• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

CIA Running Secret Terror Prisons

TimmyBoy

Banned
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Does this sort of secrecy threaten a society that is suppose to be free and open?

CIA runs secret terrorism prisons abroad: report


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The CIA has been holding and interrogating al Qaeda captives at a secret facility in Eastern Europe, part of a covert prison system established after the September 11, 2001, attacks, The Washington Post reported on Wednesday.
The newspaper said the existence and locations of the facilities were known only to a handful of officials in the United States and, usually, only to the president and a few top intelligence officers in each host country.

The CIA has not acknowledged the existence of a secret prison network, the Post said. A CIA spokesman did not immediately return a call seeking comment.
The prisons are referred to as "black sites" in classified U.S. documents and virtually nothing is known about who the detainees are, how they are interrogated or about decisions on how long they will be held, the report said.
The paper, citing several former and current intelligence and other U.S. government officials, said the CIA used such detention centers abroad because in the United States it is illegal to hold prisoners in such isolation.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051102...sETv5UB;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl
 

Deegan

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
5,528
Reaction score
2
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Sweet, that is great news, it's about time the CIA got off their lazy ass, and started protecting this country.:roll:
 

TimmyBoy

Banned
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Deegan said:
Sweet, that is great news, it's about time the CIA got off their lazy ass, and started protecting this country.:roll:
So you don't see any danger with government secrecy threatening what is supposed to be a free and open society?
 

Binary_Digit

DP Veteran
Joined
May 21, 2005
Messages
4,145
Reaction score
1,637
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
The paper, citing several former and current intelligence and other U.S. government officials, said the CIA used such detention centers abroad because in the United States it is illegal to hold prisoners in such isolation.
That part really ticks me off. It's illegal here, so we go do it in another country instead. Nevermind the moral reasons why it's illegal here. I swear Bush is a morally bankrupt criminal.
 

TimmyBoy

Banned
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
It would seem to me, that by American legal standards and principles, what the CIA is doing is illegal and immoral. They have these prison camps in foreign countries to get around American law, since they are not located in the US and they keep it secret to prevent a political firestorm if their is any sort of alleged human rights abuses surrounding the prisons overseas and due to the mere fact these terrorists are being held without formal charges being presented to them.
 

hiker

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2005
Messages
211
Reaction score
0
Location
at one with nature
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
TimmyBoy said:
It would seem to me, that by American legal standards and principles, what the CIA is doing is illegal and immoral. They have these prison camps in foreign countries to get around American law, since they are not located in the US and they keep it secret to prevent a political firestorm if their is any sort of alleged human rights abuses surrounding the prisons overseas and due to the mere fact these terrorists are being held without formal charges being presented to them.
And besides, they are not Americans being interrogated. And why is there an assumption that interrogation is a bad thing? I don't know that anyone is being tortured in any way, and it can save the lives of innocents. I'm all for it.
 

Deegan

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
5,528
Reaction score
2
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
It's illegal and immoral to do a lot of the things we do, like dropping bombs on women and children, but sometimes it just can't be helped. You can not deal in these terms, with an enemy that refuses to play by the same rules, to do so would not only be foolish, but dangerous. I hope they are in some dark wet hole, working these bastards over with rusty pliers, and steel pipes, whatever it takes to get the information we need, and to protect America, and our allies. When ever I feel like a weak coward, and want to second guess the importance of the CIA's work, I just remember the day those people jumped 80 to 90 stories to their deaths, and then I say to myself, screw it.
 

hiker

Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2005
Messages
211
Reaction score
0
Location
at one with nature
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
And as for it being illegal, I suppose that would be up to the local laws wherever these camps are supposed to exist. I am not fond of the part about beating it out of them, simply because a person will say anything to get you to stop hitting him. Incentives should be offered if information is correct, the beatings should be applied if you find out he is lying ;)
 

TimmyBoy

Banned
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
hiker said:
And besides, they are not Americans being interrogated. And why is there an assumption that interrogation is a bad thing? I don't know that anyone is being tortured in any way, and it can save the lives of innocents. I'm all for it.

Well, their are effective ways of interrogation without torture, but we have no evidence to support torture is going on in the CIA prison in Eastern Europe either. To defeat terrorism, it must be defeated by our ideas and not the use of force or torture or secrecy, which is the way of the dictator. I think that we can do better than this personally.
 

Binary_Digit

DP Veteran
Joined
May 21, 2005
Messages
4,145
Reaction score
1,637
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
hiker said:
And besides, they are not Americans being interrogated. And why is there an assumption that interrogation is a bad thing? I don't know that anyone is being tortured in any way, and it can save the lives of innocents. I'm all for it.
Right. They aren't Americans and thus they aren't entitled to the "liberty and justice for all" part of American values. And we wonder why they call us arrogant...

Deegan said:
I hope they are in some dark wet hole, working these bastards over with rusty pliers, and steel pipes, whatever it takes to get the information we need, and to protect America, and our allies.
Geez, do some research before you support such a sick and demented thing as torture!

"Meet, for example, retired Air Force Col. John Rothrock, who, as a young captain, headed a combat interrogation team in Vietnam. More than once he was faced with a ticking time-bomb scenario: a captured Vietcong guerrilla who knew of plans to kill Americans. What was done in such cases was "not nice," he says. "But we did not physically abuse them." Rothrock used psychology, the shock of capture and of the unexpected. Once, he let a prisoner see a wounded comrade die. Yet -- as he remembers saying to the "desperate and honorable officers" who wanted him to move faster -- "if I take a Bunsen burner to the guy's genitals, he's going to tell you just about anything," which would be pointless. Rothrock, who is no squishy liberal, says that he doesn't know "any professional intelligence officers of my generation who would think this is a good idea.""

"Or listen to Army Col. Stuart Herrington, a military intelligence specialist who conducted interrogations in Vietnam, Panama and Iraq during Desert Storm, and who was sent by the Pentagon in 2003 -- long before Abu Ghraib -- to assess interrogations in Iraq. Aside from its immorality and its illegality, says Herrington, torture is simply "not a good way to get information." In his experience, nine out of 10 people can be persuaded to talk with no "stress methods" at all, let alone cruel and unusual ones. Asked whether that would be true of religiously motivated fanatics, he says that the "batting average" might be lower: "perhaps six out of ten." And if you beat up the remaining four? "They'll just tell you anything to get you to stop.""

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A2302-2005Jan11.html

""Anybody with real combat experience understands that torture is counterproductive," says F. Andy Messing, a retired major in the U.S. Special Forces and a conservative leader with the ear of the president. "It is a downhill slope if you engage in it. Everyplace it has been used that I have studied — the French were big for it in Algeria — it comes back and bites you." And, it seems, keeps biting."

http://www.insightmag.com/main.cfm/include/detail/storyid/253614.html

"Willie J. Rowell, who served for thirty-six years as a C.I.D. agent, told me that the use of force or humiliation with prisoners is invariably counterproductive. “They’ll tell you what you want to hear, truth or no truth,” Rowell said. “ ‘You can flog me until I tell you what I know you want me to say.’ You don’t get righteous information.”"

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040510fa_fact

"The use of torture has been criticized not only on humanitarian and moral grounds, but on the grounds that evidence extracted by torture tends to be extremely unreliable and that the use of torture corrupts institutions which tolerate it."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture#Use_of_torture

"The various rationalizations for torture do not bear close scrutiny. Intelligence specialists concede that the information acquired by torture cannot be considered reliable."

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article10410.htm



PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF HUMANITY DO NOT SUPPORT TORTURE!
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
23,722
Reaction score
8,409
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Deegan said:
It's illegal and immoral to do a lot of the things we do, like dropping bombs on women and children, but sometimes it just can't be helped. You can not deal in these terms, with an enemy that refuses to play by the same rules, to do so would not only be foolish, but dangerous. I hope they are in some dark wet hole, working these bastards over with rusty pliers, and steel pipes, whatever it takes to get the information we need, and to protect America, and our allies. When ever I feel like a weak coward, and want to second guess the importance of the CIA's work, I just remember the day those people jumped 80 to 90 stories to their deaths, and then I say to myself, screw it.

* Right on.
 

Binary_Digit

DP Veteran
Joined
May 21, 2005
Messages
4,145
Reaction score
1,637
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Right on, because human emotion is the best known decision maker.
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
23,722
Reaction score
8,409
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Binary_Digit said:
"Or listen to Army Col. Stuart Herrington, a military intelligence specialist who conducted interrogations in Vietnam, Panama and Iraq during Desert Storm, and who was sent by the Pentagon in 2003 -- long before Abu Ghraib -- to assess interrogations in Iraq. Aside from its immorality and its illegality, says Herrington, torture is simply "not a good way to get information." In his experience, nine out of 10 people can be persuaded to talk with no "stress methods" at all, let alone cruel and unusual ones. Asked whether that would be true of religiously motivated fanatics, he says that the "batting average" might be lower: "perhaps six out of ten." And if you beat up the remaining four? "They'll just tell you anything to get you to stop.""

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A2302-2005Jan11.html

""Anybody with real combat experience understands that torture is counterproductive," says F. Andy Messing, a retired major in the U.S. Special Forces and a conservative leader with the ear of the president. "It is a downhill slope if you engage in it. Everyplace it has been used that I have studied — the French were big for it in Algeria — it comes back and bites you." And, it seems, keeps biting."

http://www.insightmag.com/main.cfm/include/detail/storyid/253614.html

"Willie J. Rowell, who served for thirty-six years as a C.I.D. agent, told me that the use of force or humiliation with prisoners is invariably counterproductive. “They’ll tell you what you want to hear, truth or no truth,” Rowell said. “ ‘You can flog me until I tell you what I know you want me to say.’ You don’t get righteous information.”"

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040510fa_fact

"The use of torture has been criticized not only on humanitarian and moral grounds, but on the grounds that evidence extracted by torture tends to be extremely unreliable and that the use of torture corrupts institutions which tolerate it."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture#Use_of_torture

"The various rationalizations for torture do not bear close scrutiny. Intelligence specialists concede that the information acquired by torture cannot be considered reliable."

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article10410.htm



PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF HUMANITY DO NOT SUPPORT TORTURE!

* Right on...However, where the confusion on this site is how people define torture. There are many interrogation techniques that have been defined on this site as "torture" by the ignorant. Actual "torture" isn't necessary, because after a certain point, even interrogation becomes useless.
 

Binary_Digit

DP Veteran
Joined
May 21, 2005
Messages
4,145
Reaction score
1,637
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
GySgt said:
* Right on...However, where the confusion on this site is how people define torture. There are many interrogation techniques that have been defined on this site as "torture" by the ignorant. Actual "torture" isn't necessary, because after a certain point, even interrogation becomes useless.
"(1) “torture” means an act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control;
(2) “severe mental pain or suffering” means the prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting from—
(A) the intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severe physical pain or suffering;
(B) the administration or application, or threatened administration or application, of mind-altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the personality;
(C) the threat of imminent death; or
(D) the threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain or suffering, or the administration or application of mind-altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or personality" - United States Code TITLE 18, PART I, CHAPTER 113C, Para. 2340

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00002340----000-.html

The only thing that needs to be defined are adjectives like "severe," "extreme," and "profound." And I imagine the courts would define these terms for each case, if a lawsuit is brought before them.
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
23,722
Reaction score
8,409
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Binary_Digit said:
Right on, because human emotion is the best known decision maker.

What!?! Human emotion is not the "best" decision maker. Far from it. The general American has this weakness. America's willingness to send their son's off to die in war and then execute a complete 180 when they get bored and their son's are in war dieing is proof of America's emotional weakness. Iraq isn't the only time this happened. Vietnam...Somalia...Bosnia....
 

Deegan

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
5,528
Reaction score
2
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Binary_Digit said:
Right on, because human emotion is the best known decision maker.
No, these are professionals, they know that torture would not work, and indeed, would be counter productive. What I said was out of emotion, it's just a pleasent little thought I have sometimes, when ever I think back to that day, or hear these animals have struck yet again. You may not care, and may be emotionless to situation, but I do, and will not apologize for having those thoughts.
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
23,722
Reaction score
8,409
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Binary_Digit said:
"(1) “torture” means an act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control;
(2) “severe mental pain or suffering” means the prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting from—
(A) the intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severe physical pain or suffering;
(B) the administration or application, or threatened administration or application, of mind-altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the personality;
(C) the threat of imminent death; or
(D) the threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain or suffering, or the administration or application of mind-altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or personality" - United States Code TITLE 18, PART I, CHAPTER 113C, Para. 2340

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00002340----000-.html

The only thing that needs to be defined are adjectives like "severe," "extreme," and "profound." And I imagine the courts would define these terms for each case, if a lawsuit is brought before them.

These definitions are wrong. There is definitions as prescribed on paper and their are definitions as prescribed by reality. Basically, according to these very liberal definitions, if the guy's feelings are hurt, then he's been tortured.:roll:
 

Binary_Digit

DP Veteran
Joined
May 21, 2005
Messages
4,145
Reaction score
1,637
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Those definitions are wrong? Are you serious? That is straight from the United States Code, how do you figure it's wrong??
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
23,722
Reaction score
8,409
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Binary_Digit said:
Those definitions are wrong? Are you serious? That is straight from the United States Code, how do you figure it's wrong??
Like I said...

"There are definitions as prescribed on paper and there are definitions as prescribed by reality."

According to those definitions, after we have put the Islamic prisoners up at the Hilton, they can have a legitimate grievance because they are emotionally scarred, because they smelled bacon at breakfast.
 

Binary_Digit

DP Veteran
Joined
May 21, 2005
Messages
4,145
Reaction score
1,637
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
No, hurting the guy's feelings would NOT be torture under those definitons. Like I said, extreme, severe, profoundly. Heck even slapping a person one time may not be torture under that definition, because of those adjectives.
 

SixStringHero

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
1,586
Reaction score
133
Location
Southwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I must have missed the memo, because as far as I know INTERROGATION is NOT SYNONYMOUS with TORTURE.

Of course we will all just assume that such things are happening without proof right?
 

TimmyBoy

Banned
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,466
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
SixStringHero said:
I must have missed the memo, because as far as I know INTERROGATION is NOT SYNONYMOUS with TORTURE.

Of course we will all just assume that such things are happening without proof right?
I don't like to assume anything. I remember in my last post I stated that we have no proof that torture is going on. But why the secrecy? Why the need to take those prisons outside the borders of the US?
 

Deegan

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
5,528
Reaction score
2
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
TimmyBoy said:
I don't like to assume anything. I remember in my last post I stated that we have no proof that torture is going on. But why the secrecy? Why the need to take those prisons outside the borders of the US?
I would assume that it is done to keep some over zealous ACLU lawyer from trying to get them freed, and end up on our city streets, but that's just my take on it.:roll:
 

Calm2Chaos

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
3,967
Reaction score
7
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
How smart would it be to announce a prison they hold all the known terrorist in. And some of the top ones at that. Because we know that if it was common knowledge they wouldn't go after it ....LMAO

No this is no threat to a free society and is no threat to me or my freedoms. It is however just another pebble you can throw at your country to show how much you dislike it.
 

Calm2Chaos

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
3,967
Reaction score
7
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Binary_Digit said:
That part really ticks me off. It's illegal here, so we go do it in another country instead. Nevermind the moral reasons why it's illegal here. I swear Bush is a morally bankrupt criminal.
And your incapable of understanding why this isn't or wasn't common knowledge?
 
Top Bottom