Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » State Secrets (Page 2)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: State Secrets
javelin
Member
Member # 1284

 - posted      Profile for javelin   Email javelin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I haven't heard of the others? Anything I can read about them from?
Posts: 8614 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
philnotfil
Member
Member # 1881

 - posted      Profile for philnotfil     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Khaled El-Masri

Abu Omar

Maher Arar


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A30275-2005Mar12.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A522-2003Nov4¬Found=true

Posts: 3719 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
javelin
Member
Member # 1284

 - posted      Profile for javelin   Email javelin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Thank you - I appreciate you doing that for me.
Posts: 8614 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The questions of seizure and torture are related but seperate. AQ members are trained to lie about torture. Non AQ members might very well do the same for street cred. Has Newsweek taught us nothing? I am not saying the onus is on the men, but a bit of skepticism is in order.

Can't say I'm happy about their success rate (three is too many), their secrecy rate (Euroweenies who were happy in the past to gang probe Soviets are suddenly...passive and accusatory when it comes to Islamofascists), and their choice of targets...but we don't have all the information that Cleric firebrand isn't supplementing his sermons with active measures.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
philnotfil
Member
Member # 1881

 - posted      Profile for philnotfil     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
There are more than just three, those are the ones that were entirely done by the US. There have been several others where we got bad information from other governments and did the same to people who were never charged and eventually released. Those governments aren't mad at us, because they had some responsibility. It could even be that they used us to do something they didn't think that they could get away with.

Those are the three cases where the US government took people from other countries without clearing it with those countries first, and were wrong in the ID.

In some of the cases independent doctors have found signs of torture, in the rest of the cases independent doctors haven't been allowed, and the official doctors said that there was no sign of torture.

Posts: 3719 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jesse
Member
Member # 1860

 - posted      Profile for Jesse   Email Jesse   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Not all tortures leave signs. I've tagged myself with a stun gun as a party trick before, repeatedly, and had no visible marks.

That's not an accusation of torture, it's a statement that just because the worlds most qualified doctors can't find conclusive evidence of torture doesn't tell us it did not happen.

Just because someone, whether affiliated with a terrorist organization or not, tells us they were tortured doesn't mean we should assume it occurred either. They may have a very justifiable grudge (the grudge being justifiable, the lies not being justified) or be motivated by financial reward.

Even lie detectors only have an accuracy of somewhere around 90%.
_______________________________________________________

Flydye-

"You seem to assume that I am a knuckledragging Hun who is happy to grab the FAA (First Available Arab) and throw him in Gitmo forever based on the word of Bobba Fett."

Don't make assumptions about my assumptions [Wink]

I think you're willing to tolerate less transparency in Government in regard to this issue than I am. Erm, well, actually I know that.

I think that's because you think that's the course that will provide the greatest security for our nation.

I just disagree with you.

"1. The CIA seizures should be rare and restricted to high quality targets, not a fishing expedition."

Obviously, agreed.

"2. We have no idea about the number and quality of any persons seized."

Part of the problem, in terms of the battle for Hearts and Minds, a battle I don't think is unwinnable.

"3. Back on topic. We need to be very sure before we grab a guy. How sure? There are two sliding scales here, surety and danger."

Agreed. Grabbing the wrong guy, when the wrong guy closely matches the available description of the AQ operative we believe to be transporting Sarin into Iraq, forgivable. That's part of police work. However, try like hell to confirm his identity once he's in custody, 'cause your butt is on the line if you blow it. That's what I'm looking for.

"4. Of course there are records kept. In the case of this program, we seal the records for 10-15 years before review by a Congressional panel. The guy can wait that long before he gets his day in court, particularly in relation to it's sensitivity, current nature etc. The biggest problem is the whole "face your accuser" thing. For those appalled by the Plame tempest in a teapot, this directly affects National Security. Perhaps closed door hearings with screens to keep the fellows from being revealed. Not good but the best compromise I can come up with."

We aren't always well served by keeping the information secret for 10-15 years. When it is safe to release it earlier, it should be released. You'll note I didn't attack the courts decision, I asked why the case wasn't dismissed without prejudice, so that the suit could be brought when the information will no longer pose a serious risk to our security.

Sworn statements by Agent X are actually ok with me, when warranted. I see no need for the farce of a trial with curtains.

"4. If they don't have review, I'd be surprised. The problem is the security clearance. Yes, sometimes security is CYA, but not largely. Exactly how many people have security clearances high enough to even hear about this program? This is a logistical matter. "Three people can keep a secret if two of them are dead". BF. Given the predilection of slightly disenchanted (liberal) people running to the Times with every little secret, the idea of trusting MORE people with secret programs doesn't make sense. Lord knows the Times has shown restraint in National Security matters"

I'm not asking that any more people than a Review Panel be trusted with the information. I don't know of a single leak ever coming from a FISA court judge.

I don't see how "We have established a Panel which will review Extraordinary Rendition Procedures on an ongoing basis, to insure to the best of our ability that the innocent are protected, and that violations of the rules and regulations governing the program are not tolerated." compromises our security.

I'm saying what I think the standards should be, not that those standards should be made public.

Posts: 11410 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KnightEnder
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I tazered myself once on accident and it hurt like hell, you're crazy. And I don't think lie detectors are that accurate. They depend largely on the subject buying into the concept. That's why the technicians wear white lab coats even though they aren't doctors.

Sorry, back to your torture thread.

KE

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
This isn't a torture thread. It is a thread on when the government should attempt to grab people off the streets for security interests. It seems Jesse and I agree on most of the major points, though I would certainly agree to standard police interrogation techniques without the thoroughness that Jesse demands.

First, if we can apply it to U.S. citizens, we can certainly apply it to suspected terrorists.

Secondly, from what I know of the German guy, he was no angel; frequenting anti-American mosques and having shady friends. Membership has it's price as well. You want to hang with the bad boys, expect greater scrutiny. Harassing these guys in great numbers is counter productive. Harassing these guys mistakenly because of mistaken identity is their karma catching up to them. Truely innocent grabs are as rare as a nun at a Biker Convention.

Jesse, one point since we seem to agree on the larger issues. The program could have everything you want and more and we still wouldn't know about it. All our speculation (including that last one) comes from our biases . One fact we know is we've thrown back our (known) mistakes suggests someone is keeping an eye on things, if only becaue I doubt the snatchers would change their minds after three months. They have too much invested. An observation worth what you paid for it.

As for your last statement, it is almost an admission that the program exists. I'm mixed on my feelings of revealing such a program. On the one hand, I can see your compatriots making big political hay unfairly. (We just want to know the program has oversight...GOTCHA!) On the other, revealing the potential existance makes the bad guys look over their shoulders more. Sleepless guys make mistakes. [Wink]

[ July 01, 2006, 09:18 PM: Message edited by: flydye45 ]

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jesse
Member
Member # 1860

 - posted      Profile for Jesse   Email Jesse   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
We know it exists. Everyone in Europe knows it exists. Everyone in the Middle East, except possibly a handfull of traditional Beduin knows it exists.

Pretending it doesn't exist, at this point, makes us look like total feminine hygiene products.
------------------------------


Oh, and KE...yeah, I used to be a lot more crazy, but I'm talking 40,000 volt stun gun not police Tazer. Still, I would term it torture to do it to another person for purposes of extracting information. One of the most intense pains I've ever experienced and I've had some fairly serious injuries.

Posts: 11410 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
philnotfil
Member
Member # 1881

 - posted      Profile for philnotfil     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by flydye45:
Secondly, from what I know of the German guy, he was no angel; frequenting anti-American mosques and having shady friends. Membership has it's price as well. You want to hang with the bad boys, expect greater scrutiny. Harassing these guys in great numbers is counter productive. Harassing these guys mistakenly because of mistaken identity is their karma catching up to them. Truely innocent grabs are as rare as a nun at a Biker Convention.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/03/AR2005120301476_pf.html

quote:
In May 2004, the White House dispatched the U.S. ambassador in Germany to pay an unusual visit to that country's interior minister. Ambassador Daniel R. Coats carried instructions from the State Department transmitted via the CIA's Berlin station because they were too sensitive and highly classified for regular diplomatic channels, according to several people with knowledge of the conversation.

Coats informed the German minister that the CIA had wrongfully imprisoned one of its citizens, Khaled Masri, for five months, and would soon release him, the sources said. There was also a request: that the German government not disclose what it had been told even if Masri went public.

quote:
Masri was held for five months largely because the head of the CIA's Counterterrorist Center's al Qaeda unit "believed he was someone else," one former CIA official said
P.S. No one in the CIA is willing to put their name on a figure (why is that not surprising), but "anonymous sources" have been reported to say that about three dozen of these cases are under review because they messed something up. The scary thing as that we only know of about a dozen of them. If no one has figured out who those other two dozen (approximately) are yet, what is to keep the CIA from just sweeping everything under the rug?
Posts: 3719 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DonaldD
Member
Member # 1052

 - posted      Profile for DonaldD   Email DonaldD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Som exactly why aren't we simply rounding up all known members and associates of the Hell's Angels and renditioning them for 5 months at a go? If you run with the bad boys, you gotta expect a little anal electroshock.
Posts: 10751 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
livermeer kenmaile
Member
Member # 2855

 - posted      Profile for livermeer kenmaile   Email livermeer kenmaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ahem: any fool motha-fockah who thinks that using 'standard' police interrogation techniques is acceptable needs to do at least 6 months' hard time.

'lessen you been behind bars or at the mercy of those who can put you there via extreme manipulation aka 'interrogation', you need to SHUT THE **** UP.

There is igonrance. There is apathy. And there are both.

It is one thing to not know. It is another thing to not care. It is the worst thing to neither know nor care. The latter composes what I call Ignorant Asshole.

*sigh*

Posts: 1449 | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm taking ten before I respond to such a post, livermeer.

Donald once again distorts what I said. Here, let me repost it.

quote:
Harassing these guys in great numbers is counter productive. Harassing these guys mistakenly because of mistaken identity is their karma catching up to them.
When Donald explains how anal probing is standard or legal police procedure, I'll explain the difference between mass round-ups and honest mistakes in the course of an investigation.

So, philnotfil, according to your article

1. The CIA has the Inspector General looking into things. (Jesse point satisfied)

2. She has no idea what's going on because the CIA isn't talking. She has rumour. (flyedye point satisfied)

3. Out of the rumoured 3,000 captured, a rumoured 3 dozen were improperly captured. Let's get out the green eyeshade...about a 1.2% failure rate. Yes, it sucks if you are in that three dozen. That does not make it a grim statistic. Would that the police were that accurate. (Jesse point hopefully satisfied)

4. As far as my statement that innocents are never taken.

Edited for no darned good reason.

[ July 02, 2006, 02:59 PM: Message edited by: flydye45 ]

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
philnotfil
Member
Member # 1881

 - posted      Profile for philnotfil     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm not sure what point number four was supposed to be, but I found it amusing.

A 1.2% failure rate is pretty good for taking people into custody. It isn't so good when you are doing more than taking them into custody.

I don't mind them picking peole and bringing them in (I would prefer that they clear it with the governments of whatever country they happen to be in, we could at least try to be good neighbors), but what damage is done by taking a day or two to check what we know about the identity of the person we want, and the identity of the person we took?

In Masri's case they had all of the information that they needed to realize he wasn't the person they were trying to grab the very day that they took him. They didn't bother too much with making a positive ID after they took him. Three months later, a paper pusher in DC says, hey this guy isn't the Masri we wanted, where did you guys stick him?

Is it really too much to ask for that we ID these people before we turn them over to countries that we have denounced for torturing their (our) prisoners?

Yes, I realize that people can use false names and fake passports and we don't have fingerprints for many of the people we are looking for. Doing the best with what you have is far different from deciding that you can't do it perfectly so you won't do it at all.

I like to think that if the CIA had someone looking over their shoulder they would have not gotten this one so far wrong.

Posts: 3719 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Truely innocent grabs are as rare as a nun at a Biker Convention.


IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Allow me to clarify my statement for our more excitable posters:

"I have not problem applying standard legal police interrogation techniques on terrorism suspects. But then again, I am trusting a certainty of guilt which has so far only been 98.8% warrented. If you consider desk drawers and broomsticks as standard interrogation techniques, all I have to say is stop believing movies.

I've spent a year working with in law enforcement. It's clear what abuses are possible in the system legally, much less when dealing with the CIA. Except for certain people being not knowing or caring who I am or what I know, I'd say their analysis is brilliant.

[ July 02, 2006, 06:44 PM: Message edited by: flydye45 ]

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KnightEnder
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Are you quoting yourself?

I've been behind bars. Your perspective changes. My dad's perspective, after 25 years of being a police officer, changed so much seeing what they did to his son that he retired. He couldn't arrest and brutalize people like he used to.

KE

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I am responding to livermeer. I attempted a clarification. Livermeer seems to feel that the guard from Shawshank is my model at identifying the first available arab. It is not. Instead, I would apply the rough and tumble of "Law and Order" to such persons as we would to an American check kiter.

Comparing common illicit techniques of 25 years ago to current legal police techniques is not a relevant conversation.

[ July 03, 2006, 12:08 AM: Message edited by: flydye45 ]

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
livermeer kenmaile
Member
Member # 2855

 - posted      Profile for livermeer kenmaile   Email livermeer kenmaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I am encouraged to hear that persons within current law enforcement institutions feel they've reason to believe that certain interrogation techniques of the past have been eliminated from present usage. This at least supports optimism on the matter.

I view with extreme abhorrence any recommendations we move even *slightly* toward those techniques of the past we so dearly wish to believe are removed from our present.

Perhaps, having read this, we can understand why

"Comparing common illicit techniques of 25 years ago to current legal police techniques is not a relevant conversation."

is a reversed description of what's happening here. What's happening here is -- as thoroughly publicly acknowledged -- a reversion to older techniques. Higher-ups have been moving to reduce the standards defining legal interrogation techniques.

Thus we see recurrent headlines asking When is torture justified? and Who ordered the torture at (name scandal site)?

Having said this, one may now understand why I view with extreme skepticism that interrogation techniques have been *sanitized* to the extent some would like to believe. Too many of us, particularly those of a philosophical bent that stresses Law and Order from one side of their mouth while encouraging the bending or breaking of law in order to promote law and order, from the other side of their mouth, are willing to state that, in effect, 'a little of the old disease is OK' for me to believe that 'humanitarian hygiene' in practiced interrogation is as fine as some folks wish to think. I have a son who narrowly escaped doing 6 months to a year for evidence planted in his wallet by the arresting officer. (He escaped by becoming a fugitive from his former state of residence.) Falsified evidence that places someone behind bars for half a year or more is deliberate torture, especially when one considers the sexual/gang politics in penal institutions and the increasing incidence of AIDS and other STDs within same.

Or, as me old friend Wolfy would say: Would you drink a milk shake with doggie doo-doo in it? Say, only half a teaspoon? That's not so much. Sure you don't mind just half a teaspoon of doggie doo-doo in that sweet blueberry/banana milkshake?

We can tell ourselves it's not REALLY doggie doo-doo when mixed in such modest amounts: but dog****'s dog**** and that's that.

I'VE SEEN ENOUGH FACETS OF MORAL EQUIVOCATION APPLIED TO THIS AND RELATED TOPICS TO CARVE A FRIGGIN' DODECAHEDRON.

Viewed through such a lens, all one needs do, if one sees something unpleasant, like, say, an innocent person pulled from the street and treated to cattle-prod tersticular rejuvenation therapy, is move the dodecahedron a smidge and one see... oh look! Snow White & the Seven Dwarves! I LOVE that movie!

As for reductions in police brutality: high-availability of sniper rifles with muzzle mufflers in the hands of men trained (usually bu the USA Armed Forces) to use them accurately. That's my opinion on what got law enforcement's attention: dead cops. After the civil rights/black power movements of the 60s, the 70s (in my native Chicago) were punctuated by recurrent sniper killings of police officers in black neighborhoods.

It's a matter of respect, as the dons say.

Having ne's hands cuffed behind one's back and placed behind bars with a number of strangers, many of whose most commonly shared attribute is a tendency toward sociopathy, is extreme rendition right there.

I repeat: 'lessen you spent some serious time behind bars you need to SHUT THE **** UP.

P.S. I sometimes donate plasma to augment family income. One of the question they ask is:

WITHIN THE PAST (I think it's ten) YEARS, HAVE YOU BEEN LOCKED UP FOR MORE THAN THREE CONSECUTIVE DAYS?

If you have, it's a permanent disqualifier from donating. Standard wisdom says that no one can stay awake for more than 3 days in a row, and that once asleep, one ois fair meat for various practices -- like gang rape -- particularly endemic to prisons.

Whether it's advocating 'extreme rendition' or nibbling, however slightly, at habeas corpus, or the recently refuted attempt by the Bush administration to ambiguously expand the definition of enemy combatant as it relatess to trial by a court of law, I am so firmly set against it that my teeth hurt just thinking about it.

Just as there are terrorists 'out there' who are a threat to safety, so are there terrorists 'in there' -- within the criminal justice system -- who are also threats to our society.

But I don't hear folks advocating we pick up cops from the street and whisk them to secret locales and render them extremely.

When it's your neighbor's fence over which you're confronting the other, there's room to move. Wheh it's a set of bars through which you're loking at the other, there's no moving.

Edited to aid bile venting

[ July 04, 2006, 12:36 PM: Message edited by: livermeer kenmaile ]

Posts: 1449 | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Those darned ducts must be empty now. Congrats.

Edited to add: I fail to see how planted evidence makes what I said any less relevant. As a person, I seek the truth and fess up. As Jesse pointed out, if we have a dude who looks like OBL, it does us no good if we rest on our laurels. This attitude is not unique to liberals, livers, or the Ornery.

[ July 05, 2006, 02:51 AM: Message edited by: flydye45 ]

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
philnotfil
Member
Member # 1881

 - posted      Profile for philnotfil     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Just digging this back up to see if anyone thinks that now the CIA has admitted that they really do this, if Khaled will get to have his case heard in court?
Posts: 3719 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
vulture
Member
Member # 84

 - posted      Profile for vulture   Email vulture   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm going to go out on a limb and say "no". There will no doubt be some compelling reason why the people involved can't be held accountable.
Posts: 1768 | Registered: Oct 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Colin JM0397
Member
Member # 916

 - posted      Profile for Colin JM0397   Email Colin JM0397   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I read Bush's entire speech from Wednesday. He addressed this in an indirect sort of way. The legislation he's asking for will block lawsuits of this type.

Taken at face value and reading between the lines a bit, he's admitting the CIA uses and will continue to use methods that some folks consider torture. However, the DOJ and CIA lawyers have determined our methods do not violate our laws and norms.

From the little bit I know on the subject, you don't need to torture someone if you have time on your side. However, you do need to make them very uncomfortable - physically, mentally, emotionally, etc - to get some leverage.

If this guys account is actual, then it really sucks his case will most likely get lumped in with the terrorists trying to screw with us and will be blocked.

OTOH, this legislation could very well allow his case to proceed if he can show the treatment/torture he was subject to was not sanctioned actions, therefore the law exempting the US and government employees doesn't apply to his case. Of course, for the case to proceed at that point he'd have to prove the torture did indeed happen as he says it did before initiating the case... kind of a catch-22, it seems.

Perhaps we could throw in a provision in the new bills that the military tribunals can hear prisoner complaints – so as to not expose classified intel to the public courts – and then determine if there is justification to allow a civil suit…???

[ September 08, 2006, 12:08 PM: Message edited by: jm0397 ]

Posts: 4738 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1