Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
Yamato

Human Rights Watch Update on US Waterboarding

54 posts in this topic

CAIRO (AP) — Human Rights Watch said it has uncovered evidence of a wider use of waterboarding in American interrogations of detainees than has been acknowledged by the United States, in a report Thursday that details further brutal treatment at secret CIA-run prisons under the Bush administration-era U.S. program of detention and rendition of terror suspects.

The report also paints a more complete picture of Washington's close cooperation with the regime of Libya's former dictator Moammar Gadhafi in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. The U.S. handed over to Libya the Islamist opponents of Gadhafi that it detained abroad with only thin "diplomatic assurances" that they would not be mistreated, and several of them were subsequently tortured in prison, Human Rights Watch said.

More:

http://news.yahoo.com/rights-watch-evidence-wider-us-waterboarding-072030417.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CAIRO (AP) — Human Rights Watch said it has uncovered evidence of a wider use of waterboarding in American interrogations of detainees than has been acknowledged by the United States, in a report Thursday that details further brutal treatment at secret CIA-run prisons under the Bush administration-era U.S. program of detention and rendition of terror suspects.

The report also paints a more complete picture of Washington's close cooperation with the regime of Libya's former dictator Moammar Gadhafi in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. The U.S. handed over to Libya the Islamist opponents of Gadhafi that it detained abroad with only thin "diplomatic assurances" that they would not be mistreated, and several of them were subsequently tortured in prison, Human Rights Watch said.

More:

http://news.yahoo.co...-072030417.html

The CIA working with Muammar Gaddafi. Can't believe that would happen :whistle:

That being said I would be more interested on the types and amount of torture being perpetrated by us or on our behalf currently.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But, but, but.....President Bush said we don't torture! So too President Obama!

And US presidents simply do not lie. :no:

And the Attorney General just announced last week that there is no evidence that we tortured.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
post-86645-0-82999800-1347106938_thumb.j

post-86645-0-63448900-1347106981_thumb.j

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's interesting is how few churches and organized religions have come out in opposition to the torture. The sounds of silence, as MLK observed.

What's depressing is how many self-described christians actually condone such torture. :cry:

A few too many episodes viewed of "24", I guess.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

post-86645-0-82999800-1347106938_thumb.j

That first photo looks more like someone being apprehended in a combat situation - note the helmet and NVGs on the soldier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's interesting is how few churches and organized religions have come out in opposition to the torture. The sounds of silence, as MLK observed.

What's depressing is how many self-described christians actually condone such torture. :cry:

A few too many episodes viewed of "24", I guess.

Your reference to 24 made me think about this simple question. If you had every reason to believe that a captured combatant KNEW the location of a nuclear weapon within the US would you condone torture to find it or would you stand on your very worthy principles and allow thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands to die? Maybe you'd get nonsense from him or maybe you'd stop a tragedy. The point is, I guess, is your set of principles worth an unlimited number of other people's lives?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your reference to 24 made me think about this simple question. If you had every reason to believe that a captured combatant KNEW the location of a nuclear weapon within the US would you condone torture to find it or would you stand on your very worthy principles and allow thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands to die? Maybe you'd get nonsense from him or maybe you'd stop a tragedy. The point is, I guess, is your set of principles worth an unlimited number of other people's lives?

There is multiple way's that they can find out the information they require to keep people safe without resorting to torture, spying on those people monitoring telephone

call's etc doing those thing's would bring about more credible evidence than torture ever will

If or when the economy collapses and if You go out to steal some food for You and Your family and You get caught, the government could class You as a

terrorist and torture You as they do other people, You could disagree with something the government say or do go on a protest and get classed as a terrorist for speaking

Your mind and get tortured

And it is highly possible they would or could torture at will, why else would they bring out the NDAA the patriot act etc in America

As You know already most thing's the American government do, the UK government are soon to follow

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your reference to 24 made me think about this simple question. If you had every reason to believe that a captured combatant KNEW the location of a nuclear weapon within the US would you condone torture to find it or would you stand on your very worthy principles and allow thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands to die? Maybe you'd get nonsense from him or maybe you'd stop a tragedy. The point is, I guess, is your set of principles worth an unlimited number of other people's lives?

Maybe the US should come clean and leave/repeal the Geneva Convention which they have signed. One of the most recent points agreed to by all signatory nations was against "willful killing, torture or inhumane treatment, including biological experiments"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if i could save lives from torture sure i would use it, if im just torturing the dude to find some drugs hidden under a bridge no im fine i will just use good detective work to accomplish a task with low risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is multiple way's that they can find out the information they require to keep people safe without resorting to torture, spying on those people monitoring telephone

call's etc doing those thing's would bring about more credible evidence than torture ever will

If or when the economy collapses and if You go out to steal some food for You and Your family and You get caught, the government could class You as a

terrorist and torture You as they do other people, You could disagree with something the government say or do go on a protest and get classed as a terrorist for speaking

Your mind and get tortured

And it is highly possible they would or could torture at will, why else would they bring out the NDAA the patriot act etc in America

As You know already most thing's the American government do, the UK government are soon to follow

But in such a case the government will have gone from being a protector to a tyrant and such rules would be pointless anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the US should come clean and leave/repeal the Geneva Convention which they have signed. One of the most recent points agreed to by all signatory nations was against "willful killing, torture or inhumane treatment, including biological experiments"

Considering that most of our opponents in war have never abided by the conventions anyway, I have no problem with that. I would never condone such treatment of another human being for casual reasons, however, I would condone it in a situation where it could save many lives. Our choice when faced with barbarity is to surrender to it by inaction, be smarter in our approaches or to meet fire with fire. As a LAST RESORT in a very deadly situation I would do the latter. Speaking as a person who has struggled to breathe for months on end I DEFINITELY consider waterboarding a form of torture. But it's effects pass in time, those of a deadly weapon would not. The bottom line is we are faced with great evil in the world and we are approaching a time when civility will be a luxury none of us can afford if we wish to survive. If a person's morals prohibit their own survival then my hat's off to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But in such a case the government will have gone from being a protector to a tyrant and such rules would be pointless anyway.

The main point of not torturing people is to have the moral high ground in any argument, making it clear who is fighting for good. If we are torturing prisoners of war, then how can we lecture against other acts of inhumanity?

It has also caused issues with coalition forces in Afghanistan, who follow the UN guidelines of preventing torture, which are now being investigated by the UN for handing prisoners over to the US.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering that most of our opponents in war have never abided by the conventions anyway, I have no problem with that. I would never condone such treatment of another human being for casual reasons, however, I would condone it in a situation where it could save many lives. Our choice when faced with barbarity is to surrender to it by inaction, be smarter in our approaches or to meet fire with fire. As a LAST RESORT in a very deadly situation I would do the latter. Speaking as a person who has struggled to breathe for months on end I DEFINITELY consider waterboarding a form of torture. But it's effects pass in time, those of a deadly weapon would not. The bottom line is we are faced with great evil in the world and we are approaching a time when civility will be a luxury none of us can afford if we wish to survive. If a person's morals prohibit their own survival then my hat's off to them.

I personally don't feel like we are at the "last resort" at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally don't feel like we are at the "last resort" at the moment.

I agree with that. I think that is a plastic sort of argument though. When IS a situation important enough? When a squad of soldiers could be saved? A company or battalion? How many saved lives is the decision worth? Real life and death here Prof. I realize that the act of torture is abhorrent and that when we do it as a nation it makes us as dirty as those we fight. But if we cannot survive without it then what do we do? Are we to allow those who are most willing to be evil to survive while our way of life fails? Quite a dilemma. I personally could not torture another human being. That being the case I guess I would lose my right to an opinion here but I cannot imagine living in a world where our enemy's sense of what is acceptable becomes our way of life. Edited by and then

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Torture is wrong and morally irreprehensible any way one cuts it.

What is intelligence for? What is command for? If the enemy outsmarts you, outfights you, out prepares you, etc. Thats just war.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Torture is wrong and morally irreprehensible any way one cuts it.

What is intelligence for? What is command for? If the enemy outsmarts you, outfights you, out prepares you, etc. Thats just war.

You speak of it as some contest where the rules are more important than who wins or loses. It's easy enough to stand on principle when it won't affect you personally. I think that the equation would change drastically for most here as soon as the life being saved by it were your own or one of your loved ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That first photo looks more like someone being apprehended in a combat situation - note the helmet and NVGs on the soldier.

"enemy combatants fight in the nude ? Maybe they've imported ancient celtic warriors? "THEY"re sneaky ya know.. LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A plastic sort of argument, AND THEN?

Good Heavens man, what you seem to display consistently is a plastic moral code. You can rationalize any sort of behavior, torture and murder included, if only you can create some sort of hypothetical or fantasy one might see on TV.

Your feigned concern about "other peoples' lives" is utterly bogus. You are happy to have other peoples' lives ruined, and your support of torture for Manning and failure of due process for Assange are but 2 examples of HOW your moral code is plastic. You rely upon TV and government to define for you what is right and what is wrong.

You happily throw governance under the rule of law to the 4 winds, hoping it does not return.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A plastic sort of argument, AND THEN?

Good Heavens man, what you seem to display consistently is a plastic moral code. You can rationalize any sort of behavior, torture and murder included, if only you can create some sort of hypothetical or fantasy one might see on TV.

Your feigned concern about "other peoples' lives" is utterly bogus. You are happy to have other peoples' lives ruined, and your support of torture for Manning and failure of due process for Assange are but 2 examples of HOW your moral code is plastic. You rely upon TV and government to define for you what is right and what is wrong.

You happily throw governance under the rule of law to the 4 winds, hoping it does not return.

Precisely, if for his own country or an ally.... its only for the greater good.

if for his enemy... a outcry for their necks to be dismembered from their shoulders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A plastic sort of argument, AND THEN?

Good Heavens man, what you seem to display consistently is a plastic moral code. You can rationalize any sort of behavior, torture and murder included, if only you can create some sort of hypothetical or fantasy one might see on TV.

Your feigned concern about "other peoples' lives" is utterly bogus. You are happy to have other peoples' lives ruined, and your support of torture for Manning and failure of due process for Assange are but 2 examples of HOW your moral code is plastic. You rely upon TV and government to define for you what is right and what is wrong.

You happily throw governance under the rule of law to the 4 winds, hoping it does not return.

I made my argument clearly. That you disagree is you prerogative but spare me your moralizing. Your opinion of me is totally immaterial to the discussion.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Torture is wrong and morally irreprehensible any way one cuts it.

What is intelligence for? What is command for? If the enemy outsmarts you, outfights you, out prepares you, etc. Thats just war.

Did our soilders get treated right in the hands of the Japanese? The Koreans? The Vietnamese?

Exactly. Terrorists don't deserve human rights when they want to kill innocent people

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Unthinkable" with Samuel L. Jackson was an interesting watch if only to look at both sides of the torture debate.

Regardless of stance on the subject, I think it is safe to say that what some consider "torture" isn't and what some consider not, actually is.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Unthinkable" with Samuel L. Jackson was an interesting watch if only to look at both sides of the torture debate.

Regardless of stance on the subject, I think it is safe to say that what some consider "torture" isn't and what some consider not, actually is.

I had trouble watching that movie. Now THAT is torture. And the scenario was a perfect setup to the question at it's most fundamental level. When is it acceptable? And how far are you willing to go? Excellent movie.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"enemy combatants fight in the nude ? Maybe they've imported ancient celtic warriors? "THEY"re sneaky ya know.. LOL

He's obviously under medical care - perhaps he had a gown on or was sleeping in the nude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.