Of and relating to "Torture" in a War on Terror

I tried to do a poll on this over a year ago -- miserable failure. So I will start from the other direction -- querying you first -- and build a poll from there.

Please contribute your thoughts on:

1. What are permissable interrogation techniques/conditions of confinement? (Please name some specifics here -- part of soliciting the details is to note what one person means as opposed to another when using a given term).

2. What techniques are always inappropriate (what is torture)?

3. What techniques are conditionally appropriate (if any)?

4. Are different techniques/levels of severity appropriate when dealing with different suspects/subjects? E.G. domestic alleged and convicted criminals, foreign nationals accused of a crime, enemy combatants, irregular enemy combatants, terrorists, suspected terrorists etc.

5. What larger Law/Treaty/Cultural Norms do you see as relevant to this discussion, if any?

Feel free to cite sources in support.

Thanks in advance for your assistance?

The important bits
1. 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.
...........

2. No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.

Anyone who supports or tries to justify torture is a sick :daisy: who is a disgrace to humankind

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Anyone who supports or tries to justify torture is a sick :daisy: who is a disgrace to humankind

---

Likewise as anyone who buries their head in the sand of ignorance is a sick -whatever foul language you subscribe to enter that word here - who is a disgrace to mankind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Anyone who supports or tries to justify torture is a sick :daisy: who is a disgrace to humankind

---

So righteously indignant.. awesome! :laugh4:

Quote:

---

Likewise as anyone who buries their head in the sand of ignorance is a sick

---

You have tried to justify torture because of "circumstances" , your ignorance is as astounding as your barbarism , though of course barbarism and ignorance do go well together .
read this bit again No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.

when did your government ratify this ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

You have tried to justify torture because of "circumstances" , your ignorance is as astounding as your barbarism , though of course barbarism and ignorance do go well together .
read this bit again No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.

when did your government ratify this ?

---

So very self-righteous indeed, sounding very much like a...fundamentalist. Haven't you decried all fundamentalism at one point or another...above is a mirror.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShadeHonestus

Likewise as anyone who buries their head in the sand of ignorance is a sick -whatever foul language you subscribe to enter that word here - who is a disgrace to mankind.

---

I think the ignorance is on your part. The whole aim of Al Qaeda was to take down the West. What utter brilliance it takes to then play their game by their rules. By playing the game of torture we only help their propaganda machine and prove them correct that we are the barbarians.

A: Why torture terrorists?
B: Because they will destroy our way of life.
A: So to stop them destroying our freedoms we will take away their rights and freedoms for security.
B: Correct.
A: Don' we lose our freedoms too?
B: If you aren't doing anything wrong you have nothing to hide?
A: So to stop my freedoms from being destroyed I have to give them all up?
B: Correct.
A: So how do we know they have done the bad things.
B: Their neighbours told us.
A: The ones we paid money to tell us who the bad guys are.
B: Right.
A: But what if the neighbours were the terrorists and sold out the good guys?
B: We use intelligence to figure that out.
A: The same intelligence that figured out 9/11 was going to happen?
B: No, a different intelligence.
A: Which is?
B: Well we torture the illegal combatants until they tell us the truth.
A: So you torture them to figure out if they really are the bad guys?
B: Correct.
A: But what if they don't cooperate?
B: We torture them some more until they do.
A: So how do you tell if they are good guys who don't know anything.
B: We only torture those who are in prison.
A: But I thought we hadn't determined yet if they were actually bad guys.
B: Well if they are in prison they must be.
A: Ah, I see its like the witches in the middle ages. You tie a rope to their feet, throw them in water and if they float back up they are a witch and get burned at the stake.
B: What happens if they stay down?
A: They drown.
B: Hmm, gives me a good idea for the next round of water torture. If they refuse to talk and drown they must be a terrorist. Brilliant, thanks you really help me think properly with my gray matter.

Papewaio

Asking yourself questions and answering them without subtracting bias and adding reality are an exercise in what exactly beyond self grandizement of one's argument which lends itself to run away scenarios and the 'chicken little" attitude.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by papewaio

A: Why torture terrorists?
B: Because they will destroy our way of life.

---

A: Why use enhanced techniques on those terrorists we've detained which we strongly suspect have knowledge of particular information.
B: To save lives, including yours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by papewaio

A: So to stop them destroying our freedoms we will take away their rights and freedoms for security.
B: Correct.

---

A: So to stop them from killing us we will take away their rights.
B: Give them a legal definition to afford them rights. Give our people legal definitions to protect us. Moments earlier this could have been a person on his cellphone giving the go word to set up a cell in New York. Suddenly as a detainee he wears a halo and appreciates your arguments so much that if he had flown the planes into the WTC he would swerved to avoid hitting you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by papewaio

A: Don' we lose our freedoms too?
B: If you aren't doing anything wrong you have nothing to hide?

---

What freedoms are compromised again? By given legal pretext for interrogation techniques, suddenly we forget? Or are you afraid the local cop will torture you for your milk money?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by papewaio

A: So to stop my freedoms from being destroyed I have to give them all up?
B: Correct.

---

A: So to stop my freedoms form being destroyed I have to accept legal definitions and accept the culpability of our intelligence agencies through the decades? Not to mention I have to accept my own responsibility to take part in government?
B: Correct.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by papewaio

A: So how do we know they have done the bad things.
B: Illegal wire taps that allows bush to eavesdrop on your porn calls. 1-800-976- SLUT

---

Fixed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by papewaio

A: The ones we paid money to tell us who the bad guys are.
B: Right.

---

You must have been a champion of the torreceli act or whatever the hell that moron from New Jersey was.

A: The ones we discover shooting at us with AK's or planting roadside bombs, or identified by those higher up in theaters of conflict not to mention our intelligence network as a whole.
B: Right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by papewaio

A: But what if the neighbours were the terrorists and sold out the good guys?
B: We use intelligence to figure that out.

---

Too gd ridicoulous. Its like me saying flower power will cause me to choke on daisies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by papewaio

A: The same intelligence that figured out 9/11 was going to happen?
B: No, a different intelligence.

---

Actually is quite different or haven't you followed the changes in that community under previous administrations and through this one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by papewaio

A: Which is?
B: Well we torture the illegal combatants until they tell us the truth.

---

Yes, we have mobile "torture" trucks that go wherever an enemy combantant is found. :dizzy2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by papewaio

A: So you torture them to figure out if they really are the bad guys?
B: Correct.

---

Absolutely, we do this all the time especially when they won't answer us when we just ask them if they are. /sarcasm off grow up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by papewaio

A: But what if they don't cooperate?
B: We torture them some more until they do.
A: So how do you tell if they are good guys who don't know anything.
B: We only torture those who are in prison.
A: So how do you tell if they are good guys who don't know anything.
B: We only torture those who are in prison.
A: But I thought we hadn't determined yet if they were actually bad guys.
B: Well if they are in prison they must be.
A: Ah, I see its like the witches in the middle ages. You tie a rope to their feet, throw them in water and if they float back up they are a witch and get burned at the stake.
B: What happens if they stay down?
A: They drown.
B: Hmm, gives me a good idea for the next round of water torture. If they refuse to talk and drown they must be a terrorist. Brilliant, thanks you really help me think properly with my gray matter.

---

Wow your grasp of "torture" and intelligence procedures is right out of a monty python manual isn't it? Really shouldn't you be calling for every politician who has been in office since 1941 to be hanged for conducting such an apparatus. I mean this is factual right?

Shades can't read .....No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.

he still tries to justify it
example....B: To save lives, including yours.
chicken little indeed , a whole hatchery of them screaming that the sky is falling in
No exceptional circumstances whatsoever:yes: simple isn't it .

I thought waterboarding is a summer sport...

Oh :daisy: , what did I just sign up for?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShadeHonestus

Papewaio

Asking yourself questions and answering them without subtracting bias and adding reality are an exercise in what exactly beyond self grandizement of one's argument which lends itself to run away scenarios and the 'chicken little" attitude.

A: Why use enhanced techniques on those terrorists we've detained which we strongly suspect have knowledge of particular information.
B: To save lives, including yours.

---

How PC of you. Its not torture it's enhanced information gathering techniques. And no they haven't saved my life, they if anything are leading to an environment that diminishes it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by papewaio

A: So how do we know they have done the bad things.
B: Illegal wire taps that allows bush to eavesdrop on your favourite calls. 1-800-976-:7stripper:

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shade

Fixed.

---

:holiday: Sorry I can't come to the phone right now I'm too busy...

Quote:

---

You must have been a champion of the torreceli act or whatever the hell that moron from New Jersey was.

A: The ones we discover shooting at us with AK's or planting roadside bombs, or identified by those higher up in theaters of conflict not to mention our intelligence network as a whole.
B: Right.

---

You do know how terrorist cells work right? Those that do the job aren't generally the ones who know where the next ones will occur. If a airman doesn't know where his next mission and ground target will be, what are the chances that a suicide bomber or one step up a bomb layer know where the next targets are going to be? Likewise if you do catch someone higher up the targets will change, thats the whole idea of warfare, its fluid. Its not like a board game with everyone holding cards and a list of targets for the next turn.

Quote:

---

Too gd ridicoulous. Its like me saying flower power will cause me to choke on daisies.

---

Invoking a better time :flowers:

Quote:

---

Actually is quite different or haven't you followed the changes in that community under previous administrations and through this one.

---

That they still don't have enough organic assets that can speak the languages they are intercepting? That stopping terrorism is best served by good police work and building up viable conduits into the community... as per the British experience.

Quote:

---

Yes, we have mobile "torture" trucks that go wherever an enemy combantant is found. :dizzy2:

---

Why bother with torture trucks when you can fly them from non-cooperative countries into ones that use torture umm enhanced interrogation techniques. Gees get with the times, its much better to outsource, how protectionist '84 of you.

Quote:

---

Absolutely, we do this all the time especially when they won't answer us when we just ask them if they are. /sarcasm off grow up.

---

Same difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShadeHonestus

Wow your grasp of "torture" and intelligence procedures is right out of a monty python manual isn't it? Really shouldn't you be calling for every politician who has been in office since 1941 to be hanged for conducting such an apparatus. I mean this is factual right?

---

Actually it is more Yes, Minister.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AntiochusIII

I thought waterboarding is a summer sport...

Oh :daisy: , what did I just sign up for?

---

That is a bright ray of sunshine... truly a LOL moment. Thankyou.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papewaio

I thought I recognized that number! How is your mum going after I rolled her in flour and surfed the waves in?

I thought above we had figured out the use for flour power and finding wet spots... sorry flower power... well use of that is what got me in the door.

---

Is this part of your retaliatory theory? Bravo it says much about how you say animals fear and humans think? That was what you said right...think?

I do not know whether you took the porn number to be of a personal insult to you as it was not meant to make others think that you partake in porn. It was to typify unqualified outrage...a line used much here especially among comedians.

I rarely get really personal here, sometimes I may push buttons to get reactions and uncover motives, but even to those I do I usually befriend at one time or another in separate arguments that we find like principle. I do sometimes belittle ones arguments but not their families. The arguments you put forth you are accontable for, the reciprocal you speak of comes to play here, post like a child, get told to grown up. Make a nutjob conspiracy theory, you may get called a nutjob thats just human nature and believe it or not that is with restraint.

I'm not sure I know or want to know what I uncovered in you. I will note for your benefit and no doubt your pleasure that the reason I've been able to post more recently these last few days is because I brought a member of my family into my house as opposed to her sitting in a Hospice. The off topic arena has been a release as being away from academia and my other work during this time I need exercise of the brain. I do this when she is sleeping or other family isn't here paying their respects prior to the impending departure.

No doubt tribesman will come up with some irrelevant U.N. resolution on mom jokes with his usually spewage in hopes that barking loud enough he'll find like ideologs to mate with, but I can take his insults, I can forgive him that.

Maybe its becuase we are approaching days instead of weeks, but I find your blind attacks on what you do not know or can even take into account as a possibility prior to your post as particularly troubling.

Hey folks, a spirited discussion! But....

Could you also please provide your answers to the questions posed? I was not simply trying to bait a discussion, but wanted to operationally define some of the terms etc. so that the discussion could be properly grounded.

While I've gathered impressions from you, only Tribesy has provided a direct answer.

Tribes, could you add a few specific examples to define permissable techniques and non-permissable, please?

Quote:

---

Tribes, could you add a few specific examples to define permissable techniques and non-permissable, please?

---

Isn't it clearly specific in the treaty that most countries (including the US) agreed to as to what is and what is not permissable , its certainly very very clear that under no circumstances can it be justified .....though I had to repeat that bit in big red letters as some people are too screwed up worrying about the sky falling in to understand it .

The geneva conventions is a good thing to follow. Also, the UN Convention against Torture definition provides that torture is “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 from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions”.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

1. What are permissable interrogation techniques/conditions of confinement? (Please name some specifics here -- part of soliciting the details is to note what one person means as opposed to another when using a given term).

---

Standard police interrogation techniques should be more then enough. The individual isolation lockup cell is also an acceptable technique.

Quote:

---

2. What techniques are always inappropriate (what is torture)?

---

By my simple definition anything that uses the application of pain to gain information.

Quote:

---

3. What techniques are conditionally appropriate (if any)?

---

Sleep depreviation does not seem to be torture in my mind - however there is a point that it causes harm to the human body - so one can not exceed that point.

Quote:

---

4. Are different techniques/levels of severity appropriate when dealing with different suspects/subjects? E.G. domestic alleged and convicted criminals, foreign nationals accused of a crime, enemy combatants, irregular enemy combatants, terrorists, suspected terrorists etc.

---

Different levels of security yes. Isolation can be a useful tool in gathering information - some simple manipulation of the environment such as changing the time for food and light to cause confusion does not strike me as torture.

Quote:

---

5. What larger Law/Treaty/Cultural Norms do you see as relevant to this discussion, if any?

---

The United States signed a treaty about torture - we should honor that treaty

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Isn't it clearly specific in the treaty that most countries (including the US) agreed to as to what is and what is not permissable , its certainly very very clear that under no circumstances can it be justified .....though I had to repeat that bit in big red letters as some people are too screwed up worrying about the sky falling in to understand it .

---

I think he is asking your specific ideas about what actions would constitute 'causing severe mental or physical pain or suffering in order to obtain information or whatnot.' Kind of like DC's requests for clarification in the other torture thread. Withholding AC? Cable TV? Korans? A slap? Solitary confinement? What are reasonable treatments and where is the line to separate them from torture? You've certainly laid out good guidelines to follow, but what is your personal interpretation of those guidelines?

Ajax

edit: for me personally, I think Redleg's comments seem reasonable enough. I haven't given extensive personal thought yet to what the limits and definitions should be, and I'm not well versed in standard police, FBI, military, or CIA interrogation procedures so as to invoke or criticize them specifically.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShadeHonestus

Is this part of your retaliatory theory? Bravo it says much about how you say animals fear and humans think? That was what you said right...think?

I do not know whether you took the porn number to be of a personal insult to you as it was not meant to make others think that you partake in porn. It was to typify unqualified outrage...a line used much here especially among comedians.

I rarely get really personal here, sometimes I may push buttons to get reactions and uncover motives, but even to those I do I usually befriend at one time or another in separate arguments that we find like principle. I do sometimes belittle ones arguments but not their families. The arguments you put forth you are accontable for, the reciprocal you speak of comes to play here, post like a child, get told to grown up. Make a nutjob conspiracy theory, you may get called a nutjob thats just human nature and believe it or not that is with restraint.

I'm not sure I know or want to know what I uncovered in you. I will note for your benefit and no doubt your pleasure that the reason I've been able to post more recently these last few days is because I brought a member of my family into my house as opposed to her sitting in a Hospice. The off topic arena has been a release as being away from academia and my other work during this time I need exercise of the brain. I do this when she is sleeping or other family isn't here paying their respects prior to the impending departure.

No doubt tribesman will come up with some irrelevant U.N. resolution on mom jokes with his usually spewage in hopes that barking loud enough he'll find like ideologs to mate with, but I can take his insults, I can forgive him that.

Maybe its becuase we are approaching days instead of weeks, but I find your blind attacks on what you do not know or can even take into account as a possibility prior to your post as particularly troubling.

---

Don't hit below the belt with misquoting me and putting swear words in my mouth. As a Nutjob one of my favourite movies naturally is the Nutty Professor, although I admit to preferring the original movie to that of Eddies'... yesteryears movies were so much better... the old times are always better.

If you don't like someone responding in kind to a verbal insult, methinks that you shouldn't be the kind supporting torture as you definitely won't like having that responded in kind.

I don't think I reciprocated... I think I went several steps worse, all apologies to your mum. That shouldn't have been done and I'll try and be more creative and kind in future in debating the merits of torture.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papewaio

Don't hit below the belt with misquoting me and putting swear words in my mouth. As a Nutjob one of my favourite movies naturally is the Nutty Professor, although I admit to preferring the original movie to that of Eddies'... yesteryears movies were so much better... the old times are always better.

If you don't like someone responding in kind to a verbal insult, methinks that you shouldn't be the kind supporting torture as you definitely won't like having that responded in kind.

I don't think I reciprocated... I think I went several steps worse, all apologies to your mum. That shouldn't have been done and I'll try and be more creative and kind in future in debating the merits of torture.

---

I never misquoted you.

So you can't display any decency in a discussion about something that you disagree with? How wonderfully intolerant of you. Its that type academic honesty which has obviously worked wonders in your quest for knowledge. :dizzy2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShadeHonestus

I never misquoted you.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papewaio

A: So how do we know they have done the bad things.
B: Their neighbours told us.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShadeHonestus

Quoting Papewaio
A: So how do we know they have done the bad things.
B: Illegal wire taps that allows bush to eavesdrop on your porn calls. 1-800-976- SLUT

Fixed

---

I believe this was the offending misquotation.

Ajax

You misquoted me when you put an adjusted phone number with a slur in it and attributed it to me.

I don't think being rude is the the standard I wish to live by. My actions were pathetic and boorish. Normally I try and be decent with people who have an opposing point of view. That is why I have already apologised once for my actions. My apologies again that I was mean to your and your kin in responding to the mis-represented quotation.

As for my academic career you can slur it as much as you wish if it will make you feel better as a fellow human being. :flowers::medievalcheers:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ajaxfetish

I believe this was the offending misquotation.

---

Thank you ajax.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papewaio

You misquoted me when you put an adjusted phone number with a slur in it and attributed it to me.

---

I believed as has been done numerous times around the forums that making a quote attributed to somebody and then labeling it as "Fixed" meant that it was edited by the poster and not of original content from the quoted. I did more than adjust a phone number I changed the entire second line. If its the slur you have a problem with I thought I obviously owned that as I wrote it. If it remains ambiguous, I'll state again that this was of my writing, hence the word "fixed". I could have put anything there, but figured "Slut" was of easy and universal recognition with the porn industry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papewaio

Normally I try and be decent with people who have an opposing point of view.

---

This had been my previous experience with you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papewaio

That is why I have already apologised once for my actions. My apologies again that I was mean to your and your kin in responding to the mis-represented quotation. I don't think I wish to make it my standard to behave by in being rude even it it is emotionally convenient (boorish were my actions and boorish they remain) as it is neither accurate nor useful in exchanging ideas.

---

What apology, all I saw were parting shots including one half masked in apology.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Papewaio

As for my academic career you can slur it as much as you wish if it will make you feel better as a fellow human being.

---

Well if you want to be taken seriously those parting shots in the veiled apology would not have taken place, nor would this have found its way into the discussion. This dishonesty even in apology made me question your academic honesty, that of the exercise of the academic such as our discussions and debates here in the pursuit of understanding, not of an academic career or accumulation of pedigree.

I could see how what I wrote could be taken as such, but this was not the case and if truly taken as such I offer apologies for the misunderstanding.

Temporarily closed, pending staff consultation.