All I want to know is did Judy Rulyannie and GWB officially make "9/11" their middle names yet?:dunno:
CIA Waterboarded Mohammed 183X in 1 Month, Zubaydah 83X in 1 month
- Thread starter Facial_King
- Start date
All I want to know is did Judy Rulyannie and GWB officially make "9/11" their middle names yet?:dunno:
so we should be like them? :dunno:
just because someone does something i don't like doesn't mean i should do it too.
in WWII the British refused to resort for torture. they treated German prisoners extremely well and got them to cooperate that way. they knew torture is usually counterproductive as someone will say anything to stop it. when you befriend someone, they help you. the British success at that played an important role in winning the war. :thumbsup:
meesterperfect
Hiliary 2020
so we should be like them? :dunno:
just because someone does something i don't like doesn't mean i should do it too.
in WWII the British refused to resort for torture. they treated German prisoners extremely well and got them to cooperate that way. they knew torture is usually counterproductive as someone will say anything to stop it. when you befriend someone, they help you. the British success at that played an important role in winning the war. :thumbsup:
yeah, the brits were nice to german prisoners and it helped win the war.
as opposed to the japanese castrating, dis-embowling and then burning alive its prisoners.
hmmm? the fear of getting cut open and watching your organs being removed one by one before being incinerated alive is not very much more effective than the fear of not getting your next smoke break when trying to get info from the enemy?
What you're failing to realize is the resignation to death in any event. If you're in a situation where you face that eventuality and you know you're up against brutal murderers...your best hope is to die quickly.
If you're up against those who would inflict such atrocities, you have to fairly accept you will potentially die a gruesome death. At which point, what is the point of saying anything that will be of use to your captors? Therefore, you are less likely to disclose useful information because to do so lets your captors know what they've done works. In so doing, you are 100 pct telling them to do it to the next guy because it worked on you.
The fear of being tortured really only works against people who fear death. If you've resigned yourself to dying at the hands of your captors..then torture while painful, is allot easier to resist.
Natural "fight or flight" response in most people makes us respond negatively to authoritarianism. Essentially, that's why torture produces more negative responses than credible responses.
I know this won't persuade the unpersuadable - those who won't be happy until President Obama hires Rush Limbaugh to put on a leather S&M outfit and put out his cigars on prisoner's eyes, pull out their fingernails with pliers, and do who-knows-what with their genitals (he'll have to pop some extra Viagra for that task!), etc. - but here are some items to consider:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...24/AR2009042403171_2.html?sid=ST2009042403231
Excerpts:
The military agency that provided advice on harsh interrogation techniques for use against terrorism suspects referred to the application of extreme duress as "torture" in a July 2002 document sent to the Pentagon's chief lawyer and warned that it would produce "unreliable information."
"The unintended consequence of a U.S. policy that provides for the torture of prisoners is that it could be used by our adversaries as justification for the torture of captured U.S. personnel," says the document, an unsigned two-page attachment to a memo by the military's Joint Personnel Recovery Agency...
"The requirement to obtain information from an uncooperative source as quickly as possible -- in time to prevent, for example, an impending terrorist attack that could result in loss of life -- has been forwarded as a compelling argument for the use of torture," the document said. "In essence, physical and/or psychological duress are viewed as an alternative to the more time-consuming conventional interrogation process. The error inherent in this line of thinking is the assumption that, through torture, the interrogator can extract reliable and accurate information. History and a consideration of human behavior would appear to refute this assumption."
===
ouch!
===
and this - apparently the U.S. deemed waterboarding to be torture, and considered it a capital crime, when committed by the Japanese in WWII. Even McCain had the integrity to point this out, but I doubt any of the wingers here will.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-begala/yes-inational-reviewi-we_b_191153.html
Sen. McCain was right and the National Review Online is wrong. Politifact, the St. Petersburg Times' truth-testing project (which this week was awarded a Pulitzer Prize), scrutinized Sen. McCain's statement and found it to be true. Here's the money quote from Politifact:
"McCain is referencing the Tokyo Trials, officially known as the International Military Tribunal for the Far East. After World War II, an international coalition convened to prosecute Japanese soldiers charged with torture. At the top of the list of techniques was water-based interrogation, known variously then as 'water cure,' 'water torture' and 'waterboarding,' according to the charging documents. It simulates drowning." Politifact went on to report, "A number of the Japanese soldiers convicted by American judges were hanged, while others received lengthy prison sentences or time in labor camps."
==
So pour that in your dirty rag and suck it!
:hatsoff:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...24/AR2009042403171_2.html?sid=ST2009042403231
Excerpts:
The military agency that provided advice on harsh interrogation techniques for use against terrorism suspects referred to the application of extreme duress as "torture" in a July 2002 document sent to the Pentagon's chief lawyer and warned that it would produce "unreliable information."
"The unintended consequence of a U.S. policy that provides for the torture of prisoners is that it could be used by our adversaries as justification for the torture of captured U.S. personnel," says the document, an unsigned two-page attachment to a memo by the military's Joint Personnel Recovery Agency...
"The requirement to obtain information from an uncooperative source as quickly as possible -- in time to prevent, for example, an impending terrorist attack that could result in loss of life -- has been forwarded as a compelling argument for the use of torture," the document said. "In essence, physical and/or psychological duress are viewed as an alternative to the more time-consuming conventional interrogation process. The error inherent in this line of thinking is the assumption that, through torture, the interrogator can extract reliable and accurate information. History and a consideration of human behavior would appear to refute this assumption."
===
ouch!
===
and this - apparently the U.S. deemed waterboarding to be torture, and considered it a capital crime, when committed by the Japanese in WWII. Even McCain had the integrity to point this out, but I doubt any of the wingers here will.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-begala/yes-inational-reviewi-we_b_191153.html
Sen. McCain was right and the National Review Online is wrong. Politifact, the St. Petersburg Times' truth-testing project (which this week was awarded a Pulitzer Prize), scrutinized Sen. McCain's statement and found it to be true. Here's the money quote from Politifact:
"McCain is referencing the Tokyo Trials, officially known as the International Military Tribunal for the Far East. After World War II, an international coalition convened to prosecute Japanese soldiers charged with torture. At the top of the list of techniques was water-based interrogation, known variously then as 'water cure,' 'water torture' and 'waterboarding,' according to the charging documents. It simulates drowning." Politifact went on to report, "A number of the Japanese soldiers convicted by American judges were hanged, while others received lengthy prison sentences or time in labor camps."
==
So pour that in your dirty rag and suck it!
:hatsoff:
Here's something nice for all you Americans who want the terrorism to stop, it's a documentaty by National Geographic about the Ku Klux Klan in modern day America.
They also have a very good documentary about American Nazi's. These are both groups with a radical relious ideology yet you seem content in allowing them to spread their hate. It also shows you can't even deal with this kind of thing in your own country.
They also have a very good documentary about American Nazi's. These are both groups with a radical relious ideology yet you seem content in allowing them to spread their hate. It also shows you can't even deal with this kind of thing in your own country.
I watched the two documentaries and already knew about the Klan and American nazis 14 years ago, but it is always important to see what happened to avoid that it repeats again. There are things that plague America, first gangs with the following ones:
18th Street
Aryan Brotherhood
Black Gangster Disciples
Black Guerrilla Family
Black P-Stone Nation
Bloods
Crips
Latin Kings
Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13)
Mexican Mafia
Native Gangs
Nazi Low Riders
Netas
Nortenos
Nuestra Familia
Peckerwoods
Southeast Asian Gangs
Surenos
Vice Lords
Also let's not forget biker gangs with the Hells Angels, Outlaws http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/series/inside/4371/Overview#tab-Videos/06493_00 and Bandidos. In Norway, the Hells Angels blew up a Bandidos bar with a rocket launcher.
At last but not least, there are also religious gangs including Black Panthers http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/series/inside/3952/Overview and Black nation of Islam led by Farrakhan that are dangerous and that go against American values.
Great post and link FK.While I knew waterboarding was definately considered torture I think maybe I still do not appreciate how severe of a torture it is and was unaware we had actually been that harsh on some of the Japanease who employed it with some being executed and some other getting lenghty jail sentences.
You know I have seen posts in threads here about the use of the A bombs on japan that basically said they deserved it since they had been so brutal on civilians and captured soldiers.Now while I do not criticize the use of the A bombs at that time given the circumstances I think if we are going to say that torture means you deserve to be nuked what does that say about what we deserve? But then again I forget we have a lot of double standards on such things.
They were nuked primarily to save lives and bring a deadly, costly war to an end.
Like I said don't disagree with their use and think you are correct using them saved lives, we were especially concerned with saving american ones which was a legitamate consideration.
I also think their use was inevitable given all the money, resources,effort that went into the manhattan project.
Let's not forget that the A bomb was dropped after the Japanese emperor had surrendered. The A bomb was dropped as an American show of force.
meesterperfect
Hiliary 2020
you and many others here are really really anti-us.
period.
no matter what its your automatc reaction to go against the usa.
you are not alone, its the in thing.
Anyway you are just plain wrong.
it was only a matter of time before the japanese attacked the us on us soil with chemical or atomic weaponry.
would you have preferred that?
I can't believe that after what this guy did you people are so upset because he was waterboarded.
big deal, the guy killed thousands of people, civilians who's only crime was being american.
you want to see some torture? some real torture.
do you want to hate real torturers?
watch it, but it won't bother you because its not the usa doing it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAp8bSdE5MQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQK5thIYJCI
and please don't run with the two wrongs don't make a right typical responses.
the point is you people pick and choose what you want to condemn.
if its other people doing it you don't say peep, if its the us doing something even so much more mild you automatically condemn.
the media knows this, Obama knows this, thats why it was the top story last week, and you guys fell for it hook line and sinker.
Facetious
Moderated
and once again READ the Geneva Convention again and highlight the part that makes these two ellegible. :dunno:
Boothbabe is honest and sincere, which is perfectly fine, OTOH The thread author appears to want nothing more than sheer mayhem, blood, burning corpses, busted glass, smoke & ash, don't you author, death to us all ?
Boothbabe is honest and sincere, which is perfectly fine, OTOH The thread author appears to want nothing more than sheer mayhem, blood, burning corpses, busted glass, smoke & ash, don't you author, death to us all ?
I condemn everone who commits acts of violence. And yes, I'm against the USA as a war mongering nation just like I'm against other war mongering nations. The sad thing is that the USA as a superpower has the chance and ability to change the world for the better yet your government chooses not to do so.
Perhaps, you should condemn Ben Laden who bombed the American embassy in Nairobi in Kenya in 1997, who bombed the WTC the first time in 1993 and the USS Cole in 1999. Also, you should condemn the Hezbollah, Fatah, Hamas and Al Aqsah Martyr Brigades for their daily murders against Israeli civilians. BTW, you should also condemn people who support terrorists like Bachar El Assad and Ahmadinejhad. In France like most everywhere in Europe, it is very typical from the left wing to criticize what Republicans have done and always put a sticker that Republicans are evil.
I know that the left wing in Europe loved Bill the Liar under Oath and love Daddy O. Also, there is another thing I know is that if you let your country get attacked and don't react immediately, you will be defeated or blamed for not fighting terrorism. Wars are not a pleasant thing, but they are necessary to get rid of threats. Many people forget who freed them of nazism and also with whose money Europe was reconstructed. Diplomacy doesn't always work especially with rogue regimes where strenght is needed. I think that the peace through strenght was the ideal system that allowed USA to control difficult situations and find solutions quickly, it was implemented by Ronald Reagan. Also, a strong military presence is a sign of goodwill and a reminder that the USA will always be here to rescue its allies.
We will see what the future reserve us. But the will to follow the UN by the Obama administration clearly shows that it is a weak administration which aims to please what other nations tell her do and not to defend the interests of America.
and once again READ the Geneva Convention again and highlight the part that makes these two ellegible. :dunno:
Boothbabe is honest and sincere, which is perfectly fine, OTOH The thread author appears to want nothing more than sheer mayhem, blood, burning corpses, busted glass, smoke & ash, don't you author, death to us all ?
Hey, facetious, that was beyond the pale. Totally uncalled for.
:thefinger
Similar threads
