Let's Play a Game!

[NYcarbineer]

It's now bias to dub a report about torture a 'torture report'.

I guess then it's some sort of bias to call the nightly report about the the weather the 'weather report'.

It should be called what the CIA calls it and that is enhanced interrogation. Calling it torture is biased reporting.

That's the dumbest post in this thread.

 

[NYcarbineer]

No one is talking about unbiased news people. We're talking about unbiased news reports.

My opinion is the same there has always been bias be it news people or reports.

Your opinion does not change the fact there there are unbiased news reports. You're entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.

Look at this one for example: Full article @

News from The Associated Press

GAITHERSBURG, Md. (AP) -- A small, private jet slammed into a house Monday, killing a woman and her young sons inside the home and three people on the aircraft, authorities said.

The jet crashed around 10:45 a.m. in Gaithersburg, a Washington, D.C., suburb, Montgomery County Fire and Rescue Chief Steve Lohr said during a news conference.

Authorities quickly said all three people in the plane had been killed, but it took hours for fire crews to sweep the home and confirm that three people were inside. They were identified as 36-year-old Marie Gemmell and her two sons, 3-year-old Cole and a 1-month-old Devon, police said.

They were found in a second-floor bathroom. Gemmell was lying on top of her young sons in an apparent effort to shield them from the smoke and fire, said police Capt. Paul Starks. Her husband and a school-age daughter were not home and were accounted for, police said.

There are no characterizations of the pilot or the victims. News is what happened. There is no bias or spin in this news article.

The rest of that is a non sequitur. By calling the reports 'torture' they characterized events that took place during the war. This article requires that no characterizations of persons or events be made. It is a recitation of an event which took place.

Fox News is also calling it the "torture report."

Security Concerns Over Release Of CIA Torture Report VIDEO - FOX News Radio

Alan Colmes? That is strike three. That is the second biased source you have listed. Alan Colmes is a staunch liberal, so it is natural you were drawn to him.

Are you joking? Do not insult my intelligence.

YOU are a biased source, which means using your own standards we can summarily dismiss anything you post as worthless due to bias.

 

[NYcarbineer]

This is one of those threads in which the OP proves the opposition's point. So keep on keepin' on, you sad moron.

Care to elaborate on how you reached that conclusion?

Just look at the assertion in #1 and her subsequent posts. It's laughable.

Her point in the OP is that most of the media includes bias in their reporting and she gave examples of both left and right followed by an unbiased example.

Then she posted an unbiased article from NPR.

Are you alleging that NPR is biased?

In which case the onus is on you to demonstrate that bias.

. NPR is so biased that they will face loss of Federal Grants when the GOP takes control.

If you ever listened to it, you would find the opposite is true.

They are non-partisan to a fault.

Open your mind and listen.

Centrism is biased to the left from the viewpoint of the RWnuts.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Whatever is in the torture report that the RWnuts don't like they will simply dismiss with some cockeyed arguments that it's flawed in some way,

just like they did with the Republican led committee report on Benghazi that debunked most of their fantasies about that affair.

This is just standard practice from the Nuts. They can't concede they were wrong about anything; you get thrown out of the cult if you do.

 

[Esmeralda]

So you are alleging that NPR is biased just because it used a single word that you personally disagree with?

Obviously you are incapable of identifying your own bias and setting it aside in order to see things from an unbiased perspective.

Thank you for clearing that up. Your subsequent contributions to this thread will be considered in the light of your self admitted bias.

Here's a clue: there is No News Source and No Human who is without bias. Judgment and values are applied in interpreting what happens. If the other party's value and judgement are congruent with one's own, that appears as an unbiased source, but to others' they see bias. Anyone who says he is completely unbiased is either lying or completely delusional.

Here is something for you to ponder. At one time, the focus of reporting news was to report it without bias. Those who studied journalism were taught to be objective. Though there is no person who, as an individual, is unbiased, real reporters made every attempt to be as objective and unbiased as possible. That was their mantra, those who were seriously interested in being good reporters and journalists.

What has become the norm is the opposite of that. And that is the purpose of this thread, to think about what has happend in the past decades to change the focus of reporting news from the desire to be objective to be, rather, quite biased.

You use the term 'interpeting.' News reporting should not be about interpreting. That is the point of this thread.

One cannot report on something if one doesn't either observe it firsthand or interpret second hand reports. Those acts themselves affect the reporting outcome.

IMO, based on your posts, you are very ignorant about good journalism.

Whew! That's a relief. If you agreed with me, I'd have to check my premise

You wouldn't recognize good journalism even if it reached around and gave you an atomic wedgie.

You are absolutely and completely incorrect here. Based on my education and career experience, it is something I know very well. You, on the other hand, don't have a clue.

 

[Esmeralda]

Based on what you are posting in this thread, you are not, and you are the one who is laughable. Why don't you explain your perception of how the OP's examples are in conflict with her assertions?

Her posts speak for themselves. If you can't identify the cognitive dissonance between her assertion in #1 and what she puts forward as "journalism", then illuminating you is an impossible task.

There is no cognitive dissonance. If you believe there is, then please point it out, explain it. How typically Republican to make accusations without delineating what the accusations are based on. You are a hollow voice of criticism. Explicate just what you think instead of pointing vaguely at what you want to pretend is analytical thinking

I'm a registered Democrat, you silly little knigget. And I've provided plenty of explanation for anyone capable of critical thinking.

You have not explained anything other than mentioning what you feel is a misleading headline. You a Democrat? No way. I've read your posts for a couple of years now. There is no way you are a Democrat. And stop calling me names; that only proves you are unable to engage in thoughtful and reasonable debate.

I am a registered Democrat. Whether or not you care to believe me is completely immaterial to my existence.

You may be registered as one, but you certainly don't post as one. Perhaps you are as vague and unenlightened about what the democratic party in this country stands for as you about the characteristics that make up good journalism.

 

[Esmeralda]

Real news without bias and opinion ... Was that back when a runner came up from the docks and proclaimed a boat had arrived?

.

You are young. I remember when there was plenty of news that was just reporting what happened, not telling us what to think about it, not using connotative language, not propaganda, etc. Your idea that real news is relagated to a long ago, distant past is a misconception based on your ignorance of history and your thinking what we see in news reporting today is what the reality has always been.

There is propaganda in any news that reports a narrative outside of basic simple fact without the intention to accomplish anything. All "news" by nature ... And including what is decided to be reported on ... Is reported with a purpose. When news reels came back from World War II ... They supported a narrative. I don't know how old you are ... But I am betting your were very young back then if alive at all.

My example was an example of unbiased news ... And I thanked Carla for her effort.

.

Much of the news during war is intentionally biased: at that period in history, it was often flagrant propaganda. I was not alive during WWII, but I am educated and have studied history as well as the journalism done at that time and, as well, propaganda and its techniques.

No one is saying all news throughout history until the present time has been unbiased. Why do Republicans and conservatives see everything in black and white? It's like talking to school children.

The role of news is to present the facts as clearly and objectively as possible. However, during war times, in the interest of patriotism and support for one's country, there have certainly been news agencies who were biased in favor of their own.

News reels from the period of WWII are not a good example of what real news is or was. They were intentionally biased to instill and inspire the support of Americans for the Allies. It's a propaganda technique used by governments. It is not reflective of the general idea of what makes good news, why being objective in reporting news is valued, etc.

 

[TemplarKormac]

You may be registered as one, but you certainly don't post as one.

You know, this goes to prove a point. Democrats disown members of their own party when they don't think EXACTLY the same way they do.

 

[BlackSand]

Much of the news during war is intentionally biased: at that period in history, it was often flagrant propaganda. I was not alive during WWII, but I am educated and have studied history as well as the journalism done at that time and, as well, propaganda and its techniques.

No one is saying all news throughout history until the present time has been unbiased. Why do Republicans and conservatives see everything in black and white? It's like talking to school children.

The role of news is to present the facts as clearly and objectively as possible. However, during war times, in the interest of patriotism and support for one's country, there have certainly been news agencies who were biased in favor of their own.

News reels from the period of WWII are not a good example of what real news is or was. They were intentionally biased to instill and inspire the support of Americans for the Allies. It's a propaganda technique used by governments. It is not reflective of the general idea of what makes good news, why being objective in reporting news is valued, etc.

I don't need to know how old you are or what you studied to understand you would have to go further back than World War II in order to get to a time when news wasn't biased. I don't need to care why it biased to understand it was. I honestly don't think "news" has ever been unbiased.

I never asked if you agreed with the bias ... I don't expect you to give your opinion on this matter or any matter without your bias. The funny part is the idea anyone would believe biased people reporting biased news ... Were actually ever unbiased. Fox News, CNN and MSNBC come to mind leading the current pack ... But that doesn't ABC, NBC or CBS were ever any different. Newspapers have always had editorials and the reporting most often reflects the bias of the paper's editor in other stories.

It isn't unbiased just because people may agree with the bias. Describing the desire to bias information coming out of Would War II was unnecessary ... Because I can admit I used that example because it would be easy enough for people to understand and you obviously did.

The idea people cannot identify bias when it is and has been there all the time is the problem. The ability to identify bias when it appears regardless the fact people may agree with it ... Is what keeps them stupid and biased ... You can volunteer for that category, but I have no need to do so.

.

 

[Mertex]

Based on what you are posting in this thread, you are not, and you are the one who is laughable. Why don't you explain your perception of how the OP's examples are in conflict with her assertions?

Her posts speak for themselves. If you can't identify the cognitive dissonance between her assertion in #1 and what she puts forward as "journalism", then illuminating you is an impossible task.

There is no cognitive dissonance. If you believe there is, then please point it out, explain it. How typically Republican to make accusations without delineating what the accusations are based on. You are a hollow voice of criticism. Explicate just what you think instead of pointing vaguely at what you want to pretend is analytical thinking

I'm a registered Democrat, you silly little knigget. And I've provided plenty of explanation for anyone capable of critical thinking.

You have not explained anything other than mentioning what you feel is a misleading headline. You a Democrat? No way. I've read your posts for a couple of years now. There is no way you are a Democrat. And stop calling me names; that only proves you are unable to engage in thoughtful and reasonable debate.

I am a registered Democrat. Whether or not you care to believe me is completely immaterial to my existence.

Which if true, only proves what a confused and unbalanced person you are because I've never seen you defend or side with a Democratic view.

 

[Freewill]

U.S. Boosts Security At Facilities Ahead Of Torture Report's Release

The U.S. has increased security of its facilities around the world ahead of the release Tuesday by the Senate of the executive summary of its report on the CIA's interrogation practices in the war on terrorism, White House spokesman Josh Earnest said today.

"The administration has for months been preparing for the release of this report. There are some indications that the release of this report could lead to a greater risk that is posed to U.S. facilities and individuals all around the world," Earnest said. "So the administration has taken the prudent step to ensure that the proper security precautions are in place at U.S. facilities around the globe."

He said the Senate Intelligence Committee had informed the White House that the executive summary will be released on Tuesday, adding that the White House supported the move.

"The president believes that on principle it's important to release that report so that people around the world, and people here at home, understand what exactly what transpired," he said.

The Senate Intelligence Committee voted in April to release the 480-page executive summary of the report on the CIA's interrogation policies during the presidency of George W. Bush

It's worth noting here that many people are calling the document the Senate's report. It is, in fact, the executive summary of the full 6,200-page report.

Criticism began even before its details were made public.

Secretary of State John Kerry called Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif, chair of the Senate intelligence panel, last week on behalf of the White House, asking for a delay. NPR's Lauren Hodges reported there were fears in Congress the report would put "American personnel in danger overseas and incite further violence from extremists."

But lawmakers such as Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., said it was essential the executive summary was released.

"This report would never happen in North Korea or China or Russia," she told CBS on Monday. "But in the United States, we hold our government accountable. And, I think, that process is so important, so fundamental to our democracy, that it's essential that this report comes out."

Bush, speaking on CNN over the weekend, said he hadn't read the report, but called those in the CIA "patriots."

"And whatever the report says, if it diminishes their contributions to our country, it is way off base," he said. "And I knew the directors, I knew the deputy directors, you know, I knew a lot of the operators. These are good people, really good people and we're lucky as a nation to have them."

The New York Times reported that the former president's team "has decided to link arms with former intelligence officials and challenge its conclusions."

U.S. Boosts Security At Facilities Ahead Of Torture Report s Release The Two-Way NPR




It must be pretty bad if they're having to tighten security.

My opinion, those who will cut off the heads of innocent journalists could give a shit about torture. I am guessing they laugh their asses off over the concern we show for what they do everyday. Treating us like the villains and them as some sort of victim is just pure made up BS. There won't be riots over this and if there are they are purely staged.

What I think they might care more about is our use of drones and the killing of their families and friends.

 

[boedicca]

Her posts speak for themselves. If you can't identify the cognitive dissonance between her assertion in #1 and what she puts forward as "journalism", then illuminating you is an impossible task.

There is no cognitive dissonance. If you believe there is, then please point it out, explain it. How typically Republican to make accusations without delineating what the accusations are based on. You are a hollow voice of criticism. Explicate just what you think instead of pointing vaguely at what you want to pretend is analytical thinking

I'm a registered Democrat, you silly little knigget. And I've provided plenty of explanation for anyone capable of critical thinking.

You have not explained anything other than mentioning what you feel is a misleading headline. You a Democrat? No way. I've read your posts for a couple of years now. There is no way you are a Democrat. And stop calling me names; that only proves you are unable to engage in thoughtful and reasonable debate.

I am a registered Democrat. Whether or not you care to believe me is completely immaterial to my existence.

Which if true, only proves what a confused and unbalanced person you are because I've never seen you defend or side with a Democratic view.

Then you don't grok the ideology which informs my posts.

I want the government to leave us alone. That includes a range of things from not determining whom we can marry to how we spend or save our money. And I said I'm a REGISTERED Democrat, not an ideologically partisan one.

 

[Mertex]

There is no cognitive dissonance. If you believe there is, then please point it out, explain it. How typically Republican to make accusations without delineating what the accusations are based on. You are a hollow voice of criticism. Explicate just what you think instead of pointing vaguely at what you want to pretend is analytical thinking

I'm a registered Democrat, you silly little knigget. And I've provided plenty of explanation for anyone capable of critical thinking.

You have not explained anything other than mentioning what you feel is a misleading headline. You a Democrat? No way. I've read your posts for a couple of years now. There is no way you are a Democrat. And stop calling me names; that only proves you are unable to engage in thoughtful and reasonable debate.

I am a registered Democrat. Whether or not you care to believe me is completely immaterial to my existence.

Which if true, only proves what a confused and unbalanced person you are because I've never seen you defend or side with a Democratic view.

Then you don't grok the ideology which informs my posts.

I want the government to leave us alone. That includes a range of things from not determining whom we can marry to how we spend or save our money. And I said I'm a REGISTERED Democrat, not an ideologically partisan one.

So, registering as a Democrat somehow makes the government leave you alone?

Okie-dokie!

 

[BlackSand]

U.S. Boosts Security At Facilities Ahead Of Torture Report's Release

The U.S. has increased security of its facilities around the world ahead of the release Tuesday by the Senate of the executive summary of its report on the CIA's interrogation practices in the war on terrorism, White House spokesman Josh Earnest said today.

"The administration has for months been preparing for the release of this report. There are some indications that the release of this report could lead to a greater risk that is posed to U.S. facilities and individuals all around the world," Earnest said. "So the administration has taken the prudent step to ensure that the proper security precautions are in place at U.S. facilities around the globe."

He said the Senate Intelligence Committee had informed the White House that the executive summary will be released on Tuesday, adding that the White House supported the move.

"The president believes that on principle it's important to release that report so that people around the world, and people here at home, understand what exactly what transpired," he said.

The Senate Intelligence Committee voted in April to release the 480-page executive summary of the report on the CIA's interrogation policies during the presidency of George W. Bush

It's worth noting here that many people are calling the document the Senate's report. It is, in fact, the executive summary of the full 6,200-page report.

Criticism began even before its details were made public.

Secretary of State John Kerry called Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif, chair of the Senate intelligence panel, last week on behalf of the White House, asking for a delay. NPR's Lauren Hodges reported there were fears in Congress the report would put "American personnel in danger overseas and incite further violence from extremists."

But lawmakers such as Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., said it was essential the executive summary was released.

"This report would never happen in North Korea or China or Russia," she told CBS on Monday. "But in the United States, we hold our government accountable. And, I think, that process is so important, so fundamental to our democracy, that it's essential that this report comes out."

Bush, speaking on CNN over the weekend, said he hadn't read the report, but called those in the CIA "patriots."

"And whatever the report says, if it diminishes their contributions to our country, it is way off base," he said. "And I knew the directors, I knew the deputy directors, you know, I knew a lot of the operators. These are good people, really good people and we're lucky as a nation to have them."

The New York Times reported that the former president's team "has decided to link arms with former intelligence officials and challenge its conclusions."

U.S. Boosts Security At Facilities Ahead Of Torture Report s Release The Two-Way NPR




It must be pretty bad if they're having to tighten security.

My opinion, those who will cut off the heads of innocent journalists could give a shit about torture. I am guessing they laugh their asses off over the concern we show for what they do everyday. Treating us like the villains and them as some sort of victim is just pure made up BS. There won't be riots over this and if there are they are purely staged.

What I think they might care more about is our use of drones and the killing of their families and friends.

The point may be something different completely.

I don't know of too many folks that are unaware of the fact we used advanced interrogation techniques (we tortured captives using all kinds of methods). The bias is can be evident in that Democrats feel the need to release the report right after they get their asses handed to them in the mid-terms.

The report doesn't have to biased for the presentation to serve a biased purpose.

.

 

[boedicca]

I'm a registered Democrat, you silly little knigget. And I've provided plenty of explanation for anyone capable of critical thinking.

You have not explained anything other than mentioning what you feel is a misleading headline. You a Democrat? No way. I've read your posts for a couple of years now. There is no way you are a Democrat. And stop calling me names; that only proves you are unable to engage in thoughtful and reasonable debate.

I am a registered Democrat. Whether or not you care to believe me is completely immaterial to my existence.

Which if true, only proves what a confused and unbalanced person you are because I've never seen you defend or side with a Democratic view.

Then you don't grok the ideology which informs my posts.

I want the government to leave us alone. That includes a range of things from not determining whom we can marry to how we spend or save our money. And I said I'm a REGISTERED Democrat, not an ideologically partisan one.

So, registering as a Democrat somehow makes the government leave you alone?

Okie-dokie!

You are mistaken if you think party affiliation really matters, especially in a one party state such as California. I vote on the issues.

 

[Mertex]

You have not explained anything other than mentioning what you feel is a misleading headline. You a Democrat? No way. I've read your posts for a couple of years now. There is no way you are a Democrat. And stop calling me names; that only proves you are unable to engage in thoughtful and reasonable debate.

I am a registered Democrat. Whether or not you care to believe me is completely immaterial to my existence.

Which if true, only proves what a confused and unbalanced person you are because I've never seen you defend or side with a Democratic view.

Then you don't grok the ideology which informs my posts.

I want the government to leave us alone. That includes a range of things from not determining whom we can marry to how we spend or save our money. And I said I'm a REGISTERED Democrat, not an ideologically partisan one.

So, registering as a Democrat somehow makes the government leave you alone?

Okie-dokie!

You are mistaken if you think party affiliation really matters, especially in a one party state such as California. I vote on the issues.

Okay....that clearly explains why you are registered as a Democrat.....my bad for not figuring it out earlier.......

 

[Esmeralda]

I am a registered Democrat. Whether or not you care to believe me is completely immaterial to my existence.

Which if true, only proves what a confused and unbalanced person you are because I've never seen you defend or side with a Democratic view.

Then you don't grok the ideology which informs my posts.

I want the government to leave us alone. That includes a range of things from not determining whom we can marry to how we spend or save our money. And I said I'm a REGISTERED Democrat, not an ideologically partisan one.

So, registering as a Democrat somehow makes the government leave you alone?

Okie-dokie!

You are mistaken if you think party affiliation really matters, especially in a one party state such as California. I vote on the issues.

Okay....that clearly explains why you are registered as a Democrat.....my bad for not figuring it out earlier.......

LOL

 

[TooTall]

U.S. Boosts Security At Facilities Ahead Of Torture Report's Release

The U.S. has increased security of its facilities around the world ahead of the release Tuesday by the Senate of the executive summary of its report on the CIA's interrogation practices in the war on terrorism, White House spokesman Josh Earnest said today.

"The administration has for months been preparing for the release of this report. There are some indications that the release of this report could lead to a greater risk that is posed to U.S. facilities and individuals all around the world," Earnest said. "So the administration has taken the prudent step to ensure that the proper security precautions are in place at U.S. facilities around the globe."

He said the Senate Intelligence Committee had informed the White House that the executive summary will be released on Tuesday, adding that the White House supported the move.

"The president believes that on principle it's important to release that report so that people around the world, and people here at home, understand what exactly what transpired," he said.

The Senate Intelligence Committee voted in April to release the 480-page executive summary of the report on the CIA's interrogation policies during the presidency of George W. Bush

It's worth noting here that many people are calling the document the Senate's report. It is, in fact, the executive summary of the full 6,200-page report.

Criticism began even before its details were made public.

Secretary of State John Kerry called Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif, chair of the Senate intelligence panel, last week on behalf of the White House, asking for a delay. NPR's Lauren Hodges reported there were fears in Congress the report would put "American personnel in danger overseas and incite further violence from extremists."

But lawmakers such as Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., said it was essential the executive summary was released.

"This report would never happen in North Korea or China or Russia," she told CBS on Monday. "But in the United States, we hold our government accountable. And, I think, that process is so important, so fundamental to our democracy, that it's essential that this report comes out."

Bush, speaking on CNN over the weekend, said he hadn't read the report, but called those in the CIA "patriots."

"And whatever the report says, if it diminishes their contributions to our country, it is way off base," he said. "And I knew the directors, I knew the deputy directors, you know, I knew a lot of the operators. These are good people, really good people and we're lucky as a nation to have them."

The New York Times reported that the former president's team "has decided to link arms with former intelligence officials and challenge its conclusions."

U.S. Boosts Security At Facilities Ahead Of Torture Report s Release The Two-Way NPR




It must be pretty bad if they're having to tighten security.

You failed.
The report is about US interrogation techniques.
The headline writer characterized it as "torture", which is a value judgement.
/fail.

If you're referring to waterboarding, it is torture. You need to brush up on some history. In 1947, the US charged a Japanese officer with war crimes just for waterboarding a US civilian. He did 15 years of hard labor in prison.

Since the US military waterboards some soldiers to prepare them for what might happen to them if captured, shouldn't they be arrested and imprisoned?

 

[Carla_Danger]

U.S. Boosts Security At Facilities Ahead Of Torture Report's Release

The U.S. has increased security of its facilities around the world ahead of the release Tuesday by the Senate of the executive summary of its report on the CIA's interrogation practices in the war on terrorism, White House spokesman Josh Earnest said today.

"The administration has for months been preparing for the release of this report. There are some indications that the release of this report could lead to a greater risk that is posed to U.S. facilities and individuals all around the world," Earnest said. "So the administration has taken the prudent step to ensure that the proper security precautions are in place at U.S. facilities around the globe."

He said the Senate Intelligence Committee had informed the White House that the executive summary will be released on Tuesday, adding that the White House supported the move.

"The president believes that on principle it's important to release that report so that people around the world, and people here at home, understand what exactly what transpired," he said.

The Senate Intelligence Committee voted in April to release the 480-page executive summary of the report on the CIA's interrogation policies during the presidency of George W. Bush

It's worth noting here that many people are calling the document the Senate's report. It is, in fact, the executive summary of the full 6,200-page report.

Criticism began even before its details were made public.

Secretary of State John Kerry called Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif, chair of the Senate intelligence panel, last week on behalf of the White House, asking for a delay. NPR's Lauren Hodges reported there were fears in Congress the report would put "American personnel in danger overseas and incite further violence from extremists."

But lawmakers such as Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., said it was essential the executive summary was released.

"This report would never happen in North Korea or China or Russia," she told CBS on Monday. "But in the United States, we hold our government accountable. And, I think, that process is so important, so fundamental to our democracy, that it's essential that this report comes out."

Bush, speaking on CNN over the weekend, said he hadn't read the report, but called those in the CIA "patriots."

"And whatever the report says, if it diminishes their contributions to our country, it is way off base," he said. "And I knew the directors, I knew the deputy directors, you know, I knew a lot of the operators. These are good people, really good people and we're lucky as a nation to have them."

The New York Times reported that the former president's team "has decided to link arms with former intelligence officials and challenge its conclusions."

U.S. Boosts Security At Facilities Ahead Of Torture Report s Release The Two-Way NPR




It must be pretty bad if they're having to tighten security.

My opinion, those who will cut off the heads of innocent journalists could give a shit about torture. I am guessing they laugh their asses off over the concern we show for what they do everyday. Treating us like the villains and them as some sort of victim is just pure made up BS. There won't be riots over this and if there are they are purely staged.

What I think they might care more about is our use of drones and the killing of their families and friends.

As it turns out, some of the people we held and tortured in Guantanamo Bay, didn't do anything. We held a journalist from al-Jazeera for 6 years, while he was there he was beaten and sexually assaulted. I'd imagine waterboarding was also part of that torture.

So much for leading by example.

 

[Carla_Danger]

U.S. Boosts Security At Facilities Ahead Of Torture Report's Release

The U.S. has increased security of its facilities around the world ahead of the release Tuesday by the Senate of the executive summary of its report on the CIA's interrogation practices in the war on terrorism, White House spokesman Josh Earnest said today.

"The administration has for months been preparing for the release of this report. There are some indications that the release of this report could lead to a greater risk that is posed to U.S. facilities and individuals all around the world," Earnest said. "So the administration has taken the prudent step to ensure that the proper security precautions are in place at U.S. facilities around the globe."

He said the Senate Intelligence Committee had informed the White House that the executive summary will be released on Tuesday, adding that the White House supported the move.

"The president believes that on principle it's important to release that report so that people around the world, and people here at home, understand what exactly what transpired," he said.

The Senate Intelligence Committee voted in April to release the 480-page executive summary of the report on the CIA's interrogation policies during the presidency of George W. Bush

It's worth noting here that many people are calling the document the Senate's report. It is, in fact, the executive summary of the full 6,200-page report.

Criticism began even before its details were made public.

Secretary of State John Kerry called Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif, chair of the Senate intelligence panel, last week on behalf of the White House, asking for a delay. NPR's Lauren Hodges reported there were fears in Congress the report would put "American personnel in danger overseas and incite further violence from extremists."

But lawmakers such as Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., said it was essential the executive summary was released.

"This report would never happen in North Korea or China or Russia," she told CBS on Monday. "But in the United States, we hold our government accountable. And, I think, that process is so important, so fundamental to our democracy, that it's essential that this report comes out."

Bush, speaking on CNN over the weekend, said he hadn't read the report, but called those in the CIA "patriots."

"And whatever the report says, if it diminishes their contributions to our country, it is way off base," he said. "And I knew the directors, I knew the deputy directors, you know, I knew a lot of the operators. These are good people, really good people and we're lucky as a nation to have them."

The New York Times reported that the former president's team "has decided to link arms with former intelligence officials and challenge its conclusions."

U.S. Boosts Security At Facilities Ahead Of Torture Report s Release The Two-Way NPR




It must be pretty bad if they're having to tighten security.

You failed.
The report is about US interrogation techniques.
The headline writer characterized it as "torture", which is a value judgement.
/fail.

If you're referring to waterboarding, it is torture. You need to brush up on some history. In 1947, the US charged a Japanese officer with war crimes just for waterboarding a US civilian. He did 15 years of hard labor in prison.

Since the US military waterboards some soldiers to prepare them for what might happen to them if captured, shouldn't they be arrested and imprisoned?

I bet they don't waterboard them 183 times.

In a further embarrassment for Mr Bush yesterday, Malcolm Nance, an advisor on terrorism to the US departments of Homeland Security, Special Operations and Intelligence, publicly denounced the practice. He revealed that waterboarding is used in training at the US Navy's Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape School in San Diego, and claimed to have witnessed and supervised "hundreds" of waterboarding exercises. Although these last only a few minutes and take place under medical supervision, he concluded that "waterboarding is a torture technique – period".

Waterboarding is torture - I did it myself says US advisor - Americas - World - The Independent