Quote from: IcyWind on December 09, 2014, 12:34:47 PM

Quote from: PSU on December 09, 2014, 12:33:17 PM

Quote from: IcyWind on December 09, 2014, 12:31:51 PM

Quote from: PSU on December 09, 2014, 12:30:59 PM

Easy, they give you fake info. Keep torturing them until they give you the right info.

Or, you know. Until you've committed murder.

Of course, I'm sure that's no big deal.

Its really not. War isn't pretty. You have to do some messed up things to win.

If you have to go to these lengths, violating international law and all that fun shit - have you actually won?

Yep

Easy, they give you fake info. Keep torturing them until they give you the right info.

but I don't see all torture being bad

Quote from: IcyWind on December 09, 2014, 12:21:37 PM

Whether or not it's enforceable, it only continue to make America look like an ass on the world stage.

People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. Foreign governments which accuse the U.S. of torture and immoral conduct ought be derided for the idiots they are.

A long-awaited Senate report concludes that the Central Intelligence Agency repeatedly misled the public, Congress and the White House about the agency’s aggressive questioning of detainees — including waterboarding, confinement in small spaces and shackling in stress positions — after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, minimizing the severity of the interrogations and exaggerating the usefulness of the information produced, including its role in setting in motion the U.S. raid that killed Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.

The Senate Intelligence Committee report finds that the “Enhanced Interrogation Techniques” program escaped effective scrutiny by outsiders long after its inception in 2002, with CIA records showing that President George W. Bush was never briefed by the agency on specific techniques such as waterboarding until 2006. Top Bush administration officials such as Defense Secretary Don Rumsfeld and Secretary of State Colin Powell were not told of the practices until September 2003.

The congressional review also says that the CIA’s actual tactics often went far beyond the terms laid out in Justice Department legal opinions, subjecting detainees to prolonged interrogation under a combination of harsh techniques and ignoring safeguards set forth in the legal memos such as ensuring that interrogators were well-trained and had high-level approvals before using the unusually aggressive tactics.

President Barack Obama issued a statement that stopped short of completely endorsing the report’s conclusions, but he reiterated his opposition to the Bush-era interrogation practices.

“The report documents a troubling program involving enhanced interrogation techniques on terrorism suspects in secret facilities outside the United States, and it reinforces my long-held view that these harsh methods were not only inconsistent with our values as nation, they did not serve our broader counterterrorism efforts or our national security interests,” Obama said. “These techniques did significant damage to America’s standing in the world and made it harder to pursue our interests with allies and partners.”

Obama was silent on the issues of whether the CIA misled outsiders about the program and about whether it produced important intelligence but he emphasized that he banned the harsh techniques soon after he took office

“Rather than another reason to refight old arguments, I hope that today’s report can help us leave these techniques where they belong—in the past,” he said.

Among the report’s key findings:

Quote

* Interrogation sessions were far more brutal than publicly revealed and went far beyond the scope of Justice Department approvals. Alleged 9/11 mastermind Abu Zubaydah was interrogated continuously for 17 days straight, being subjected to 183 waterboarding sessions and confinement in stress positions. He was told preparations were being made for his cremation. During one waterboarding session, Abu Zubaydah lost consciousness and water and air bubbles began pouring out of his mouth. The incident was never reported to senior CIA management, but discovered by the Senate in e-mails of CIA medical personnel.

* The CIA had little grip on basic details such as the number of detainees in the program. According to agency records, at least 119 prisoners were involved, but CIA officials represented the number at less that 100. At least a sixth of the prisoners didn’t meet the stated criteria. Sometimes senior officials were confused about where detainees were located. Vice President Dick Cheney at one point ran into diplomatic trouble because he was unaware one country was hosting a so-called black site.

* While Bush has defended the program and taken responsibility for authorizing it, he was apparently told for the first time about the details of the interrogation techniques in 2006. CIA records show that at that briefing he expressed discomfort with the “image of a detainee, chained to the ceiling, clothed in a diaper, and forced to go to the bathroom on himself.”

* Key Cabinet officials such as Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Secretary of State were kept out of the loop about the program until September 2003. An e-mail from CIA acting general counsel John Rizzo said White House staff insisted the reason was to avoid leaks, but Rizzo said it was “clear to us” that National Security Council officials feared Powell “would blow his stack if he were to be briefed on what’s going on.”

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) charged that the interrogation tactics amounted to “torture,” although the report itself doesn’t explicitly make that claim.

“The CIA’s actions a decade ago are a stain on our history and our values….Releasing this report is an important step to restore our values and show the world we are in fact a just and lawful society,” she said in a speech on the Senate floor. “This program was morally, legally and administrative misguided…..The CIA program was far more brutal than people were led to believe.”

CIA officials say the Senate review is deeply flawed, in large part because the study which formally began in 2009 relied solely on written CIA documents and did not include direct interviews with key players. The spy agency says the Senate report understates the value of intelligence received from detainees and that management problems identified in the report were rectified relatively early in the program.

CIA Director John Brennan conceded missteps in the agency’s interrogation effort, but sharply disagreed with other conclusions in the report.

“We acknowledge that the detention and interrogation program had shortcomings and that the Agency made mistakes,” the director said. “The most serious problems occurred early on and stemmed from the fact that the agency was unprepared and lacked the core competencies required to carry out an unprecedented, worldwide program of detaining and interrogating suspected al-Qa’ida and affiliated terrorists.

“In carrying out that program, we did not always live up to the high standards that we set for ourselves and that the American people expect of us,” Brennan added. “As an agency, we have learned from these mistakes.”

Brennan insisted that information obtained through the program headed off deadly terrorist attacks and he rejected the idea that CIA deliberately covered-up its actions.

“Our review indicates that interrogations of detainees on whom EITs were used did produce intelligence that helped thwart attack plans, capture terrorists, and save lives. The intelligence gained from the program was critical to our understanding of al-Qa’ida and continues to inform our counterterrorism efforts to this day,” the director said. “While we made mistakes, the record does not support the study’s inference that the Agency systematically and intentionally misled each of these audiences on the effectiveness of the program.”

For his part, Obama was silent on the issues of whether the CIA misled outsiders about the program and about whether it produced important intelligence but he emphasized that he banned the harsh techniques soon after he took office

“Rather than another reason to refight old arguments, I hope that today’s report can help us leave these techniques where they belong — in the past,” Obama said in the White House statement.

The Intelligence Committee voted in April to declassify the roughly 500-page executive summary of the 6,000-page report but the publication was delayed as lawmakers and the White House debated how to handle sensitive information such as agents’ names and other identifying characteristics.

U.S. military commanders and embassies worldwide have been bracing for possible fallout and security threats due to the release of the report.

White House press secretary Josh Earnest said Monday that the release “may have an impact” on U.S. interests abroad, but said it’s nonetheless essential for the facts of the Bush administration’s practices to be made public, where possible.

“We want to be sure that we can release that report, be transparent about it and be clear about what American values are and be clear about the fact that the administration believes and that — in a way that’s consistent with American values — that something like this should never happen again,” Earnest said.

But Republicans are worried about the threats that the report’s release may stir up. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) said Sunday on CNN that foreign leaders and U.S. intelligence officials have made clear their warnings that the report’s release “will cause violence and deaths.”

Sens. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Jim Risch (R-Idaho) said in a statement Monday night that the report’s publication “is reckless and irresponsible” given concerns about the international response. “This report does not qualify as either serious or constructive.”

Just after taking office in 2009, Obama signed executive orders ending the use of controversial Bush-era interrogation techniques and floated the idea of conducting a public accounting of the practices of his predecessor’s administration. But the review released Tuesday came not from the Obama administration but from Congress, and after administration officials engaged in a months-long tug-of-war over what would be made public.

The White House has said that Obama “strongly supports” making the report public, but the CIA and White House chief of staff Denis McDonough have been wrangling for months with Feinstein to limit details that Democratic senators say are crucial to understanding the narrative of the program.

“Without the leadership of [Intelligence panel chair] Sen. Feinstein and her determination and the support of Democrats on the committee, there’s no chance that this would see the light of day,” Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said Monday.

Resistance from the administration included Secretary of State John Kerry’s Friday call to Feinstein, in which he asked her to “consider” the timing of the release “because a lot is going on in the world, and [Kerry] wanted to make sure that foreign policy implications were being appropriately factored into timing,” State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki said.

The CIA hacked into a computer network used by the Senate Intelligence Committee and read the emails of staffers involved in the interrogation investigation, the agency’s own internal investigation this summer concluded. Feinstein first revealed knowledge of the breach in March, saying that the conflict between her panel and the CIA reflected “a defining moment for the oversight of our intelligence community.”

The intelligence committee’s Democratic majority voted in April to declassify the summary and time had almost run out before Tuesday’s release, since panel’s incoming chair, Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), and his fellow Republicans have made clear that they opposed its release.

Quote from: RC5908 on December 08, 2014, 06:42:23 PM

Quote from: RocketRudolph287 on December 08, 2014, 06:40:07 PM

I'm only respected by 2 users?
Am I not doing my job?

most people here don't want gays to be killed

#shotsfired

Quote from: IcyWind on December 09, 2014, 10:13:15 AM

Quote from: Yutaka on December 09, 2014, 10:05:18 AM

Quote from: TBlocks on December 09, 2014, 10:00:54 AM

Spoiler

Thick

I like it.

... Is this the part where I insert a gay pun/image, or....?

I just realized how bad that pic is >.>

Spoiler

Quote from: TBlocks on December 09, 2014, 10:00:54 AM

Spoiler

Thick

I like it.

First one is Amanda Todd right?

Quote from: IcyWind on December 08, 2014, 11:23:25 PM

i'm secretly RC's alt.

that explains the hom-

faboulousness