10 'torture' techniques blessed by Bush

Kevrockcity said:
that's what i figured. don't have anything against haliburton myself.
Click to expand...

Kev,

I know you read the papers and see the news. Are you forgetting the billing irregularities of KBR and Halliburton? How the military courts refused to prosecute KBR for their triple billing accounting scam? That the military not only decided to turn a blind eye, but they continue to keep them on the books and point blank told the GAO tuff shit!!! We don't care, and you can't do shit about it!


Really, you have nothing against a corporation that banked, probably nearly a trillion dollars, or it not very close to it over the past 8 years of war in the middle east? Especially, in these tough economic time... this is an OK company, REALLY!?



What I find most amazing about this conversation, Raoul... you have chosen the wrong side of this topic for sooooo many years. For so long that only nutters like We Won It Two Times (and maybe Mr. Marcy) is just about your only ally. I still have hope for you.:cool:

I'm not convinced that you are, so far, beyond your senses from return to the rational person that we knew the first few years here at the Cafe.
 
ooeat0meoo said:
Kev,



Really, you have nothing against a corporation that banked, probably nearly a trillion dollars, or it not very close to it over the past 8 years of war in the middle east? Especially, in these tough economic time... this is an OK company, REALLY!?
Click to expand...

i don't expect companies to be moral or immoral. in the grand scheme, they serve a purpose, and i'm sure most of their employees have good intentions.
 
Kevrockcity said:
i don't expect companies to be moral or immoral. in the grand scheme, they serve a purpose, and i'm sure most of their employees have good intentions.
Click to expand...

I don't care to turn this into an economics topic, but isn't that the attitude which has gotten us to where we are, today, the ruin of markets throughout the world?


Apart from corporations such as AIG and the investment banking industry... it would be fair to place KBR amongst the top ten most dispicable in the world, wouldn't you agree?


Or are ethics and laws in economics just obsticles that to be gotten around, and bravo to those that climb and destroy as much as possible towards the goal of 'More'?

*After 1 am... be back in the morning.
 
ooeat0meoo said:
:eek:

The following is a dead-on serious question...

You have admitted to working for KBR or Haliburton, several times in the past. I am sure it was in Afghanistan, but come'on... Do you mean to tell me that your position in Bahgdad has no affiliation with Kelov Brown and Root or Halliburton? Or that you past work for the KBR corporation didn't lead you to the position (whatever it is) in Iraq?
Click to expand...

No, no, and no. Why do you insist on making things up ? Stick to facts. Your posts will likely be taken more seriously if you do.
 
Raoul said:
No, no, and no. Why do you insist on making things up ? Stick to facts.
Click to expand...

OMFG!!! :eek:

If you are going to start lying, let's just stop this conversation.


I'm not going to dig through years of posts. In addition to you admitting to working for KBR, you stated that the upper managers were definately creepy individuals.


I can respect the fact that you might work in a position that you aren't at liberty to openly express on this forum... but don't lie. A 'no comment' will suffice.
 
ooeat0meoo said:
I don't care to turn this into an economics topic, but isn't that the attitude which has gotten us to where we are, today, the ruin of markets throughout the world?


Apart from corporations such as AIG and the investment banking industry... it would be fair to place KBR amongst the top ten most dispicable in the world, wouldn't you agree?


Or are ethics and laws in economics just obsticles that to be gotten around, and bravo to those that climb and destroy as much as possible towards the goal of 'More'?

*After 1 am... be back in the morning.
Click to expand...

a corporation is an amoral entity. people have morals. companies do not.

we find ourselves where we are - economically speaking - because of lack of true oversight and probably a larger culture of greed where compensation was not a reflection of work. this has little do with morality. i doubt the great majority who were doing credit default swaps actually thought they were hurting anyone.
 
ooeat0meoo said:
OMFG!!! :eek:

If you are going to start lying, let's just stop this conversation.


I'm not going to dig through years of posts. In addition to you admitting to working for KBR, you stated that the upper managers were definately creepy individuals.


I can respect the fact that you might work in a position that you aren't at liberty to openly express on this forum... but don't lie. A 'no comment' will suffice.
Click to expand...

Stop it. You're merely digging a deeper hole everytime you post.
 
Kevrockcity said:
a corporation is an amoral entity. people have morals. companies do not.

we find ourselves where we are - economically speaking - because of lack of true oversight and probably a larger culture of greed where compensation was not a reflection of work. this has little do with morality. i doubt the great majority who were doing credit default swaps actually thought they were hurting anyone.
Click to expand...


Let's peak at this from another side of the table... a board of directors has the responsibility to guide it's company in a direction that protects the interests of the corporation and investors.



The board of many banks and mortgage companies knew full well that the ponzi scam would destroy many lives. Alan Greenspan spoke of it, at least 3-4 times a year throughout 2004-til he retired in '08.



I'm sorry, but if the American people are expected to show faith and trust in the banking system and the auto industry that borrowed 100's of billions of dollars... I hope to fecking God that they have a moral compass.



The same should be expected from the corporation that had taken over nearly 50% of the USA military's duties. They are then, no more than theives at a time of war, are they not. Or is it crafty business savy? I'd love to poll the military on this question? Should Halliburton be an honest corporation or get what they can get, at any cost to the American tax payer?
 
ooeat0meoo said:
I'll take it that we are halting our discussing, then?

Fine.

I'm only doing it because I wouldn't care for you to find yourself in trouble in any sort. As you can see, I am a rational and compassionate person.
Click to expand...

:lol::wenger::lol:

On that salient note maybe you should go to sleep. :)
 
Raoul said:
:lol::wenger::lol:<----

On that salient note maybe you should go to sleep. :)
Click to expand...

By the looks of things, you want to carry on?

:boring: You can post all the insulting smilies you like... nothing is going to bend the truths of the travesty that is the American involvement in the middle-east, through these times. And most people will always shake their heads in disgust at the people such as yourself, that hold their heads high with pride in the way it had been carried out. For as long as you defend the wrongs committed, you will carry the burden of the many lives destroyed.
 
The AP is running another story on this Torture Memo stuff, today. Doesn't seem to provide any new information.

But it is clear that this story isn't drifting off softly into the night. Rather, Pres. Obama and his right hand man Emmanuel are playing the patriots by saying, 'They will not encourage the prosecution of anyone...' whilst the plan now seems to be that Attorney General Holder will be forming an independant investigation.

I wonder if A.G. Holder is feeling some international pressure, or if the Obama admin is using him to scapegoat the problem?


My question is, when will the Hague get off their asses and start doing something useful. No matter what the United States of America does about this, the Internation Court of Justice should be throroughly investigating these crimes.

I will be monitoring their site to see if they give it a mention. http://www.icj-cij.org/homepage/index.php?p1=0&p2=4


Or maybe we could start an email campaign.
 
Frosty said:
Yes, I agree. That very indistinction about what is 'torture' and what is 'cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment (CIDT)' is where governments start reinterpreting acts. Thing is, both are just as illegal.

Is waterboarding torture? If no, it certainly is CIDT and just as illegal under all circumstances.



Read Darius Rejali's Torture and Democracy. As human rights monitoring has improved, governments and states (democratic and undemocratic alike) have moved from what Rejali calls 'hard tortures' which leave marks (your broken bones for example) to 'soft tortures' which leave no marks (psychological torture, stress positions, forced standing etc).

These measures have the same effect upon individuals than simply beating someone up - there is no difference to the victim.
However, because states are not doing what is stereotypically thought of as 'torture', (e.g. broken bones), they can deny what they are doing is torture and so muddy the waters. As happened with the Bush administration (although this government was by no means on its own for this - rendition started under Clinton for example).
Click to expand...

Great post. Have just ordered Darius Rejali's Torture and Democracy via Amazon. Thanks!

ooeat0meoo said:
You can not be that naive... I certainly am not. Watch the HBO documentary, Raoul.
Click to expand...


Do you please have a link where I can watch this? Cant find it myself

ooeat0meoo said:
When Haliburton hired Raoul, they must have locked him in a box and brainwashed him into thinking that laws are nothing more than a inconvenient nicety, nothing more nothing less.
?
Click to expand...

:eek: yes, it now all makes sense. How else can someone be so blinded by this?!

ooeat0meoo said:
By the way Raoul, why do you find it amusing that I suggest you watch the HBO Doc.?

Your chosen ignorance is blocking you from the people involved discussing the facts of what happened. What exactly about the truth are you afraid of?
Click to expand...

self interest perhaps?



Raoul said:
I just find it amusing that so many people form their opinions from journalists and TV shows when so much of it can edited to skew the story in a certain direction. It can perpetuate ignorance just as it can inform.
Click to expand...

as opposed to getting them from you perhaps?! :wenger:
 
Here is that link, Sam.

http://www.hbo.com/docs/programs/ghostsofabughraib/

506x316_ghostsofabughraib01.jpg




Breaking News:

The Washington Post is now reporting that Pres. Obama is back off his origonal stance of not going after the Bush Admin. on torture allegations.

They say he is now all for A.G. Holder going after the top boys of the torture program.

___________________________

That doesn't mean anything will be done... I still believe that the only court that will properly investigate is the ICJ.

___________________________

And Raoul, don't be pointing any fingers at me or anyone else for pushing for this to happen. It's nothing personal against the righ-wing or a left agenda... it's about the law and the USA standing in the world. I believe the only way to repair relations with the world is to come clean on any possible crimes committed.
 
topper said:
I presume this is what you see is a detached observers view of your argument that what went on in Guantanamo was " interrogation" and not torture.


but hey lets put it to the test and have a trial in the US of one of these er... :rolleyes: interrogators and see what US Joe Public thinks
Click to expand...

The general public doesn't decide the outcome of trials. :)
 
Raoul said:
I just find it amusing that so many people form their opinions from journalists and TV shows when so much of it can edited to skew the story in a certain direction. It can perpetuate ignorance just as it can inform.
Click to expand...

sounds pretty convincing to me .... will watch as soon sa poss - thanks for posting rob.

This feature-length HBO special was an official selection in the American Documentary Competition at the 2007 Sundance Film Festival.

Rory Kennedy, co-founder and co-president of Moxie Firecracker Films, is one of the nation's most prolific independent documentary filmmakers, focusing on issues such as poverty, domestic abuse, human rights and AIDS. Kennedy's work has been featured on numerous broadcast and cable outlets, including HBO, A&E, MTV, Lifetime and PBS. She has directed and produced more than 20 films, including the HBO specials "Indian Point: Imagining the Unimaginable," which examines the potential for a nuclear disaster in New York City's backyard; "Pandemic: Facing AIDS," a five-part series that follows the lives of people living with AIDS throughout the world (nominated for two primetime Emmy® Awards); "American Hollow," which documents an Appalachian family caught between tradition and the modern world (nominated for a Non-Fiction Primetime Emmy® Award and Independent Spirit Award); and "A Boy's Life," about the troubling forces shaping the life of a young child in impoverished Mississippi. She executive produced "Street Fight," which was nominated for an Academy Award® for documentary feature in 2006.
Click to expand...
 
philip zelikow, former state department counselor to condi rice, was on rachel maddow last night discussing a memo who wrote refuting the bybee, yoo, et al faulty legal opinion that authorized torture. you can watch here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKzLChQ1p7k&feature=player_embedded

what's obviously striking is the bush administration's attempt to destroy all copies of this memo. taken in conjunction with the (illegal) destruction/misplacement of video recording the torture of jose padilla, abu zabayduh, abd al-rahim al-nashir, and khaleid sheikh mohammed, i think one thing is quite clear: they knew what they were doing was illegal at the time they were doing it.

these people need to be prosecuted.
 
Kevrockcity said:
philip zelikow, former state department counselor to condi rice, was on rachel maddow last night discussing a memo who wrote refuting the bybee, yoo, et al faulty legal opinion that authorized torture. you can watch here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKzLChQ1p7k&feature=player_embedded

what's obviously striking is the bush administration's attempt to destroy all copies of this memo. taken in conjunction with the (illegal) destruction/misplacement of video recording the torture of jose padilla, abu zabayduh, abd al-rahim al-nashir, and khaleid sheikh mohammed, i think one thing is quite clear: they knew what they were doing was illegal at the time they were doing it.

these people need to be prosecuted.
Click to expand...

I have no issues with anyone for the Bush administration being prosecuted for anything. :)

That aside, the professionals who were doing their jobs at an operational level shouldn't be dragged into the politics of this.
 
I've said it before and I'll say it again.

Compassion and humanity are conventions that have no place in modern warfare.

The stakes are too high, the risks too great. Was the internment of Japanese Americans in WW2 the wrong decision historically? Absolutely 100%. The people who made that decision would probably agree. They could have been given a very accurate percentage based chance that might have said there is a 97% chance nothing bad will happen. They will make the choice that was made based on that 3% EVERY SINGLE TIME. Whats more is that they should.

Red-Indian made a point in his post that I think many of you missed as you bashed it. The point is that we should be compassionate and humane whenever possible, but we should be ruthless and vicious and inhumane when situation demands it.

How does this relate to torture? I don't know and I don't think either side can ever conclusively prove that these sort of coercive techniques work, or do not work. I am sure that at some point in history, someone was tortured and gave up real information that saved many lives. I am equally sure that someone was tortured at some point in history, gave up bogus information and nothing came of it.

I think that the fact the debate over torture still exists is comforting for our civilization. It means that there are still people out there that are willing to do whatever it takes to preserve it. Right or wrongly is irrelevant, and it doesn't even really pertain to torture. It speaks to the idea that when push comes to shove, you need to be willing to get your hands as dirty as the enemy.
 
Kevrockcity said:
a corporation is an amoral entity. people have morals. companies do not.

we find ourselves where we are - economically speaking - because of lack of true oversight and probably a larger culture of greed where compensation was not a reflection of work. this has little do with morality. i doubt the great majority who were doing credit default swaps actually thought they were hurting anyone.
Click to expand...

Credit default swaps are beautiful things. I love them. They saved everyone's arses.
 
Fearless said:
Not one attack on the USA since 9/11.

Draw your own conclusions.
Click to expand...

That's feckwitted. I can't tell whether you're being facetious, stupid, or both.

You're going to have to do better than that to justify something that is morally abhorrent and even criminal. Why not say, not one attack on the USA since the Department of Homeland Security was created, and therefore the DHS is the dog's bollocks? That's a more tenable conclusion.

If you could draw a link between specific information obtained by "torture" techniques that prevented an attack on the USA, you'd have an example that would support your argument. I doubt you can, since these things are kept secret, but the Obama administration's actions would suggest that there aren't many such examples.
 
spinoza said:
That's feckwitted. I can't tell whether you're being facetious, stupid, or both.

You're going to have to do better than that to justify something that is morally abhorrent and even criminal. Why not say, not one attack on the USA since the Department of Homeland Security was created, and therefore the DHS is the dog's bollocks? That's a more tenable conclusion.

If you could draw a link between specific information obtained by "torture" techniques that prevented an attack on the USA, you'd have an example that would support your argument. I doubt you can, since these things are kept secret, but the Obama administration's actions would suggest that there aren't many such examples.
Click to expand...

Not a single attack on US soil. Thats all the evidence you need. So whatever techniques were employed, the results speak for themselves. Accept it.
 
Fearless said:
Not a single attack on US soil. Thats all the evidence you need. So whatever techniques were employed, the results speak for themselves. Accept it.
Click to expand...

Only for the simple minded.

Loads of techniques were used, some better than others. Is torture among them? I'd like to know, and you don't seem to have the answer.
 
spinoza said:
Only for the simple minded.

Loads of techniques were used, some better than others. Is torture among them? I'd like to know, and you don't seem to have the answer.
Click to expand...

Of course I don't. But I don't care. This is a war and results count. Period.

Thats the difference - I think it's morally abhorrent and even criminal if a government fails to protect it's citizens whereas you thinks it's morally abhorrent and even criminal if it does - regardless of how nasty it may be.

Again, not a single attack on US soil since 9/11 suggests that whatever went on behind closed doors worked.

Ohh - if you think Obama will do otherwise when that inevitable push comes to shove, it is you that is simple minded.
 
Fearless said:
Of course I don't. But I don't care. This is a war and results count. Period.
Click to expand...

If that were the case we'd still be fighting using the human wave and no weapons method.
Fearless said:
Thats the difference - I think it's morally abhorrent and even criminal if a government fails to protect it's citizens whereas you thinks it's morally abhorrent and even criminal if it does - regardless of how nasty it may be.
Click to expand...

Don't be fecking ridiculous. I'd like to see some proper discussion of the issue, not a blanket declaration that it's legal just because it suits current sensibilities and requirements. There's such a thing as a democratic process, and that's as important as the protection of citizens.
Fearless said:
Again, not a single attack on US soil since 9/11 suggests that whatever went on behind closed doors worked.
Click to expand...

Or, some things worked, and some things didn't. The corollary of your results based argument is that you should find out what didn't work, so you don't need to do it again.

Ergo, you don't really believe the results based argument yourself. You just don't think torture is wrong. Be honest and admit it - I'd respect that honesty.

Fearless said:
Ohh - if you think Obama will do otherwise when that inevitable push comes to shove, it is you that is simple minded.
Click to expand...

I think Obama will protect his country's interests and its citizens. I also think he will do it while attempting to respect his country's institutions and its laws.
 
Beyond dousing a few terrorists with water, a more realistic reason why there haven't been any more attacks since 9/11 is because the U.S. has improved its safety posture by instituting new regulations and law enforcement resources to prevent it from happening again. That's whats made the difference.
 
Raoul said:
Beyond dousing a few terrorists with water, a more realistic reason why there haven't been any more attacks since 9/11 is because the U.S. has improved its safety posture by instituting new regulations and law enforcement resources to prevent it from happening again. That's whats made the difference.
Click to expand...

Agreed - but it's what these law enforcement resources do and how far they take it. All I'm saying is that a comprehensive approach - which probably includes torture and bombing two countries - has had results.
 
I don't get this whole ~ Not a single attack on US soil ~ justification?


That has nothing to do with the topic... this thread is about the legal quandary the politicians, military, and private contractors find themself due to what has been defined as a war crime.


People can keep returning to the concept of beer-bonging a person to near death all they want, but there appears to be evidence that the torture of men, women, and middle-eastern children that exceeded waterboarding or the list within the memo. If this is true, we will have to wait and see how AG Holder choses to investigate or prosecute, or if the ICJ gets around to doing their job.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.