Torture ineffective

Dumbass pinko-nazi-neoconservative-hippy-capitalists.
Post Reply
User avatar
Harlowe
Nubile nuptaphobics ftw
Posts: 10640
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 8:13 pm
Location: My underground lair

Re: Torture ineffective

Post by Harlowe »

Just because some people seem to be willfully ignorant about The United Nations Convention Against Torture - especially Bush apologists - which was ratified under Reagan and re-affirmed under both Bill Clinton and George W. Bush...
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/t ... igned.html
Regardless of whatever moral judgments you make - if you believe, say, along with some 60% of Americans who usually tell pollsters that torture should remain an option at least in “rare instances” - the US has aligned itself against torture, by treaty with force of law, as ratified under Ronald Reagan, as re-affirmed by Congress under Bill Clinton, and as re-affirmed again by and under George W Bush. Here’s the United Nations Convention Against Torture, to which the US was a signatory as of 1988 - the full text having been helpfully provided to us by none other than sesquipedalian himself, with my emphases:
Article 1.
1. For the purposes of this Convention, torture means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.
2. This article is without prejudice to any international instrument or national legislation which does or may contain provisions of wider application.

Article 2.
1. Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction.
2. No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat or war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.
3. An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture.
I'll also stress this point...
No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat or war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.
Ddrak
Save a Koala, deport an Australian
Posts: 17516
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 3:00 pm
Location: Straya mate!
Contact:

Re: Torture ineffective

Post by Ddrak »

In any case, Obama should be very careful not to make this a witch hunt. The GOP obviously want to paint it as one, but I do think an investigation is warranted, even if it's just to figure out how to be sure it never happens again and what are appropriate safeguards to cover that. The only thing a full trial will provide is proof against any international criminal court action, which can be invoked if the host nation is unwilling to pursue convictions themselves, and may be worthwhile for that specific reason.

Dd
Image
Lurker
Soverign Grand Postmaster General
Posts: 6233
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 12:14 pm

Re: Torture ineffective

Post by Lurker »

Harlowe,
Just refuse to call it torture. Problem solved.
Rsak
Soverign Grand Postmaster General
Posts: 5365
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2003 9:47 am
Location: Gukta

Re: Torture ineffective

Post by Rsak »

Wonders never cease:
It was shocking. And it was highly misleading. The number is a vast inflation, according to information from a U.S. official and the testimony of the terrorists themselves.

A U.S. official with knowledge of the interrogation program told FOX News that the much-cited figure represents the number of times water was poured onto Mohammed's face -- not the number of times the CIA applied the simulated-drowning technique on the terror suspect. According to a 2007 Red Cross report, he was subjected a total of "five sessions of ill-treatment."

"The water was poured 183 times -- there were 183 pours," the official explained, adding that "each pour was a matter of seconds."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04 ... ded-times/
User avatar
Harlowe
Nubile nuptaphobics ftw
Posts: 10640
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 8:13 pm
Location: My underground lair

Re: Torture ineffective

Post by Harlowe »

Rsak wrote:Wonders never cease:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04 ... ded-times/[/quote]

Yeah, it's just all kinds of crazy when a reported number isn't defined and people misread it as incidents. The official didn't say it was "shocking and misleading" that's Fox News. The official corrected the information.
The confusion stems from language in the Justice Department legal memos that President Obama released on April 16. They contain the numbers, but they fail to explain exactly what they represent.
Lets gloss over the fact that waterboarding was going on.
Rsak
Soverign Grand Postmaster General
Posts: 5365
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2003 9:47 am
Location: Gukta

Re: Torture ineffective

Post by Rsak »

The only thing attributed to the official was "vast inflation". The rest is from Fox, but it is accurate over the uproar from people who already were aware water boarding occurred back when Bush was President and it was removed as an option.
Embar Angylwrath
President: Rsak Fan Club
Posts: 11674
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2003 2:31 am
Location: Top of the food chain

Re: Torture ineffective

Post by Embar Angylwrath »

I never thought I'd say this but Chimpsak has a point. Look at Dd's original post. He's of the opinion that KM was waterboarded 183 times. Would the all the outrage cool off if, lets say, that really equated to a couple incidents of waterboarding? I don't know how many times the guy was actually subjected to a session of waterboarding, but its beginning to look like it was a few isolated incidents involving only 2 or 3 people.

Doesn't make it right, sure, but the appearance of rampant and institutionalized torture may not be the correct interpretation if events.
Correction Mr. President, I DID build this, and please give Lurker a hug, we wouldn't want to damage his self-esteem.

Embar
Alarius
User avatar
Harlowe
Nubile nuptaphobics ftw
Posts: 10640
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 8:13 pm
Location: My underground lair

Re: Torture ineffective

Post by Harlowe »

Of course you are going to say he's right, you are one of the people that don't think there is anything wrong with it to begin with.
Lurker
Soverign Grand Postmaster General
Posts: 6233
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 12:14 pm

Re: Torture ineffective

Post by Lurker »

So if I punch Embar in the face 183 times during several hours long face punching sessions, it would be outrageous to say I punched him in the face 183 times. Got it.

And seeing that Embar made his way back to this thread maybe he can finally answer the question. You have no problem with making prisoners "uncomfortable" with sleep deprivation, stress positions, temperature extremes, threats of harm, intimidation with dogs, humiliation of all kinds - for weeks or months - as long as we might get some information ... So, is it "acceptable" for other countries to use these techniques on us?
Ddrak
Save a Koala, deport an Australian
Posts: 17516
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 3:00 pm
Location: Straya mate!
Contact:

Re: Torture ineffective

Post by Ddrak »

Embar Angylwrath wrote:I never thought I'd say this but Chimpsak has a point. Look at Dd's original post. He's of the opinion that KM was waterboarded 183 times. Would the all the outrage cool off if, lets say, that really equated to a couple incidents of waterboarding? I don't know how many times the guy was actually subjected to a session of waterboarding, but its beginning to look like it was a few isolated incidents involving only 2 or 3 people.

Doesn't make it right, sure, but the appearance of rampant and institutionalized torture may not be the correct interpretation if events.
I stand corrected on the 183 incidents. I would be surprised if it was as low as 5 sessions total though - 30-40 pours per session seems a little excessive. The problem is the only hard number we have is "183" and the rest is from people who have every reason to err on the low side.

At an uninformed guess, I'd think the number of cases of torture/mistreatment of prisoners that were ordered through the chain of command would number in the 10-20 sort of range, with probably under a dozen specific instances each (there's no point going for too many like I said in the initial post).

I don't think the outrage will cool off much - it's a serious credibility problem for the US on human rights and being the "good guys" in general that it even occurred at all with the consent of at least the VP and probably the President. Honestly, it's been an issue since the whole military prison torture/mistreatment thing in Iraq surfaced and was never properly laid to rest.

It seems fairly clear that Cheney and possibly Bush held some rather non-traditional beliefs on treatment of prisoners and the US is now stuck in the position of not being able to go back and hold people accountable without dredging up the past and resurfacing the internal partisan divisions, but not being able to move past it to re-establish credibility if it doesn't go back and hold people accountable. The damage to the US done by the Bush/Cheney presidency is going to be felt for a looong time.

Dd
Image
Embar Angylwrath
President: Rsak Fan Club
Posts: 11674
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2003 2:31 am
Location: Top of the food chain

Re: Torture ineffective

Post by Embar Angylwrath »

Harlowe wrote:Of course you are going to say he's right, you are one of the people that don't think there is anything wrong with it to begin with.
You didn't read my posts if thats what you think. I've said that I think waterboarding is torture.

Some of the other stuff, not so much.
Correction Mr. President, I DID build this, and please give Lurker a hug, we wouldn't want to damage his self-esteem.

Embar
Alarius
Partha
Reading is fundamental!!!1!!
Posts: 11322
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2002 9:42 am
Location: Rockford, IL

Re: Torture ineffective

Post by Partha »

The damage to the US done by the Bush/Cheney presidency is going to be felt for a looong time.
Told you that 8 years ago.
Well, it’s the Super-Monroe Doctrine: “Get off our oil, people who dress funny!” - M. Bouffant

"You're a bad captain, Zarde. People like you only learn by being touched, and hard. And you will greatly disapprove of where these men put their hands." - M. Vanderbeam.
Kulaf
Soverign Grand Postmaster General
Posts: 7183
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 3:06 am

Re: Torture ineffective

Post by Kulaf »

Just updating this thread with new information:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32605529/ns ... ngton_post

Apparently the information gained from KSM was fairly extensive and mostly accurate. Certainly cannot tie it dirrectly to the use of waterboarding......but something flipped him.
Partha
Reading is fundamental!!!1!!
Posts: 11322
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2002 9:42 am
Location: Rockford, IL

Re: Torture ineffective

Post by Partha »

Note that all the people saying the waterboarding worked refuse to be named.
Well, it’s the Super-Monroe Doctrine: “Get off our oil, people who dress funny!” - M. Bouffant

"You're a bad captain, Zarde. People like you only learn by being touched, and hard. And you will greatly disapprove of where these men put their hands." - M. Vanderbeam.
User avatar
Harlowe
Nubile nuptaphobics ftw
Posts: 10640
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 8:13 pm
Location: My underground lair

Re: Torture ineffective

Post by Harlowe »

Greenwald had a very thorough break down of this...

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/08/29/post/
Who are the Post's sources for this full-scale vindication of Dick Cheney's defense of torture? "Two sources who described the sessions, speaking on the condition of anonymity because much information about detainee confinement remains classified"; "one former senior intelligence official said this week after being asked about the effect of waterboarding"; "one former U.S. official with detailed knowledge of how the interrogations were carried out said"; "One former agency official." It's unclear how much overlap there is in that orgy of pro-Cheney anonymity, but there is not a single on-the-record source to corroborate the Torture-Saved-Us-From-Mass-Death narrative, nor is there even a shred of information about the motives or views of these "officials."

What makes the Post's breathless vindication of torture all the more journalistically corrupt is that the document on which it principally bases these claims -- the just-released 2004 CIA Inspector General Report -- provides no support whatsoever for the view that torture produced valuable intelligence, despite the fact that it was based on the claims of CIA officials themselves...

The Post article today is one of the most astoundingly vapid and misleading efforts yet to justify torture -- a true museum exhibit for the transformation of American journalism into little more than mindless amplifiers for those in power. It simultaneously touts facts as new revelations that have, in fact, long been claimed (that KSM provided valuable intelligence), while deceitfully implying facts that are without any evidence whatsoever (that he did so because he was tortured). Dick Cheney couldn't have said it better himself. It's so strange how often that's true of The Liberal Media.
Andrew Sullivan of the Atlantic

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/t ... rture.html
And look at the cloak of anonymity given to "one former U.S. official with detailed knowledge of how the interrogations were carried out." This Bushie is the main force in the piece arguing - by inference, not provable data - that torture worked. Why is he given anonymity, especially since he is describing war crimes he and others conspired to commit? The WaPo explains: "he requested anonymity because the events are still classified." What? He is analyzing a document that has been declassified. There is absolutely no reason for the Post to give him anonymity, except to promote the neoconservative project of torture as the core means for the war against terrorism.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/t ... e-ctd.html
The WaPo is, I'm afraid, in almost terminal decline. Its enmeshment in power is far more striking these days than its search for the truth. Which is why it fires those columnists who call torture by its real name and gives war criminals anonymity to further their own self-defense.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/t ... piece.html

"During the harshest period of my interrogation I gave a lot of false information in order to satisfy what I believed the interrogators wished to hear in order to make the ill-treatment stop. I later told interrogators that their methods were stupid and counterproductive. I'm sure that the false information I was forced to invent in order to make the ill-treatment stop wasted a lot of their time," he said."
Ddrak
Save a Koala, deport an Australian
Posts: 17516
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 3:00 pm
Location: Straya mate!
Contact:

Re: Torture ineffective

Post by Ddrak »

Kulaf wrote:Just updating this thread with new information:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32605529/ns ... ngton_post

Apparently the information gained from KSM was fairly extensive and mostly accurate. Certainly cannot tie it dirrectly to the use of waterboarding......but something flipped him.
"Mostly accurate" seems like an overstatement. According to the CIA report, it became far more accurate after the torture stopped and KSM could tell them which parts he was making up to get them to stop. I still don't buy the CIA's version in any case - KSM gave information on 30-40 differnt plots around the world, most of which were unverifiable and/or in such an early stage of planning that no real action could be taken. There were a couple of instances where they picked up people but no instances of "imminent threats" that the torture was supposed to reveal.

I have no real desire to believe the analysis of a war criminal who is hiding from prosecution behind anonymity.

Dd
Image
Partha
Reading is fundamental!!!1!!
Posts: 11322
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2002 9:42 am
Location: Rockford, IL

Re: Torture ineffective

Post by Partha »

I have no real desire to believe the analysis of a war criminal who is hiding from prosecution behind anonymity.
Why do you hate America? :roll:
Well, it’s the Super-Monroe Doctrine: “Get off our oil, people who dress funny!” - M. Bouffant

"You're a bad captain, Zarde. People like you only learn by being touched, and hard. And you will greatly disapprove of where these men put their hands." - M. Vanderbeam.
User avatar
Harlowe
Nubile nuptaphobics ftw
Posts: 10640
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 8:13 pm
Location: My underground lair

Re: Torture ineffective

Post by Harlowe »

Even McCain is pushing back on the whole torture issue. He doesn't agree with the investigation because he thinks we should look forward, but he's absolutely not supporting the torture as being effective.

He was on Face the Nation

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MD1x_aaf ... r_embedded
User avatar
Harlowe
Nubile nuptaphobics ftw
Posts: 10640
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2002 8:13 pm
Location: My underground lair

Re: Torture ineffective

Post by Harlowe »

A good editorial piece on Cheney/Torture in NY Times was linked on the Daily Dish today...

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/03/opini ... .html?_r=3
The government owes Americans a full investigation into the orders to approve torture, abuse and illegal, secret detention, as well as the twisted legal briefs that justified those policies. Congress and the White House also need to look into illegal wiretapping and the practice of sending prisoners to other countries to be tortured.
Ddrak
Save a Koala, deport an Australian
Posts: 17516
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 3:00 pm
Location: Straya mate!
Contact:

Re: Torture ineffective

Post by Ddrak »

I'm not convinced a thorough investigation would achieve much. What is really needed is a clear direction from the government to make sure it never happens again, and to simply squash dissent on the matter. They need to dump a whole bucket of PR money into discrediting anyone supporting the concept of torture as a good idea and make it impossible for any politician to advocate torture without eliminating their chance of ever going near a public office again.

Simply put, the very word torture must be put once again beyond the pale where it belongs.

Dd
Image
Post Reply