Reed writes: "Not even the elegant voice of Dame Helen Mirren can make the Senate Intelligence Committee Report on Torture less horrifying. John Oliver recruited the legendary actress to record an audiobook version for Sunday's episode of Last Week Tonight, which focused on the disconnect between public perception of torture and its real-life applications."
John Oliver. (photo: HBO)
John Oliver, Helen Mirren Blast CIA Torture
27 June 15
'Last Week Tonight' host speaks out against gruesome "enhanced interrogation" techniques
ot even the elegant voice of Dame Helen Mirren can make the Senate Intelligence Committee Report on Torture less horrifying. John Oliver recruited the legendary actress to record an audiobook version for Sunday's episode of Last Week Tonight, which focused on the disconnect between public perception of torture and its real-life applications.
According to a CBS News poll, 57 percent of Americans believe that "aggressive tactics provide information to prevent terror attacks." Citing the Senate report, Oliver breaks down the grotesque details of such tactics, which include one game of "Russian Roulette" and five detainees being subjected to "rectal rehydration." One man was even imprisoned through "mistaken identity" and ended up dying in his cell, likely from hypothermia. (Oliver tries to soften the mood by reading Beatrix Potter's lighthearted The Tale of Peter Rabbit, but rectal infusion even winds up in the children's story.)
The Senate report found that "enhanced interrogation techniques" were ineffective, so why do the majority of Americans believe it's successful? Oliver argues that popular TV shows like 24 are partly to blame since they present a dramatized version that always ends well for good guys like Jack Bauer. The host ends by condemning torture, a process even North Korea called "brutal medieval."
"If enhanced interrogation were not torture, which it is, and even if torture did work, which it doesn't, America should not be a country that tortures people," the host says. "Because it is brutal; it is medieval; and it is beneath us."
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |
Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
Should the postal service be eliminated or totally privatized, see what your delivery costs do. And, if you live in a rural area, you will really be in for "sticker shock".
We must stand together, get rid of onerous laws and return our postal service to future viability.
DPM is not exaggerating at all when he says that absent the USPS there will be serious sticker shock. It costs $40 to send an overnight shipment from South Texas to Washington, D.C. by FedEx. The same thing can happen with the USPS for a fraction of that.
The only reason I even think of using an inept outfit like FedEx is that the people I send to require it and are paying for it. And FedEx won't even deliver to your house! You have to go to their station if you want to get your package.
http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/consumerawareness/a/Postal-Service-Bonuses-End.htm
So, where are you getting your information that contradicts this information?
Frankly, I think you just assumed it.
This is just more smoke and mirrors. Just google "post office executive bonuses" to get to the truth. MSM, your listening to too much Rush Linbaugh!!
"The U.S. Postal Service suspended bonuses and other incentives for its top managers and executives in summer 2011. The Postal Service said it took the action as a result of its "dire financial situation," the loss of $8.5 billion in fiscal year 2010 and expected deficit of $8 billion more in 2011.
"We must continue to identify opportunities to reduce spending where possible, and eliminate costs which are not deemed essential for the continuation of our operations," Anthony J. Vegliante, the Postal Service's chief human resources officer, said in a memo distributed in summer 2011. Vegliante earned a salary of $240,000 in 2011."
See also: Highest Paying Postal Jobs
The suspension of bonuses and other incentives for top Postal Service managers and executives was described as a "temporary policy change" that was to remain in place "until further notice," the Postal Service said. It did not effect Postal Service clerks, mail handlers and union workers.
This link gives at the very end postal salaries of upper management.I worked for the post office and while I was aware of bonuses I wasn't aware of how much postal management's salaries were until I wandered into this video.
Instead, since most of us hate the big private banks, with good reason, why not create public non-profit banks, at either the state or county level and let them operate mini-branches out of the existing post offices? That would provie more than enough revenue to balance the U.S. Postal Service budget.
There might even be enough money left over to gift those damn lobbyists with a free, one-way ticket to Mars. Perhaps that is not far enough away, but it would be a good start.
Clearly, UPS and FedEx have been
bribing/lobbyin g/pressuring etc. congressmen and Senators in order to take away business from the Post Office.
Thanks!
Unless you do X. Y is going to happen for these reasons and then why, ought to be the format- not bassakwards.
Thanks for the info Matt, but you should have been asked to do it over before it was published.
Instead, since most of us hate the big private banks, with good reason, why not create public non-profit banks, at either the state or county level and let them operate mini-branches out of the existing post offices? That would provie more than enough revenue to balance the U.S. Postal Service budget.
There might even be enough money left over to gift those damn lobbyists with a free, one-way ticket to Mars. Perhaps that is not far enough away, but it would be a good start.
The United States Postal Savings System was established in 1911 but was discontinued on March 28, 1966. Google
postal savings system for websites with more details.
Republicans get next day service.
Democrats get next week service
Liberals get next month, if any, delivery. :-)
Has anyone really considered why the founders wanted to guarantee a postal service's existence by mandating it in the US Constitution? I would like to see the US Postal Service become a more central part of the government's structure. Its budget should be independent of revenue and the department take on responsibility for any broad based mass communications. At the time the Constitution was written the mail was the only mass media available. Could the intent of naming the USPS in the Constitution was to assure that mass media would be available to everyone? By outsourcing this critical function we diminish our democracy. Closing down local post offices puts millions of rural and poor Americans at a greater of being under the control of the Corporations that by their networked connected nature cannot be impartial when deciding delivery routes, times, and office locations.
"UNPROFITABLE. So what? When has the Pentagon ever made a profit? Never, nor does anyone suggest it should. Neither has the FBI, Centers for Disease Control, FDA, State Department, FEMA, Park Service, etc. Producing a profit is not the purpose of government-- its purpose is service."
I only know this because an old friend is a postmaster. I printed out and gave that office the Jim Hightower article. The employees were grateful to read something that supports their efforts. There is way too much propaganda out there, as you know. Your comments are pertinent and I plan to quote you when speaking with my old friend.
He might even be technically correct, and this is the reason we should worry.
Have we lost all sense of logic in the face of unmitigated greed?
No, I'm sure the Republicans didn't consider this when voting on it.
Finally, as for the comment of the post office being the only meeting place in town, why not have the post office take up lodge at the local Wal-Mart?
Nowadays all we get are the crumbs that spill from the tables of the very rich--those who profit from the misfortunes of others and laugh all the way to the bank
The only way open to us at present is to turn out the vote as we turn out the scum who do the bidding of the corporatists. Turn out Scott Walker; turn out Rick Perry, and Rick Scott; turn out Christy and Kasich. When the 99% awaken to the colossal scam that they have been subjected to, the 1% had better hide under their beds. They'd better get out of the country before they're found by those carrying torches and pitchforks.
Just a note: Fedex is non-union while UPS is unionized.
Another question: the Postal Service is in the Constitution? Wouldn't an amendment be needed to privatize it?
They can decide under one of their felonious laws to not allow you to have mail. IRS will be direct depositing...so me ways good but then again Big Brother is in your business. I believe one should set up separate account for such transactions and go to Credit Unions or out of Country. Canada gives a crap about their people...USA doesn't
Republicans want no min wage. Want us working for food..pink slime and monsanto poison. GOP been destroying Unions since ReaGun, and you are the ones that must change it
You can argue the fairness or whether such payments are or are not deserved, but it's there, in black and white on a Postal Service UNION site.