Barak Obama discloses Bush 'torture' methods including use of insects

reply to post by L.HAMILTON


If 183 gave us the information we needed, then GOOD! The only problem I have is that we think these people deserve the right to stay silent. You want to stay silent? We can arrange that --- PERMANENTLY!

Originally posted by tezzajw
See, this is where it gets ridiculous.

I can't find the thread, but I once argued against someone in the past, when he claimed that the 'operations' in Afghanistan and Iraq are technically not wars. Whatever...

If they are wars, then captured prisoners are POWs and should be treated as such, under the Geneva Convention.

If they are not wars, then captured prisoners should be presumed innocent unless proven guilty, in a court of law. If they are not wars, then what duristiction do US forces have taking prisoners, on foreign soil, in the first instance?

I'll go along with the presumption that the US is at war (against terra). So, captured prisoners are POWs, who have rights.

A bit of trivia; enemy prisoners are EPW (Enemy Prisoners of War). US captured troops are POWs.

I feel they should be treated as EPWs; it would make things easier.

Originally posted by tezzajw
If the US forces weren't inside Afghanistan, then they wouldn't have to worry about their troops being captured - would they?

Of course it's not right that US troops are captured and tortured. So why don't the US do the right thing and abandon their occupation? Defend against Al-CIAda on US soil, instead of smashing up the Middle East for more profitable ventures.

So, they can just totally disregard the Geneva Conventions when it comes to captured US troops?

www.washingtonpost.com...

Twenty-one years earlier, in 1947, the United States charged a Japanese officer, Yukio Asano, with war crimes for carrying out another form of waterboarding on a U.S. civilian. The subject was strapped on a stretcher that was tilted so that his feet were in the air and head near the floor, and small amounts of water were poured over his face, leaving him gasping for air until he agreed to talk.

"Asano was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor," Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) told his colleagues last Thursday during the debate on military commissions legislation. "We punished people with 15 years of hard labor when waterboarding was used against Americans in World War II," he said.

when used against americans its torture - and 1 japanese officer went to prison for 15 years for it


but when the CIA do it to the rest of the planet its an `enhanced interorgation technique` and so must be `OK`

media.washingtonpost.com...


^^ US Soldiers torturing a NVC army soldier.

amazing really who wants the world to think the truth.

lies , damned lies and statistics.

Originally posted by Harlequin
www.washingtonpost.com...

Twenty-one years earlier, in 1947, the United States charged a Japanese officer, Yukio Asano, with war crimes for carrying out another form of waterboarding on a U.S. civilian. The subject was strapped on a stretcher that was tilted so that his feet were in the air and head near the floor, and small amounts of water were poured over his face, leaving him gasping for air until he agreed to talk.

"Asano was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor," Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) told his colleagues last Thursday during the debate on military commissions legislation. "We punished people with 15 years of hard labor when waterboarding was used against Americans in World War II," he said.

when used against americans its torture - and 1 japanese officer went to prison for 15 years for it


but when the CIA do it to the rest of the planet its an `enhanced interorgation technique` and so must be `OK`

media.washingtonpost.com...


^^ US Soldiers torturing a NVC army soldier.

amazing really who wants the world to think the truth.

lies , damned lies and statistics.

The Geneva Convention applies to us. We are an established army that follows the rules of war. The terrorist organizations do not, therefore they the Geneva Conventions are not applicable. Most notably, in order to be defined as a lawful combatant, you must not take civilians as hostages. We have not taken civilian hostages, but various terrorist organizations have certainly taken our press/media hostage. As a result, the terrorist armies are considered unlawful combatants, and the Geneva Conventions do not recognize them as prisoners of war when captured... Therefore, we are breaking no law. At least, that's how I view it.

Any input is appreciated, I enjoy being corrected when I'm wrong, as long as there is substantiating evidence.

edit: And, specifically, to your post, the convicted Japanese officer waterboarded a CIVILIAN. We did not waterboard civilians in Vietnam, as far as I know. The picture you linked even says NVC Soldier.

[edit on 21-4-2009 by Highground]

reply to post by Highground


apparantly you don`t research your replies well


the US army soldiers involved in that picture were court martialed and sent to prison for torture.

`enemy combatant` there is no such term outside of the USA - in every other country on the planet - when you are captured fighting then the geneva conventions apply.

except when the USA makes up words to get around that little convention.

the USA captured enemy soldiers and then commited war crimes.

get over the fact that thanks to Bush , the USA is the most hated country on the planet - even so called allies , well , just ask how the personal at USAF Upper Heyford are treated by the locals.

edit:

we do not take civilins as hostages


and the planet your on is what?

Abu Ghraib

ever heard of it?

90% of the so called inmates that survived being tortured were freed as there was NO evidence at all against them

same at gitmo - imprisoning children and torturing children - in the name of the USA.

held hostage to be brutally tortured and murdered by the CIA and the USA Army.

[edit on 21/4/09 by Harlequin]

This man was an interrogator for the Army.

If anyone is interested, he has a lot to say about these memos that were released, and about torture and his job.

Is the army being damaged? Yes. If nothing else (and it's a pretty big nothing else) perception of what is going on is changing. That changes the recruit base. I am not the only mid-level NCO (SSG/SFC) whom I know to have left/be leaving. One of the guys I was in Iraq with hung it up as soon as he got back. He had 17 years in. Wasn't worth it to stay.

And...

So we use a bit of head game. Take advantage of the shock of capture, the silence he's been kept in, the segregation he's undergone, and the sense of loss, shame, helplessness, and fear that go with it.

We look for clues, his attitude, his rank, the condition of his gear; his uniform, how much ammo he had (and how much it was, relative to the rest of the dead and the captured) how many people were killed and wounded in the fight, his pocket trash (which includes things like letters and photos).

We then make nice, offer him a cup of coffee, a cigarette. Engage in chit-chat. Feel him out. Ride the clues.

Is he an officer? Did his unit get stomped? is he acting proud anyway? Then maybe I belittle him, tell him a trained chimp could've done better, get him angry enough to blurt out information.

Maybe his unit was stomped, but he seems at a loss... ashamed. Then I tell him no one could've stopped it, build him up. Get him to tell me why I'm right.

The trick (and it's the only trick we really need) is to get them talking and, to not make them think we want anything other than a truthful answer. Once they start to talk, I will get everything he knows, or at least everything my commander wants.


...


If you talk about anything else... you'll talk about everything else.

And that's why the situation at Abu Ghraib bothers me. These were not that time sensitive, these guys didn't need to go off the reservation. If they had as many prisoners as they say they did (and this is just in April, when the fighting in Falluja was the primary thing on the agenda) they could afford to take the extra hour or so it might have taken to get a guy talking.

And before April... they had all the time in the world, because the more prisoners one has to work with, the easier it is to get them to talk. You can play on fears. I come to talk to A: Ten minutes later I come to talk to B:, along about the time I get to G, he will be afraid, because A-F have not been seen since. He's probably been told we will torture, and then kill, him. He's convinced himself this is happening. When all I want to do is ask questions, he tells all he knows, because in his mind he's saving his life.

On the flip side, if I start to hit him, he resists, because that is what he's been trained to do, avoid giving up information in exchange for pain.

And we know this doesn't work. If you think torture is useful in breaking people, and thus garnering information, talk to John McCain, or anyone else who had a room at the Hanoi Hilton.

pecunium.livejournal.com...

pecunium.livejournal.com...

pecunium.livejournal.com...

Originally posted by Highground

The Geneva Convention applies to us. We are an established army that follows the rules of war. The terrorist organizations do not, therefore they the Geneva Conventions are not applicable. Most notably, in order to be defined as a lawful combatant, you must not take civilians as hostages. We have not taken civilian hostages

/SNIP

HELLO?! That's exactly what you did before torturing them in Abu Ghraib and GITMO!

You even did it to innocent British citizens, let alone people from the middle east. As I said before, you either follow the rules, or don't. If you don't then you are giving the green light for people to abduct, torture and possibly even kill US citizens. Why aren't you up in arms about the inhumane treatment of innocent people? The propaganda machine sure did a number on you, huh?

Originally posted by Harlequin
reply to post by Highground

 

apparantly you don`t research your replies well


the US army soldiers involved in that picture were court martialed and sent to prison for torture.

`enemy combatant` there is no such term outside of the USA - in every other country on the planet - when you are captured fighting then the geneva conventions apply.

except when the USA makes up words to get around that little convention.

the USA captured enemy soldiers and then commited war crimes.

get over the fact that thanks to Bush , the USA is the most hated country on the planet - even so called allies , well , just ask how the personal at USAF Upper Heyford are treated by the locals.

Maybe you should read what I wrote. I said that we never waterboarded CIVILIANS. Funny, it was even in all caps. That was a soldier. The VC was an organized army, they were protected under Geneva.

edit:

we do not take civilins as hostages


and the planet your on is what?

Abu Ghraib

ever heard of it?

90% of the so called inmates that survived being tortured were freed as there was NO evidence at all against them

same at gitmo - imprisoning children and torturing children - in the name of the USA.

held hostage to be brutally tortured and murdered by the CIA and the USA Army.

[edit on 21/4/09 by Harlequin]

"Any person who seizes or detains and threatens to kill, to injure or to continue to detain another person (hereinafter referred to as the "hostage") in order to compel a third party, namely, a State, an international intergovernmental organization, a natural or juridical person, or a group of persons, to do or abstain from doing any act as an explicit or implicit condition for the release of the hostage commits the offence of taking of hostages ("hostage-taking") within the meaning of this Convention."

Definition of "hostage" by the Geneva conventions. Was Al Qaeda threatened? Hamas? Taliban? Did we threaten any third party? Not that I can recall, or know of. Just because you deem someone a hostage doesn't make it so. Sure, people were held against their will. False imprisonment, maybe, but hostages? Negative. It was wrong, but not a disqualifying factor as a lawful combatant under the Geneva Conventions. Sorry, try again.

Did Obama not say "It's a time for reflection not retribution" ?
I wonder how many murderers or rapists that used that as their defense in a court of law would be told "ok fair enough, you did wrong, what's done is done.Lets just all move on"!
You should all be very worried by that statement!!

I must also say, seriously, when we have Terrorists and nutjob fundamentalists slicing and sawing the heads off of captured allies, how in any shape, form, or fashion do any of the methods presented here represent true torture? One of the methods involved placing a caterpillar into the cell of a Terrorist afraid of bugs, lol, how hilarious is that? That is creative, and it actually WORKED!

Sounds like 1984, Doesn't it?

1984, room 101 on Wikipedia:

Here a person's greatest fear is forced upon him or her for the final re-education step: acceptance.

Dick Cheney must be charged, and tried for war crimes. He is on record admitting to it, as is Bush Jr. but Cheney was the instigator in the whole damn mess, so at the very least, he must be held to account for his crimes. If they can't get him for 9/11 conspiracy, for national security reasons, then nail him for the war crimes.

This would send out a powerful signal to the world regarding the retoration of the USA's moral authority. It will also send a powerful signal to the dark shadow government that it must change it's ways.

I dont know if this has already been posted but we subject our own guys to the "torture" methods described...

From wikipedia:



Thats right...over 40,000 US military personnel have been waterboarded, slammed up against a wall and maybe had a bug thrown at them. And uh....no lasting psychological damage...I know its amazing!

And I havent been in the military before but I work with alot of people that either have been or still are. The old timers say that the methods used on suspected terrorists sound an awful lot like bootcamp USED TO BE.

Originally posted by BingeBob
Thats right...over 40,000 US military personnel have been waterboarded, slammed up against a wall and maybe had a bug thrown at them. And uh....no lasting psychological damage...I know its amazing!

Yeah, they beat our asses in SERE school. I read the story and was going thru a mental checklist, "had that done to me....had that done to me..."

I continue to believe that the interrogtion methods outlined in the memos come no where near the definition of torture. And as others have pointed out, if that those methods are indeed torture, those of us that have served or serve in the military have also been tortured. Torture was defined as an act causing sevre pain and physical injury - like pulling out fingernails, breaking bones, sticking a fire hose up one's ass, starving or fatally dehydrating someone, and other acts causing injury.

One thing the critics and talking heads fail to mention: insurgents not fighting in a war on behalf of a country who are not wearing the uniform of that country are not covered by the Geneva Conventions. Those protocols only apply to lawful combatants. The US decided to voluntarily apply the Geneva rules to EC's, but even in doing so, would not officially bring them under the Geneva Conventions.

Those not covered under the Conventions who are caught in acts of war have no protection - they can be taken off the grid, executed as spies, or ground into hamburger (with pork fat, for better grilling).

Locked in a dark room with an insect? Give me a freakin' break! If the bad guys do scream like little girls, that should have been filmed and broadcast on Al Jazerra - these are your fighters!

So they screwed with peoples heads - if that is torture, than every member of Congress is guilty of torturing the American people.

reply to post by jerico65


Well stated, Jericho. This is not torture.

It would appear that there are a number of weenies that simply detest discomfort. Probably momma still wipes their butts, and they've led a fairly comfortable life with few inconveniences their entire lifetime.

Non-uniformed combatants have no - and I mean zero - protections under the Geneva Conventions. For past decades, they've been summarily shot on the spot, and that would include all through the Second World War, Korea, Vietnam, right up until today.

Now if you're feeling frisky, you may want to squeeze what you can out of the guy before he assumes ambient temperature.

Personally, I never saw a need to take a non-uniformed combatant prisoner. But that's just me.

Call me lazy.

Waterboarding, as well as these other techniques are not forms of torture, which implies physical injury, pain generation, or even maiming.

Waterboarding, with select techniques, generate a psychological fear, discomfort, or terror. Nothing wrong with that, no harm done, no blood - no foul.

To NOT get information, accurate information, is to not perform your duty, and willfully to place your fellow soldiers or citizens in harm's way.

It would be great if everyone would live in peace and leave everyone else alone. But when a group takes it to you, you must take every measure possible to minimize further damage and injury to your fellow soldiers and citizens.

And if you have to break out the blowtorch . . .

reply to post by jerico65


Very well stated. Thumbs up to you, good sir. Starred.

The fact that some of you Americans are condoning any sort of torture disgusts me.

You all keep saying how evil the terrorists are and that you are this world superpower that supports freedom and democracy... hows about acting like it.

You are no better than Muslim extremists when you go down to their level.

And don't say 'oh but the things they do are so much worse'... that doesn't mean jack.

You still use methods of harm and intimidation to get (probably false) information out of prisoners.

An intelligent interrogator can get more reliable information with the spoken word in a day than your torturers can get in a week of waterboarding. I guess the US has no need for intelligence when you can do what you want and then cry foul when another country does the same.

Hypocrites.

reply to post by fooffstarr

Your opinion of me means absolutely nothing.

If the lives of my family, my fellow soldiers, my fellow citizens, or my country are threatened by those who would use any means at their disposal to harm us, then you can bet your sweet *** that personally, I'd go just as low as it takes to save innocent lives.

Hard situations sometimes require hard measures.

Besides, the way it's currently done, once the interrogation is over, they get to walk back to their holding area.

And for those who have such a negative opinion, I will ask you a question, and you don't have to respond, but give yourself an honest answer.

If your child or spouse were being held for certain death, and you had - not the authorities - YOU - had the man who could tell you where your child or spouse were - and there is no one else to turn to for help - you're going to sit there and tell me that even under these circumstances that you won't make - MAKE - him talk?

You're just going to serve tea an crumpets, or here in the States, beer and chips, and let it happen?

If you answer yes, then you are the worst kind of human.

Originally posted by fooffstarr
You are no better than Muslim extremists when you go down to their level.

And don't say 'oh but the things they do are so much worse'... that doesn't mean jack.

Actually, it does. Torturing, mutilating and executing POWs is a lot different than stuffing a dude into a box with some bugs. One is torture, the other is harrassment. The bugs probably suck, but he'll get over that.

Originally posted by fooffstarr
You still use methods of harm and intimidation to get (probably false) information out of prisoners.

Well, you don't take one person's word on what is obtained; that's why you question others.

Originally posted by fooffstarr
An intelligent interrogator can get more reliable information with the spoken word in a day than your torturers can get in a week of waterboarding.

Depends on the person. Some are clueless and will spill the beans to everything over a cup of tea. Some have had training against that, and you need to step it up a notch.

Originally posted by fooffstarr
I guess the US has no need for intelligence when you can do what you want and then cry foul when another country does the same.

Actually, it's the other way around.

Originally posted by fooffstarr
Hypocrites.

Whatever, Gus. Walk a mile in my shoes.

Originally posted by 5thElement
reply to post by rogue1

 

It was in Bosnia, southern part, started 1992, it was a very, very sad, wild and unforgettable ride

I had a feeling this is what you were talking about, I have heard some very sad stories from this time there, I know a couple of bosnians who now live here in London who have lost their family etc too.

Stay strong, even with the emotional scars, I hope you are living a better life now..?

Peace.

[edit on 23-4-2009 by _Phoenix_]

"....."Nudity: This technique is used to cause psychological discomfort, particularly if a detainee, for culture or other reasons, is especially modest," a memo recommended...."

if i'm not mistaken, this is standard procedure. the verbage in this article extremely undervalues the psychological trauma that induced by stripping someone naked and exposing them. make them lie on their back.. spread their legs.

it is common practice also for enemies to rape the women of the opposing force. research this.

people seem to get focused on waterboarding, when their are other just as serious torture techniques that go on.

don't be surprised if these tactics are used on woman in the back rooms.

the most vulnerable position for someone is on their back, naked.

re-evaluate the abu ghreib photos. this was the extreme. prosecution should have gone higher up than it did. they also withheld a good deal of photos that would have been too traumatic for the public to watch.

once again, i repeat...

don't for one second believe that these are the extent of the methods used. i also believe that it is used on more then "terrorist" suspects.

wake up people.

we have black ops.. mkultra programs that never shut down. the crimes & autracities are horrendous.