Gina Haspel

I studied mass media at Emerson.
Including history of mass media.
Including the War of the Worlds broadcast.
Control of the medium was the big issue then, which is very similar to the net today and attempts to impose control through net neutrality.

 

damn Mongo... licking a lot of boots in here today...

i'm more concerned with the allegations of her deliberately destroying evidence of misconduct, rather than you guys harping about headlines and Blart being a crooked traffic cop...

 

Well that WOULD be the point.

 

Probably true. ( I can`t speak to that intelligently), but the threat of a repeat after the experience when you can think clearly? Priceless.

 

I think I am missing something...

 

Getting a raise and hiding something. If you miss there is an anatomy problem.

 

I was under the assumption we were talking about money.

 

Never assume in this place.

 

Show me where I speak of the matter 'as if' I have firsthand knowledge of it's effectiveness/ineffectiveness?

Sigh.

1) Who EXACTLY are these professionals? You quoted ONE field, psychology.....unless I'm going blind there was no link provided as to the specifics, was it ONE guy or a group? Who are they? Do they have any potential ulterior motives, much like we've ALREADY seen with fake data and such from the global climate industry/hacks. I mean, are you still so young and naive that you can't understand there may be potential motives that drive data. Me, I DOUBT A LOT these days.

2)Dang.....do YOU secretly fantasize about me jerking off to people being tortured??? Get that dirty mind out of the gutter young lady! I mean I've heard of freaks amongst us but that subject matter doesn't do much for me but hey, what you and D'ern do behind closed doors.....

3) Where? LOL...... You delivered hearsay......maybe others aren't as gullible as you are, is that possible?

IMHO, unless the very people writing about the effectiveness/ineffectiveness are actually there or involved in the team who are conducting the investigation then they really don't know shit. Do you honestly think the Government releases ALL info, good or bad?

I, personally, highly doubt the government is in the business of being sadists but if that's your thing, have at it. You certainly wouldn't be alone.

Easy there tiger, you're living up to the s/n and av.

Ah yes, the obligatory 'bad' cop insinuation from one of the BBS degenerates.....lol

Shoc......king!!!

 

This dude just conspiracy questioned the validity of an entire field of science...

Lololol shut the fuck up, geezus christ.

 

I already told you I couldn't link you to subscription journals. But I quoted an area of study that cannot be faked. That is the automatic response of the brain to stress. I also gave you plenty of ammunition to go an refute the science if you so choose. You choose not to try and prove me wrong with alternate science, but to just tell me I am wrong without any basis. I am NOT wrong about how the brain responds to stress and how that relates to torturing someone.

But the Army field guide on Intelligence (at least it did last time I dug into this) blatantly states that torture is against protocol because it is unreliable and often harms the further gathering of intel. They only print that to make the hippies feel good?



Darren washes the dishes while I blow him.
Since you led off with ellipses, I assumed you wanted to know.

 

Funny how many times you say it can work in limited cases then someone comes back refuting your saying it doesn't work. I guess the word limited confuses them.

 

Multiple fields since Neuroscience agrees with Psychology.

Psychology is a fun mistress for some in here depending on the topic.

 

I love trying to figure out how people tick. I love listening to people talk. Psychology and neuroscience are fascinating to me.
You can't just void entire areas of science because it doesn't mesh with your fefes.
Would the government employ tactics that are known to be unreliable? Absofuckinglutely. It's all about the mission, no matter how they have to get there.

Funnily enough, they are amazing at data collection and expanding treatments for trauma. Most of our trauma protocols come right from the battlefield these days. Rest assure, if I am responding to you after an explosion, you will likely live thanks to the US MILITARY. It will hurt like nothing you have ever felt while shove my fingers into your open wound, put pressure on the spurting artery, and then stuff an entire roll of kerlex into your mangled meat - and if you are still conscious, you might want to punch me - but you may just come out of it with your whole brain in tact. The tourniquet is bloody uncomfortable too, FYI. The government collects data on EVERYTHING, even if they deny they have data on something you are looking for...they have it. Their data collection is why we change our trauma protocols. We used to make sure you could breathe first - now we actually stop your bleeding first. Why the fuck does it matter if you have a patent airway if your femoral artery is severed? You will die anyways if I don't get that bleed under control.

Anyways. Waaaaaaaaaaaaay off track here.

 

you know what the term "outlier" means, right? and that it IS a thing that exists in the realm of physical reality in which we currently live?

 

I think there is too much of a hangup on individual results in this discussion.

Yes, an individual is likely to give mucked up info under duress. But that info isn't necessarily ALL garbage. Collect info from multiple sources and you can start to pull the fact from the fiction by lining things up and where possible confirming / denying details through other means.

 

No one is hung up on the individual, an unreliable tactic means that out of multiple people being exposed, the results yielded are often unusable. As a whole, this method is unreliable. One person in the group might give you something you can use, but how many people went through the slaughterhouse for you to get it and how long did it take? How many hours did you have to expose them to these methods to get them to say something? Did they give you information before you started torturing them (as in the case of the Guantanamo detainees)?

And this is where the ethical pitchfork comes in.
How many people are we allowed to torture to put a bunch of shitty info together to make a bigger piece?
How many innocent people?

 

Ahhhh OK, sorry....I'll just take YOUR word on it. E.I.....is a flop! LOL....."cannot be faked" + "I never said it didn't ever work" <<<< I suppose that GUY/GAL never got the memo, apparently.

Since you insist on sharing stuff I never asked about, what's he get for doing laundry?

If you're going to join the conversation, how about making clear of what ever it is you're rambling on about, instead of letting your tourettes control you?

STFU??? Damn, you must have me confused for your bf/gf/wife/husband or mother.
And you call yourself a 'professional'??? Imagine that....

 

I give, how many?

 

42?