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.

 

CASE CLOSED - Yes...It was TORTURE and we knew it all along

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 24 2009 @ 11:53 PM
link   
On May 7, 2004 A report from the Office of the Inspector General entitled Counter Terrorism and Interrogation Activities (September 2001-October 2003) was compiled detailing the activities and legalities of interrogation techniques. FULL REPORT HERE

In this report, it states that under the The Torture Convention Treaty "any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining [information from him]..."

Article 16 of the Torture Convention defines torture as "cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment or punishment." Article 16 has been interpreted as

The United States understands the term "cruel inhumane, or degrading treatment or punishment," as used in Article 16 of the convention, to mean the cruel, unusual, and inhumane punishment prohibited by the Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States.



18 USC 2340A(a) Whoever outside the United States commits or attempts to commit torture shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both, and if death results to any person from conduct prohibited by this subsection, shall be punished by death or imprisoned for any term of years or for life.


Congress has defined "severe mental pain or suffering": The prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting from -

  • The intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severe physical pain or suffering;
  • The administration or application, or threatened administration or application, of mind altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or personality;
  • The threatened imminent death; or,
  • The threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, sever physical pain or suffering, or the administration of mind altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or personality...


These definitions and findings made in 2004 were again clarified for the CIA in 2005 by the Office of the United States Attorney General. FULL REPORT HERE In this report, definitions of torture were related to the Eighth Amendment against the treatment of cruel and unusual treatment. The term "shock the conscious" was used to clarify the degree of treatment that would need to be displayed in order to be characterized as torture.
-----------------------------------------

I find no excuse for this behavior in light of the new findings and information that has been released. The CIA was well informed, and continued using these techniques under the promise that they would be shielded from prosecution. My personal opinion is that everyone involved should face charges; however, the people that were carrying out the orders should receive mitigating sentences if found guilty. The people at the top should face the heaviest sentences if found guilty.




posted on Aug, 24 2009 @ 11:58 PM
link   
The people at the top are our congressmen. They have meetings where they are informed of what the CIA and FBI are doing. If they don't think it falls within the law they discontinue it or never start it. The ones to blame are sitting high on the hill and they arent going to take the heat for this.



posted on Aug, 25 2009 @ 12:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Texcin
 


They are responsible as they knew what happened and thought the best way to cover the mistake was to create immunity. Question is why create immunity for something that is legal? Because they knew what was going on was illegal.



posted on Aug, 25 2009 @ 12:16 AM
link   
Well, whether it was legal or not I don't give a damn what they did to those terrorist . They didn't kill them or cut off their heads . They are fat and happy sitting in Gitmo and I really could care less if they scared them REALLY bad and caused the emotional problems.If they scared them while they were waterboarded SO WHAT! Boo hoo , cry me a river. They deserved more done to them then what they got. Thats just my opinion.



posted on Aug, 25 2009 @ 11:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Texcin
 


You mention nothing about someone breaking the laws when they know they are breaking the laws. We are a nation of laws, not a nation of men.



posted on Aug, 25 2009 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Texcin
Well, whether it was legal or not I don't give a damn what they did to those terrorist .


They are ALLEGED terrorists. No one has been tried and found guilty.



posted on Aug, 25 2009 @ 05:25 PM
link   
reply to post by groingrinder
 


According to the letter from the Director of the CIA they have now officially declared that people within the organization were torturing. The only argument left is: It prevented further attacks.

You are right these people were picked up and claimed to be terrorists. Then tortured to get them to admit their involvement to justify the torture. Very odd logic in my mind. By that standard they should arrest everyone and torture them to admit to violating laws. We can round up all the criminals that way.



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 09:08 PM
link   
A shameless bump to bring awareness with the recent news regarding the horse camp torture facility unveiling today.



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 09:20 PM
link   
reply to post by ExPostFacto
 





The only argument left is: It prevented further attacks.


I can never consider this a valid argument. As you mentioned earlier we are a nation of laws, and our laws forbid it. Whether the ends justify the means is irrelevant when those means sacrifice ourselves along the way.



posted on Nov, 19 2009 @ 10:00 PM
link   
Case closed .... yes.

Now the CRIMINAL perps need to pay for their crimes against humanity. Even if it means the death penalty. Personally, I hope it does. Even if it means applying this punishment to congressmen and the white house occupants. All of them.



posted on Feb, 16 2010 @ 10:12 PM
link   
Bumping this thread since Dick Cheney and Fox news still are trying to convince people that torture is perfectly legal and Obama's failure to torture risks the countries safety. One of the duties of Presidents as outlined by the constitution itself is to uphold all treaties. Unless congress wants to break the treaty or eradicate the treaty then torture can not and should not occur. Really it shouldn't ever occur. If Cheney supports torture he should lobby to remove us from our treaty.



posted on Feb, 16 2010 @ 10:20 PM
link   
I support a much higher level of transparency and a degree of accountability regarding this issue.



posted on Feb, 23 2010 @ 06:49 PM
link   
reply to post by MemoryShock
 


I agree. From what I've read the campaign to put torture as an acceptable method into the mind of the public is being twisted and yet we still see no transparency on interrogation techniques being used.



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join