NationStates Jolt Archive

US faces new torture claims

Agencies
Tuesday December 21, 2004

The US government was today facing fresh allegations that its soldiers seriously abused and tortured prisoners in Iraq and Guantánamo Bay.
The revelations came in US government documents released yesterday by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). The group got the documents - some dated after the Abu Ghraib prison scandal - as part of a lawsuit accusing the government of being complicit in torture.

FBI agents witnessed prisoners being beaten, choked and having lit cigarettes placed in their ears, the New York Times reported.

According to the documents, FBI agents said they saw detainees in Guantánamo Bay being held in chains for up to 24 hours.

In one email, the writer described seeing a "detainee sitting on the floor of the interview room with an Israeli flag draped around him, loud music being played and a strobe light flashing".

In another FBI message, dated from August, the writer reports more than once witnessing prisoners chained to the floor in foetal positions, with no food or water. They had often soiled themselves.

On one occasion, the temperature in a room was lowered so much the barefooted detainee was shivering. In another, the room was so hot the detainee had pulled out some of his hair before passing out.

Anthony Romero, executive director of the ACLU, said the FBI documents continued to show that the US government was "torturing individuals in some instances" and demonstrated a major rift between FBI agents and the military over proper interrogation techniques.

One of the memorandums, dated June 24 this year, was sent to Robert Mueller, the FBI director, and other senior bureau officials, the newspaper said.

In the memo, marked as a high-priority report, a witness "described that such abuses [of civilian detainees] included strangulation, beatings, placement of lit cigarettes into the detainees' ear openings and unauthorised interrogations".

Also, some military interrogators allegedly posed as "friendlier" FBI officials while using harsh tactics on detainees, both in Iraq and at Guantánamo Bay.

Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said posing as FBI agents was not on a list of interrogation methods approved by the defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld. The Pentagon insists Guantánamo Bay is humane and that all allegations of abuse are investigated.

ACLU lawyers also pointed to an email from an FBI supervisor in Iraq to bureau bosses in Washington, dated May 22 2004, which suggested for the first time that the US president, George Bush, personally authorised harsh interrogation techniques, including "sleep management" and sensory deprivation.

A White House spokesman said yesterday that the author of the email was mistakenly referring to defence department orders authorising various interrogation methods and that there had been no order from Mr Bush.

White House press secretary Scott McClellan said: "What the FBI agent wrote in the email is wrong. There is no executive order on interrogation techniques". The FBI declined to comment.

Asked about Guantánamo at a news conference yesterday, Mr Bush said, "You've got to understand the dilemma we're in. These are people that got scooped up off a battlefield attempting to kill US troops. And I want to make sure, before they're released, that they don't come back to kill again."

Interesting article,

So is there a question or position you are putting forward?

A link so we can see who wrote this would be nice. It's always good to be able to check sources.

Also, in before the usual stampede of http://www.animeleague.net/~berrik/emot-amerikkka.gif posts.

Is anyone surprised? The US isn't exactly known for its devotion to human rights and adherence to a protocol free of torture, unfortunately.

Is anyone surprised? The US isn't exactly known for its devotion to human rights and adherence to a protocol free of torture, unfortunately.

Thanks for proving my point http://www.animeleague.net/~berrik/emot-waycool.gif

Loud noises, uncomfortable temperatures, and flashing lights arn't torture in my book.

So then the question must be what is a tolerable lvl of interogation (torture)?

Call me when you've arrested all of the guys who cut people's throats on Al-Jazeera, and hanged them.

Then we'll be able to talk about who's being held to account. I'm sure (as this investigation indicates) that the US is being held to a much, much higher standard than any Arab in any country on earth.

Loud noises, uncomfortable temperatures, and flashing lights arn't torture in my book.

Ah, yes, the US book that lets you invent terms so that you can deny people their human rights, and the US book that lets you invade countries without proof of cause, and the US book that considers such atrocities as Al-Ghurayb singular incidences despite constant reports to the contrary, and the US book that seems to let you think that mental torture is somehow not torture at all...

Yeah, great book you chaps seem to have, there! :rolleyes:

I'm sure (as this investigation indicates) that the US is being held to a much, much higher standard than any Arab in any country on earth.

As well it should be!

I'd just like to point out that the author of the thread has still not posted a source.

Also, in after being right.

edit: and in after condescending leftist :rolleyes:

Ah, yes, the US book that lets you invent terms so that you can deny people their human rights, and the US book that lets you invade countries without proof of cause, and the US book that considers such atrocities as Al-Ghurayb singular incidences despite constant reports to the contrary, and the US book that seems to let you think that mental torture is somehow not torture at all...

Yeah, great book you chaps seem to have, there! :rolleyes:

Roll those eyes all you like. No way to stop it, now, is there? You'll notice that the US is actually attempting to police this - to hold someone responsible. Can you name one person on the "other" side of the "war on terror" who is coming close to doing the same?

Just so we know, the enemies of the US are far down on the "moral equivalence" scale.

Looks Like Commie Pinko posted and ran

Now that I think of it, I'm pretty sure this article is BS.

Why?

Because the FBI is responsible for DOMESTIC matters. Why would they have anything to do with Gitmo?

Now that I think of it, I'm pretty sure this article is BS.

Why?

Because the FBI is responsible for DOMESTIC matters. Why would they have anything to do with Gitmo?

They investigate federal crimes. It's their area of concern, especially if someone has raised an assertion in federal court.

They could also have been ordered there by the Executive branch to see if what the military is telling the Executive is the truth.

They investigate federal crimes. It's their area of concern, especially if someone has raised an assertion in federal court.

They could also have been ordered there by the Executive branch to see if what the military is telling the Executive is the truth.

Ah, ok. In any case, I'll take a 'wait and see' on this, though with no article link, I'll probably be doing more waiting than seeing *shrug*

I did a search and found this link:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0%2C12271%2C1378211%2C00.html

You'll notice that the US is actually attempting to police this - to hold someone responsible.

Oh, yeah, like letting all senior officials off the hook by feeding the lowly soldiers to the sharks?

Can you name one person on the "other" side of the "war on terror" who is coming close to doing the same?

Seeing as your "policing" of the situation is dismal, at best, I'll grant you that. What I will not grant is the idea that because your enemy does something, it's okay for you to do it, or that you should get some sort of leniency. It's wrong, no matter who does it.

Just so we know, the enemies of the US are far down on the "moral equivalence" scale.

Then stop trying to stoop to their level. You're claiming to be better, are you not? Act like it.

So what is the US to do, Ask nicely if they are involved in anything?

Since we're judging people by their country, I declare you a terrorist because Swiss banks have Yasser Arafat's accounts. ;)

Since we're judging people by their country, I declare you a terrorist because Swiss banks have Yasser Arafat's accounts. ;)

Sweden is not Switzerland.

Oh, yeah, like letting all senior officials off the hook by feeding the lowly soldiers to the sharks?

Seeing as your "policing" of the situation is dismal, at best, I'll grant you that. What I will not grant is the idea that because your enemy does something, it's okay for you to do it, or that you should get some sort of leniency. It's wrong, no matter who does it.

Then stop trying to stoop to their level. You're claiming to be better, are you not? Act like it.

The question remains - do you have any proof of senior official involvement? Until you do, such as an email or signed document, you're just making accusations - accusations that are by definition unfounded - they would never hold up in any court. Especially the Hague. You'll need some evidence there, won't you? Or is the Hague a kangaroo court?

We're not stooping to their level. We're probably not as nice as we should be - and I bet some low level people are taking matters into their own hands to get results or revenge. But we haven't come near as low as they have. There's no way anyone can claim moral equivalence of action or cause.

Sweden is not Switzerland.


Meh, if Europeans can't tell the difference between people from Texas and people from, say, Montana, I can be excused a minor geographical error after 16 hours without sleep. :D

So what is the US to do, Ask nicely if they are involved in anything?

What the US is to do is to refrain from torture. Simple as that. Some sort of transparency so that we could start taking its word seriously again would be nice. The US has, to my chagrin, very little credibility left nowadays.

Meh, if Europeans can't tell the difference between people from Texas and people from, say, Montana, I can be excused a minor geographical error after 16 hours without sleep. :D

"Europeans", at least the ones I keep company with, can manage the simple task of realising geographical differences. It's the mono-culture in the US which makes it hard to see the difference between you all.

"Europeans", at least the ones I keep company with, can manage the simple task of realising geographical differences. It's the mono-culture in the US which makes it hard to see the difference between you all.

You obviously haven't been to the US. Monoculture my rectum.

Yes, torture in any form isn't right.

To the people who are pointing fingers at the US right now in some effort to say "look at how wrong you are" I have this question.

What would you do given the circumstances that the US is in.

Let the UN step in and handle all matters of the conflicts that the US has started?

Let the people who continue to terrorize the *world* do so with a slap on the wrist?

All I hear in this thread is a bunch of "it's not right" and America tortures too. how about possible solutions and maybe, just maybe this thread would be different from the many we see about people being upset about how *AMERICA* is acting.

I am certainly not claiming that America is the only victim and the fact that they've been attacked gives them the right to committ all sorts of abuses of human rights. I'm just wondering how the people who are doing a bunch of finger pointing and seem to have the intellectual capacity to back their claims up, would resolve the situation.

I don't see any UN force hunting down Osama, do you?

I think its unbelievable........

that anyone can actually agree with torturing another human being....:(

The question remains - do you have any proof of senior official involvement? Until you do, such as an email or signed document, you're just making accusations - accusations that are by definition unfounded - they would never hold up in any court. Especially the Hague. You'll need some evidence there, won't you? Or is the Hague a kangaroo court?

The US's evasion of the ICJ makes your comments irrelevant. However there are several signs pointing to the unavoidability of senior involvement, the sheer scale of the atrocities being one. Too bad the US hasn't conducted a very good investigation so that we may know how far it went.

We're not stooping to their level.

Then why are you denying people their human rights? Why did you keep a Swedish citizen captive under, what appear to be and what he has claimed, torturous conditions for over two years without ever charging him with anything, let alone providing any proof or reason to have had him incarcerated for so long?

We're probably not as nice as we should be - and I bet some low level people are taking matters into their own hands to get results or revenge. But we haven't come near as low as they have. There's no way anyone can claim moral equivalence of action or cause.

Nobody is. We're just holding you to a standard you should have no trouble meeting.

What the US is to do is to refrain from torture. Simple as that. Some sort of transparency so that we could start taking its word seriously again would be nice. The US has, to my chagrin, very little credibility left nowadays.


I would love for that to happen, but it is not feasible.

If a known terrorist leader is captured, the information he has is to critical to lives around the world.

I doubt asking him nicely will work. I am not saying that the US is right in what they are currently doing, but without some sort of coercion (SP) we would never be able to get information.

You obviously haven't been to the US. Monoculture my rectum.

Your rectum must be impressively wide then, seeing as I have been to the US on several occasions and lived there for over a year.

Compared to Europe, your culture is severely unvaried, and the variations that exist find themselves poorly presented.

Well, my BS meter just went off. There are plenty of people, including many on this forum, who believe that our enemies in the war on terror are not only the moral equivalent in cause and action, but morally superior to the US in every way.

Plenty of people at the UN who believe that as well.

I'm sure if we went over a similar long term conflict, say, the UK vs. the IRA, we could get hundreds of abuse and torture cases going - not to mention detention without trial for years, including non-UK citizens.

Some were even assassinated by the UK government. Has one UK Prime Minister ever been brought to the Hague for those crimes? Even investigated?

I would love for that to happen, but it is not feasible.

If a known terrorist leader is captured, the information he has is to critical to lives around the world.

I doubt asking him nicely will work. I am not saying that the US is right in what they are currently doing, but without some sort of coercion (SP) we would never be able to get information.

Then what good is fighting for your "way of life" and your "liberties" if you are so unloathed to sacrifice them?

Scenrio:

You child has been kidnapped.

YOU have captured the kidnapper but he will not tell you where your child is, all he says is no one will ever find your child and that your child will die alone and laughs at you.

Are you willing to advocate torturing him?

Meh, if Europeans can't tell the difference between people from Texas and people from, say, Montana, I can be excused a minor geographical error after 16 hours without sleep. :D

Texas and Montana are still in the same country, and not very far apart.. Swisserland and sweden are really different!

http://www.secretashell.com/BobSoft/Images/euro-sweden-swiss.JPG

Well, my BS meter just went off. There are plenty of people, including many on this forum, who believe that our enemies in the war on terror are not only the moral equivalent in cause and action, but morally superior to the US in every way.

Plenty of people at the UN who believe that as well.

Their prerogatives. I do not share that sentiment - neither with them, nor with you.

I'm sure if we went over a similar long term conflict, say, the UK vs. the IRA, we could get hundreds of abuse and torture cases going - not to mention detention without trial for years, including non-UK citizens.

Some were even assassinated by the UK government. Has one UK Prime Minister ever been brought to the Hague for those crimes? Even investigated?

The UK has been on the recieving end of considerable international criticism over that conflict for a very long time. The inability to bring a foreign leader to justice in no way means that what they did was right. It does not excuse them, nor does it justify what they did. As well it does none of those things with what the US is doing, either.

Scenrio:

You child has been kidnapped.

YOU have captured the kidnapper but he will not tell you where your child is, all he says is no one will ever find your child and that your child will die alone and laughs at you.

Are you willing to advocate torturing him?

Irrelevant argumentation.

Well, if the French could torture people in Algeria and get away with it, and the UK could torture the IRA and get away with it, and the Russians can torture all sorts of people, including Americans, and get away with it, and the Chinese could torture people during the Korean War and get away with it....

the list goes on and on and on....

yadda yadda yadda - bad Americans is all I hear...

Well, my BS meter just went off. There are plenty of people, including many on this forum, who believe that our enemies in the war on terror are not only the moral equivalent in cause and action, but morally superior to the US in every way.

Plenty of people at the UN who believe that as well.

I'm sure if we went over a similar long term conflict, say, the UK vs. the IRA, we could get hundreds of abuse and torture cases going - not to mention detention without trial for years, including non-UK citizens.

Some were even assassinated by the UK government. Has one UK Prime Minister ever been brought to the Hague for those crimes? Even investigated?

The USA was the biggest funders of the IRA and you harp on about terrorism now!

I don't think 'our enemies in the war on terror' are more moral than USA, I believe the ones that didn't vote for Dick and Bush are probably well read, intellegent people. It's just the other Americans and their retarded leader that are the ones that bring the others down.

Why do people keep talking about Iraq as if they bombed the towers or started a war with America ? It's all getting a bit 1984 (The George Orwell book) where Big Brother has all old newspapers changed to make all records prove him right..

I believe it is releveant in that, there are times when torture is justified.

That scenario is a little personal.

But in knowing that a terrorist has information on other terrorists and potentially other plots how can you not do what you can to get that information. The potential to save thousands of lives is to great. The terrorist has shown his disdain for human life, I am not advocating murder or permanent harm, but there are psycological methods to get this information.



What I have read so far is that torture is just wrong and should not be allowed.

I don't see any UN force hunting down Osama, do you?

Who is searching for Osama?

The USA was the biggest funders of the IRA and you harp on about terrorism now!

I don't think 'our enemies in the war on terror' are more moral than USA, I believe the ones that didn't vote for Dick and Bush are probably well read, intellegent people. It's just the other Americans and their retarded leader that are the ones that bring the others down.

Why do people keep talking about Iraq as if they bombed the towers or started a war with America ? It's all getting a bit 1984 (The George Orwell book) where Big Brother has all old newspapers changed to make all records prove him right..
I'd be willing to bet that plenty of dumb people voted for Kerry as did plenty of smart people, just like plenty of smart people voted for Bush as did plenty of dumb people. Let's not fall to conventional political cartoon stereotypes here.

I don't happen to know anyone who believes Iraq has ever attacked the US.

Who is searching for Osama?
US, Afghan and Pakistani forces are hunting for bin Laden.

Hey Fass, at least we "evil" Americans don't torture people using ABBA. That would truely be evil. We should send you Swedes to the Hague to face charges for pushing ABBA on the world. You'll all hang!

Well, if the French could torture people in Algeria and get away with it, and the UK could torture the IRA and get away with it, and the Russians can torture all sorts of people, including Americans, and get away with it, and the Chinese could torture people during the Korean War and get away with it....

the list goes on and on and on....

yadda yadda yadda - bad Americans is all I hear...

So you are deaf to the criticism directed at the Putin-regime? You are blind to the European sentiments to what France did in Algeria? You are impervious to the support the IRA garnered as a result of disgust over what the UK government did?

The list goes on and on...

"Us poor Americans" is all I hear.

/sarcasm

Why do people keep talking about Iraq as if they bombed the towers or started a war with America ? It's all getting a bit 1984 (The George Orwell book) where Big Brother has all old newspapers changed to make all records prove him right..


I completly agree with you. The original reason was because of WMD. There were several reasons in the middle.

Now it is because of their links to Al Queda.

As each reason for the war G and D put forward was shot down they would change it to a new one.

The sad thing is that a significant portion of the US is buying into it.

I bet torture occurs on a regular basis, but sanitary of course.

I completly agree with you. The original reason was because of WMD. There were several reasons in the middle.

Now it is because of their links to Al Queda.

As each reason for the war G and D put forward was shot down they would change it to a new one.

The sad thing is that a significant portion of the US is buying into it.

If you figure that to the average rural American, all Arabs are alike, then he doesn't really need to articulate much of a reason.

Now that I think of it, I'm pretty sure this article is BS.

Why?

Because the FBI is responsible for DOMESTIC matters. Why would they have anything to do with Gitmo?

FBI is responsible concerning any action dealing with US citizens. While typically this is only domestic, they are also responsible for maintaining international image and investigating foreign affairs in regards to the individual. The only way it would fall under the jurisdiction of say the NSA or CIA is if it were a matter of national security. This is hardly the case, it is simply a few rogue soldiers sick and tired of seeing their friends killed in a war i don't believe anyone truly has any heart in but many, such as myself see as a necessity none the less.

While i am by no means advocating what the soldiers are doing, may i remind you what our boys went through in vietnam, korea, and germany? in each case we stepped in because we felt we were justified in our cause and in many ways we were as we are in this one. The problem lies in that once you've seen your friends go through hell as many of these soldiers have due to the beheadings and other sloppy terrorist tactics, you're prone not to care so much about moral standards.

If they can behead our boys, we can strip em naked. sounds fair to me. i don't agree with it, but it sounds fair.

Your rectum must be impressively wide then, seeing as I have been to the US on several occasions and lived there for over a year.

Compared to Europe, your culture is severely unvaried, and the variations that exist find themselves poorly presented.
I was with you more or less until this.

First of all, I am shocked, SHOCKED I say, to hear that different countries in a block have more distinction than states in single nation. The devil you say. Really now....

Secondly, if you managed to spend a year here and found our variations 'poorly presented' you are a piss poor observer and cynically seeing what you wanted to see. Northern and southern California can't get along so much not to mention the different coasts, and North and South? Barely on speaking terms, really. It's important to remember that no matter what the cynics say the television is not the end all be all of our culture.

Now someone f'd up your country with an entirely different country. Sure, that hurts. I'm sorry. Want a lollipop?
http://dris.dyndns.org:8080/external/images/lollipop.jpg
But seriously. Over here we have a cliched comic routine comparing LA to New York. You know why? Because they really are very different.

Criticism is fine. Nations built up as a bitchtocracy, we're supposed to criticize, though some forget that. But come on, try not to stick that nose too far in the air. It diminishes the rest of your argument just to impress your other euro friends. Remember, not as bad-better. That's the real substance of this argument, that people shouldn't strive to be as bad but instead to be better. Cheap deaming shots about our culture because someone made one about yours...hmm?

I did a search and found this link:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0%2C12271%2C1378211%2C00.html

I searched and found the article earlier. Above is the link I posted

Hey Fass, at least we "evil" Americans don't torture people using ABBA. That would truely be evil. We should send you Swedes to the Hague to face charges for pushing ABBA on the world. You'll all hang!

Pfft! That you lack the taste and that certain je ne sais quoi
to appreciate ABBA's 70's pop is your loss.

You'd been better off accusing Sweden and the US jointly over such acts as Britney Spears and The Backstreet Boys, who were US funded but had most of their hits written by Swedish writers. We can all share the shame over those ones...

Anyways Fass, where in America have you been, because I've found massive regional differences across the country. California is radically different from the midwest. The midwest is different from the northeast and everybody is different from the South (except Florida, the lower peninsula of Ohio)

I was with you more or less until this.

First of all, I am shocked, SHOCKED I say, to hear that different countries in a block have more distinction than states in single nation. The devil you say. Really now....

I was not the one trying to compare mistaking countries with mistaking provinces/states in a country. Nor did I get a bug up my butt over his mistake - I pointed out his error. He went on with the "oh, but US states blah blah blah".

Secondly, if you managed to spend a year here and found our variations 'poorly presented' you are a piss poor observer and cynically seeing what you wanted to see.

Northern and southern California can't get along so much not to mention the different coasts, and North and South? Barely on speaking terms, really. It's important to remember that no matter what the cynics say the television is not the end all be all of our culture.

Poorly presented internationally. You do not market the subtleties of your culture very well.

In the US, the differences are tangible, but on a local level that left me unimpressed. The differences were of such matter only to matter to Americans.

Now someone f'd up your country with an entirely different country. Sure, that hurts. I'm sorry. Want a lollipop?
http://dris.dyndns.org:8080/external/images/lollipop.jpg

Want to improve your reading comprehension?

Cheap deaming shots about our culture because someone made one about yours...hmm?

I wouldn't call mistaking Sweden with Switzerland a cheap shot at all. It tells more about the person who mistook them than about the countries themselves.

And I see no shame in being mistaken for Switzerland. It's a wonderful country. Granted my experiences of it are of the Alps, Geneva and Zürich, so I may not be able to speak about the country as a whole.

Fass, pardon us if we're trying to stop terrorism and keep our country and yours safer. The fewer of these people alive, the better (insurgents/terrorists)... so if we have to manipulate them mentally to get info (physical torture be damned) on where their friends are hiding and sniveling, pardon us for doing it.

if you have a better idea on how to get information from thugs, please let us know.

"In the US, the differences are tangible, but on a local level that left me unimpressed. The differences were of such matter only to matter to Americans."

Well, it reminded me of the time that I told a girl in Northern Germany that she sounded just as sweet as a woman I'd heard speak in the Schwaben Alps.

Got slapped for that one. Even worse when I told another German girl that she looked remarkably like her Polish friend.

Slapped again.

Other than language differences, and the general tendency I noticed for the French to have filthy cities (like US cities, but with more of a urine smell), and the tendency for the Germans to be excruciatingly tidy, I could say that Europe definitely has a monoculture if I use your method of measurement.

The only differences are on a local level, and only matter in social situations like dating.

Anyways Fass, where in America have you been, because I've found massive regional differences across the country. California is radically different from the midwest. The midwest is different from the northeast and everybody is different from the South (except Florida, the lower peninsula of Ohio)

I was in New York for some time, some time in Seattle, then some time in Houston, a few weeks in Boulder, then some time in New Orleans (now, there I'll grant you the culture was different enough to be of importance on an international scale, but that's understandable, it being quasi-French and all), then some time in Miami, with visits to DC and some rural places. It was one of those rotating language programs/cultural immersion things.

I never claimed that there were no cultural differences between the states (or even parts of states). I said that you present them poorly on an international level (it was "Europeans" that were being accused by that other guy, after all) and that the mono-culture is predominant.

I was not the one trying to compare mistaking countries with mistaking provinces/states in a country. Nor did I get a bug up my butt over his mistake - I pointed out his error. He went on with the "oh, but US states blah blah blah".
Just going by what you typed, slugger.



Poorly presented internationally. You do not market the subtleties of your culture very well.

In the US, the differences are tangible, but on a local level that left me unimpressed. The differences were of such matter only to matter to Americans.
What, we're supposed to market every nittering aspect of our culture to europe? Why would we do that and more importantly, why in the hell would you care? I think at this point it could be argued that you all haven't presented enough of a difference between Sweden and Switzerland that we get to call the nordic countries a monoculture, then.

You where unimpressed on a local level? I think my charge on that still stands. Perhaps you haven't looked at a map and realized our size.



Want to improve your reading comprehension?
You're just sore my picture of a lolli didn't work, now aren't you....



I wouldn't call mistaking Sweden with Switzerland a cheap shot at all. It tells more about the person who mistook them than about the countries themselves.
A diminishing remark met by a diminishing remark. Telling about both people, really.

And I see no shame in being mistaken for Switzerland. It's a wonderful country. Granted my experiences of it are of the Alps, Geneva and Zürich, so I may not be able to speak about the country as a whole.
Given the size of Switzerland you would disqualify yourself from making too sweeping a judgement on the country because you've only been to it's three major cities, but will condemn the entire US to monoculture because...you've been to all 50 states? Traveled outside our urban centers and surrounding suburbs?

Or maybe just thought it'd be hip to take a passing shot at american culture?

I'm going to go with the latter. You had a point originally, should have stuck with that. Your little side rail here has lost you a great deal of credibility.

Fass, pardon us if we're trying to stop terrorism and keep our country and yours safer.

Is that what you're doing, invading countries that had no ties to terrorists? Keeping people in legal limbo by undermining habeas corpus?

The fewer of these people alive, the better (insurgents/terrorists)

'Insurgents'/the resistance and terrorists are not the same.

... so if we have to manipulate them mentally to get info (physical torture be damned) on where their friends are hiding and sniveling, pardon us for doing it.

Pardon you for it is exactly what I will not do.

if you have a better idea on how to get information from thugs, please let us know.

Getting information from them is not as important as safeguarding democratic principles, rights and liberties. And, no you're not safeguarding them by undermining them.

That's all well and good to say Fass. The problem is that there are plenty of historical references to countries who, when put to the test in situations involving politically intolerable hostile acts, committed these very same acts and justified them with the same arguments.

Doesn't make it right, but I don't see the UN booting the US out and invading us and taking our soldiers and leaders to the Hague. And you won't.

Before that happens, all those other countries will be parading theirs through the court first.

There's a difference between what should be done, what might be done, and what ends up happenning. Historically speaking, we'll never know exactly what happened.

I think at this point it could be argued that you all haven't presented enough of a difference between Sweden and Switzerland that we get to call the nordic countries a monoculture, then.

Switzerland is not a "nordic country" ... :rolleyes:

not every american supports this, i my self belive tortures should be forced to go through what they make others go through. Bush is not a good president with his little crusade, he used 9/11 to rally support.

So how, exactly, do you define torture?

Personally, just because the ultra-liberal (in fact, more liberal than many euro "legal" groups) ACLU calls something "torture" does not necessarily make it so... What do they consider "beating" or "strangling". A slap and a hand around the neck or actually beaten black & blue or asphyxiation? After defining it, what measures are too extreme for the current situation? Are there differences depending on the immediacy of the threat?

For example, if there were clear intelligence that Sweden were going to be attacked with a biological weapon on a large scale within the next 12 hours and a prisoner knew the exact time and place, would Fass then approve whatever means to save his/her family, friends, and co-workers (at least the liked ones ;) )?

Are psyops (noise, temperature, sleep deprivation, etc.) okay? How, where, and when do you draw the line? No one's been accused of very extreme acts IMHO (ask a Vietnam vet what kind of acts a field radio or car battery connected to the genitals can incite), though the cigarette burns seem unnecessary given the other means at their disposal (which also doesn't sound like an "approved" interrogation method to me). Demeaning a prisoner and making them uncomfortable at times, which includes most of the (unproven) accusations, is far different than "torture".

Also, a key (and possibly the most important) point to remember is that the "rules of war", even as prescribed by the UN and the Geneva Convention, do not apply to groups such as those in Afghanistan and Iraq who now reside in Guantanamo.

So how, exactly, do you define torture?

What do they consider "beating" or "strangling".

Are psyops (noise, temperature, sleep deprivation, etc.) okay?



US law says no physical means can be used to extract infomation not even a slap. No contact.

As for psyops...if they follow US law then it is illegal, meaning then no they can't use this

Just going by what you typed, slugger.

Umm, that reading comprehension thing bugging you again?

What, we're supposed to market every nittering aspect of our culture to europe? Why would we do that and more importantly, why in the hell would you care?

If you don't want to do it, and fail to do it, why then bitch about the differences between "Montana and Texas"?

I think at this point it could be argued that you all haven't presented enough of a difference between Sweden and Switzerland that we get to call the nordic countries a monoculture, then.

Switzerland is not a Nordic country, so that utterance makes no sense.

Had you tried with Norway, Denmark and Sweden, you may have had a point.

You where unimpressed on a local level? I think my charge on that still stands. Perhaps you haven't looked at a map and realized our size.

So you're a large country? So is Canada, and look at their provincial differences. Same sort of things only made interesting to and by locals.

You're just sore my picture of a lolli didn't work, now aren't you....

Aww, you're just sorry you couldn't read her Majesty's English.

A diminishing remark met by a diminishing remark. Telling about both people, really.

"Sweden is not Switzerland" is a diminishing comment?


Given the size of Switzerland you would disqualify yourself from making too sweeping a judgement on the country because you've only been to it's three major cities, but will condemn the entire US to monoculture because...you've been to all 50 states? Traveled outside our urban centers and surrounding suburbs?

Read my other post for an account of where in the US I had visited. But if you want me to say that the US is a wonderful country, then fine: The US is a wonderful country. Granted my experience of it is of those places, so I can't speak for all of it.

Now, how does saying something about ones impression of the state of "wonderfulness" of a country equal saying something about its culture? Was I saying something about Swiss culture?

I'm going to go with the latter. You had a point originally, should have stuck with that. Your little side rail here has lost you a great deal of credibility.

Too bad you had none, what with your inability to understand what you read.

Switzerland is not a "nordic country" ... :rolleyes:
....wwooooooooossssshhhhh.......

US law says no physical means can be used to extract infomation not even a slap. No contact.

As for psyops...if they follow US law then it is illegal, meaning then no they can't use thisUS Law applies to U.S. citizens on U.S. territory and has no relevance to this discussion...

Okay, then we'll just wait patiently for info... I'm sure that will work.

Of course Saddam's people did things fairly. Saddam must not have been a bad guy, or else many people outside the US would not think that kicking him out and dealing with the aftermath was "illegal" or "immoral" ... right?

yeah, we should have just let him continue to deny liberty and go so far as killing gobs of his own citizens. Yeah, that guy was cool. We definitely shouldn't have gotten rid of him.

Umm, that reading comprehension thing bugging you again?



If you don't want to do it, and fail to do it, why then bitch about the differences between "Montana and Texas"?



Switzerland is not a Nordic country, so that utterance makes no sense.

Had you tried with Norway, Denmark and Sweden, you may have had a point.



So you're a large country? So is Canada, and look at their provincial differences. Same sort of things only made interesting to and by locals.



Aww, you're just sorry you couldn't read her Majesty's English.



"Sweden is not Switzerland" is a diminishing comment?




Read my other post for an account of where in the US I had visited. But if you want me to say that the US is a wonderful country, then fine: The US is a wonderful country. Granted my experience of it is of those places, so I can't speak for all of it.

Now, how does saying something about ones impression of the state of "wonderfulness" of a country equal saying something about its culture? Was I saying something about Swiss culture?



Too bad you had none, what with your inability to understand what you read.
Aw, you get a woosh too.

I guess the long and short of it is:
I do not agree with some of my country men that euro=snob but that does not mean that eurosnobs don't exist. So thank you Fass for making a dumbass argument I get to have with my country men that much harder. Congradulations.

Okay, then we'll just wait patiently for info... I'm sure that will work.

Of course Saddam's people did things fairly. Saddam must not have been a bad guy, or else many people outside the US would not think that kicking him out and dealing with the aftermath was "illegal" or "immoral" ... right?

yeah, we should have just let him continue to deny liberty and go so far as killing gobs of his own citizens. Yeah, that guy was cool. We definitely shouldn't have gotten rid of him.

Is it up to you to rid the World of bad people? Why only do it there? Why now? Why not when you helped him get to where he was?

Aw, you get a woosh too.

I guess the long and short of it is:
I do not agree with some of my country men that euro=snob but that does not mean that eurosnobs don't exist. So thank you Fass for making a dumbass argument I get to have with my country men that much harder. Congradulations.

Aww, don't beat yourself up over resorting to cheap ad hominems.

US Law applies to U.S. citizens and has no relevance to this discussion...

So foreigners enjoy no legal protection while in the US? Americans enjoy no legal protection while in another country? How do people dare to travel if this is the case?

So foreigners enjoy no legal protection while in the US? Americans enjoy no legal protection while in another country? How do people dare to travel if this is the case?Fixed it... Now would you please deal with the issue instead of just diverting it? I asked some reasonable and legitimate questions and you're just wasting everyone's time...

I thought I'd check out the forums (as you can see, I'm new to posting from my count) to see if any intelligent discussion went on here... Sadly, I'm disappointed. :gundge: :(

Fixed it... Now would you please deal with the issue instead of just diverting it? I asked some reasonable and legitimate questions and you're just wasting everyone's time...

So US soldiers don't have to follow local or US law? Why are they permitted anywhere, then? And how is Guantanamo Bay not a "US territory"? Last time I checked, you were leasing it, making it yours. How else could you be there?

I thought I'd check out the forums (as you can see, I'm new to posting from my count) to see if any intelligent discussion went on here... Sadly, I'm disappointed. :gundge: :(

Yeah, you are bringing the level down.

This thread is about US Torture claims, not who's better, bigger, older, more cultured or has the least (convicted) war criminals!

Some people (wherever they come from) can't read maps and believe everything they read in national enquirer or their countries equivalent toilet-roll replacement. Good for you.
Being racist / culturist or whatever is not a very grown-up argument, nor is it a reason to torture someone.

The USA is wrong to torture people, just as everyone before and since. It's sad that some of the Americans that have contributed to this thread have said that it's ok to torture people, and even given childish arguments as to why this would EVER be acceptable.

"How else do you get information?" etc.

Rubbish.
I suppose you think it's 'OK' to nuke some country too ?

There are differences between which laws apply to american citizens on U.S. soil, U.S. military personnel, and prisoners from abroad taken in an armed conflict. International laws apply to the prisoners, the Uniform Code of Military conflict to U.S. military personnel, and the U.S. Constitution to american citizens on U.S. soil.

It's reasonable that you don't understand the differences, especially in U.S. law, but it sounds as if you're just trying to avoid the crux of the discussion to me. If I'm incorrect, sorry (and I'd be willing to give more info on the legal aspects).

This thread is about US Torture claims, not who's better, bigger, older, more cultured or has the least (convicted) war criminals!

Some people (wherever they come from) can't read maps and believe everything they read in national enquirer or their countries equivalent toilet-roll replacement. Good for you.
Being racist / culturist or whatever is not a very grown-up argument, nor is it a reason to torture someone.

The USA is wrong to torture people, just as everyone before and since. It's sad that some of the Americans that have contributed to this thread have said that it's ok to torture people, and even given childish arguments as to why this would EVER be acceptable.

"How else do you get information?" etc.

Rubbish.
I suppose you think it's 'OK' to nuke some country too ?
Well, that's kind of my question and point... Is there relativist morality in these or some situations or (as your point seems to be) is it simply wrong and never acceptable... Which brings me to one of the other points, which is the difficulty in defining "torture"... and thanks Bob, for wading through the rhetoric and getting back on point!

Torture is a fundamental aspect of intelligence gathering isn't it? Now I know our society is generally more liberal than ever before, and I'm not condoning the torture and mutilation of other human beings, but if I was a captured enemy 'soldier' I'd be assuming that at any moment I'd have a bag over my head, a fist in my stomach and my face down in a bucket of piss. If you're going to participate in acts of warfare, terror and assassination then you're going to have to come to terms with the fact that the Geneva Convention is paperwork, and paperwork takes time...

OK, so innocent people appear to get tortured. But that happens every day of the year in some places and because America is not (directly) involved people don't actually care. If you care about the torture of innocents then stop just giving a shit about what America does and start caring about what all dictatorships and puppet regimes do.

Electronic Intifada (http://www.electronicintifada.com)

Torture is a fundamental aspect of intelligence gathering isn't it?

No, espionage is.

Torture is virtually worthless from an intelligence POV because people will say anything to make it stop.

There are differences between which laws apply to american citizens on U.S. soil, U.S. military personnel, and prisoners from abroad taken in an armed conflict. International laws apply to the prisoners

Why are they not being followed, then? Torture is one of things the declaration of Human Rights is supposed to protect us from, no matter our status?

And you said nothing about "prisoners from abroad" in your original statement. You said "foreigners" had no protection under US law.

No, espionage is.

Torture is virtually worthless from an intelligence POV because people will say anything to make it stop.

It depends on the nature of the torture and the persons using the torture and the person being tortured.

Drugs are apparently extremely effective today, as is a combination of drugs and sensory deprivation.

Torture is virtually worthless from an intelligence POV because people will say anything to make it stop.
Sorry, I do not believe this to be true. You're assuming that the person being tortured knows every detail that the torturer wants to know. You're also assuming that military intelligence (an oxymoron in itself) is infallible. If I'd got intelligence I wasn't sure was entirely accurate and I had prisoners who may be able to fill in details I wouldn't hesitate to begin interrogating them. And if I thought they were yanking my chain and costing me the lives of my troops... it's electrodes-on-the-nadgers time until I'm satisfied with what I hear that isn't screaming. That's the theory anyway...

It depends on the nature of the torture and the persons using the torture and the person being tortured.

Drugs are apparently extremely effective today, as is a combination of drugs and sensory deprivation.

Good grief, Torture is NOT intellegence gathering.

Forcing people to take drugs is wrong, just as much as beating them.
Human rights is NOT American law, it's world law. People have rights, whether they're cutting soldiers heads off or defending their homes against an invading country, or flipping burgers at McD's.. It doesn't matter WHO they are, or WHAT they have done, it matters that a country as allegedly culturally diverse as USA can produce or promote racism, or racially motivated torture, in their armed forces.
Racism is not a reason for torture, nor is "eye for an eye" idiot mentality.

I think you need to gather your intellegence.

Actually, Fass, torture (loosely defined) in many forms is approved of by international law (i.e. drugs, above) and is an extremely effective tool for the military.

Good grief, Torture is NOT intellegence gathering.

Forcing people to take drugs is wrong, just as much as beating them.
Human rights is NOT American law, it's world law. People have rights, whether they're cutting soldiers heads off or defending their homes against an invading country, or flipping burgers at McD's.. It doesn't matter WHO they are, or WHAT they have done, it matters that a country as allegedly culturally diverse as USA can produce or promote racism, or racially motivated torture, in their armed forces.
Racism is not a reason for torture, nor is "eye for an eye" idiot mentality.

I think you need to gather your intellegence.

The French and the UK do the sensory deprivation thing as well. They also do the drugs and the white noise and the "uncomfortable positions".

There is ample legal precedence for European acceptance of many of these policies, at the very least tacitly within their own countries.

And you said nothing about "prisoners from abroad" in your original statement. You said "foreigners" had no protection under US law....and I never said that. I called them "prisoners from abroad" and simply "prisoners". Talk about reading comprehension problems... The pot calling the kettle "black".

Peace - Out...

Ah, yes, the US book that lets you invent terms so that you can deny people their human rights, and the US book that lets you invade countries without proof of cause, and the US book that considers such atrocities as Al-Ghurayb singular incidences despite constant reports to the contrary, and the US book that seems to let you think that mental torture is somehow not torture at all...

Yeah, great book you chaps seem to have, there! :rolleyes:
If I remember correctly, quite a few of our techniques that we've used recently were taken out of the UK's book, we're just borrowing them, so to speak.

Then stop trying to stoop to their level. You're claiming to be better, are you not? Act like it.
The moment we publicly burn and hang bodies, as well as tape beheadings of innocent civilians and show them on our news services let me know. Until then, shut up.

The French and the UK do the sensory deprivation thing as well. They also do the drugs and the white noise and the "uncomfortable positions".

There is ample legal precedence for European acceptance of many of these policies, at the very least tacitly within their own countries.

It's wrong, it doesn't matter who does it. UK are wrong, France are wrong, USA is WRONG.

Eat meat, take drugs, smoke cigarettes.. all fine..
Be religious, don't be religious.. also fine..
Be smart, be dumb.. it doesn't matter..

Torture people, take away their human rights, hurt them, degrade their humanity.. WRONG

War is bad, people do bad things for beliefs of freedom, divinity or rightiousness. Ok, fine. But torturing people in Cuba is not right. It's inhumaine. How can USA troops torture people in the name of democracy and ironically freedom ?

War is bad Mmmmmmmkay.
Okay Mr Garrison.

If I remember correctly, quite a few of our techniques that we've used recently were taken out of the UK's book, we're just borrowing them, so to speak.

The UK also invented concentration camps, and doesn't Camp XRay or whatever sound like one of those ?

Bob,

So, if you had a known terrorist in your custody. You knew he had information that could stop a terrorist act, you would not use drugs to get the information and stop the attack, you would let innocent people die?

Mortimus, there are several people on this forum who would never torture someone under any circumstances (or so they say), and never commit a violent act (so they say) under any circumstances.

Easy to say, isn't it?

The moment we publicly burn and hang bodies, as well as tape beheadings of innocent civilians and show them on our news services let me know. Until then, shut up.
Warning: the link included may be a regular newspaper, but the images depicted might be considered by some forum members (and possibly the mods) to be extremely disturbing. If I have offended anyybody or broken a rule in posting this link, I apologize. But I felt the poster's comment demanded it.

Will THIS (http://www.guardian.co.uk/gall/0,8542,1211872,00.html) do you for now? I assume you find this acceptable behaviour?

Okay Mr Garrison.

Very intellegent. I thank you.

My problem isn't with war, I can't do anything about it and I'm not completely against it. My problem is with torture and people saying it's right.

Seems ambiguously homosexual, but not torture.

Seems ambiguously homosexual, but not torture.
You're either taking the piss or you're a moron. I'll assume the former because I'm too nice a guy to admit suspecting the latter. :)

So Bob,

I agree that things were taken way to far in Iraq. The soldiers that committed those crimes are being punished.

But I would really like to know if you would condone a drug based interogation in order to gain critical information to stop a terrorist act.

Bob,

So, if you had a known terrorist in your custody. You knew he had information that could stop a terrorist act, you would not use drugs to get the information and stop the attack, you would let innocent people die?

The key word here is 'known'.. by known terrorist, do you propose that the intellegence leading to the custody of the alleged terrorist is correct ?
So the prisoner is definately a threat to people directly, or undirectly ?

Well, in this situation I still wouldn't torture someone psyically or drug inducement. I would maybe interrogate them continually for a few days, but not stick cigarettes in their ears certainly.

Even if it was Osama himself, I still wouldn't advocate physical torture. What is the point in having laws if the basic rights and wrongs are ignored?

You don't eat people, it's one of those thing you know is wrong, and not the tastiest barbaque sauce in the world would make it right.
Torture is the same. You just don't. No amount of wrongs make a right.

Hmm. I remember as part of fraternity hazing, being forced to drink a gallon of iced tea after eating a pound of unsalted butter, then having to hold that down without vomiting while I was driven to a remote farm, where I was told to publicly urinate with a blindfold on - little did I know that they had stood me in front of an electric fence.

Not torture. Even though at the time it was largely against my will (yes I went to the initiation, but after the butter, I wanted to leave. Couldn't.)

You could have gotten some drunk frat brothers in the same situation, and they would have been laughing hard.

So Bob,

I agree that things were taken way to far in Iraq. The soldiers that committed those crimes are being punished.

But I would really like to know if you would condone a drug based interogation in order to gain critical information to stop a terrorist act.

if you waited longer than 16 minutes before re-posing you would know :)

US, Afghan and Pakistani forces are hunting for bin Laden.

And there are Brits there, and some damned fine Canadian troops (I wish their political leadership was more deserving of their outstanding military men.) And I seem to recall some Germans and Poles and Czechs, too.

Sooner or later the French will come in and say it couldn't be done without them. :)

Amazing thing is, despite all that has happened in Afghanistan and Iraq, the UN has still done nothing. They haven't even postured well; too busy trying to cover up the corruption in a decade long oil for food scam they had running in Iraq, most likely. Every day, the UN proves itself to be less and less important on the world stage.

...they would have been laughing hard.
I retract my previous comment, in part.

:)

Anyway, if torture is ok, why is Bush and his aides denying he said people could be tortured ?

Anyways Fass, where in America have you been, because I've found massive regional differences across the country. California is radically different from the midwest. The midwest is different from the northeast and everybody is different from the South (except Florida, the lower peninsula of Ohio)

Texas is as different from Montana as Helsingland is from Norrland (those are 2 different "states" so to speak in Sweden) or as different as Bayern is from Schleswig-Holstein. Sweden and Switzerland is as different as USA and Sweden or USA and Switzerland. It's mindboggling that Americans don't grasp this.

On the topic of torture, talk to any intelligence professional (not politcally appointed leaders) and you wil get the same answer: Torture is useless since the tortured person sooner or later will tell you exactly what YOU want to hear, not necessarily what is the truth.

I can't even believe I'm reading about people trying to defend and equivocate America's actions at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay!!!! This is unbelieveable!

News flash people: America is about the moral high ground. The reason why the world community has looked up to us in the past is because we hold ourselves to a higher standard than terrorist thugs. We don't do what they do. America is all about taking the high road; thats what made us a great nation. That's what set us apart, made us special, made us a true Democracy, and made us the good guys!

Anyone who advocates America in a role as a torturer is NOT a true American, is a traitor, and should leave this once great land before they soil it further.

Anyone who advocates America in a role as a torturer is NOT a true American, is a traitor, and should leave this once great land before they soil it further.
But Mr Browning says that the actions aren't torture they're just slightly homosexual high jinks that may possibly have gone too far. And from what he's said about hazing rituals I think he knows his stuff. :mp5:

The key word here is 'known'.. by known terrorist, do you propose that the intellegence leading to the custody of the alleged terrorist is correct ?
So the prisoner is definately a threat to people directly, or undirectly ?

Well, in this situation I still wouldn't torture someone psyically or drug inducement. I would maybe interrogate them continually for a few days, but not stick cigarettes in their ears certainly.

Even if it was Osama himself, I still wouldn't advocate physical torture. What is the point in having laws if the basic rights and wrongs are ignored?

You don't eat people, it's one of those thing you know is wrong, and not the tastiest barbaque sauce in the world would make it right.
Torture is the same. You just don't. No amount of wrongs make a right.

I do appreciate your point of view, and even respect it, but I myself cannot abide by that viewpoint.

I may be a lesser person for my view, but given the same scenario, I would use whatever means necessary to stop the attack.

I agree that may be wrong, even immoral, but having seen what terrorists can and have done first hand, I would do whatever I could to stop it.

I do wish to qlarify that I would only take those kind of actions if I knew for a fact that the person had information. Using drug induced interogation metods to troll for information is wrong in my eyes.

To be perfectly frank. The FBI doesn't do investigations into prisons that aren't civilly owned. And by civilly owned, I mean, America has a civil government and a real government.

But Mr Browning says that the actions aren't torture they're just slightly homosexual high jinks that may possibly have gone too far. And from what he's said about hazing rituals I think he knows his stuff. :mp5:

Indeed. I received far more humiliating treatment during fraternity hazing, including urinating blindfolded on an electric fence.

Of course, no pictures were sent out over the Internet (it didn't exist yet).

Indeed. I received far more humiliating treatment during fraternity hazing, including urinating blindfolded on an electric fence.

Of course, no pictures were sent out over the Internet (it didn't exist yet).
Is there a thread started everytime a Palestinian murders an innocent child in Israel. Is there a thread started everytime the French appease some terrorist in exchange for profits? Why is there a thread started everytime someone makes a claim of American injustice? It must be hard living in a world where America is out to kill and rape you all. :rolleyes:

Is there a thread started everytime a Palestinian murders an innocent child in Israel. Is there a thread started everytime the French appease some terrorist in exchange for profits? Why is there a thread started everytime someone makes a claim of American injustice? It must be hard living in a world where America is out to kill and rape you all. :rolleyes:

I have had no end of reading Palestinian claims that Israel is trying to commit genocide and kill off all the Palestinians. This despite UN figures that show a burgeoning population in Palestinian areas.

And despite the fact that if Israel really wanted to do them all in, it would be done in a matter of weeks. Or less.

I've heard similar claims of genocide by Americans in Iraq - if we wanted them all dead, we could do it with no US troops on site, and be done in 20 minutes.

Farcical nonsense. Orwell was right - people who usually claim to be intellectuals (from the Left) looking out for human rights are almost always only looking for something bad to say about the US or UK. Never, ever, ever anything bad about people who are truly heinous in their outlook on life.

I really appreciate those who equate the throat slashing of innocent old women on Al-Jazeera with the abuses at Abu Gharaib.

US Law applies to U.S. citizens on U.S. territory and has no relevance to this discussion...

military officals must obay their rules, and if it is a jail it can be considered US teritory.