a good idea, people were telling them it was a bad idea, but they collectively put hands over their ears and sang 'lalalala, i cant heaaaaar you; and stop talking so that I can continue not hearing you'.

____________________________
Your soul was made of fists.

Jar the Sam
#11 Dec 09 2014 at 8:59 PM Rating: Excellent
Tracer Bullet
*****
12,636 posts
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
that it very directly lead to what is arguably the most hyped foreign policy act by the Obama administration (OBL killing).

Well, except no.

Was going to make a joke about getting your news from Zero Dark Thirty, so I looked it up to confirm my joke was going to be accurate, and found this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/23/us/politics/acting-cia-director-michael-j-morell-criticizes-zero-dark-thirty.html?_r=1& wrote:
In a message sent Friday to agency employees about the film, “Zero Dark Thirty,” [acting Director of the CIA Michael J.] Morell said it “creates the strong impression that the enhanced interrogation techniques that were part of our former detention and interrogation program were the key to finding Bin Laden. That impression is false.”
#12 Dec 09 2014 at 9:10 PM Rating: Good
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
My views on torture are summed up pretty succinctly by Nice Guy Eddie: If you beat this man enough he'll tell you he started the goddam Chicago Fire but that doesn't necessarily make it so.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#13 Dec 10 2014 at 8:39 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
gbaji wrote:
you think it's 2005.
Mr 1980, folks.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#14 Dec 10 2014 at 6:02 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
angrymnk wrote:
Ahh, I see what you are saying. The world knew, but the average Joe Shmoe didn't. So this report is mainly aimed for an American audience.


Nope. Any Joe Shmoe who didn't already know all of this, likely still doesn't, because they live under a rock or something. This report is mainly aimed at American Liberals to rile them up against the GOP for the next election cycle (and I suppose to dove tail into whatever "the GOP has an evil agenda, so thank goodness I'm blocking it for you all" angle the Whitehouse will be taking in the meantime).

This has nothing to do with informing people of things they didn't already know.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#15 Dec 10 2014 at 6:11 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
trickybeck wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
that it very directly lead to what is arguably the most hyped foreign policy act by the Obama administration (OBL killing).

Well, except no.

Was going to make a joke about getting your news from Zero Dark Thirty, so I looked it up to confirm my joke was going to be accurate, and found this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/23/us/politics/acting-cia-director-michael-j-morell-criticizes-zero-dark-thirty.html?_r=1& wrote:
In a message sent Friday to agency employees about the film, “Zero Dark Thirty,” [acting Director of the CIA Michael J.] Morell said it “creates the strong impression that the enhanced interrogation techniques that were part of our former detention and interrogation program were the key to finding Bin Laden. That impression is false.”


Um... This information was known prior to the film coming out (or being filmed, for that matter). The guy who was the actual CIA director at the time (not "acting" and not after the fact) said publicly that the information that lead to OBL's death was obtained via enhanced interrogations. The film based its story on that, not the other way around.

The CIA itself has consistently maintained that this is true as well (well, aside from a couple of obvious political appointees along the way, I suppose). I guess we could play dueling CIA director statements if you want, but let's not pretend that there's just one side to this.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#16 Dec 10 2014 at 6:18 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I suppose there's the "Agency trying to cover its ass in the face of massive public and Congressional disapproval" side and the "The truth" side but I'd assume only morons would take the former and pretend it's equally valid as the latter.

Edited, Dec 10th 2014 6:18pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#17 Dec 10 2014 at 7:00 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
So, before proceeding, can we agree that the film was not the source of the claim that enhanced interrogation lead to the death of OBL? Simple yes or no will suffice.

Ok:

Jophiel wrote:
I suppose there's the "Agency trying to cover its ass in the face of massive public and Congressional disapproval" side and the "The truth" side but I'd assume only morons would take the former and pretend it's equally valid as the latter.


Neither of those propositions are inherently contradictory though. One side can engage in CYA without the other side having "the truth" on their side. There's at least as much vested interest in one side insisting that no useful intelligence ever came from enhanced interrogation as there is the other side insisting that there was. I just find the former claim incredibly unlikely. No useful intelligence ever? Really?

A reasonable and objective person would assume the truth is somewhere in between. Well, he would if there was a reasonable in between here. The problem is that one side is taking the already reasonable position that "some" intelligence was gained via these techniques, while the other is taking the absurd position that "no" intelligence was gained. The "some" position is almost certainly true, right? I mean, if we're being reasonable, rational, objective people.

The correct question here isn't whether any intelligence was gained via enhanced interrogation, but how much was gained, and whether it was worth the means used to get it. Of course, to answer this, we'd need to honestly assess what was done, make some real ethical analysis of those actions, and weigh them against the alternative of not using them. Platitudes are not sufficient for this analysis. Constant repetitions of "torture doesn't work!" doesn't accomplish this. Sadly, most people would prefer to go forward using emotion inspiring slogans and don't want to bother with pesky facts and analysis. Par for the course, I guess.

____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#18 Dec 10 2014 at 8:05 PM Rating: Good
We should be better than our enemy. There's no excuse for torturing people, no matter how many times Dick insists it saves lives. If it was up to him, we would have bombed North Korea & Iran too.
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#19 Dec 10 2014 at 8:20 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
***
1,323 posts
gbaji wrote:


A reasonable and objective person would assume the truth is somewhere in between. Well, he would if there was a reasonable in between here. The problem is that one side is taking the already reasonable position that "some" intelligence was gained via these techniques, while the other is taking the absurd position that "no" intelligence was gained. The "some" position is almost certainly true, right? I mean, if we're being reasonable, rational, objective people.

The correct question here isn't whether any intelligence was gained via enhanced interrogation, but how much was gained, and whether it was worth the means used to get it. Of course, to answer this, we'd need to honestly assess what was done, make some real ethical analysis of those actions, and weigh them against the alternative of not using them. Platitudes are not sufficient for this analysis. Constant repetitions of "torture doesn't work!" doesn't accomplish this. Sadly, most people would prefer to go forward using emotion inspiring slogans and don't want to bother with pesky facts and analysis. Par for the course, I guess.



Heh, I am curious to what you would admit to if enough 'enhanced interrogation' was applied to you.

Reasonable and objective.. it is almost as my bad as my congress critter responding to me saying that he won't even entertain the notion of dropping support of TPP. It can be discussed in general, but reasonable adults must support it. In the same way Hillary whined about the leaks ( reasonable people, we must talk like adults ).

Condescending *******; maybe I do not fit your idea of reasonable ( translate: I don't roll over on command when TV heads say I should ).
____________________________
Your soul was made of fists.

Jar the Sam
#20 Dec 10 2014 at 8:47 PM Rating: Good
****
4,158 posts
Since this report was released I have read and heard a few interviews with various people (an ex CIA operative, a psychologist type and a couple of people who were then or are now, part of the US administration) and they have all used a similar tone as Gbaji in relation to what the report has finally put into black and white. That tone being very much a 'yeah but we all knew it was going on, people were scared and scared people sometimes do stupid stuff', sort of thing.

Whilst it may be true, it in no way minimizes or excuses the absolute reprehensible behavior of the US security forces or the officials at all levels who are supposed to be maintaining some sort of standards of operational behavior. The fact that people in positions of power felt that it was not only productive, but actually morally acceptable to torture prisoners sometimes to death should be a matter for absolute disgust among the people of the United States of WTF, as it is among the people of the rest of the civilised world. It is not something that should be trivialized in any way.

What these apologists seem unable to understand is that all those people who were still happily supporting the US and its actions abroad in the belief that they were doing it for the good of the people of the countries they were bombing, for all the 'right' reasons, if you will, are now reading in their newspapers and watching on their TV's the news that the US is not only just as bad as the 'terrorists' they were supposedly fighting, but in many ways worse because they were committing these atrocities under the cover of 'humanitarianism'. I suggest that many of these people will feel betrayed and angry about having been hoodwinked into supporting the US and that anger will manifest in not inconsiderable blow back towards the US and its people.

The next time someone official stands in front of a camera and tries to garner support fo a US led humanitarian venture into someone elses country I truly hope someone stands up and calls them out for the lying f*ck that they obviously are.

Of course, a few of the big names on charges for war crimes would go a long way to fixing the reputation of the US, but as the self proclaimes exceptional country, I can't really see that happening any time soon.
____________________________
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.

#22 Dec 10 2014 at 10:40 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
Omegavegeta wrote:
We should be better than our enemy. There's no excuse for torturing people, no matter how many times Dick insists it saves lives. If it was up to him, we would have bombed North Korea & Iran too.

This is the same thing I posted on Facebook in rebuttal to my Midwesterner military/police family. We should not allow the enemies to dictate how poorly we treat them. That's kinda what makes us better than them.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#23 Dec 11 2014 at 12:36 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
A reasonable and objective person would assume the truth is somewhere in between.

There is no "in between". Either torture was directly responsible for locating and killing bin Laden or it wasn't. If your answer is "Well, maybe it kinda sorta was... it's in between!" as a justification for torture, you're morally bankrupt anyway.
Quote:
Platitudes are not sufficient for this analysis

...said the guy using "Is it yes or no? The answer is in between!" as his answer.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#24 Dec 11 2014 at 7:18 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
A discussion this morning on the radio, What Is Torture? Our Beliefs Depend In Part On Who's Doing It. Written transcripts are not yet available, but there was nothing surprising; Some studies showing that peeps justify and redefine torture differently depending on who's being tortured by who. Nothing terribly ground-breaking, but it was kind of interesting.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#25 Dec 11 2014 at 8:09 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
It's "enhanced interrogation"!

Granted, it's enhanced with torture but as polite turn of phrase can work wonders for being able to look at yourself in the mirror after you defend it.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#26 Dec 11 2014 at 8:28 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
gbaji wrote:
Constant repetitions of "torture doesn't work!" doesn't accomplish this.
Unless it's about song lyrics.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 192 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (192)