BS: US torture

Subject: BS: US torture
From: GUEST,JTT
Date: 27 Dec 02 - 02:11 PM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2607629.stm

Interesting BBC story about the US in Bagram using torture and the sleep deprivation and psychops that drove people crazy in Northern Ireland.

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Dec 02 - 02:17 PM

Here's the link as a blue clicky - and note that story was picked up from the Washington Post - as evidenced by this quote from a US official: "We don't kick the [expletive] out of them. We send them to other countries so they can kick the [expletive] out of them." (I suspect that there aren't too many places where "expletives" are seen as more obscene to print than stories of torture.)

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: Ebbie
Date: 27 Dec 02 - 02:35 PM

An aside- McGrath, that reminds me of something I read. A woman steps into a mess on the sidewalk and yelps, "Oh, shit. I stepped into some doggie doo doo."

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: Gareth
Date: 27 Dec 02 - 02:42 PM

Errr ! Who used/uses torture in Northern Ireland ?

Oh Sorry, I was forgetting suspected informers are beyond protection.

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Dec 02 - 02:46 PM

Fair point, Gareth.

Doesn't make what the USA are doing right though.

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: Gareth
Date: 27 Dec 02 - 02:49 PM

Dear Anon Guest, for once I agree with you !!!

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: ard mhacha
Date: 27 Dec 02 - 03:00 PM

Gareth, If you can obtain The Guinea Pigs by John McGuffin, it will explain your question on who used torture in Ireland. Ard Mhacha.

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: Gareth
Date: 27 Dec 02 - 03:03 PM

Ard Mhacha, I think torture by Terrorists of both sides is well documented.

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: ard mhacha
Date: 27 Dec 02 - 03:40 PM

The European Court of Human Rights found the British Government guilty of Cruel and Degrading treatment, this consisted of Hooding, white noise, spreadeagled for hours against a wall by their fingertips, deprieved of food and sleep, whilst hooded pushed from helicopters hoovering a few feet from the ground, made to run the gauntlet between soldiers with guard dogs.
There is much more, the men who survived this ordeal were never the same, they were all interned by the British without any charge.
As I said Gareth found guilty on two occasions by The European Court of Human Rights in Ireland in the early 1970s.. Ard Mhacha.

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Dec 02 - 03:52 PM

The thing is, as the guy quoted in that story comments, torture is not a good way to get accurate information.

But then that's not really what it's about. The real purpose is to break the people who are tortured, and to terrorise their possible sympathisers, and to create a kind of bond of blood brotherhood between the torturers and those who authorise them.

When the torturers in Chile tried out all the techniques they had been taught in the School of the Americas, they weren't primarily trying to get information; and nor were the torturers in the Castlereigh, or in the Securité, or Putin's friends in the KGB...And the list goes on. They were engaged in terror, licensed by those above them.

Essentially, torture is a form of terrorism, whoever does it - just as terrorism is a form of torture. Sometimes it's individuals who are tortured, sometimes it's communities, sometimes it's whole peoples.

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: Greg F.
Date: 27 Dec 02 - 05:56 PM

Torture is terrorism? Can't be! Say it ain't so!! The U.S. is the champion in the War Against, Terrorism!

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: katlaughing
Date: 27 Dec 02 - 06:58 PM

Do they really expect those who were let go from Guatanomo to say they were beaten? Imagine the threats to them and their families before they were let go.

We've got to stop this collision course the Shrub has our country on!!

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: Bobert
Date: 27 Dec 02 - 07:16 PM

Maybe too late, Kat. Looks like Junior has just deployed the hospital ships to the Persian Gulf. This is usually a prelude to an attack. No opne is gonna be able to stop Bush's thirst for war except the American people and right now they are a tad comfy with Bush.

I hate to say it but the American people must have that morbid curiosity that allows a people to sit by and watch events unfold that will surely bring about the DEATHS of many people. Well, I hope they get the *jollies bag* filled this time because this is the most avildable war in the history of the US yet some folks just need to see a few of their kids or neighborhood's kids come home in body bags.

And it doesn't matter if Saddam just gives up tomorrow because Bush *will find* some country to have a *hot war* with so that the American sheep can get their jollies and be entertained. Hey, it does take the focus away from Bush's other shortcomings.

The man is in over his head on every front. He equates peace with killing! He equates economic health by deficits.

He may not be an idiot but he is definately EVIL!

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: Raedwulf
Date: 27 Dec 02 - 07:44 PM

Calm down, Bob. I'm English - do you think I'd not be cynical about the Shrub?! If Saddam rolled over & died (figuratively or literally) tomorrow, The Almighty Ignorance wouldn't go to war with Iraq. If he goes to war with N.Korea, which is at least looking plausible if not yet possible, it won't have anything to do with whether or not he's fighting Saddam.

He's an idiot of monumental proportions, perhaps (probably). I don't believe he "equates peace with killing". I wouldn't say he was evil. An idiot, yes. Evil? No!

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Dec 02 - 08:32 PM

It isn't really worth speculating whether a statesmen is "evil" or not. That's between them and God I suppose, and noone else can really judge those things, and paying any attention to it distracts from what matters. In any case evil men can do good things and good men can do evil things. What we can judge, and have to judge, is whether what is being done is evil or not - and what's happening here looks pretty evil to me (as it does to the Pope and the Archbishop of Canterbury - and, I was pleased to note, to the Parish Priest when he gave the sermon for the Mass attended by Tony Blair and his family this Christmas).

There are so many echoes of Kaiser Bill and the inexorable rolling out of the Great War. And all the evidence seems to show how popular that was with his subjects, and how proud they felt, and how justified in what they were doing.

I don't know whether it's really true that most Americans are gung-ho for this - I can't really believe it. But one thing's for certain - even if Tony Blair succeeds in dragging us into it, it won't be a popular war here in any way.

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: smallpiper
Date: 27 Dec 02 - 09:24 PM

except with the arms manufacturers

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: Bobert
Date: 27 Dec 02 - 09:52 PM

Raedwulf: I'm calm. Just realistic. And if Bush wants my son to fight his f**kin' war, he won't get him! I'll have him in Canada in a New York Minute! No, make no bones about George Bush! He is a servant of the Devil! He serves Satan! He is no more a Christain than Herod! He has made *HIS* deal with the Devil. He will kill people for his own glory. It doesn't matter if it's one person or 100,000. The fact that he has made a decision that's *his* image is worth more than the life of one single human being makes him a *servant* of the Devil!

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: Gareth
Date: 28 Dec 02 - 04:08 AM

Ard' - What a pity that the IRA never wer tken to the Court of Human rights.

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: ard mhacha
Date: 28 Dec 02 - 07:29 AM

Gareth, I never realised the IRA were in control here!, this is a so-called democracy being castigated for their brutality, and this is very relevant to this Thread, as the methods used were taken from the CIA`s handbook. Ard Mhacha.

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: MARINER
Date: 28 Dec 02 - 11:05 AM

Who was it said that "Fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity"?

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: Don Firth
Date: 28 Dec 02 - 12:50 PM

"I don't know whether it's really true that most Americans are gung-ho for this. . . ."

Kevin, I keep hearing on the news that the polls say that Bush has a general approval rating of about 60%, and that the vast majority of Americans back him all the way on the Iraq war. Nevertheless, I have yet to meet anyone, be it friends, relatives, or casual acquaintances who don't think that Bush is way off base and is using the war thing to divert people's attention from his fouled-up domestic policies and his attempts to get his agenda passed under the radar. If the polls are true, then I really should run into someone (besides DougR) who thinks Bush is just fine. Where are all these people who think Bush is the bee's knees? Could it be that I lead a sheltered life?

Or could it be that (as CBS newsman Dan Rather implied a brief time ago) there is a lot of news that isn't allowed to make the news?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: Amos
Date: 28 Dec 02 - 01:01 PM

You're right on the dime there, Don. One way to subvert the rule of democracy is to invent a fictitious majority, which of course can only be done by lying, and using mass media. You can use it to pose as a leader when you are actually just being a thief.

Wish Bob Woodward would remember who he used to be!



A

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: SINSULL
Date: 28 Dec 02 - 03:00 PM

I work in a pro-Bush environment yet none of them "support" war. They do however "support" their president. Not mine - I voted for Gore (or against Bush, I don't remember). At least the younger people listen when I tell them about Viet Nam and real people who died horrible deaths or lived worse lives as a result. I know hundreds who openly oppose a war with Iraq but none who enthusiastically support one. Maybe they are all on the west coast?

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: ard mhacha
Date: 28 Dec 02 - 03:23 PM

What a strange, strange, Country the land of the free and the home of the naive.
Who voted for the scum-bag?. Ard Mhacha.

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: DougR
Date: 28 Dec 02 - 03:44 PM

Enough to elect him Mhacha.

Bobert: there you go again. I'll bet Bush's ears are beet red! You sure aren't saying very nice things about him.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Dec 02 - 04:09 PM

All right, there is room for a lot of disagreements about politics - but is there anyone who does not think that torture of captives is intolerable, whoever does it?

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: Don Firth
Date: 28 Dec 02 - 04:39 PM

Katherine Harris voted for George W. Bush. Some are more equal than others.   

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: Don Firth
Date: 28 Dec 02 - 04:43 PM

Torture is an atrocity, and anyone who perpetrates it, or authorizes it--all the way to the top--should be held accountable.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: ard mhacha
Date: 29 Dec 02 - 05:46 AM

If that were only true Don, the perpetrators in northern Ireland were promoted. Ard Mhacha.

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: Stephen L. Rich
Date: 29 Dec 02 - 06:52 AM

Isn't asking the Bush administration to investigate these allegations just a bit like hiring an alcoholic to tend bar? How reliable is a US Goverment investigation likely to be?

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: Gareth
Date: 29 Dec 02 - 09:27 AM

Ard Mhacha - Yes they were promoted - I understand at least two of them served as ministeres in the Northern Ireland Government.

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Dec 02 - 09:32 AM

I'd think any "Goverment investigation" into these kinds of allegations - any Government - should be treated the same way as a declaration by Saddam Hussein about his arms holdings. In other words, as material to be included in the scope of a proper investigation to be carried out by dispassionate and trustworthy international observers.

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: Ireland
Date: 29 Dec 02 - 10:16 AM

If torture was not expected at some level or part of a "War Process" why do so many countries train their military (special forces)to resist it?

In reality if torturing one person within a mm of their life results in intelligence that save many lives who is to say which is the greater evil. Having the means to obtain such info or doing nothing and letting others die so some one can live in a sanitised world.

I look at it like this those in Guatanomo were quite happy to terrorise/torture people in Iraq we can see the evidence of such people, blowing the brains out of a mother on a football pitch in front of her children to hanging people from goal posts. Taliban, Al qaeda,all the same people who have shown they are not beyond using torture on a massive scale.

Since Sept 11 Bin Laden is torturing the world with the threat of terrorism, if torture gets info to stop this I for one will not complain.

We have in N.Ireland many examples of torture, a widowed mother taken from her young family by the IRA and disposed of.The purpose of such acts, to stop people doing the right thing and reporting the illegal activities of others, who were intent on handing out their brand of torture,punishments shootings, bombing and maiming innocents.

I have had friends in Castlereagh who were beaten, totally innocent people, so I have no argument with condemning such acts, but when it is carried out on those who are known terrorists, either side, I have no pity for them at all. These people were not worried about the pain they would inflict on innocent people out trying to get on with their life, why should I worry about such scum.

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Dec 02 - 12:55 PM

The people in Guantanamo Bay are by no means all "known terrorists". For example in October three men who had been held there for a year were released without any charge. Why, they were even paid compensation. $500 dollars between them. I suppose, since they were, after all, Afghans, the US authorities thought that was a generous payout for a year locked in a cage.

If it's all right to torture terrorists, and I'm right in my assertion that torture is a form of terrorism, that would mean that it's all right to torture the people who aid and abet a government which goes in for that kind of terrorism... That way it never stops.

Torture is not a good way of getting accurate information. It's a good way of ensuring that your side has a supply of people who have been corrupted and degraded into becoming torturers. A useful enough resource I suppose. People who will do anything you ask them to do.

Here's a link to a piece in today's Observer about this, focussing on the case of an English Muslim teacher from Birmingham who's been held in Bagram since February, after being kidnapped in Pakistan and taken into Afghanistan. No representative of the British Foreign Office, let alone a lawyer, a Red Cross official or a member of his family has been allowed to see him so far. "We are still pressing the Americans, but as yet we have been allowed no access" said the Foreign Office spokesman.

One thought-provoking element in the story is this quote:

It is believed that some, who had battle wounds when captured, are denied painkillers as a further way of coaxing information from them.

"Pain control is a very subjective thing" one US official said, deadpan, to the Washington Post last week.

The Nazis used to go in for that too. That sounds like a Nazi official talking to the Washington Post there. Why aren't we surprised?

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: Ireland
Date: 29 Dec 02 - 01:51 PM

Corrupted and degraded, who corrupted people to take such degrading actions as flying an aeroplane into a building? If action is taken which turns a person around from being part of such actions to being part of preventing them I am all for it.

How can we lead by example when we live in a world that see's such as a weakness?

We have people on both sides who think their way is their Gods way, one crowd is relying on humanity to prevail and the other is using the threat of their might to keeps everyone in line.

If we do not want to live by the Law of Islam and others want to make us what do we do? Who has an answer?

We have extremes on both sides, Bush gets slammed for using the word Crusade, but others can keep using the word Jihad, where is the difference? The difference I see is that Jihad can have many connotations, including the right to spread Islam through the use of violence, that is kill off everyone who does not accept Islam or corrupt or degrade them into Islam. Taleban is the example of how people are tortured into following the law of Islam, women are degraded into denying their education and corrupted men/followers uphold such laws.

We have those on the Christian side just as bad, and one sure thing is, those who are meek Christian or Muslim, who rely on goodness to prevail will be the ones who sit back and watch the extremists ruin what we have.

People are willingly following security checks at airports etc, they have given up part of their freedom, worry free travel etc etc, why? some nut took it into his head the notion to put fear into peoples lives because they do not follow his way of life. No way do I feel sorry for those guys, they brought it on themselves. I feel sorry for their innocent victims and the degredation some of them may go through.

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: NicoleC
Date: 29 Dec 02 - 02:10 PM

Ireland, we are not talking about toturing guilty people. We are talking about torturing people that are SUSPECTED of something. The problem with suspicion is that's it often wrong -- one reason why we have trials instead of one person arbitrarily meeting out judgement.

Secondly, what if they are guilty? Shall we be as inhumane as they? Shall we commit the same acts which we so loudly decry? On one hand, you suggest the average, ordinary people who are prisoners in Guantanamo were forced into their acts by the Taliban, then you say they brought it upon themselves. Which is it? People who live lives of limited choice and less information on which to make those choices may not be able to make the same choices we do.

It is a convenient fiction that there is one accepted code of behavior for all humans regardless of culture. Children learn only what they are taught. If you are taught that it is right to kill others when your leader says so -- whether it be in a terrorist training camp or at a US military installation, that does not mean you deliberately make an evil choice -- you simply make the one that's available to you based on what you have been taught.

If we resort to the same evil acts when we DO have a choice, then we are no better than our "enemy," and the enemy has won. We also teach our children, and our enemy's children, that we only pretend to denounce these acts -- in truth they are an acceptable way to live.

Is that what you want to teach a new generation? More blood?

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: Stephen L. Rich
Date: 30 Dec 02 - 04:20 AM

After reading the other Gaurdian article (29-12-02, or for my countrymen 12-29-02) I am somewhat ashamed to say that I'm not especially surprised.

The lesson in all of this may be to beware of any leader who tells you that you MUST be afraid of anyone. They are not leading you to anywher that decnt, caring, intelligent people want to go. They are only trying to solidiy and consolidate thier power.

Stephen Lee

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: Ireland
Date: 30 Dec 02 - 09:27 AM

"On one hand, you suggest the average, ordinary people who are prisoners in Guantanamo were forced into their acts by the Taliban, then you say they brought it upon themselves. Which is it?"

NicoleC, not a bit of it,I really do not give a fig for those who executed people and enforced the Taleban rule, they have brought it on themselves.

It was the people who were forced to live under the taleban rule not enforce it are the people I'm referring to and I think you know that.

The "can't we all get along" sentiment does not work, too many justify their actions for taking life, from freedom fighters to religious zealots, or those who want everyone to toe the party line.

"If we resort to the same evil acts when we DO have a choice, then we are no better than our "enemy," and the enemy has won."

What are you suggesting here, if we say took up the same tactics as our enemy then the enemy has won? Adaptation and playing the enemy at their own game won many conflicts,the torturing of prisoners is not a new phenomenon,and is not a useless as some say it is.

"CIA director George Tenet has said that interrogations overseas have yielded results.
"Almost half of our successes against senior al-Qaeda members have come in recent months," he said in a speech earlier this month"

If you read the report you will have noticed the last paragraph, harsh conditions but not beaten, Which is it harsh or tortured?

I agree that it is barbaric to torture people, but if it has to be done and if it saves lives then it is worth it. In the context of the War on Terror when we have Bin Laden terrorising the World any method to get intelligence is all right by me.

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: Gareth
Date: 30 Dec 02 - 10:59 AM

Nichole C, I agree with your sentiments. May the time come when the Republican/ Loyaalist element acknowledge that the Provisional/Real IRA / Assortd Protestants
have no right to the moral high ground on this. And I just wonder how much of the troubles are due to " freedom fighters" or money leaching bastards who seek status and wealth at the expense of the inocent population.

Answers on a postcard please to G Adams c/o Stormont Building, Belfast, United Kingdon of Great Brittain and Northern Ireland, and Ian Paisley of the same address.

Gareth - who is sick of the patriot game.

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: NicoleC
Date: 30 Dec 02 - 11:28 AM

"I agree that it is barbaric to torture people, but if it has to be done and if it saves lives then it is worth it."

Ahhh, but whose lives? Only the ones you think are worthy of saving? That's the problem with that argument. The terrorists use it too to justify the lives they say they are trying to save in the West Bank and Iraq. Are their lives worth less because you don't know them or share their culture?

I don't believe that self-proclaimed better motives justify the same actions one is condemning. Someone else always thinks their motives are better than yours.

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: Don Firth
Date: 30 Dec 02 - 12:08 PM

And how can you be so sure beforehand that it will save lives?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: ard mhacha
Date: 30 Dec 02 - 12:40 PM

Aren`t we all sick of patriotism, wouldn`t the two B`s warmongering make anyone sick. Ard Mhacha.

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: Ireland
Date: 30 Dec 02 - 02:28 PM

"Ahhh, but whose lives? Only the ones you think are worthy of saving?"

Where do you get that impression, I do not agree with the 2B's and their wanting to go to war. I do not agree with our security being reliant on good will towards man, it's a nice sentiment but not all people share that.

As you have reiterated what I said, that both sides can use the argument to justify their action, we have to acknowledge the fact the one side has to be the aggressor and in such cannot moan when they get a taste of their own medicine.If the side I'm on happens to protect my interests and freedoms that the aggressor wants to take away I have no pity on them when they are put in their box. Rather Al Qaeda get put in their box by any means than any innocent person anywhere in the world.

We have people who do live their lives in the manner you want, which is something we all should aspire to do, problem is there are too many on all sides who see that as a weakness and are willing to use force to impose their will, any ideas how you could stop that?

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: Melani
Date: 30 Dec 02 - 03:09 PM

I think there is considerable question as to whether enough people voted for Bush to get him elected, and I certainly wasn't one of them. I agree with Bobert--I would not be surprised to find three tiny 6's tatooed on the guy's scalp.

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: DougR
Date: 30 Dec 02 - 04:16 PM

Ireland: I think you make some good points.

McGrath: "it is believed that those who were wounded were denied treatment (or words to that affect). The statement, "It is believed", is evidently sufficient proof to you that it happend (else why would you provide us the quote?) Since it is a quote from "The Guardian" I, for one am not convinced.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Dec 02 - 04:28 PM

I wrote this right after Ireland's post at 29 Dec 02 - 01:51 PM, as a reply to it and the Mudcat went down before I posted it. So I'll post it now anyway:

I'd suggest that the reason why Bush was criticised for using the word "Crusade" in this context was that in doing so he was implying that the line of conflict was between Christians on one side and Muslims on the other.

I'm not an Arabic speaker, but my understanding is that Jihad essentially means "holy struggle". In which case in a sense a Crusade is just a special Christian version of this concept. In both cases the term has been used to cover many kind of non-violent activity as well. But also some horrible things, both in the Middle Ages and more recently - for example the code name for Hitler's attack on the Soviet Union was "Operation Barbarossa", referring to a Crusading Emperor.

Only a very very stupid person could have used the term in the context of trying to build a coalition which has to include Muslims - most of whom were appalled by what happened on September 11th, and see it as an act of blasphemy for those responsible to have associated it with the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful.

It is clear that "these guys" whom Ireland casually indicates that it is all right to torture (though I am sure he doesn't actually mean that) include innocent people. Equally clearly, the guys who are doing the torture are themselves terrorists, engaged in a terrorist activity, which degrades everybody who consents to it or approves of it.

Real true believing terrorist don't tend to crack under torture - the people who crack are the fringe people pulled in, and the totally innocent, who have no accurate information, but say whatever they think might stop the torturers. It's a lousy way of getting accurate information. It's a great way of getting false information and false confessions.

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Dec 02 - 04:49 PM

Doug - that quote from The Guardian was actually a quote from The Observer. That's not much difference (though I did indicate this in the post, so you must have been speed reading). More to the point though, as the story indicates, the allegation is taken from the Washington Post, as also is the quote from an unnamed US Government official which appears to substantiate it.

A conscientious paper indicates when an allegation is not proven by the use of expressions such as "it is believed", and the Guardian and the Observer are conscientious papers. There are plenty of papers which fudge this kind of thing, and I don't put much stock by them. I believe the Washington Post is another conscientious paper, which tries to indicate what's fact and what's comment. (The Tory Daily Telegraph is another, and personally I wouldn't disparage a story - as opposed to an editorial or comment column - just because it appeared in a paper whose politics I did not share.)

The actual facts in this business are open to investigation and it'd be wrong to jump prematurely to conclusions. There is room for different beliefs and suspicions about whether torture is being permitted and encouraged by agents of our Governments. My view is that the previous records of the agencies under suspicion have to be taken into account, and unfortunately there is clear evidence of the sue of torture by both our countries. But that still just adds up to suspicion.

However when people assert that torture is a permissible thing to do, that goes too far. It's the kind of disagreement that breaks off communication.

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: Ireland
Date: 30 Dec 02 - 07:02 PM

"Real true believing terrorist don't tend to crack under torture - the people who crack are the fringe people pulled in, and the totally innocent, who have no accurate information"

McG of H you give too much credit to terrorists who sneak up on people and blow their brains out or fly people into buildings. Terrorists are human, the course they take in life does not make them any more immune to torture than the ordinary person on the street, it does make them less sensitive to violence though which when used on them may seem harsh to the average bystander.

Those on the fringe may not have a lot of accurate intelligence but they still have some. This info could have been gleamed from many or a few of the prisoners, a good intel collator can make use of the given details, that's were the advantage lies. At the ending of the original Article it was said useful intelligence was obtained.

I am glad you realise I do not advocate torturing innocent people in any way shape or form, but I do realise that, as terrorist spokesperson's in N.Ireland point out that there are innocent people killed in all wars, those on the fringe of terrorism as such run the same risks. M.McGuiness said in the past that those killed or maimed in an IRA atrocity had only themselves to blame for being there in the first place. Not word for word but the just of his statement.

I would rather have a world were we have no such decisions to make but I look at the terrorist strikes anywhere in the world as torture. If we do not do what terrorists of the world want they torture us by bombing and shooting innocent people. If you pick up victims who are mince meat or just slices of skin that is real torture, knowing if we do not do what is demanded then the same is going to happen.

We have to realise that war is dirty and vile, fought with many means and torture is one such way, tying our hands by not taking terrorists on at their own game makes the job all the harder. I have no problems with terrorising the terrorist they brought it on by doing what they did.

Nowhere have I seen people asking to be victims of a terrorist attack so where is the need for terrorists, what is their worth or reason for being?

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Dec 02 - 07:26 PM

Torture is a form of terrorism. To deplore terrorism, but condone the use of torture means essentially that you are nlot deploring terrorism as such, but merely terrorism which is carried out by other people.

If the suggestion is that, since war is cruel and innocent peiple get killed in it, it is acceptable to use any and every method, including torture of people who are suspected of having some kind of information that might be useful - that is precisely the way that terrorist actions are justified. But of course, what is being justified here is a terrorist action. Terrorism dressed up as a response to terrorism and atrocity - but then terrorism normally is dressed up as a response to terrorism and atrocity.

The kind of people who kill in cold blood, and explode bombs at the risk of their own life, whether terrorists or members of Special Forcres Units, do not in practice crack easily under torture. Whether that is giving them "credit" is arguable. Call, it fanaticism, call it dedication, it's a very unusual state of mind which requires preparation and training, and that is what it gets. The fact that one despises the things people have done does not in any way mean that they are less liable to resist torture.

Subject: RE: BS: US torture
From: Gareth
Date: 30 Dec 02 - 07:40 PM

Mmmmm ! time to get back to objectivity.

Historical Perspective - If I read M R D Foot's history of British support to resistance movements correctly the official view was that even the best and most resiliant agent would talk after 48 hours "interogation" by the Gestapo of the French "Milice". That was the time scale to run and hide for those members of the underground who could be compromised. From this we can believe that torture works. If it did not, why put a 48 hour deadline ???

I must in fairness add that post war many official (ie Gaullist) French claimed as hero's, resistance members who did not talk, or named collaberaters as resistance stalwarts. But never confuse official french views on this matter with reality.

Secondly, in the Irish context, I wonder to what extent continued violence, knee cappings etc, are for the "cause", and to what extent they continue to provide status and income for a bunch of saddistic physcopaths ??? Financed by collecting tins being rattled in American bars.

Thirdly I would never, never claim that the London "Gaurdian", or it's sunday companion the "Observer" are accurate or objective when discussing the US of A - Sorry Kevin, if I want accurate reporting I reach for the "Telegraph".

Torture is torture, and should not be encompassed by any civilised nation. I would question wether phycological pressure is torture, other wise interogation scripts may read like this :-

Interogator "Where were you and your mates going to plant this bomb ??"

Suspect " I am innocent "

Interogator " Ok you can go "

Suspect "Can I have my Semtex back ???"

Gareth