Carter says U.S tortures prisoners

reply to post by 4thDoctorWhoFan


If you watch the Carter interview, he says anyone can redefine what torture is, then claim to not be torturing, this is what you are doing. Use the generally accepted definition.

Originally posted by 4thDoctorWhoFan
Also, it will give me time to do a little research and respond to your accusations about Bush because foreign policy and popular national issues are my strong points,

u dont even need evidence we all know its true

Originally posted by Redge777
If you watch the Carter interview, he says anyone can redefine what torture is, then claim to not be torturing, this is what you are doing. Use the generally accepted definition.

Umm......No! Thats NOT what I am doing. I am going by the generally accepted definition. The problem is Carter and liberals like him are redefining torture to make it PC. Pretty soon, you will be saying harsh language is torture.

reply to post by 4thDoctorWhoFan


Article 3 of the Geneva Convention states

To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:
(a) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;
(b) Taking of hostages;
(c) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;
(d) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.

White house executive order agrees with this
www.whitehouse.gov...

Your comment on panties on the head is the use of cultural norms of Arabic people to humiliate them, the grouping of them naked, modesty being a big part of there culture, and the use of female guards also are used for this. A discovery channel episode in 2000 stated that humiliation is used to break down a prisoner.

It is also shown that psychological torture actually has more long ranging effects then physical torture.

OK I use the Geneva Convention as my definition, signed by many countries including the USA, where do you get yours? Alberto Gonzales and Fox News?

In the spirit of honesty, you should say that you disagree with established definitions of torture and redefine it.

reply to post by RogerT


Ho hum, here we go again ...

Nothing more here than several examples of Bush mis-speaking because he either didn't know the facts or was given the wrong facts. None of this is really considered lying. None of this shows that Bush knowingly gave out false information. Look up the definition of lying yourself.

But let's use what you said here for a moment. Have you ever passed along information you were given by someone else that later on proved to be at least partially incorrect? If so, then by your own examples here (not mine), you are also a liar (and a hypocrite).


[edit on 10/15/2007 by centurion1211]

Originally posted by Redge777
OK I use the Geneva Convention as my definition, signed by many countries including the USA

** SIGH **
How many times does it have to be pointed out that the Geneva Convention does NOT apply to these terrorists. Geesh!!

Your definition would apply and be correct if we were fighting someone who actually signed the Geneva Convention.

reply to post by 4thDoctorWhoFan


I thought torture was wrong on morale grounds. Not to mention it is bad at getting intel, and it hurts the reputation of the country doing it.

Maybe you only think it is bad if you can't redefine prisoners to get around it. Which happens again to be what Carter said.

[edit on 16-10-2007 by Redge777]

Originally posted by centurion1211
Ho hum, here we go again ...

Nothing more here than several examples of Bush mis-speaking because he either didn't know the facts or was given the wrong facts. None of this is really considered lying. None of this shows that Bush knowingly gave out false information. Look up the definition of lying yourself.

Isn't that called "plausable deniability"? Works great for those that are willing to swallow it. He gets "wrong facts" a LOT! I could also call that a "cop out". He's the CIC, he should make sure of his fact.

But let's use what you said here for a moment. Have you ever passed along information you were given by someone else that later on proved to be at least partially incorrect? If so, then by your own examples here (not mine), you are also a liar (and a hypocrite).

[edit on 10/15/2007 by centurion1211]

Nope, NEVER do. I check my facts before I put them out there and even disclaim them if I can't verify what the info states. Are you saying that I'd make a better administrator that Bush?

reply to post by intrepid


Bush the first and only political figure to use "plausible deniability"? If that's what he was in fact doing, hardly.

You never make mistakes?

If you are in fact human, then perhaps you would make a better administrator than Bush. Might even nominate you for demi-god, or even full-fledged god, er, God.
[/tongue-in-cheek]



[edit on 10/16/2007 by centurion1211]

reply to post by centurion1211


I really laugh when people say politicians are excused for lies, yes lies, that lead to wars, because of the reason 'all people lie at times.'

oh and when Bush released Donald Rumsfeld, he said he did not want to announce it before election because it would go against what he wanted to present to the people. What he said must either be a lie, or an admission of lieing, by logic it is proof he lied.
(paraphrased quote, if you want to argue it go look it up)

[edit on 16-10-2007 by Redge777]

Originally posted by centurion1211
reply to post by intrepid

 

Bush the first and only political figure to use "plausible deniability"? If that's what he was in fact doing, hardly.

Sorry, I thought we were talking about Bush and not someone else. Deflection, not a good debate tool.

You never make mistakes?

Sure I do but not about sources. I make DAMN sure before I put something out there. Haven't you learned that yet? Do you think that the leader of the strongest nation on the planet should be less than a guy on an internet site? If so, that's scary.

If you are in fact human, then perhaps you would make a better administrator than Bush. Might even nominate you for demi-god, or even full-fledged god, er, God.
[/tongue-in-cheek]

[edit on 10/16/2007 by centurion1211]

Cool. When do I get my cheques from you, my devoted accolite? Heaven awaits you.

Originally posted by intrepid

Originally posted by centurion1211
reply to post by intrepid

 

Bush the first and only political figure to use "plausible deniability"? If that's what he was in fact doing, hardly.

Sorry, I thought we were talking about Bush and not someone else. Deflection, not a good debate tool.

Actually, I thought the thread was about Carter said. Whoever injected Bush into the discussion first is your "deflector". But, hey, that happens on just about every thread here. Doesn't matter what the original subject was, it's all about Bush.

A lot of people didn't like Carter's performance in the white house, but very few question his personal integrity. I find his accusations plausible.

A number of posters have said that the U.S. doesn't have to give the prisoners at Guantanamo the same rights as U.S. citizens. Some of the prisoners ARE U.S. citizens, imprisoned indefinitely without formal charges.

Here we are, Americans invading Afghanistan and Iraq because we presumably have a better way--a better form of government--with liberty and justice for all. Except for those we suspect--and in many cases it's only a suspicion--are our enemies. We're supposed to be better than our enemies, more humane than they are. No, I do not advocate we turn Guantanamo into a Hilton Hotel, but we should at least observe the Geneva conventions, whether the middle eastern countries sign it or not. Using torture is destroying our image around the world and also at home.

Study after study has shown that torture usually elicits only false confessions. Treat the prisoners as we woukd treat U.S. prisoners, and maybe they'll want to cooperate.