[JamesP]

America Tortures Prisoners, Carter Says
CNN

WASHINGTON (Oct. 10) -- The United States tortures prisoners in violation of international law, former President Carter said Wednesday.

Former President Jimmy Carter told CNN's Wolf Blitzer on Wednesday that the U.S. tortures prisoners captured in the war on terror. "I don't think it. I know it," Carter said.

"Our country for the first time in my life time has abandoned the basic principle of human rights," Carter said. "We've said that the Geneva Conventions do not apply to those people in Abu Ghraib prison and Guantanamo, and we've said we can torture prisoners and deprive them of an accusation of a crime to which they are accused."

Carter also said President Bush creates his own definition of human rights.

Carter's comments come on the heels of an October 4 article in The New York Times disclosing the existence of secret Justice Department memorandums supporting the use of "harsh interrogation techniques." These include "head-slapping, simulated drowning and frigid temperatures," according to the Times.

The White House last week confirmed the existence of the documents but would not make them public.

Responding to the newspaper report Friday, Bush defended the techniques used, saying, "This government does not torture people."

Asked about Bush's comments, Carter said, "That's not an accurate statement if you use the international norms of torture as has always been honored -- certainly in the last 60 years since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was promulgated.

"But you can make your own definition of human rights and say we don't violate them, and you can make your own definition of torture and say we don't violate them."

[Thelonious]

Everybody knows that Bush-Chenney torture their victims.

Anybody who pretends they don't is lying scum.

If you don't think that waterboarding and stress positions, face slapping and all the other 'interrogation' technics being used by US personnel are torture, then you won't mind trying them out on your wife or son or sister. Go ahead, Try these things at home. Prove to your friends and family that these things are not torture.

[CHUQ]

This is a post I put on one of my blogs about torture.


There has been a bunch of crap written and said and thought about the torture technique of waterboarding. I have seen it defended on discussion forums and I have seen it condemned on some of the same forums. But what is waterboarding?

It was first used, as far as I can tell, during the Spanish Inquisition in the 1500's against Jews, Protestants and other heretics. The Nazis and the Japanese used it during WWII, the North Vietmese employed it and the Khmer rouge of Cambodia used it on difficult prisoners. And that brings us to today and the US use of it.


LINK (http://oracleofinkwell.blogspot.com/)

[Thelonious]

"Last week, much to my dismay, government officials testified before Congress that the United States has used the interrogation technique known as waterboarding and would like to hold out the option of using it in the future. As someone who has experienced waterboarding, albeit in a controlled setting, I know that the act is indeed torture. I was waterboarded during my training to become a Navy flight crew member. […]
Waterboarding has, unfortunately, become a household word. Back then, we didn’t call it waterboarding — we called it “water torture.” We recognized it as something the United States would never do, whatever the provocation. … Waterboarding is torture, and torture is clearly a crime against humanity."

— Richard E. Mezo, who served in the Navy for six years, describing in the Washington Post his experience being waterboarded. [Washington Post]

source: todays or yesterdays Washington Post

[Thelonious]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/02/us/02detain.html?hp=&pagewanted=print

Recycled Chinese Torture Charts, False Confessions, and Gitmo

* Running an entire interrogation class on a chart showing the effects of “coercive management techniques” for possible use on prisoners, including “sleep deprivation,” “prolonged constraint,” and “exposure” was nothing out of the ordinary at Gitmo in 2002. [NY Times]
* The fact that the chart had been copied, word for word, from a 1957 Air Force study of Chinese Communist techniques used during the Korean War to obtain confessions was a revelation, some say even to the interrogators themselves.
* Chinese Communist techniques which lead to many false confessions, several from American prisoners.
* The only change made in the chart presented at Guantánamo was to drop its original title: “Communist Coercive Methods for Eliciting Individual Compliance.”
* “What makes this document doubly stunning is that these were techniques to get false confessions,” Senator Levin said at a hearing. “People say we need intelligence, and we do. But we don’t need false intelligence.”
* This document is the latest and most vivid evidence of how Communist interrogation methods have snuck their way into American efforts in Gitmo, but certainly not the first.
* There is some concern that these methods, since known to elicit false confessions in the past, could throw into question the validity of many interrogations at Gitmo, not to mention the morally reprehensible nature of these findings.

Decades old, inhumane torture methods proven to get false and unreliable information? That sure sounds like a solid basis for US policy.

[red states rule]

America Tortures Prisoners, Carter Says
CNN

WASHINGTON (Oct. 10) -- The United States tortures prisoners in violation of international law, former President Carter said Wednesday.

Former President Jimmy Carter told CNN's Wolf Blitzer on Wednesday that the U.S. tortures prisoners captured in the war on terror. "I don't think it. I know it," Carter said.

"Our country for the first time in my life time has abandoned the basic principle of human rights," Carter said. "We've said that the Geneva Conventions do not apply to those people in Abu Ghraib prison and Guantanamo, and we've said we can torture prisoners and deprive them of an accusation of a crime to which they are accused."

Carter also said President Bush creates his own definition of human rights.

Carter's comments come on the heels of an October 4 article in The New York Times disclosing the existence of secret Justice Department memorandums supporting the use of "harsh interrogation techniques." These include "head-slapping, simulated drowning and frigid temperatures," according to the Times.

The White House last week confirmed the existence of the documents but would not make them public.

Responding to the newspaper report Friday, Bush defended the techniques used, saying, "This government does not torture people."

Asked about Bush's comments, Carter said, "That's not an accurate statement if you use the international norms of torture as has always been honored -- certainly in the last 60 years since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was promulgated.

"But you can make your own definition of human rights and say we don't violate them, and you can make your own definition of torture and say we don't violate them."

The bottom line is, the US does not "torture" terrorists

Libs love to rant about waterboarding, but here are the facts on waterboarding

It was used only 3 times

Each time the terrorist cracked in less then one minute

Each time, the terrorists gave info that prevented attacks and saved lives

Would you people rather worry about the comfort of terrorists, and let the attacks happen?

[-V-]

The bottom line is, the US does not "torture" terrorists

IF you successfully get the victim to talk against their will it can only be because it is unbearable torture. People like John McCain do not succumb to interrogation techniques that are mildly persuasive (or, as you put it "uncomfortable").

Libs love to rant about waterboarding, but here are the facts on waterboarding

It was used only 3 times. Each time the terrorist cracked in less then one minute. Each time, the terrorists gave info that prevented attacks and saved lives

I'm not sure in what alternative universe your "facts" were pulled from, but even if true, none of it matters.

We don't torture our enemy because we don't want our enemy torturing McCain -- period.

If we are justified to torture to save American lives, they are justified to torture to save their people's lives. In your bizarro world everyone would have justification to torture anyone.

This breaking news just in from God: "American life = Iraqi life in my eyes".

Would you people rather worry about the comfort of terrorists, and let the attacks happen?

Would you want Iran soldiers to "worry about your son's comfort" if they suspected he knew something about U.S. hostilities towards Iran?

[red states rule]

IF you successfully get the victim to talk against their will it can only be because it is unbearable torture. People like John McCain do not succumb to interrogation techniques that are mildly persuasive (or, as you put it "uncomfortable").



I'm not sure in what alternative universe your "facts" were pulled from, but even if true, none of it matters.

We don't torture our enemy because we don't want our enemy torturing McCain -- period.

If we are justified to torture to save American lives, they are justified to torture to save their people's lives. In your bizarro world everyone would have justification to torture anyone.

This breaking news just in from God: "American life = Iraqi life in my eyes".



Would you want Iran soldiers to "worry about your son's comfort" if they suspected he knew something about U.S. hostilities towards Iran?

The facts on waterboarding comes from ABC news. Would you rather allow a terrorists attack rather then put the terrorist thorugh a little discomfort?

Discomfort they can avoid by telling the truth

Our soldiers have been tortured and mirdered by terrorists, but I do not here the same level of outrage from the left as they show for the terrorists who are still breathing

[Thelonious]

The facts on waterboarding comes from ABC news.

LOL.

Not only are your "Facts" hysterically funny, if anyone else on this server claimed they had "Facts" from ABC new you'd say it was just bullshit from the liberal media.

The truth is YOU have no idea how many suspected terrroists were watertortured, and ABC news doesn't either. Further anyone who breaks under torture will say ANYTHING the torturer wants to hear. So NO information gained this way is reliable at all.

Just like all the FACTS about Iraq's WMD's and the links to Al-Queda, the FACTS about torture preventing terrorist attacks will prove to be propaganda bullshit from the Morons and the Dubya Administration.

[Thelonious]

Also be careful... there is a difference between a Terrorist and a Suspected Terrorist... all I have to do is give your name and address to the FBI and your a Suspected Terrorist in about 20 seconds... Does that make you a terrorist? Fcuking important difference. Be clear when you write about these things.

[red states rule]

Also be careful... there is a difference between a Terrorist and a Suspected Terrorist... all I have to do is give your name and address to the FBI and your a Suspected Terrorist in about 20 seconds... Does that make you a terrorist? Fcuking important difference. Be clear when you write about these things.

Why am I not surprised those who are determined to paint the US as the bad guy ignore the facts?

Remember your Dem leaders saw the video, and never said a word at them time.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/...ive-only-.html

and

http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/waterboarding_has_only_been_used_by_the_united_sta tes_three_times

There have been many instances where terrorists released have been picked up again on the battlefield, or became a homicde bomber - killing innocnet people

[-V-]

if you insist on asking again, I'll answer again with more clarity and I'll expect you to answer my question:

Would you rather allow a terrorists attack rather then put the terrorist thorugh a little discomfort?

Yes, we have to take the same risk that we hoped the Vietnamese would have taken with John McCain, regardless if he had information that would have helped their side.

Your turn, Red States Rule:

Would you approve of Al-Queda waterboarding (i.e. discomforting) your son to get information out of him?

[red states rule]

if you insist on asking again, I'll answer again with more clarity and I'll expect you to answer my question:



Yes, we have to take the same risk that we hoped the Vietnamese would have taken with John McCain, regardless if he had information that would have helped their side.

Your turn, Red States Rule:

1. Do you approve of the Vietnamese's torture of John McCain?

2. Would you approve of Al-Queda waterboarding "discomforting" your son via waterboarding to get information out of him?

So if an attack does happen, you would not blame the adminiatration for not everything possible to prevent the attack?

I can see the left right now dismissing the excuse we could not use harsh tactics to get the info and stop the attack

The big difference in John McCain was covered under the GC - terrorists are not

Terrorists already torture their captives - and they do much worse then waterboarding. They cut their heads off with a hacksaw and video tape it

[-V-]

Would you approve of Al-Queda
waterboarding (i.e. discomforting)
your son
to get information out of him?

[red states rule]

Would you approve of Al-Queda waterboarding
(i.e. discomforting) your son
to get information out of him?

Ok, I will answer again. It is comon knowledge terorists do not care about how they treat their captives - we know going in they torture their captives

Waterboarding is mild compared to what they normally do

We can't expect anything else from them

[-V-]

Yes or No?

[red states rule]

Yes or No?

Since our troops are covered by the GC, our troops should not be treated in such a matter in the first place

Terrorists do not care about the "rules" the left have tried to set in place in this war

Of course I do not want our troops treated in such a matter, but it happens because of the type of enemy we are facing

OBL said we would use our own laws against us - and he was right. The left is trying to fight a PC war

[red states rule]

By the way V, to be covered under the GC, the parties must follow the following rules

In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:

1. Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.

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.

and

2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions:

(a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;

(b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;

(c) That of carrying arms openly;

(d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

3. Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power.



Terrorists do even come close to meeting these requirements

[-V-]

I'll have to take that as a NO, you do not want your son waterboarded under any circumstances.

How convenient that you say "our troops are covered by the Geneva Convention and theirs are not.

Did we not drop bombs on buildings containing civilians in Iraq, are not hundreds of thousands of Iraq civilians not dead by our hands, and even more Vietnamese civilians killed by American troops?

So how do John McCain, John Kerry, and our soldiers in Iraq qualify for the Geneva Convention and theirs do not?

[red states rule]

I'll have to take that as a NO, you do not want your son waterboarded under any circumstances.

How convenient that you say "our troops are covered by the Geneva Convention and theirs are not.

Did we not drop bombs on buildings containing civilians in Iraq, are not hundreds of thousands of Iraq civilians not dead by our hands, and even more Vietnamese civilians killed by American troops?

So how do John McCain, John Kerry, and our soldiers in Iraq qualify for the Geneva Convention and theirs do not?

Did you read the requirements to be covered by the GC? Terrorists do not meet any of them - our troops meet all of them

We are in a war, and innocents on both sides get killed. AQ terrorists slaughter people for fun and to spread terror - yet the left says nothing about that

Our troops go to great leagths to try and not harm civilians, yet the left paint them as cold blooded killers (some John Murtha lingo there)

[-V-]

Did you read the requirements to be covered by the GC? Terrorists do not meet any of them - our troops meet all of them

You can add as many rules as it takes to build an excuse, including a requirement that to be covered the party must be represented by a flag adorned with the colors red, white, and blue, but it does not change the equation:

American life = Iraqi life in God's eyes

[red states rule]

America Tortures Prisoners, Carter Says
CNN

WASHINGTON (Oct. 10) -- The United States tortures prisoners in violation of international law, former President Carter said Wednesday.

Former President Jimmy Carter told CNN's Wolf Blitzer on Wednesday that the U.S. tortures prisoners captured in the war on terror. "I don't think it. I know it," Carter said.

"Our country for the first time in my life time has abandoned the basic principle of human rights," Carter said. "We've said that the Geneva Conventions do not apply to those people in Abu Ghraib prison and Guantanamo, and we've said we can torture prisoners and deprive them of an accusation of a crime to which they are accused."

Carter also said President Bush creates his own definition of human rights.

Carter's comments come on the heels of an October 4 article in The New York Times disclosing the existence of secret Justice Department memorandums supporting the use of "harsh interrogation techniques." These include "head-slapping, simulated drowning and frigid temperatures," according to the Times.

The White House last week confirmed the existence of the documents but would not make them public.

Responding to the newspaper report Friday, Bush defended the techniques used, saying, "This government does not torture people."

Asked about Bush's comments, Carter said, "That's not an accurate statement if you use the international norms of torture as has always been honored -- certainly in the last 60 years since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was promulgated.

"But you can make your own definition of human rights and say we don't violate them, and you can make your own definition of torture and say we don't violate them."

Who cares what Peanut Carter says? He has been a nutcase for years

He has openly snuggled up to terrorists all around the world

[red states rule]

You can add as many rules as it takes to build an excuse, including a requirement that to be covered the party must salute to a flag adorned with the colors red, white, and blue, but it does not change the equation:

American life = Iraqi life in God's eyes

Sorry V - you can't make up your own rules. Those requirements are in GC rules and requirements - something the left chooses to ignore while attacking our troops and the folks who try to keep us safe

[-V-]

Did you read the requirements to be covered by the GC? Terrorists do not meet any of them

Maybe you are the only one who missed the warm and fuzzy photos of the terrorist suspects in Abu Ghraib Prison, who qualify under item (1), being subjected to subsection C. Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;

our troops meet all of them

Unfortunately, there are way too many cases of our soldiers NOT (2)(c) conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war both on their own and, moreso, under the command of their superiors. There are hundreds of thousands of bodies of Iraqi citizens as evidence.

Hell, the whole damn war was illegal from the start. We tried to assasinate their President before the war started, and in fact, we never even declared war at all.

[red states rule]

Maybe you are the only one who missed the warm and fuzzy photos of the terrorist suspects in Abu Ghraib Prison, who qualify under item (1), being subjected to subsection C. Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;



Unfortunately, there are way too many cases of our soldiers NOT (2)(c) conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war both on their own and, moreso, under the command of their superiors. There are hundreds of thousands of bodies of Iraqi citizens as evidence.

Hell, the whole damn war was illegal from the start. We tried to assasinate their President before the war started, and in fact, we never even declared war at all.

V, the members of the US military were tried for their actions. I would hardly call it torture

As I have said before, you human rights folks have been silent on the real examples of torture. The torture that comes from the terrorists

I have read one things from you lefties on the acts of torture the terrorists use on our troops and civilians

Here is an example


What does torture look like?
By Michelle Malkin • May 25, 2007 12:40 PM

Don Surber and Wretchard at The Belmont Club note the silence of the human rights crowd and the MSM in regard to the al Qaeda torture manual published at The Smoking Gun. Writes Wretchard:

The problem with the word “torture” is that it has been so artfully corrupted by some commentators that we now find ourselves at a loss to describe the kinds of activities that the al-Qaeda interrogation manual graphically recommends. Now that the term “torture” has been put in one-to-one correspondence with such admittedly unpleasant activities as punching, sleep deprivation, a handkerchief pulled over one’s face and loaded with water, searches by women upon sensitive Islamic men or the disrespectful handling of Korans — what on earth do we call gouging people’s eyes out?

Answer: we call it nothing. My fearless prediction is that not a single human rights organization will seriously take the matter up. There will be no demonstrations against these barbaric practices, often inflicted upon Muslims by other Muslims, in any of the capitals of the world. Not a single committee in the United Nations will be convened nor will any functionary in the European Union lose so much as a night’s sleep over it. The word for these activities — whatever we choose to call it — will not be spoken.
Indeed, the news that Pfc. Joseph Anzack Jr.’s body showed signs of possible torture has been met by the human rights brigade with…

Nothing.

The continued search for our two other missing soldiers has been met by the human rights brigade with…

Nothing.

This Memorial Day weekend, break the silence and remember our soldiers who suffered and sacrificed. Remember American courage and strength in the face of brutality. Remember the difference between good and evil.

http://michellemalkin.com/2007/05/25/what-does-torture-look-like/

As far as the war, Pres Bush said the same things about WMD's and Saddam as your fellow Dems said

Dems like Bill, Hillary, Kennedy, Reid, Pelosi, and others

[-V-]

Red, I doubt that you or Michelle really believe that anyone equates waterboarding with eye gouging. If so, we'll all sign a declaration that the latter is more heinus, as is breaking 2 fingers instead of one. Then, maybe you can move on to the real equation concerning this matter, and all matters you might ever ponder:

American life = Iraqi life in God's eyes

[Thelonious]

Why am I not surprised those who are determined to paint the US as the bad guy ignore the facts?

Who is "determined to paint the US as the bad guy" ???

What on Earth are you talking about? Are you delusional again?

[red states rule]

Who is "determined to paint the US as the bad guy" ???

What on Earth are you talking about? Are you delusional again?

Take your pick within the Dem party and liberal media

If you need a recent example, here you go


Chris Satullo: A not-so-glorious Fourth
U.S. atrocities are unworthy of our heritage

Put the fireworks in storage.
Cancel the parade.

Tuck the soaring speeches in a drawer for another time.

This year, America doesn't deserve to celebrate its birthday. This Fourth of July should be a day of quiet and atonement.

For we have sinned.

We have failed to pay attention. We've settled for lame excuses. We've spit on the memory of those who did that brave, brave thing in Philadelphia 232 years ago.

The America those men founded should never torture a prisoner.

The America they founded should never imprison people for years without charge or hearing.

The America they founded should never ship prisoners to foreign lands, knowing their new jailers might torture them.

Such abuses once were committed by the arrogant crowns of Europe, spawning rebellion.

Today, our nation does such things in the name of our safety. Petrified, unwilling to take the risks that love of liberty demands, we close our eyes.

We have done such things, on orders from the Oval Office. We have done them, without general outrage or shame.

Abu Ghraib. Guantanamo. CIA secret prisons. "Rendition" of prisoners to foreign torture chambers.

It's not enough that we had good reason to be scared.

The men huddled long ago in Philadelphia had better reason. A British fleet floated off the Jersey coast, full of hands eager to hang them from the nearest lampposts.

Yet they pledged their lives and sacred honor - no idle vow - to defend the "inalienable rights" of men. Inalienable - what does that signify? It means rights that belong to each person, simply by virtue of being human. Rights that can never be taken away, no matter what evil a person might do or might intend.

Surely one of those is the right not to be tortured. Surely that is a piece of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

This is the creed of July 4: No matter what it costs us, no matter how it scares us, no matter how foolish it seems to a cynical world, America should stand up for human rights.

for the complete article
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/20080701_Chris_Satullo__A_not-so-glorious_Fourth.html

[red states rule]

Red, I doubt that you or Michelle really believe that anyone equates waterboarding with eye gouging. If so, we'll all sign a declaration that the latter is more heinus, as is breaking 2 fingers instead of one. Then, maybe you can move on to the real equation concerning this matter, and all matters you might ever ponder:

American life = Iraqi life in God's eyes

V, it is the left that tosses out the word torture on a regular basis. They play the torture card almost as much as they play the race card

Words mean things, and the left actions when it comes to real torture is nothing but total silence

[Thelonious]

Red,
So let me get this straight, ok? When Arabs do it to our boys it is torture, and when Americans do it to them it is a little discomfort. Is that the correct way to define torture in your view?

[red states rule]

Red,
So let me get this straight, ok? When Arabs do it to our boys it is torture, and when Americans do it to them it is a little discomfort. Is that the correct way to define torture in your view?

Do libs have a filter that prevents them for comprehending basic facts?

We do not torture people. There ar no lasting effects from our interrogation methods. Nobody needs to go to the hospital afterwards

Our troops go to the funeral home when the terrorists are done with them

Do you remember the terrorist pigs laughing after beheading Dan Peral?

I know full well that most on the left see the US and the miltary as terrorists, and the AQ pigs as freedom fighters - but the US is not the bad guy here

[Thelonious]

Do libs have a filter that prevents them for comprehending basic facts?

We do not torture people.

Red,
If waterboarding is just a little discomfort, then you won't mind doing it to your son or daughter, or maybe your mother.
Try it. Film it. Then send me the video, to show me just how innocent the practice is, ok? If you don't I will know that you are full of siht.

[Thelonious]

I happen to think that it is digusting what the North Vietnamese did to John McCain. I think it was torture, but according to the Dubya Administration McCain only got "enhanced interogation technics"... Who is full of shit here?

[Thelonious]

"Taxi to the darkside"... a new film about AMERICAN, yes, USA torture... Will Torture be as all-American as Apple Pie...

the film premiered on HBO this week. Get a copy. Show your family (maybe leave the kids out, it is ****ing gruesome), show your friends, show your neighbors, then let them know how McCain has FLIPFLOPPED on the Torture issue, so that his position NOW, is Exactly the same as DUBYA's...