Comments on: I Get Around http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/26/i-get-around-2/ Wed, 05 Jan 2011 21:59:36 -0600 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2 By: bluebutterfly http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/26/i-get-around-2/#comment-6593 bluebutterfly Mon, 26 Jan 2009 23:27:30 +0000 http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/26/i-get-around-2/#comment-6593 <p>An x -Guantanamo guard and two x -detainees are touring the UK together. Lots of information at these sites:</p> <p><a href="http://www.guantanamovoices.org/" rel="nofollow">http://www.guantanamovoices.org/</a></p> <p><a href="http://www.cageprisoners.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.cageprisoners.com/</a></p> An x -Guantanamo guard and two x -detainees are touring the UK together. Lots of information at these sites:

http://www.guantanamovoices.org/

http://www.cageprisoners.com/

]]> By: bluebutterfly http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/26/i-get-around-2/#comment-6590 bluebutterfly Mon, 26 Jan 2009 22:57:03 +0000 http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/26/i-get-around-2/#comment-6590 <p>So, what do you think? Are we ever going to see a proper investigation of 911? Are we ever going to see that country, and others, exposed? Is the phony war on terror ever going to end? Why do you think FISA only grants immunity after 911?</p> So, what do you think? Are we ever going to see a proper investigation of 911? Are we ever going to see that country, and others, exposed? Is the phony war on terror ever going to end? Why do you think FISA only grants immunity after 911?

]]> By: sghiteinfla http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/26/i-get-around-2/#comment-6582 sghiteinfla Mon, 26 Jan 2009 21:31:42 +0000 http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/26/i-get-around-2/#comment-6582 <p>Ok they are going to study it so nothing is set in stone yet.</p> <p><a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/EnsuringLawfulInterrogations/" rel="nofollow">http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_.....rogations/</a></p> <blockquote><p>(ii) to study and evaluate the practices of transferring individuals to other nations in order to ensure that such practices comply with the domestic laws, international obligations, and policies of the United States and do not result in the transfer of individuals to other nations to face torture or otherwise for the purpose, or with the effect, of undermining or circumventing the commitments or obligations of the United States to ensure the humane treatment of individuals in its custody or control.</p></blockquote> Ok they are going to study it so nothing is set in stone yet.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_…..rogations/

(ii) to study and evaluate the practices of transferring individuals to other nations in order to ensure that such practices comply with the domestic laws, international obligations, and policies of the United States and do not result in the transfer of individuals to other nations to face torture or otherwise for the purpose, or with the effect, of undermining or circumventing the commitments or obligations of the United States to ensure the humane treatment of individuals in its custody or control.

]]> By: sghiteinfla http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/26/i-get-around-2/#comment-6581 sghiteinfla Mon, 26 Jan 2009 21:21:27 +0000 http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/26/i-get-around-2/#comment-6581 <p>I believe the executive order banned extraordinary renditions as well. I will look it up and confirm or deny</p> I believe the executive order banned extraordinary renditions as well. I will look it up and confirm or deny

]]> By: Valtin http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/26/i-get-around-2/#comment-6578 Valtin Mon, 26 Jan 2009 20:18:34 +0000 http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/26/i-get-around-2/#comment-6578 <p>Cobernicus, you are absolutely correct. I have documented, furthermore, that only a few years back the Pentagon and various politicians, including John McCain, KNEW that the Army Field Manual as constituted included coercive and abusive techniques that would violate Geneva, at a minimum.</p> <p>I have written up my evidence with an article that went up at AlterNet just yesterday (forgive the long title):<br /><a href="http://www.alternet.org/story/122341/how_the_press%2C_the_pentagon%2C_and_even_human_rights_groups_sold_us_an_army_field_manual_that_%28still%29_sanctions_torture/" rel="nofollow">How the Press, the Pentagon, and Even Human Rights Groups Sold Us an Army Field Manual that (Still) Sanctions Torture</a></p> <p>An earlier article as even more evidence to back up what I say:<br /><a href="http://www.alternet.org/story/117807/how_the_u.s._army%27s_field_manual_codified_torture_--_and_still_does/" rel="nofollow">How the U.S. Army’s Field Manual Codified Torture — and Still Does</a></p> <p>Letting the military and the CIA and the Executive branch dictate the “facts” and the relevant discourse on this matter is doing a disservice to the country, and Spencer, I’m counting on you to get the truth out, and not take BS, even when it comes from Jane Mayer, for the real story.</p> Cobernicus, you are absolutely correct. I have documented, furthermore, that only a few years back the Pentagon and various politicians, including John McCain, KNEW that the Army Field Manual as constituted included coercive and abusive techniques that would violate Geneva, at a minimum.

I have written up my evidence with an article that went up at AlterNet just yesterday (forgive the long title):
How the Press, the Pentagon, and Even Human Rights Groups Sold Us an Army Field Manual that (Still) Sanctions Torture

An earlier article as even more evidence to back up what I say:
How the U.S. Army’s Field Manual Codified Torture — and Still Does

Letting the military and the CIA and the Executive branch dictate the “facts” and the relevant discourse on this matter is doing a disservice to the country, and Spencer, I’m counting on you to get the truth out, and not take BS, even when it comes from Jane Mayer, for the real story.

]]> By: consumetheconsumer http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/26/i-get-around-2/#comment-6572 consumetheconsumer Mon, 26 Jan 2009 18:01:03 +0000 http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/26/i-get-around-2/#comment-6572 <p>Please, can we stop referencing this: “C.I.A. officials have argued for years that so-called “enhanced” interrogation techniques have yielded life-saving intelligence breakthroughs” unless and until someone in the CIA actually comes forward with a shred of evidence to support these so called “life-saving intelligence breakthroughs”. And don’t give me the whole we can’t tell you for fear that AQ will learn what we do. The CIA and every other American intelligence agency selectively leaks what it wants, when it wants. Coming forward with a little meat to back up otherwise baseless claims is the least we can ask for — that, or just stop repeating the meme over and over and over again.</p> Please, can we stop referencing this: “C.I.A. officials have argued for years that so-called “enhanced” interrogation techniques have yielded life-saving intelligence breakthroughs” unless and until someone in the CIA actually comes forward with a shred of evidence to support these so called “life-saving intelligence breakthroughs”. And don’t give me the whole we can’t tell you for fear that AQ will learn what we do. The CIA and every other American intelligence agency selectively leaks what it wants, when it wants. Coming forward with a little meat to back up otherwise baseless claims is the least we can ask for — that, or just stop repeating the meme over and over and over again.

]]> By: selise http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/26/i-get-around-2/#comment-6571 selise Mon, 26 Jan 2009 17:43:33 +0000 http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/26/i-get-around-2/#comment-6571 <p>ok, i just called the senate intelligence committee and was told that panetta’s hearing is not tomorrow. any info would be greatly appreciated, as i try to keep a <a href="http://www.netrootsmass.net/2009/01/hearing-list-for-week-of-jan-26-2009/" rel="nofollow">list of hearings</a> for those of us here (at fdl) who, like me, don’t have $$ for a cq.com subscription.</p> ok, i just called the senate intelligence committee and was told that panetta’s hearing is not tomorrow. any info would be greatly appreciated, as i try to keep a list of hearings for those of us here (at fdl) who, like me, don’t have $$ for a cq.com subscription.

]]> By: Fern http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/26/i-get-around-2/#comment-6570 Fern Mon, 26 Jan 2009 17:29:58 +0000 http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/26/i-get-around-2/#comment-6570 <p>Well, in all fairness, it is true that the mission and circumstances of CIA spies and military interrogators are different. And they likely need to approach their work differently. Not that that justifies the use of torture by either group.</p> Well, in all fairness, it is true that the mission and circumstances of CIA spies and military interrogators are different. And they likely need to approach their work differently. Not that that justifies the use of torture by either group.

]]> By: macaquerman http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/26/i-get-around-2/#comment-6567 macaquerman Mon, 26 Jan 2009 17:09:19 +0000 http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/26/i-get-around-2/#comment-6567 <p>You know, maybe you’re right. Could be that Obama might be smart enough to do things differently.</p> You know, maybe you’re right. Could be that Obama might be smart enough to do things differently.

]]> By: selise http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/26/i-get-around-2/#comment-6566 selise Mon, 26 Jan 2009 17:07:37 +0000 http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/26/i-get-around-2/#comment-6566 <blockquote><p>an assurance that Dennis Blair made to the Senate intelligence committee during his confirmation hearing to become director of national intelligence.</p></blockquote> <p>while i’m asking questions in the hopes that spencer will be back to reply…. </p> <p>spencer, it’s not clear to me - what assurance are you referring to here?</p>

an assurance that Dennis Blair made to the Senate intelligence committee during his confirmation hearing to become director of national intelligence.

while i’m asking questions in the hopes that spencer will be back to reply….

spencer, it’s not clear to me – what assurance are you referring to here?

]]>