So why did we put Japanese to death who water tortured our troops
if it is not torture?

On Apr 22, 10:27 am, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 5:05 PM, Mark <> wrote:
>
> No, it is EXACTLY the same.... when arrested the accused nterrorists are
> simply people with no ID and no proof.... wrong place wrong time.... torture
> is used to sort them out.
> Torture is NOT acceptable on any level, I would not care whose child or
> family is at risk, including my own. The is and MUST remain without emotion.
>
> ==================
>
> Mark,
>
> This is part of the dilemma, and I am still not convinced, at least  in my
> mind, that Level I, Level II or Level III enhanced interrogation tactics
> constitute torture.   I noticed that no one responded to my question
> regarding whether these tactics (attached) from Rumsfeld's "Defense
> Department Working Group" constituted "torture".
>
> It is also misplaced to somehow now accuse the captors (or interrogators) as
> torturing individuals to sort them out, because they had no identification.
> I don't believe that this happened.  There is no evidence of this ever
> taking place, and I am unaware of any allegations to such activity.
>
> There were only 28 individuals who were exposed to either Level I, Level II
> or Level III enhanced interrogation tactics, and it was because these
> individuals had been determined to be knowledgable of information that was
> detrimental to our National Security.
>
> As Bradbury's May 10th, 2005 Memorandum points out, and as former Vice
> President Dick Cheney stated on FOX News on April 20th and April 21st, our
> Nation's intelligence agencies had relatively little information on al
> Queida, the Taliban, and those who were flying jets into our skyscrapers.
> We were being attacked (or thought we were) by chemicals in the mail, (you
> do recall the Anthrax scare?)  and it was pretty much assumed that the
> "First Wave" of attacks by al Queida on September 11, 2001, were not going
> to be the last. We were at war, with an enemy we knew relatively little
> about.
>
>   On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 2:47 PM, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> >> NOw you are mixing apples and oranges...  NO ONE is arguing for a
> >> universial application of torture...   The argument here is about
> >> using non lethal means to extract critical life saving information
> >> from PROFESSIONAL terrorists --- a very limited and far greater
> >> specified application than what you are seeking to argue...
>
> >> On Apr 21, 3:19 pm, Mark <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> > So the various police forces in the US should return to the day of the
> >> > rubber hoses ?? And when your son/daughter/family member does not "rat
> >> out"
> >> > its ok to "save the many" by using it ??
>
> >>  > On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 1:16 PM, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> > > The Left does not understand mental torture/extraction of information.
> >> > > Mossad does, evidently.//I don't think the ME terrorists have arrived
> >> > > at the mental category of interrogations which the Left assumes. The
> >> > > Left is a victim oriented mentality to begin with- pass the Band-Aids.
> >> > > As unemployment and crime rises in their cities and their experience
> >> > > first hand challenges them, we will see.
>
> >> > > On Apr 21, 1:46 pm, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> > > > One question NOT debated is "If these methods did save hundreds of
> >> > > > lives, is it justified??? If one takes the position of no, then you
> >> > > > place yourself into the position of saying "not torturing 1 man is
> >> > > > more important than hundreds of lives".... To date the Left ignores
> >> > > > this question with the unproven claim the "torture will never give
> >> you
> >> > > > any worthwhile information"...
>
> >> > > > On Apr 20, 10:46 pm, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> > > > > I start out where I left off last night.
>
> >> > > > > That I am attempting to understand and comprehend the facts of
> >> what
> >> > > took
> >> > > > > place with our treatment of prisoners. The thirty detainess that
> >> have
> >> > > > > been specifically referenced by Bybee, Bradbury and to a degree
> >> Yoo and
> >> > > > > Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's "Working Group
> >> Within The
> >> > > > > Department of Defense"; these thirty detainees were subjected to
> >> > > enhanced
> >> > > > > interrogation tactics, which by Department of Defense and CIA
> >> > > classification
> >> > > > > were either level I, II or III categories of enhhanced tactics,
> >> (Level
> >> > > III
> >> > > > > being the most alarming and disconcerting) and according to
> >> recently
> >> > > > > released information, only three detainees were ever subjected to
> >> Level
> >> > > III
> >> > > > > tactics.
>
> >> > > > > I don't think anyone can deny that of these thirty individuals,
> >> all
> >> > > were
> >> > > > > undoubtedly intent on destroying our very way of life, and the
> >> United
> >> > > States
> >> > > > > as we know it. Obviously, with the more information that is
> >> released,
> >> > > > > the better to understand and comprehend the facts. As I said last
> >> > > evening,
> >> > > > > if I sound like I am playing "devil's advocate" it is only my own
> >> means
> >> > > > > and personal mechanism to comprehend and understand the facts, as
> >> we
> >> > > (with
> >> > > > > unclassified security clearances) know them to be. I make no
> >> > > argument
> >> > > > > here. Instead, I am only trying to ascertain two distinct issues:
>
> >> > > > > (1) "Whether the CIA interrogators', (or other American
> >> "authorized
> >> > > > > interrogators' ") use of enhanced interrogation tactics
> >> constituted
> >> > > > > "torture"; and
>
> >> > > > > (2) "Whether the United States somehow avoided or evaded
> >> principles of
> >> > > the
> >> > > > > Geneva Accords, as well as the Convention Against Torture and
> >> Other
> >> > > Cruel,
> >> > > > > Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; (e.g.; "Cat") and
> >> other
> >> > > > > international treatise of which the United States is a signatory;
> >> thus
> >> > > > > making the actions of the Bush Administration unconstitutional.
>
> >> > > > > ** Not only did I send my initial message predominately regarding
> >> > > Steven
> >> > > > > Bradbury's May 10, 2005 and May 30, 2005 Memorandums to
> >> PoliticalForum,
> >> > > but
> >> > > > > I also sent it to several attorney friends of mine, one here in
> >> Tampa
> >> > > and
> >> > > > > one in Washington, D.C. who specializes in International Law. I
> >> > > also
> >> > > > > sent my message to another attorney in Gainesville Florida who I
> >> > > believe
> >> > > > > forwarded my message to other attornies, or at least she forwarded
> >> the
> >> > > > > message to individuals who seem to have given these issues a good
> >> deal
> >> > > of
> >> > > > > thought. Surprisingly, (with a couple of exceptions) most of the
> >> > > replies
> >> > > > > by counsel have been very much colored by partisan politics, which
> >> was
> >> > > a bit
> >> > > > > of a shock to me. It would appear that their cognitive and
> >> critical
> >> > > > > thinking skills and abilities are so clouded by their apparent
> >> hatred
> >> > > for
> >> > > > > the previous Adminstration, that they can no longer see this issue
> >> from
> >> > > a
> >> > > > > rational, non-partisan standpoint.
>
> >> > > > > A couple of thoughts that keep coming to mind:
>
> >> > > > > If a prisoner, say in any United States jail or prison is a danger
> >> to
> >> > > > > himself, or to others that may very well effect the safety or
> >> security
> >> > > of
> >> > > > > the prison, because of this prisoner's mental disability, and the
> >> > > prison
> >> > > > > officials or his jailers administer psychotropic drugs upon the
> >> > > prisoner
> >> > > > > against his will in order to maintain safety and security in the
> >> > > prison,
> >> > > > > does this constitute "torture" to the prisoner?
>
> >> > > > > I know that this question, "dodges the bullet" so to speak, but
> >> > > assuming
> >> > > > > that Bradbury's May 10th Memorandum's facts are correct, (as well
> >> as
> >> > > Yoo's
> >> > > > > March 31, 2004 Memorandum) and in fact, the enhanced interrogation
> >> > > tactics,
> >> > > > > whether they constituted torture, or whether they didn't,
> >> prevented
> >> > > hundreds
> >> > > > > of thousands of lives lost by a dirty bomb going off in Washington
> >> > > D.C., or
> >> > > > > another skyscraper being hit in Los Angeles, or any other
> >> metropolitan
> >> > > area
> >> > > > > in the United States, or in Western Europe, were the enhanced
> >> > > interrogation
> >> > > > > techniques sustainable and justified?
>
> >> > > > > There are allegations that if true, are deeply disturbing. Joseph
> >> > > > > Margulies who was lead counsel in *Rasul v, Bush*, 542 U.S. 466
> >> > > (2004) has
> >> > > > > made allegations that admittedly he never witnessed first hand,
> >> that
> >> > > he
> >> > > > > alleged took place at Gitmo and Baghram, but nevertheless, I
> >> believe
> >> > > would
> >> > > > > be hard to get around 18 U.S.C. 2340 *et. seq.* *See* *Also*
> >> > > "Guantanamo
> >> > > > > and the Abuse of Presidential Power"; Margulies, Jos. (2006).
>
> >> > > > > Attached is a a list from the January 15, 2003 Memo written by
> >> > > Rumsfeld's
> >> > > > > "Working Group Within The Department of Defense". Do you consider
> >> > > these
> >> > > > > enhanced interrogation tactics as "Acts of Torture"??
>
> >> > > > > On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 8:48 PM, Lobo <[email protected]>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> > > > > > MARK
>
> >> > > > > > I'm not trying to defend Clinton's actions (or Bush Senior's or
> >> > > Ronald
> >> > > > > > Reagan's). I agree that those renditions were illegal in most
> >> cases.
>
> >> > > > > > But there are degrees of illegality and of moral wrongness, and
> >> to
> >> > > say
> >> > > > > > that there is no difference between delivering a kidnappee with
> >> a
> >> > > > > > legal outstanding warrant to a foreign court to stand trial, and
> >> > > > > > delivering one (who might simply be the victim of a bad
>
> ...
>
> read more »
>
>  TortureOrNotTorture.pdf
> 153KViewDownload
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to