It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

ABUSE CRISIS: ACLU : Bush Authorized Torture

page: 8
0
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kidfinger
..........
What I have been trying to get at is the fact that you cannot see that it doesnt matter what scale the torture is on, its ALL still torture, and if you condone the easy stuff, you must be willing to under go the ruff stuff as well. So, since the previouse question seems to be something you would rather avoid with a battle of wit, I will rephrase the question. Do you condone torture?


Why? because you say so?..... There isn't a middle ground according to you?........

A person can condone lesser forms of punishment and be against capital punishment at the same time, in case you didn't know.




posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 01:37 PM
link   
Oh boy....

as posted by Marg
Seekerof don't get confused now...



Marg,

I'm neither confused nor adrift on this matter.


as posted by Marg
I know the ACLU FBI papers are very bad for bush administration.


Bad? Perhaps. Unfounded and unfactual, likely. With all that has been presented, there is simply nothing to be found as 'damning' and remains nothing more than an unconfirmed and unfactualized allegation, perpetuated by the ACLU.





seekerof



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 01:38 PM
link   
Seekerof, I agree. To some degree both sides of this debate are guilty of bending "the facts" toward their preferred perspective. But it is difficult to get hold of the facts when the key players are liars and disinformation junkies, isn't it? So, when there is a leak such as this which hints at what is really going on we have a tendency to see it as the tip of the iceberg. That's generally a very sound way of viewing this sort of thing. \

After all, until the Abu Graib revelations we were generally led to believe that our "leaders" were a benign and friendly force in the desert whose presence was for the good of the locals and all mankind and we were only doing bad things to bad people. Oh, we made mistakes, like killing an entire extended family of bride and groom in Afghanistan at their wedding celebration. But, of course, that was alright since we really honestly truly, God so help us, thought they were bad guys. So it was OK to kill them and all we needed to give in return was a sincere "We're sorry, but you looked like bad guys, what with the wedding celebration and all that going on." . What bunk! But many Americans want to believe in their leaders and dismiss all the signs of evil that are in their faces every day.

We have seen many evening news images of captured suspected enemy combatants and insurgents tortured in broad daylight. What is it when a man is forced to maintain a squatting position for hours on end with a hood over his head and his hands tied behind his back with plastic ties. That's not torture???? Why don't you try it some time, and don't forget to make the plastic ties nice and tight so they dig in and cut off circulation. I bet you couldn't endure that for ten minutes. Torture is always acceptable when it's inflicted on someone else. The public displays are always benign attempts to say "lookie here, we aren't being so bad to them" but pale in comparison to what the sadists among us are doing to their victims behind closed doors.

Saying that the bad guys' sadists are as bad or badder than ours is neither an argument nor a justification. It might make you feel better about the evil that they're committing in your name, but, such feelings aside, it's still evil.



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 01:45 PM
link   
Well this thread has now successfully lowered Torture to "have you stopped beating your wife" and "do you spank you kids". US public education at its best.



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by DrHoracid

Where was the ACLU when 80 children were burned alive in WACO and a small innocent Cuban boy was taken at GUNPOINT back to a communist hellhole called CUBA. The ACLU has an agenda - that is to tear down America.


Now, Dr.haracid lets be fair now, Waco was a mess and as a mother I will not comment on Julian Gonzales.

No body is tearing our country but the policies of our administration. Atrocities can not be hidden for to long from the eyes of the American people.

Through history we have been able to find out sooner of later of the bad things that our elected officials has done in the name of our nation and its people I called bad judgment decisions.

Thank to the INTERNET we are getting news faster than ever. Our officials are elected by the people and the people has the right to know what they are doing in our name.

That is how a true American should feel about its government.

A presidend does not have the right to ask his people to be "with him or against him" he is suppoused to be with the people and when he goes against the people that is for us the to judge him. No for him to judge us.



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by DrHoracid

Where was the ACLU when 80 children were burned alive in WACO and a small innocent cuban boy was taken at GUNPOINT back to a communist hellhole called CUBA. The ACLU has an agenda - that is to tear down america.


NOt only that, I want to see what ACLU is doing about what the French military has been doing in the Ivory Coast....by shooting at disarmed people, including women and children...these were people that had no guns, or rifles, yet the French forces opened fire and killed many. We haven't heard anything else about this situation....

I want to see where ACLU, together with every other "human right association or group" was when last month or so 22 Cubans who left Cuba in "balsas" (home made boats) some of them being women and children, arrived in Bahamas and the government put the Cubans in jail, mistreating them, torturing them, and doing a whole lot worse than what is said in the above memo.... They already sent these Cubans back to castro's country last week, and you can be sure the men, and probably the women, will most probably be in jail for most of the rest of their lives for trying to escape.....the children will be "indoctrinated" into accepting the policies of castro....


[edit on 22-12-2004 by Muaddib]



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 01:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
.......................
Thank to the INTERNET we are getting news faster than ever. Our officials are elected by the people and the people has the right to know what they are doing in our name.

That is how a true American should feel about its government.

A presidend does not have the right to ask his people to be "with him or against him" he is suppoused to be with the people and when he goes against the people that is for us the to judge him. No for him to judge us.


Thanks to the internet a lot of bs information is out there too, and many people are willing to believe anything that is on the internet......

About your comment on what a president has a right to ask or not to ask to the people......I also remember another president, a democrat, saying "ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 01:58 PM
link   
I agree ALL torture is wrong, but if I were captured by my enemy while trying to kill them, I would not be surprised when they didn't give me an ice cream cone, take me to happy fun camp and give me fuzzy slippers. I have not heard many suggestions, beside the obvious "we shouldn't be there to begin with" which I am in full agreement with, as to how you extract crucial information from a highly determined enemy that may save the lives of your fellow soldiers. Bring in Dr. Phil? Maybe he could passively convince them to spill the beans, but I doubt it. How do you get info from your enemy if not by torture?

Put yourselves in the shoes of the prisoners, imagine if you hated your captors and believed they were sent by the devil, and they politely ask you to rat out your friends, would you think "gee, they're really nice guys, Allah be damned, I'm gonna help them out", probably not, you'd probably tell them a lie and send them on a wild goose chase, or, they could attach electrodes to your nuts, send some voltage through those bad boys, and most would sing like a bird, and not lie because they don't want more of the same. It just seems logical that if you're fighting a war, right or wrong, you fight to win and keep your comrades safe.



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 02:00 PM
link   
Well Muaddib, is very sad the problem with the Cuban situation, but you have to understand that people in the US is screaming for the government to used stronger policies against illegals.

I am against the closing of borders and I thing that anybody should be allowed to enter this country in good faith.

But you are very well aware that the heat is on about migration policies.

Sad very sad for your Cuban fellow nationals. After all I was not born in the US main land either and even when I was born American I feel very touchy about migrants and our borders in this country I think is very unfair what they have to go through.



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib
NOt only that, I want to see what ACLU is doing about what the French military has been doing in the Ivory Coast


I think ACLU stands for 'American' Civil Liberties Union, not much jurisdiction in the Ivory Coast, call the UN on that issue.



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib

About your comment on what a president has a right to ask or not to ask to the people......I also remember another president, a democrat, saying "ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."


Exactly we have the right to make sure that our country leaders are doing the right thing for the good of our nation.

So we should not expect the government to do all the decisions without asking us the people of this nation if we want it or not.



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib

A person can condone lesser forms of punishment and be against capital punishment at the same time, in case you didn't know.


Go back and reread my allagory.


Seekerof,

You say there is a grey area to torture, and that is what you condone. Let me quote a little something that really describes the truth about how that "grey area" affects the body. Then lets see if you still beilieve its humain.


Dr. O'Malley was the first medical man to see any of the men who had undergone the SD [sensory deprivation] torture. He saw two of the original twelve men in Crumlin Road jail sixteen days after their ordeal, and one other somewhat later. He estimated that all three had developed a psychosis within the first day of interrogation. The psychosis consisted of loss of sense of time, perceptual disturbances leading to visual and auditory hallucinations, profound apprehension and depression, and delusional beliefs e.g. hearing Paisley [A Protestant Minister] lead an evangelical choir intent on slaughtering Catholics.
? Of the three men, O'Malley gave as his opinion that one would recover completely, one would possibly recover but the process would be lengthy, and one was in need of urgent psychiatric assistance if he was to make a full recovery. Despite the doctor's recommendations, nothing was done and all were subsequently moved from Crumlin jail to Long Kesh [an internment camp].
In his book The Guinea Pigs (1974), author John McGuffin goes a long way towards explaining exactly how this type of psychological torture works. Sensory deprivation (SD) refers literally to the artificial deprivation of the senses auditory, visual, tactile and kinesthetic. In connection with the Northern Ireland 'guineapigs' it meant (1) hooding prisoners prior to their interrogation; (2) constant use of a sound machine which produces white noise', a high pitched hissing, mushy sound; (3) long periods of immobilization, being forced to lean against a wall, legs wide apart with only the fingertips touching the wall; (4) little or no food or drink; and (5) being forced to wear loose overalls, several sizes too big. In addition, (6) prisoners were deprived of sleep for days on end; while not technically SD this accentuates the process.
"There is a purpose behind all these actions. Measures (1), (2), (3) and (5) cause visual, auditory, kinesthetic and tactile deprivation while measures (4) and (6) deprive the brain of oxygen and sugar necessary for normal functioning. In addition, measures (1), (4) and (6) may disturb the normal body metabolism. Hooding causes an imbalance in the ratio of oxygen to carbon dioxide in the air breathed and this causes mental confusion. The wall-standing, which is deliberately made to sound so innocuous by apologists like Sir Edmund Compton is extremely painful especially when accompanied by beatings and causes, in addition to fatigue and swollen wrists and ankles, poor circulation of the blood which leads to a reduced supply of oxygen and sugar to the brain. The restricted and in some cases almost non-existent diet was also sugar-free (Storr has pointed out that the brain needs three things if it is to function efficiently: sensory stimulation, sugar and oxygen).


Now after having read this, can you really say that the "grey area" is a good thing? Sounds like a pretty bad way to be treated to me. As I have said befor, there are better, proven methods of interrogation that are more congruent with American values and beliefs. The grey area is very inhumain. Very Bushlike. Very Hitlerlike. Yes, I am making that comparison because it is there in his actions. He has provide no growth and benifit for this country or the world. Only a global struggle which threatens to eliminate the American way of life.

source:
www.geocities.com...



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 02:07 PM
link   
As indicated in this topic thread previously, "torture" and its definition is indeed a grey area, probably along the lines of defining a freedom fighter/insurgent and a terrorist. Your presented information is enlightening, but in no uncertain terms changes my stance and belief on its controversial uses.





seekerof

[edit on 22-12-2004 by Seekerof]



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 02:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by DrHoracid
Where was the ACLU when 80 children were burned alive in WACO and a small innocent cuban boy was taken at GUNPOINT back to a communist hellhole called CUBA. The ACLU has an agenda - that is to tear down america.


I beg to differ,

The ACLU was established to safeguard the American values of freedom and personal liberty embodied in the Constitution. They have nothing to do with investigating religious cult mass murder or the immigration issues of refugee civilians from Cuba.

Are the FAA investigating train wrecks?

I actually support the ACLU and their fight for our civil liberties. What's wrong with defending women who remain susceptible to sexual harassment at airline security gates? Or the Ethiopian woman who was brought to the US and forced to work without pay in complete violation of state, federal and international laws. Or the continuing fight for gay rights, such as marriage or an Arkansas law that bans gay people and anyone living in a household with a gay adult from being foster parents in the state.

Sure they're liberal, but the overall good intentions IMO are needed.



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 02:09 PM
link   


Where was the ACLU when 80 children were burned alive in WACO and a small innocent cuban boy was taken at GUNPOINT back to a communist hellhole called CUBA. The ACLU has an agenda - that is to tear down america.


This is irrelevent. I ask you this: Where was CNN when Kissenger sold arms to Indonesia, who then carried out the slaughter of over 200,000 East Timor Citizens? Where was CNN when America was selling arms to Iraq after Iran refused to accept a puppet? Where was CNN when American armed contras and other such notirous death sqauds were tearing apart Latin America? Where is CNN when companies like Wal-Mart and Disney endorse child labour in third world countries?

I could go on in regards to what your news agencies exclude from thier matieral to be conveyed to the general public.

This thread has turned into, "Bush did not sign the executive order, there for these torture incidents are okay," " Other countries use these techniques, therefore, it's okay for us to use them." Wrong. America is the moral edifice on this planet --or so it deems itself-- it has no place in acting like the animal it has.

I'm not sure what I'm debating here anymore. Most people would rather ignore and pass over simple common sense.

Deep



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 02:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
Well Muaddib, is very sad the problem with the Cuban situation, but you have to understand that people in the US is screaming for the government to used stronger policies against illegals.

I am against the closing of borders and I thing that anybody should be allowed to enter this country in good faith.

But you are very well aware that the heat is on about migration policies.

Sad very sad for your Cuban fellow nationals. After all I was not born in the US main land either and even when I was born American I feel very touchy about migrants and our borders in this country I think is very unfair what they have to go through.


Marg there is a difference, there is a policy that allows Cubans who reach US shores to seek political assylum, because they live in an oppressive government, they can't speak outloud like you are doing in here, they can't demonstrate against the government "in any manner" if they do they are sent to jail, they never are able to find a job, and they are harrassed by castro's thugs. While the policies regarding Haiti, and other countries is different, because they do not have the same situation as the people in Cuba, Hatians just want to get away from the bad "economy" in Haiti. Cubans are living under an oppressive regime.



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by ZeroDeep

I'm not sure what I'm debating here anymore. Most people would rather ignore and pass over simple common sense.

Deep


Such is the nature of the Bush supporter. Which is why it's pointless to debate this topic. Even if I had a video tape of Bush stabbing an interm to death, they would still try to justify his actions...



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 02:17 PM
link   

as posted by Thorfinn
Even if I had a video tape of Bush stabbing an interm to death, they would still try to justify his actions...


This is considered a blanket statement, for it does not incorporate motivation for the stabbing (ie: was it self-defense or was just for the hell of it).

In the applied case of your comment, "justification" is relative.





seekerof

[edit on 22-12-2004 by Seekerof]



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 02:20 PM
link   
I just thought I would refresh everones memory on what actually was happenning at Abuidontknowhowtospellit prison.

www.thememoryhole.org...

WARNING
This link contains graphic pics.

These are the pics that made headlines, plus a few I had never seen before. It is intresting to not that there are 2 pics revealing military personell engaging a captured insurget in a head lock and beating them. @ pics of the same person beating 2 people in an identicle manner. Seems a step anove the grey area to me. There are neumerous pics of prisoners with wounds that are indictive of torture.



posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thorfinn Skullsplitter

Such is the nature of the Bush supporter. Which is why it's pointless to debate this topic. Even if I had a video tape of Bush stabbing an interm to death, they would still try to justify his actions...


I would not condone if i see proof that Bush is actually stabbing someone, except self defense....... Now you are taking it to the extreme...... The same extreme i say that some 16 democrat senators wrote and signed a draft bill and then democrats/liberals and others claimed that it was Republicans doing this....

It is the same as the "fake documents" which were presented as truth of Bush' military records even though it was found that they were fake....

This new move by ACLU is an exageration of the facts. Even if Bush wouldn't have signed the above memo, there would still be some soldiers and even some officers that would have used all sorts of torture, even those that happened in Abu Graib.



[edit on 22-12-2004 by Muaddib]




top topics



 
0
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join