| Author |
Message |
    
Robert Livingston
Citizen
Username: Rob_livingston
Post Number: 631
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 2:48 pm: | 
|
From the Village Voice:
FBI agents saw torture by Israeli flag, by lit cigarettes in ears—under 'executive order'
Terrible explosive news from Mosul this morning: A dining hall full of U.S. troops was blown up by rockets and mortars, killing at least 22.
A tragedy that's laid at the feet of the Bush regime's tragic foreign policy. Now, turn to the other explosive news: the FBI documents pried out of the government by the ACLU. They include memos by FBI agents with new information on U.S. torture techniques at Gitmo and Abu Ghraib:
• Agents saw ". . . strangulation, beatings, placement of lit cigarettes into the detainees' ear openings, and unauthorized interrogations."
• An FBI agent saw a prisoner draped with an Israeli flag, accompanied by loud music and flashing strobe lights. (This morning's New York Times story on the FBI documents neglects to mention this torture-by-Israeli-flag, but you can bet your ••• the Arab world will come unglued by this disgraceful and inflammatory behavior toward a Muslim by Americans.)
• The "scorpion." A prisoner alleges: "They tortured me and cuffed me in an act called the scorpion, and pouring cold water on me. They tortured me from morning until the morning of the next day, and when I fell down from the severe torture I fell on the barbed wires, and then they dragged me from my feet and I was wounded and, they punched me on my stomach."
Feeling queasy? So were the FBI agents, who wrote to their superiors:
We emphatically do not equate any of these things our personnel witnessed with the clearly unlawful and sickening abuse at Abu G that has come to light. The things our personnel witnessed (but did not participate in) were authorized by the President under his Executive Order.
It's a given that George W. Bush doesn't know ••••. But we still want to ask: What did Bush know of the interrogation "techniques" we've used on prisoners? And when did he know it?
Look at the documents yourself
|
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 2941
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 10:47 pm: |
|
RL is trying to credibly place the idea that Bush gets off on torture and was into naked pyramids. No onc buys that inference, except for Ted Kennedy and he's not aware of MOL. |
Montagnard
Citizen
Username: Montagnard
Post Number: 1361
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 21, 2004 - 11:24 pm: |
|
You can't just sweep this under the carpet, though. It's vital for the future of American freedom that U.S. law enforcement officials conduct themselves in an ethical manner. |
Albatross
Citizen
Username: Albatross
Post Number: 420
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 22, 2004 - 1:49 am: |
|
cjc, there are a lot of documents there. No matter Mr. Livingston's posting and accusations, this is a BIG problem. |
Robert Livingston
Citizen
Username: Rob_livingston
Post Number: 635
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 22, 2004 - 9:07 am: |
|
cjc: I didn't even editorialize on that one, so I guess the inference that Bush is a sadomasochistic supporter of torture comes from somewhere within yourself. (The article didn't even mention naked pyramids, cjc, so I wonder what's on your mind??)
But Albatross is right. If the directive of torture was an Executive Order, as these FBI agents attest, then Bush is in for a world of hurt.
|
Straw's world
Supporter
Username: Strawberry
Post Number: 4177
Registered: 10-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 22, 2004 - 9:31 am: |
|
boring |
Mark Fuhrman
Citizen
Username: Mfpark
Post Number: 1008
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 22, 2004 - 9:58 am: |
|
Might not be too boring if it comes up in the Gonzalez hearings. |
Albatross
Citizen
Username: Albatross
Post Number: 422
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 22, 2004 - 11:54 am: |
|
Mr. Livingston, you misinterpreted my post. I don't care so much where it came from; it's not an automatic condemnation of Bush. If it goes back to him, so be it, but the violations of civil and human rights are the biggest problem. I'm focusing on the actions, not the actor. |
Robert Livingston
Citizen
Username: Rob_livingston
Post Number: 641
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 22, 2004 - 12:05 pm: |
|
Sorry, Mr. Albatross, didn't mean to put words in your mouth.
However, the actions are known and it will be a Watergate-sized scandal when it becomes clear that the president ordered the torture, if in fact he did. |
Michael Janay
Citizen
Username: Childprotect
Post Number: 1411
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 22, 2004 - 12:47 pm: |
|
it will be a Watergate-sized scandal when it becomes clear that the president ordered the torture, if in fact he did.
Sure...
How awful, a prisoner was draped in an Israeli flag... oh the humanity. Oh my goodness. Bush authorized the use of women's panties, and allowing dogs to bark at the terrorists. He authorized them to be kept in uncomfortable positions and deprived of external stimulation.
I mean, this borders on hilarity... the American Civil Liberties Union suggests that President Bush issued an Executive Order authorizing the use of inhumane interrogation methods against detainees in Iraq. In fact, the document the ACLU cites as evidence that "President Bush issued an Executive Order authorizing the use of inhumane interrogation methods" says nothing like that at all! Absolutely nowhere in the document does the FBI refer to "inhumane interrogation methods." Here's what it says about the executive order:
"This instruction begs the question of what constitutes 'abuse'. We assume this does not include lawful interrogation techniques authorized by Executive Order."
The memo goes on to list some of these techniques, such as sleep "management", use of military working dogs, "stress positions" such as half squats, loud music, etc. In other words, the same lawful techniques as already listed in documents already released by the Department of Defense back in June, 2004 (and as I recall, there was a stink on MOL then too).
In fact the FBI memos go on to state "We emphatically do not equate any of these things our personnel witnessed with the clearly unlawful and sickening abuse witnessed at Abu G that has come to light. The things our personnel witnessed (but did not participate in) were authorized by the President under his Executive Order. I can safely say that none of the employees during our three rotations witnessed the abuse at Abu G."
Watergate...yeah... right. |
Chris Prenovost
Citizen
Username: Chris_prenovost
Post Number: 179
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 22, 2004 - 4:39 pm: |
|
All the alleged abuse notwithstanding, the United States, in it's treatment of prisoners of war, has compiled a record against which almost all other nations in the world must hang their heads in shame.
Just a quick reality check. And I am not trying to ignore or discount the abuse allegations. It just helps to take a look at the big picture every now and then. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 4852
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 22, 2004 - 5:35 pm: |
|
Michael, I don't know who is responsible, but someone is, and it is the top dog's job to find the person and penalize him severely. Agree or disagree?
The buck should stop somewhere. |
Michael Janay
Citizen
Username: Childprotect
Post Number: 1419
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 22, 2004 - 5:45 pm: |
|
Responsible for what?
in this case there doesn't appear to have been anything wrong.
It wasn't torture. Pouring cold water and putting a flag on someone? Come on.
Let me know when they drive nails through a guys testicles, until then, drop this "torture" BS.
And those responsible for the Abu Graib mess were and are found and penalized. The buck stopped at the Col. running the prison. |
Mustt_mustt
Citizen
Username: Mustt_mustt
Post Number: 173
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 22, 2004 - 6:30 pm: |
|
There is an army general or colonel, or possibly a marine, in our midst. A person with a ruthless mindset...all in the name of promoting democracy and freedom, however "torturous" that path may be!
A unilateral universalist, if you will.
The antenna has been upped on this thread. No doubt about that!
|
Montagnard
Citizen
Username: Montagnard
Post Number: 1366
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 22, 2004 - 10:48 pm: |
|
Look at Chile. What comes out at the time is usually just the tip of the iceberg. |
E
Citizen
Username: Scubadiver
Post Number: 27
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 22, 2004 - 11:25 pm: |
|
O.K. I'll play the other side of the argument here. In general, is everyone out there opposed to all forms of torture for any reason?
1 a : anguish of body or mind : AGONY b : something that causes agony or pain
2 : the infliction of intense pain (as from burning, crushing, or wounding) to punish, coerce, or afford sadistic pleasure
I think at first view, we as ethical people would reject such a notion. But what if someone kidnapped your spouse or child, and that abductor was captured. Would anyone still hold on to this anti-torture view if torture could be used to know their location? What about if in these cases in the news where torture could be used to gain information to prevent a future 9/11 attack?
My only point here is that I could accept the use of torture in some cases to gain information. Additionally, I could possibly see the presentation of these cases in this "wartime" scenario.
|
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 4859
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 23, 2004 - 9:48 am: |
|
E, whether torture is ethically acceptable or not, we have established that it is illegal, and we have agreed not to commit it. We do not stand on any moral high ground when we violate that agreement. Giving up that moral high ground uproots whatever tenuous justification we have for being at war.
And I say that whether or not we can agree on the acceptability of torture. I won't bother trying at the moment. |
Valentine Michael Smith
Citizen
Username: Umbert
Post Number: 51
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, December 23, 2004 - 1:29 pm: |
|
I think you are misunderstanding what Mr. Janay is trying to say here, not only are things like putting cigarettes out in someone's ear not torture, but it's justified, because while these people don't quite understand it just yet, we are doing it for their own good. Just like the bombs we drop on them, it's for there own good. Really, one day they'll thank us for it, and when the whole world is a better place because of this war, all of you will thank the Michael Janays of the world for having the courage to make the hard decisions to bomb civilians and torture prisoners.
In the meantime, why don't the rest of you commies keep your mouths shut and stop questioning your leaders during this time when your country needs you most.
|
Robert Livingston
Citizen
Username: Rob_livingston
Post Number: 650
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, December 23, 2004 - 1:35 pm: |
|
VMS: don't forget that Mr. Janay is observing this torture from the crisp, clear image of his 25 percent improved picture on his hi-def television. If only the picture was that good during shock and awe...that would have been something! |
Duncan
Supporter
Username: Duncanrogers
Post Number: 3693
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, December 23, 2004 - 7:34 pm: |
|
CJC is an articulate, clearly very smart, well educated man. His political views are not, however, his own. He culls then from sources that agree with his instinct. Just like the rest of us. But, unlike the rest of us, he is wrong.
He is an isolationist in a world where that is nearly impossible. |
Tom Reingold
Supporter
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 4874
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 23, 2004 - 7:48 pm: |
|
Duncan, rather than attacking the messenger, why don't you give an argument that opposes that of the person you want to defame?
All I got from cjc's message, through the sarcasm, is that Bush is not happy to hear about the torture. I surmise the same thing of Bush. |
Face
Citizen
Username: Face
Post Number: 464
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, December 23, 2004 - 9:39 pm: |
|
Simply by winning the recent election with an "overwhelming majority", has allowed Bush to torture his very vocal opposition. Thanks for the gift G.W., and Merry Christmas. |
Mark Fuhrman
Citizen
Username: Mfpark
Post Number: 1017
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Friday, December 24, 2004 - 11:00 am: |
|
He sure tortures the English language. |
Dr. Winston O'Boogie
Citizen
Username: Casey
Post Number: 921
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, December 24, 2004 - 12:12 pm: |
|
And referring to an "overwhelming majority" for Bush tortures reality. |
Mark Fuhrman
Citizen
Username: Mfpark
Post Number: 1019
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Friday, December 24, 2004 - 1:08 pm: |
|
Certainly tortures logic, unless a few percent has not become overwhelming. Then again, logic has never been the strong point of the radical right. |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page