NationStates Jolt Archive

'War on terror' trials could allow evidence obtained through torture

US military officers, breaking with domestic and international legal precedent, said that "war on terror" military tribunals at the Guantanamo naval base could allow evidence obtained through torture.

The US military officer presiding over the trial of an alleged aide to Osama bin Laden said he was not ready to rule out such evidence.

The officer, who wields power similar to a judge, was asked by the defense lawyer representing Ali Hamza Ahmad al-Bahlul, a Yemeni accused of plotting terror attacks for bin Laden's Al-Qaeda network, if he was ready to exclude all evidence secured through torture.

After a long pause, Colonel Peter Brownback declined to commit to a blanket ban on evidence obtained as a result of torture.

"What you and I mean by torture could be different," Brownback told defense lawyer Major Tom Fleener.

He said "a red-hot needle in the eye" constitutes torture but was not ready to commit to a prohibition in advance of the trial. "My personal belief is that torture is not good," he added.

But he said it would depend on the circumstances and how the prosecution presented the evidence.
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/060302/1/3z38u.html

This to me implies that the US has tortured or is willing to torture individuals. For what purpose? Torture someone enough and they'll say anything.

So does this make you proud to be an American? I bet it does!

I'm just waiting for Bush to announce he's changing the nation's name to Oceania. or perhaps Eurasia or Eastasia.

Well, he'll get his orders, even though it seems that right now he hasn't been told yet.

But considering the whole issue of extraordinary rendition, creative interrogation techniques and all the rest of it, it would seem very dumb to now disregard the "evidence" they bent all the rules to get.

Can they not through torture get "any" evidence they want?

Can they not through torture get "any" evidence they want?

As a matter of fact, that would be my primary concern. Not only is torture immoral, illegal, and just not a way to get in good with any of the world's free governments, it shouldn't be admissable evidence, not just because it shouldn't be practiced, but because it's subjective. Torture subjects will give you the answer they know you want, just to get you to stop torturing them. None of their answers are reliable.

A new low? Somehow I suspect that this has been going on for years. Its just that we now have a media to get this sort of information out.

man, i was hoping for a thread that said something like "no, literally, the whole country is sinking due to plate tectonics."

i've had about all the war crimes i can take.

Great. Just fucking great.

man, i was hoping for a thread that said something like "no, literally, the whole country is sinking due to plate tectonics."
If it did, it wouldn't be due to plate teutonics. It more likely be due to the average American getting so fat the whole country starts sinking.

Mind if I blame Bush?

don't forget to blame the Great Depression on Bush as well... I don't think that's been done yet...

I'm at the point of apathy, really should I care that they Torture some
al-Qaeda terrorist, you know the same guys who want to kill everyone not Islamic? They'd do the same to us.

Precisely. Ok say I accused you of.... (uh rediculous example...) having an Orgy with Micheal Jackson, Ronald Reagan, and every single alien from Predator Vs Alein on the 31st of Feburary of 2101. Of course, this isn't true, and everyone knows this (and if you think its true, you need help. Seriously), and you'd deny it of course because its a false accusation. However, were I to...
-threaten to sic attack vicous attack dogs on you if you dont....
-hook you up to a battery and threaten to shock you to death if you don't confess to...
-Whip you several times until you confess that you...
-and tortured you in other ways untill you...
... Confessed that you had an Orgy with Micheal Jackson, Ronald Reagan, and every single alien from Predator Vs Alein on the 31st of Feburary of 2101, odds are you'd probably tell me that yes you did, just to get me to stop torturing you, even though its blantly obvious that not only did you NOT do this, its also physically impossible. (Because: the aliens don't exist, at least they haven't been proven that they do, and its physically impossible to do ANYTHING on the thirty-first of feburary since the number of days in the month of feburary only go up to 28, at max 29 during leap year, Reagan is dead, and the fact thats its only 2006 at the moment so unless you time travel (which to our knowledge no such means exists to do so) thats phisically impossible too. as for Micheal... well... that might be possible. :p ).

get my drift?

and RE: #11

Another point is not all of them in gantanamo are proven to be or otherwise have connections to al-quita. yet they torture them all the same, even if they're just some poor farmer that these "Bounty hunters" grab and CLAIM they have connections to Al-quita (when in reality the poor farmer has probably not even HEARD of them) for a quick buck or so.

They'd do the same to us.
Which is not, has never been and will never be an excuse. Particularly not if you are claiming to be the good guys.

don't forget to blame the Great Depression on Bush as well... I don't think that's been done yet...
While its true that we can't blame the first one on the bush bowl, if the economy continues in the direction its going, we may soon have ANOTHER great Depession to deal with, and if/when THAT Happens, THEN we CAN blame him for it, as well as the Republican slimeballs, and the lucky-go happy dems. (I do not mean of course the actual dems like Russ Feingold, Kennedy, Howard Dean, or other TRUE progressive democratic senators/representatives, I mean the "Republican lites" AKA "Republicrats" Like Hillary and Joe Leiberman.)

Which is not, has never been and will never be an excuse. Particularly not if you are claiming to be the good guys.

Unless it's the WWE, where the difference between the good guys and the bad is just Flavor of the Day.

It is such a shame that people are harmed in a war.

It is such a shame that people are harmed in a war.
That must be the most simplistic statement I have heard all week.

And since I don't have all day, I won't list what's wrong with it.

It is such a shame that people are harmed in a war.
and let me guess, is that your take on hitler and the jews as well?

Its BECAUSE of the horrendious acts in WWII and wars beyond that we have the GENIVA CONVENTIONS, which by theroy SHOULD be followed.

but alas, it seems the US is so godlike that it can defy any sort of law it wants and get away with it. Even its own.

That must be the most simplistic statement I have heard all week.

And since I don't have all day, I won't list what's wrong with it.
It is very simplistic, and its good you dont want to argue it, becuase I don't have the time to defend it.

Unless it's the WWE, where the difference between the good guys and the bad is just Flavor of the Day.
But I have a feeling that the 'submission holds' the US Military are doing to prisoners are alot worst than WWE somehow...

It is very simplistic, and its good you dont want to argue it, becuase I don't have the time to defend it.

Time or logic? Anything you can throw up, I can slap down with the proven slippery slope argument I think.

It is such a shame that people are harmed in a war.

A war on what? Terror? That's just a word. People shouldn't be harmed in war against literature, only books.

and let me guess, is that your take on hitler and the jews as well?

Its BECAUSE of the horrendious acts in WWII and wars beyond that we have the GENIVA CONVENTIONS, which by theroy SHOULD be followed.

but alas, it seems the US is so godlike that it can defy any sort of law it wants and get away with it. Even its own.
Almost had it, but Geneva convention was after WW1. And it is news to me that I am facist.

It is very simplistic, and its good you dont want to argue it, becuase I don't have the time to defend it.
Let me guess. Your argument would run something like this:
http://www.salon.com/comics/boll/2005/12/22/boll/story.gif

Mind if I blame Bush?

Yeah, sure. Everyone else 'round here does. Whether or not he has anything whatsoever to do or not with the issue at hand. It's just a shame that all this hatred doesn't get channeled into something worthwhile and productive in this country. There is a perverse part of me that wants to support W. just because if he seems to p*ss so many people off, then he must be doing something right. I have seen his detractors, and damned if they don't make him look good in comparison. Well, maybe not good, but ok. Even with his rampant proclivity for cronyism taken into consideration. At least he can make a decision. W. may be a lot of things, but impotent he is not.

It is such a shame that people are harmed in a war.
Hey! I think that's Saddam's defense.

"Your Honor, it was a war. Ugly stuff happens"
"Well, I guess you're right. Have a good day then"

Yeah, sure. Everyone else 'round here does. Whether or not he has anything whatsoever to do or not with the issue at hand. It's just a shame that all this hatred doesn't get channeled into something worthwhile and productive in this country. There is a perverse part of me that wants to support W. just because if he seems to p*ss so many people off, then he must be doing something right. I have seen his detractors, and damned if they don't make him look good in comparison. Well, maybe not good, but ok. Even with his rampant proclivity for cronyism taken into consideration. At least he can make a decision. W. may be a lot of things, but impotent he is not.

Would it shatter your left wing conspiracy theory if I said that Bush was not directly responsible for the violation of the detainees' human rights, but contributed to the mess by appointing lackeys like Rumsfeld and Gonzales who were both of the mindset that "Hmm... maybe we shouldn't be so uptight about torturing suspects for information, whaddayathink?"

:p

Does what actually happened and what in fact was done to obtain statements have any bearing on this debate or is it just a "Bush authorized torture and is an Asshole" thread?

I decry torture and think it has no place anywhere, on the other hand, what is "torture?" Shouldn't we know the facts of what was done before we decide the person was tortured? Isn't the Judge right to tell both sides that I'll make a decision on suppressing the evidence when I learn what "torture" was involved?

Red hot needles in the eye? torture, sure. Sleep deprivation as the result of non-stop Barry Mainlow music, sick and twisted, yes, torture, no.

Which is not, has never been and will never be an excuse. Particularly not if you are claiming to be the good guys.

I put "staying alive" above of "get people to like us" on the Priority List. Go ahead and bitch. It's all you've been doing for the better part of the last half century.

Does what actually happened and what in fact was done to obtain statements have any bearing on this debate or is it just a "Bush authorized torture and is an Asshole" thread?

I decry torture and think it has no place anywhere, on the other hand, what is "torture?" Shouldn't we know the facts of what was done before we decide the person was tortured? Isn't the Judge right to tell both sides that I'll make a decision on suppressing the evidence when I learn what "torture" was involved?

Red hot needles in the eye? torture, sure. Sleep deprivation as the result of non-stop Barry Mainlow music, sick and twisted, yes, torture, no.


The problem with this type of argument is that you give a single judge (or you in the case of your post) autonomy over international law. Since when does a military judge get to define the parameters of what torture is? There are international guidelines that have been neglected.

And while this is mostly a Bush-bash thread (and rightly so) it could probably be extended to most current, past, and (unfortunately) future world leaders. US offenses make world news because it is a country that is/should be an examplar to other nations. When a powerful nation (economically, politically, and militarily) sets an example of gross negligence of human rights, it undermines the ability of the world community to make meaningful strides forward in diplomacy and plain humanity.

I put "staying alive" above of "get people to like us" on the Priority List. Go ahead and bitch. It's all you've been doing for the better part of the last half century.


How are you safer due to information coerced under duress and public outcry about abuses? This behavior encourages anger. It quells nothing.

I put "staying alive" above of "get people to like us" on the Priority List. Go ahead and bitch. It's all you've been doing for the better part of the last half century.

If you overlook how the "Me First, Fuck The Rest of You" mentality has resulted in Vietnam and Iran ending up on the "Wrong Side" because the people on the receiving end of the political sodomy were just fed up.

The problem with this type of argument is that you give a single judge (or you in the case of your post) autonomy over international law. Since when does a military judge get to define the parameters of what torture is? There are international guidelines that have been neglected.

And while this is mostly a Bush-bash thread (and rightly so) it could probably be extended to most current, past, and (unfortunately) future world leaders. US offenses make world news because it is a country that is/should be an examplar to other nations. When a powerful nation (economically, politically, and militarily) sets an example of gross negligence of human rights, it undermines the ability of the world community to make meaningful strides forward in diplomacy and plain humanity.

Nice "dodge the question" answer. "What is 'torture'" I ask and you reply with a claim that "international guidelines have been neglected" without telling us what the guidelines are or how they have been neglected and claims that the U.S. is setting "an example of gross negligence of human rights" but doesn't say what rights or how they are being neglected, and more to the point, how the statements of this particular person have been influenced in any way by anything we may or may not have done to him.

I will give you credit for admitting it is a "Bash Bush" thread though. At least you're honest enough to admit that facts don't matter, distaste for an administration is all that counts.

If you overlook how the "Me First, Fuck The Rest of You" mentality has resulted in Vietnam and Iran ending up on the "Wrong Side" because the people on the receiving end of the political sodomy were just fed up.


You're breakn' my heart. Read up on history. Greatness isn't acheived by making the whole world think you're just a bunch of swell guys who only wanna be left alone. All the great countries of the world hurt some people's feelings now and then, and were quite unapologetic about it. Sure, we COULD folow Europe's lead, but then instead of the reighning superpower we would be nothing more than a bunch of washed-up welfare-addicts, completely and utterly incapable of projecting anything resembling influence anywhere in the world, sitting around waiting for the day when our collapsed post-Christian birthrates result in anti-gay, anti-women, anti-everything-liberals-love Islamists taking over by default.

You're breakn' my heart. Read up on history. Greatness isn't acheived by making the whole world think you're just a bunch of swell guys who only wanna be left alone. All the great countries of the world hurt some people's feelings now and then, and were quite unapologetic about it. Sure, we COULD folow Europe's lead, but then instead of the reighning superpower we would be nothing more than a bunch of washed-up welfare-addicts, completely and utterly incapable of projecting anything resembling influence anywhere in the world, sitting around waiting for the day when our collapsed post-Christian birthrates result in anti-gay, anti-women, anti-everything-liberals-love Islamists taking over by default.

What? A manly God-fearing Bush-worshipping "Real American" like you can get hearbroken?

:rolleyes:

You're making it sound like having the country run by anti-gay, anti-women anti-everything-neocons-love Fundies as is the case right now is a much better option. And empire-building has been out of fashion since the late 20th century; just take a look at World War 2 as an example. Besides which, even when they were the norm, empires never last forever. They all eventually crumble.

Your Liberal Doomsday Scenario's amusing in its overblown proportion.

I'm just waiting for Bush to announce he's changing the nation's name to Oceania. or perhaps Eurasia or Eastasia.

who another person has decided to compare a capitalist economic/political system to orwell's communist horror story. how original.


oh by the way what country are you from?

Nice "dodge the question" answer. "What is 'torture'" I ask and you reply with a claim that "international guidelines have been neglected" without telling us what the guidelines are or how they have been neglected and claims that the U.S. is setting "an example of gross negligence of human rights" but doesn't say what rights or how they are being neglected, and more to the point, how the statements of this particular person have been influenced in any way by anything we may or may not have done to him.

I will give you credit for admitting it is a "Bash Bush" thread though. At least you're honest enough to admit that facts don't matter, distaste for an administration is all that counts.

I don't see how I am "dodging the question" by not citing specific Geneva Conventions measures of war crime. You have posed no realistic question. "What is torture?"??!?! Do you fancy yourself a philosopher? Your argument seems to be that since I have not told you exactly what treatises of international law forbid torture, nor the scientific proof that a tortured person will say most anything when they break, then my points (generalized as they are) are baseless. That, my friend, is dodging. The point here is not the definition of torture, but the suggestion that judges can act as arbiters of international law compounded by the faulty belief that the behavior of guards in military prisons somehow makes you safer.

Just so you can drop the "dodging the question" bit...

Torture is forbidden by the Geneva Conventions, both in cases of internal conflicts (Convention I, Art. 3, Sec. 1A), wounded combatants (Convention I, Art. 12), civilians in occupied territories (Convention IV, Art. 32), civilians in international conflicts (Protocol I, Art. 75, Sec. 2Ai) and civilians in internal conflicts (Protocol II, Art. 4, Sec. 2A).


War crimes are againt the customary laws of war which are applicable in any conflict, regardless of whether the country in question is a signatory to the Geneva Convention. They include the rights listed in the common article 3 of the Geneva Conventions (Convention I, Article 3) and the basics of human rights law – freedom from torture, mutilation and rape, slavery, and willful killing. Customary law also forbids genocide, crimes against humanity, as well as war crimes.

You can find the relevant passages online. Enjoy.

Wow, a lot of light thinking going on here.

by light thinking, I mean thinking on the surface levels. Its hard to do the heavy thinking, thinking in ways that make you sick in side, thinking in ways that make you feel unclean, but ways that you see will cost the fewest lives in the long run. Heavy thinking is what a battle field surgeon must do: try longer to save the limb, or lose the patient. save this man, or save that man. that's heavy thinking.

here's some heavy thinking. I approve of torture. in interrogation, to find out specifics, not generalizations. not "Are you" questions, but "Where is" and "How will". in prison to deter repeat offenders. our prisions are choked up with people who intentionally get locked up because its easier to got to prison and live off the state than to get a job. I don't like thinking about these things, I get no joy from the idea of people being in pain, or being tortured. It makes me as sick as any other reasoning person. but its something that I think has to be done.

now, as far as a lot of the Bush bashing going on. Keep doing it. You're in the United States of America. you have that right. this is a country where burning our flag, OUR FLAG that you pledged allegience to in elementry school, is protected as free speech. decry our leader, its okay. but do it for something that fully his fault. The economy is ours. we are the economy. we control its ebb and flow, we make the stocks go up and down. thats us. Bush didn't send this country into a recession (Which is over now by the way) we did. we freaked out. we got scared because of the way the election went. I'm sorry but... try some heavy thinking. go to levels you aren't comfortable with.

Wouldn't the time you spend stewing about poloticians be better spent becoming or finding a good one. one who will be stead fast and honest. one we can look up to and be proud of. Bush isn't it, I'll admit that. but Clinton wasn't it either, in my simple opinion, we haven't had a leader we can look up to in all areas of life since Franklin Roosevelt.

at time I feel like I'm living in the world of metal gear solid.

This might be pedantic, but I do not see this as the USA sinking low.

The people pushing this through and having it done in the name of the USA who are sinking low.

These actions are not synonymous with the USA and it seems that not being right wing is seen as anti-USA.

Kill! Maim! Burn! Kill! Maim! Burn! Kill! Maim! Burn!

Yes.

Quite.

Wow, a lot of light thinking going on here.

by light thinking, I mean thinking on the surface levels. Its hard to do the heavy thinking, thinking in ways that make you sick in side, thinking in ways that make you feel unclean, but ways that you see will cost the fewest lives in the long run. Heavy thinking is what a battle field surgeon must do: try longer to save the limb, or lose the patient. save this man, or save that man. that's heavy thinking.

here's some heavy thinking. I approve of torture. in interrogation, to find out specifics, not generalizations. not "Are you" questions, but "Where is" and "How will". in prison to deter repeat offenders. our prisions are choked up with people who intentionally get locked up because its easier to got to prison and live off the state than to get a job. I don't like thinking about these things, I get no joy from the idea of people being in pain, or being tortured. It makes me as sick as any other reasoning person. but its something that I think has to be done.

now, as far as a lot of the Bush bashing going on. Keep doing it. You're in the United States of America. you have that right. this is a country where burning our flag, OUR FLAG that you pledged allegience to in elementry school, is protected as free speech. decry our leader, its okay. but do it for something that fully his fault. The economy is ours. we are the economy. we control its ebb and flow, we make the stocks go up and down. thats us. Bush didn't send this country into a recession (Which is over now by the way) we did. we freaked out. we got scared because of the way the election went. I'm sorry but... try some heavy thinking. go to levels you aren't comfortable with.

Wouldn't the time you spend stewing about poloticians be better spent becoming or finding a good one. one who will be stead fast and honest. one we can look up to and be proud of. Bush isn't it, I'll admit that. but Clinton wasn't it either, in my simple opinion, we haven't had a leader we can look up to in all areas of life since Franklin Roosevelt.

Torture in prisons? So you dont really care for the constitution then? I'm not an american but i thought there was an amendment that banned torture. I would really have as much of a problem with it as I do if some of you guys wouldnt simultaneously advocate torture as well hold up the constitution as all the basis of all western law.

Wow, a lot of light thinking going on here.

by light thinking, I mean thinking on the surface levels. Its hard to do the heavy thinking, thinking in ways that make you sick in side, thinking in ways that make you feel unclean, but ways that you see will cost the fewest lives in the long run. Heavy thinking is what a battle field surgeon must do: try longer to save the limb, or lose the patient. save this man, or save that man. that's heavy thinking.

here's some heavy thinking. I approve of torture. in interrogation, to find out specifics, not generalizations. not "Are you" questions, but "Where is" and "How will". in prison to deter repeat offenders. our prisions are choked up with people who intentionally get locked up because its easier to got to prison and live off the state than to get a job. I don't like thinking about these things, I get no joy from the idea of people being in pain, or being tortured. It makes me as sick as any other reasoning person. but its something that I think has to be done.

now, as far as a lot of the Bush bashing going on. Keep doing it. You're in the United States of America. you have that right. this is a country where burning our flag, OUR FLAG that you pledged allegience to in elementry school, is protected as free speech. decry our leader, its okay. but do it for something that fully his fault. The economy is ours. we are the economy. we control its ebb and flow, we make the stocks go up and down. thats us. Bush didn't send this country into a recession (Which is over now by the way) we did. we freaked out. we got scared because of the way the election went. I'm sorry but... try some heavy thinking. go to levels you aren't comfortable with.

Wouldn't the time you spend stewing about poloticians be better spent becoming or finding a good one. one who will be stead fast and honest. one we can look up to and be proud of. Bush isn't it, I'll admit that. but Clinton wasn't it either, in my simple opinion, we haven't had a leader we can look up to in all areas of life since Franklin Roosevelt.

How is torturing someone for specifics any better than for generalisations? They're just as capable of making up specifics to get sadistic guards to stop torturing them.

And I'm no expert on American law of history, but isn't there something in the bill of rights or the constitution about cruel and unusual punishment? Surely torturing POWs and regular prisoners, who have already been tried and convicted most likely, is cruel at the very least.

oh by the way what country are you from?
Why does that matter?