Originally Posted By Mr X <a href="http://www.nybooks.com/icrc-report.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.nybooks.com/icrc-report.pdf</a> Yikes.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh The Red Cross interviewed terrorist detainees who were trained to exaggerate or lie about their detainment. It's not surprising they said they were tortured. "They turned me into a newt!" "A newt?" "I got better."
Originally Posted By Mr X That's a fair point. And there is probably some truth to that. But notice in the report where they do specify in each case the number of people who made the same or similar claims. And, if you really think about it, if they were really going to lie, why did they stop on the fairly mild side of abuse? Why did not a single one of them complain of car batteries attached to their genitals? I find the stories plausible, considering the other evidence that has come to light (from officials, lawyers, and even statements from the former Vice President). It hardly consists of proof, but then again, is it not something that deserves further investigation?
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <I find the stories plausible> The point of the piece is that the Red Cross, the recognized authority, finds it plausible. We have also released people from Guantanamo that we have said flat out were not terrorists; they were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time, or were turned over for money by bounty hunters, or due to a tribal vendetta. Some of THESE people have said they were tortured. They were not terrorists, and obviously were not "trained to exaggerate or lie about their detainment." It's shameful, but to attempt to sweep it under the rug by implying that anyone who said they were tortured must have been lying about it is to compound the shame.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <we have said flat out were not terrorists> I doubt we said that about many, if any at all. <They were not terrorists, and obviously were not "trained to exaggerate or lie about their detainment."> Even if they weren't terrorists, which is not certain, that doesn't mean they did not lie. After all, we've seen many examples of ordinary citizens of the Middle East lie about the actions of the US or Israel. I think it's shameful that some people would believe the worst about their country that they would trust the word of people who are most likely our enemy.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <<we have said flat out were not terrorists>> <I doubt we said that about many, if any at all.> It doesn't matter if it was one. It still disproves your insinuation. <<They were not terrorists, and obviously were not "trained to exaggerate or lie about their detainment.">> <Even if they weren't terrorists, which is not certain,> There are some about whom it is certain. <that doesn't mean they did not lie.> Nor does it mean they did, as you insinuate they must have, without a shred of evidence. The Red Cross accepts their word, and they're trained to look for lies in this situation. <After all, we've seen many examples of ordinary citizens of the Middle East lie about the actions of the US or Israel.> Yeah, and people lie every day about tons of things. The point is you have no proof for your insinuation. <I think it's shameful that some people would believe the worst about their country that they would trust the word of people who are most likely our enemy. > Some of these people who were arrested were not our enemies, and we've even said so. And I don't like to believe the worst of my country; but I also don't stick my head in the sand and make the worst more likely to happen again.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <It still disproves your insinuation.> No, it doesn't. <Nor does it mean they did, as you insinuate they must have, without a shred of evidence.> There's plenty of evidence.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>I think it's shameful that some people would believe the worst about their country<< I think it's more shameful to not want one's country to live up to its highest ideals. Those ideals are no small things, and they are not certainly not easy to maintain. People have fought and died for those ideals. I like to see bad guys captured. But I like it more when I know that we have followed the strict rules we put in place to ensure fairness and true justice.
Originally Posted By piperlynne <<I think it's more shameful to not want one's country to live up to its highest ideals. Those ideals are no small things, and they are not certainly not easy to maintain. People have fought and died for those ideals. I like to see bad guys captured. But I like it more when I know that we have followed the strict rules we put in place to ensure fairness and true justice.>> Ditto. (i.e. Couldn't have put it better myself)
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>Well, you're just not American enough, 2oony.<< Apparently not, according to the definitions of some. It would be funny if it weren't so serious, that so many people who wrap themselves in the flag and lecture others on how to be American patriots seem to have a real distaste for the principles that truly make this country the special place it is. They're happy to waive off as inconvenient and inconsequential things like trials and evidence and humane treatment. I choose to believe we are capable of the best, that's why it is disappointing when we fall short.
Originally Posted By piperlynne So, the article regarding the Red Cross was specifically targeting "medical professionals". Back in as early as 2005, Washington actually admitted to torture, so I believe denying that it occurred is beside the point. <a href="http://www.forbes.com/feeds/afx/2005/06/24/afx2110388.html" target="_blank">http://www.forbes.com/feeds/af...388.html</a> and we've had rulings on it. <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Oct28/0,4670,CBGuantanamoTortureRuling,00.html" target="_blank">http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2...,00.html</a> but you can simply look at the Geneva Conventions definition and the "tactics" that have been employed and make your own inferences. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Geneva_Convention" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T...nvention</a> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Geneva_Convention" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F...nvention</a> <<Torture, according to the United Nations Convention Against Torture, is: “ any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a male or female 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 only from, inherent in, or incidental to, lawful sanctions.[1] >>
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <<It still disproves your insinuation.>> <No, it doesn't.> Of course it does. You insinuate in #2 (actually, you pretty much just SAY) that the people who told the Red Cross they were tortured were all terrorists who lied about it. We know that is not true. And now the recognized authority on such matters, who is trained to look for lies, has confirmed it is not true. <<Nor does it mean they did, as you insinuate they must have, without a shred of evidence.>> <There's plenty of evidence.> You really don't get to move the goalposts here. Sure, some of the actual terrorists might well have lied about it; Mr. X and I both agree with that. But a). a guilty person could still have been tortured, and b). not all these people were guilty. You insinuate, with no evidence at all, that they ALL lied about it. Not the case, and you have no leg to stand on here. And 2oony, you said what I tried to say at the end of #5 better than I did.
Originally Posted By DyGDisney Thanks for the research and links piperlynne. Wish more people would take the time to do that (myself included sometimes!).
