CIA 'tortured and sodomised' terror suspect, human rights court rules

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

There are two kinds of sodomy and it was probably anal passive against his will obviously with an inanimate object (like a broom handle but could have been a penis shaped dildo for psychological effects).

The CIA notorious for assassinating presidents, running the drug trade and now sodomy!

John Edgar Hoover had american citizens murdered without a right to trial "The Black Panthers" some things never change. Just think what a better place this would have been if JFK had dismantled this new mafia criminal syndicate, the henchemen for the elite. Yet we still fund these gangsters without congressional oversight with immunity !

Things you never hear people say

I like the CIA

The CIA keeps us safe

The CIA are the good guys

Yet this useless alphabet agency as obsolete and corrupt as it is gets away with every crime one can fathom with impunity? They ran more coc aine then Tony Montana and probably still do. I mean for the love of god these guys were giving people STD's, LCD, performing experiments like MK-Ultra and not a single agent has ever been held accountable for crimes against humanity? They got away with whacking JFK as some may know. Nobody has the testicular fortitude to shut down this home grown terrorist organization unfortunately.

And ya gotta wonder what they used to rape the fella with?

sounds like a great place to work!

No?

Oh, it was some hairy muslim guy?!

Sounds like some operative has a fetish.... why not just, idk, do something less gross? For all we know, this guy would confess to being a purple people eater, if he was getting loved by a pineapple.... not accurate/precise information that.

The remarkable thing is.... because there was state police present, MACEDONIA gets blamed as a country.

But in the case of the CIA, it's the agency that gets cornered, not the US??? How is that?

That to me says two things:

- Either the CIA is considered an autonomous entity that works on its own outside the rule of government
OR
- Someone is too much of a weak kiss ass mofo to actually have the guts to blame the US for letting corrupt, terrorist organizations like the CIA exist at all.

The state of the world is in decline!

I call for the complete and utter removal of letter agencies of any kind. They need to be removed from the face of the Earth!

reply to post by flice


but then who will kill the politicians for us?! (joking)

Seriously people, the main issue here is the relative worth of the information extracted in such a situation; can you actually rely on information that is extracted from someone who'd claim they are a black 8' tall Eskimo whose mother roomed with Shamoo the whale in her sophomore year at an all-male university, just to keep their anus from being further distended?

The Spanish Inquisition tried that.

Or maybe someone in government should think about how good status the US really has if you have to torture people to tell the CIA anything at all............ It's a question about trust and reliability, and the US government hasn't really done ANYTHING the last many decades to earn that the natural way.

This is what you get when you let money and greed rule what should have been ruled by the people.

reply to post by flice


Hm.... I find the following type of situation more concerning

1.) This was a case of mistaken identity.
2.) Arguably he denied being the man in question, which is why the situation escalated to torture. (over an extensive period, and he was eventually dumped on the side of the road in Albania. Was he still alive?)
3.) If/had he cracked due to the torture and started naming random people, the situation would have escalated further.
4.) Those random people would be dealt with in a manner of ways, some killed, others monitored, others would be abducted for further interrogations.
5.) This would create a snowballing effect.
6.) The bigger this gets, the greater the blow back/negative opinion of the USA/CIA when/if it came to light.

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

not quite sure what to say about this - sodomised him?? really?? Some CIA operative got paid to do that????

And

The use of CIA interrogation methods widely denounced as torture during the Bush administration's "war on terror" also came under scrutiny in Congress on Thursday. The US Senate's select committee on intelligence was expected to vote on whether to approve a mammoth review it has undertaken into the controversial practices that included waterboarding, stress positions, forced nudity, beatings and sleep and sensory deprivation.

The report, that runs to almost 6,000 pages based on a three-year review of more than 6m pieces of information, is believed to conclude that the "enhanced interrogation techniques" adopted by the CIA during the Bush years did not produce any major breakthroughs in intelligence, contrary to previous claims. The committee, which is dominated by the Democrats, is likely to vote to approve the report, though opposition from the Republican members may prevent the report ever seeing the light of day.

Nice - you're allowed to know that millions was spent for no useful purpose in a brutal and illegal campaign.........but if you don't actually read the "official" report that makes it better somehow for the GOP?????

just how stupid are they??

www.guardian.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

Hey man, this was someones dream job!

reply to post by repeatoffender


no doubt! Too bad that middle eastern fellow wasn't the right middle eastern fellow.... and now the CIA has "kidnapping & sodomy" as a committed action that the public knows about. Not good that, the less the public knows about the CIA the better.... and sodomy IS one of those things that tends to get EVERYONES attention.... lololololololol

*edit* now that I think about it, having no proof that this story actually occurred, I really doubt that any of this happened. It sounds like a great idea for a comedy movie though!

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

Personally, I believe torture CAN be a tool and SHOULD be an option. However, as historical example has to look at, torture warrants ought to be required on a case by case.

Since you condone the practice one small part of me kind of wishes you had some information that someone high up might wish to obtain through these methods...

But I totally disagree with torture so that small part fades quickly and is replaced by the hope that one day you see why this is wrong.

The cia was created as an anti-nazi brigade, and now they are going after the muslims. So put those two together and you'll see who that benefits.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000



Personally, I believe torture CAN be a tool and SHOULD be an option.

Wow, I just lost a lot of respect for you! Which sucks because you are one my favorite posters. Torture is never ok, end of story!

reply to post by SymbolicLogic


The European Court of Human Rights front page lists the decision as it's first item...

www.echr.coe.int...

And the actual findings of the court...

hudoc.echr.coe.int...#[%22itemid%22:[%22003-4196815-4975517%22]]

It happened.

The reason that the CIA isn't charged and it is just Macedonia found guilty is it is a European court trying a European entity. It isn't an international court and it wouldn't matter anyway, the US doesn't recognize the authority of the IC.

Something always seems to smell bad, when the CIA is involved.
Just think of their state of mind, to do this to someone, I know some low life pervert would do this in a second.

IMHO the CIA should be classified as a terrorist organization. They show all the hallmarks of being one.

reply to post by DarknStormy


Theres obviously more to it then.

I think all torture is wrong and dreadful, and people will admit to anything under torture.

I hope this man gets every penny he deserves.

I sometimes wonder how much physical torture is about real expectations of receiving information, and how much it is about an attempt to discipline and punish (in the theoretical sense of Michel Foucault).

Ultimately it also seems to be about extracting some confession to save face for the captors, even if the crime and sentence are eventually negligible.

Some feminists have always drawn a comparison between right-wing wars and porn, and who can forget the sexual nature of some of the Abu Ghraib prison photos?

What I find quite interesting from a gender study perceptive is how "sodomy" and "male rape" are disconnected by some posters.

It's almost like "our guys" do not rape other men, and therefore the "sodomy" must have been via some depersonalized device.

That is, torture must be mechanical and devoid of any hint of perversion.

Well, I'm not convinced about this at all, and there's certainly a current stream about US prisons and male rape in popular culture and film (whether through threats or actual scenes, for example: The Shawshank Redemption, American Me, American Histroy X, Harold and Kumar in Guantanamo Bay, Oz, etc.).

In such material certain elements of law enforcement either actively or tacitly collude with criminal elements to facilitate male rape.

This occurs throughout the world, and not just in the War on Terror.
It is probably also denied throughout the world, and I'd say it's more common in sexist and homophobic systems than in places that recognize male rape as equal in severity to the rape of females.
That is of course in countries that actually treat female rape as a consistent and serious crime, which is still questionable in some regimes (and patriarchal lines of thinking) involved in renditions.

In SA male rape is legally recognized, but it is still frequent in holding cells, and few men come forward to lay charges.
But this is changing.
Even in SA some didn't get the message that male rape is serious, and one advert was pulled that suggested drunk drivers would be raped in jail.
One cannot enforce a law (against drinking and driving) by relying on another crime (male rape) as a deterrent, especially before anyone has been proven guilty by a court!
But yet, forced sodomy (male rape) is almost tacitly and comically accepted like that by much of society.
It's quite mind-boggling.

Male rape is an act of power, and I fail to see why this must be projected on an object, because I think this man was raped by another man, and institutionalized male rape is probably quite common.

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
not quite sure what to say about this - sodomised him?? really?? Some CIA operative got paid to do that????

If he was being payed or not, why does that even matter? Maybe he was being payed for whatever bs job he was doing, and then he decided on his own to do it?

Individuals do many cruel things on their own, and who pays them while they take the liberty to do such things makes no difference whatsoever when it comes down to understanding the crime, and applying the punishment.

Just trying to understand where you're coming from with that? While at the same time, Just saying. ~$heopleNaton

no human being should ever be raped or tortured. THERE ARE BAD EGGS IN EVERY GROUP, every side has monsters

I am politically conservative, but am totally opposed to any form of physical torture or abuse.

1. It isn't effective.
The most successful interrogator in Western history was in the Nazi Luftwaffe, A lance corporal named Hans Scharff. (He used his lowly rank to get even more information from US and British officers). He NEVER used active physical abuse, and only used sleep deprivation or denial of food for less than 24 hours. He got tons of information, particularly from Americans, and materially slowed the Allied advance into France based on his information on bombing targets and schedules. He frequently used the TRUTH to get his subjects to be honest with him.

2. It ecourages evil acts
Having the power / authority to harm another person is a tremendous responsibility; the fact that "no one will ever know" leads to interrogators venting their rage, stepping over boundaries, and then covering it up afterward.

3. Information garnered from torture is not trustworthy.

4. It weakens the resolve of our troops.
Sun Tsu wrote in The Art of War that the five factors which determine success in warfare:
a) moral doctrine
b) physical environment
c) geography
d) command leadership
e) unit efficiency

On that list, #1 is about morality. The USA lost in Vietnam because Americans became convinced that we didn't deserve to win. The same has happened in Afghanistan.