It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why all the Secrecy?

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 07:01 AM
link   
The Federal government is attempting to muzzle former detainees and their lawyers. Apparently they do not want information relative to the treatment of detainees to become common knowledge. Releasing this informaion even to their attorneys would be considred 'extremely' dangerous. How then are these detainees to defend themselves? What if they are innocent and treated in a manner that would, under normal circumstances, be considered illegal. It appears the government is trying to excuse itself from any questionable behavior even if they have the wrong man. This seems to minimize the rule of law.
 



www.washingtonpost.com

The Bush administration has told a federal judge that terrorism suspects held in secret CIA prisons should not be allowed to reveal details of the "alternative interrogation methods" that their captors used to get them to talk.The government says in new court filings that those interrogation methods are now among the nation's most sensitive national security secrets and that their release -- even to the detainees' own attorneys -- "could reasonably be expected to cause extremely grave damage." Terrorists could use the information to train in counter-interrogation techniques and foil government efforts to elicit information about their methods and plots, according to government documents submitted to U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton on Oct. 26.Gitanjali Gutierrez, an attorney for Khan's family, responded in a court document yesterday that there is no evidence that Khan had top-secret information. "Rather," she said, "the executive is attempting to misuse its classification authority . . . to conceal illegal or embarrassing executive conduct."
Kathleen Blomquist, a Justice Department spokeswoman, said yesterday that details of the CIA program must be protected from disclosure. She said the lawyer's proposal for talking with Khan "is inadequate to protect unique and potentially highly classified information that is vital to our country's ability to fight terrorism."



Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Looks like the same old same old. Is the government attempting to pardon themselves for any wrong doing with no qualifications? Clearly they are trying to suppress any record of their wrongdoing. How is an innocent person supposed to defend himself?
If these particular detainees are not terrorists then why is it so 'vital' to keep the information on their treatment 'classified'? Doesn't this secrecy make presenting a adequate defence much more difficult? Also why all the secrecy? If the government has arrested and detained people illegally shouldn't they be held accountable? This seems to indicate that it's alright to cast a very wide net when rounding up suspects and any mistakes are simply excused. Are we a country of laws or not? We can't have it both ways. Are we accountable or not?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...
[edit on 8-11-2006 by polanksi]

[edit on 8-11-2006 by polanksi]




posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 07:41 AM
link   
New World Order in the process of completion. Police State in the process of completion.

Get ready. More ish gonna hit the fan slowly. Take cover.


apc

posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 08:08 AM
link   
Apparently? What if? Appears? Seems? That's some truely objective journalism right there.


The facts in this issue are hardly worthy of the bias displayed in the opening statement.

This administration has repeatedly demonstrated a desire to keep our interrogation techniques a secret. The most rational reason for this is because they want to keep our enemies from training in ways to defeat these techniques.



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 08:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by apc

This administration has repeatedly demonstrated a desire to keep our interrogation techniques a secret. The most rational reason for this is because they want to keep our enemies from training in ways to defeat these techniques.






"...they want to keep our enemies from training in ways to defeat these techniques."

What a great opener.

As a child, I was intrigued by torture and read everything I could find. My favorite techniques involve live bamboo - one has the victim staked over bamboo shoots, which then proceed to grow into the body. Takes a couple days, but it's effective, apparently.

Seems it's painful to have alien plant materials invade ones' cells and tissues, and it appears many will do or say anything just to make it stop.

Soldiers are trained to ignore pain, but of course, such training can be overcome with a sufficient amount of pain.

However, it seems you're saying 'these techniques' go beyond pain?

What might apply, I wonder? Drugs, chemicals, psychology breakdown stuff. That's another old favorite of mine btw - Chinese water torture. No pain but apparently, waiting for the random dripping sounds seems to drive men mad. Again, they will do or say anything just to make it stop.

But what if our noble defenders use medical techniques to bypass crude mechanical devices and go straight to the nerve endings, perhaps right into the brain?


Which reminds me of another oldie but goodie - the Spanish bastinado. This technique involves beating the soles of the feet to a bloody pulp - apparently the most of the body's nerves end in the feet, so targeting the nerve endings in the feet seems to cause pain throughout the entire body.

And yet again, men seem willing to do or say anything just to make it stop. Apparently, the tools and techniques used in the Inquisition had a similar effect.

Which brings us to the real problem with torture as an interrogation technique. Torture is ineffective precisely because men will do or say anything just to make it stop.

You can't rely on the information. Torture techniques are state secrets? I don't think so.

.



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 10:06 AM
link   
APC am I to 'assume' you believe all detainees to be guilty until proven innocent? But they are not allowed to defend themselves nor are their attornies allowed to use all pertinent evidence. Then I can conclude that we are not a country of laws? That does not bode well for our collective future.


apc

posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 11:02 AM
link   
We can inject irrelevant viewpoints all day long and it won't change the nature of the issue. It's not an issue of torture, or legal defense... it's simple war and the control of information provided to the enemy.

>
I still find the opening statement of this posting so grossly biased I am amazed it was approved. The only fact, however twisted, was the first sentence, the rest was complete and total opinion which doesn't belong in the opening.

[edit on 8-11-2006 by apc]



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow
Which brings us to the real problem with torture as an interrogation technique. Torture is ineffective precisely because men will do or say anything just to make it stop.


If its so obviously ineffective....why do professionals continue to use it? Just for the kicks? Nothing better to do?

Not only will torture victims tell you anything....they will also tell you everything...literally puke everything from their mind in order to make it stop. I doubt a torture victim can rationally invent crap on the fly, while hiding the real intel.

apc is correct...it is intelligence that a combatant would not want its opponent to know. Whether its illegal, horrific, torture techniques, or something as simple as the time of day interrogations are conducted. The release of that information is comparable to publishing battle plans and tactics.



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 01:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by apc
We can inject irrelevant viewpoints all day long and it won't change the nature of the issue. It's not an issue of torture, or legal defense... it's simple war and the control of information provided to the enemy.

>
I still find the opening statement of this posting so grossly biased I am amazed it was approved. The only fact, however twisted, was the first sentence, the rest was complete and total opinion which doesn't belong in the opening.

[edit on 8-11-2006 by apc]


If it is a war, then they are provided protections under the gc - do they not? If it is a war, then the Red Cross and AI should have been allowed there. They weren't! Those that have been released, including the Canadian, has reported about the torutre there - which goes to underline the illegal nature of this entire thing.

Seriously apc, exactly how many lies, half-truths and obfuscations does there have to be, before you come to grips with the fact that you have been lied to. That those that you seem to hold allegence to are not worthy of it?

BTW - there is nothing wrong with being biased against Torture - is there?



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 01:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrPenny

Originally posted by soficrow
Which brings us to the real problem with torture as an interrogation technique. Torture is ineffective precisely because men will do or say anything just to make it stop.


If its so obviously ineffective....why do professionals continue to use it? Just for the kicks? Nothing better to do?

Not only will torture victims tell you anything....they will also tell you everything...literally puke everything from their mind in order to make it stop. I doubt a torture victim can rationally invent crap on the fly, while hiding the real intel.

apc is correct...it is intelligence that a combatant would not want its opponent to know. Whether its illegal, horrific, torture techniques, or something as simple as the time of day interrogations are conducted. The release of that information is comparable to publishing battle plans and tactics.


With a battery charger to your nutsack, I am willing to bet you will be willing to claim you are santa claus, or that you were honestly responsible for the war of 1812, or just about anything. You just want it to stop. It has been shown - REPEATEDLY - that torture is not effective in getting any information from the captured. It just doesn't work.

I am simply amased at the lack of morals and ethics around the world. It is no wonder the place is all f'd up.



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrPenny
Not only will torture victims tell you anything....they will also tell you everything...literally puke everything from their mind in order to make it stop. I doubt a torture victim can rationally invent crap on the fly, while hiding the real intel.



That is unless they are innocent, in which case they will have no choice, otherwise they will slowly get killed for 'playing tough'. edit: streamlined&reworded

[edit on 8-11-2006 by Long Lance]


apc

posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Waiting2awake
If it is a war, then they are provided protections under the gc - do they not?
If it is a war, then the Red Cross and AI should have been allowed there. They weren't! Those that have been released, including the Canadian, has reported about the torutre there - which goes to underline the illegal nature of this entire thing.

All another issue entirely having no application here.



Seriously apc, exactly how many lies, half-truths and obfuscations does there have to be, before you come to grips with the fact that you have been lied to. That those that you seem to hold allegence to are not worthy of it?

Trying to spin things to support an agenda adds extra complexities that distract from the genuine intention. And you know nothing of where my allegiance is held.



BTW - there is nothing wrong with being biased against Torture - is there?


From the guidelines for submitting news...



This first paragraph should portray just the facts of the story in an objective and unbiased way and not your opinion.



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 01:40 PM
link   
I disagree it has everything to do with what the article is stating, although it may be against the rules of submition. For that I can see your point, but I wonder if the concern is one for the rules and regulations being followed, or rather a concern for what this really means to a certain political side? Maybe I am wrong and it is just for the integirty of the board. If so... cool.



*BTW - we all know where all the usual posters allegencies lie. You can tell from their posts
Just thought you should know.

Cheers



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 01:46 PM
link   
Can we get back to the topic?



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 02:12 PM
link   
OK The point is that we the US is not living up to our stated beliefs. We are not allowing innocent people to represent themselves in a court of law and are allowing people who are commiting war crimes to go free. Attempting to keep information from the enemy is but a consequence of our own actions. Up until very recently you could learn how to build a nuclear bomb on the internet. Torture techniques seem to pale in comparision.


apc

posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Waiting2awake
*BTW - we all know where all the usual posters allegencies lie. You can tell from their posts

Not always.


polanksi
Attempting to keep information from the enemy is but a consequence of our own actions.

Perhaps, but it is one which we must deal with.



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 08:52 PM
link   
Considering this is a conspiracy website I think that the question we should be asking is who the government is referring to as the enemy when they said this. Are they talking about terrorists or just your average citizen? Assuming that the answer is "terrorists" then that begs the question of who's the terrorist they're referring to? An extremist hellbent on killing innocents or your average citizen with an opinion?



posted on Nov, 8 2006 @ 09:01 PM
link   
I think it is probably more important to this administration that the American public doesn't find out what they've been doing to gain information.

The alleged terrorists don't get to vote.



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join