Believe this?


sorabji.com: Are there any news?: Believe this?
THIS IS A READ-ONLY ARCHIVE FROM THE SORABJI.COM MESSAGE BOARDS (1995-2016).

By patrick on Tuesday, April 12, 2005 - 06:05 pm:

    I read this in the LA Times, but I know you have to register, so, here's another link
    http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/nationworld/la-fg-masri12apr12,0,408425.story?coll=sfla-newsnation-front

    Sorry, the link has commas. Cut and paste.

    Ok, so assuming you read this Tom Clancy-esq story. Do you believe it? If so? Is it justified if indeed American agents perpetuated this? What have we gotten ourselves into?


By platypus on Tuesday, April 12, 2005 - 06:53 pm:

    There was an excellent article in a recent New Yorker about the rising trend of interrogating people overseas (where torture methods can be used.) They interviewed several people for the article, including American citizens, who were kidnapped and tortured for extended periods of time.

    So yes, alas, I can believe it. But I don't think it's justified. I think there's a long history of abusive interrogation and fear tactics playing into this, and it's not a matter of what we're getting into, but, rather, what we are perpetuating.


By Benoit on Tuesday, April 12, 2005 - 07:12 pm:

    Britney Spears is pregnant!


By patrick on Tuesday, April 12, 2005 - 07:25 pm:

    well, here's the thing. I don't think any of these practices are anything new. It's just, our fears are being manipulated in a way that will allow us to be more accepting of these practices because of this vague war on an ideology (i.e. terrorism).

    The process, approved by Reagan, you speak of, Extraordinary Rendition, is a practice that was recently brought into light in which detainees are taken to other countries by prior arrangement and interrogated there. Critic of the war on terror and author of Why The West Is Losing The War on Terror, Michael Sheuer, 22 year Veteran of the CIA cites that the policy is misunderstood. And says the policy was designed to remove a threat off the streets ASAP and sieze documents and of course incarcerate immediately. He says the CIA never picked up anyone that wasnt wanted by the host country. He says the CIA, as a service organization has been left hanging by the Dept of Justice and the Congress, because often the agency is left with these individuals and they are denied access to facilities on US soil. He cites the "cowardace of Congress and Executive branch" when this policy was drafted. He says the interrogation of this policy is not the most important part of it. He was adament that when this policy was utilized, at least under the Clinton administration, the anti-torture aspect is strictly adhered to.

    Do I believe that, yes and no.

    Like the soldiers in Abu Ghraib who tortured inmates, its a breakdown of system and no one agency is soley responsible.

    I recommend you listen to Warren's Olney's show on this two weeks ago.
    http://www.kcrw.org/cgi-bin/db/kcrw.pl?show_code=tp&air_date=3/28/05&tmplt_type=show
    Go to the 12 minute mark or so to hear Michael Sheuer's interview on it.


By platypus on Tuesday, April 12, 2005 - 07:41 pm:

    Yeah, I am going to have to call bullshit on Michael Sheuer, either that or the right hand knoweth not what the left hand is doing. There's pretty clear evidence that victims of extraordinary rendition are often innocent, and always tortured, and, also, not always wanted in the nation they are sent to. (Often Egypt, says the New Yorker.) And I'm not entirely certain it's a system breakdown, myself. I really suspect that it's a policy that might be being abused, perhaps. I really think his claims are a load of bunkum, honestly.

    I don't know if we are more accepting because of our fears, though. I believe that most people don't realize the extent of the policy, because there is a sort of willful ignorance about these things in this country. It's also not as though the government is displaying this for our approval--it's coming out in bits and pieces, in such a way that I think perhaps the government would prefer that we not know, because they are aware that it's not justifiable.

    I mean, if the issue is getting a "threat" in custody, the United States has prisons, and the ability to get warrants, etc, to confiscate the individual's property and documents. I fail to see how exporting someone to be tortured would really make sense here, if containment is your goal. Expanding the chain of custody does not lead to security.


By patrick on Wednesday, April 13, 2005 - 11:56 am:

    I dunno, he was an agent for 22 years. To what extent of involvement he had or whether he simply pushed pencils is unknown, but he worked for the CIA and had demonstrated has no problem being critical of the current administrations policies so, i dont think its entire bunk.

    I think what he means is that, often the executive branch will exploit the CIA for political purposes but doesnt really want to deal with the baggage that comes with it like detainees or oh...i dunno, fallout like uh, dead civilians from guerilla death squads the CIA was asked to train *coughJohnNegropontehackcough*. If they come to US soil, there's potential for that dirty laundry to air, more so than if they are held in a cell abroad. its the beaurocrats having their cake and eating it to.

    Sheuer does ask, in the interview i linked above, 'are we safer because of this policy?' and thats a serious consideration. but at what price? i havent seen tons and tons of evidence that innocent people are being systematcially abused. in fact, i question i hear about this and related subjects because of the clandestine nature of it all.


bbs.sorabji.com
 

The Stalking Post: General goddam chit-chat Every 3 seconds: Sex . Can men and women just be friends? . Dreamland . Insomnia . Are you stoned? . What are you eating? I need advice: Can you help? . Reasons to be cheerful . Days and nights . Words . Are there any news? Wishful thinking: Have you ever... . I wish you were... . Why I oughta... Is it art?: This question seems to come up quite often around here. Weeds: Things that, if erased from our cultural memory forever, would be no great loss Surfwatch: Where did you go on the 'net today? What are you listening to?: Worst music you've ever heard . What song or tune is going through your head right now? . Obscure composers . Obscure Jazz, 1890-1950 . Whatever, whenever General Questions: Do you have any regrets? . Who are you? . Where are you? . What are you doing here? . What have you done? . Why did you do it? . What have you failed to do? . What are you wearing? . What do you want? . How do you do? . What do you want to do today? . Are you stupid? Specific Questions: What is the cruelest thing you ever did? . Have you ever been lonely? . Have you ever gone hungry? . Are you pissed off? . When is the last time you had sex? . What does it look like where you are? . What are you afraid of? . Do you love me? . What is your definition of Heaven? . What is your definition of Hell? Movies: Last movie you saw . Worst movie you ever saw . Best movie you ever saw Reading: Best book you've ever read . Worst book you've ever read . Last book you read Drunken ramblings: uiphgy8 hxbjf.bklf ghw789- bncgjkvhnqwb=8[ . Payphones: Payphone Project BBS
 

sorabji.com . torturechamber . px.sorabji.com . receipts . contact