Hey Cam, do you know what the context of this pic is? I'm assuming (with no evidence backing) it's not depicting a 'current' or 'new' event..It appears almost as if an anglo is being subjected to the torture and that the procedure has been around a while. Do you have any more info on the pic?CameronPoe wrote:
Here's an illustration of it from a Cambodian prison.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e … -small.jpg
Then please show a bit more balance in your opinions/posts. Quit bashing the US for doing things that are fairly normal world-wide.Dilbert_X wrote:
Read my post please. 'I'm aware the rest of the world does this to varying extents.'But you keep forgetting that countries ratify under certain conditions. They don't necessarily ratify or accept the language verbatim. It's not only the US that does this.
That's a bit extreme. I'm not saying there is no point in signing international agreements. What I am saying is that the purpose of a country's government in international politics is to protect it's interests. So long as international goals don't conflict in any way with a country's interests (or infringe on its sovereignty), it's fine to implement international agreements. If there is a way to ratify an international agreement so as not to infringe on sovereignty or negatively impact one's interests, what's the problem with that? That's the whole point of debating the content of the agreement and ratifying it to begin with.Dilbert_X wrote:
Then there is no point in signing international agreements is there? If you sign and ratify a treaty you're required to write it into your own laws, thats the whole point.No country should EVER let international agreements take precedence over their own laws and their own interests. If you want to let the UN decide what your interests are, then you can go ahead and let them determine your tax structure, wage requirements, provincial boundaries, trade agreements, etc. as well.
If you negotiate and sign a treaty and then don't bother youself over observing it you've wasted everone's time and goodwill.
Don't expect the rest of the world to observe treaties either.
Otherwise just close your borders, marry your sisters and become one huge version of Utah.
The other extreme is to let your country's internal laws be dictated by an international body that could give two shits about your country and its interests. That's not a particularly good mix, either.
Last edited by FEOS (2007-12-17 01:31:41)
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
well, that depends. The general idea of international regulation is that we all give up a little bit, for the benefit of the community. Of course, if you sign international treaties with the intent to only follow them if it fits your political agenda at the time, and chose to ignore them if it doesn't, the whole concept is flawed.
Hence the ineffectiveness of the UN in its current form.
Hence the ineffectiveness of the UN in its current form.
It's not a matter of ignoring the agreement. The caveats are there as part of the acceptance documentation. The owners of the agreements know under which conditions what portions of the agreement will be executed by whom. If they don't like the caveats, they can always say that the country in question didn't ratify the agreement.
So the country in question takes a hit because the international body didn't do its job?
So the country in question takes a hit because the international body didn't do its job?
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
No the country in question takes a hit because on one day they decide waterboarding is a war crime and should be punishable by 15 years hard labour, on another day they decide waterboarding is just great and it should be govt policy to waterboard whoever they feel like.
Either the US has caveats in place or it doesn't, you can't have it both ways.
Either the US has caveats in place or it doesn't, you can't have it both ways.
Fuck Israel
It looks to me a picture from the Tuol Sleng Genocide Museum. I visited that place when I was in Cambodia. I won't forget it.462nd NSP653 wrote:
Hey Cam, do you know what the context of this pic is? I'm assuming (with no evidence backing) it's not depicting a 'current' or 'new' event..It appears almost as if an anglo is being subjected to the torture and that the procedure has been around a while. Do you have any more info on the pic?CameronPoe wrote:
Here's an illustration of it from a Cambodian prison.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e … -small.jpg
As for the context, the Khmer Rouge would torture people to extract accusations and false confessions before executing them. The use of water-boarding* provided illegitimate information, which was used to round up more people, continuing the genocide.
*Note: It was not an exclusive torture method.
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that international agreements are static. They aren't. So, in effect, any country (not just the US) can have it both ways...they just revise their ratification caveats. The UN can either accept that or not. If they choose to accept it, then they can't bitch about it later.Dilbert_X wrote:
No the country in question takes a hit because on one day they decide waterboarding is a war crime and should be punishable by 15 years hard labour, on another day they decide waterboarding is just great and it should be govt policy to waterboard whoever they feel like.
Either the US has caveats in place or it doesn't, you can't have it both ways.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Whatever, its hypocrisy however you look at it.
Fuck Israel
Now we're back to the OP...the hypocrisy of certain US lawmakers WRT interrogation techniques. Only took 269 posts to get you there, Dilbert.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Thank you.mcminty wrote:
It looks to me a picture from the Tuol Sleng Genocide Museum. I visited that place when I was in Cambodia. I won't forget it.462nd NSP653 wrote:
Hey Cam, do you know what the context of this pic is? I'm assuming (with no evidence backing) it's not depicting a 'current' or 'new' event..It appears almost as if an anglo is being subjected to the torture and that the procedure has been around a while. Do you have any more info on the pic?CameronPoe wrote:
Here's an illustration of it from a Cambodian prison.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e … -small.jpg
As for the context, the Khmer Rouge would torture people to extract accusations and false confessions before executing them. The use of water-boarding* provided illegitimate information, which was used to round up more people, continuing the genocide.
*Note: It was not an exclusive torture method.
My point was about the hypocrisy of the US military and the Presiduhnt.Now we're back to the OP...the hypocrisy of certain US lawmakers WRT interrogation techniques. Only took 269 posts to get you there, Dilbert.
The legality of torture has never changed, the lawmakers were irrelevant as they never actually passed any laws until now.
Fuck Israel
hahahahahha dead fucking wrong as always you skinny little bitchCameronPoe wrote:
PS If I was subjected to that and was innocent I'd just spout whatever bullshit I thought the torturer wanted to hear just to fucking make it stop - how useful the intelligence you garner must be....
lol11 Bravo wrote:
hahahahahha dead fucking wrong as always you skinny little bitchCameronPoe wrote:
PS If I was subjected to that and was innocent I'd just spout whatever bullshit I thought the torturer wanted to hear just to fucking make it stop - how useful the intelligence you garner must be....
Well well, the CIA lied about what they did and how effective it was.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nat … story.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nat … story.html
Sounds like treason to me - govt employees lying to congress - heads should roll.A report by the Senate Intelligence Committee concludes that the CIA misled the government and the public about aspects of its brutal interrogation program for years — concealing details about the severity of its methods, overstating the significance of plots and prisoners, and taking credit for critical pieces of intelligence that detainees had in fact surrendered before they were subjected to harsh techniques.
...
Several officials who have read the document said some of its most troubling sections deal not with detainee abuse but with discrepancies between the statements of senior CIA officials in Washington and the details revealed in the written communications of lower-level employees directly involved.
Officials said millions of records make clear that the CIA’s ability to obtain the most valuable intelligence against al-Qaeda — including tips that led to the killing of Osama bin Laden in 2011 — had little, if anything, to do with “enhanced interrogation techniques.”
Fuck Israel
- globefish23
- sophisticated slacker
- +334|6562|Graz, Austria
-- "Off with their heads!"
- SuperJail Warden
- Gone Forever
- +641|3958
America should establish a foreign legion like the French.
Mexico is establishing a foreign legion here.
- SuperJail Warden
- Gone Forever
- +641|3958
That is probably the place where we would draw most of the people for the legion. The war in Syria would be over already if the U.S. deployed 8,000 U.S. trained, equipped, and supported soldiers no one in America cared about.
We should conscript our Puerto Ricans then. It's not like they pay taxes or contribute anything.SuperJail Warden wrote:
That is probably the place where we would draw most of the people for the legion. The war in Syria would be over already if the U.S. deployed 8,000 U.S. trained, equipped, and supported soldiers no one in America cared about.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Send all the fat people.
If they win - great
If they don't - oh well
If they win - great
If they don't - oh well
Fuck Israel
- SuperJail Warden
- Gone Forever
- +641|3958
jay just doesn't like that his crowning life achievement can be performed just as well by a foreigner looking for a green card.
i want a crowning life achievement too. what do i do? oh, i'd rather not emigrate to 'murika, if it's all the same to you.
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
SuperJail Warden wrote:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/12/09/the-most-gruesome-moments-in-the-cia-torture-report.html
The use of torture by the CIA is unacceptable.
Fuck Israel
1) The CIA's use of "enhanced interrogation techniques" was not an effective means of acquiring intelligence or gaining co-operation from detainees.
2)The CIA's justification for the use of its enhanced interrogation techniques rested on inaccurate claims of their effectiveness.
3) The interrogations of CIA detainees were brutal and far worse than the CIA represented to policymakers and others.
4) The conditions of confinement for CIA detainees were harsher than the CIA had represented to policymakers and others.
5) The CIA repeatedly provided inaccurate information to the Department of Justice, impeding a proper legal analysis of the CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program.
6) The CIA has actively avoided or impeded congressional oversight of the programme.
7) The CIA impeded effective White House oversight and decision-making.
8) The CIA's operation and management of the programme complicated, and in some cases impeded, the national security missions of other executive branch agencies.
9) The CIA impeded oversight by the CIA's Office of Inspector General.
10) The CIA co-ordinated the release of classified information to the media, including inaccurate information concerning the effectiveness of the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques.
11) The CIA was unprepared as it began operating its Detention and Interrogation Program more than six months after being granted detention authorities.
12) The CIA's management and operation of its Detention and Interrogation Program was deeply flawed throughout the programme's duration, particularly so in 2002 and early 2003.
13) Two contract psychologists devised the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques and played a central role in the operation, assessments, and management of the CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program. By 2005, the CIA had overwhelmingly outsourced operations related to the programme.
14) CIA detainees were subjected to coercive interrogation techniques that had not been approved by the Department of Justice or had not been authorised by CIA headquarters.
15) The CIA did not conduct a comprehensive or accurate accounting of the number of individuals it detained, and held individuals who did not meet the legal standard for detention. The CIA's claims about the number of detainees held and subjected to its enhanced interrogation techniques were inaccurate.
16) The CIA failed to adequately evaluate the effectiveness of its enhanced interrogation techniques.
17) The CIA rarely reprimanded or held personnel accountable for serious and significant violations, inappropriate activities, and systemic and individual management failures.
18) The CIA marginalised and ignored numerous internal critiques, criticisms, and objections concerning the operation and management of the CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program.
19) The CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program was inherently unsustainable and had effectively ended by 2006 due to unauthorised press disclosures, reduced cooperation from other nations, and legal and oversight concerns.
20) The CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program damaged the United States' standing in the world, and resulted in other significant monetary and non-monetary costs.
2)The CIA's justification for the use of its enhanced interrogation techniques rested on inaccurate claims of their effectiveness.
3) The interrogations of CIA detainees were brutal and far worse than the CIA represented to policymakers and others.
4) The conditions of confinement for CIA detainees were harsher than the CIA had represented to policymakers and others.
5) The CIA repeatedly provided inaccurate information to the Department of Justice, impeding a proper legal analysis of the CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program.
6) The CIA has actively avoided or impeded congressional oversight of the programme.
7) The CIA impeded effective White House oversight and decision-making.
8) The CIA's operation and management of the programme complicated, and in some cases impeded, the national security missions of other executive branch agencies.
9) The CIA impeded oversight by the CIA's Office of Inspector General.
10) The CIA co-ordinated the release of classified information to the media, including inaccurate information concerning the effectiveness of the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques.
11) The CIA was unprepared as it began operating its Detention and Interrogation Program more than six months after being granted detention authorities.
12) The CIA's management and operation of its Detention and Interrogation Program was deeply flawed throughout the programme's duration, particularly so in 2002 and early 2003.
13) Two contract psychologists devised the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques and played a central role in the operation, assessments, and management of the CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program. By 2005, the CIA had overwhelmingly outsourced operations related to the programme.
14) CIA detainees were subjected to coercive interrogation techniques that had not been approved by the Department of Justice or had not been authorised by CIA headquarters.
15) The CIA did not conduct a comprehensive or accurate accounting of the number of individuals it detained, and held individuals who did not meet the legal standard for detention. The CIA's claims about the number of detainees held and subjected to its enhanced interrogation techniques were inaccurate.
16) The CIA failed to adequately evaluate the effectiveness of its enhanced interrogation techniques.
17) The CIA rarely reprimanded or held personnel accountable for serious and significant violations, inappropriate activities, and systemic and individual management failures.
18) The CIA marginalised and ignored numerous internal critiques, criticisms, and objections concerning the operation and management of the CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program.
19) The CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program was inherently unsustainable and had effectively ended by 2006 due to unauthorised press disclosures, reduced cooperation from other nations, and legal and oversight concerns.
20) The CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program damaged the United States' standing in the world, and resulted in other significant monetary and non-monetary costs.
Fuck Israel