Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[PTTG??]

SCP-523: "J. Assange" MEMETIC HAZARD
Est. x20,000% more effective than near-leathal doses of [REDACTED] truth serum, exposure to be limited to blind, deaf, mute, and highly armed D-class personel...

[Deimos56]

SCP-523: "J. Assange" MEMETIC HAZARD
Est. x20,000% more effective than near-leathal doses of [REDACTED] truth serum, exposure to be limited to blind, deaf, mute, and highly armed D-class personel...

Doesn't the blindness and deafness prevent them from knowing when to fire?

[Virex]

That's why they're highly armed
Scratch that, I thought you were saying "where to fire"

[Sir Pseudonymous]

What is being done to Manning isn't actively torture. Solitary confinement does horrible things to someone's head, but it's still SOP when holding high-profile detainees.

No, both are false : solitary confinement is recognized as torture by several nation and an inquiry is about to be launched.

There are also "several nations" that "recognize" homosexuality as a capital offense, or "recognize" Jews as animals instead of people (or conversely, in one particular case, all non-Jews as not-human). A country saying something doesn't make it correct.

And honestly, the (semi-important) people complaining now only give a shit about it this time because Manning is a particularly high profile case, and specifically one who gave a giant "Fuck You" to the US just for shiggles.

And it's only used as procedure for the most violent criminal, when all contact is an hazard to the personnel.

And when contact is a hazard to the detainee. As I said, if he was placed with other prisoners (do they even do that in a military prison?) he would be skinned alive within the hour. If he was given any object that one might kill oneself with, a guard might off him and make it look like a suicide (I can't imagine there's a guard in the facility that wouldn't love to put a bullet in his head). And if he was given visitors at all hours, and all sorts of safe, modern comforts, then it wouldn't be a prison, it'd be a fucking resort.

[Askot Bokbondeler]

SCP-523: "J. Assange" MEMETIC HAZARD
Est. x20,000% more effective than near-leathal doses of [REDACTED] truth serum, exposure to be limited to blind, deaf, mute, and highly armed D-class personel...

Doesn't the blindness and deafness prevent them from knowing when to fire?

they fire continuously

[Sergius]

Actual torture is a punishment, not an information gathering technique. As an interrogation technique, torture is completely fucking useless at gaining actual information.

You're getting it wrong. Torture is fucking useless at getting a (truthful) confession, not at gathering information. Because with enough torture, a person will admit to anything even if they didn't do it, just to make it stop (and you won't stop until you've heard exactly what you want).

A person may or may not reveal important information under torture.

The only justification to torturing without even asking for anything is if you're Darth Vader.

Really, anything done to him is a lose/lose situation. Make an example of him to deter others from being as fucking stupid as he was, and you just make him a martyr and encourage more idiocy. Let him off easy and you send a message that such behavior is acceptable.

But depending on who you ask, such behavior IS acceptable.

If you're a government that treads over people's rights, you may think it's not. A lot of people would however think the government's actions are the ones that aren't acceptable.

[Sir Pseudonymous]

Actual torture is a punishment, not an information gathering technique. As an interrogation technique, torture is completely fucking useless at gaining actual information.

You're getting it wrong. Torture is fucking useless at getting a (truthful) confession, not at gathering information. Because with enough torture, a person will admit to anything even if they didn't do it, just to make it stop (and you won't stop until you've heard exactly what you want).

I'm assuming you mixed those up, and meant it's *not* useless at getting a confession, and is useless at gathering information?

The only justification to torturing without even asking for anything is if you're Darth Vader.

You don't seem to understand the power scaring everyone shitless over what you might do if they cross you carries. That's a big part of how organized crime works.

Really, anything done to him is a lose/lose situation. Make an example of him to deter others from being as fucking stupid as he was, and you just make him a martyr and encourage more idiocy. Let him off easy and you send a message that such behavior is acceptable.

But depending on who you ask, such behavior IS acceptable.

If you're a government that treads over people's rights, you may think it's not. A lot of people would however think the government's actions are the ones that aren't acceptable.

Ok, even ignoring the question of whether or not someone doing what you're claiming he did (expose some intangible "wrongdoing" or somesuch) would be doing the right thing (probably not, but moving on), Manning did not do that. He stole random documents containing only the most trivial of information proving that GASP US intelligence is actually doing what intelligence agencies fucking do, and that diplomacy GASP AGAIN entails more than fucking press releases. None of which had a flying fuck to do with his grievances against the military (a completely separate entity from the state department), which were comprised of trivial, isolated incidents being mishandled by his (low-ranking) direct superiors. Manning did something extremely fucking stupid for extremely petty and misguided reasons. Assange, loathsome jackass though he is, handled his end quite well, if for even more fucktarded reasons ("I'ma piss off dem fascists into bein more fascisty so GLORIOUS ANARCHIST REVOLUTION AGAINST THE OPPRESSOR!" ).

[Urist is dead tome]

Dr. Deuteronomy is right about everything.

But I think part of the problem is that neither Manning nor Assange have any real reason to do these things. Assange just seems to be a wannabe yellow journalist. And Manning is probably one of those people who just did this cause some chick at the bar doesn't like the the Army.

[Flaede]

"Oh, I'ma get them militaries by stealing all these random messages sent by people who were not them to people who were also not them and sending them to a random third party!"

This whole 'dumb speak' thing for words you put in manning's mouth  is kind of undermining any respect I have for your opinions on the matter (and I think upthread Assange got the same treatment). Why do you do it? I understand you might think his opinions are dumb and all, but if you're going to put words in his mouth, why not make it so I can read them clearly?

[Duuvian]

Actual torture is a punishment, not an information gathering technique. As an interrogation technique, torture is completely fucking useless at gaining actual information.

You're getting it wrong. Torture is fucking useless at getting a (truthful) confession, not at gathering information. Because with enough torture, a person will admit to anything even if they didn't do it, just to make it stop (and you won't stop until you've heard exactly what you want).

I'm assuming you mixed those up, and meant it's *not* useless at getting a confession, and is useless at gathering information?

The only justification to torturing without even asking for anything is if you're Darth Vader.

You don't seem to understand the power scaring everyone shitless over what you might do if they cross you carries. That's a big part of how organized crime works.

Really, anything done to him is a lose/lose situation. Make an example of him to deter others from being as fucking stupid as he was, and you just make him a martyr and encourage more idiocy. Let him off easy and you send a message that such behavior is acceptable.

But depending on who you ask, such behavior IS acceptable.

If you're a government that treads over people's rights, you may think it's not. A lot of people would however think the government's actions are the ones that aren't acceptable.

Ok, even ignoring the question of whether or not someone doing what you're claiming he did (expose some intangible "wrongdoing" or somesuch) would be doing the right thing (probably not, but moving on), Manning did not do that. He stole random documents containing only the most trivial of information proving that GASP US intelligence is actually doing what intelligence agencies fucking do, and that diplomacy GASP AGAIN entails more than fucking press releases. None of which had a flying fuck to do with his grievances against the military (a completely separate entity from the state department), which were comprised of trivial, isolated incidents being mishandled by his (low-ranking) direct superiors. Manning did something extremely fucking stupid for extremely petty and misguided reasons. Assange, loathsome jackass though he is, handled his end quite well, if for even more fucktarded reasons ("I'ma piss off dem fascists into bein more fascisty so GLORIOUS ANARCHIST REVOLUTION AGAINST THE OPPRESSOR!" ).

For the first one, I think he actually had it right. He's saying a confession could be the result, but it's not necessarily the truth. In other words, you actually need to know the information beforehand for torture information to be reliable. This makes it even more of a question of conscience. I suppose it could be used to fill in gaps in info but if they are important it's quite possible the person could quite likely guess at the quickest way to make the torture stop, and if they can do that, they can lie about it.

As for totally dismissing what Manning may or may not have revealed to wikileaks, I can only hope you are only glancing at the headlines and not reading the stories.

[Phmcw]

There are also "several nations" that "recognize" homosexuality as a capital offense, or "recognize" Jews as animals instead of people (or conversely, in one particular case, all non-Jews as not-human). A country saying something doesn't make it correct.

I was referring to most European countries, and that there is precedent where such practice have been recognized as such by the us.
US also signed various pact and treaties  against torture.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/AMR51/146/2007/en/c96da132-d367-11dd-a329-2f46302a8cc6/amr511462007fr.html

Ho, and here is a call from Amnesty international to end solitary confinement for two criminal, because apparently American wannabe patriots like to whine that there being persecuted as a nation, when the world point them out on obvious offenses.

Anyway, this seems lost on you and you seems to think that torture is a perfectly good response for his offenses.
History will judge, but has already spoken twice on the matter, and most likely won't change his mind.
Welcome in the rank of the supporters of torture and of the enemies of human rights, the NSDAP housing is on your right, and both the Chinese and Russian communist party are on your left, please don't mind the blood.

[Megaman]

Government information is kept secret for a reason.
Edit: On the torture subject, it works because after you set an example, people will fear you.

[Sir Pseudonymous]

For the first one, I think he actually had it right. He's saying a confession could be the result, but it's not necessarily the truth. In other words, you actually need to know the information beforehand for torture information to be reliable. This makes it even more of a question of conscience. I suppose it could be used to fill in gaps in info but if they are important it's quite possible the person could quite likely guess at the quickest way to make the torture stop, and if they can do that, they can lie about it.

Oh, I believe misread that then. Torture is good at making someone claim whatever they think will make it stop, it's not in the least bit useful at gathering usable information (at least unless you already knew enough to not really need the information).

As for totally dismissing what Manning may or may not have revealed to wikileaks, I can only hope you are only glancing at the headlines and not reading the stories.

I've neither seen nor heard discussed anything the least bit surprising. Prove me wrong; show me something that proves the US was engaged in the nefarious super villainy shit everyone's implying, rather than just the normal muck of intelligence (which is, recall, simply a polite term for espionage) and diplomacy.

"Oh, I'ma get them militaries by stealing all these random messages sent by people who were not them to people who were also not them and sending them to a random third party!"

This whole 'dumb speak' thing for words you put in manning's mouth  is kind of undermining any respect I have for your opinions on the matter (and I think upthread Assange got the same treatment). Why do you do it? I understand you might think his opinions are dumb and all, but if you're going to put words in his mouth, why not make it so I can read them clearly?

Those are asides I write to drive home whatever point I just made by highlighting the absurdity of the actions I'm condemning. Ignore them if you like, it won't remove too much from my argument.


Also, Phmcw, if you're going to bother linking things, you mind linking the English? Seeing as how that's what we're speaking and all. My French is rusty as hell, after all.

[ChairmanPoo]

Government information is kept secret for a reason.

Empty statement of the day: Everything is done for a reason. Not always a good reason, but a reason, nonetheless.

[Phmcw]

Well, critical crime committed by the US, IE crime hat would warrant an international inquiry :

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

1) One of the biggest objectives at the US embassy in Madrid over the past seven years has been trying to get the criminal case dropped against three US soldiers accused of the killing of a Spanish television cameraman in Baghdad.

2)A scandal involving foreign contractors employed to train Afghan policemen who took drugs and paid for young "dancing boys" to entertain them in northern Afghanistan caused such panic that the interior minister begged the US embassy to try to "quash" the story, according a US embassy cable. (actually only if the story has actually been covered, but it is to be linked with other stories of similarly questionable contractor hired in Afganistan.)

3)• A potential "environmental disaster" was kept secret by the US last year when a large consignment of highly enriched uranium in Libya came close to cracking open and leaking radioactive material into the atmosphere.

4)• In 2007, the German government made it clear to US officials that they were not interested in following through with the arrest warrants issued for 13 CIA operatives involved in the 2003 abduction of Khaled el-Masri, a Lebanese-born German. In public, Angela Merkel's office continued to call for an investigation.(for the kidnapping itself)

5)• The US threatened the Italian government to make sure that no international arrest warrants were issued for CIA agents accused of being involved in cleric Abu Omar's abduction.

Very dirty tricks committed by the us:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

1)US diplomats spied on UN leadership

• Diplomats ordered to gather intelligence on Ban Ki-moon
• Secret directives sent to more than 30 US embassies
• Call for DNA data, computer passwords and terrorist links

2)• The US seeks to manipulate nations opposed to its approach to tackling global warming.

3)• The US and China worked together to prevent European nations from reaching an agreement at last year's climate summit in Copenhagen.

4)• BP suffered a giant gas leak in Azerbaijan 18 months before the Gulf of Mexico disaster.(you can see how it is relevant)

Critical for Britain: WikiLeaks cables:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

1)Bangladeshi 'death squad' trained by UK government

Critical from other

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

1)Moldova's president offered a $10m (£6.4m) bribe to a political rival in a desperate bid to keep his defeated communist government in power, according to a secret US diplomatic cable.

2)•US diplomats are concerned about the growing power of Russian organised crime and believe it has contacts with the highest levels of government in Moscow. (I have other source that warn me on this for a long time. Western government fail to act accordingly.)

3)• Saudi Arabia is the world's largest source of funds for Islamist militant groups and the Saudi government is reluctant to stem the flow of money, according to Hillary Clinton. (Still it's one of your ally.)

4)• The pharmaceutical giant Pfizer paid investigators to unearth corruption links to Nigeria's attorney general in an attempt to persuade him to stop his legal action against a controversial drug trial involving children with meningitis.

5)• In 2007, the German government made it clear to US officials that they were not interested in following through with the arrest warrants issued for 13 CIA operatives involved in the 2003 abduction of Khaled el-Masri, a Lebanese-born German. In public, Angela Merkel's office continued to call for an investigation.

I put my comments between parentheses.

And for one last link :

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/10/world/europe/10wikileaks-react.html?_r=1&scp=3&sq=wikileaks&st=cse

This paper explain the damage done just by the fight against Wikileak. Just wait for Manning's treatment to be known in France, Spain and Germany...
Source : guardian.
Sorry if I must occasionally link to French article, but hey are not easy to find in English. Beside, there is quite a gap beween French and Anglo-American  newspaper