Slashdot Mirror


CIA Watchdog 'Mistakenly' Destroyed Its Only Copy Of A Senate Torture Report (yahoo.com)

An anonymous reader writes: According to Yahoo News, the CIA inspector general's office "mistakenly" destroyed its only copy of a mammoth Senate torture report at the same time lawyers for the Justice Department were assuring a federal judge that copies of the document were being preserved. Agency officials described the deletion of the document to Senate investigators as an "inadvertent" foul-up by the inspector general. "CIA inspector general officials deleted an uploaded computer file with the report and then accidentally destroyed a disk that also contained the document, filled with thousands of secret files about the CIA's use of 'enhanced' interrogation methods," reports Yahoo News. The Senate Intelligence Committee and Justice Department knew about the incident last summer, sources said. However, the destruction of a copy of the sensitive report was never made public, nor was it reported to the federal judge at the time who was overseeing a lawsuit seeking access to the still classified document under the Freedom of Information Act. Despite this incident, a CIA spokesperson has said another unopened computer disk with the full report is still locked in a vault at agency headquarters. "I can assure you that the CIA has retained a copy," wrote Dean Boyd, the agency's chief of public affairs, in an email. Feinstein is calling for the CIA inspector general to obtain a new copy of the report to replace the one that disappeared. A 500-page summary was released in 2014, and concluded that the CIA misled Americans on the effectiveness of "enhanced interrogation." Specifically, the interrogations were poorly managed and unreliable.

209 comments

  1. "Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by headkase · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's a fact no matter how you try to weasel out of it: "enhanced interrogation" is actually torture. Which doing so in a time of war is a war crime. The stuff Japanese people were sentenced to death for shortly after their trials at the end of World War II.

    --
    Shh.
    1. Re:"Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "enhanced interrogation" is actually torture.

      Also, "imminent" is actually "in the immediate future", but they have redefined that too (as in, for responses that normally require an immediate threat).

      Also, "militant" is someone who actively fights, not a "male adult person killed by drone"

      The list goes on.

    2. Re:"Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, wait, people might say they don't care if it's a war crime? It's also ineffective, especially compared to other techniques. And, even if it were effective, it puts your own soldiers at risk of the same or worse treatment, which is yet another reason why it was banned internationally.

      Besides the "war crime" aspect you mention, I don't understand why it was ever used. The people who authorized this stuff are criminals and idiots.

    3. Re:"Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Whatever you call them they're not uniformed combatants and won't receive the protections the Geneva Conventions afford.

    4. Re: "Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why was this modded down? The US hasn't declared war since WWII. I suppose moderators don't like history.

    5. Re:"Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They read too much fiction and think it applies in the real world.

    6. Re: "Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They clearly declared a war on terror. And they have been at war on drugs for decades.

    7. Re: "Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      War is something declared on another nation. Once again, the boogeyman doesn't count.

    8. Re:"Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by meerling · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's not actually a Geneva Convention issue, that's a separate agreement that covers torture as a no-no. The US is a signatory of certain international agreements on human rights that ban, among other things, torture, and those are not limited to any specific time or circumstances.

    9. Re:"Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by meerling · · Score: 1

      Criminals, idiots, and mistook hollywood fictional creations as being representative of reality.

    10. Re:"Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      "enhanced interrogation" is actually torture.

      Yeah, so it is. Look at the polls. Nobody cares. They want more.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    11. Re: "Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by Darinbob · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The restriction against torture during wartime is supposed to mean "not even in the extreme case of war", but some people seem to think it means it's ok as long as it's not war?

    12. Re: "Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about Eurasia?

    13. Re:"Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by gumbi+west · · Score: 1

      "I was only following orders/public opinion!"

    14. Re:"Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by Darinbob · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Then they should get the protections that apply to civilians, protections that apply when not at war, and so forth. There are also international laws and treaties and protocols other than the Geneva Convention that cover battlefield and prisoner situations. The US supreme court however has said that the Geneva Conventions, common articles 3, do apply in the war on terror even though it is not a state vs state conflict.

      International criminal courts have had a ruling that said there was no middle ground between civilian and soldier, no status of person that was not covered by some law. That is, civilians engaged in hostile actions are subject to domestic law of the state detaining them. This may mean military tribunal as far as international law goes, however the supreme court has been disagreeing with congress and executive over this. Neither US nor international law allow the secret indefinite detention without trial for unlawful combatants, and neither allows torture.

      The military in general supports all this and has a strict military code of justice. They do not want to treat detained combatants badly because they know it will cause repercussions when US soldiers are captured. The CIA however as a civilian organization is much looser and with fewer ethical or moral restrictions, and no hesitation to act outside the law, they're the bastards to watch out for.

    15. Re:"Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well then. That makes torture perfectly acceptable then, doesn't it!?

    16. Re:"Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by BlueStrat · · Score: 2

      It's a fact no matter how you try to weasel out of it: "enhanced interrogation" is actually torture.

      It is "enhanced interrogation" just like tractor-trailers full of Semtex detonated at the various TLA HQs' would be "enhanced objection".

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    17. Re: "Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Redefining such crimes under the auspices of semantics is the height of cowardice, malice and cynicism. If ever there was a case for exterminating a group of people, you and anyone prone to thinking like you would be ideal. The world would be a better place without people who practice such insidious and poisonous politics. It's probably fortunate that you're likely just a powerless internet troll with a fetish for troublemaking.

    18. Re: "Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by Plus1Entropy · · Score: 4, Informative

      The US hasn't declared war since WWII.

      This is one of those nonsense things people say that simply isn't true.

      A declaration of war is an act of Congress. People like to throw around the word "formal" as if that means something, i.e. that it doesn't count somehow if the act doesn't say "declaration of war" or a variation thereof. The Constitution mentions no specific form that the legislation must take, it simply says "Congress shall have the power to [...] declare war".

      Since WWII, there have been Congressional acts passed for the Vietnam War, the Gulf War, and the Iraq War, to name a few.

      --
      Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
    19. Re: "Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      Why was this modded down? The US hasn't declared war since WWII.

      Really? What was the Invasion of Iraq, a camping trip? And we just happened to bring 250,000 soldiers with us to guard the beer cooler?

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    20. Re: "Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The war on terror is a war against key middle Easter countries, just like the war on drugs was against Latin American nations. Maybe the war against copyright piracy will be the name for the Asian campaign. This is nothing short of empire building by attacking other nations using fancy titles to assure everyone that you are not really attacking anyone.

    21. Re: "Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, even were it written in the Constitution it means nothing. When bombs are dropping, soldiers are fighting and people are dying you are in war. You can write on a piece of paper and the Congress, Senate, etc. can approve that it is only war if they are using pancakes, it doesn't change what it is. Chill with the politics and turn your mind on for a change. See the works for how it really is and not what you want it to be.

    22. Re:"Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whatever you call them they're not uniformed combatants and won't receive the protections the Geneva Conventions afford.

      If you actually bother reading the Geneva Convention it only requires that one part in a conflict have signed it for both to be bound by it.

    23. Re:"Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is not informative, it is blatantly wrong.
      The Geneva Conventions states that as long as one side in a conflict has signed the convention, all sides are bound by it. (War crimes will be punished according to the convention even if one side doesn't agree with them being war crimes.)
      It might seem strange, but the purpose is to make sure that human dignity is preserved, even in the state of war.
      Just because the other party doesn't want to play ball it doesn't mean that you can start torturing people or kill civilians.

    24. Re:"Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I was only following orders/public opinion!"

      If someone was ordered to shoot up a school, I doubt he'd be free of the consequences. That's about the only difference between the two situations since both orders are technically illegal by US law.

    25. Re:"Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by tinkerton · · Score: 1

      In fact it may be the most mentally destructive form of torture around. Which it was designed to be. We know it as enhanced interrogation because , well, officials want to call it that way and because the press is lost to journalism.

    26. Re:"Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by jandersen · · Score: 2

      Well, as we all know, if it is legal, then it is moral, and if you aren't found of, then it must have been legal. (That was sarcasm, by the way).

    27. Re:"Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This may mean military tribunal as far as international law goes ...

      I was told that the ancient Greeks ruled that if someone directly aids an act of war, they are a soldier. It's quite different to the USA's definition of an enemy combatant. Also, the USA created a dog and pony show called the 'Nuremberg trials' to prove they were the good guys. When was the last time the USA even attempted to prove they were the good guys?

    28. Re:"Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which ones were sentenced to death?
      The ones that weren't employed by the US government like Unit 731 who were given immunity so they can develop bio-chemical engineering and weaponization for the US which was lagging behind in that area?

    29. Re: "Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by mr_shifty · · Score: 1

      There was no declaration of war in either US invasion of Iraq. World War II was the last time the United States actually declared war.

      --
      And the circle of life continues to spin, occasionally wobbling on its axis thanks to the weighty presence of dumb.
    30. Re:"Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To add to your sarcasm: The government can make anything "legal".

    31. Re:"Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a fact no matter how you try to weasel out of it: "enhanced interrogation" is actually torture. Which doing so in a time of war is a war crime. The stuff Japanese people were sentenced to death for shortly after their trials at the end of World War II.

      The Constutition.

      The Bill of Rights.

      The Right to a Fair Trial.

      A Justice System.

      Not sure if you've noticed or not, but bringing up the past, no matter how fucking relevant it still is, means JACK SHIT today, so good luck with your World War II comparisons. You haven't even raised an eyebrow with that shit when our leaders today want to label the Benghazi incident as too old to worry about now.

      Wake up.

    32. Re:"Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by Alumoi · · Score: 1

      You may be right, but in order to be convicted you must first loose. Only the looser gets to be punished, the victor is always right.

    33. Re: "Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Another conundrum:
        uniformed troops vs. Civilians? Illegal aka Geneva convention, as explained by pre 1996 changes.
      How about another tidbit? Those who enable enhanced techniques are just as guilty as the abuser.
      And how about this, those who approve of the techniques, example, lawmakers, and judges, are guilty, repeat again, nuremburg?
      Already settled in your warm blanket? Check who have been prosequeted, check their sentences, life...
      Ready for another neat one, they also detained non military,and hung quite a few, more the one, so it applies to civilians also. Not just protect, but applies. And not just the loser, but has been prosequeted against the winners. Just because you have a white hat doesn't mean you are good, or right, just you were stronger.

    34. Re: "Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by um...+Lucas · · Score: 1

      Wasn't the Korean War a declared war? If not, why would there need to be an armistice?

    35. Re:"Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The CIA did it" is a great way to stop investigations into a group's criminal activities, especially if an actual CIA agent can be scapegoated.

    36. Re: "Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by inode_buddha · · Score: 3, Interesting

      THIS. x1000. The really shitty part is the reason why: back during ww2, Roosevelt and congress got a law passed against undue profiteering from war time contracts by large corporations.

      Everything since then has been a "police action" or "in an advisory capacity". such as VietNam. This is so that large corporations can make whatever profits they want without being bound by the wartime law.

      Youknow how it works, lobbyists, Red Scare, Blackwater and Haliburton, etc.... and meanwhile people die. Thats a big bloody pile of loot on a lot of people's hands.

      --
      C|N>K
    37. Re:"Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The CIA, despite what movies portray, is similar to any other US Govt entity. The majority [not all] of their employees work 0900 to 1700+ writing reports ("products") from scattered bits of information from other parts of the world so it can be used at higher levels of the government. The parts that make the CIA different are the information many times comes from very interesting areas, they have very smart people working for them (thanks to Hollywood), and they are extremely arrogant because they have this reputation (and thus get the funding to back said arrogance. Or the funding causes the arrogance. Either way it's correlated, as can be seen by similar attitudes in DARPA, NSA, certain DoD programs and some popular Embassies.)

      The "products" are designed for other intelligence members, military, other SES's / political appointees (and thus dumbed down / "Quad Charted" appropriately), and this is no different that it is for other things coming out of other government agencies. In fact, the CIA's failures since they were the OSS are why we have so many separate intelligence agencies in the US now (and the CIA has to fight for budget support just like everyone else. The products usually include some bit asking if you are using it or similar so they know how many people use it. This then becomes part of the budget justification for keeping that effort going. The same pandering for money happens with defense programs, federal parks, FAA system upgrades, NOAA satellites, all of NASA, etc...

    38. Re:"Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by vel-ex-tech · · Score: 1

      What are you suggesting? If you're a young man in the Middle East, you should make sure to wear a uniform at all time?

      I sure hope you and the person who modded you up are not the same crowd that's railing against hijabs. There again, I keep trying to apply logic to your insanity.

      It only goes to prove what I've been saying. Nobody gives a fuck about men. A woman wearing a hijab? Crime against humanity! A man killed by a drone strike? Dipshit should have been wearing a uniform!

    39. Re: "Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There was no declaration of war in either US invasion of Iraq. World War II was the last time the United States actually declared war.

      Oh, I see. It wasn't a "war" because we didn't call it a "war".

      Like when I rape some girl, I don't call it "rape". I call it "unilateral surprise sex", so that way it's not really rape. Or when I break in your house and take your TV and money. Don't bother calling the police, because it's not "stealing", I just "borrowed your stuff forever".

      You're right, we didn't actually declare war, but that doesn't mean we didn't go to war.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    40. Re: "Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by davec727 · · Score: 1

      The Korean War is between North and South Korea. The US never declared war on North Korea, instead officially acting under the UN to defend South Korea from invasion.

    41. Re:"Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What I don't get is why Feinstein gives two whistles about torture. She's all for spying on people; she has no concern about governmental power abuse. Why should she care if the government is physically abusing people?

    42. Re:"Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by Agripa · · Score: 1

      It is not a war crime unless the enemy is in a position to enforce it against you. In connection with the deliberate strategic bombing of civilian targets, General Curtis LeMay said, "If we’d lost the war, we’d all have been prosecuted as war criminals."

    43. Re:"Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by murdocj · · Score: 1

      And yet, when I searched for the application of the Geneva Convention in non-state wars, I immediately found a paper stating that such conventions do NOT apply to non-state actors, and that revising such conventions to apply to such cases is an ongoing effort. See http://digitalcommons.wcl.amer...

      Sorry to confuse you with the facts.

    44. Re: "Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Vietnam War and Gulf War are not formal acts of war. The reason "formal" is used is because there are certain laws which come into effect if an act of war has been declared in accordance with the constitution. For example under the UCMJ article 85 "Any person found guilty of desertion or attempt to desert shall be punished, if the offense is committed in time of war, by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct, but if the desertion or attempt to desert occurs at any other time, by such punishment, other than death, as a court-martial may direct."
      Since Vietnam was not a declared war it does not fulfill the requirement of "committed in time of war" and so a deserted could not be sentence to death. And indeed no
      There are other, civil laws, primarily in areas of espionage, sabotage and so forth which require an act of war to invoke the death penalty. At no time has any court considered the Vietnam War or Gulf War declared wars which allow those penalties to be invoked.

    45. Re: "Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fine, just change all the other instances of "war" in every other law that refers to the explicitly defined condition of a declared war

      "Unsanctioned desertion during times of declared shmeeglar..."
      "Committing acts of sabotage/espionage against the state in times of declared shmeeglar..."
      "during an active period of declared shmeeglar, convicted persons of treasonous actions..."

      Over the last few years there seems to have been an increasing amount of confusion and bickering that could, sarcasm aside, probably be remedied by more specific terminology - except it doesn't exist.

      Anyway, a random anonfag on the internet has gone to the trouble of redefining a formal classification for you (despite existing first and using explicit conditions over subjective wordslinging) so when we send men to bully around in Whateverstan you can call it a "war" without worrying about the chance you might cause a trumped up treason charge to get someone killed.

      One of the main points of law (or what ought to be) is formal definition of rape and theft. We don't you getting sued for traffic rape, do we?

    46. Re: "Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      We're talking about international law here, which doesn't really care about internal legal status. If we're conducting combat operations against a halfway organized foe, the laws of war apply, regardless of whether the US military could sentence a soldier to death for desertion.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    47. Re: "Enhanced Interrogation" is Torture. by Plus1Entropy · · Score: 1

      I think you're mixing up two things here. One is whether or not Congress authorizing the use of military force in a foreign country is a declaration of war (Yes, it is. See my comment above, the Constitution, and various case law examples). The other is the definition of "time of war" according to the UCMJ, or other relevant laws.

      I highly doubt (and a bit of research into use of the term during Courts Martial reinforces this) that if you abandon your post at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, while the US military is fighting a war halfway around the world, that anyone is going to consider it "desertion during a time of war". Even if there was a war on at the time.

      Insurance is another good example. If a pipe bursts in your house, the insurance company isn't going to tell you, "Sorry, Congress just passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, and we don't cover damage during a time of war." The inverse is also true, damage could be sustained through an act of war (like a terrorist attack), without there being a declaration of war in place at the time.

      So, using the legal definition of a "time of war" as a litmus test for whether or not the country had declared war makes no sense.

      --
      Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
  2. Sadism. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Since torture methods are known to barely work, is torture mostly an excuse for sadists to get kicks? some twisted Biblical notion of hellish justice disguised as interrogation?

    We know why torture doesn't happen, but when it does, why does it?

    1. Re:Sadism. by vonWoland · · Score: 2

      In this case, it happened because placating the fears of public officials regarding their own ineptitude turned out to be increadibly lucerative: http://www.businessinsider.com...

    2. Re:Sadism. by zlives · · Score: 1

      but but it worked on 24

    3. Re:Sadism. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We know why torture doesn't happen, but when it does, why does it?

      For art's sake.

    4. Re:Sadism. by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The idea that torture doesn't work is more truthiness than truth. But whether it works or not is irrelevant. It is immoral and should not be allowed.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    5. Re:Sadism. by mark-t · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Torture is used because the people who use it believe, perhaps entirely sincerely, that the person they are torturing knows something that the people who are performing the torture either want to or need to know, and the importance of them knowing this is of more importance to them than the personhood of the person they are torturing. Of course. it has precisely zero effectiveness if this belief is mistaken.

    6. Re:Sadism. by meerling · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Talk to professional interrogators, or the people that have actually studied the subject.
        According to them, torture is worse than worthless because the 'intelligence' you gather is far more likely to be false than anything else.
      So again, stop believing hollywood, they make shit up for a living.

    7. Re:Sadism. by meerling · · Score: 1

      There's also the psychological dominance factor, and suppression of a population via fear, but yeah, sadism looks to be a big part.
      There are people that have actually studied the subject. (I don't know how they got their data, but apparently they did.)

    8. Re:Sadism. by meerling · · Score: 0

      Of course they also believed you were a witch if they tried to drown you via 'dunking' and it failed, at which point they would then burn you at the stake, or stone you, or murder you via some other barbaric means.
      Obviously if you drowned you were innocent, but still dead.

    9. Re:Sadism. by Alomex · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Israel which is a friendly country to the USA let it be known to the Bush administration that they had given up using torture against terrorism as it was so ineffective.

      The Bush administration, just like you, was impervious to facts, always preferring their own ideological preconceived notions to reality. Lately, this seems increasingly have become a signature of the whole GOP. If facts are not to your liking just pretend they aren't true.

    10. Re: Sadism. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i assume you vote D.

      so where were all your highly moral D heroes when the evil R were torturing people?

      hmmmm.....?

      thought so.

      thanks for playing though.

    11. Re:Sadism. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Talk to professional interrogators, or the people that have actually studied the subject.

        According to them, torture is worse than worthless because the 'intelligence' you gather is far more likely to be false than anything else.
      So again, stop believing hollywood, they make shit up for a living.

      ... believe guy on Internet, he doesn't get paid to make shit up.

    12. Re:Sadism. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Often "want to hear" rather than "want to know". They have an agenda and need some "evidence", so they persuade someone to say anything they want so they can convince others to go with their agenda. Sadly, it is ineffective for truth, but quite good at creating the false "evidence" desired.

    13. Re:Sadism. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course. it has precisely zero effectiveness if this belief is mistaken.

      Or if it can't be verified immediately.
      Someone being tortured will tell you whatever is needed to make the torture stop.

      If you don't stop the torture when he gives you information then the torture won't work.
      If you stop the torture when he lies then a lie will be as good as the truth.
      The information you can get from torture is limited to what you can verify within a few seconds.

    14. Re:Sadism. by jandersen · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Torture is used because the people who use it believe, perhaps entirely sincerely, that the person they are torturing knows something that the people who are performing the torture either want to or need to know, and the importance of them knowing this is of more importance to them than the personhood of the person they are torturing.

      Torturers always have ways of explaining away their actions. It is for their country, their faith, the truth or liberty - for the greater good. The goal justifies the means. You should read up om Himmler's speeches to the SS top; all torturers think like that, whether it is the Spanish Inquisition and their "We cause you suffering in this life, so your time in Purgatory will be shorter", Daesh's burning and stoning of innocent people - or the waterboarding og suspected terrorists by the Americans. Good people don't do this, not just out of regard for the victim, but because they have chosen not to lower themselves to the same level as the terrorists and their sadistic torturers.

      Of course. it has precisely zero effectiveness if this belief is mistaken.

      It has no value whether their belief is true or false, we already know that. A person who undergoes torture is focused entirely on escaping the mistreatment, not on giving accurate information. When you are tortured, your trust in the torturer and in people in general is fundamentally destroyed, and you don't believe that you are not going to be tortured again, soon, whether you tell the truth or not, so you only want the hell you are in right now, to stop; so you say anything they want to hear. At least it may buy you a few hours or even days before it starts again.

      In order to gather reliable evidence, you absolutely must establish some sort of trust - you make promises, then keep them, you respect the individual, and gradually they may change their minds and cooperate. You reward cooperation, but not in a way that makes them feel they are being paid off for being traitors. And so on. It isn't really difficult.

    15. Re:Sadism. by gweihir · · Score: 1

      It is about destroying the victim and about spreading fear. It has been known to be completely ineffective as a means of getting information at the very least since the French tortured vigorously in Algeria about 50 years ago. They never found out anything worthwhile they did not already know and they really tried to go to the limits possible.

      So, yes, sadism, desire to dehumanize and eradicate the victim, and to terrorize others. Noting even remotely compatible with civilized society. However something religious fanatics of all colors really like, just think of the "eternal torment in hell" used to scare people. They really enjoy giving people a preview of that.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    16. Re:Sadism. by gweihir · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Indeed. People under torture lie to make it stop temporarily. They make up stuff when the interrogators insist they must know something, but do not.

      On the moral side, the only sane way to deal with torturers and those ordering it is to either execute them or lock them up permanently in a closed mental institution. These people have no place in human society.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    17. Re:Sadism. by gweihir · · Score: 1

      As any halfway sanely organized secret organization has both compartmentalized information and knows what to change and move when somebody is captured, torture is never effective, unless the information would have been easily available by other means. This means the torturers and those that are ordering it are deep in the evil spectrum, because they did not bother to find out about the things they are doing beforehand.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    18. Re:Sadism. by gweihir · · Score: 1

      A good source seems to be the war in Algeria 50 years ago. Both the French and the natives tortured excessively, wit little beneficial effect to them, if at all.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    19. Re:Sadism. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... if this belief is mistaken.

      The problem is shown in the television show '24'. Sooner or later, the interrogators think all answers can be found by torture. It's like saying all terrorists can be found by mass surveillance. The problem is magnified in cultures where life is cheap: Piss-off someone and they'll tell the army you're a witch, I mean a terrorist. The result is the same; torture until death or horrible injuries result.

    20. Re:Sadism. by mvdwege · · Score: 3, Informative

      has been known to be completely ineffective as a means of getting information at the very least since the French tortured vigorously in Algeria about 50 years ago.

      It has been known far longer than that

      --
      "I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
    21. Re:Sadism. by gweihir · · Score: 1

      True. The French in Algeria may just be the most solid data available. Likely everybody smart in history that could observe torture figured this out sooner or later.

      This is an interesting link, in any case. Thanks!

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    22. Re: Sadism. by Alomex · · Score: 1

      What you say has no connection whatsoever to what i wrote. It's funny that you think it does. It's like me saying, "hey your fly is open", and you reply "yeah but Jimmy hasn't taken a shower". Maybe so, and?

    23. Re:Sadism. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The idea that torture doesn't work is more truthiness than truth. But whether it works or not is irrelevant. It is immoral and should not be allowed.

      How ironic we want to label torture as immoral, and yet we have no problem sanctioning the alternative (warfare) at the highest levels.

      For FUCKS sake, talk about semantics. We might as well just drop this whole immoral argument now, because it's only making us look all the more ignorant.

    24. Re:Sadism. by tinkerton · · Score: 1

      torture is used for multiple reasons. Torture is sold with a story of some imminent danger where the tortured person has done very bad things and also has a key that when disclosed will stop this imminent danger. If you think this story represents the reality it is easier to support it. In reality this may apply to very exceptional cases but the bulk is that it's used for general information gathering , for turning people into informants , for terrorizing the population. For general information gathering the torture record is pretty weak.

      Why do you think the Guantanamo prisoners have been gradually released over a decade? To obfuscate the fact that there was so little incriminating information against the prisoners.

    25. Re:Sadism. by Your.Master · · Score: 1

      He literally told him to go talk to a primary source, not to take his own word for it.

    26. Re:Sadism. by Your.Master · · Score: 1

      What? How are torture and war alternatives to one another?

    27. Re:Sadism. by mark-t · · Score: 1

      It has no value whether their belief is true or false, we already know that. A person who undergoes torture is focused entirely on escaping the mistreatment, not on giving accurate information.

      Technically true... but it is only *after* they have a realization that what they believe to be the truth will not actually make the torture stop, that a person being tortured will generally resort to trying to fabricate whatever lie they think will make the torture stop. In absence of any evidence to indicate that it would not make the torturing stop, generally speaking, the first go-to response of a person being tortured who has been pushed beyond their endurance limit is to say what they believe to be the truth. In this way, one can argue that torture is effective at getting the truth, but if or when the truth is not verifiable, then torture is just a waste of everybody's time.

    28. Re:Sadism. by T.E.D. · · Score: 3, Informative

      Talk to professional interrogators, or the people that have actually studied the subject. According to them, torture is worse than worthless because the 'intelligence' you gather is far more likely to be false than anything else.

      Not quite. If you want to get to the truth of what happened, then torture is worthless. However, if you want someone to say a specific thing regardless of what the truth is (eg: admit to a crime), torture can be very effective.

      For example, the CIA was feeling pressure to prove their methods were effective. So their main goal whenever they tortured someone at their black sites was to get them to give up names of others who they could kidnap and torture. They became sort of the Amway of torture. The victim would eventually start giving names of anyone plausibly Muslim they may have rattling around in their head, and then the next round of renditions would begin. The CIA could then throw up all the numbers of names and leads they were getting as proof that their methods were working.

      You will to this day hear Bush Admin. officials cite these numbers to defend their torture program.

    29. Re: Sadism. by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately the brits in Ireland wanted a second opinion: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik....

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    30. Re:Sadism. by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

      The problem is that you watch television fiction and think it has any relationship to reality at all.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    31. Re:Sadism. by tinkerton · · Score: 1

      I wonder if your post has any relationship to mine. Wrong location? In any case I can't figure out what your enlightened criticism is supposed to be.

    32. Re:Sadism. by tinkerton · · Score: 1

      Well Have I ever. Now your post is no longer listed as a reply to mine but to someone else. Apologies.

    33. Re:Sadism. by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

      Ah, slashcode. :)

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    34. Re:Sadism. by mvdwege · · Score: 1

      I was pointed at Father Spee through the '1632' fiction series (where the writers perpetuate the mistaken 'von Spee' name). After reading up on him I was quite impressed. An interesting person, and the 'Cautio Criminalis' is an interesting work, so I am glad to help another one find it ;)

      --
      "I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
  3. Huh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well I think someone should "mistakenly" go to jail then.

  4. So a cross between "my dog ate it" and ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "sorry, its in my other pants"?

  5. Criminally negligent/incompetent by rsborg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If the CIA were a person (or smaller less corrupt organization) they'd be held liable (and possibly in contempt) with massive punishments.

    I guess it's not just the banks that can be TBTF.

    --
    Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
    1. Re:Criminally negligent/incompetent by barc0001 · · Score: 1

      Is it a case of TBTF or "screw with us and we'll show you what replaced the heart attack gun"?

      http://www.military.com/video/guns/pistols/cias-secret-heart-attack-gun/2555371072001

    2. Re:Criminally negligent/incompetent by Njorthbiatr · · Score: 1

      I say we kill them for high treason. Apparently they forgot that this was a democracy.

      Oh, and we don't need evidence, just like they don't. The CIA is sure good at forgetting things, like the fact that we have a second amendment for this very fucking reason.

    3. Re:Criminally negligent/incompetent by rsborg · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I say we kill them for high treason. Apparently they forgot that this was a democracy.

      Oh, and we don't need evidence, just like they don't. The CIA is sure good at forgetting things, like the fact that we have a second amendment for this very fucking reason.

      They're part of the executive branch - you know the ones that are charged with enforcing the law? That branch has shown repeatedly, in every administration in the past 50+ years, that it cannot/will not control the CIA (not to mention any other alphabet-soup agency).

      The Military Industrial Complex needs to be smashed, in order for this to take effect - and that means defeating the funding of this monstrosity.
      The only way we can do this is to defund the branch.

      --
      Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
    4. Re:Criminally negligent/incompetent by Sir+Holo · · Score: 1

      If the CIA were a person (or smaller less corrupt organization) they'd be held liable (and possibly in contempt) with massive punishments.

      I guess it's not just the banks that can be TBTF.

      This is the most shameful aspect of Sovereign Immunity.

      US Citizens pay the CIA via taxes. Yet, when this tax-payer organization 'goes rogue', we have no Constitutional avenue of redress to punish them for their War Crimes.

      Also as a result of CIA actions (over the last 40 years), many US Citizens have died – the ones who pay their salary. Innumerable people from foreign nations have died at their hands, too.

    5. Re:Criminally negligent/incompetent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Military Industrial Complex needs to be smashed

      What will they be replaced with?

    6. Re:Criminally negligent/incompetent by Sarten-X · · Score: 2

      Having worked for large corporations and the government, I actually can fully understand how this could happen without any foul play (opinions of Slashdotters notwithstanding).

      One guy says "it's preserved somewhere", another guy says "it's on those disks" and a third guy says "let's scrap all of those disks". Nobody ever stops to ask "where's the backup?" or "are these disks needed?". Instead, it's just a game of moving targets and priorities, trying to stay ahead of the collapsing mess of bureaucracy whose only concern is "why does this cost so much?".

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    7. Re:Criminally negligent/incompetent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the CIA were a person (or smaller less corrupt organization) they'd be held liable (and possibly in contempt) with massive punishments.

      I guess it's not just the banks that can be TBTF.

      True that. This whole thing about the report is a big "so what".
      If the CIA emailed a pdf of the report to everyone one the planet, nothing would change.

      On second thought, everyone that opened the CIA's pdf would get a rootkit installed, but that's not really a change.

    8. Re:Criminally negligent/incompetent by ShaunC · · Score: 3, Interesting

      What will they be replaced with?

      Maybe a Construction Industrial Complex. Fix all these roads, bridges, subways, water and sewer lines, etc. that are crumbling apart all over our own country instead of dropping a trillion dollars worth of bombs on someone else's country.

      --
      Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
    9. Re:Criminally negligent/incompetent by Tablizer · · Score: 2

      If the CIA were a person...they'd be held liable...with massive punishments.

      Well, we could torture them, but they lost the instructions.

    10. Re: Criminally negligent/incompetent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So why isn't Hillary Clinton in jail because of Benghazi?

      because her last name is the same a a previous president.

    11. Re:Criminally negligent/incompetent by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

      If the CIA were a person (or smaller less corrupt organization) they'd be held liable (and possibly in contempt) with massive punishments.

      I guess it's not just the banks that can be TBTF.

      This is the most shameful aspect of Sovereign Immunity.

      US Citizens pay the CIA via taxes. Yet, when this tax-payer organization 'goes rogue', we have no Constitutional avenue of redress to punish them for their War Crimes.

      Also as a result of CIA actions (over the last 40 years), many US Citizens have died – the ones who pay their salary. Innumerable people from foreign nations have died at their hands, too.

      I thought the CIA was funded by illicit drug/weapons dealing

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    12. Re:Criminally negligent/incompetent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The CIA is sure good at forgetting things, like the fact that we have a second amendment for this very fucking reason.

      Go ahead.

      Or did you forget that NSA monitors all communication? You can't gather enough forces to matter before they find out and stop you.
      The second amendment is cute but completely toothless. If you want to stand up against the government you need to gather a larger group of people first and there is no group with strong economic interest that has made sure that you still can do that.

    13. Re:Criminally negligent/incompetent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nonsense. The Bush administration controlled the CIA very effectively. And in gratitude gave out a big medal to the director of the overwhelming evidence of nuclear weapons in Iraq as I recall.

    14. Re: Criminally negligent/incompetent by s4m7 · · Score: 1

      Why build useful stuff when we can build a wall instead.

      --
      This comment is fully compliant with RFC 527.
    15. Re:Criminally negligent/incompetent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What will they be replaced with?

      Maybe a Construction Industrial Complex. Fix all these roads, bridges, subways, water and sewer lines, etc. that are crumbling apart all over our own country instead of dropping a trillion dollars worth of bombs on someone else's country.

      Careful with those kinds of ideas. Common Sense was outlawed three Administrations ago. You can be arrested for that now.

    16. Re:Criminally negligent/incompetent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The CIA is not under the military in any way, other than joint interagency association coordination groups / task forces formed with the military.

      (In counterpoint, many of the CIA's paramilitary activities of the past are now being given to SOCOM due to better intelligence sharing and the better backup in the form of airstrikes and communication lines with conventional military forces that SOCOM has when something goes to shit).

      The NSA however, _is_ a military agency (technically) like MDA, DLA, DIA, DFAS, etc...

    17. Re:Criminally negligent/incompetent by T.E.D. · · Score: 1

      They're part of the executive branch - you know the ones that are charged with enforcing the law? That branch has shown repeatedly, in every administration in the past 50+ years, that it cannot/will not control the CIA (not to mention any other alphabet-soup agency).

      The Bush Administration controlled the CIA just fine. The torture was their own idea. The CIA didn't even know how to do it at first, and had to raid the military's SEER (anti-torture training class) for expertise.

      Please, no false equivalencies here.

  6. FUCK THIS BULLSHIT. GO TO JAIL! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The CIA is a rogue fully-unaccountable shadow organization that thumbs its nose at ALL regulators including Congress. The longer this is allowed to go on the closer to a totalitarian state we are allowing ourselves to veer toward. Checks and balances mean JACK SHIT when they just go right around all of them.

  7. So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    So just to summarize this story - an agency was given a file, they accidentally deleted it, then asked for a new one from the original owner, and the owner said "ok".

    1. Re: So... by niftydude · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, if you believe that the new report the CIA will provide is the same as the old report, then I have a bridge I would like to sell you.

      --
      You can never know everything, and part of what you do know will always be wrong. Perhaps even the most important part.
    2. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh, and it will be exactly the same as the destroyed one and we can tell because, how?

      you naif. enjoy being a babe in the woods...

    3. Re: So... by Mr.CRC · · Score: 1

      This really does argue for the need for digital document authenticity/signatures.

    4. Re: So... by Sir+Holo · · Score: 1

      Well, if you believe that the new report the CIA will provide is the same as the old report, then I have a bridge I would like to sell you.

      Especially considering that the CIA were caught red-handed manipulating the computers, and deleting files from said computers, of the Congressionally Mandated Investigatory Task Force.

      The word TRUST contains none of the following letters: C, I, & A.

    5. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So just to summarize this story - an agency was given a file, they accidentally deleted it, then asked for a new one from the original owner, and the owner said "ok".

      Not quite. An agency that is known to have committed war crimes, is known to have willfully destroyed evidence of those crimes, is known to have blatantly lied repeatedly to those who are supposed to oversee it, was given a file documenting their war crimes. They claim to have "accidentally" deleted the file. (The quote marks are absolutely required due to their established behaviors.) The original owner of the file, clearly disbelieving the claim of the deletion being accidental, has requested that a new copy of the document be provided to the agency with the understanding that this one won't also be "accidentally" destroyed.

  8. Re:FUCK THIS BULLSHIT. GO TO JAIL! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I am going to smash the CIA and scatter the splinters to the wind." - J. F. Kennedy, after the Bay of Pigs failure

    Seems he never got the chance...

  9. Can we "Mistakenly" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Execute the whole goddamn organization for treason?

    We can do it while assuring them the injections are vaccines.
    (well in a way they are...)

  10. Copies still exist; CIA IG deleted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Senate Intelligence Committee, which produced the report, has copies of its own report. The CIA has copies. The CIA IG destroyed its copy, provided to it by the Senate Intelligence Committee, and told the committee. Stupid, yes...but given that it was the Senate Intelligence Committee's report, it's not like the CIA IG destroying its only copy of the Senate's report amounts to, well, anything.

    1. Re:Copies still exist; CIA IG deleted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but...but...but...OUTRAGE.

    2. Re:Copies still exist; CIA IG deleted by CaseCrash · · Score: 2

      The outrage is that they don't keep proper backups of their files

      They should just redownload it from OneDrive.

      --
      No, that link you posted to a web comic we've all seen a hundred times is not "obligatory."
    3. Re:Copies still exist; CIA IG deleted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Print them out, bind them, and put them in a safe somewhere. Libraries manage to keep books for hundreds of years, I'm sure the CIA could.

    4. Re:Copies still exist; CIA IG deleted by rahvin112 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      No they don't. That's the entire point. Because of it's classified nature there are very few copies of this report. The copy that was destroyed was the Senate's "copy" (they didn't really have a copy because the entire document was classified to protect the torturers). You may hate Feinman, and I do because she's happy to go along with Jack Booted Thugery, but when she stood on the Senate floor and claimed the CIA was subverting government she was telling the truth. The CIA was hiding and deleting documents the Senate committee had already seen. The CIA was deliberately obstructing the Senate and all "civilian" oversight.

      But you know what? No one even cared. I've believed for a long time that the only way to fix the FBI and CIA and the abuses they commit is to destroy them and create new agencies from the ground up to take over their responsibilities. Both agencies have been unelected, corrupt, unchecked little boys clubs that wield influence and power over our democracy.

      Disband them both and reassign their responsibilities, because when they reach the point they have the only solution is to burn them down and rebuild them from the ground up.

    5. Re:Copies still exist; CIA IG deleted by quantaman · · Score: 1

      The Senate Intelligence Committee, which produced the report, has copies of its own report. The CIA has copies. The CIA IG destroyed its copy, provided to it by the Senate Intelligence Committee, and told the committee. Stupid, yes...but given that it was the Senate Intelligence Committee's report, it's not like the CIA IG destroying its only copy of the Senate's report amounts to, well, anything.

      The Senate Intelligence Committee, which produced the report, has copies of its own report. The CIA has copies. The CIA IG destroyed its copy, provided to it by the Senate Intelligence Committee, and told the committee. Stupid, yes...but given that it was the Senate Intelligence Committee's report, it's not like the CIA IG destroying its only copy of the Senate's report amounts to, well, anything.

      I think there's a lot of things going on in this story that needs expert analysis, here's my attempt at fundamentally misunderstanding the important points:

      1) It makes sense they'd just have one copy. The full report is highly classified and has major political ramifications. They really want to make sure there's not a lot of random copies floating around.

      2) Someone at the CIA supposedly thought they were supposed to delete the report, I feel like the CIA is a place with established mechanisms for deleting things without backups.

      3) If you want to avoid giving up a doc in a FOIA request not having the doc is a really good excuse.

      4) Other agencies still have the file, I don't know if that's relevant to any open FOIA requests.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    6. Re:Copies still exist; CIA IG deleted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's almost like they're trying to NOT keep copies of things.

      Deleting your only copy?? C'mon. I had more copies of the 7th grade classwork than these clowns, but they do seem to be managed like a kindergarten.

    7. Re:Copies still exist; CIA IG deleted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think there was a President who suggested the CIA should be disbanded--and got his brains blown out a few months later. Go figure. (Read "JFK and the Unspeakable".)

    8. Re:Copies still exist; CIA IG deleted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Not sure about CIA as have never worked with them. But we deal with classified files where I work and their are two fundamental things. Firstly that the environment is properly protected and access controlled, secondly that EVERY FILE, EVERY ACCESS, EVERY CHANGE is recorded and backed up, on site and secure off site. The thing about classified files is you need to know who, when, how they were changed and need to be able to show what they were changed from (at least that is my experience). So I find the concept that they accidentally deleted with no backups complete bullshit.

    9. Re:Copies still exist; CIA IG deleted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe we could extend the new Dept of Homeland Security to take over their responsibilities?

    10. Re:Copies still exist; CIA IG deleted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even if it's classified, things can still be subject to the Federal Records Act. Since it was a Senate report and not from the CIA, I find it extremely hard to believe there isn't a record in an archive somewhere. If there isn't a copy in the Congressional Records archive or with the Senate Intelligence Committee's internal records, I would immediately suspect the CIA of having purposefully removed it--which would be extremely damning if found true.

      Oh wait, maybe they did:
      http://thehill.com/policy/technology/213933-cia-admits-to-wrongly-hacking-into-senate-computers

  11. Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Someone is either a.) getting promoted for making that disappear b.) getting fired for making that disappear or c.) appearing to get fired but actually getting promoted by another agency for making that disappear.

    They need to make sure it is really gone, because having the original turn up later and someone running a comparison of the two would assuredly find large chunks of the original missing from the back-up doc and that would be quite embarrassing.

  12. when they get it back they will put it on display by hguorbray · · Score: 5, Funny

    in the basement, in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard'.

    -I'm just sayin'

  13. Sedition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is clearly sedition. Hang them. And by them, I mean at the very least a dozen of the highest ranking CIA officials.

    Make an example of what happens to public servants who go out of their way to serve themselves to the point of actively harming the public.

  14. Unopened disk ... by Obfuscant · · Score: 2

    a CIA spokesperson has said another unopened computer disk with the full report is still locked in a vault at agency headquarters.

    And we'll be happy to open the disk and give you a copy of the contents just as soon as we locate the Torx T10 driver we need to do so... can we keep the cool magnets?

  15. Could always by liqu1d · · Score: 5, Funny

    Ask the NSA I'm sure they've got a copy.

    1. Re:Could always by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure Hill has a copy on her server too.

    2. Re:Could always by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      or ask Putin

    3. Re:Could always by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure every intelligence agency around the world has a copy of her server too.

  16. How about some Extreme waterboarding with trump! by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    How about some Extreme waterboarding with trump! and he will put that out with out an cover up.

  17. Never a Snowden around when you need one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If you're reading this, and you have access to this report, and you consider yourself a loyal, patriotic American, then you don't need me to tell you what the right thing to do is.

  18. And then ... by Egg+Sniper · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "CIA inspector general officials deleted an uploaded computer file with the report and then accidentally destroyed a disk that also contained the document. Then, while carrying the computer from which the file was deleted, officials tripped and dropped it into an MRI scanner's powerful magnet. In an effort to free the computer it was struck repeatedly with a rubber mallet. Once freed, being alarmingly warm, the computer was submerged in water to cool. Later, the computer fell from the horse that was transporting it and it was trampled to pieces. The pieces were cast into the volcano."

    1. Re:And then ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The pieces were cast into the volcano.

      That is complete BS and has no place on this fine site of /..
      Everybody knows that you have to cast a virgin in the volcano along with the pieces.

      CAP === 'coarse'

    2. Re:And then ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was entirely accidental, but all too easy to do, as Rosemary Woods demonstrated.

    3. Re: And then ... by liqu1d · · Score: 1

      You talk as though that isn't completely plausible.

  19. Chicken and Egg by s.petry · · Score: 1

    I think that Hillary learned how to be evasive and deny from the best in the CIA. It's pretty amazing how many critical files and witnesses have 'vanished' since the advent of the CIA.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    1. Re:Chicken and Egg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Was that Google search supposed to prove something? All I get is a bunch of links explaining how the CIA is necessary for democracy to survive.

  20. hooding, waterboarding are bad. Raping 13yo girls by raymorris · · Score: 0, Troll

    Waterboarding (pouring water over the enemy combatant's face) and hooding (putting a bag over their head so they can't see) are bad. The US shouldn't do those things, as policy. No country should, and especially the US (more on that later*).

    On the other hand consider if we captured Osama bin Laden , who knew about plans for future terror attacks. If our interrogation experts thought that putting a bag over his head to annoy him might increase the information he revealed (potentially saving innocent lives), I'd happily fetch a bag for that use. I digress. Generally, those techniques are bad policy.

    > The stuff Japanese people were sentenced to death for shortly after their trials at the end of World War II.

    The japanese war criminals were convicted of kidnapping all the girls and women in villages they attacked and making them "sexual slaves". In other words, raping these civilians hundreds of times each. They were also convicted of mass murder - men from the villages, once they were too emaciated to work in the forced labor camp, would be lined up and shot.

    Again, pouring water on a terrorist's face isn't a very nice thing to do to that terrorist. Systematically raping thousands of girls, many of them hundreds of times each, is a completely different level of horrible.

    To say to the survivors of this rape program that their story is no worse than someone who chose to be a terrorist having water poured on them is deeply offensive and shows an incredible lack of perspective or understanding of the world.

    I promised more about why the US especially shouldn't be mean to enemy combatants. The US is not historically a people, not an ethnic group or ancient tribe who established borders of the area they control like most nations. Japan is the area that (ethnic) Japanese people control, the area of Japanwse culture. The responsibility of the Japanese government is to the Japanese people, and it should protect Japanese culture and tradition.

    The US isn't descended from an ancient tribe or ethnic group. The US wasn't created to define the area of US culture and traditions. Rather, was explicitly founded to protect freedom , justice, and liberty. That's the entire PURPOSE of founding the country, expressed in the founding documents. The US claims to be, aspires to be, "the brightest beacon of freedom to the world". Japan makes no such claim. Therefore, in order to accomplish our explicit purpose, the reason the country exists in the first place, we must treat justice and freedom as our top priorities. When we don't do so, we've failed in a way that other countries don't, because they make no claim of being "the land of liberty". This concept is called "American Exceptionalism". Some disagree, of course. President Obama rejects the concept American Exceptionalism, the idea that the US has a special responsibility to respect people's rights.

  21. Re:FUCK THIS BULLSHIT. GO TO JAIL! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Going to get modded down but what if they are intentionally being rotted?

    The parallelisms between crap like this an immigration are quite interesting. There are other countries that have been into torturing their own people for a hell of a lot longer then Canada or the US even exists.

  22. Whoops! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Our bad! We won't ever do that again, we promise." -- the CIA

  23. Re:hooding, waterboarding are bad. Raping 13yo gir by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You understand don't you, that they killed several of them during the torture. They didn't just do a little light spanking or face washing! They suffocated, drowned and dehydrated a few beyond the point a doctor could recover them. Even in Guantanmo, there were a number of unexplained deaths, prisoners due for release suddenly committing suicide by suffocation etc.

    > "Systematically raping thousands of girls, many of them hundreds of times each, is a completely different level of horrible."
    Wouldn't killing the girls be worse? Sex isn't as bad a killing, and its normal for women to have sex hundreds of times a year, die-ing is definitely a one time, do not want, thing.

    Did they get useful intel? Doubtful. Could they have got what intel they got by more tried and tested means? Yep, that's why they're tried and tested. The CIA tortured because Bush wanted them to. He needed to be seen to be doing something, given his close relationship to the Bin Ladens (Bin Laden family rescued one of his failing oil businesses, and he blocked the report 'Bin Laden determined to Strike in the US").

  24. Non-story - they have a backup by schwit1 · · Score: 2

    Despite this incident, a CIA spokesperson has said another unopened computer disk with the full report is still locked in a vault at agency headquarters. "I can assure you that the CIA has retained a copy," wrote Dean Boyd, the agency's chief of public affairs, in an email.

    1. Re:Non-story - they have a backup by Sir+Holo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Despite this incident, a CIA spokesperson has said another unopened computer disk with the full report is still locked in a vault at agency headquarters. "I can assure you that the CIA has retained a copy," wrote Dean Boyd, the agency's chief of public affairs, in an email.

      Would you like to buy a bridge?

    2. Re:Non-story - they have a backup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Despite this incident, a CIA spokesperson has said another unopened computer disk with the full report is still locked in a vault at agency headquarters. "I can assure you that the CIA has retained a copy," wrote Dean Boyd, the agency's chief of public affairs, in an email.

      Yeah right, and when the courts demand that they produce said document it will be discovered that the disk was accidentally stored too close to a high-intensity alternating magnetic field for the past year or so.

    3. Re:Non-story - they have a backup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The ONLY effect of which was to completely scramble the report into one that lauds the heroic interrogations of the CIA and the trillions of lives -yes, trillions!- they saved in the process. It is also quite informative, teaching us right (being tortured by the CIA) and wrong (NOT being tortured by the CIA).

  25. Re:hooding, waterboarding are bad. Raping 13yo gir by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    Get your history right. We executed Japanese Soldiers for waterboarding ours during WWII. You listen to Faux News too much.

    http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2015/jan/12/bobby-scott/bobby-scott-after-wwii-us-executed-japanese-war-cr/
    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2007/dec/18/john-mccain/history-supports-mccains-stance-on-waterboarding/
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2014/12/16/cheneys-claim-that-the-u-s-did-not-prosecute-japanese-soldiers-for-waterboarding/

  26. Re:How about some Extreme waterboarding with trump by Sir+Holo · · Score: 1

    How about some Extreme waterboarding with trump! and he will put that out with out an cover up.

    No! The orange will all wash off of his face!

  27. Can we start executing the CIA? by Jharish · · Score: 1

    We executed Hussein, Milosevic and most of the Nazis for doing this stuff. Basically, we put a bunch of racist sadists in charge of a program where they got to dehumanize, torture and kill brown people who had no legal process. Why can't we start with the President and work our way down to the people who were 'just following orders'? I'd like to see some justice.

    1. Re:Can we start executing the CIA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We executed Hussein, Milosevic and most of the Nazis for doing this stuff. Basically, we put a bunch of racist sadists in charge of a program where they got to dehumanize, torture and kill brown people who had no legal process. Why can't we start with the President and work our way down to the people who were 'just following orders'? I'd like to see some justice.

      OK comrade, we start with you. Prove you are not CIA.

  28. But of course... by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 0

    ...It's perfectly OK for ISIL to chop heads off, execute innocent people with suicide bombs, keep women uneducated and in burkas, teach teenage boys how to be abusers, murderers, .and worst of all "martyrs"...

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    1. Re:But of course... by Rakshasa+Taisab · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When you have to compare yourself to ISIL to look good, I guess you've reached the top of the bottom.

      --
      - These characters were randomly selected.
    2. Re:But of course... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When you have to compare yourself to ISIL to look good, I guess you've reached the top of the bottom.

      Well said.
      So well said that I'm going to steal it.

    3. Re:But of course... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice strawman you got there.

    4. Re:But of course... by Whibla · · Score: 1

      No, not in the slightest.

      Now, what was your point again?

  29. Re: hooding, waterboarding are bad. Raping 13yo gi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Part of American Exceptionalism was that we abhorred torture unlike other nations with darker histories that cared not for individual Liberty.

    You seem to have missed that memo.

  30. Re:FUCK THIS BULLSHIT. GO TO JAIL! by Darinbob · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The Church committee had a good chance, and the Pike committee in the house as well, back in the Ford administration. Donald Rumsfeld was a part of the administration back then and worked very hard to prevent the Church Committee from dismantling the CIA, and the administration did seem very worried that the this could have happened. The Church committee were called traitors by some hardliners at the time. Since that time, the executive has amassed even more power relative to congress.

  31. Re:hooding, waterboarding are bad. Raping 13yo gir by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    On the other hand consider if we captured Osama bin Laden , who knew about plans for future terror attacks.

    I'd rather consider if we captured you, and we believe that you know about plans for future attacks. But you don't actually know about any future attacks, so you can't tell us about any. But we don't believe you know nothing, and so we keep torturing you. Finally, you decide to lie, and tell us that you do know of one future attack. But we disbelieve that you only know about one, so the torture continues.

  32. Watchdog destroyed report? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Really? "My dog ate my homework?"

  33. Re:hooding, waterboarding are bad. Raping 13yo gir by vux984 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Waterboarding (pouring water over the enemy combatant's face) and hooding (putting a bag over their head so they can't see) are bad.

    Are you serious? Waterboarding someone is a drowning technique. Waterboarding is 'pouring water over their face' the way tearing someone's finger nails out is a 'rough manicure'. They were drowning people several times a day for days or weeks on end. You need to get your head straight on this.

    "In other words, raping these civilians hundreds of times each."

    Wait that sounds pretty unpleasant. Are you sure you wouldn't prefer to write it as "In other words, they potentially got some unwanted sexual attention"? /sarcasm

    Systematically raping thousands of girls, many of them hundreds of times each, is a completely different level of horrible.

    Yes, absolutely, but really its only different because of the scale. We only waterboarded (hopefully) a small number of people (possibly dozens) of times. Not hundreds or thousands. But seriously you can't claim the moral high ground over a criminal who raped his victims repeatedly when you drowned and resuscitated your own victims over and over again. The ONLY thing that made us better was the scale was pretty small by comparison.

    I'm not even sure which torture I'd call more inhuman -- held down and raped by soldiers repeatedly vs held down and drowned repeatedly... to hear the waterboarding victims talk; about the panic attacks, nightmares they live with now, the terror and the pain they felt... they might well have opted for the rape instead. Maybe it doesn't even make sense to try to hold one or the other as worse.

  34. Re:hooding, waterboarding are bad. Raping 13yo gir by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    thank you for putting American Exceptionalism in terms of responsibilities to ourselves, not in terms of "we are better than others" which is usually how it comes out. its similar for Jews, who claim to be the chosen people: chosen to be the bearers of gods message, not exactly shits and giggles, sort of a burden, doesnt make you better, just gives you a special purpose. I strongly agree that that is America's purpose, and we need to put it front and center in all our dealings with the world: support our values, we respect you more. support them less, we will limit contact with you. dont get me started on how we cut deals with vile govts. its not just evil, its particularly evil for us to do, as our constitution gives us no excuse to do it.

  35. Re:FUCK THIS BULLSHIT. GO TO JAIL! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They are unaccountable to YOU.
    HOWEVER, they are accountable to the PRESIDENT, and BOTH BUSH and OBAMA have known EXACTLY what has been going on since DAY ONE.

    BUSH, CHENEY, OBAMA, RUMSFIELD, ALEXANDER, RICE, HAYDEN, the ENTIRE DOJ, CIA, NSA, BOTH CHAIRS and subs of Senate and House Intel Committees....

    ALL of these people knew and know EXACTLY what's going on, and APPROVED of it.

    Prosecute them all.

  36. Re:when they get it back they will put it on displ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I’m sorry, but if you can’t be bothered to take an interest in local affairs, that’s your own lookout.

  37. Guess you forgot to read your own source by raymorris · · Score: 2

    I guess you forgot to read any of those pages before you linked to them. Here are a couple of quotes from your first link:

    ---
    Scott qualified his statement to make clear he was referring to executed Japanese military members who faced a variety of war crime charges, including waterboarding, not that they were sentenced to death solely for that offense. ...
    Wallach, in his essay, wrote that six Japanese generals who ordered and permitted water torture were sentenced to death. He added, however, that those generals were also convicted of many other war crimes
    ---

    So yeah, in a few cases, when someone committed "many other war crimes" (primarily intentionally starting the war), and btw they also did waterboarding, a few such people were sentenced to death.

    1. Re:Guess you forgot to read your own source by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      Time to set the precedent then!

      I am perfectly happy to send them, with all of the evidence to very public and open courts and let these questions be decided....in the daylight.

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
  38. And in an Unrelated News Story by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

    AP Langly, WV Slashdot readers are all Un-Wed Mothers.

  39. Lily Tomlin vindicated by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "No matter how cynical you become, there is just no way to keep up." Lily Timlin

  40. Oh sure I believe that by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Oh I totally believe that they only had one copy of this critically important report. It's too bad that the dog ate it or whatever.

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    1. Re:Oh sure I believe that by shawn2772 · · Score: 1

      Oh I totally believe that they only had one copy of this critically important report. It's too bad that the dog ate it or whatever.

      Allow me to quote from the summary

      a CIA spokesperson has said another unopened computer disk with the full report is still locked in a vault at agency headquarters. "I can assure you that the CIA has retained a copy," wrote Dean Boyd, the agency's chief of public affairs, in an email. Feinstein is calling for the CIA inspector general to obtain a new copy of the report to replace the one that disappeared.

      So they're not claiming it's completely gone. At worst this is a delaying tactic, not obstruction.

  41. Re:How about some Extreme waterboarding with trump by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

    Then PETA will become involved due to cruelty to whatever he's wearing in place of hair.

  42. Trump will fix that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trump will make sure that torture is very well managed.

  43. Re:hooding, waterboarding are bad. Raping 13yo gir by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Waterboarding is drowning under controlled conditions. It's supposed to simulated but many times the victims did drown and had to be resuscitated.

    I think the main point is that if the US is going around trying to convince the world that it's the shining example of goodness that has been wronged then it shouldn't be going around doing evil acts like this. After the 9/11 attacks there was a tremendous amount of sympathy and goodwill towards the US in which it could have used for much good. Even after the invasion of Afghanistan it kept much of that goodwill because it got the approval from the UN. Then it didn't get the approval for the invasion of Iraq due to the lack of evidence but still went ahead, proof of how prisoners were treated came out, Guantanamo, the death toll from the second Iraq war (and not just the US casualties), the torture scandal, drone strikes, and a long list of other things has eroded that goodwill and even turned it into hostility from certain areas. The world was ready to help the US but it's leaders chose a path of vengeance instead of tackling the problem.

  44. ask confirmable questions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q: Where is Ali bin-Abu hiding?
    A: He's in him mom's basement.

    (check... not found, more torture)

    Q: Where is Ali bin-Abu hiding?
    A: He's at the hotel, room 42, cross dressing

    (check... OK, we got him)

    1. Re:ask confirmable questions by vel-ex-tech · · Score: 1

      The subliminal manipulation in this comment is interesting. So we're trying to find Ali bin Abu, and we receive information from torturing that he may be in this mom's basement. So we go check, and he's not there. More torture.

      However, the torture is so effective now that not only do we get Ali bin Abu's actual location, but we also get the interesting tidbit that he's a filthy cross dresser in addition to being a filthy Muslim!

      The Jews are doing a bang up job here. Not only have they manufactured the schism of Christian/Muslim which makes you all shut your brains off, but now they're able to apply the other parts of their brainwashing to further make you all shut your brains off.

      Note that half the time we hear how horrible the Muslims are because they kill gays. The other half of the time, it's fine for us to torture and kill them because they're gay.

      Such propaganda. So doublethink. Wow.

  45. Good points by raymorris · · Score: 2

    You make a couple of good points. I think that's much more insightful than suggesting that waterboarding Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the other perpetrators of 9/11 is just as raping innocent girls.

  46. Sign of fall of the US empire ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    All great empire started to show inside corruption to the highest level before falling to small outside influence. I do wonder if what we are seeing, are the inherent sign that the institution are so corrupt that they can destroy such document in impunity (whoever said "if you think the "copy" has the same info I have a bridge for you" there is no no way to detect if there was foul play to change the report), and when you add the other signs and crack at the seams (particularly the social cracks) then it does not show a pretty picture. Add to that ongoing war cost and past war cost. I do wonder sincerely if we are seeing the destabilization and fall of the US empire, it reminds me of the russian empire fall, economical , debt ridden, and showing similar corruption.

  47. The Holy Spirit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    has a backup copy.

  48. The dog? by jandersen · · Score: 1

    ... "mistakenly" destroyed its only copy of a mammoth Senate torture report ...

    A genuine "The dog ate my report", then? Amazing, you would have thought adults could do better.

    1. Re:The dog? by DeVilla · · Score: 1

      That depends. How do you define "do"?

  49. So now we know by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 2

    its only copy of a mammoth Senate torture report

    So that's why they died out!

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  50. Funny by meerling · · Score: 1

    Funny how they keep doing that, except for the times they've claimed to have 'misplaced' it, or have redacted it to black pages, or just said "no".
    Of course, it isn't like they've been caught lying to the public and the government before...

  51. Freak accident by kbg · · Score: 2

    "Yes sir, we accidently destroyed the disk. You see we where testing a flamethrower and accidently burned the disk, and then as it happens sometimes a steamroller came by and just happened to crush it, and finally we spilled some highly corrosive acid on the remains.It was just a freak accident."

  52. Re:when they get it back they will put it on displ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The funny thing is, that would actually be a pretty good place to put a copy :P

  53. Ransomware? by cpghost · · Score: 1

    C'mon CIA Watchdog, don't be so cheap: cough up a Bitcoin or two to get the decryption key to that CIA Torture Report from your friendly Ransomware Provider...

    --
    cpghost at Cordula's Web.
  54. Re:FUCK THIS BULLSHIT. GO TO JAIL! by sabbede · · Score: 1

    For what, misinterpreting a memo? Having to get another copy of the report? Whoop-dee-fucking-doo.

  55. Clinton 2016 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Clinton is a square shooter

    1. Re:Clinton 2016 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Squares for Trump 2016.

  56. God DAMMIT by thrasher+thetic · · Score: 1

    Evil conniving murdering fucking cunt-faced shit-eating bastards. I pay TAXES to these assholes.

  57. Construction Industrial Complex by Tenebrousedge · · Score: 1

    Incidentally, Panama actually has this phenomenon. The construction companies have been giving kickbacks to the government officials, and the officials have been coming up with more money and ever more inventive ways to keep the debt off the books. A lot of money seems to be going into useless skyscrapers, but they're also building roads and hospitals.

    If you're going to have corrupt industries, it's probably better that they are constructive rather than destructive.

    --
    Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
  58. Yeah if you believe that one... by Whatchamacallit · · Score: 1

    Yeah if you believe it, I have a bridge for sale in NYC...

  59. Re:hooding, waterboarding are bad. Raping 13yo gir by shawn2772 · · Score: 0

    Yes, absolutely, but really its only different because of the scale. We only waterboarded (hopefully) a small number of people (possibly dozens) of times. Not hundreds or thousands. But seriously you can't claim the moral high ground over a criminal who raped his victims repeatedly when you drowned and resuscitated your own victims over and over again. The ONLY thing that made us better was the scale was pretty small by comparison.

    Don't stoop to the GP's methods.

    Clearly, the only difference wasn't the scale. Another crucial difference was the purpose. I'm not claiming that torture is justifiable, and I fully agree that what the US did was wrong, and that we should be ashamed and should take action to ensure it doesn't happen again, but motives do matter and there is a difference between abuse for its own sake or for individual gratification and abuse for a specific and important goal.

  60. Re:How about some Extreme waterboarding with trump by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

    Not a problem. You can get Cheetos at any supermarket or convenience store.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  61. Re:How about some Extreme waterboarding with trump by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    Trump will just get rid of PETA , NIMBY , ETC.

  62. Don't worry, Snowden has it... by DeFKnoL · · Score: 1

    ...Probably. LOL

  63. Playbook by h8sg8s · · Score: 1

    Seems the CIA and its Inspector General are reading from the IRS playbook.

    --
    Organization? You must be joking..
  64. Re:hooding, waterboarding are bad. Raping 13yo gir by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm not claiming that torture is justifiable [...] but motives do matter

    Make up your mind. Is torture indefensible, or are you defending torture, to any degree, if the torturer claims it's for a good cause?

  65. Waterboarding by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They waterboarded 3 people...TOTAL
    Nobody drowned. Withstanding waterboarding is part of Seal Training.
    You people are idiots, ....uninformed, brainwashed, idiots. Go back to MoveOn.org, keep reading and continue to drink your Koolaid.

    1. Re:Waterboarding by vux984 · · Score: 1

      http://www.theguardian.com/law/2015/oct/16/cia-torture-water-dousing-waterboard-like-technique

      http://www.theguardian.com/law...

      But that's beside the point. I never claimed it was a lot of people. Only that the people who were waterboarded were waterboarded repeatedly: dozens, even hundreds of times.

      Nobody drowned.

      Drowning is defined as respiratory impairment from being in or under a liquid. Drowning doesn't need to result in death.

      Withstanding waterboarding is part of Seal Training.

      Your point? Even SEALs have come out and said that its torture.

      And they've also pointed out that their training was in very controlled circumstances, and that they *knew* they would be ok, how long it would be, when it would be over, and that they'd be taken care of. And that comparing it to what goes on in a CIA secret prison is ridiculous.

  66. Re:hooding, waterboarding are bad. Raping 13yo gir by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, there is no difference. Torture is torture, and only evil people do it. It never produces results, and if you say there's a difference ... you're as bad. Don't try to justify evil to look intelligent, you just look deluded and evil.

  67. Ding Ding Ding! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We have a winner! Torture is immoral and cannot be allowed. It violates every principle that freedom-loving societies are built upon.

    I suppose torture might work, occasionally. It really doesn't matter. Discussions about the effectiveness of torture sidetrack the bigger issue. Some foolish people are gradually led to believe that the effectiveness of torture means we might morally be able to employ it. No, we can never. When we employ torture, we become monsters ourselves. Do you want to destroy the moral center of our men and women in uniform?

    Torture destroys who we are. That's why we cannot use torture. And that's without even considering what it does to the people we torture.

  68. What Am I Doing?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "OMG!!! What am I doing?! I just cannot seem to stop feeding these important Senate report pages through the shredder! Won't somebody stop me?"

    Said the loyal CIA employee to no one in particular.