Today I'm angry about.....

[Bijou Bob]

I'm also angry at The Grauniad. And 5 live. And Radio 4. All of whom seem to insist I should be devastated about our involvement in rendition and a little after hours activity in some remote prisons. I couldn't give a flying feck. Don't presume to speak for me.

[Hoboh]

Guardian censors!!

How the hell can you censor someone for using information from one of its own articles? Not once but three feckin' times, it must have been a bloody foreigner given the subject was immigration.

Is that it?
The world's leading shit religion's leading fecking dickhead's supporters publish a pamphlet outlining how Allah approves of the rape of fourteen year old sex slaves, and the world's flora and fauna is being decimated on an ever increasingly unprecedented scale, and you're pissed off abaht the fecking Gruniad!
I sometimes need life affirming idiocies such as yours just to make it through to the next day.
Thank you for your gift of December 15th.

Merry Christmas

(They didn't allow comments on that or I would probably have been banned, the tree hugging stuff you can keep it)

[Prufrock]

That we've managed to produce people who not only aren't against the use of torture on principle, but haven't got the nous to twig that it doesn't fecking work anyway

[Hoboh]

That we've managed to produce people who not only aren't against the use of torture on principle, but haven't got the nous to twig that it doesn't fecking work anyway

Not seen anyone using the blow torch yet! Then anally feed them grilled meatballs.

[William the White]

I'm also angry at The Grauniad. And 5 live. And Radio 4. All of whom seem to insist I should be devastated about our involvement in rendition and a little after hours activity in some remote prisons. I couldn't give a flying feck. Don't presume to speak for me.

That's what torture is, eh?

But honestly, as a guardian reader, I wouldn't ever presume to speak for you. And I won't ever try. I promise.

There isn't room for two beneath your stone.

[Bijou Bob]

That we've managed to produce people who not only aren't against the use of torture on principle, but haven't got the nous to twig that it doesn't fecking work anyway

Ah, the voice of someone who hasnt ever had to get his hands dirty doing society's dirty work and wouldn't have the balls to, but is happy to criticise others while they try to keep him and his family safe.

You and I have no idea what information has come from it and never will. I suspect the use of enhanced techniques has been very limited. For me, I'm thankful that there are people out there with the spine to do that work so that you can go back to college safely.

[Hoboh]

I have never been able to get my head around folk who seem to be against killing and violence, condemning everything some sectors of society do, then find it understandable when the butchers of ISIS etc. start causing mass mayhem or students riot because the other lot started it!
You are either against killing and violence or you support it's use, cannot have it both ways.
No doubt people would take issue with me for wanting every single ISIS supporter eliminating but indirectly support their killings because the Yanks, us, the Martians, my cat started it!

[Prufrock]

That we've managed to produce people who not only aren't against the use of torture on principle, but haven't got the nous to twig that it doesn't fecking work anyway

Ah, the voice of someone who hasnt ever had to get his hands dirty doing society's dirty work and wouldn't have the balls to, but is happy to criticise others while they try to keep him and his family safe.

You and I have no idea what information has come from it and never will. I suspect the use of enhanced techniques has been very limited. For me, I'm thankful that there are people out there with the spine to do that work so that you can go back to college safely.

Massive balls to torture someone. You need huge stones to "rectally feed" someone locked up hungry and dehydrated in a cell.

As for having no idea: if only someone like the US Senate had just done a big report into it and found out it was going on. Or the US President was so glib about it as to say "we tortured some folks". Or that the same report found that not only was torture more widespread than had already admitted, but that the information in it we either knew already, or was false. Turns out if you torture someone they'll say anything to make it stop. If only we'd known that already for hundreds of years.

All that is of course strongly countered by your "suspicions". So it's a tricky one.

[Prufrock]

I have never been able to get my head around folk who seem to be against killing and violence, condemning everything some sectors of society do, then find it understandable when the butchers of ISIS etc. start causing mass mayhem or students riot because the other lot started it!
You are either against killing and violence or you support it's use, cannot have it both ways.
No doubt people would take issue with me for wanting every single ISIS supporter eliminating but indirectly support their killings because the Yanks, us, the Martians, my cat started it!

Is anyone saying that?

As deplorable as this torture stuff is it's not in the same league as ISIS. Criticism of one is not approval of the other, or even mitigation.

To stretch the metaphor to breaking point though, it might not put us in the same league as ISIS, but it does show we're playing the same sport, which is shameful.

[Bijou Bob]

That we've managed to produce people who not only aren't against the use of torture on principle, but haven't got the nous to twig that it doesn't fecking work anyway

Ah, the voice of someone who hasnt ever had to get his hands dirty doing society's dirty work and wouldn't have the balls to, but is happy to criticise others while they try to keep him and his family safe.

You and I have no idea what information has come from it and never will. I suspect the use of enhanced techniques has been very limited. For me, I'm thankful that there are people out there with the spine to do that work so that you can go back to college safely.

Massive balls to torture someone. You need huge stones to "rectally feed" someone locked up hungry and dehydrated in a cell.

As for having no idea: if only someone like the US Senate had just done a big report into it and found out it was going on. Or the US President was so glib about it as to say "we tortured some folks". Or that the same report found that not only was torture more widespread than had already admitted, but that the information in it we either knew already, or was false. Turns out if you torture someone they'll say anything to make it stop. If only we'd known that already for hundreds of years.

All that is of course strongly countered by your "suspicions". So it's a tricky one.

And by the CIA themselves, who have clearly stated that they did receive valuable information, so pardon me if I don't roll over and let us get walked over just yet. You're clearly a capable and educated guy who could have done anything you wanted to as a career. You chose a parasitic career path that makes money off the success or failure and misery of other people. Criticising those who keep you safe from a very safe distance, whilst having no idea of what they are facing on a day to day basis to ensure you don't die on the streets of this country as an innocent victim is easy.

The issue I take with your point of view and that of Will the White, is that you mentally distance yourselves from the impact of terrorism on its victims to try to maintain some moral high ground. I'm interested. Should we use the intelligence gained by the CIA, or should we hold up our hands in horror and not touch it?

[Raven]

Audi drivers, do you have to be a knob to drive one or does driving an Audi turn you into one?

[Prufrock]

You can't use it because you don't know it's true. Plenty of the stuff people came out with was, understandably, total bollocks. So you need to independently verify it by other means and if you can, you didn't need the torture, and if you can't, it's too unsafe to use because you could put the lives of the proper brave soldiers - not the ones hiding in a cell armed with a car battery - the proper ones, in danger if the info is dodgy.

Also, don't try to pretend you're not trying to take a moral high-ground of your own. "Ensur(ing) you don't die on the streets" - bullshit. That report also says that a quarter of the people tortured turned out to be wholly innocent. One innocent person froze to death after being tied-up naked in his cell. So as for these torturers "keeping me safe"; do you think torturing innocent people is more, or less likely to turn them to extremism? To address Hoboh's concerns, that's not in any way meant to condone any future terrorists, but do we think there are likely to be more or fewer terrorists in future when 25% of the people we're torturing are innocent.

It's not a James Bond film. These people aren't evil geniuses, they don't have super-human abilities to keep secrets unless Jack Bauer interrogates them. They're also not pathologically evil. They need reasons to do these things. Plenty of those are out of our control, but lets not give them more hey?

Study after study after study shows it doesn't work. Of course the CIA say it does, they'd be a bit f*cked if they didn't. The Senate report found that their claims that attacks had been prevented were false. They already had this information form elsewhere. And, even when stuff was true, as above, they can't know which is the true bit and which isn't.

So: it doesn't work; it leads to the torture of innocent people, putting us at least on the same ground as the likes of ISIS if not in the same league; and, it's not difficult to see how those innocent people when released might feel they have reason not to stay innocent anymore.

I'm not convinced.

[malcd1]

Audi drivers, do you have to be a knob to drive one or does driving an Audi turn you into one?

Good question. I'm not sure what comes first.

(I would put BMW drivers in the same category)

[Bruce Rioja]

Audi drivers, do you have to be a knob to drive one or does driving an Audi turn you into one?

Good question. I'm not sure what comes first.

(I would put BMW drivers in the same category)

See, I would limit that to specifically drivers of the 5 Series.

I used to have an A4 but couldn't be doing with how pokey it was. It did go like shit off of a stick, mind.

[Beefheart]

Well, it's not like the CIA to lie about stuff.

[Hoboh]

You can't use it because you don't know it's true. Plenty of the stuff people came out with was, understandably, total bollocks. So you need to independently verify it by other means and if you can, you didn't need the torture, and if you can't, it's too unsafe to use because you could put the lives of the proper brave soldiers - not the ones hiding in a cell armed with a car battery - the proper ones, in danger if the info is dodgy.

Also, don't try to pretend you're not trying to take a moral high-ground of your own. "Ensur(ing) you don't die on the streets" - bullshit. That report also says that a quarter of the people tortured turned out to be wholly innocent. One innocent person froze to death after being tied-up naked in his cell. So as for these torturers "keeping me safe"; do you think torturing innocent people is more, or less likely to turn them to extremism? To address Hoboh's concerns, that's not in any way meant to condone any future terrorists, but do we think there are likely to be more or fewer terrorists in future when 25% of the people we're torturing are innocent.

It's not a James Bond film. These people aren't evil geniuses, they don't have super-human abilities to keep secrets unless Jack Bauer interrogates them. They're also not pathologically evil. They need reasons to do these things. Plenty of those are out of our control, but lets not give them more hey?

Study after study after study shows it doesn't work. Of course the CIA say it does, they'd be a bit f*cked if they didn't. The Senate report found that their claims that attacks had been prevented were false. They already had this information form elsewhere. And, even when stuff was true, as above, they can't know which is the true bit and which isn't.

So: it doesn't work; it leads to the torture of innocent people, putting us at least on the same ground as the likes of ISIS if not in the same league; and, it's not difficult to see how those innocent people when released might feel they have reason not to stay innocent anymore.

I'm not convinced.

Whey hay Freedman didn't work and others said it did,

Can I claim moral high ground?

[Montreal Wanderer]

This seems to have gone OTT. " You chose a parasitic career path that makes money off the success or failure and misery of other people." Really? Well, social workers get a salary for dealing with the failure and misery of other people. To stereotype all lawyers as parasites is absurd. As for torture, we have to be opposed to it. We have signed international conventions to that effect. The information gained is known to be extremely suspect. Tony Blair may still believe there are weapons of mass destruction because he was shown undeniable evidence, but the rest of us are a little more sanguine on the subject. I don't think torturers keep me safe tbh. We either have the rule of law and all its safeguards, or we don't. If we don't, anyone can be tortured especially, of course, if they are a visible minority.

[Hoboh]

This seems to have gone OTT. " You chose a parasitic career path that makes money off the success or failure and misery of other people." Really? Well, social workers get a salary for dealing with the failure and misery of other people. To stereotype all lawyers as parasites is absurd. As for torture, we have to be opposed to it. We have signed international conventions to that effect. The information gained is known to be extremely suspect. Tony Blair may still believe there are weapons of mass destruction because he was shown undeniable evidence, but the rest of us are a little more sanguine on the subject. I don't think torturers keep me safe tbh. We either have the rule of law and all its safeguards, or we don't. If we don't, anyone can be tortured especially, of course, if they are a visible minority.

Saddam did have WMD's no doubt at all, were the intel failed was they didn't see he had got rid of them, mostly if believed to his pal next door.

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

This seems to have gone OTT. " You chose a parasitic career path that makes money off the success or failure and misery of other people." Really? Well, social workers get a salary for dealing with the failure and misery of other people. To stereotype all lawyers as parasites is absurd. As for torture, we have to be opposed to it. We have signed international conventions to that effect. The information gained is known to be extremely suspect. Tony Blair may still believe there are weapons of mass destruction because he was shown undeniable evidence, but the rest of us are a little more sanguine on the subject. I don't think torturers keep me safe tbh. We either have the rule of law and all its safeguards, or we don't. If we don't, anyone can be tortured especially, of course, if they are a visible minority.

Saddam did have WMD's no doubt at all, were the intel failed was they didn't see he had got rid of them, mostly if believed to his pal next door.

So, the CIA were clever enough to find their existence, but not the convoys it would have taken to ship 'em across the country and over the border? They must have some shit satellites up there...

[Hoboh]

This seems to have gone OTT. " You chose a parasitic career path that makes money off the success or failure and misery of other people." Really? Well, social workers get a salary for dealing with the failure and misery of other people. To stereotype all lawyers as parasites is absurd. As for torture, we have to be opposed to it. We have signed international conventions to that effect. The information gained is known to be extremely suspect. Tony Blair may still believe there are weapons of mass destruction because he was shown undeniable evidence, but the rest of us are a little more sanguine on the subject. I don't think torturers keep me safe tbh. We either have the rule of law and all its safeguards, or we don't. If we don't, anyone can be tortured especially, of course, if they are a visible minority.

Saddam did have WMD's no doubt at all, were the intel failed was they didn't see he had got rid of them, mostly if believed to his pal next door.

So, the CIA were clever enough to find their existence, but not the convoys it would have taken to ship 'em across the country and over the border? They must have some shit satellites up there...

If you wanted something not to be seen you'd hardly set up a convoy, or move things in the right weather conditions.
Feck you'd be able to move an entire army round the UK with not a cat in hells chance of a sat image today.