3DHS on Torture

[sirs]

It is a leagal question that doesn't benefit from ambiguity.  Could being subjected to endless pointless quibbling over details of the argument rather than the point in question , torturous parsing of common words and verbose justification for verbosity be consideredTorture?

No?

Big monstrous YES, to that one.  Boy, oh boy, the amount of anquish and mental distress in having to deal with some of Tee's irrationalization somersaults, definately needs to be officially declared as such     

[Plane]

It is a leagal question that doesn't benefit from ambiguity.  Could being subjected to endless pointless quibbling over details of the argument rather than the point in question , torturous parsing of common words and verbose justification for verbosity be consideredTorture?

No?

Big monstrous YES, to that one.  Boy, oh boy, the amount of anquish and mental distress in having to deal with some of Tee's irrationalization somersaults, definately needs to be officially declared as such     



Mote ----> beam   

[Universe Prince]

And I don't have a problem with "distress" either, as a means of interrogating terrorists.

You're not getting this. And no matter what I say, you're keep minimizing it with quotes, like saying "distress" and "angush", and by talking about mental stress as if I were talking about getting fired after a bad day at work. So forget it. If you cannot grasp the notion of excruciating physical and/or mental distress, suffering or pain as torture, then there is no point in bothering to discuss this with you.

[Plane]

And I don't have a problem with "distress" either, as a means of interrogating terrorists.

You're not getting this. And no matter what I say, you're keep minimizing it with quotes, like saying "distress" and "anguish", and by talking about mental stress as if I were talking about getting fired after a bad day at work. So forget it. If you cannot grasp the notion of excruciating physical and/or mental distress, suffering or pain as torture, then there is no point in bothering to discuss this with you.

     What level of distress are you considering to be unacceptable?

Say that on a scale of one to ten , one being comfortable and ten being enough pain to make death look good , should he point of forbidding be five or eight?



Can this be made objective?

[sirs]

The problem you have Prince is that I can differentiate between having a bad day and sleep deprivation.  I can differentiate between losing out on a promotion and debilitating pain.  You ever get a migraine??  I've had them since I was 12, so anquish and physical suffering I know plenty.  I also know the difference between distress and actual acts of torture.  What I "minimize" is the effort to upgrade acts such as simple head slapping (read NOT getting the tar beat out of you) and loud music as acts of "torture", while those who commit the real acts of barbary and torture, rarely get mentioned, much less condemned.  And when they do, it sure appears as token criticism, and not too long, gotta get back on the evils of American head slapping

[Christians4LessGvt]

sirs
i reluctantly support it as a last resort
if there is just cause to think it could produce something of vital importance to save american/allies lives
then yes
however I reject torture for the sake of torture, in other words as say for punishment
you don't torture someone just because they are the enemy or as a punishment option
there has to be an overwhelming justifiable reason to get access to vital national security information
but if the torture in very limited cases can produce vital information to ensure the country's safety, then yes

(btw sirs:)
yes i fully expect, as is often the case with "them"
to be demonized
just like with immigration
if you don't agree with "them" on immigration, eventually you must be a racist
and I expect with this torture issue, it will be the same
if you think it is ok in a very rare instance as a last resort
then I expect to be painted as some raving lunatic
that wants a torture chamber at every police station
to be used daily in all prisons and jails
which of course is once again a "demonization for disagreement"

[The_Professor]

Tee appears to want to debate "torture", and even though it's been discussed adnauseum, I started a thread for those that may wish to chime in

Now, I'm guessing that certain terms need to be defined with some parameters, since its far too easy to lay claim that anyone that supports Bush or the war on terror, and the use of interrogation techniques, supposedly supports "torture".  So, before any discussion can be initiated, lets lay some groundwork

Head slapping is NOT torture, can we agree to that?  Made to listen to loud music and various means of sleep deprivation is NOT torture.  Can we agree to that?  Being made to wear panties on one's head is NOT torture, can we agree to that?

If we can't even agree to the above, I really see no reason to continue.  Can we all agree to that?

On the panties thing, I agree that it is not torture.

More a wreath on the crown of the victorious.

Good one, Crane! 

[Mr_Perceptive]

Gosh, what a bunch of panty-waists and do-gooders! Grow up, folks!

If natonal security is at stake, you do what is necessary to extract the information. This is defined by the CA and his designees. If you personally do not wantto participate in the process ,then back off.

I have done this a few times in order to extract valuable information. I remember in 'Nam, I extracted information on where the Cong were waiting in ambush for our troops. Without this information, probably 20 guys would have been slaughtered. Do I regret this? Hell no, I would willingly do it again!

When you get all high and mighty, just remember that sometimes people lives are at stake!

[_JS]

Tee appears to want to debate "torture", and even though it's been discussed adnauseum, I started a thread for those that may wish to chime in

Now, I'm guessing that certain terms need to be defined with some parameters, since its far too easy to lay claim that anyone that supports Bush or the war on terror, and the use of interrogation techniques, supposedly supports "torture".  So, before any discussion can be initiated, lets lay some groundwork

Head slapping is NOT torture, can we agree to that?  Made to listen to loud music and various means of sleep deprivation is NOT torture.  Can we agree to that?  Being made to wear panties on one's head is NOT torture, can we agree to that?

If we can't even agree to the above, I really see no reason to continue.  Can we all agree to that?

Sleep deprivation can most certainly be defined as torture.

The Romans did not play semantics with sleep deprivation, they called it tormentum vigilae or "waking torture." It is a tactic that the Imperial Japanese and KGB used thoroughly. The British used it on IRA prisoners as well. South Africa was infamous for their use of sleep deprivation on ANC prisoners during apartheid.

Here's testimony from John Schlapobersky, who was tortured in this manner in the 1960's by South Africa.

I was kept without sleep for a week in all. I can remember the details of the experience, although it took place 35 years ago. After two nights without sleep, the hallucinations start, and after three nights, people are having dreams while fairly awake, which is a form of psychosis.

By the week's end, people lose their orientation in place and time - the people you're speaking to become people from your past; a window might become a view of the sea seen in your younger days. To deprive someone of sleep is to tamper with their equilibrium and their sanity.

And here is the testimony of Menachem Begin, later to be Prime Minister of Israel, who was tortured in this manner by the KGB in his younger days:

In the head of the interrogated prisoner, a haze begins to form. His spirit is wearied to death, his legs are unsteady, and he has one sole desire: to sleep... Anyone who has experienced this desire knows that not even hunger and thirst are comparable with it.

I came across prisoners who signed what they were ordered to sign, only to get what the interrogator promised them.

He did not promise them their liberty; he did not promise them food to sate themselves. He promised them - if they signed - uninterrupted sleep! And, having signed, there was nothing in the world that could move them to risk again such nights and such days.

You can find more here.

[_JS]

Gosh, what a bunch of panty-waists and do-gooders! Grow up, folks!

If natonal security is at stake, you do what is necessary to extract the information. This is defined by the CA and his designees. If you personally do not wantto participate in the process ,then back off.

I have done this a few times in order to extract valuable information. I remember in 'Nam, I extracted information on where the Cong were waiting in ambush for our troops. Without this information, probably 20 guys would have been slaughtered. Do I regret this? Hell no, I would willingly do it again!

When you get all high and mighty, just remember that sometimes people lives are at stake!

Yeah, I'm calling bullshit on this one.

[Lanya]

Gosh, what a bunch of panty-waists and do-gooders! Grow up, folks!

If natonal security is at stake, you do what is necessary to extract the information. This is defined by the CA and his designees. If you personally do not wantto participate in the process ,then back off.

I have done this a few times in order to extract valuable information. I remember in 'Nam, I extracted information on where the Cong were waiting in ambush for our troops. Without this information, probably 20 guys would have been slaughtered. Do I regret this? Hell no, I would willingly do it again!

When you get all high and mighty, just remember that sometimes people lives are at stake!

That is why we are ...or were... a better country, or so i thought, than countries who torture.  Because we have laws that prohibit the use of torture.  Torture is unamerican.   It is antithetical to our country's standards. 

[Mr_Perceptive]

Gosh, what a bunch of panty-waists and do-gooders! Grow up, folks!

If natonal security is at stake, you do what is necessary to extract the information. This is defined by the CA and his designees. If you personally do not wantto participate in the process ,then back off.

I have done this a few times in order to extract valuable information. I remember in 'Nam, I extracted information on where the Cong were waiting in ambush for our troops. Without this information, probably 20 guys would have been slaughtered. Do I regret this? Hell no, I would willingly do it again!

When you get all high and mighty, just remember that sometimes people lives are at stake!

Yeah, I'm calling bullshit on this one.

Bullshit? You must be so empty between the ears, it isn't funny!

Sometimes you do what you need to do to get the job done!

Bet you never been in combat.

[_JS]

Bullshit? You must be so empty between the ears, it isn't funny!

Sometimes you do what you need to do to get the job done!

Bet you never been in combat.

I've known a lot of vets, especially Vietnam vets, including my own father.

I've never heard any of them talk like that, even the gung-ho types.

Others may buy into all that and that's fine with me. But there was something really odd about that little paragraph you wrote. Just my observation. I'm not asking anyone else to believe me.

[Mr_Perceptive]

sigh...sometimes, I wonder why I bother with you liberal types. So much effort to educate you with so little results. And, increasingly, at my age, I find I have even less patience...

However, I did my duty to protect EVERYONE, including you, for what it is worth.

[_JS]

Socialist, not liberal. 

Educate away, I'm listening.