search results matching tag: interrogations

» channel: weather

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (138)     Sift Talk (11)     Blogs (14)     Comments (336)   

Clouseau Interrogates the Staff

siftbot says...

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Pink Panther Strikes Sgain, Clouseau, Interrogates, staff, Peter Sellers' to 'Pink Panther Strikes Again, Clouseau, Interrogate, staff, Peter Sellers' - edited by xxovercastxx

Two Girls Detained and Harrased at American Border

Skeeve says...

I'd like to hear the border patrol's version of these events. About 300,000 people cross the US/Canada border every day, there isn't enough time or manpower to search and interrogate people without a reason.

While I don't doubt that harassment happens at the border, something is fishy about their story. It doesn't help their cause that they are the type of people warning about chemtrails and other retarded conspiracy theories.

Cops Tampered with Witnesses at Trayvon Martin Crime Scene

messenger says...

It's not up to the public at large to decide if charges are warranted. It is up to the public at large whether an investigation is warranted. In that light, I would sign a petition to have Zimmerman brought in for questioning, and to have witnesses properly interrogated by an independent (non-local) police authority as the locals have already shown that they are willing to steer witnesses. >> ^DuoJet:

Please sign the petition to prosecute George Zimmerman:
http://www.change.org/petitions/prosecute-the-killer-of-17-y
ear-old-trayvon-martin

One Way To Deal With A DUI Checkpoint (Refusal)

budzos says...

>> ^liverpoolfc:

You claim Police stopping people for random breath testing will lead to all that paranoid crap i'm not going to bother repeating.
If you think police performing random traffic stops to catch drunk-drivers is a dangerous thing I feel sorry for you and the state America is in.
I'm not British but i'd put money on you being a Republican. I'm not afraid of my Government or police force - clearly you are.


You're desperate to paint me as illogical but to me it just looks like you have poor reading comprehension. I don't claim random stops will lead to those other things. I claim that if the government felt they could get away with it, they would do those things.

EDIT: Some people don't understand what liberty and freedom is. I'm not anti-cop or even anti-government. Again, not any more than Ben Franklin or anyone else who gives it a LOT of thought. Randomly stopping people who are just going about their lives to assert your authority by shining flashlights in their eyes and interrogating them, which puts some people into weeks long spirals of panic and paranoia completely unrelated to any actual criminal culpability, is not harmless or purely protective.

Agent Charged w Espionage Act aka Your Country Is So Fucked

Shepppard says...

I can't NOT do a run-down of the subtitles. They're just too goddamn funny.

"The justified and has charged up former C_i_a_ officer
are john and tour kalo
steeple player is said that right
arbiter reiterates problems they write me anyway out with a espionage act
now that's a very very serious charge you know that before president obama
theres only been
three instances of the united states government
charging someone with the espionage act
forgiving excessive information
as they claim
this former cia officer there
and
six different tastes
that is special on it because president or bob promise to
i'd be air and friend to whistle blowers
entrance passage
there's something wrong in our government he reported he was going to
help you
doesn't look like he's albania
so whatever sag ideal while he talked about
how we want a quart of people
and how was torture
now he thought it was justified even did an interview on sixty minutes
and said
uh that he thought it worked the underplayed amount of george but we did
but do you happen to call it torture
now they look at that missy i did not like that
furthermore there was a two thousand a new york times story which invade
believe he is the source of the dam
proving at and so they well okay i got past and i jack I guess you're you
know
there was one of the toughest laws we have
and we're company get your are part of the spaces
because it's if
here's a great irony of that
if you actually do the waterboarding if you didn't torture
you got no punishment whatsoever
now present all mama claimed it was torture and ridiculous and he says he
stopped at
as ridiculous in a squabble right
is torture
but he didn't always scot-free
the president will not
look backward euler look for work
if you report the waterboarding the torture
espionage act
when I play with a look back work
all its to protect the C_i_a_'s after this thing
protect that's the bush administration
error and dick cheyney that order that torture well then of course you look
backward and in fact the new uh... looked very deep into you know us info about
charging
the defense lawyers at one time all back
our whole system is based on
an adversarial system
where somebody gets a defects
now one of the press uh.. tactics was to look at that
interrogators
and try and determine who they were so they can bring them into the court
and say eight use them as witnesses
because the guys who aren't going to have a bank
that are face execution
listen when you get an executed we should be able to call the witnesses

That's not even half the video. But I laughed my ass off.

POW blinks "TORTURE" in morse code during a forced interview

cosmovitelli says...

>> ^thumpa28:

Oh wow i see what you did there, its like prison minus the torturing to death bit! Wait, i got one too!
I wonder if the people facing the death penalty in Texas can blink 'electric chair'1!!!
Ohohoh i love Videosift for its deep socio political comment and talking cats.
>> ^Payback:
>> ^honkeytonk73:
What I got from his Morse code message was 'Enhanced Interrogation Techniques in use', not 'torture'.

Ya... I wonder what the Gitmo detainees call their little home-away-from-home.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LPubUCJv58&sns=em

POW blinks "TORTURE" in morse code during a forced interview

thumpa28 says...

Oh wow i see what you did there, its like prison minus the torturing to death bit! Wait, i got one too!

I wonder if the people facing the death penalty in Texas can blink 'electric chair'1!!!

Ohohoh i love Videosift for its deep socio political comment and talking cats.

>> ^Payback:

>> ^honkeytonk73:
What I got from his Morse code message was 'Enhanced Interrogation Techniques in use', not 'torture'.

Ya... I wonder what the Gitmo detainees call their little home-away-from-home.

POW blinks "TORTURE" in morse code during a forced interview

POW blinks "TORTURE" in morse code during a forced interview

Jake Tapper grills Jay Carney on al-Awlaki assassination

packo says...

>> ^bcglorf:

>> ^packo:
>> ^NetRunner:
There are two key questions that I think we should try to keep distinct here.
First, was this legal? Well, yes. This isn't a criminal matter, this is war. You don't put enemy forces on trial before you shoot them, you just shoot them. There are still limits on what you're allowed to do in war, but simply killing people is generally considered legal. Even targeting specific people providing aid and comfort to the enemy is not forbidden under the rules of war.
The other question is...should this be legal?
Well, I think the fact that declaring war on non-state organizations gives government latitude so wide that it becomes legal to engage in targeted killing of one of its own citizens is a pretty powerful reason to believe that it shouldn't be legal. An easy way to change the law to make it illegal would be to pass a resolution delcaring that AUMF against Al Qaeda null and void. Then this whole thing would revert to a matter of law enforcement, and not "national security".
The thing is, to prevent future Congresses from being able to declare war on non-state entities would require an amendment to the Constitution -- right now it just says Congress has the power to declare war, full stop. It doesn't say that they can't declare war on whatever entity they choose.
But I think people out there wanting to claim that it already is illegal simply haven't been paying attention.
politics

technically it isn't war because terrorists are not afforded the same rights as active participants in war... via the Geneva Convention for example
the burden of proof, and right to trial... are paramount in these times... when things are at their darkest, that's when upholding these value is MOST important (to point the finger at your opponent and say they aren't playing by the rules is quite CHILDISH, especially when you've went through such lengths to formalize the opinion in your citizens that the reason the enemy attacks is because they hate your freedoms/way of life
the problem with classifying people as terrorists and then assassinating them without any due process is that the "arguement" is made in the court of public opinion... usually by the media networks who are biased and lacking of journalistic integrity... if that's all you need to justify killing people, the arguement can QUICKLY/EASILY be made about ANYONE
the ONLY real, understandable reason I can contemplate would be putting these individuals to trial and making the proceedings available to the public would reveal many skeletons the US has in it's closet... but the validity and morality of this are another debate
as a religious text I don't believe in says (paraphrased)... how you treat the lowest of me, is how you treat all of me... this doesn't just equate to the poor/downtrodden... but to the most vile and unrepentant
holding your morality/standards to be so high compared to someone else means very little when you sacrifice them (irrespective of whether or not it is convenient or easy to do so)

You misunderstand.
It isn't war because America, or NATO or the west has declared war against the terrorists. That's not where this started. Your naive belief in that is what's tainting your understanding of this.
The Islamic Jihadists have openly declared and been waging war on us since long before the events of 9/11. The 'us' I refer to in this is not merely America, or the west, but anyone and everyone who is not themselves an Islamic fundamentalist as well.
You can fumble around all you want over reasons and 'proofs' that America is not really at war with the jihadists, but the reality is that THEY are at war with America. It is the very identity they have taken for themselves for pity sake. We've only been able to ignore it for so long because 90% of the casualties in this war have been middle eastern moderate muslims. Your ilk seem to want to claim sympathy for religious differences by allowing the status quo to continue were muslims get to continue to bear the full brunt of the jihadist war against us both. It's twisted and I detest it.


I never mentioned anything to the beginnings of hostilities.. you are making assumptions there. And with the government (multiple administrations) labelling these actions as the "WAR ON TERROR", by definition, they declared it war (even if they choose to not adhere to the rules of war)... the fact that they then went through the trouble (primarily for interrogation purposes) declared terrorists not covered by the Geneva Convention, and thus having no rights as war participants is what I was pointing out.

It's nitpicking, and childish to resort to a "who declared war on who" because if you want to get down to it, you are plainly ignoring western powers foreign diplomacy/intervention over the last 50+ years. There is many reasons why these fundamentalists are hostile... if "your way of life" actually makes the list, its not your love of fast food, miniskirts and women's rights... its how your way of life is subsidized through intervention in terms of their leadership, whether it be through installation of puppet/friendly regimes (no matter how oppressive/brutal) or through regime change or through economic hardships placed on nations who's leaders don't fall in line... let alone other issues such as Israel.

It's this police state mentality which garnered the West such a lovely reputation in the middle east... and as much as you'd love to point out it's for stability in the region, or so democracy can make inroads, or whatever other propaganda you happen to believe in... the truth is it has ALWAYS been about oil and oil money... not even in the interests of the western power's citizenry as much as for the oil lobbies.

Democracy and freedom are only ok as long as they fall in line with Western (particularly American) interest. If they were being honest it would be outfront there, plain as day the MAJOR issue there is ENERGY (and the money to be made from it).

So as much as you believe it is WESTERN nation's responsibility to solve problems (forcebly and usually without consent of those involved) in this manner, its EXACTLY this type of thinking that got us here. And if you honestly think we've only started meddling in the Middle East, you are naive (perhaps blind is a better word).

Extremism will only be defeated by the environment in the Middle East being such that it can't take root and grow. This will never be accomplished by force or political buggery.

You should stop playing cowboy's and indians, come back to reality, and start detesting the real issues at play here... not FOX TV political rhetoric.

All of the above doesn't even touch on the original point I made that if you are a US Citizen, you should be viewing the assasination of a US Citizen, at your government's sayso, without their providing ample reason (or any really) as to why he could not have been captured, with some foreboding... let alone the US government's denile of his family trying to get him legal representation etc...

If you want to hold yourself up as a shining beacon for the world to follow... when the going gets tough, better not falter or backup and do a complete 180, or all the preening and puffing you did early... it shines in a different light

What do they call that when 1 person (or entity) gets to decide what the laws are, at any given point in time, irrelevant as to what they may have been just a few moments earlier?

Scientists Scan Movie Clips From Your Brain

SDGundamX says...

How long until we have "thought police" using a refined version of this during suspect interrogations?

Also, wtf--some of those didn't match up at all (the birds flying looked like the person was psychically predicting the next image of the person talking...).

Sarzy (Member Profile)

Batman Interrogation

Zifnab says...

Cinema I can go with, but not talks.>> ^siftbot:

Adding video to channels (<a rel="nofollow" href="http://cinema.videosift.com" style="color:#">Cinema, <a rel="nofollow" href="http://talks.videosift.com" style="color:#778855">Talks) - requested by ant.

Can't embed CollegeHumor videos anymore due to its iframe? (Geek Talk Post)

Can't embed CollegeHumor videos anymore due to its iframe? (Geek Talk Post)



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists