Adam
- 65
- 1
Funny. Keep clinging to those delusions russ.Regarding the pictures specifically, the definition doesn't fit. That isn't torture.
Funny. Keep clinging to those delusions russ.Regarding the pictures specifically, the definition doesn't fit. That isn't torture.
russ,russ_watters said:...altering definitions in order to exploit the connotation of a choice word is a tactic I most often see in liberals for some reason. And it is particularly dishonest...
hughes johnson said:russ,
It is dishonest, but I don't believe that it's done on purpose. Most liberals are failures in life, and they spend a great deal of time trying to muck things up for anyone who is a success. If this seems annoying to you, don't be surprised, it is meant to be. These people invest a lot of their time annoying anyone who has been "lucky" in life. It never dawns on them that this behavior is the root of their own failure in the first place. They are the voluntary downtrodden. What really pisses them off is when "disadvantaged" minorities from the ghetto make successes of themselves, leaving their "saviors" in their dust. Look at the way they treat Condi, Clarence Thomas, and J.C. Watts. It's funny to watch; and a good lesson in life.
Be specific. Give me a specific example of torture and connect it to the definition with a specific argument. IE, 'here is a picture of a US soldier beating a prisoner. Beatings are torture because they are inflicting physical pain.'Adam said:Funny. Keep clinging to those delusions russ.
I go back and forth on this one. I think it varies from one to the next. There are several people here who have Orwell's "doublethink." Its the ability to hold two mutually exclusive ideas in your head at the same time and believe both are true. Its human nature to want to believe certain things, but what separates some is when they manufacture or manipulate evidence in order to show it. Could that be done unconsciously? Maybe, but I don't think so. In fact, I have heard in here peple say that its ok to lie if necessary to get your point across. Sooner or later though, I think these guys do think about the fact that they always have to lie/manipulate information to make their argument and realize that means there is a flaw in their argument. After that, either the intellectual honesty takes over or the desire to have the world match their perception takes over.It is dishonest, but I don't believe that it's done on purpose.
Yeah, that too, kat: if its not bad enough on its own, exaggerate it.hyperbole-hyperbole-hyperbole!
That's the applicable word Russ~!
True enough. A female friend of mine does this for a living; she says torture costs extra.russ_watters said:A naked prisoner simulating sex is humiliating, but humiliation does not constitute torture.
Who exactly was howling treason about what? I think I know the thread and person you are talking about (if that's all this is) - but take another look: he wasn't the first to use the word. Its a clever tactic, use a word that doesn't apply in order to get it into a conversation for others to use as ammo.Njorl said:It is no more dishonest than the howls of treason from conservatives.
I don't actually believe what I posted. It was more an exercise to point out that what you posted was silly. Most of my friends are successful liberals. Many of the "failures" I've known have been bitter racists that I would never classify as liberal in a million years. It isn't liberals who complain about blacks and women getting jobs through affirmative action, illegal immigants undercutting their salary and mysterious Jewish conspiracies stealing all the money. Well, maybe we complain about the illegal immigrants, but only because they're being exploitedhughes johnson said:Njorl,
I don't hate you at all (not even a little). I don't think that you are "un-American" either. I must confess however that I'm not that fond of Ted Kennedy. His record on women is the same as O.J. Simpson's...
One...
so far.
Njorl said:what you posted was silly.
Njorl said:Most of my friends are successful liberals.
russ_watters said:The second flaw is the one several people are operating on: there is a big problem here with the very definition and use of the word "torture," and I think that's what Bystander meant to imply.
Torture is defined as severe mental or physical pain inflicted as a means of punishment. Regarding the pictures specifically, the definition doesn't fit. That isn't torture. Note to avoid the application of the same straw-man again: This doesn't mean I'm saying its ok.
russ_watters said:Be specific. Give me a specific example of torture and connect it to the definition with a specific argument. IE, 'here is a picture of a US soldier beating a prisoner. Beatings are torture because they are inflicting physical pain.'
A naked prisoner simulating sex is humiliating, but humiliation does not constitute torture.
Wasn't there also a case in New York a few years ago, involving four (?) policemen mistreating a civilian*, in a manner not dissimilar to that described in some of the reports? IIRC, at least one cop was convicted and jailed for x years.selfAdjoint said:If the prisoners had been US citizens, so treated in the US, by cops, what would have happened?
Maybe the same thing, according to a lot of reports that say the methods used in Iraq were just clumsily implemented versions of things that are routinely practiced in US prisons. And did you see that the guy in charge of the contracter interrogators was indicted in Utah for tormenting a prisoner until he died?
I'm fine with that: based on that, none of the items in the list you quoted qualify as torture, with the possible exception of a and k. But there isn't enough information to substantiate a claim of torture. Again, the word 'torture' is used because of its connotation: murder and rape (they have apparently happened) are crimes but are not necessarily part of torture.pelastration said:But I think also that we should tackle the 'technically question' Rumsfeld referred to: The difference between "Abuse" and "Torture". My idea is that torture is an extended version of abuse.
Scaring someone is not torture.1. I gave you the photo in previous post. The dogs. That must have been a terrible situation for that prisoner. That's unhuman treatment.
You can't make assumptions like that. That's not the way this works. If you want to make an accusation, it has to be substantiated. Remember the usual example of burden of proof shifting: 'I claim you are an axe murderer. Prove me wrong.' That's what you are doing here: 'lets assume its torture since we don't know.'2. A naked prisoner simulating sex is humiliating? Maybe that's your interpretation of the photo. What do you think is happening? Serious. Who says - or is absolutely sure - it was not extreme painful?
You are misinformed.And Russ, ever had the idea that AIDS is transferable by oral contact?
A good question - and one that ironically gets pushed aside by all the hyperbole.Nereid said:Can we get back OT please?
Dubya said the behaviour was unacceptable. But the behaviour was known about for months; both internal and external sources had provided ample evidence. To what extent was the torture (or whatever other term Russ, hughes, et al wish to use) condoned? There're reports coming out that there was at least some kind of tacit approval. To what extent were reports kept from reaching Myers etc by deliberate policy (a form of 'plausible deniability')? We don't know yet; but Rummy's tears sure seem like those of a crocodile.
As a PF mentor you should check before you post disinformation. Yes Russ, Yes ... you can get AIDS through oral sex.russ_watters said:You are misinformed.
russ_watters said:I'm fine with that: based on that, none of the items in the list you quoted qualify as torture, with the possible exception of a and k. But there isn't enough information to substantiate a claim of torture. Again, the word 'torture' is used because of its connotation: murder and rape (they have apparently happened) are crimes but are not necessarily part of torture..
amp said:Causing MENTAL anguish IS torture. If you were forced to stay awake for several days would you be comfortable and relaxed? Your dismissiveness of obvious inhumanity and villany is disheartening.
It's voluntary.hughes johnson said:During U.S. military basic training, advanced infantry schools, and combat operations, troops are routinely subjected to mental anguish and sleep deprivation... If I work on electrical power lines for three days during an emergency power outage, and I have to stand in an extremely uncomfortable position for hours on end while risking electrocution, can I sue?
You didn't have to actually put this in black and white, we've been reading your posts for a long time.Adam said:Some people will gladly say black does not meet the definitions of black, and white doesn't meet the definitions of white, as long as they can maintain a death-grip on their delusions.
Adam said:It's voluntary.
During U.S. military basic training, advanced infantry schools, and combat operations, troops are routinely subjected to mental anguish and sleep deprivation. Have I been tortured? Am I entitled to a monetary settlement for this torture? If the Iraqis kept me up all night with their annoying attacks (obviously done on purpose) can I sue the Iraqi Government?
If I work on electrical power lines for three days during an emergency power outage, and I have to stand in an extremely uncomfortable position for hours on end while risking electrocution, can I sue? Will the UN help me? How about the red cross? Will they ignore this "obvious inhumanity and villany" leaving me "disheartened"?
I must remind you, amp, that I never said it was right or ok. But your extension of the definition of "torture" makes it cover virtually every physical crime there is. No, rape is not necessarily torture. Rape is rape - and that's bad enough.amp said:Russ has the double think mentality. Raping a woman IS torture to HER by the definition Pel provided as it involves the elements stated. Causing MENTAL anguish IS torture. If you were forced to stay awake for several days would you be comfortable and relaxed? Your dismissiveness of obvious inhumanity and villany is disheartening.
I'm standing by that one: the info you provided says that aids can be contracted by fluid transfer in open wounds - and that is unrelated to the sex act. You could similarly say it is possible to get AIDS by shaking hands with someone who has AIDS. You can call that factually accurate if you want, but its extremely misleading.As a PF mentor you should check before you post disinformation. Yes Russ, Yes ... you can get AIDS through oral sex.
Yes amp, I must have missed the thread, or even the post, that expresses your outrage at this.russ_watters said:Amp, what do you call publically beheading an American civilian? Burning several to death and dismembering them?
This is called a straw man. Nice try though.Adam said:How does this in any way make it voluntary for those POWs to be tortured?
Unless I missed it, not even the US military claims that all those held in the prison were criminals; they were taken there for the primary purpose of gathering intel ... apparently by means that included what most folk would call 'torture', and which Dubya has declared unacceptable. No doubt many of those subject to ill-treatment were 'guilty' of nothing but being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Unless it is claimed that the US forces are infallible, or that all Iraqis are 'fair game' ... I doubt that Russ, hughes, phat, etc would make either such claim.russ_watters said:Every criminal in jail will tell you they are there against their will, but every one of them made a choice and is now paying the consequences.
Nereid said:Unless I missed it, not even the US military claims that all those held in the prison were criminals; they were taken there for the primary purpose of gathering intel ... apparently by means that included what most folk would call 'torture', and which Dubya has declared unacceptable. No doubt many of those subject to ill-treatment were 'guilty' of nothing but being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Unless it is claimed that the US forces are infallible, or that all Iraqis are 'fair game' ... I doubt that Russ, hughes, phat, etc would make either such claim.
studentx said:Half those pics look fake
Especially the ones where several troops rape a woman, you would expect them to be tanned, but some are ridiculously pale. I don't think its possible to be pale in Iraq.
Yes these were in my opinion of too good quality. Disinformation (both political sides + some journalists) is often used. Wasn't this a controversion about Rumsfeld making a disinformation cell, not that one with Feith/Wurmser but another one?studentx said:The photos of british troops abusing prisoners were faked.
And so once again Sy Hersh is making news with his investigations “Torture at Abu Ghraib: American Soldiers Brutalized Iraqis. How Far Up Does the Responsibility Go?” in the May 10 New Yorker magazine and “Chain of Command: How the Department of Defense Mishandled the Disaster at Abu Ghraib” in its May 17 issue.
These articles, like much of his writing over three and a half decades, feature Hersh’s favorite villains – wrong-doing American soldiers, wicked American leaders and evil agents of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, the CIA.
Before you swallow these stories whole, as if they were accurate and true, you ought to know more about this aging enfant terrible of American journalism.
In going after the CIA regarding Chile, Hersh did more than ignore evidence that the Castro-supported Marxist Allende (who had been elected under odd circumstances with only about a third of votes cast for President) was moving to prevent honest future elections that would depose him. Hersh also accused the then-American Ambassador to Chile of being part of a plot to overthrow Allende, an error for which Hersh and the New York Times issued a rare apology on that newspaper’s front page.
“I don’t read him anymore because I don’t trust him,” Max Holland, a Contributing Editor of the ultra-Leftist The Nation magazine, told the Columbia Journalism Review’s Sherman.
“I read what he writes with some skepticism or doubt or uncertainty,” said Newsweek Assistant Managing Editor Evan Thomas (who, incidentally, comes by his own Leftist politics as grandson of longtime Socialist presidential candidate Norman Thomas).
And Hersh has reported false information in other stories. His 1991 book The Sampson Option (about Israel’s nuclear weapons program) relied largely on a source widely recognized as a notorious liar. Another of Hersh’s sources for this book later admitted to telling the author what he wanted to hear, although false, in exchange for money.
When Hersh published his 1983 book The Price of Power: Kissinger in the Nixon White House, the editor-in-chief of the liberal The New Republic magazine Martin Peretz wrote: “There is hardly anything [in this book] that shouldn’t be suspect.”
Yes, Kat, and ... ?kat said:http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=13394
It is already one of the actual pratices.ptex said:The U.S. should send all terrorist to Sadi Arabia or some other Islamic based country for interrogation they know how to get answers.
Andy said:How do we know that the US pictures haven't been faked aswell? I have thought since this all kicked off that the pictures had been faked by anti war demonstrators or some other group that has something to gain from from undermining the US's power. Why would the troops take pictures of themselves torturing and abusing the prisoners? that's stupid, too stupid.