Obama releases Bush torture memos

Shamikebab · 17 Apr 2009 at 19:02

gillywibble said:
I would rather a video of Platinum87 undergoing it.

But...but he's IMMUNE to ALL psychological torture!!

Glaucus · 17 Apr 2009 at 19:02

Shamikebab said:
But...but he's IMMUNE to ALL psychological torture!!

The good thing is it's not psychological.

DanH84 · 17 Apr 2009 at 19:09

AcidHell2 said:
his arms and legs are strapped. So no pressure on chest. He also has next to no water being applied. where the video I posted has a heavy constant stream which will go straight through he towel.

if you tightly strap arms to your sides does that not apply pressure to the sides of your chest though? he also had restricted movement which would lead to increased feelings of panic. regardless i haven't seen any videos of people lasting for ages under waterboarding. whether he cracked in 12 seconds and someone else lasted 20seconds doesn't really hold any huge importance. People obviously tend to crack extremely quickly with this form of interrogation.

Glaucus · 17 Apr 2009 at 19:14

DanH84 said:
if you tightly strap arms to your sides does that not apply pressure to the sides of your chest though? he also had restricted movement which would lead to increased feelings of panic. regardless i haven't seen any videos of people lasting for ages under waterboarding. whether he cracked in 12 seconds and someone else lasted 20seconds doesn't really hold any huge importance. People obviously tend to crack extremely quickly with this form of interrogation.

nope doesn't hold any importance. I just found it funny he "cracked" in a few seconds with hardly any water. where as other where lasting longer and practically being drowned.

NiCkNaMe · 17 Apr 2009 at 19:16

vonhelmet said:
I'd like all the torture apologists to cite all the times that it has been effective in extracting useful information.

How would we ever find that out? It's not like successful torturists willingly publish their findings every month.

I'd like you to cite all the times that it has been ineffective in extracting useful information. Oh wait. That'd be too easy. Those that dissaprove of torture also love the public eye..... :rolleyes:

Sankari · 17 Apr 2009 at 19:17

Le_Petit_Lapin said:
Anyway, I don't really have any qualms about them using it as a method of extracting information. Its clearly effective, they wouldn't use it otherwise!

It's prohibited under international law.

Le_Petit_Lapin · 17 Apr 2009 at 19:22

Evangelion said:
It's prohibited under international law.

Is it? Waterboarding in particular?

Bar · 17 Apr 2009 at 21:08

AcidHell2 said:
his arms and legs are strapped. So no pressure on chest. He also has next to no water being applied. where the video I posted has a heavy constant stream which will go straight through he towel.

There is a strap across his upper arms and chest - this will restrict his ability to breath in.

The water starts being poured on his face at 3:15 and he gives in at 3:33 - this is 18 seconds long.

In the first video he is covered with a hood and then a towel is pressed down (you can see both guys holding it tight to his face) and then the water is poured on over his nose and mouth.

The second video is simply someone with a hood on having water poured over his head. There is no strapping to hold him down, no compression on his chest, no towel over his face to hold the water in place (instead of streaming away).

The first video is down by a couple of professionals who know how to do waterboarding properly, the second one is just some mates messing around.

Vonhelmet · 17 Apr 2009 at 23:34

NiCkNaMe said:
Those that dissaprove of torture also love the public eye.....

Is everyone who disagrees with you doing it for the kudos?

zain · 17 Apr 2009 at 23:51

How can you approve of torture methods for suspects who were in the wrong place at the wrong time? How many even got convicted? Afaik it was zero.

I'd understand if they had strong evidence but suspicion is not enough.

platinum87 · 18 Apr 2009 at 14:53

PaulStat said:
what's "the war"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Sarajevo

Sankari · 18 Apr 2009 at 15:30

Le_Petit_Lapin said:
Is it? Waterboarding in particular?

Yes. The UN Convention Against Torture states that "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment". Waterboarding is internationally regarded as falling under this category, which is precisely why it is prohibited.

Additionally, the European Court of Human Rights has ruled: "No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture".

This overrides the old "well, we had to torture him because he had essential information that was needed to save lives" excuse.

At the end of WWII, the US government prosecuted Yukio Asano (a Japanese officer). His crime? Waterboarding prisoners of war. His sentence? 15 years' hard labour.

At the end of WWII, Captain Mitsuo Komai of the Japanese Imperial Army was prosecuted in Changai, Singapore. His crime? Waterboarding prisoners of war (specifically, like this chap). His sentence? Death by hanging.

Examples could be multiplied.

oyston92 · 23 Apr 2009 at 23:58

platinum87 said:
the only reason you cannot understand it is because your all weak...

ok but my shoes are on this is the last post

because i become mentally stronger the more i am angry and annoyed and i have suffered enough punches to the face and broken ribs, i have scars all over my body so adding some more wouldnt freak me out like some ladyboys on here

is this because you are a weak boy and get beaten up all the time

Hxc · 24 Apr 2009 at 00:00

oyston92 said:
is this because you are a weak boy and get beaten up all the time

Best first post ever.

soapboxstuart · 24 Apr 2009 at 00:19

HEADRAT said:
But it's against International Law, you can't expect to get away with it, it's a slippery slope that a civilised country should never take. If we are fighting for our "way of life" in the West then surely we have to uphold the Laws we've signed up to?

HEADRAT

You have absolutely nailed this debate.
If you decide that torture is acceptable then the question about who exactly is the terrorists must be asked?

oyston92 · 24 Apr 2009 at 00:20

Hxc said:
Best first post ever.

lol, not a bad way to start my overclockers campaign

Red and White · 24 Apr 2009 at 00:22

Streeteh said:
Sorry nitefly, had to steal your picture.

brilliant post and sums it up so well. tears of laughter here

Hxc · 24 Apr 2009 at 00:24

That comic is also genius. Every single time I can just hear the lame "yay" in my head. Love it.

Robi · 24 Apr 2009 at 00:29

platinum87 said:
the only reason you cannot understand it is because your all weak...

ok but my shoes are on this is the last post

because i become mentally stronger the more i am angry and annoyed and i have suffered enough punches to the face and broken ribs, i have scars all over my body so adding some more wouldnt freak me out like some ladyboys on here

You sir, are a pleb.

Liefrich · 24 Apr 2009 at 00:38

HEADRAT said:
But it's against International Law, you can't expect to get away with it, it's a slippery slope that a civilised country should never take. If we are fighting for our "way of life" in the West then surely we have to uphold the Laws we've signed up to?

HEADRAT

This is one of the best posts I have ever read on OCUK, I congratulate you!

I agree with it; torture should not be used, especially if you damn well sign up to an international treaty. You can't then expect "rouge" countries to not go along with doing things such as making WMD's etc etc.