torturing children w/ insects?

[whylaff]

Originally posted by: newnameman

Originally posted by: cyclohexane
link

Why wasn't this talked about before? If true, this is pretty damn low. These guys got some explaining to do.

Please show me the memo that describes "torturing children w/ insects".

You forgot to read the memo that outlined the new procedures for ?hearsay? and ?vague parallels?. It?s part of the new ?Must Be True? doctrine. Since the suspect?s second hand account also uses the word ?insects?, it is an obvious war crime and anyone who wrote or writes a non-binding legal opinion that I disagree with the interpretation of should be impeached. Besides, skepticism is overrated, especially when so many innocent people are having pain or suffering inflicted upon them. When will people finally start to think of their emotional well being? Have they no soul?

 

[Zenmervolt]

Originally posted by: newnameman

Originally posted by: cyclohexane
link

Why wasn't this talked about before? If true, this is pretty damn low. These guys got some explaining to do.

Please show me the memo that describes "torturing children w/ insects".

If you read the memos they allow the use of one insect, provided that it was harmless. While the memos did allow telling the subject that the insect was capable of stinging or biting, they also required telling the subject that the imaginary sting or bite would not cause sickness or severe pain.

Of course, phrasing it that way (the truthful way) makes for a lot less outrage, so they might as well trump this up.

ZV

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: dahunan
I put NOTHING above the Bush admins.... they would murder innocent prisoners and rub human feces all over their bodies if they thought it might suit their Empirialistic needs

Damn, I really had to stop and check the date on this post. So tell me again if they'e willing to do that, why'd they let someone else become President?

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: newnameman

Originally posted by: cyclohexane
link

Why wasn't this talked about before? If true, this is pretty damn low. These guys got some explaining to do.

Please show me the memo that describes "torturing children w/ insects".

If you read the memos they allow the use of one insect, provided that it was harmless. While the memos did allow telling the subject that the insect was capable of stinging or biting, they also required telling the subject that the imaginary sting or bite would not cause sickness or severe pain.

Of course, phrasing it that way (the truthful way) makes for a lot less outrage, so they might as well trump this up.

ZV

You make some valid points I considered too, but before people generalize too much about how harmless some of these activities are, let's remember that the difference between rape that can ruin a woman's life for decades and a 'great night' is 'in the woman's head', her consent to and feelings about the actions, when we talk about exploiting phobias, and let's remmeber that the restraint shown was to try to avoid the clearest violations of war crime laws, not a moral restraint not to harm the prisoners.

The policy was to investigate the prisoners' phobias and to use psychologists to assist in obtaining the maximum trauma.

I've recommended Naomi Klein's "The Shock Doctrine", it does a great job at escribing the horrific effects of harmless-sounding things like 'sensory deprivation'.

There is a political agenda for some to minimize the treatment of the prisoners, and it's a mistake to fall for it too easily.

 

[RightIsWrong]

Originally posted by: theflyingpig

Originally posted by: Lanyap

?The Pakistani guards told my son that the boys were kept in a separate area upstairs and were denied food and water by other guards,? the statement read. ?They were also mentally tortured by having ants or other creatures put on their legs to scare them and get them to say where their father was hiding.?

At a military tribunal in 2007, the father of a Guantanamo detainee alleged that Pakistani guards had confessed that American interrogators used ants to coerce the children of alleged 9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed into revealing their father?s whereabouts.

Is this information really credible? This person said that his son said that the Pakistani guards said... Seems like a lot of innuendo in this story.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/p...ics/20090416_memos.pdf

Of course it's credible. It should be obvious to anyone that the US would torture children without hesitation. Any attempt to discredit this article is an attempt to cover up the truth. Everyone knows this.

So let me get this straight....

There are secret memos about torture that include using insects on children and then, two years later people are giving accounts of children being scared and threatened with insects.

So, you put 2+2 together and get 5 because there clearly no way these people could be credible sources. After all, they are terrrorrrrrissstss!!

Just out of curiosity...what would you consider a credible source?

Clearly the Bush administration's memos stating that they considered it and the Red Cross being told with no possible knowledge of these memos accounts of kids being treated in that same exact manner aren't enough for you.

 

[theflyingpig]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
So let me get this straight....

It doesn't matter if the information is credible or not, the public does not want to hear things like this so the Obama administration will make this go away. No one will be punished. Fools like you will yell and scream about it, but in the end, no one with any power will listen. Everyone knows this.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Originally posted by: Sacrilege

Originally posted by: fallout man

?The Americans also once stripped and beat two Arab boys, ages fourteen and sixteen, who were turned over by the Pakistani guards at the detention center,? he said. ?These guards told my son that they were very upset at this and said the boys were thrown like garbage onto a plane to Guantanamo. Women prisoners were also held there, apart from their husbands, and some were pregnant and forced to give birth in their cells. According to Mohammed, one woman also died in her cell because the guards could not get her to a hospital quickly enough. This was most upsetting to the Pakistani guards.?

sweet. :roll:

These quotes are from Muslims with an agenda; they are untrustworthy. You are being played like a fiddle for propaganda purposes.

Do you have any credible, reliable sources, like someone from the Bush Administration? They would know exactly what was going on and can clear the record.

What BS. First, you don't think the Bush administration had an agenda? What fuckin rock have you been under? And yeah, they are going to admit they tortured children, wake the hell up. :roll:

Originally posted by: Craig234


Perhaps. "You are being played like a fiddle for propaganda purposes" was just too much the normal line, and not clearly sarcasm, so....

I guess it's a testament to the rightiers' radicalism that they say things that set off the meter much more but are not sarcastic, so it's harder to tell at times.

 

[JSFLY]

Originally posted by: fallout man

Originally posted by: JSFLY
Scaring kids with bugs.... that's a cute one. I've done that to my little sister before.

Anyone have an IP address for this creepy asshole?

If you've treated your sister as these detainees have been treated, you will be PMITA prison before you can say "pain not resembling organ failure."

Don't try to make it sound dismissively cute there, bugsy.

Perhaps you believe information should be extracted from children via conventional methods of torture, but I don't.

Know what cures arachnophobia? Being up close and personal with a spider and eventually coming to the realization that it's not going to hurt you.

 

[RightIsWrong]

Originally posted by: theflyingpig

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
So let me get this straight....

It doesn't matter if the information is credible or not, the public does not want to hear things like this so the Obama administration will make this go away. No one will be punished. Fools like you will yell and scream about it, but in the end, no one with any power will listen. Everyone knows this.

So you would prefer that we all just sit back, shut up and let those in power abuse it and take advantage of everyone that they desire?

 

[theflyingpig]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong
So you would prefer that we all just sit back, shut up and let those in power abuse it and take advantage of everyone that they desire?

That is what is going to happen. Sure there will be a few who will try to do something about this, but the vast majority of people will simply forget about this. In a few months this story will be forgotten. If it makes you feel better, you should start a movement to out those responsible for this. I doubt you will get much further than the internet though. Like I said earlier, those with the power to do anything about this will remain silent.

 

[whylaff]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: Zenmervolt

Originally posted by: newnameman

Originally posted by: cyclohexane
link

Why wasn't this talked about before? If true, this is pretty damn low. These guys got some explaining to do.

Please show me the memo that describes "torturing children w/ insects".

If you read the memos they allow the use of one insect, provided that it was harmless. While the memos did allow telling the subject that the insect was capable of stinging or biting, they also required telling the subject that the imaginary sting or bite would not cause sickness or severe pain.

Of course, phrasing it that way (the truthful way) makes for a lot less outrage, so they might as well trump this up.

ZV

You make some valid points I considered too, but before people generalize too much about how harmless some of these activities are, let's remember that the difference between rape that can ruin a woman's life for decades and a 'great night' is 'in the woman's head', her consent to and feelings about the actions, when we talk about exploiting phobias, and let's remmeber that the restraint shown was to try to avoid the clearest violations of war crime laws, not a moral restraint not to harm the prisoners.

The policy was to investigate the prisoners' phobias and to use psychologists to assist in obtaining the maximum trauma.

I've recommended Naomi Klein's "The Shock Doctrine", it does a great job at escribing the horrific effects of harmless-sounding things like 'sensory deprivation'.

There is a political agenda for some to minimize the treatment of the prisoners, and it's a mistake to fall for it too easily.

As a human being, I understand your argument, but applying that internal desire to see no harm done to others does not transcend into the realm of law?it is a balance. The mere act of detaining someone against their will has the potential to cause harm in the fashion you have described. If they talk loudly to him and damage his hearing, is that pain and suffering? If they stir up mental images with emotional underpinnings through an aggressive line of questioning, is that pain and suffering? Since we have to at some point (or we could all do whatever we wanted whenever we wanted) when do we say it is ?ok? to put this individual?s liberty and free will on hold in this process? Where do we put the line?

 

[reallyscrued]

Originally posted by: theflyingpig

Of course it's credible. It should be obvious to anyone that the US would torture children without hesitation. Any attempt to discredit this article is an attempt to cover up the truth. Everyone knows this.

The Truth Is Out There.

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: sciwizam

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: Sacrilege
Do you have any credible, reliable sources, like someone from the Bush Administration? They would know exactly what was going on and can clear the record.

Let me look through the memos.

Hm... here are the JFK memos describing his adultery... the Nixon memos describing how he sabotaged the 1968 LBJ Viet Nam peace talks... the Reagan memos describing the Iran-Contra planning... the Clinton memos describing his lies about sex... the George Bush memos describing Jeb Bush's activities to ensure Florida went for him in 2000...

Hm. Darn, it looks for the first time in history, the criminal acts aren't laid out in memos!

We better hops this doesn't get out, or they'll be able to get away with crime all the time by just not writing memos describing it!

Until then, of course, we can be sure they are innocent if they haven't written memos we have access to with the details of the crimes. So clearly, these things didn't happen.

Time for a new meter?

Perhaps. "You are being played like a fiddle for propaganda purposes" was just too much the normal line, and not clearly sarcasm, so....

I guess it's a testament to the rightiers' radicalism that they say things that set off the meter much more but are not sarcastic, so it's harder to tell at times.

It's you and people like you who are being played. The Non American world see's how politically divided America is and how people love to play the blame game on Bush. So now they can use that and say "Well while Bush was president they did bad things to me" and fools like you will immediately jump to defend them and keep on bashing Bush.
You fail to realize we live in a very dangerous world. Playing nice will only get you so far. HSometimes to protect a large group of people a small group of people will have to suffer. It may seem cruel, but that's how things are.