US Senate Votes To Ban Torture

[g5000]

>> In the war crimes tribunals that followed Japan's defeat in World War II, the issue of waterboarding was sometimes raised. In 1947, the U.S. charged a Japanese officer, Yukio Asano, with war crimes for waterboarding a U.S. civilian. Asano was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor.

... On Jan. 21, 1968, The Washington Post ran a front-page photo of a U.S. soldier supervising the waterboarding of a captured North Vietnamese soldier. The caption said the technique induced "a flooding sense of suffocation and drowning, meant to make him talk." The picture led to an Army investigation and, two months later, the court martial of the soldier.

Cases of waterboarding have occurred on U.S. soil, as well. In 1983, Texas Sheriff James Parker was charged, along with three of his deputies, for handcuffing prisoners to chairs, placing towels over their faces, and pouring water on the cloth until they gave what the officers considered to be confessions. The sheriff and his deputies were all convicted and sentenced to four years in prison. << -- Waterboarding: A Tortured History
​

it would be all well and good if the recent cases involved soldiers, which they do not. One of the downsides of being an unlawful combatant is you don't get the protections given to soldiers under the rules of war.

and the last one was done by law enforcement on civilian prisoners, again, not the same thing.

Waterboarding itself was defined as "water torture" by the US Government. TORTURE. It had nothing to do with the status of the victim.

 

[g5000]

Just another reason we shouldn't be playing by the rules. We should be playing by their rules which is No rules.

Doubt they would like that at all.

Spoken like I would expect a nazi to speak.

LMAO Buddy.

Just another reason we shouldn't be playing by the rules. We should be playing by their rules which is No rules.

Doubt they would like that at all.

Spoken like I would expect a nazi to speak.

LMAO Buddy.

I'm a realist and your a coward who doesn't have the balls to do what needs to be done. A coward who hides behind that moral highroad and the good guy bullshit all the while calling anyone who doesn't agree with you a Natzi.

LMAO asshole.

 

[martybegan]

Cowards. These torture fetishists are cowards. They tremble in fear of the Muslim terrorist bogeyman. They are so frightened, they are willing to throw out our Constitution and our humanity to feel safer.

Unlawful combatants are not protected by out constitution.

The question was about citizens and you were willing to torture them, too. You were willing to shred the Constitution to feed your torture fetish.

As for unlawful combatants, as I have proven to you THREE TIMES, they are protected by the Geneva Conventions from torture.

I am willing to strip Americans of their citizenship if they decide to unlawfully take up arms against our country or another country.

And again, that is your interpretation, nothing more. If you take up arms against a nation state as an undeclared participant, I have zero issue with them lining your ass up and opening fire summarily. And as for interrogation, make these assholes squeal.

 

[martybegan]

>> In the war crimes tribunals that followed Japan's defeat in World War II, the issue of waterboarding was sometimes raised. In 1947, the U.S. charged a Japanese officer, Yukio Asano, with war crimes for waterboarding a U.S. civilian. Asano was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor.

... On Jan. 21, 1968, The Washington Post ran a front-page photo of a U.S. soldier supervising the waterboarding of a captured North Vietnamese soldier. The caption said the technique induced "a flooding sense of suffocation and drowning, meant to make him talk." The picture led to an Army investigation and, two months later, the court martial of the soldier.

Cases of waterboarding have occurred on U.S. soil, as well. In 1983, Texas Sheriff James Parker was charged, along with three of his deputies, for handcuffing prisoners to chairs, placing towels over their faces, and pouring water on the cloth until they gave what the officers considered to be confessions. The sheriff and his deputies were all convicted and sentenced to four years in prison. << -- Waterboarding: A Tortured History
​

it would be all well and good if the recent cases involved soldiers, which they do not. One of the downsides of being an unlawful combatant is you don't get the protections given to soldiers under the rules of war.

and the last one was done by law enforcement on civilian prisoners, again, not the same thing.

Waterboarding itself was defined as "water torture" by the US Government. TORTURE. It had nothing to do with the status of the victim.

It has everything to do with the status of the person breaking the rules of war. You want protections afforded by the rules? Follow the rules. If you can't win the fight following the rules, don't start the fight.

 

[martybegan]

>> In the war crimes tribunals that followed Japan's defeat in World War II, the issue of waterboarding was sometimes raised. In 1947, the U.S. charged a Japanese officer, Yukio Asano, with war crimes for waterboarding a U.S. civilian. Asano was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor.

... On Jan. 21, 1968, The Washington Post ran a front-page photo of a U.S. soldier supervising the waterboarding of a captured North Vietnamese soldier. The caption said the technique induced "a flooding sense of suffocation and drowning, meant to make him talk." The picture led to an Army investigation and, two months later, the court martial of the soldier.

Cases of waterboarding have occurred on U.S. soil, as well. In 1983, Texas Sheriff James Parker was charged, along with three of his deputies, for handcuffing prisoners to chairs, placing towels over their faces, and pouring water on the cloth until they gave what the officers considered to be confessions. The sheriff and his deputies were all convicted and sentenced to four years in prison. << -- Waterboarding: A Tortured History
​

it would be all well and good if the recent cases involved soldiers, which they do not. One of the downsides of being an unlawful combatant is you don't get the protections given to soldiers under the rules of war.

and the last one was done by law enforcement on civilian prisoners, again, not the same thing.

Doesn't matter "who it involves" or who it doesn't --- the point is WE -- the same country that committed these war crimes in Iraq -- prosecuted others, including our own personnel, for doing the same thing.

An action is either a crime, or it isn't a crime. You can't change definitions like shirts. The point is a hypocrisy of definitions. If it's wrong for a US soldier to waterboard Vietnamese, if it's also wrong for a Japanese soldier to waterboard Americans, if it's additionally wrong for Sheriff Humpy to pull over out-of-state license plates and waterboard them ---- then it's wrong. PERIOD.

Having it both ways: Priceless.

Interesting background -- Sheriff Humpy was discovered and nailed when one of his random harassment stops that he took back to waterboard turned out to be an undercover FBI agent. Oopsie.

Apparently the FBI doesn't think it's kosher either.

Actually you can have it any way, it all depends on the status of the person in question. Rules only protect people who follow them.

 

[Claudette]

Just another reason we shouldn't be playing by the rules. We should be playing by their rules which is No rules.

Doubt they would like that at all.

Spoken like I would expect a nazi to speak.

LMAO Buddy.

Just another reason we shouldn't be playing by the rules. We should be playing by their rules which is No rules.

Doubt they would like that at all.

Spoken like I would expect a nazi to speak.

LMAO Buddy.

I'm a realist and your a coward who doesn't have the balls to do what needs to be done. A coward who hides behind that moral highroad and the good guy bullshit all the while calling anyone who doesn't agree with you a Natzi.

LMAO asshole.

Nice looking young ladies. Too bad they are racists.

Mayby they will burn a cross on your lawn??

 

[ChrisL]

I wonder what kind of people would want to torture another person. I mean, if my child was kidnapped and I needed to find out where he was or something, then I could almost understand torture, but to torture a person that you don't even know just to get some information? You must be kind of a sick fuck.

 

[Pogo]

I wonder what kind of people would want to torture another person. I mean, if my child was kidnapped and I needed to find out where he was or something, then I could almost understand torture, but to torture a person that you don't even know just to get some information? You must be kind of a sick fuck.

People like Claudette apparently.

 

[martybegan]

I wonder what kind of people would want to torture another person. I mean, if my child was kidnapped and I needed to find out where he was or something, then I could almost understand torture, but to torture a person that you don't even know just to get some information? You must be kind of a sick fuck.

Nuclear bomb in LA, the person you have has the location and the shut down code. Bomb goes of in 1 hour.

Proceed.

 

[Claudette]

I wonder what kind of people would want to torture another person. I mean, if my child was kidnapped and I needed to find out where he was or something, then I could almost understand torture, but to torture a person that you don't even know just to get some information? You must be kind of a sick fuck.

The only sick fucks I see are the ones hiding behind that moral highroad. Guess that's you.

 

[ChrisL]

I wonder what kind of people would want to torture another person. I mean, if my child was kidnapped and I needed to find out where he was or something, then I could almost understand torture, but to torture a person that you don't even know just to get some information? You must be kind of a sick fuck.

The only sick fucks I see are the ones hiding behind that moral highroad. Guess that's you.

Why? You think that a person should WANT to torture people and that people who wouldn't do that are the sick fucks? Having morals makes one a sick fuck?

 

[ChrisL]

I wonder what kind of people would want to torture another person. I mean, if my child was kidnapped and I needed to find out where he was or something, then I could almost understand torture, but to torture a person that you don't even know just to get some information? You must be kind of a sick fuck.

Nuclear bomb in LA, the person you have has the location and the shut down code. Bomb goes of in 1 hour.

Proceed.

Okay, that's another fair example. However, torture should not be used as a normal interrogation method. For one thing, it's not very reliable because people will say anything to get the torture to stop.

 

[Claudette]

I wonder what kind of people would want to torture another person. I mean, if my child was kidnapped and I needed to find out where he was or something, then I could almost understand torture, but to torture a person that you don't even know just to get some information? You must be kind of a sick fuck.

Nope. Just a realist.

You must be a gutless wonder.

 

[ChrisL]

I wonder what kind of people would want to torture another person. I mean, if my child was kidnapped and I needed to find out where he was or something, then I could almost understand torture, but to torture a person that you don't even know just to get some information? You must be kind of a sick fuck.

The only sick fucks I see are the ones hiding behind that moral highroad. Guess that's you.

This is hilarious, really. It reminds of when I tell people that I don't like watching movies about people being tortured and killed, and they look at me like I'm the weird one. I'm like, no, it's you who is weird if you like that kind of stuff.

 

[ChrisL]

I wonder what kind of people would want to torture another person. I mean, if my child was kidnapped and I needed to find out where he was or something, then I could almost understand torture, but to torture a person that you don't even know just to get some information? You must be kind of a sick fuck.

Nope. Just a realist.

You must be a gutless wonder.

So if you don't want to torture or don't get enjoyment out of it, a person is gutless? Is this how you really feel? If so, seek help.

 

[Claudette]

I wonder what kind of people would want to torture another person. I mean, if my child was kidnapped and I needed to find out where he was or something, then I could almost understand torture, but to torture a person that you don't even know just to get some information? You must be kind of a sick fuck.

People like Claudette apparently.

Well it sure wouldn't be a gutless wonder like you bucko.

 

[Pogo]

I wonder what kind of people would want to torture another person. I mean, if my child was kidnapped and I needed to find out where he was or something, then I could almost understand torture, but to torture a person that you don't even know just to get some information? You must be kind of a sick fuck.

Nope. Just a realist.

You must be a gutless wonder.

So if you don't want to torture or don't get enjoyment out of it, a person is gutless? Is this how you really feel? If so, seek help.

People making critically wounded points like Claudette does reveal the real reason we, or anybody, engages in torture -- sadism. The emotional feedback of "revenge". It absolutely DRIPS off her posts with all the references to "shitbags". She's not interested in results or tactics or efficacies or saving American lives and image -- she just wants the emotional wank of sadism. It's like porn to that element.

Sadly it's how they roll in the shallow end of the gene puddle.

 

[Claudette]

I wonder what kind of people would want to torture another person. I mean, if my child was kidnapped and I needed to find out where he was or something, then I could almost understand torture, but to torture a person that you don't even know just to get some information? You must be kind of a sick fuck.

Nope. Just a realist.

You must be a gutless wonder.

So if you don't want to torture or don't get enjoyment out of it, a person is gutless? Is this how you really feel? If so, seek help.

Since I don't consider water boarding torture your comment is laughable.

Oh an no one would enjoy real torture. Too much blood and screaming.

 

[ChrisL]

I wonder what kind of people would want to torture another person. I mean, if my child was kidnapped and I needed to find out where he was or something, then I could almost understand torture, but to torture a person that you don't even know just to get some information? You must be kind of a sick fuck.

Nope. Just a realist.

You must be a gutless wonder.

So if you don't want to torture or don't get enjoyment out of it, a person is gutless? Is this how you really feel? If so, seek help.

People making critically wounded points like Claudette does reveal the real reason we, or anybody, engages in torture -- sadism. The emotional feedback of "revenge". It absolutely DRIPS off her posts with all the references to "shitbags". She's not interested in results or tactics or efficacies or saving American lives and image -- she just wants the emotional wank of sadism. It's like porn to that element.

Sadly it's how they roll in the shallow end of the gene puddle.

Oh I'm sure she could find someone here on this very site who is into that kind of stuff. Claudette don't forget the safe word!

 

[Claudette]

I wonder what kind of people would want to torture another person. I mean, if my child was kidnapped and I needed to find out where he was or something, then I could almost understand torture, but to torture a person that you don't even know just to get some information? You must be kind of a sick fuck.

Nope. Just a realist.

You must be a gutless wonder.

So if you don't want to torture or don't get enjoyment out of it, a person is gutless? Is this how you really feel? If so, seek help.

People making critically wounded points like Claudette does reveal the real reason we, or anybody, engages in torture -- sadism. The emotional feedback of "revenge". It absolutely DRIPS off her posts with all the references to "shitbags". She's not interested in results or tactics or efficacies or saving American lives and image -- she just wants the emotional wank of sadism. It's like porn to that element.

Sadly it's how they roll in the shallow end of the gene puddle.

Excuse me while I stand over here and LMAO.

No one would enjoy real torture. Too much blood and screaming.

Oh and they are shitbags. Killers par excellance who would dearly love to kill you me and anyone else they could get their hands on. Oh and they really would torture you.