• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Breaking News hundred of torture camps found right here in the U.S.

Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
They have just found that a slew of torture camps exist not overseas or in secret prisons but right here in the good old U.S. of A read on:

HOLD THE PRESSES. I've discovered that the use of torture by the U.S. government is far more pervasive than previously believed. There are major facilities all over the country where thousands of men and women who have not committed any crime are held for prolonged periods while subjected to physical and psychological coercion that violates every tenet of the Geneva Convention.

They are routinely made to stand for long periods in uncomfortable positions. They are made to walk for hours while wearing heavy loads on their backs. They are bullied by martinets who get in their faces and yell insults at them. They are hit and often knocked down with clubs known as pugil sticks. They are denied sleep for more than a day at a time. They are forced to inhale tear gas. They are prevented from seeing friends or family. Some are traumatized by this treatment. Others are injured. A few even die.

Should Amnesty International or the International Committee of the Red Cross want to investigate these human-rights abuses, they could visit Parris Island, S.C., Camp Pendleton, Calif., Ft. Benning, Ga., Ft. Jackson, S.C., and other bases where the Army and Marines train recruits. It's worth keeping in mind how roughly the U.S. government treats its own defenders before we get too worked up over the treatment of captured terrorists.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/12982

Yep according to the Al-Qaeda Bill of Rights . . . . I mean the McCain torture Bill boot camp is now considered as torture let's hope the libs get around to stopping this right away just as soon as their done tying the hands of our military from winning the war on terror.
 

vergiss

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
2,356
Reaction score
1
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
It's very simple: you cannot have the moral high ground if you behave immorally. Duh.
 

M14 Shooter

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
2,622
Reaction score
68
Location
Toledo-ish OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
vergiss said:
It's very simple: you cannot have the moral high ground if you behave immorally. Duh.
Is it immoral to kill/torture 1 to save 1,000,000 innocents?

The categorical imperative, when faced with contradictory choices, fails.
At that point, one must revert to the utilitarian model.
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
FinnMacCool said:
If you can prove that torturing can save 1,000,000 people then no.
Here's the deal partna the McCain torture Bill now considers the same techniques used by drill instructors in bootcamp as torture. Cruel and degrading treatement? Just what the **** does that mean anyways, are we allowed to do anything to extract info out of terrorist scum? Perhaps we should grant them all the rights of the constitution, hay maybe these people would be happy if we let them go completely, maybe even grant them citizenship and set them up with a welfare check that they can spend on bomb making equipment. Would that satisfy their liberal guilt enough for em. Ha, it seems to me that the left in this country won't be happy until we get attacked again, after all that's what they want anyways so they can point at Bush and say: "hay look I told you that his war on terror wasn't working."

It's like these people want us to lose a war for their own political benefit it's disgusting.
 
Last edited:

FinnMacCool

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 23, 2005
Messages
2,272
Reaction score
153
Location
South Shore of Long Island.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
I don't believe boot camp would actually be torture but I think that a lot of the stuff that goes along with it could be. Have you ever seen the movie 'A Few Good Men'? I think **** like that is a problem.
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
FinnMacCool said:
I don't believe boot camp would actually be torture but I think that a lot of the stuff that goes along with it could be. Have you ever seen the movie 'A Few Good Men'? I think **** like that is a problem.
Oh my freaking god that article I posted was a joke it was a cynical look at the McCain Bill and you actually took it seriously, the whole point is that the torture bill is freaking ridiculous, did that go over your hear or what???:rofl :rofl :doh
 

Deegan

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
5,528
Reaction score
2
Location
Chicago
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
FinnMacCool said:
I don't believe boot camp would actually be torture but I think that a lot of the stuff that goes along with it could be. Have you ever seen the movie 'A Few Good Men'? I think **** like that is a problem.
No sir, stuff like that is the solution, and God help the enemy of the men who finish that test of strength, courage, and determination.:shock:

I couldn't do it, I wouldn't even try, but I thank God everyday for men like that, I wish it was not necessary, but unfortunately it is.
 

FinnMacCool

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 23, 2005
Messages
2,272
Reaction score
153
Location
South Shore of Long Island.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Oh my freaking god that article I posted was a joke it was a cynical look at the McCain Bill and you actually took it seriously, the whole point is that the torture bill is freaking ridiculous, did that go over your hear or what???
I didn't check the link, to be honest. I was responding to your question, and M14's post. I don't think the anti torture bill is ridiculous though.

The whole idea of the bill is to make the world realize that the United States of America doesn't condone torture and thats the most important thing. This won't stop torture but it will help our image.
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
FinnMacCool said:
I didn't check the link, to be honest. I was responding to your question, and M14's post. I don't think the anti torture bill is ridiculous though.

The whole idea of the bill is to make the world realize that the United States of America doesn't condone torture and thats the most important thing. This won't stop torture but it will help our image.
No the most important thing is how the bill defines torture: 'cruel and degrading treatment.' That means that yelling at a terrorist suspect will no longer be allowed because it's degrading to the poor terrorist. Gimme a break.
 

FinnMacCool

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 23, 2005
Messages
2,272
Reaction score
153
Location
South Shore of Long Island.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
No the most important thing is how the bill defines torture: 'cruel and degrading treatment.' That means that yelling at a terrorist suspect will no longer be allowed because it's degrading to the poor terrorist. Gimme a break.
I haven't seen the actual bill so I can't really argue against that but let me just say that yelling or slapping a terrorist subject would be even harder to regulate then torturing. The whole idea is to improve our image and thats what matters. Refusing this bill says 'Okay world. We condone torture because we turned down a No-Torture bill.' We're hated enough already. We don't need people to say we're torturing now.
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
FinnMacCool said:
I haven't seen the actual bill so I can't really argue against that but let me just say that yelling or slapping a terrorist subject would be even harder to regulate then torturing. The whole idea is to improve our image and thats what matters. Refusing this bill says 'Okay world. We condone torture because we turned down a No-Torture bill.' We're hated enough already. We don't need people to say we're torturing now.
Ya the torture bill is going to sway world opinion. :roll:

Here's the deal this torture bill the way it is worded now is bullshit, and people are spinning it to hide the real issue by saying that if you don't support the torture bill then you support torture, which is not the issue at all, the issue is that the bill defines torture in such a way as to not allow any interogation techniques to be used at all it defines torture as cruel and degrading treatment which can mean just about anything.

Passing this bill is like saying to the terrorists: "Don't worry if you get caught because the U.S. has tied its own hands."
 

jallman

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
36,915
Reaction score
11,283
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
They have just found that a slew of torture camps exist not overseas or in secret prisons but right here in the good old U.S. of A read on:

HOLD THE PRESSES. I've discovered that the use of torture by the U.S. government is far more pervasive than previously believed. There are major facilities all over the country where thousands of men and women who have not committed any crime are held for prolonged periods while subjected to physical and psychological coercion that violates every tenet of the Geneva Convention.

They are routinely made to stand for long periods in uncomfortable positions. They are made to walk for hours while wearing heavy loads on their backs. They are bullied by martinets who get in their faces and yell insults at them. They are hit and often knocked down with clubs known as pugil sticks. They are denied sleep for more than a day at a time. They are forced to inhale tear gas. They are prevented from seeing friends or family. Some are traumatized by this treatment. Others are injured. A few even die.

Should Amnesty International or the International Committee of the Red Cross want to investigate these human-rights abuses, they could visit Parris Island, S.C., Camp Pendleton, Calif., Ft. Benning, Ga., Ft. Jackson, S.C., and other bases where the Army and Marines train recruits. It's worth keeping in mind how roughly the U.S. government treats its own defenders before we get too worked up over the treatment of captured terrorists.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/12982

Yep according to the Al-Qaeda Bill of Rights . . . . I mean the McCain torture Bill boot camp is now considered as torture let's hope the libs get around to stopping this right away just as soon as their done tying the hands of our military from winning the war on terror.
I have never read a more inane, irrelevant, and pointless load of partisan BS in the entire time I have been a member of this forum. Let me point out one serious flaw in your little parody...MEN AND WOMEN OF THE ARMED SERVICES VOLUNTEER...you know, they have an idea of what they are getting into and they willingly sign waivers and forms that permit the kind of treatment they receive as training.

Prisoners of war are prisoners...they have no say in how they are treated and so, we should be held to a standard of humane treatment, especially when it comes to those under suspicion but not yet proven to be criminals/terrorists.

If you dont like McCain or you are just in love with Bush, say so...but dont attack a war hero who faced torture for 5 years with this partisan hackmanship. Weak.
 

FinnMacCool

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 23, 2005
Messages
2,272
Reaction score
153
Location
South Shore of Long Island.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Ya the torture bill is going to sway world opinion.
Maybe not but rejecting the bill definatly won't help us nor will it help Bush's approval ratings ;)
Here's the deal this torture bill the way it is worded now is bullshit, and people are spinning it to hide the real issue by saying that if you don't support the torture bill then you support torture, which is not the issue at all, the issue is that the bill defines torture in such a way as to not allow any interogation techniques to be used at all it defines torture as cruel and degrading treatment which can mean just about anything.
I haven't seen the bill yet so I cannot argue against this.

Passing this bill is like saying to the terrorists: "Don't worry if you get caught because the U.S. has tied its own hands."
__________________
Going to jail, whether your tortured or not, isn't fun. And I still think that they will be tortured regardless.
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
jallman said:
I have never read a more inane, irrelevant, and pointless load of partisan BS in the entire time I have been a member of this forum. Let me point out one serious flaw in your little parody...MEN AND WOMEN OF THE ARMED SERVICES VOLUNTEER...you know, they have an idea of what they are getting into and they willingly sign waivers and forms that permit the kind of treatment they receive as training.

Prisoners of war are prisoners...they have no say in how they are treated and so, we should be held to a standard of humane treatment, especially when it comes to those under suspicion but not yet proven to be criminals/terrorists.

If you dont like McCain or you are just in love with Bush, say so...but dont attack a war hero who faced torture for 5 years with this partisan hackmanship. Weak.
First, I like McCain,

Second, Bush has now come out in support of the bill which in my opinion is freaking retarted,

Third, I don't like this bill and the way it is worded,

Fourth, are you seriously suggesting that because of McCain's service he is above critism,

Fifth, as per the bills definition of torture as cruel and degrading torture you are herby guilty of torture because you degraded me with your post. :mrgreen:


See how that works? Everythings torture now, people who are in jail right now are being tortured because they are being forced to eat crappy food and wear uniforms, that's degrading and I won't stand for it. :roll: :2wave:
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
FinnMacCool said:
Maybe not but rejecting the bill definatly won't help us nor will it help Bush's approval ratings ;)

Trajan Octavian Titus said:
good freaking plan, conduct the war on terror based on popularity polls.
I haven't seen the bill yet so I cannot argue against this.

Trajan Octavian Titus said:
well I've already explained to you what the bills definition of torture is.
Going to jail, whether your tortured or not, isn't fun. And I still think that they will be tortured regardless.
It's not about torture it's about tying the hands of the military from being able to interogate terrorist suspects you people just aren't getting it.
 

FinnMacCool

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 23, 2005
Messages
2,272
Reaction score
153
Location
South Shore of Long Island.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
good freaking plan, conduct the war on terror based on popularity polls.
Well you can blame Bush on that. But if I were in his shoes, I would've done the same thing.
well I've already explained to you what the bills definition of torture is.
So should I take your word for it? I would have to see the actual thing first.

It's not about torture it's about tying the hands of the military from being able to interogate terrorist suspects you people just aren't getting it.
How does it tie their hands together?
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
FinnMacCool said:
Well you can blame Bush on that. But if I were in his shoes, I would've done the same thing.

Trajan Octavian Titus said:
Actually Bush has stated many times that he doesn't conduct policy based on polls not like another president by the name of Clinton.
So should I take your word for it? I would have to see the actual thing first.

Trajan Octavian Titus said:
Well if you don't believe me here's a snippet from the Washington Post:

The amendment by McCain, one of Bush's most significant backers at the outset of the Iraq war, would establish uniform standards for the interrogation of people detained by U.S. military personnel, prohibiting "cruel, inhuman or degrading" treatment while they are in U.S. custody.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/05/AR2005100502062.html
How does it tie their hands together?
It's going to outlaw any form of coercive interogation.
 

FinnMacCool

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 23, 2005
Messages
2,272
Reaction score
153
Location
South Shore of Long Island.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Actually Bush has stated many times that he doesn't conduct policy based on polls not like another president by the name of Clinton.
Oh yeah, he says that :roll: This poll should be evidence enough that Bush isn't some noble leader but just a petty politician influenced by things such as polls. If he were a true noble leader, he would've vetoed it.

Well if you don't believe me here's a snippet from the Washington Post:

The amendment by McCain, one of Bush's most significant backers at the outset of the Iraq war, would establish uniform standards for the interrogation of people detained by U.S. military personnel, prohibiting "cruel, inhuman or degrading" treatment while they are in U.S. custody.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...100502062.html
I know about that. But I would have to see what they define as 'cruel and degrading'


It's going to outlaw any form of coercive interogation.
I'd have to read the bill.
 

teacher

DP Veteran
Joined
May 20, 2005
Messages
5,980
Reaction score
30
Location
Nomad.Got a couch,beer,meat,cute daughters,Batman
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Deegan said:
No sir, stuff like that is the solution, and God help the enemy of the men who finish that test of strength, courage, and determination.:shock:

I couldn't do it, I wouldn't even try, but I thank God everyday for men like that, I wish it was not necessary, but unfortunately it is.
I brought my own visegrips, where they at? Stupid friggin Arab, what's your plan? (crack). Who's your boss? (crack). What's that? Fly planes into what? Oh, tough guy huh? (crack). Thank you. The doctor will see you in a minute.

Three broken fingers just saved 3000 lives.

What's for lunch? Crab legs sounds good...
 

FinnMacCool

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 23, 2005
Messages
2,272
Reaction score
153
Location
South Shore of Long Island.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
I brought my own visegrips, where they at? Stupid friggin Arab, what's your plan? (crack)
To buy lots of cheese
. Who's your boss?
Ben Affleck (crack).
[NOTE: I changed it to reflect what they COULD tell him]What's that? Buy lots of cheese? Oh, tough guy huh? (crack). Thank you. The doctor will see you in a minute.

Three broken fingers just saved 3000 lives.
That sums up how affective torture is.
 

Binary_Digit

DP Veteran
Joined
May 21, 2005
Messages
4,145
Reaction score
1,637
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
McCain's bill will not undermine our ability to interrogate detainees. First, McCain's bill would establish the Army Field Manual as the uniform standard for interrogation.

http://mccain.senate.gov/index.cfm?fuseaction=NewsCenter.ViewPressRelease&Content_id=1611

Second, the Army Field Manual, echoing people who have actually interrogated enemy prisoners for a living, points out that torture is worthless anyway:

"Experience indicates that the use of force is not necessary to gain the cooperation of sources for interrogation. Therefore, the use of force is a poor technique, as it yields unreliable results, may damage subsequent collection efforts, and can induce the source to say whatever he thinks the interrogator wants to hear."

http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/library/policy/army/fm/fm34-52/chapter1.htm

And it also points out that known successful and approved interrogation techniques are not considered torture:

"However, the use of force is not to be confused with psychological ploys, verbal trickery, or other nonviolent and noncoercive ruses used by the interrogator in questioning hesitant or uncooperative sources."

Anyone, anyone who claims that torture leads to useful information has not done one bit of research on the subject.
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
FinnMacCool said:
Oh yeah, he says that :roll: This poll should be evidence enough that Bush isn't some noble leader but just a petty politician influenced by things such as polls. If he were a true noble leader, he would've vetoed it.


I know about that. But I would have to see what they define as 'cruel and degrading'



I'd have to read the bill.
Here's the exact defintions as specified by McCain sponsored amendment 1977 specifically page S10909:

(a) In General.--No individual in the custody or under the physical control of the United States Government, regardless of nationality or physical location, shall be subject to cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment.

d) Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment Defined.--In this section, the term ``cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment'' means the cruel, unusual, and inhumane treatment or punishment prohibited by the Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, as defined in the United States Reservations, Declarations and Understandings to the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Forms of Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment done at New York, December 10, 1984.

Here's a link to the whole bill:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r109:1:./temp/~r1097f3cWm:e911694:

Here's the Fifth, Eighth and Fourteenth amendments:

Fifth Amendment – Due process, double jeopardy, self-incrimination, private property.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Eighth Amendment – Prohibition of excessive bail, as well as cruel or unusual punishment.
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Amendment XIV -

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state.


Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.


Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any state shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.


Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Here are the key provisions of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment,
New York, 10 December 1984:



Key Provisions


The prohibition against torture is absolute and, according to the Convention, no exceptional circumstances whatsoever, including state of emergency or war or an order from a public authority may be invoked as a justification of torture. "Torture" is defined as:


"... any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions."


States parties have the obligation to prevent and punish not only acts of torture as defined in the Convention, but also other acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, when such acts are committed by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity.


States parties have an obligation to take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture from occurring on their territories. Measures mentioned in the Convention include the prohibition and punishability by appropriate penalties of all acts of torture in domestic criminal law; education and information regarding the prohibition against torture to be fully integrated into the training of law enforcement personnel, civil or military, medical personnel, public officials and others; the systematic review by State parties of interrogation rules, instructions, methods and practices as well as of arrangements for the custody and treatment of suspects, detainees and prisoners; guarantees for the promptand impartial investigation by competent authorities into allegations oftorture; the protection of witnesses; and the possibility for victims to obtain redress and fair and adequate compensation and rehabilitation.


In addition, States parties have an obligation not to expel, return or extradite a person to another State where he or she would be in danger of being subjected to torture. An act of torture is required to be made an extraditable offence and a State party is to take measures to establish its jurisdiction over crimes of torture committed in any part of its territory by one of its nationals and when an alleged offender is present on its territory and not extradited.


In order to monitor and review actions taken by States parties to fulfil their obligations, the Committee against Torture has four procedures at its disposal. The first is the obligation for all States parties to submit periodic reports to the Committee for examination, which results in the adoption of recommendations by the Committee to the State party in question. A particular feature of the Convention is that if the Committee receives reliable information indicating that torture is being systematically practised in the territory of a State party, the Committee may decide to initiate a confidential inquiry of the situation. Such inquiry would be carried out in cooperation with the State party concerned and would include country visits. The Committee can also consider complaints from individuals who claim to be victims of a violation by a State party to the Convention. This may be done only if the State party concerned has declared that it recognizes the competence of the Committee to receive and examine such complaints. As of 15 June 2000, 44 State parties had made such a declaration. Finally, a procedure of State-to-State complaints is provided for by the Convention, but has so far never been resorted to.

http://www.un.org/millennium/law/iv-9.htm

Notice that part in bold as specified by the amendments defintion of cruel and degrading treatment coercive treatment will herby be made illegal.
 
Last edited:

Binary_Digit

DP Veteran
Joined
May 21, 2005
Messages
4,145
Reaction score
1,637
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Just in case anyone still thinks torture leads to useful intelligence.

""Anybody with real combat experience understands that torture is counterproductive," says F. Andy Messing, a retired major in the U.S. Special Forces and a conservative leader with the ear of the president. "It is a downhill slope if you engage in it. Everyplace it has been used that I have studied — the French were big for it in Algeria — it comes back and bites you." And, it seems, keeps biting."

http://www.insightmag.com/main.cfm/include/detail/storyid/253614.html

"Meet, for example, retired Air Force Col. John Rothrock, who, as a young captain, headed a combat interrogation team in Vietnam. More than once he was faced with a ticking time-bomb scenario: a captured Vietcong guerrilla who knew of plans to kill Americans. What was done in such cases was "not nice," he says. "But we did not physically abuse them." Rothrock used psychology, the shock of capture and of the unexpected. Once, he let a prisoner see a wounded comrade die. Yet -- as he remembers saying to the "desperate and honorable officers" who wanted him to move faster -- "if I take a Bunsen burner to the guy's genitals, he's going to tell you just about anything," which would be pointless. Rothrock, who is no squishy liberal, says that he doesn't know "any professional intelligence officers of my generation who would think this is a good idea.""

"Or listen to Army Col. Stuart Herrington, a military intelligence specialist who conducted interrogations in Vietnam, Panama and Iraq during Desert Storm, and who was sent by the Pentagon in 2003 -- long before Abu Ghraib -- to assess interrogations in Iraq. Aside from its immorality and its illegality, says Herrington, torture is simply "not a good way to get information." In his experience, nine out of 10 people can be persuaded to talk with no "stress methods" at all, let alone cruel and unusual ones. Asked whether that would be true of religiously motivated fanatics, he says that the "batting average" might be lower: "perhaps six out of ten." And if you beat up the remaining four? "They'll just tell you anything to get you to stop.""

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A2302-2005Jan11.html

"Willie J. Rowell, who served for thirty-six years as a C.I.D. agent, told me that the use of force or humiliation with prisoners is invariably counterproductive. “They’ll tell you what you want to hear, truth or no truth,” Rowell said. “ ‘You can flog me until I tell you what I know you want me to say.’ You don’t get righteous information.”"

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040510fa_fact

"Craig Murray, the former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan, told me that “the U.S. accepts quite a lot of intelligence from the Uzbeks” that has been extracted from suspects who have been tortured. This information was, he said, “largely rubbish.”"

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?050214fa_fact6

"The use of torture has been criticized not only on humanitarian and moral grounds, but on the grounds that evidence extracted by torture tends to be extremely unreliable and that the use of torture corrupts institutions which tolerate it."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture#Use_of_torture

"The various rationalizations for torture do not bear close scrutiny. Intelligence specialists concede that the information acquired by torture cannot be considered reliable."

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article10410.htm

I guess that just about covers any reasonable argument over the legitimacy or necessity of torture.
 
Top Bottom