torture

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by raycarey

you have the opportunity, you have chosen not to accept it.

if you had the courage of your alleged convictions, you'd stay in the military and go to iraq in any capacity possible....and before you start stating how it just isn't possible.....if you really wanted to go, you could....and you know it.

what about all those posts about helping the innocent iraqi children and spreading freedom?

i guess they don't matter anymore, huh?

---

Nope. We've been over this many times before and you just seem to know more about it than I do. Why don't you join the Navy and find out for yourself ?

I haven't changed my position. And I never will. I still believe toppling Saddam was the right thing to do. I still think it was the right thing to do giving the Iraqi people a chance at freedom.

Besides you're the one who has been rooting against the Iraqi people from the very beginning. Don't try to lay your guilt trip on me. You're the one who has been steadfast in your opposition against them having or experiencing freedom.

I'm still wondering why someone who is so infatuated with me ... who can pull up my old quotes from a couple years ago wouldn't want to meet me in person ? Is it that personal with you ?

The military will not send me to Iraq. I really can care less if you understand that or not. The only leg you have to stand on is if this would be accepted as true ... then what's my excuse for not going to Iraq in a civilian capacity ?

It's ironic to me that you have never cared about the Iraqi people from the beginning ... but I can see that even if I were to change course and start supporting an immediate withdrawal and leave the iraqi people to be slaughtered by the sectarian violence ... you would only be interested in trying to attack me personally. It's obvious you're motives are purely personal.

Does Mr Galt know who you are ?

this thread is about torture, but i'll respond.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

I still believe toppling Saddam was the right thing to do. I still think it was the right thing to do giving the Iraqi people a chance at freedom.

---

is there anyone on this board who has made a argument against that? it is the manner in which it was done. perhaps that's a bit too 'nuanced' for you, but there's not too much i can do about that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

Besides you're the one who has been rooting against the Iraqi people from the very beginning. Don't try to lay your guilt trip on me. You're the one who has been steadfast in your opposition against them having or experiencing freedom.

---

i'm sure it makes it easier for you to apply false statements to me, but i think every rational person who reads this quote will see your desperation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

who can pull up my old quotes from a couple years ago wouldn't want to meet me in person ?

---

i didn't pull up an old post, it's just kind of hard to forget when you were telling unwell about all the presents you sent to iraqi children for christmas! think about it---iraqi children and christmas? nice job. why didn't you just send them bibles and crucifixes?

and why in god's name would i ever want to meet you in person?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

then what's my excuse for not going to Iraq in a civilian capacity ?

---

good question. i see you're all excited about taking a 100 hour tefl course in thailand....don't you care about the iraqi children and democracy in iraq anymore?

now then, back on topic.....

i wonder if those most recently captured war profiteers/contracters are being waterboarded right now....and i wonder if they think it's a fraternity prank?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by meepho

as for torture we mere mortals will never really know what goes on.
if it serves the purpose of protecting the masses then who am i to condenm that.

---

Information on torture and interrogation practices is readily available, including the specifics employed by various groups/govs.

Does any of it serve the purpose of protecting the masses? -very doubtful, the scenario referred to, i.e. someone knows crucial info which would be essential to prevent a massacre, is entirely hypothetical.

Unless you care to believe the assertions of the Saddams of the world that torture is effective in interrogating criminals, I cannot see any justification for it.
It's worth reading the miliary article I linked about the ethics and morals, it's written by someone who knows the subject.
Glad to be here

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by raycarey

i wonder if those most recently captured war profiteers/contracters are being waterboarded right now....and i wonder if they think it's a fraternity prank?

---

:1st:

Would these be considered torture:

** Being hooked up to an apparatus that by all indications was an electric chair?

** Being blind folded and forced to jump into a box of what appeared to be jagged glass?

** Being sat naked in front of an elevated ramp, blind folded and a bowling ball set in motion towards your gonads ?

ok, you try and let us know :D

Just to put this topic into perspective:

Ironically, it is not the restrictions on information gathering, but the negligence of authorities in charge which made 9/11 possible.

The present problem with interrogations is not the lack of torture, but the lack of skilled interrogators.

Furthermore, there is no evidence that torture is more effective than existing methods to extract reliable information.

True definition of torture: Reading posts on here from the bleeding-hearts (y'all know who you are) telling us waterboarding and sleep-deprivation etc. is torture...:rolleyes:

Sleep deprivation IS torture. It can lead to death.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir Burr

Sleep deprivation IS torture. It can lead to death.

---

So can smoking a pack of fags a day too - so?
My point is with the 'right' amount of sleep-deprivation or having to listen to music by Barry Manelow or "Nine Inch Nails" does not qualify as torture.

It always helps to inform oneself, you may learn something, Booner:

Quote:

---

Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, 1984

Article 1

For the purposes of this Convention, the term "torture" means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.

This article is without prejudice to any international instrument or national legislation which does or may contain provisions of wider application.

---

COMPILATION UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW - Definition of Torture

Quote:

---

The prohibition against torture is also fundamental to humanitarian law (also known as the laws of war), which governs the conduct of parties during armed conflict. An important element of international humanitarian law is the duty to protect the life, health and safety of civilians and other noncombatants, including soldiers who are captured or who have laid down their arms. Torture of such protected persons is absolutely forbidden. Common Article 3 to the Geneva Conventions, for example, bans "violence of life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture" as well as "outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment." The use of force to obtain information is specifically prohibited in Article 31 of the Fourth Geneva Convention: "No physical or moral coercion shall be exercised against protected persons, in particular to obtain information from them or from third parties."

---

Human Rights Watch - The Legal Prohibition Against Torture

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stroller

Ironically, it is not the restrictions on information gathering, but the negligence of authorities in charge which made 9/11 possible.

---

Good point. With too much info to handle already, the government is not capable of processing that kind of info effectively, as it can be manipulated, and usually it's the case, as info gathered under torture is not deemed reliable. Again, watching too many 24 episodes can lead to some people to think that "valuable" info is going to save the world. It doesn't work that way. And the real world is not as simplistic as 24. It's a small boy wet dream.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stroller

Furthermore, there is no evidence that torture is more effective than existing methods to extract reliable information.

---

And it's not, that's also why spying is more effective and more money is well spent. Torturing is third world techniques to gather information, because it's cheap and show an example for others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sir Burr

Sleep deprivation IS torture. It can lead to death.

---

Not in Boon Mee world, it's all good fun and college level pranks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

True definition of torture: Reading posts on here from the bleeding-hearts (y'all know who you are) telling us waterboarding and sleep-deprivation etc. is torture...:rolleyes:

---

first of all, i don't think anyone on this thread mentioned sleep deprivation until you did.

secondly...

Quote:

---

In its 2005 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, the U.S. Department of State formally recognizes "submersion of the head in water" as torture in its examination of Tunisia's poor human rights record.[12]
On September 6, 2006, the United States Department of Defense released a revised Army Field Manual entitled Human Intelligence Collector Operations that prohibits the use of waterboarding by U.S. military personnel.

---

but i suppose the defense and state departments are just bleeding hearts, huh?


Waterboarding - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I deleted a batch of off-topic banter.

ok, back to torture.

Quote:

---

The Bush administration asserted in federal court yesterday that Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and three former military officials cannot be held liable for the alleged torture of nine Afghans and Iraqis in U.S. military detention camps because the detainees have no standing to sue in U.S. courts.

Deputy Assistant Attorney General C. Frederick Beckner III also argued that a decision by the court to let a trial proceed would amount to an infringement by the judiciary on the president's power to wage war and would open the door to new litigation in U.S. courts by foreign nationals who feel aggrieved by U.S. government policies.

---

U.S. Denies Liability in Torture Case - washingtonpost.com

this will be a good test for the roberts court.

If they have no standing to sue then what standing do we have to hold them and try them?

Can we release all the Gitmo detainees
in Russia?


No Happy meals, No Qurans, No special rights...
Russian special forces shot dead a former GuantanamoBay inmate in southern Russia on Wednesday, the FSB security service said, describing him as an extremist.
.
Odizhev, born in 1973, was included in a report earlier this year by the New York-based Human Rights Watch on the alleged abuse in Russia of seven former inmates of the GuantanamoBay prison after Washington handed them back to Moscow in 2004.

The mistake here was to "hand them back", as has been pointed out already elsewhere.
If they are released uncharged, they should be free to go where they want to.

Good news for all so-called 'human rights' advocates. It seems water boarding has been taken off the list of approved interrogation techniques by the CIA. Wonder if terrorists have taken head-chopping off theirs..

Link

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Good news for all so-called 'human rights' advocates. It seems water boarding has been taken off the list of approved interrogation techniques by the CIA. Wonder if terrorists have taken head-chopping off theirs..

---

There's a great rationale: 'Well they're much worse!!'

Doesn't quite sit with lectures on 'freedom' and 'democracy' though does it.

Have "terrorists" signed any international agreements, or are they bragging about being the very peak of civilisation and upholding everyone's freedom?
Or why would you expect 'them' to make changes to their "approved interrogation techniques"?:rolleyes:

Well, it's good news for Al-Queda. You boys recall KSM? That lovely gentleman who was responsible for the 9/11 plot? He gave up more plots after a little session with the H2O. From the afore-mentioned article: "A senior CIA official said KSM later admitted it was only because of the water-boarding that he talked." There's a war on if y'all haven't noticed so this 'freedom/democracy' thing obviously takes a back seat...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

There's a war on if y'all haven't noticed so this 'freedom/democracy' thing obviously takes a back seat...

---

Indeed, 'The War of Terror'. Oops, I meant "on".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Well, it's good news for Al-Queda. You boys recall KSM? That lovely gentleman who was responsible for the 9/11 plot? He gave up more plots after a little session with the H2O. From the afore-mentioned article: "A senior CIA official said KSM later admitted it was only because of the water-boarding that he talked." There's a war on if y'all haven't noticed so this 'freedom/democracy' thing obviously takes a back seat...

---

LMAO Booners. I don't buy that shit! One little known person plotted a master plan against the mighty US then he alongwith his accomplices managed to hijack several planes? He alone's responsible for several beheadings, including that of Daniel Pearl?

Did he confess being a master mind of WWII? :kma:

well, after being tortured at guantanamo bay, the charges against the so called "20th Hijacker" have been dropped.

Quote:

---

The Pentagon has dropped charges against a Saudi at Guantanamo who was alleged to have been the so-called "20th hijacker" in the Sept. 11 attacks, his U.S. military defense lawyer said Monday.

---

Quote:

---

Officials previously said al-Qahtani had been subjected to a harsh interrogation authorized by former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld.

---

Quote:

---

U.S. authorities have acknowledged that Mohammed was subjected to waterboarding by CIA interrogators and that al-Qahtani was treated harshly at Guantanamo. Al-Qahtani last fall recanted a confession he said he made after he was tortured and humiliated at Guantanamo.
The alleged torture, which he detailed in a written statement, included being beaten, restrained for long periods in uncomfortable positions, threatened with dogs, exposed to loud music and freezing temperatures and stripped nude in front of female personnel.

---

Charges dropped against '20th' hijacker - Guantanamo - MSNBC.com

i wonder if america will ever hold the moral high ground on any nation or organization ever again. with what we know about the immoral and illegal actions of the bush administration,it doesn't seem likely.