BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 May 04 - 03:52 PM

Bot a PM? I misread the post. I'm glad about that. Gareth can be a pugnacious vilain at times, but generally a fair one.

I think we sometimes build up a mental picture of people we tangle with on these threads which doesn't really match reality. And sometimes people play up to misunderstandigs like that, in a way that reinforces the misunderstanding.

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: ard mhacha
Date: 10 May 04 - 03:32 PM

Lets get back on track, did anyone see Blair on Channel 4 News tonight, John Snow`s line of questioning had him waffling when he was asked, did he intend to question the visiting Chinese Prime Minister on Human Rights. The answer was incomprehensible.

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: GUEST
Date: 10 May 04 - 03:16 PM

Hello Kevin.
Gareth wasn't quoting a PM; I have never communicated privately with the man. (although I did have one quite sinister PM from him, after I made that post)

Jim

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: GUEST,Jim McCallan
Date: 10 May 04 - 03:09 PM

Excellent quote, Gareth.

Don't see anything about prejudice in there, though.
Just me telling you that you are not up to discussing some of the conversations in these threads; something to do with your prejudices keeping you back, I should think.

You see, it takes away from the discussion at hand, when people have to continually jump in and correct you, Gareth. Your facts are often wrong; you misquote people, and it is tedium to have to go back and keep on correcting you. It is, actually...
You don't seem to pay attention to much of the content that some people contribute to this forum, and your first line of defence always seems to consist of questioning the intelligence of your interlocutor, or as you have so inexcusably done above when you called somebody 'brain-damaged' If you spent a bit more time actually reading others' posts, and 'formulating' what you are going to say, I think I might respect you a bit better that I presently do.

You have changed your position about this war in Iraq, since I first started reading your posts. I think you know this yourself, as well.
That is good, for if there is one thing that this kind of a discussion forum is good for, it is to make people think about positions they hold, and the relevancy of them as time travels on. Hence the spake that 'you are learning'

Don't look for demons everywhere you go, and try and be a bit kinder to those who don't agree with you. The '13year old drivel' that I was referring to in that post,as you know very well was me reacting to your ridiculous (and criminal suggestion), that you would without question kill your children if you thought they would grow up to be another Saddam Hussein.

That is not the kind of thing I would even joke about, Gareth, and the printed word, on this forum, defines one.
I didn't 'know' you long when you made that remark, and I really had second thoughts about informing the people you are also as vocal in representing here; the Caerphilly Labour Party, about some of your 'final solutions'.

Where on Earth do you think you are?
This isn't a game we're playing here, Gareth, certainly not for me; a game where the person with the snappiest 'fuck off' line 'wins'

I have no doubt that behind all your hang-ups, you probably are quite politically astute.
You choose not to go that way, however.
Instead quite a lot of us have to stop our train of thought to 'wipe your arse' every once in a while, and as I said above, that can be quite tedious.

Another thing I could do, of course, is to ignore you in future. I am under no obligation to even acknowlege you on this forum, never mind respond to your "Errrr Jim's.... " Because if you can't grasp the concepts that are being thrown open for discussion, here, well then why the devil should I waste my precious time 'correcting' you?
It is not the reason I come to this forum.

To make sure you do not misunderstand me, again, please keep this quote in your notebook, Gareth:
I BELIEVE IN JUSTICE FOR ALL!

Have you got that, now?

Jim

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 May 04 - 02:23 PM

Quoting a PM in an argument on a thread? I'm sure there's a decree against that somewhere. If not, there should be.

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Gareth
Date: 10 May 04 - 01:03 PM

Try Here Jim, its argument Jim, but not as we know it !

"Subject: RE: BS: Scott Ritter:Kerry also to blame for war
From: Jim McCallan - PM
Date: 15 Feb 04 - 09:18 PM

One of the better things you have to do, Gareth, obviously does not include contributing anything of moment to the conversations you embroil yourself in.

From the limited time I have been reading your drivel, I would put a mental age on you, of about 13.

I can plainly see that some of the concepts discussed in these threads go miles over your head, and you contradict yourself continually.

I hope I said that politely "

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 May 04 - 12:13 PM

Being selective about facts is one way to deceive other people and to deceive oursleves, and we all do it. But we can at least try to avoid stating as facts things which are demonstrably false.

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 10 May 04 - 12:07 PM

It was an impression he had, McGrath. That impression my have been garnered from something he read or heard somewhere else, as you suggest. Quite probably.

Yes, facts are sacred, but here's the weird thing about facts: People usually only notice the facts they are inclined to look for in the first place, and they will allow those facts, and only those, to back up their established opinions. They will fail to notice, discount, or deny other facts and say that those other facts are rumour, hearsay, fabrications, lies, misconceptions, irrelevant, beside the point, etc...

And we all do it. Except maybe Mr Spock or Data from Star Trek. :-)

Given the fact that there are always more facts available than anyone can keep track of AND that the news media are themselves prejudiced in regard to which facts they deem worthy of reporting and which should be ignored...we are all operating on only part of the facts!

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 May 04 - 11:59 AM

It's one thing to have a different opinion about how facts should be interpreted - but it's a different thing to make a completely false statement, like the one from "Two bears" that I quoted. (""The people in that prison had ALL tried to kill U.S. Soldiers and Iraqi civilians"") I assume this was not an intentional lie, but that he hadn't checked up on the facts, as contained in that official report by General Taguba.

I am aware that some mainstream media may have printed stories that misinformed him on this important point - but what with Google and so forth, it doesn't take very long to check up on that kind of stuff, and identify more reliable sources of information.

Obviously we can't all agree. There are clearly a lot of people who share "Two bear's" view of the situation, so it's a good thing thta the Mudcat provides a space where we can explore our differences in a courteous way. But, as the saying goes "Comment is free, but facts are sacred".

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Little Hawk
Date: 10 May 04 - 10:39 AM

Two Bears is a great guy, and a good friend of mine, but he's a bit addled when it comes to politics...in my opinion. :-) This is the result of having grown up as a Republican, in all probability. While being tremendously liberal (meaning flexible and open-minded) about most subjects, he rails against "bleeding heart liberals" when it comes to politics. This is ironical.

People's views about reality generally get set very early in life, so if one grows up in a circumstance where "conservatives" are seen as good guys and "liberals" are seen as bad guys...well, one just keeps on seeing it that way.

So, you can expect to continue disagreeing with Two Bears on politics.

The News Media are now reporting that 70 to 90 % of the Iraqi prisoners were wrongfully arrested, in that they never posed a threat to coalition forces in the first place, nor had they made any attack on coalition forces.

The coalition doesn't have enough soldiers on the ground to properly police Iraq, its soldiers are inadequately trained and lack experience, and they have been pre-conditioned by several years of propaganda to hate Muslims. The fact that they then arrest the wrong people, imprison the wrong people, and commit atrocities on those prisoners is really almost inevitable. The particular degree and nature of their acts, however, is inexcusable...just as it was in Vietnam. They should never have invaded Iraq in the first place. They are a hostile occupying force on land that does not belong to them, and can certainly expect further resistance...until they leave.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 May 04 - 10:25 AM

"The people in that prison had ALL tried to kill U.S. Soldiers and Iraqi civilians" (two bears)

Further to my comment to the effect that this claim just is not true -this is what General Taguba had to say in his official report. Here's a relevant quote from Seymour Hersh in the New Yorker TORTURE AT ABU GHRAIB:

"A lack of proper screening also meant that many innocent Iraqis were wrongly being detained—indefinitely, it seemed, in some cases. The Taguba study noted that more than sixty per cent of the civilian inmates at Abu Ghraib were deemed not to be a threat to society, which should have enabled them to be released. Karpinski's defense, Taguba said, was that her superior officers "routinely" rejected her recommendations regarding the release of such prisoners.

The New Yorker coverage of this is the one from which most of the rest of the media stories appear to take their starting point.

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Metchosin
Date: 10 May 04 - 01:45 AM

OK. Sadam Hussein's regime did not torture prisoners, they abused them. Chile, under Pinochet's government did not use torture, they abused their citizens. It wasn't exactly torture that took place in Argentina, it was abuse. And the Spanish Inquisition abused suspected heritics in order to obtain information from them.

I now stand disabused of my previous perceptions. You are right, the word "torture" is emotionally charged, but sometimes one needs a jolt to get real.   

Please don't be ashamed to be an American, Joe, there are those in the world that recognize the wonderful humanity of the American people too. Abuse of authority and power occurs in all countires, including my own and probably always will, as long as it is allowed to be hidden under rocks and couched in sanitized terms.

What makes the US special in some regards is that a lot of Americans have always had the courage to stick their necks out and examine their own dirty laundry in public. That it one of the things that I admire about the American people.

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: GUEST
Date: 10 May 04 - 01:07 AM

Don't forget, there have been several homicides involved. That should qualify as torture.

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Joe Offer
Date: 10 May 04 - 12:45 AM

I'm not so sure it's good to insist on the word "torture." Torture is an emotionally-charged word. I suppose "abuse" has an emotional impact, but it's not as strong. If you portray "torture" as appalling, are you implying that "abuse" is not?

When we decry injustice, I think it is imperative that we avoid the use of emotionally-charged words. Pure logic is our best weapon in defense of justice.

I don't care what the reason - it's not humane to mistreat a prisoner for any reason, no matter how compelling your need to obtain information. The conduct of the U.S. personnel was appalling, and it makes me ashamed to be an American.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: artbrooks
Date: 09 May 04 - 10:42 PM

Well, these are pretty graphic for a family newspaper. A brief look at the Free Press's website would show that the abuse issue is being covered very well. (www.freep.com)   The on-line edition of USA Today shows pictures that my local paper wouldn't, for that very reason.

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Mr Happy
Date: 09 May 04 - 09:52 PM

'In Detroit, which has the biggest concentrations of Arabs outside the Middle East, neither the Free Press nor the News ran the torture photos.
USA Today, the largest U.S. general circulation daily paper, published thumbnail-size photos of 116 U.S. soldiers killed during April on its front page, and bypassed the Iraq photos entirely.'


http://www.atheistnetwork.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=1853

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Jim McCallan
Date: 09 May 04 - 07:22 PM

Can you give me some example of these prejudices that I am supposed to have, Gareth?

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Gareth
Date: 09 May 04 - 06:22 PM

Err Jim - What makes you think that you can debate the issues ?

Or is your ideal of a good debate one in which everybody agrees with your prejudices ?

Gareth.

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: GUEST
Date: 09 May 04 - 04:47 PM

Two_bears : 09 May 04 - 02:46 PM

"assorted terrorists"

How many of them do you get for a penny?
10?

LOL

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: dianavan
Date: 09 May 04 - 04:21 PM

If they are not POWS, they are civilians and are innocent until proven guilty.

Two Bears doesn't seem to understand that subjecting human beings to degradation is unnaceptable to civilized people.

Two Bears commented: "Lots of children was abused. I sure was."

I think that Two Bears needs to realize that that this is not normal.
I'm sorry it happened to you Two Bears. It wasn't your fault. You need to get some help.

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: GUEST,Clint Keller
Date: 09 May 04 - 04:00 PM

" Most of the attacks against the Iraqi civilians, and Iraqi police,
   and U.S, military; are caused by foreign fighters from Syria,
   Jordan, and assorted terrorists.

   "How should they be categorized?" --Two Bears

As human beings, and as innocent until proven guilty.

As an American, I believe these are inalienable rights, no matter what the Geneva Convention or any other set of rules says.

clint

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: GUEST,M'Grath of Altcar
Date: 09 May 04 - 03:17 PM

It's double speak. Typical of the nonsense that is being flushed out of Bush & Bliar's mouths.

   War criminals lied at Nuremburg too.

Damn their eyes.

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: artbrooks
Date: 09 May 04 - 03:11 PM

Granted, if only for the sake of discussion, that this is correct, the Civilian Convention states the following:

Art. 3(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.

In other words, once thay are placed hors de combat by detention, they are entitled to all of the protections of the convention.

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 09 May 04 - 03:09 PM

"The people in that prison had ALL tried to kill U.S. Soldiers and Iraqi civilians."

That simply is not true. Clearly whatever sources you have been reading have failed to give you an accurate picture. The people in that prison are people who have been picked up for a number of reasons. Some appear to have been pulled in more or less at random, because the people whom the arresting party had gone out to get were not there when they got there, and they didn't want to return empty-handed. In some cases, after being held in terrible conditions, the people pulled in have been released without any kind of charge, let alone any kind of trial.

This isn't a matter of controversy. It has been reported in the whole range of media in this country (England), and no doubt in most countries.

.....................

Once again. All prisoners are entitled to be kept under reasonable basic conditions, and that includes adequate sleep, food, clothing and shelter. All prisoners - prisoners of war, civilians, criminals, hostages, soldiers or guards awaiting court martial, the lot.

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Two_bears
Date: 09 May 04 - 02:46 PM

It is sometimes useful to have some idea what you are talking about before you start talking. There are a number of Geneva Conventions. Among these are different ones that apply to civilians and to POWs. Two bears, since you insist that these "detainees" are not POWs, I suggest that you look at Article 6 of the civilian convention, which specifically states that Articles 3(1)(a) and (c) apply to this situation. (a) forbids cruel treatment and torture and (c) bans "outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment." Both the US and Iraq are signators, BTW.
-----

   Most of the attacks against the Iraqi civilians, and Iraqi police,
   and U.S, military; are caused by foreign fighters from Syria,
   Jordan, and assorted terrorists.

   How should they be categorized?

Two Bears

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Metchosin
Date: 09 May 04 - 01:47 AM

from the Oxford English Dictionary:

Torture (2). Severe excurciating pain or suffering of body or mind; anguish, agony, torment.

Perhaps some have lost the capacity to comprehend or speak the English language?

Comprehend (2). To grasp with the mind, take in. ME. (3). To apprehend with the senses, esp. sight.

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: artbrooks
Date: 09 May 04 - 01:04 AM

It is sometimes useful to have some idea what you are talking about before you start talking. There are a number of Geneva Conventions. Among these are different ones that apply to civilians and to POWs. Two bears, since you insist that these "detainees" are not POWs, I suggest that you look at Article 6 of the civilian convention, which specifically states that Articles 3(1)(a) and (c) apply to this situation. (a) forbids cruel treatment and torture and (c) bans "outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment." Both the US and Iraq are signators, BTW.

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Jim McCallan
Date: 08 May 04 - 11:40 PM

"Your comment proves that you can not debate the issues ..."

Neither can you, Two_bears..... well you haven't done so yet, anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Two_bears
Date: 08 May 04 - 11:37 PM

You sure that isn't Two Beers? Or possibly Running Mouth?

   Greg: Your comment proves that you can not debate the issues
   fairly; so you have to use insults.

Two Bears

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Jim McCallan
Date: 08 May 04 - 11:29 PM

The published word is no respector of sobriety

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 08 May 04 - 11:26 PM

You sure that isn't Two Beers? Or possibly Running Mouth?

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Jim McCallan
Date: 08 May 04 - 11:07 PM

What exactly have I claimed?

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Two_bears
Date: 08 May 04 - 11:05 PM

Is it OK if we rub your nose in it 2 Bears, when your theories fall flat on their face?
-----

Absolutely! If I misquote; or make mistakes in my debating; they deserve to be pointed out so not to confuse others.

Are you willing to be put through the same treatment?

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Two_bears
Date: 08 May 04 - 11:01 PM

Looks like you studied at the Gareth Williams Institute for Advanced Debating Skills (GWIADS for short)

   Nope. ;-)

They CAN also be classified as innocent civilians

   Absolutely; providing they are inocent

And I wish they would stop taking 9 posts to say it

   Unfortunely; there is so much bilge claiming to be fact; it took 9
   posts yo do it.

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Two_bears
Date: 08 May 04 - 10:53 PM

Simple I just imagine I'am an aging brain damaged republican.
-----

Interesting! I think the same thing about some bleeding heart liberals.

Two Bears

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Jim McCallan
Date: 08 May 04 - 10:51 PM

Is it OK if we rub your nose in it 2 Bears, when your theories fall flat on their face?

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Two_bears
Date: 08 May 04 - 10:49 PM

The distinction between use of the word torture and abuse is relevant in legal terms. The Geneva Convention uses the word torture to describe the treatment the Iraqi detainees received at the hands of US troops and private contractors. Torture is
-----

Excuse me; but if you were as intelegent as you THINK you are; you would study the Geneva Convention (GC), and UNDERSTAND that the GC ONLY applies to POWS, then you would do research to see if the POW status is applicable to the detainees, and the detainees in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. They are NOT. They are only entitled to the status of enemy combatant.

True POWs are members of other nations's army, and have identification providing NAME, ID number, and other material.

Two Bears

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Jim McCallan
Date: 08 May 04 - 10:47 PM

"It was NOT torture. It was.... abuse...
What people saw was .... attempts to prevent the people from sleeping
.... to dehumanize the prisoners the way they did
I will agree that it was ... humiliating; but not torture."

Looks like you studied at the Gareth Williams Institute for Advanced Debating Skills (GWIADS for short)

"It was stupidity to take pictures and videotapes."

It was not. It was serendipitous.
Otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion

"Iraqi civilians CAN be classified are as enemy combatants, and such people are not entitled (by law) the benefits of Prisoner of war status."

They CAN also be classified as innocent civilians

"I wish the people would stop listening to the 7 second sound bytes that are designed to evoke emotion instead of applying logic and and reason to the situation"

So do I.

And I wish they would stop taking 9 posts to say it

Jim

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Two_bears
Date: 08 May 04 - 10:42 PM

Many children in this country are beaten, starved, locked up, kept in chains, etc. It is "officially" written into our laws as "Child

   Hello Chaos. Lots of children was abused. I sure was.

think of for them doing it is to provide some flimsy evidence to "prove" the WMD's were around, were sold to terrorists, ties to Al Quaida, etc.

   They do not need flimsy evidence. It is FACT that Saddam Hussein
   HAD WMDs. He used them against the Kurds, and in the Iraqi and
   Iranian war. There is video proof that Saddam Hussein USED WMDs in
   the past does NOT give me a warm fuzzy feelings that they have noy
   been found yet.

   Did Hussein ship the WMDs he had to Syria?

   Did Hussein place them aboard those three ships that flew
   different nation flags at different times; when ships are supposed
   to fly the flag of the nation of ownership.

   Did Hussein order the army to bury the WMDs in sand, and use GPS
   to mark the sites. A few months ago; the U.S. Military found a
   complete jet buried in the sand.

   Did Hussein sell the WMDs or terrorists, and they are trying to
   smuggle them into the U.S. I do not want to see the report that
   millions of people in LA, Chicago, New York, San Francisco, etc
   were killed by Anthrax, VX gas, etc.

Two Bears

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Two_bears
Date: 08 May 04 - 10:28 PM

All prisoners are entitled to be kept under reasonable basic conditions, and that includes adequate sleep, food, clothing and shelter.
-----

They AREN'T prisoners of war. They are enemy combatants, and the Geneva Convention is NOR applicable to Enemy Combatants

Two Bears

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Two_bears
Date: 08 May 04 - 10:26 PM

So, McGrath, if you were the officer in charge of interrogation, how would YOU get the information you needed? Offer them tea and cakes, and hope they cooperate? What is an acceptable way of gaining intelligence? Sleep deprivation is not torture. It's a method of gaining needed information.
-----

Diana:

The guilty ones are the ones that should take the fall. No more; no less.

Two Bears

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Two_bears
Date: 08 May 04 - 10:21 PM

So, McGrath, if you were the officer in charge of interrogation, how would YOU get the information you needed? Offer them tea and cakes, and hope they cooperate? What is an acceptable way of gaining intelligence? Sleep deprivation is not torture. It's a method of gaining needed information.
-----

I see someone else like me sneaked in.

Good for you!

I wish the people would stop listening to the 7 second sound bytes that are designed to evoke emotion instead of applying logic and and reason to the situation.

The people in that prison had ALL tried to kill U.S. Soldiers and Iraqi civilians. They are NOT members of an Iraqi army, and have no official Iraqi identification, and they are not entitled to the status of POW, and are NOT entitled to the Geneva Convention.

I was beginning to think I was the only one here that understood the situation.

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Two_bears
Date: 08 May 04 - 10:14 PM

Did Rush Limbaugh actually say that? Boy, do I have a "college prank" figured out for him!!
----

Unfortunately; Rush really did say that stupid remark.

Two Bears

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Two_bears
Date: 08 May 04 - 10:12 PM

Fo me, almost worse than Bush not coming out with an honest and simple apology (arrogant brat that he is), was the embarassing smirk on his face.
----

That's just great; have someone that had nothing to do with the idiotic behaviour; appologize, take responsibility for the activity.

I say find the oes that are guilty of the actions; court martial them, then send them to Leavenworth for the next 10 years. The same should be dished out to the people that ordered them to do it.

Two Bears

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Chief Chaos
Date: 08 May 04 - 10:10 PM

Bribery is not a reliable way of obtaining info as unless the person providing info stays within the perview of his "contacts" he can take money for false info and fade into the crowd. And once a person is bought, there is no reason to believe that he can't be bought by the other side. That person may also be working for the other side providing just enough to be a good source but providing disinformation as well. THe only way it works is to have several sources offering the same info that can be corroborated. That gets rather expensive and is still not that reliable. None of this is to be construed to exhonerate using torture.

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Two_bears
Date: 08 May 04 - 10:07 PM

The US government and it's media puppets are studiously avoiding the use of the word 'torture' so that the Geneva Conventions don't get invoked against them at the UN, where they have gone hat in hand, to look for any old warm military
-----

If it was torture; I would agree with you.

I will agree that it was awful stupid, wrong, and humiliating; but not torture.

Two Bears

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Two_bears
Date: 08 May 04 - 10:02 PM

torturing. It's in the Torturers' Union contract with the government that the soldiers aren't allowed to do any of the torturing, only abusing. It's right after the clause that says that they can't be tried in a U.S. military court because they're civilians, but they can't be tried in U.S. civilian courts because they're in Iraq, and they can't be tried in Iraqui courts because they're Americans.   
-----

You are correct that private contractors do the interogating.

What people saw was idiotic attempts to prevent the people from sleeping.

It was idiotic to dehumanize the prisoners the way they did.

It was stupidity to take pictures and videotapes.

In another portion of the message you talked about the geneva convention. Your lack of knowledge in this matter astounds me.

1. During the Vietnam War; the VC NEVER treated American soldiers according to the geneva convention because the Viet Kong was not a signatory of the Geneva convention.

2. We can not categorize the detainees (prisoners in Iraq and in Cuba) as prisoners of war. The reason for this is that they are NOT members of the Iraqi army (they wore no uniform, and had no identification as a soldier of the Iraqi army. Since they wore NO military uniform, and had NO military identification (ID or even dog tags); so they ONLY way the foreign fighters, and Iraqi civilians CAN be classified are as enemy combatants, and such people are not entitled (by law) the benefits of Prisoner of war status.

Two Bears

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Two_bears
Date: 08 May 04 - 09:49 PM

Yet for some reason, most the US media keeps using the word being peddled by the White House.
-----

It was NOT torture. It was wrong, idiotic, abuse, shameful; etc.

Torture is what happened when Saddan Hussein was in charge, Saddam had rape rooms, and forced parents to watc children's eyes be gouged out, sentenced a 10 year old boy to prison for years because he refused to join the Baathist regime.

Are you aware the media knew about this shameful incident in January when it happened, and the military chain of command started an investigation ONE day after they became aware of the incident. The media sat on this story for three months until they had pictures to shock the nations conscience.

Two Bears

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Greg F.
Date: 08 May 04 - 09:39 PM

Its really absurdly simple. Doug can explain further, if needed:

1. When the U.S. or its minions perpetrates it, its merely "interrogation" possibly bordering on "abuse".

2. When any other nation perpetrates it- in particular those godless Eye-Rackie towel-head terrorist sonzabitches that blew up the Twin Towers,& messed with poor private whats-her-name, its "torture'.

Q.E.D.

I believe, I do, I believe its true
I believe exactly what they tell me to
I believe, I do, I believe its true
I'm a simple guy, I believe.

Works for me-

Greg

Subject: RE: BS: It is TORTURE not 'abuse'!!!
From: Jim McCallan
Date: 08 May 04 - 03:38 PM

No, Gareth. Nothing like that.

You just wouldn't understand, that's all.