Nerd Mentality

Assman

Playing Red Hot Chilli Peppers is considered torture and dehumanizing!? LMAO.

I'd say anything used to prevent a single moment of peace and quiet and sleep, irregardless of what song or band is being played, is torture.
___________________
"I have captured the enemy for meat testing! Praise me! PRAISE ME!!!" -GIR
Wi-Fi ID: 1627 8934 4983 8539

Assman

Maybe I'm missing the point, but what type of inhumane torturing techniques have we done? I wouldn't consider sleep depravation, restraint in painful positions, loud music, and bright lights considered inhumane torturing techniques. It isn't like we're cutting off body parts. For those that do act unethical, like the Abu Ghraib prison incident, those soldiers were dealt with and punished.

But now they're trying to pass legislation that will make it ok to do the same thing that happened in Abu Ghraib. This isn't about what happened in the past, it is about what may happen in the future. Also there has been MANY contradictions within the white house on how we should actually treat the terrorists. Should we treat them as POWs? Or criminals? Or people without rights? I don't believe that anyone has actually agreed upon it.
___________________
Strange days indeed.

Caster13

I'd say anything used to prevent a single moment of peace and quiet and sleep, irregardless of what song or band is being played, is torture.

I hope to God that you never get abducted by a terrorist, if that's the case.

Or get married.
___________________
Kung Fu treachery.

Pojo

I hope to God that you never get abducted by a terrorist, if that's the case.

Or get married.

If by some odd chance, the government were to think you were a terrorist, I'm sure you would not want to be subjected to some of the tactics they have used before. Especially not some of the tactics that they will use if this is passed. These are people being held without trial, you can't torture them, you really shouldn't be able to treat them badly at all.
___________________
Strange days indeed.

Calcifer

If by some odd chance, the government were to think you were a terrorist, I'm sure you would not want to be subjected to some of the tactics they have used before. Especially not some of the tactics that they will use if this is passed. These are people being held without trial, you can't torture them, you really shouldn't be able to treat them badly at all.

If you try to be nice to everyone during a war, you're going to get your ass beat. There is important info out there that needs to come to the surface.

Most of these people are terrorists. Don't allow yourself to be fooled. I think they deserve much worse than this, but I understand that we have certain limitations. Unfortunately, we have a bunch of pussy organizations telling us that we're being mean to people based around the idea that we maybe, might harm some innocent folks (as if that is the intention). WELL DUH. Are you Rosie O'Donnell or something? I guess we shouldn't go to war because we might hurt someone that didn't do anything wrong? It sucks, but it's not a decision that is made without thought. The consequences must be weighed.

These are the kind of people that would be asking the terrorists what they did wrong as the terrorist slit their throats. Don't become a pushover, because you will get trampled.
___________________
Kung Fu treachery.

I'd say anything used to prevent a single moment of peace and quiet and sleep, irregardless of what song or band is being played, is torture.

You have to be ****ing ****ting me. It's a no win situation with idiots like you. God, you're ****ing retarded.

I hope to God that you never get abducted by a terrorist, if that's the case.

Or get married.

Amen to that, brother.
___________________
The secular progressive movement(liberals)are ruining this country.

Pojo

I hope to God that you never get abducted by a terrorist, if that's the case.

I doubt being abducted by terrorists would be a pleasent situation in any case.

Or get married.

That's just mean.

Assman

You have to be ****ing ****ting me. It's a no win situation with idiots like you. God, you're ****ing retarded.

It's not a no win situation because of me, it's a no win situation because of the situation.

Torture is, simply, the infliction of pain and/or suffering, yes? The human body and mind needs a few certain things to maintain itself: food, water, rest. Being deprived of such things is effective to inflicting suffering on the human body and mind. And thus, depriving any of these, I'd say is torture.

Besides, you didn't even try to argue against me. I just presented a more thorough version of my argument, so why don't you see if there are any logical gaps in it?. Simply calling me an idiot and retarded is just lazy thinking.
___________________
"I have captured the enemy for meat testing! Praise me! PRAISE ME!!!" -GIR
Wi-Fi ID: 1627 8934 4983 8539

Assman

I pray to god one day that terrorist kills you. That would make my day.

Spoken like a real American. You have no class, Assy.

It's a no win situation, because you're too soft on terrorists. Depravation is used, but it isn't like the U.S. is starving them to death, and when I use the word "torture", it's the implication of what liberals think we're doing. Continious physical abuse, etc.

You brought up ethics before. There's a fine line between what is ethical and what is torture. Your argument was that terrorists don't fall under the Geneva convention and so what is ethical and what is torture becomes a non-issue with you. It doesn't matter what is done because terrorists are no longer under the umbrella of protection and so what the hell do you care if it's torture or not? And what do you define as unethical anyway?
___________________

I was young and confused and your mom didn't want me around no more. Now pass me dem damn collard greens!

Assman

It's a no win situation, because you're too soft on terrorists.

I think terrorists should be locked up for life in solitary confinement. That's soft?

Depravation is used, but it isn't like the U.S. is starving them to death

Torture doesn't have to include death, it just constitutes the infliction of suffering and pain.

and when I use the word "torture", it's the implication of what liberals think we're doing. Continious physical abuse, etc.

I specifically posted in this thread in response to the whole playing Red Hot Chili Peppers thing, that's what I'm arguing about and I argue that it counts as torture. So far you've provided no counter-argument.

I pray to god one day that a terrorist kills you. That would make my day.

How exactly is sentiment like that any different than those of a terrorist? Actually, I'd say it's even worse; terrorists have a cause, political, religious, idealogical, whatever. But here you are apparently enjoying the mere thought of a human being suffering. Do you even consider yourself a good person?
___________________
"I have captured the enemy for meat testing! Praise me! PRAISE ME!!!" -GIR
Wi-Fi ID: 1627 8934 4983 8539

You brought up ethics before. There's a fine line between what is ethical and what is torture. Your argument was that terrorists don't fall under the Geneva convention and so what is ethical and what is torture becomes a non-issue with you. It doesn't matter what is done because terrorists are no longer under the umbrella of protection and so what the hell do you care if it's torture or not? And what do you define as unethical anyway?

Er, I never said since terrorists don't fall under the Geneva Convention, whatever is done to them is a "non issue" to me. The whole argument is that liberals think we're doing major physical abuse to these terrorists when we're not, and what the U.S. is doing isn't unethical under the Geneva Conventions, but If you want to play that game, then the entire Geneva Conventions should be scrapped, judging by what you say.

I specifically posted in this thread in response to the whole playing Red Hot Chili Peppers thing, that's what I'm arguing about and I argue that it counts as torture. So far you've provided no counter-argument.

I've already made a counter argument, but I'll take the blame for not mentioning what constitutes torture according to the liberal media in the beginning of the thread.
___________________
The secular progressive movement(liberals)are ruining this country.

Assman

I've already made a counter argument

Other then

Playing Red Hot Chilli Peppers is considered torture and dehumanizing!? LMAO.

I don't see you explaining how or why depriving the human body/mind of rest is not torture.
___________________
"I have captured the enemy for meat testing! Praise me! PRAISE ME!!!" -GIR
Wi-Fi ID: 1627 8934 4983 8539

Do you agree that our future enemies should use the same approach on our young soldiers?

I have no control over what our "future enemies" will do. Odds are, it will be far far worse than anything we even consider doing. What they do already is far worse. And in the end, it will probably always be that way, simply because we're interested in protecting lives, and they're interested in destroying them.

Were we at war with a sovereign nation that respected rights of captured prisoners, there might be an argument here, but as it stands, there is absolutely no intention on the part of our enemies to grant anyone they capture any kind of mercy.

The March 6 memo, prepared for Rumsfeld explained that what may look like torture is not really torture at all. It states that: If someone "knows that severe pain will result from his actions, if causing such harm is not his objective, he lacks the requisite specific intent even though the defendant did not act in good faith". What this means in understandable English is that if a parent, in his anxiety to know where his son goes after choir practice, does something that will cause severe pain to his son, it is only "torture" if the causing of that severe pain is his objective. If his objective is something else — such as finding out where his son goes after choir practice — then it is not torture.

Rumsfeld's memo goes on: "A defendant" (by which he means a concerned parent) "is guilty of torture only if he acts with the express purpose of inflicting severe pain or suffering on a person within his control".

Couldn't be clearer. If your intention is to extract information, you cannot be accused of torture.

In fact, the report went further. It said, if a parent "has a good-faith belief (that) his actions will not result in prolonged mental harm, he lacks the mental state necessary for his actions to constitute torture". So all you've got to do to avoid accusations of child abuse is to say that you didn't think it would cause any lasting harm to the child. Easy peasy! I currently have a lot of my son's friends locked up in the garage, and I'm applying electrical charges to their genitals and sexually humiliating them in order to get them to tell me where my son goes after choir practice.

Dick Cheney's counsel, David S Addington, says that's just fine. William J Haynes, the US Defense Department's general counsel, agrees it's just fine. And so does the US Air Force General Counsel Mary Walker.

In fact, practically everybody in the US administration seems to think it's just fine, except for the State Department lawyer, William H. Taft IV, who perversely claims that I might be opening the door to people applying electrical charges to my genitals and sexually humiliating me. So I'm going to round up all the children in the neighborhood, chain them and set dogs on them. I might accidentally kill one or two — but I won't have intended to — and perhaps I'll take some photos of my wife standing on the dead bodies, and then I'll show the photos to the other kids, and finally, perhaps, I might get to find out where my son goes after choir practice. After all, I'll only be doing what the US administration has been condoning since 9/11.

Another:

The law defines torture as an act specifically intended to inflict "severe physical or mental pain or suffering," including the use of mind-altering substances or other procedures "calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the personality."

Torture also could be the a threat of death, or the threat that someone else will be subjected to abuse or threatened with death.

However, in both civilian and military cases, experts note that the laws and guidelines have qualifiers – words such as "profoundly" – that may complicate situations.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/world/iraq/20040509-2344-whatistorture.html


Also, the executive order by the president considers loud music not torture:

This isn't the actual Executive Order, it just referrs to one. You can trust that the ACLU is attempting to extract this Executive Order. And if it exists, you can trust that the White House will block all attempts to do just that. The actual released document goes into what the Executive Order set out as approved.

Although we have no reason to believe any of our personnel disobeyed our instructions and participated in interrogations that utilized techniques beyound the bounds of FBI practice but within the parameters of the Executive Order (e g , sleep deprivation, stress positions, loud music, etc), some of our personnel were in the general vicinity of interrogations in which such tactics were being used, and because of their proximity to the sites of these interrogations, heard of saw things which would be indicative of interrogations utilizing the techniques authorized by the Executive Order Examples are loud music, interrogators yelling at subjects, prisoners with hoods on their heads, etc.

http://www.visi.com/~corwin/polblog/2004/12/more-light-on-torture.html


The issue comes down to the media hyping and overreacting what has been done by calling it torture. Sleep deprivation is not torture. Loud music is not torture. Discomfort is not torture. Fear is not torture. Loud music is not torture. Humiliation is not torture. It isn't like the detainees are going to become mentally unstable due to the music. They seem to be alright when it comes to the music blasting from the speakers in Mosques when beating women in the streets of Kabul.

One last thing. We know the definition of torture is "Something causing severe pain or anguish." What constitutes "severe"?:

5. Causing great discomfort, damage, or distress: a severe pain; a severe storm.
6. Very dangerous or harmful; grave or grievous: severe mental illness.

So torture is the infliction of severe physical pain or excruciating physical or mental pain. We know nothing of this happening to detainees.
___________________
The secular progressive movement(liberals)are ruining this country.

Adrian

Do you agree that our future enemies should use the same approach on our young soldiers?

Our young soldiers already go through tougher **** than that. It's called the army.

And yeah, especially those that HAVE to undergo this kind of torture so that they won't divulge important info.
___________________
Kung Fu treachery.

MrSnuggles

i only wish that our enemies would treat us the way we treat them.

So you're actually wanting to have your neighbourhood blown to bits by terrorists? Wow, with this and Assman praying for someone to get killed by a terrorist, n-philes' retard conservatives are really letting their true colours show.
___________________

leafs rule

So you're actually wanting to have your neighbourhood blown to bits by terrorists? Wow, with this and Assman praying for someone to get killed by a terrorist, n-philes' retard conservatives are really letting their true colours show.

simple minded idiot. terrorists CUT OFF THE HEADS of people they capture. what does the US do? they put them in a resort where they eat mcdonalds and subway, pray 5 times a day uninteruppted, get a minimum of 2 hours exercise a day, have the "privilege" of their lawyers passing letters to other terrorists right under the noses of the government. and i could go on but i wont.

and since youre gonna think i made all that up, read this:

http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/a_deadly_kindness_opedcolumnists_richard_miniter.htm

The politically correct regulations are unbelievable. Detainees are entitled to a full eight hours sleep and can't be woken up for interrogations. They enjoy three meals and five prayers per day, without interruption. They are entitled to a minimum of two hours of outdoor recreation per day.

Interrogations are limited to four hours, usually running two - and (of course) are interrupted for prayers. One interrogator actually bakes cookies for detainees, while another serves them Subway or McDonald's sandwiches. Both are available on base. (Filet o' Fish is an al Qaeda favorite.)

Interrogations are not video or audio taped, perhaps to preserve detainee privacy.

Call it excessive compassion by a nation devoted to therapy, but it's dangerous. Adm. Harris admitted to me that a multi-cell al Qaeda network has developed in the camp. Military intelligence can't yet identify their leaders, but notes that they have cells for monitoring the movements and identities of guards and doctors, cells dedicated to training, others for making weapons and so on.

And they can make weapons from almost anything. Guards have been attacked with springs taken from inside faucets, broken fluorescent light bulbs and fan blades. Some are more elaborate. "These folks are MacGyvers," Harris said.

Other cells pass messages from leaders in one camp to followers in others. How? Detainees use the envelopes sent to them by their attorneys to pass messages. (Some 1,000 lawyers represent 440 prisoners, all on a pro bono basis, with more than 18,500 letters in and out of Gitmo in the past year.) Guards are not allowed to look inside these envelopes because of "attorney-client privilege" - even if they know the document inside is an Arabic-language note written by a prisoner to another prisoner and not a letter to or from a lawyer. That's right: Accidentally or not, American lawyers are helping al Qaeda prisoners continue to plot.

___________________
JFK: Ich bin ein Berliner
BHO: Ich bin ein beginner

MrSnuggles

simple minded idiot. terrorists CUT OFF THE HEADS of people they capture. what does the US do? they put them in a resort where they eat mcdonalds and subway, pray 5 times a day uninteruppted, get a minimum of 2 hours exercise a day, have the "privilege" of their lawyers passing letters to other terrorists right under the noses of the government. and i could go on but i wont.

and since youre gonna think i made all that up, read this:

Wait, they get mcdonalds....and subway??? It seems like now is as good a time as ever to be a Terrorist®!
___________________

MrSnuggles

simple minded idiot. terrorists CUT OFF THE HEADS of people they capture. what does the US do? they put them in a resort where they eat mcdonalds and subway, pray 5 times a day uninteruppted, get a minimum of 2 hours exercise a day, have the "privilege" of their lawyers passing letters to other terrorists right under the noses of the government. and i could go on but i wont.

and since youre gonna think i made all that up, read this:

Mcdonalds and subway? Sign me up Bin Laden!!!
___________________

Assman

Sigh*. For the last time, when I used the word torture in the above quote, I was implying what the definition of torture is to liberals and conservatives. It's simple: Liberals think torture is physical beatings as to conservatives think playing loud music isn't torture.

Yes, I know, but that's not a counter-point to my defining depriving one of rest as torture (which is what I'm saying), that's a counter-point/criticism of how different people defines torture (which is what I'm ignoring because it's rather irrelevant when my argument is about what I'm saying what torture is).

P.S. Playing loud music isn't considered torture because:

What's the purpose of playing loud music?

The issue comes down to the media hyping and overreacting what has been done by calling it torture. Sleep deprivation is not torture. Loud music is not torture. Discomfort is not torture. Fear is not torture. Loud music is not torture. Humiliation is not torture. It isn't like the detainees are going to become mentally unstable due to the music. They seem to be alright when it comes to the music blasting from the speakers in Mosques when beating women in the streets of Kabul.

One last thing. We know the definition of torture is "Something causing severe pain or anguish." What constitutes "severe"?:

Dictionary?

5. Causing great discomfort, damage, or distress: a severe pain; a severe storm.
6. Very dangerous or harmful; grave or grievous: severe mental illness.

So torture is the infliction of severe physical pain or excruciating physical or mental pain.

Okay, there's a serious logical flaw in what you just posted above.

First, you say that "Discomfort is not torture".

You then say that torture is "Something causing severe pain or anguish".

You then provide a definition of "severe" which says includes "Causing great discomfort".

So then. Something of "great discomfort" is "severe". Torture is to inflict something of a "severe" level. So how is inflicting "great discomfort", which is "severe", not torture?

We know nothing of this happening to detainees.

You're the one that brought up the Red Hot Chili Peppers, and the links you copied and posted also show that blasting loud music is an acceptable form of interrogation according to the U.S. government, which is something I'd file into the "great discomfort" category.

Also, when you said the following:

The issue comes down to the media hyping and overreacting what has been done by calling it torture. Sleep deprivation is not torture. Loud music is not torture. Discomfort is not torture. Fear is not torture. Loud music is not torture. Humiliation is not torture.

You're not actually making an argument against blasting loud music as a means of inflicting (I would guess) mental pain and thus torture on a person. You're making an argument about semantics and the use of the word "torture".

However, I'm merely claiming that torture is the infliction of pain/suffering. You, and the links you provided, merely argue that the definition of torture is subjective/based on perception/not torture if it could extract information/whatever, not that torture isn't the infliction of pain/suffering.

When you say "Sleep deprivation is not torture, etc", you're just saying it's not torture because people say it's not torture, you're not proving that it's not physically/mentally painful.
___________________
"I have captured the enemy for meat testing! Praise me! PRAISE ME!!!" -GIR
Wi-Fi ID: 1627 8934 4983 8539

Okay, there's a serious logical flaw in what you just posted above.

First, you say that "Discomfort is not torture".

You then say that torture is "Something causing severe pain or anguish".

You then provide a definition of "severe" which says includes "Causing great discomfort".

So then. Something of "great discomfort" is "severe". Torture is to inflict something of a "severe" level. So how is inflicting "great discomfort", which is "severe", not torture?

I like how the way how you dodge the obvious. I said discomfort is not torture. I didn't say GREAT discomfort. Discomfort means to make uncomfortable. It doesn't say anything about severe. You lose.

"Something causing severe pain or anguish." What constitutes "severe"?:

Since torture means severe pain:

5. Causing great discomfort, damage, or distress: a severe pain; a severe storm.
6. Very dangerous or harmful; grave or grievous: severe mental illness.

So torture is the infliction of severe physical pain or excruciating physical or mental pain.


There is no proof any of the above is going on to the detainees. You've lost the argument. Game over, Caster.
___________________
The secular progressive movement(liberals)are ruining this country.

Assman

I like how the way how you dodge the obvious. I said discomfort is not torture. I didn't say GREAT discomfort. Discomfort means to make uncomfortable. It doesn't say anything about severe. You lose.

Since torture means severe pain.

So torture is the infliction of severe physical pain or excruciating physical or mental pain.

I would say you're hardly one for particulars. So, I missed out on a subjective adjective, that hardly derails the underlying logic. What's the difference between "discomfort" and "great discomfort"? Seeing as to how both of those have the same word "discomfort" in them, I think it's safe to assume that the only difference is the amount, which when dealing with people of different bodies and different mental capabilities is entirely subjective to begin with.

So how much then? Just how much of a discomfort is being exposed to unending music at ten decibals? Fifteen? Twenty? Just how long do you keep a detainee awake and sleep deprived before it goes from being something discomforting to torture?

Just as well, I would say the distinction between "discomfort" and "great discomfort" is irrelevant. As I said before, when the human body/mind is deprived of things such as food/water/rest, it suffers. Rest occurs when the body/mind is in a state of comfort, if it is discomfortable, like say when it cannot sleep because it is actively being kept awake, then it's not resting.

As well, as I asked before but you never answered: What's the purpose of playing loud music?

There is no proof any of the above is going on to the detainees.

I never explicitly said that sleep deprivation is used on detainees--though I suppose it is implied, plus there's the fact that you provided links saying that the U.S. would do these things and that they are standard interrogation practices or whatnot--but even if it's not being used that's irrelevant to my argument since, yet again, I'm arguing that torture is the infliction of pain/suffering. I'm not arguing that it is happening, just that irregardless if it is, it (blasting loud music/sleep deprivation) is torture.

You've lost the argument. Game over, Caster.

Nothing's more amateur-ish than someone in an argument claiming their own victory with such a cliche phrase like "Game over". You should let your arguments speak for themselves, and considering that I've still got counter-arguments, I would hardly say they spoke enough.
___________________
"I have captured the enemy for meat testing! Praise me! PRAISE ME!!!" -GIR
Wi-Fi ID: 1627 8934 4983 8539

Assman

It's alright, Caster. I guess we have our own interpretation of what constitutes torture(pain, suffering), and it's obvious it'll never get settled, and sorry for being asshole to you. You're not one of the people here that I hate, so If I act childish, it's my way of being an arrogant prick, and I don't really mean it.

No hard feelings. Though I do think if we keep going, things certainly can get settled or come close to it.

I see it that being unformtable isn't torture. If I'm sitting in class for 3 hours, i'm uncomfortable. I'm not in severe physical or mental pain. When I hear my mother turn the stereo up loud when listening to opera, I don't consider that torture. I'm not in severe physical or mental pain.

'Course, in all of these examples you provided, you're not taking into account being restrained into the situation. As Adam Savage and Kari Byron found out. Torture/suffering isn't unless one is specifically forced into it and (knows they) cannot escape it. I'd imagine detainees are in that situation.
___________________
"I have captured the enemy for meat testing! Praise me! PRAISE ME!!!" -GIR
Wi-Fi ID: 1627 8934 4983 8539

Suffering refers to prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting from the intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severe physical pain or suffering; the administration or application, or threatened administration or application, of mind altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the personality; the threat of imminent death; or the threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain or suffering, or the administration or application of mind altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or personality.

From what I've read or heard on the news, none of this is going on. This does fall under great discomfort---->severe pain though.

And this:

We have also modified in some important respects our analysis of the legal standards applicable under 18 U.S.C. §§ 2340-2340A. For example, we disagree with statements in the August 2002 Memorandum limiting "severe" pain under the statute to "excruciating and agonizing" pain. Id. at 19, or to pain "equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impainnent ofbodHy function. or even death." Id.at 1. There are additional areas where we disagree with or modify the analysis in the August 2002 Memorandum. as identified in the discussion below.8

http://www.legaldaily.com/

Same deal. Now if the detainee suffered a hearing loss, then yes. I'd definately classify that as torture.
___________________
The secular progressive movement(liberals)are ruining this country.

What techniques are approved for use in Guantanamo?
According to The Washington Post, they include:

reversing detainees' normal sleep patterns;
exposing detainees to heat, cold, and "sensory assault," including loud music and bright lights; and
forcing prisoners to stand for up to four hours at a time.

P.S. Please answer my questions, Xavius from the previous page.
___________________
The secular progressive movement(liberals)are ruining this country.

The United States has stated publicly that it does not engage in torture or cruel and inhumane treatment of prisoners. Defense officials said yesterday that the techniques on the list are consistent with international law and contain appropriate safeguards such as legal and medical monitoring. "The high-level approval is done with forethought by people in responsibility, and layers removed from the people actually doing these things, so you can have an objective approach," said one senior defense official familiar with the guidelines.

"We wanted to find a legal way to jack up the pressure," said one lawyer who helped write the guidelines. "We wanted a little more freedom than in a U.S. prison, but not torture."

___________________
The secular progressive movement(liberals)are ruining this country.