President spanks Lauer's ass in the Oval Merged with GW V. Matt Lauer

[Bullypulpit]

Any proof of this or are we just supposed to trust your word?

Torture is defined as:

<blockquote>For the purposes of this Convention, 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. - <a href=http://www.hrweb.org/legal/cat.html>UN Convention Against Torture</a></blockquote>

Given this internationally accepted definition of torture, waterboarding does indeed qualify as torture. Even if it didn't, international law and US treaty obligations prohibit mistreatment which does not meet the definition of torture.

It should also be noted that the new US Army Field Manual

<blockquote>...bans torture and degrading treatment of prisoners, for the first time specifically mentioning forced nakedness, hooding and other infamous procedures used during the five-year-old fight against terrorism.

Delayed more than a year amid criticism of the Defense Department's treatment of prisoners, the revised Army Field Manual released Wednesday updates a 1992 version.

It also explicitly bans beating prisoners, sexually humiliating them, threatening them with dogs, depriving them of food or water, performing mock executions, shocking them with electricity, burning them, causing other pain and a technique called "water boarding" that simulates drowning, said Lt. Gen. John Kimmons, Army Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence. - <a href=http://www.netscape.com/viewstory/2006/09/06/army-bans-some-interrogation-techniques/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mercurynews.com%2Fmld%2Fmercurynews%2Fnews%2Fpolitics%2F15451651.htm&frame=true>The Mercury News</a></blockquote>

Is that sufficient?

 

[Bullypulpit]

Problem is those who were captured on the battlefield are already those engaged in war against us, their detention is not pre-emptive, especially true when the big catches were made. If Bin-laden were captured tommorrow would you still say the same???

And we have the right and the duty to defend ourselves from our attackers. We do not, however have the right to torture them. The same would apply to Osama bin Laden. And he should be tried for his crimes in court of law, knowing the charges against him, with access to all evidence against him, access to counsel, with secret evidence and evidence acquired through coercion or torture excluded from the proceedings.

 

[glockmail]

Torture is defined as:

<blockquote>For the purposes of this Convention, 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. - <a href=http://www.hrweb.org/legal/cat.html>UN Convention Against Torture</a></blockquote>

Given this internationally accepted definition of torture, waterboarding does indeed qualify as torture. Even if it didn't, international law and US treaty obligations prohibit mistreatment which does not meet the definition of torture.

It should also be noted that the new US Army Field Manual

<blockquote>...bans torture and degrading treatment of prisoners, for the first time specifically mentioning forced nakedness, hooding and other infamous procedures used during the five-year-old fight against terrorism.

Delayed more than a year amid criticism of the Defense Department's treatment of prisoners, the revised Army Field Manual released Wednesday updates a 1992 version.

It also explicitly bans beating prisoners, sexually humiliating them, threatening them with dogs, depriving them of food or water, performing mock executions, shocking them with electricity, burning them, causing other pain and a technique called "water boarding" that simulates drowning, said Lt. Gen. John Kimmons, Army Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence. - <a href=http://www.netscape.com/viewstory/2006/09/06/army-bans-some-interrogation-techniques/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mercurynews.com%2Fmld%2Fmercurynews%2Fnews%2Fpolitics%2F15451651.htm&frame=true>The Mercury News</a></blockquote>

Is that sufficient?

Actually it’s not sufficient, as we are talking about Geneva, not something the UN Bureaucrats cooked up and the US did not sign on to. Even if we did, the use of the term “severe pain or suffering” precludes water boarding, unless you are talking about extremely weak individuals or children. Since we are talking about trained guys that run around in the desert loaded down with weapons and supplies, water boarding is definitely not severe.

With regards to the politically correct, wimpified version of the Army Field Manual that you cited, you failed again, as we are discussing actions that our soldiers did before this was written.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Actually it’s not sufficient, as we are talking about Geneva, not something the UN Bureaucrats cooked up and the US did not sign on to. Even if we did, the use of the term “severe pain or suffering” precludes water boarding, unless you are talking about extremely weak individuals or children. Since we are talking about trained guys that run around in the desert loaded down with weapons and supplies, water boarding is definitely not severe.

With regards to the politically correct, wimpified version of the Army Field Manual that you cited, you failed again, as we are discussing actions that our soldiers did before this was written.

Let me strap you to a board and hold your head under water...I'm certain you'd be changing your tune. And, how do you know that for "...trained guys that run around in the desert loaded down with weapons and supplies...", waterboarding would not be a severe experience? Have you ever seen the look on the face of someone who can't breath? For whatever reason? It is a look of pure terror...Whether they are suffering from pulmonary edema or an airway obstruction...They invariably describe it as a terrifying experience.

So, imagine having that experience...unable to breathe...drowning...repeatedly...day in and day out. It constitutes torture under international and US law. Deal with it.

Our own 5th Amendment prohibits coerced confessions in criminal cases as such confessions are unreliable and do not get us any closer to the truth. It is no different in the case of torturing foreign detainees. Under duress, they will tell their interrogators what they want to hear, not what they need to hear. The intel thus gained is generally acknowledged as unreliable at best. At worst, it leads to wasted time and manpower tracking down whatever false leads the detainee provides just to make the pain stop...rather than concentrating on the viable intel obtained through more proven and reliable means of interrogation.

As for the Army changing the Field Manual, they did the right thing for the right reasons, which is far more than can be said for Chimpy and Co.

 

[Annie]

Let me strap you to a board and hold your head under water...I'm certain you'd be changing your tune. And, how do you know that for "...trained guys that run around in the desert loaded down with weapons and supplies...", waterboarding would not be a severe experience? Have you ever seen the look on the face of someone who can't breath? For whatever reason? It is a look of pure terror...Whether they are suffering from pulmonary edema or an airway obstruction...They invariably describe it as a terrifying experience.

So, imagine having that experience...unable to breathe...drowning...repeatedly...day in and day out. It constitutes torture under international and US law. Deal with it.

Our own 5th Amendment prohibits coerced confessions in criminal cases as such confessions are unreliable and do not get us any closer to the truth. It is no different in the case of torturing foreign detainees. Under duress, they will tell their interrogators what they want to hear, not what they need to hear. The intel thus gained is generally acknowledged as unreliable at best.

As for the Army changing the Field Manual, they did the right thing fo the right reasons, which is far more than can be said for Chimpy and Co.

Bully, if I force you to read a month of National Review, you might consider that cruel. So, I'm in violation if I have a position of power and make you write summaries?

 

[Bullypulpit]

Bully, if I force you to read a month of National Review, you might consider that cruel. So, I'm in violation if I have a position of power and make you write summaries?

Hardly, dear lady, since I love to read anyways. It would also give me no end of pleasure to poke holes in their right-wing claptrap.

So, how does it feel to be supporting the means used by despots throughtout the ages to instill fear in their enemies, both at home and abroad? How does it feel to support torture, which runs so contrary to the ideals of the founders of this Republic? How does it feel to support torture, which runs contrary to both US and international law? How does it feel to support and administrationwhich defines toture as anything which results in organ failure or death, while any thing less is just "aggressive interrogation"?

Hope you sleep well tonight.

 

[Annie]

Hardly, dear lady, since I love to read anyways. It would also give me no end of pleasure to poke holes in their right-wing claptrap.

So, how does it feel to be supporting the means used by despots throughtout the ages to instill fear in their enemies, both at home and abroad? How does it feel to support torture, which runs so contrary to the ideals of the founders of this Republic? How does it feel to support torture, which runs contrary to both US and international law? How does it feel to support and administrationwhich defines toture as anything which results in organ failure or death, while any thing less is just "aggressive interrogation"?

Hope you sleep well tonight.

Actually I'll sleep well, though I wish all was what you claim it to be. It's not, because your ilk is winning. There should be the limit, short of torture. My guess, until there is an attack that forces the West to recognize the East, will not happen.

In a real sense, we diss them by figuring they are not up to the challenge, in this, we are wrong.