Thread: The Red Cross Torture Report: What It Means

Originally Posted by FIAWOL

"They do not think like us..."

bullshit.

Known a lot of people from that part of the world-they have a finally developed sense of right and wrong..

Of justice, and injustice...

And of hypocrisy.

well maybe they have "finally" developed it. their system of justice is basically "an eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth". very few second offenders, they are beheaded. and since most of you libs are also feminists, what do you think about the treatment of women under islam and sharia law? Women are unclean second rate creatures to be used for pleasure and reproduction only.

Originally Posted by A. Crowley

How could you fail to see the very first definition of torture as defined by Websters if you weren't a Republicant in denial, asshat?

it's called cherry-Picking, and when you aren't pulling "information" directly out of your ass, it's just what Desperate Rightwing Whackjobs (like you) always do.....

1 a: anguish of body or mind : agony b: something that causes agony or pain2: the infliction of intense pain (as from burning, crushing, or wounding) to punish, coerce, or afford sadistic pleasure3: distortion or overrefinement of a meaning or an argument : straining


Here's the definition, it does not identify waterboarding, it uses terms like anguish and agony. I can identify anguish and/or agony in a variety of ways, if you cannot you are in need of education. Under this definition torture could be anything. Geeze, drinking a froen mrgarita can cause anguish and agony, of a sort. Anyway, how does shaving fit in? Knew I did not make a mistake or lie.

Originally Posted by FIAWOL

I am saying that the gray area is not significant.

That you are playing clintonesque "what does is mean" bullshit is worthless.

In other words, you don't care. It suits your purposes as it is.

Originally Posted by Get Real

You want something that is not there, this is interpretation.

What is considered torture was interpreted by what was set forth in CAT and the other documents presented by others in this thread to you.

What the ICRC report found and what CAT states goes hand in hand, so according to what CAT states the ICRC drew these conclusions of TORTURE.
MEANING THEY INTERPRETED IT FROM WHAT THE DOCUMENT STATES.

Here is an example:

1.3. Other Methods of Ill-treatment 1.3.1. Suffocation by water 1.3.2. Prolonged stress standing 1.3.3. Beatings by use of a collar 1. 3 + Beating and kicking (from the ICRC report)

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,....(from the CAT definition of torture)

And there is this:


Cheney was key in clearing CIA interrogation tactics

Vice President Dick Cheney said Monday that he was directly involved in approving severe interrogation methods used by the CIA, and that the prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba should remain open indefinitely.

Cheney's remarks on Guantanamo appear to put him at odds with President Bush, who has expressed a desire to close the prison, although the decision is expected to be left to the incoming administration of President-elect Barack Obama.

Cheney's comments also mark the first time that he has acknowledged playing a central role in clearing the CIA's use of an array of controversial interrogation tactics, including a simulated drowning method known as "waterboarding."

"I was aware of the program, certainly, and involved in helping get the process cleared," Cheney said in an interview on ABC News.

Asked whether he still believes it was appropriate to use the waterboarding method on terrorism suspects, Cheney said: "I do."

Cheney was key in clearing CIA interrogation tactics - Los Angeles Times

Cheney also said this to Larry King

CHENEY: I do. I think those programs were absolutely essential to the success we enjoyed of being able to collect the intelligence that let us defeat all further attempts to launch attacks against the United States since 9/11.

Transcript: DICK Cheney Interview with CNN’s John King - Cheney Says Obama Choices Create Risk : Clips & Comment

Compare what Cheney has admitted to, to what CAT says, take note of the highlighted portions of both

Ban on torture and cruel and degrading treatment

Article 2 of the convention prohibits torture, and requires parties to take effective measures to prevent it in any territory under its jurisdiction. This prohibition is absolute and non-derogable. "No exceptional circumstances whatsoever"[5] may be invoked to justify torture, including war, threat of war, internal political instability, public emergency, terrorist acts, violent crime, or any form of armed conflict.[6] Torture cannot be justified as a means to protect public safety or prevent emergencies.[6] Neither can it be justified by orders from superior officers or public officials.[7] The prohibition on torture applies to all territories under a party's effective jurisdiction, and protects all people under its effective control, regardless of citizenship or how that control is exercised.[6] Since the Conventions entry into force, this absolute prohibition has become accepted as a principle of customary international law.[6]

Because it is often difficult to distinguish between cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment and torture, the Committee regards Article 16's prohibition of such treatment as similarly absolute and non-derogable.[6]

The other articles of part I lay out specific obligations intended to implement this absolute prohibition by preventing, investigating and punishing acts of torture.


United Nations Convention Against Torture - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The criteria for torture could be precisely written/defined if there were not those who choose to be able to change the rules for power or revenge.

Originally Posted by bobcatsmoosh

1 a: anguish of body or mind : agony b: something that causes agony or pain2: the infliction of intense pain (as from burning, crushing, or wounding) to punish, coerce, or afford sadistic pleasure3: distortion or overrefinement of a meaning or an argument : straining


Here's the definition, it does not identify waterboarding, it uses terms like anguish and agony. I can identify anguish and/or agony in a variety of ways, if you cannot you are in need of education. Under this definition torture could be anything. Geeze, drinking a froen mrgarita can cause anguish and agony, of a sort. Anyway, how does shaving fit in? Knew I did not make a mistake or lie.

Does legal precedent count, then?

Twenty-one years earlier, in 1947, the United States charged a Japanese officer, Yukio Asano, with war crimes for carrying out another form of waterboarding on a U.S. civilian. The subject was strapped on a stretcher that was tilted so that his feet were in the air and head near the floor, and small amounts of water were poured over his face, leaving him gasping for air until he agreed to talk. Waterboarding Historically Controversial - washingtonpost.com

Originally Posted by bobcatsmoosh

The criteria for torture could be precisely written/defined if there were not those who choose to be able to change the rules for power or revenge.

You mean like you and others on this thread are attempting to do?
and
Like Bush/Cheney did?

Now, bobcatsmoosh I ask this simple question.

Did the U.S. torture?

Originally Posted by bobcatsmoosh

In other words, you don't care. It suits your purposes as it is.

What I said is clear enough. The standards work, the gray areas are so small as to be a non issue...

Except for lying scumbags who want to play word games to justify torture.

Like You

Originally Posted by FIAWOL

"They do not think like us..."

bullshit.
.

I agree rocat on this. For example ME & SE people do not put a high value on their lifes, because their religions are more steadfast than ours. The VCs worse fear wasn't dying for the cause, they feared having their parts spread so that when they awoke in their afterlife they would be whole. Decapitation and chucking skulls to poles on your perimeter put the fear of fking god in them, and they also went to great lengths to retrieve dead bodies even during fire fights or after. Body counts always had to factor in a % of missing bodies. And as long as the enemy had a breath, he was trying to get away after being wounded to go die where he would be whole. No value on life however.

And of couse Islam is only interested in saving face and honor of their god and are willing die and get on to their virgins. They place no value in this life.

Originally Posted by shintao

I agree rocat on this. For example ME & SE people do not put a high value on their lifes, because their religions are more steadfast than ours. The VCs worse fear wasn't dying for the cause, they feared having their parts spread so that when they awoke in their afterlife they would be whole. Decapitation and chucking skulls to poles on your perimeter put the fear of fking god in them, and they also went to great lengths to retrieve dead bodies even during fire fights or after. Body counts always had to factor in a % of missing bodies. And as long as the enemy had a breath, he was trying to get away after being wounded to go die where he would be whole. No value on life however.

And of couse Islam is only interested in saving face and honor of their god and are willing die and get on to their virgins. They place no value in this life.

That also is bullshit. Indeed, I find the concept that THEY put a smaller value on life rich, given how many people we murder without a qualm.

This is just another example of the "them" "other" demonization that ignorant and lazy thinkers are prone to engage in.