Discussion on:

A simple yes or no, please. Does this. . . . . . .

..... satisfy the definition of torture? Not to influence your answer, but consider the extremes of torture. At what point does it start, and what is the inhuman extreme?

In order to get a quick count, please answer yes or no in the subject line, and then elaborate as desired in the body of the message.

http://content1.clipmarks.com/content/7E8ADC46-F3DD-4D6F-B184-3A07CF501B7C/

Not in this case.

In the case where I am taken into custody -- a prisoner, involuntarily -- is where torture commences. These other things...they are variations of torture.

By definition, torture is mental anguish. anguish: extreme mental distress

The Geneva Convention (which most humane countries adhere to)considers waterboarding torture, of course the US Attorney Heneral doesn't consider it torture unless equivalent to accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure. WTF?


There is no doubt, even with the very carefully controlled and explained example you provided. Could you not find an example from somewhere other than the ad laced Playboy network?

This shows another such test, in a VERY controlle environment on a level board, no incline to reduce oxygen capacity.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LPubUCJv58

There is no question that in this test, there was mental distress and anguish, which by definition is "torture".

Many people seem to think of bullwhips, bamboo under fingernails, public beatings etc as torture however it takes much less than that to suit such classification.

Now to run through the video you posted as well as teh one I posted, these are volounteers, on a TV camera, in a very controlled situation, using just a little water (my example barely splashes the guy, when he actually pours water, Hitchens concedes IMMEDIATELY).

Now add to that, foreign language, capture by the enemy, some hot headed interrogator pouring water continuously and not justy a few seconds on and a few off, and you most definitely have "torture".

more controlled examples to keep teh press happy: He hardly gets waterboarded even, mouth free etc. QUOTE:"I do not want to say this...torture"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUkj9pjx3H0

Interrogation is questioning, coerced interrogation is repeated questioning, TORTURE is causing mental anguish in an attempt to interrogate.

Another pathetic attempt at excusing US actions.

Now THIS is torture:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CSe38dzJYkY&feature=PlayList&p=D3750E73321CE2CC&index=31

By definition, torture is mental anguish. anguish: extreme mental distress

Wouldn't it be different from person to person?

now play by the rules and stop f-ing up Max's thread. For Christ's sake, no matter how clearly it is put, some 'tard goes and does otherwise and turns a Y or N thread into a BS debate of personal defense.

Who is the judge? The Geneva Convention was one rough outline that simply means squat to an American. You'll enforce it but not abide by it.

In a controlled environment, with people you know and fully trust in, it is proven unbearable mental anguish.

But of course, due your lack of mental capacity, you feel that a prisoner of war, in a foreign nation, physically held to a board (of course while be screamed at and called Haji by his brother's killers), having a cloth forcefully help to his face by someone with a personal hatred toward you (while usually covered with a bag/blindfold for convenience) and THEN sumitting him to an even more extreme version of the pretty press op demonstrations shown here, is NOT causing mental anguish?

Tony, I am so sick of your constant, mindless and completely moronic BS. If you had a brain cell it would die of loneliness, your posts are just such a waste of time. You are by far the most ignorant, uneducated hick to post on TR.

In fact, you are so blatantly ignorant, you can't even follow the requested format of the thread's main post, for god's sake!

You don't think forced, waterboarding of a prisoner is torture to them?

Then say 'Yes" in your title and then shut the f**k up for once.

I checked twice.

Tony was responding to you, not Max.

You mean by posting below me, and commenting on something I said, he was talking to me? Really? What gave thay away for you?

Of course he was talking to me, but did ANYONE read max's post and request for a simple yes or no in the subject with any comments to follow in the body, so he had an easy tally?


Sh*t, how did your country ever survive this long?

Even I followed Max's requested format before commenting and I don't normally play by his rules.

Damn, you lot are so stupid!

With that.

Sorry Max, but your post did prove one thing. People here post without reading the post they are replying to at all and just ramble on about what they assume follows the title.

I've seen a more astute group bumbling over feed in a farm trough.

I count to three of us.

I followed his direction.

Tony, I am so sick of your constant, mindless and completely moronic BS. If you had a brain cell it would die of loneliness, your posts are just such a waste of time. You are by far the most ignorant, uneducated hick to post on TR.

Love you too

2.5 hours after you had ranted and spewed your utter trollop, due to not paying attention to teh post, and 3 minutes after you proudly posted the above reply saying how you finally figured it out and followed the rules when you answered Max.

Sorry Tony, but I'm just not as simple as you and won't fall for such lies.

Ever do that?

And you can think about it all you like, t wasn'y a race, but you still decided to post a bunch of mouth before you had thought about it, and ignoring the format Max had asked for.

By now it doesn't matter, the whole thread is screwed but it takes a few people to get it right first so that others follow suit.

I don't think so.

It stormed, and we got to see the underside of leaves.

I thought I was the most uneducated hick on Tech Republic!

Typical faithless Brit... re-using the same rehearsed compliments to every other schoolboy. Probably learned the habit in boarding school.

Tony can have a real redkneck, anti-taxation pain in the arse with a 'me only', individualistic mindset.

You are just a hick with the most ridiculous interpretations of what you read, resulting in your pathetic backpeddling.

Tony's proven his share of reading comprehension issues, but at least he stands firm and is consistent on his anti-taxation stand.

He doesn't simply parrot things he reads, incorrectly, as you chose to do.

I'm anti-taxation too.

You're not just liberal, then, you're a full blown socialist?

Explains so much.

I actually sit more right than centre and don't live in a socialist country either.

How little you really know...

I just took a 50% pay cut so someone else can have a job!

However I seriously doubt it was just an act of kindness " hey boss, how about you cut my pay 50% and give some other poor guy a job? It's not rith that I make all this money while people are out of work, lets spread the wealth."

Yeah, I sure that's how it went down.

the thought that counts?

It actually was your idea.

Oz didn't follow the yes or no rules either so STFU!

and are looking for an effective method, I find sex with with nubile women extremely distasteful. Any expressions of pleasure you note are a brave attempt on my part to overcome my revuslsion for this hideous ans demeaning action, and convince you of how hard I am and should result of more applications of the same.

To make the point a little more obvious, waterboarding wasn't chosen as an interrogation technique so the recipient would volunteer for more.

One wonders if any of them discovered a fetish for water bongage, invovlving burly blokes in combat gear...

I like it. Kinda like Monty Pythons where a condemned man gets to choose his own method of execution. So he has a dozen topless women chase him down until he finally falls of a cliff. Not all THAT bad.

when a mother refuses to give candy to her screaming tot, she's "torturing" it.

"By definition, torture is mental anguish. anguish: extreme mental distress"

The child qualifies on all counts. Therfore, the mother is torturing her child.

Ridiculous.

.
Edited for grammar.

so I gave up on it as I got fed up with my various security add-ons jumping up and wondered why the buggers can't just carry it all on their own site.

Guy bet that he could endure 15 seconds

You might have a selection of sites.

(There's about a 1 minute video.)

called scripts that called scripts that called to several other web sites. I went to Youtube and ran the same search and came up with nothing related. Changed the Youtube search to Waterboarding and found several other clips of people being waterboarded, but not the one you mention. However, the few who went through it said it was an effective method, but I wonder how effective it is against people really determined not to talk or those prepared to lie and those with anti-interrogation training. Either way, it's clearly something they don't like having done to them, but then, so is listening to a boring speaker for hours on end.

I would NOT call it torture.

Okay.

I guess you're all right. Even though you put it at the end.

instead of starting a new sub-thread

Rule.

..

on your idea of torture. Some people, including the US government, consider torture as being something that inflicts "severe physical stress", such as would be found "due to organ failure".

in other words, phusical beating to the point of near death. Medievil stuff like the Romans did but not quite to death.

The Geneva Convention, which most civilized mations have supported, including the US when it suits their agenda (such as atrocities committed against their own).

However the Geneva Convention considered torture a point of mental anguish, which Bush denied and quickly claimed that they have no obligation to support.

In other words, what's best for us, is best for us and we'll decide what's right and wrong.

I am more than confident that if you were captured by an enemy, thrown in a substandard quality prison, beaten and humiliated for months on end and then waterboarded making you feel lik eyou were drowning, you would return to Australia complaining that you were tortured.

But sitting in the living room it's pretty easy to dismiss a DEMONSTRATION, as bein gnot all THAT bad.

You have to remember, these videos were made due to the scrutiny of Gitmo's tactics. I don't think they are going to really show you what went on, they certainly didn't want people ot know how the prisoners were stripped naked and humlilated by troops either, unfortunately THAT truth got out before a pretty anal fest demo could be orchestrated for the press.

Is back-peddling.

Should you know authentically otherwise, you would keep your peace.

WHat someone claism is torture based on a 'made for TV video' is obviously not a demonstration of what goes on when at war with an person you are trained to deem and enemy and treat as one that should be killed.

Based on teh video, I would find it hard to consider torture, based on the actual definition of forture.

But people define torture as something FAR more destructive, as history has shown us when illustrating medievil torture.

But in a more human society that is lookign to set an example of humanity, we need to accept a more modern and passive understanding of torture and not compare it to history books.

Interrrogation, again by definition, does not include torture or such forms of fear or anguish enduced coercion. We don't allow for it in our legal system, even towards mass murderers why should we accept doing it to others ?

'Ve af veys of meking yuo tok!' Is not something we choose to follow in modern society, or do you feel we should impose a more Nazi focused approach to our society too?

Did the British forces occupying Ireland apply the Geneva Convention at all times when using "harsh interrogation techniques" on Irish prisoners detained "at her majesty's leisure" during the height of the conflict in Northern Ireland? I've heard the Protestants used to enjoy spitting out of their windows onto Catholic school children walking to school. Lovely, the way your people *and* your nation treated Ireland... but that really goes back CENTURIES, doesn't it, now?

Seems like the US isn't the only nation that finds the Geneva convention convenient only when it suits their goals. Hmmm?

Cheers.

Without making excuses, you are also referring to actions written before the ammendment to International Humanitarian Law, which wasn't enacted until the late 1980's. Actions that simply PALE in contrast to teh action of waterboarding.

These actions, even then deemed torture by some (and definitely NOT by your own description), were considered Highly Coercive Interrogation (HCI)that was brought into action by the security forces of Northern Ireland.

There were 5 actions used as HCI:
1) hooding,
2) wall-standing
3) subjection to noise
4) relative deprivation of food and water and
5) sleep deprivation.

(All actions currently carried out by the USA)

At no time were people subjected to being drowned.

"Hooding", was defined as a hood without ventilation. This is the same type of hood applied BEFORE waterboarding even begins.

So what you deem Britain's cruel and unusual punishment of others, is a simple precursor to waterboarding.

So if yuo want to reflect upon the past actions of others in order to excuse your current actions, you could at least reflect on the Crusades, or why not reflect on stoning?
At least theywere actions far more torturous than waterboarding.

What you deem "harsh interrogation techniques" for those detained "at her majesty's leisure" don't even begin to reach the extremes seen in more modern times, breaching ammended laws that you are now trying to defend ignoring. You took HCI to the next level with Guantanamo Bay, even with the past ot reflect and learn from.

Does it excuse continuation of such atrocities? nope, no way, no how.

But that's okay, this is the US, not Britain 40 years ago, its just...different, now because it's the USA.

"its just...different, now because it's the USA." Uh... huh.

Sure sounded like a lot of elaboration with a fairly patriotic tone and a whole lot of justification going on in that last post.

Also sounds like parroting what your GOVERNMENT told you happened without questioning. Didn't Irish prisoners *die* while in the custody of Her Majesty's agents? That is WAY less harsh than waterboarding, you're sure right... *rolling eyes*

Hey... hooding, "wall-standing", sleep deprivation, subjection to noise...

Sounds like an Abu Gharib greatest hits list... except this was 40 years ago, in Ireland, at the hands of the English.

We - learned - from - the - best.

Thanks.

I never made excuses for the actions of England. MY government told me nothing of the sort, I don't live in England.

My point was how can you suggest that the actions of 40 years ago excuse your actions of todau, especially wen international laws have been changed, some specifically due to the Irish conflict.

And once again, for those of you that can't read, I suppose if you can justify todays actions based on yesterdays, why not crucifiction, stoning, a full religious crusade, the iron maiden etc?

You can't.

Man has evloved over time, well soe of us have anyway, and as a result, we adjust and fine tune loose laws to better define acceptable and unacceptable actions, waterboarding now falls under the title iof ill treatment and is therefore deemed illegal. However you press on in its defense for some reason that simply can't be defended.

That's like saying theft is illegal, unless you are stealing for what you personally feel is a good reason.

Get a grip

Cuz they start typing like Ozzy talks after a 5th of Whiskey and a handful of teh qu-qwa-kuh-qualudes...

"It's K-K-K-Ken c-c-c-coming to k-k-k-kill me."

I hate that I am teh readig impaired. It is a wound I've carried with me all my life.

(Oh, and I didn't even bother to finish readig the actual post past the title. I just couldn't bear it, so painful are my mental impairments).

Laying in bed, watching the Olympics doesn't work well for my typing, which is horrific at its best.

There's a difference between getting under one's skin *where someone would actually have ot care what you think) and just being a tool that is not worth the time. You don't get under my skin, you just make Americans look bad, just as all ignorant peons around here do.

Are proud to have you representing the setting sun of their empire.

Obviously you haven't taken a hard lokk at teh USA recently. No superpower remains a super power, to fool yourself into think that you are some untouchable nation is a complete joke. YOu are faing worse internal disaster and external dissention and trust than ever before. You are in risk of losing once powerful, for you, trade agreements. America relies on the rest of teh wolrd to simply feed it's narion, built it's homes, provide your electricity, fish, lumber, grain, and everything else, alone you would perish very quickly whilst other nations would quickly resume trade agreements and prosper in your wake.

You are fooling yourself to think otherwise for even one minute. You aren't independant. you are 100% reliant on the resources of other nations.

"It really upset me when you did this..."

"Well YOU did THIS... weeks ago, so you have NO right to get upset at me about this..."

*staring with puzzled, I'm not sure how to proceed look* ---???

What does the setting (set) sun of England's empire have to do with America's decline as a super-power?

That wasn't the discussion. Focus... the point is over HERE, not the convenient place you're trying to (once again) derail it to.

I never voiced an opinion one way or another about America's status as super power. That isn't the argument. So why is that the first place you took it, and the only thing you address?

Because that is just how you argue. You're a tool, Oz. An entertaining tool, one that won't give up, but still, a king-sized ratchet-wrench, none-the-less.

And have you been drinking again? You're back to that stuttering like Ozzy thing again...