Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |  [ show all ]
Re: Why Not Just Call It Torture? [Re: Disco Cat]
    #8009070 -

Disco Cat writes:

Quote:
Some definitions for panic from various online dictionaries are:

Terror inspired by a trifling cause or a misapprehension of danger

A sudden, overpowering terror

A sudden overwhelming fear, with or without cause, that produces hysterical or irrational behavior, and that often spreads quickly through a group of persons or animals.

Overpowering fright

A sudden, overpowering terror, often affecting many people at once

Of, relating to, or resulting from sudden, overwhelming terror


You prove my point. According to the definitions of "panic" you yourself supply, panic is either a form of terror or a reaction to terror. Terror is not a synonym for pain or for anguish.




Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Why Not Just Call It Torture? [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #8009433 -

> Sorry. Not even close.

Easy to say.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Why Not Just Call It Torture? [Re: Phred]
    #8009588 -

You would try and have one believe that a dictionary definition of torture is an intelligent grounds for an argument. That Webster can tell us what torture is or isn't.

Ok so let's say for the sake of your argument because waterboarding doesn't inflict visible physical damage it is therefore not "torture." Would you say that tying up a man, and forcing him to watch you rape and torture his wife and or/children is not torture? Because if inflicts no "anguish" on him? How about locking him in solitary confinement with no light or human contact for indefinite periods of time? Not torture? If not, than why has isolation been considered the most effective means for driving an individual insane for centuries, even more than physical torture (see Foucault's Discipline and Punish). How about the fact the US government has defined sleep deprivation as a form of torture?

I don't understand where you get off telling people you know what torture is based on the following evidence:
1) A dictionary
2) An afternoon spent windsurfing
Did your windsurfing accident look like this:

I don't mean to be callous re: a near death experience you had. I am sorry that happened to you. But you brought it in as an arugment and I think it is therefore open to deconstruction.


Before Bush came along the US government, along with most others, defined waterboarding as torture.
Quote:
Republican presidential candidate John McCain, who was tortured as a prisoner of war in North Vietnam, considers waterboarding a form of torture. McCain has been quoted as saying that waterboarding is "no different than holding a pistol to his head and firing a blank."


I was fortunate enough to recently march in Washington where I met a man who had been waterboarded repeatedly by the Khmer Rouge. He had also been beaten with clubs, fists and a pipe. He said waterboarding was the worst phyiscally and mentally. The beatings hurt, but when he realized they wanted to keep him alive, they were not as scary. He said that he asked them over and over again to let him die while they were waterboarding, because the experience of death was so real, so immediate. Tell me. If it's not "anguish" that motivates a man who is undergoing simulated drowning to be allowed to drown, than what is it?
What would your answer be to this man?

It is obvious you won't be convinced. When George Bush turned over what the government already knew as torture and decided waterboarding was acceptable, you were ready with spoon in hand to swallow the notion that it isn't torture because "blah blah blah blah linguistics blah blah." And then you try and claim that denouncing torture as torture is typical of the left. I find it be in particularly bad taste to try and win your argument by bringing partisan mudslinging into such a serious question. I know for a fact many republicans who have been in wars are outraged that anyone in their party would claim that waterboarding is not a form of torture. McCain, who is in a position to know, whereas you aren't, is one such republican. If you are going to swallow Bush's shit sandwich, at least recognize that a lot of people in the GOP don't share your taste buds.

Ultimately, the important question to me however, is not wheter waterboarding should be called "torture" or "interrogation technique" or "operation freedom water technique #7." Rather, whether or not we want, as a nation, to engage in a practice that every other cizilized democracy has abolished years ago, and put ourselves in the company of the Khmer Rouge and the Spanish inquisition. After WWII, when we defeated Japan, we persecuted Japanese soldiers for subjected US soldiers to waterboarding. And damn straight. They should have been. But what was the point if now Bush and Cheney have allowed it to happen? What did my Grandfather fight for, if these assholes are throwing human rights into the toilet?

Sources: David Corn
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/01/national/main3441363.shtml


--------------------
:hst:
Society in every form is a blessing,
but government at its best is but a necessary evil 
- Thomas Paine

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Why Not Just Call It Torture? [Re: gluke bastid]
    #8009624 -

He was waterboarded by the Khmer Rouge? Waterboarded? He is one lucky man. I have trouble believing this. The KR certainly had no problem debating the niceties of what is or is not torture and routinely murdered their victims.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Why Not Just Call It Torture? [Re: Phred]
    #8009727 -

Phred said:
You prove my point. According to the definitions of "panic" you yourself supply, panic is either a form of terror or a reaction to terror. Terror is not a synonym for pain or for anguish.



:rolleyes:

I didn't realize that in the US being in a state of terror was akin to sipping iced tea on the beach.

If a person is suffering terror they are so obviously well and deep in a state of mental anguish that it feels ridiculous just pointing it out. Just what do you think mental anguish is?


You must have meant to say that the act of terror is not synonymous with pain or anguish, but the state of it certainly includes pain and anguish. However, it could not be a complete synonym because pain and anguish can have sources other than terror, yet if a person is experiencing terror then they are most certainly at least in mental pain and anguish.

Edited by Disco Cat (02/11/08 05:35 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Why Not Just Call It Torture? [Re: gluke bastid]
    #8009741 -

Quote:
You would try and have one believe that a dictionary definition of torture is an intelligent grounds for an argument. That Webster can tell us what torture is or isn't.


Oh by all means, let's all just ignore whatever the dictionary says a word means and just go with our gut feel.

Is waterboarding unpleasant? Fuck yeah. Is it something most non-masochistic humans would prefer to avoid? Fuck yeah. Is it torture? Fuck no.

Quote:
Would you say that tying up a man, and forcing him to watch you rape and torture his wife and or/children is not torture?


LOL. Being a bit redundant here, aren't we? Tying up the guy and making him watch is a lot less repugnant than raping and actually torturing innocents, wouldn't you say? Rather pointless to quibble about what he's going through when you've already jumped the shark on his wife and kid.

Quote:
How about locking him in solitary confinement with no light or human contact for indefinite periods of time?


For how long?

Look, the waterboarding thing is over as soon as they stop. There's no lingering after effects the way there might be with tossing someone in the hole for six months or so.

Quote:
I don't understand where you get off telling people you know what torture is based on the following evidence:
1) A dictionary


That's as far as you need to go.

Quote:
Before Bush came along the US government, along with most others, defined waterboarding as torture.


Incorrect. Until you can direct us to the legislation signed into law prior to January of 2001 defining waterboarding as torture, you can stuff that "fact" back into the orifice from which you plucked it.

Quote:
I was fortunate enough to recently march in Washington where I met a man who had been waterboarded repeatedly by the Khmer Rouge.


Are you sure? Because the Khmer Rouge were famous for utilizing a water torture (that wasn't waterboarding) that really was a torture. It went like this:

The captive was restrained, and yards and yards of rough gauze or muslin cloth were forced down his thoat. Then buckets of salt water were poured down his mouth. Some of the water ended up in the lungs, some in the stomach. The captive was then punched in the stomach repeatedly till he vomited up the water while at the same time the yards of cloth were yanked back up his throat, lacerating it severely in the process. This procedure was then repeated over and over, the cloth getting bloodier and bloodier with each repetition.

Quote:
It is obvious you won't be convinced.


Yep. Waterboarding isn't torture by any dictionary definition I can find nor by the UN definition quoted here -- particularly waterboarding as used by US interrogators. Of the three terrorists subjected to it, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed lasted the longest -- four minutes -- before cracking. This impressed the interrogators, since the average time by volunteers and US Special Forces trainees is just over a minute.

Quote:
Ultimately, the important question to me however, is not wheter waterboarding should be called "torture" or "interrogation technique" or "operation freedom water technique #7."


AH. Now we get to the crux of the biscuit. You object to extracting information from terrorists who don't wish to give that information. In order to bolster your position, you see no harm in characterizing this extraction in inflated and emotional terminology rather than making an actual cogent argument against the practice.



Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Why Not Just Call It Torture? [Re: Disco Cat]
    #8009883 -

Quote:
I didn't realize that in the US being in a state of terror was akin to sipping iced tea on the beach.


Terror isn't synonymous with anguish. Terror is an especially vivid form of fear, and fear isn't equivalent to anguish, either.

Causing someone to panic isn't the same as torturing them.





Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Why Not Just Call It Torture? [Re: Phred]
    #8010546 -

Even if it isn't torture (which it is), I've yet to see any sort of proof that torture actually works. I find it much more likely that they say whatever comes into their heads to make them stop the torture.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Why Not Just Call It Torture? [Re: Phred]
    #8010648 -

Phred said:
Quote:
You would try and have one believe that a dictionary definition of torture is an intelligent grounds for an argument. That Webster can tell us what torture is or isn't.


Oh by all means, let's all just ignore whatever the dictionary says a word means and just go with our gut feel.


Sarcasm is not going to help you. I just assumed that you would be grown up enough to understand that a dictionary definition, while never negating the nature of what it describes, can only begin to describe the nature of what it attempts to define. Look up orgasm. Or yellow. Or time. I am not denying that the dictionary definitions you provided are true, just that your use of them is dogmatic and dumbed-down. If you didn't agree with me, you wouldn't even be involved in this thread.

Quote:
Is waterboarding unpleasant? Fuck yeah. Is it something most non-masochistic humans would prefer to avoid? Fuck yeah. Is it torture? Fuck no.


why not?

Quote:
LOL. Being a bit redundant here, aren't we? Tying up the guy and making him watch is a lot less repugnant than raping and actually torturing innocents, wouldn't you say? Rather pointless to quibble about what he's going through when you've already jumped the shark on his wife and kid.


You just purposefully ignored the point of my argument and are trying to attack the theoretical example. If you aren't going to bother replying to the issue than why bother posting a reply? Clearly I was trying to make a point. I will spell it out:

Do you really believe that you can't torture someone without causing permanent or temporary physical damage?

Quote:
Look, the waterboarding thing is over as soon as they stop. There's no lingering after effects the way there might be with tossing someone in the hole for six months or so.



No lingering effects to sleep deprivation either.

Quote:
Incorrect. Until you can direct us to the legislation signed into law prior to January of 2001 defining waterboarding as torture, you can stuff that "fact" back into the orifice from which you plucked it.


Never made any claim about legislation. But since the US army court martialed its own soldiers for practicing waterboarding during Vietnam there is sort of an implied rejection. Besides, the point is that this shit wasn't being promoted until Bush and Gonzales.

Quote:
I was fortunate enough to recently march in Washington where I met a man who had been waterboarded repeatedly by the Khmer Rouge.


Quote:
Are you sure? Because the Khmer Rouge were famous for utilizing a water torture (that wasn't waterboarding) that really was a torture. It went like this:


I'm sure, he described it in no uncertain terms.

Quote:
AH. Now we get to the crux of the biscuit. You object to extracting information from terrorists who don't wish to give that information.


You probably decided that since I am oppossed to torture, I am on the left and I want to see terrorists do whatever they want to. You're so out of control when it comes to partisan division! I am oppossed to torture and I consider waterboarding torture. I am also oppossed to the suspension of habeas corpus. I believe in Civil and Human rights. There are all types of things the military that could do that might be effective, but aren't worth it. I don't think we should go around nuking the world and I don't think that we should torture our prisoners and not try them. Why? I'll quote Heinrich Eberbach, a Nazi General who was captured and tried in England: One must have a certain amount of humanity and decency, because otherwise the pendelum of history swings against you

Quote:
In order to bolster your position, you see no harm in characterizing this extraction in inflated


What have I inflated?
Quote:
and emotional


I'm proud to be emotional in regards to this and many other political questions. As soon as you stop being emotional you start being apathetic.
Quote:
terminology rather than making an actual cogent argument against the practice.


My argument is very cogent, and cogency and passion are hardly mutually exclusive. Here is a summary: Refusing to discuss a term beyond its dictionary definition wouldn't even pass in junior high school debate, and waterboarding is clearly a form of torture as evinced by various evidence and arguments I presented.

Please note that never did I make a claim that it shouldn't be used, all I demand is that if you stand behind it stop deluding yourself so you can sleep better at night. Be a man. Admit what you are advocating. That it is ok to torture confirmed terrorists in order to find out what their buddies are up to.


--------------------
:hst:
Society in every form is a blessing,
but government at its best is but a necessary evil 
- Thomas Paine

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Why Not Just Call It Torture? [Re: Phred]
    #8010715 -

I'll also post the following reply, but Zorbman gets all the credit for it.

Phred said:
Look, the waterboarding thing is over as soon as they stop. There's no lingering after effects the way there might be with tossing someone in the hole for six months or so.


'Some victims were still traumatized years later, he said. One patient couldn’t take showers, and panicked when it rained. “The fear of being killed is a terrifying experience,” he said.' -Dr. Allen Keller, the director of the Bellevue/N.Y.U. Program for Survivors of Torture.

http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/02/14/050214fa_fact6?currentPage=5


--------------------
:hst:
Society in every form is a blessing,
but government at its best is but a necessary evil 
- Thomas Paine

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Why Not Just Call It Torture? [Re: Phred]
    #8010825 -

Phred said:
is not the least bit painful. Therefore, it is by definition not torture.


phred, not to second guess you but have you ever been a participant on the
receiving end? it's a little painful, trying to cough up 15 gallons of water
while flat on your back, they show us all sorts of shit in the media as
demonstrations of water boarding... a gallon jug poured on the forehead...




this would hardly be questionable, actual methods range from a large bucket to a
trashcan filled with water, it's dumped on your face while you're blindfolded,
they dont try playing that nonsense chinese water torture shit, they simulate
drowning and the fact is asphyxiation is not that uncommon with the method

while it's only a little pain, it's definitely terrifying, in fact since it
doesnt qualify as torture, it must be terrorism.... really would you confess
to anything if the methods of extraction didnt hurt or have you fearing for your
life and limb?

Quote:
The systematic use of terror, the deliberate creation and exploitation of fear for bringing about political change



Quote:
I realize Libbies have trouble winning arguments when forced to use words the way they are defined, but that's not my problem, nor should it be the problem of Republicans.


I guess

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/torture


--------------------
California Has Legalized Child Prostitution

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Why Not Just Call It Torture? [Re: Prisoner#1]
    #8010837 -

BTW, I'm all for torture, it's effective


--------------------
California Has Legalized Child Prostitution

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Why Not Just Call It Torture? [Re: gluke bastid]
    #8010872 -

Quote:
I just assumed that you would be grown up enough to understand that a dictionary definition, while never negating the nature of what it describes, can only begin to describe the nature of what it attempts to define.


Of course, duh. But it does capture the essentials -- what differentiates the concept under discussion from every other concept. What is the difference between torturing someone and frightening someone? Why are there two words rather than one? Because the two acts are not the same. Inducing in someone the sensation that he is drowning is not the same as inducing physical or mental agony in that person.

Now, if you want to claim that undergoing waterboarding is an unpleasant experience, a frightening experience, a panic-inducing experience, even a terrifying experience, you'll get no argument from me. But it isn't torture.

So far the only people in this discussion who actually have any experience at all with either waterboarding or drowning are the two people (Seuss and myself) who say it isn't torture. Coincidence? I think not.

Words have meanings. That's why there are so many of them. If you aren't going to use words the way they're meant to be used, there's no point having a discussion.

Quote:
why not?


Because it isn't painful, either mentally or physically. It's unpleasant and frightening, true. But that doesn't fit the requirement.

Quote:
Do you really believe that you can't torture someone without causing permanent or temporary physical damage?


No, I don't believe that. I have suffered for over two decades now from the most excruciating medical condition known to man: Horton's Syndrome (also known as suicide headaches or cluster headaches), so I know just how possible it is to suffer agonizing pain with no permanent or even temporary physical damage. But waterboarding isn't painful.

Quote:
Never made any claim about legislation.


No? You said "Before Bush came along the US government, along with most others, defined waterboarding as torture." Until you can provide us the federal government statute or bill or executive order or rules of engagement defining waterboarding as torture, you will excuse me for treating it as yet another bullshit claim with no backing other than your own gut feel.

Quote:
Besides, the point is that this shit wasn't being promoted until Bush and Gonzales.


That was because everything changed after September 11. You are aware, are you not, that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was captured because one of his homies coughed him up after a 35 second waterboarding session?

Quote:
You probably decided that since I am oppossed to torture, I am on the left and I want to see terrorists do whatever they want to. You're so out of control when it comes to partisan division! I am oppossed to torture and I consider waterboarding torture. I am also oppossed to the suspension of habeas corpus. I believe in Civil and Human rights. There are all types of things the military that could do that might be effective, but aren't worth it. I don't think we should go around nuking the world and I don't think that we should torture our prisoners and not try them. Why? I'll quote Heinrich Eberbach, a Nazi General who was captured and tried in England: One must have a certain amount of humanity and decency, because otherwise the pendelum of history swings against you.


You are a member of a US security organization charged with making sure a second September 11 doesn't happen. You capture a guy you are certain knows the whereabouts of the chief architect of the first September 11 attacks -- Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. You ask him repeatedly to cough up KSM's location. He refuses. You have every reason to believe KSM would love to pull off another September 11-style attack, that he is in fact planning one right now. What methods will you use to get the guy to talk?

We already know you won't waterboard him. But how about these methods --

-- Strip him naked, tie him to a chair, have a scantily-clad hooker parade in front of him, who then extracts a tampon (apparently bloody) from herself and wipes it repeatedly in his beard. When he doesn't crack, the hooker smears the guy's copy of the Koran with this tampon.

-- take one of his fellow jihadis into the next room in the company of two very hefty and nasty looking dudes carrying electric drills and soldering irons. A few minutes later blood curdling shrieks can be heard coming from the room over the sizzle of burning flesh and whining drill bits churning through bone. The shrieks are suddenly cut off. One of the big dudes re-enters the room with a thoroughly shredded clump of flesh that upon being waved under the prisoner's nose appears to bear a marked resemblance to a scorched and pierced scrotal sack. Of course, the whole thing is staged using sound effects and other Hollywood tricks. But your prisoner doesn't know this.

-- take him and his jihadi colleague for a blindfolded helicopter ride. A safety net is rigged under the landing gear of the copter, but it can't ne seen from inside. Remove their hoods, tell your target to talk or he'll be tossed out the door. When he doesn't talk, toss his buddy out the door and into the net.

Are any of those methods torture? No, they aren't. They're unpleasant, disgusting, sacreligious, terrifying. But they aren't torture. And neither is waterboarding.




Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Why Not Just Call It Torture? [Re: Redstorm]
    #8010895 -

Redstorm writes:

Quote:
Even if it isn't torture (which it is), I've yet to see any sort of proof that torture actually works. I find it much more likely that they say whatever comes into their heads to make them stop the torture.


Waterboarding works. That's how Khalid Sheikh Mojammed was captured. His homie was waterboarded for 35 seconds and returned to his cell. Next morning he claimed to have had a revelation from Allah that the right thing to do was to tell his captors where KSM was. He told them, and lo and behold! KSM was right where the guy said he'd be.

And of course torture works. Ask any Viet Nam war POW. Ask John McCain. Do you think all those Viet Nam war POWs signed those "confessions" because they wanted to? No... they signed them to get their captors to stop the torture.

If torture didn't work, we wouldn't be having this discussion, fa cryin' out loud.




Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Why Not Just Call It Torture? [Re: Phred]
    #8010957 -

Phred said:
You are a member of a US security organization
What methods will you use to get the guy to talk?



are we using the normal US intel to determine this guys knows something, to date
it's pretty damned sketchy but lets say it's accurarte, I's start with the
incisors, hammer, screw driver... tappity tap, whoops, that one broke
"does it hurt when I stick things in the hole?" yeah... I bet it does.

that's just me, waterboarding takes too long, the UN isnt going to find his body
when I;m finished so I wont be answering to them or anything from the justice
department... torture is a messy business, it starts with a bad haircut

waterboarding is just sloppy amateur stuff but since it's carried out by 'enemy
combatants' as opposed to 'the good guys' that you went through training with,
it qualifies as anguish of the mind with a little bodily fluid tossed in


--------------------
California Has Legalized Child Prostitution

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Why Not Just Call It Torture? [Re: gluke bastid]
    #8010965 -

Oops. Forgot to address a few points --

Quote:
What have I inflated?


The definition of torture.

Quote:
My argument is very cogent, and cogency and passion are hardly mutually exclusive. Here is a summary: Refusing to discuss a term beyond its dictionary definition wouldn't even pass in junior high school debate...


Improperly defining terms wouldn't pass muster in a junior high school debate. Scaring the piss out of someone is not the same as torturing them.

Quote:
...and waterboarding is clearly a form of torture as evinced by various evidence and arguments I presented.


None of the "evidence" and "arguments" pass muster. The fundamental basis of the concept "torture" involves extreme pain -- agony, to be more accurate. This agony can be either physical or mental, but need not be permanent. The point is, waterboarding doesn't generate agony. It generates fear, panic, perhaps even terror in many individuals. But fear, panic and terror are not the same thing as agony. As one who has experienced real agony more times than he cares to remember (as a clusterhead) and has also experienced fear and panic on several occasions, I assure you the two are not equivalent at all.

Quote:
Please note that never did I make a claim that it shouldn't be used...


No? What was the point of all this, then --

Quote:
I am oppossed to torture and I consider waterboarding torture. I am also oppossed to the suspension of habeas corpus. I believe in Civil and Human rights. There are all types of things the military that could do that might be effective, but aren't worth it. I don't think we should go around nuking the world and I don't think that we should torture our prisoners and not try them.


Sure sounds to me like you're saying it shouldn't be used. To paraphrase the rest of your comment:

"All I demand is that if you stand behind your opposition to harsh interrogation stop deluding yourself so you can sleep better at night. Be a man. Admit what you are advocating. That it is wrong to torture confirmed terrorists in order to find out what their buddies are up to."



Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Why Not Just Call It Torture? [Re: Phred]
    #8011077 -

Phred said:
Quote:
Please note that never did I make a claim that it shouldn't be used...


No? What was the point of all this, then --

Quote:
I am oppossed to torture and I consider waterboarding torture. I am also oppossed to the suspension of habeas corpus. I believe in Civil and Human rights. There are all types of things the military that could do that might be effective, but aren't worth it. I don't think we should go around nuking the world and I don't think that we should torture our prisoners and not try them.


Sure sounds to me like you're saying it shouldn't be used.


Reword what I wrote above to "I don't think that we should torture prisoners that we have not tried." Original one wasn't clear.


--------------------
:hst:
Society in every form is a blessing,
but government at its best is but a necessary evil 
- Thomas Paine

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Why Not Just Call It Torture? [Re: gluke bastid]
    #8011141 -

Quote:
Reword what I wrote above to "I don't think that we should torture prisoners that we have not tried." Original one wasn't clear.


Tried for what? They aren't being interrogated as part of a punitive sentence handed down by a court or a tribunal, they're being interrogated so the US security forces can roll up the rest of their network and thwart planned operations.



Phred


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Why Not Just Call It Torture? [Re: Phred]
    #8011359 -

Quote:
Are any of those methods torture? No, they aren't. They're unpleasant, disgusting, sacreligious, terrifying. But they aren't torture. And neither is waterboarding.


I just recently watched a movie about Palestinian women that were tortured by Israel. One was beaten, and raped for weeks, she had a pole shoved in her vagina. I am sure that you would consider that "torture"...but she said the worst part was when she was made to get naked in front of her father. I was not able to tell if there was more that was implied, but I think the idea is the same. You can go on and on all you want about legality, and semantics of "torture" but I fail to see how anyone with any empathy can call the things you mentioned anything but torture.

There have also been studies done that have showed that torture does NOT work. I will try and find it. I can't remember who it was that did them.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Why Not Just Call It Torture? [Re: art]
    #8011848 -

So the experience brings the human being it is being inflicted upon to think they are about to die, but it is not torture... Well, the experience of the immediacy of my own death wasn't torture when I was on 'cid, but I guess I didn't have accompanying, physical sensations to make it more unpleasant, and I guess I had accepted it... Anyone who isn't ready to die is going to be tortured by the idea that they will die, especially in a situation like that, and I'm not buying "oh they were trained for it, they know we're just fucking with them". :lol:

At least where we're looking to draw the line is nowhere near the likes of the iron maiden, so I guess we're making progress... :smirk:


--------------------
:redpanda:
If I should die this very moment
I wouldn't fear
For I've never known completeness
Like being here
Wrapped in the warmth of you
Loving every breath of you
:heartpump: :bunnyhug: :yinyang:

:yinyang: :levitate: :earth: :levitate: :yinyang:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |  [ show all ]

Shop: Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Released CIA Memos : Some Suspects Waterboarded Hundreds of Times
( 1 2 3 4 ... 9 10 all )		 Madtowntripper 9,750 183 08/28/17 02:46 PM
by Happy Days
* Canada Can't Shake Somali Scandal..Torture-Killing EvilBastard 1,220 18 08/20/02 05:20 AM
by Innvertigo
* Waterboarding Used 266 Times on 2 Suspects Cognitive_Shift 469 2 04/20/09 04:25 AM
by Seuss
* "torture-lite" and human rights after 9/11 Edame 883 4 06/28/03 08:08 AM
by Cornholio
* Waterboarding is blessed by God Luddite 660 9 01/25/17 12:31 PM
by Morel Guy
* Break Them Down. (Torture) Psychoactive1984 1,246 14 05/15/05 12:54 PM
by Annapurna1
* Bush to veto bill banning waterboarding *DELETED*
( 1 2 all )		 Chemy 2,397 39 03/12/08 12:12 AM
by Yossarian22
* Carry on torture!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
( 1 2 all )		 madscientist 2,346 30 07/30/02 11:11 AM
by toxick

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
3,597 topic views. 0 members, 38 guests and 43 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.024 seconds spending 0.005 seconds on 16 queries.