[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
lixy wrote:
IrishSteel wrote:
Page 15 of the Bradbury report states:
In our limited experience, extensive use of the waterboard can introduce new risks. Most seriously, for reasons of physical fatigue or psychological resignation, the subject may simply give up, allowing excessive filling of the airways and loss of consciousness.
Now, how do you think they talk about loss of consciiousness?
Waterboarding is waterboarding. Its use is believed to help get confessions and the like (although the validity and reliability of what you get is debated).
You can’t have it both ways;
-
Either it is a useful as a physical abuse technique to break people, or it isn’t. If it is, then it must be torture. The UNCAT defines torture as “any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a male or female person for such purposes as obtaining from him, or a third person, information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity.”,
-
Or it is child’s play whereby the kidnapped or arrested person is safely made to hold his/her breath for 20 seconds at a time, with no physical or psychological harm. And if that is your position, it must then surely be useless. And why use something so controversial that you know is useless?
I don’t expect you to understand arguments and be able to reason. You don’t even have the guts to say “I would torture to save other people’s lives! America, fuck yeah!”. That would be a infinitely more reasonable than this sissy crap you’re spewing.
P.S: Having health personnel in torture facilities isn’t always driven by concerns for the welfare of the tortured. It is to keep the person alive so that they can be tortured some more. Dead people can’t talk.
Wow - you guys just love giving me help in proving my points - don’t you? Really you can stop anytime - I’m doing fine on my own. We;re not going to do that Rio thing again no matter how nice you are.
Didn;t you stop ti think for one moment that since they obviously KNOW that this is a risk that they will be on the lookout for it - WHEN they actually use such a technique? Or do you honestly think they are stupid enough to ignore the training and warnings that they receive?
Did you stop to notice that the danger is not from the technique directly - but instead directly from actions on the part of the person being questioned?
And let’s revisit the earlier fact that the times that we have used it - we did actually get actionable information from the terrorist KSM!
I don’t want it both ways. After that time in Rio . . . but I digress . . .
So, if it is a form of applying psychological and physiological pressure designed to elicit information from a prisoner - it’s torture in your book? Well, then just the mere act of yelling a question or swearing at them would constitute torture - but then you ruin your own point by stating that TORTURE IS ANY ACT (OF) SEVERE PAIN OR SUFFERING, WHETHER MENTAL OR PHYSICAL.
And once again you aid me in my quest to prove you wrong.
SEVERE - hmmmm at what level does something become severe pain or suffering?
You spin your wheels so well - I say it is child’s play but ultimately out of sheer boredom becomes effective. If it were true torture as you claim - he would have broke in the first 5 times not at the 168th time. So yes it is child’s play - but the worst possible technique we have
I am all for much worse techniques on terrorists (ie real torture methods - you know, hat pins up the thumb nails, slice open the arm and pour in salt and then stitch it up, ball peen hammer to the digits, power drills through soft tissue, acids burns) - but since we are not allowed to use them - I am perfectly fine with using our childhood pranks.
So at the end of it all - I guess I do get it both ways![/quote]
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.
Voltaire
"The United States participated actively and effectively in the negotiation of the Convention . It marks a significant step in the development during this century of international measures against torture and other inhuman treatment or punishment. Ratification of the Convention by the United States will clearly express United States opposition to torture, an abhorrent practice unfortunately still prevalent in the world today.
The core provisions of the Convention establish a regime for international cooperation in the criminal prosecution of torturers relying on so-called 'universal jurisdiction.' Each State Party is required either to prosecute torturers who are found in its territory or to extradite them to other countries for prosecution."
Signing Statement, UN Convention on Torture from 1984
Ronald Reagan
Art 1.
For the purposes of this Convention, the term “torture” means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.:
Article 2
-
Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction.
-
No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.
-
An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture.
Article 4
-
Each State Party shall ensure that all acts of torture are offences under its criminal law. The same shall apply to an attempt to commit torture and to an act by any person which constitutes complicity or participation in torture.
-
Each State Party shall make these offences punishable by appropriate penalties which take into account their grave nature.
Article 5
- Each State Party shall take such measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over the offences referred to in article 4 in the following eases:
(a) When the offences are committed in any territory under its jurisdiction or on board a ship or aircraft registered in that State;
(b) When the alleged offender is a national of that State;
(c) When the victim is a national of that State if that State considers it appropriate.
Article 6
-
Upon being satisfied, after an examination of information available to it, that the circumstances so warrant, any State Party in whose territory a person alleged to have committed any offence referred to in article 4 is present shall take him into custody or take other legal measures to ensure his presence. The custody and other legal measures shall be as provided in the law of that State but may be continued only for such time as is necessary to enable any criminal or extradition proceedings to be instituted.
-
Such State shall immediately make a preliminary inquiry into the facts.
-
Any person in custody pursuant to paragraph 1 of this article shall be assisted in communicating immediately with the nearest appropriate representative of the State of which he is a national, or, if he is a stateless person, with the representative of the State where he usually resides.
-
When a State, pursuant to this article, has taken a person into custody, it shall immediately notify the States referred to in article 5, paragraph 1, of the fact that such person is in custody and of the circumstances which warrant his detention. The State which makes the preliminary inquiry contemplated in paragraph 2 of this article shall promptly report its findings to the said States and shall indicate whether it intends to exercise jurisdiction.
Article 7
-
The State Party in the territory under whose jurisdiction a person alleged to have committed any offence referred to in article 4 is found shall in the cases contemplated in article 5, if it does not extradite him, submit the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution.
-
These authorities shall take their decision in the same manner as in the case of any ordinary offence of a serious nature under the law of that State. In the cases referred to in article 5, paragraph 2, the standards of evidence required for prosecution and conviction shall in no way be less stringent than those which apply in the eases referred to in article 5, paragraph 1.
-
Any person regarding whom proceedings are brought in connection with any of the offences referred to in article 4 shall be guaranteed fair treatment at all stages of the proceedings.
[b]
Article 12
Each State Party shall ensure that its competent authorities proceed to a prompt and impartial investigation, wherever there is reasonable ground to believe that an act of torture has been committed in any territory under its jurisdiction.
Article 13
Each State Party shall ensure that any individual who alleges he has been subjected to torture in any territory under its jurisdiction has the right to complain to, and to have his case promptly and impartially examined by, its competent authorities. Steps shall be taken to ensure that the complainant and witnesses are protected against all ill-treatment or intimidation as a consequence of his complaint or any evidence given. [/b]
Article 15
Each State Party shall ensure that any statement which is established to have been made as a result of torture shall not be invoked as evidence in any proceedings, except against a person accused of torture as evidence that the statement was made.
[b]
Article 16
- Each State Party shall undertake to prevent in any territory under its jurisdiction other acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment which do not amount to torture as defined in article 1, when such acts are committed by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. In particular, the obligations contained in articles 10, 11, 12 and 13 shall apply with the substitution for references to torture of references to other forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. [/b]
So much for the UN convention pushed through by Ronald Reagan.
So, when are we going to see those trials?