Posting Towards Gomorrah

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
I thought one of your arguments for going into Iraq is that SH tortured people.

eta:

Perhaps we should invade.

• U.N. expert: Iraq torture may be worse By ELIANE ENGELER, Associated Press Writer
  2 hours, 36 minutes ago
  
  
  
  GENEVA - Torture in Iraq may be worse now than it was under Saddam Hussein, with militias, terrorist groups and government forces disregarding rules on the humane treatment of prisoners, the U.N. anti-torture chief said Thursday.
  
  Manfred Nowak, the U.N. special investigator on torture, made the remarks as he was presenting a report on detainee conditions at the U.S. prison in Guantanamo Bay as well as to brief the U.N. Human Rights Council, the global body's top rights watchdog, on torture worldwide.
  
  Reports from Iraq indicate that torture "is totally out of hand," he said. "The situation is so bad many people say it is worse than it has been in the times of Saddam Hussein."
  
  Nowak added, "That means something, because the torture methods applied under Saddam Hussein were the worst you could imagine."
  
  Some allegations of torture were undoubtedly credible, with government forces among the perpetrators, he said, citing "very serious allegations of torture within the official Iraqi detention centers."
  
  "You have terrorist groups, you have the military, you have police, you have these militias. There are so many people who are actually abducted, seriously tortured and finally killed," Nowak told reporters at the U.N.'s European headquarters.
  
  "It's not just torture by the government. There are much more brutal methods of torture you'll find by private militias," he said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060921/...n_iraq_torture

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Perhaps we should invade.

• U.N. expert: Iraq torture may be worse By ELIANE ENGELER, Associated Press Writer
  2 hours, 36 minutes ago
  
  
  
  GENEVA - Torture in Iraq may be worse now than it was under Saddam Hussein, with militias, terrorist groups and government forces disregarding rules on the humane treatment of prisoners, the U.N. anti-torture chief said Thursday.
  
  Manfred Nowak, the U.N. special investigator on torture, made the remarks as he was presenting a report on detainee conditions at the U.S. prison in Guantanamo Bay as well as to brief the U.N. Human Rights Council, the global body's top rights watchdog, on torture worldwide.
  
  Reports from Iraq indicate that torture "is totally out of hand," he said. "The situation is so bad many people say it is worse than it has been in the times of Saddam Hussein."
  
  Nowak added, "That means something, because the torture methods applied under Saddam Hussein were the worst you could imagine."
  
  Some allegations of torture were undoubtedly credible, with government forces among the perpetrators, he said, citing "very serious allegations of torture within the official Iraqi detention centers."
  
  "You have terrorist groups, you have the military, you have police, you have these militias. There are so many people who are actually abducted, seriously tortured and finally killed," Nowak told reporters at the U.N.'s European headquarters.
  
  "It's not just torture by the government. There are much more brutal methods of torture you'll find by private militias," he said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060921/...n_iraq_torture

it understandable that Penske and i don't read the longer posts, but you should at least read what you post, shouldn't you?

The automoton is counting the headchoppers.

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by Spanky
If they did this to an American citizen then we would have to figure out how the hell this happened. But if the Canadians tell us one of their citizens is a terrorist and deal with it, why would we assume that they have screwed up. Why would we double check their conclusion on one of their citizens.

And if we were going to start second guessing the validity of legal processes of other countrys, I would think Canada would be last on our list. If Russia says he is a terrorist, we double check, but the Canadians? Who would of thought?

(1) Spanky, there was no legal process involved, was there? The Canadian law enforcement just put his name on a watch list.

Plus, "who'da thunk it"? -- name me an error-free system.

(2) I do think that, at a minimum, if we're going to grab people off the street so to speak, and send them to foreign lands to be tortured, as a matter of national policy we ought to take it upon ourselves to do a little bit of due diligence first.

Originally posted by Spanky
This is simply not true.

So, you're now saying that the Administration did not believe in the positions the DOJ took in the Hamdi and Padilla cases (and others)?

The Administration actually thought that terrorism suspects designated as "enemy combatants" by Executive branch _should_ have access to lawyers and to our court system (at least if they happen to be U.S. citizens), and the opportunity to see the evidence against them, etc.?

If the government had won those cases, Spanky, you and me and Slave would all be in about the same boat as this Syrian/Canadian (in terms of legal rights) if someone had put our names on such a watch list.

Maybe you better send a memo, Spanky, because it looks like some career prosecutors have been running buck wild.

S_A_M

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Next time you feel the urge to criticize Ty for relying on sources that he has not personally interviewed, finger-printed, and given a proctology exam to, please remember this post.

Though I guess if he said he "conclusively substantiated" something, and he said it on Fox, then you don't need to know who his sources were.

I never said unequivocally that torture has worked and then when asked for a cite used this guys statement to verify it. I also did not say that it has been proven "torture works" Right up front I stated who the guy was and what he said so people would know exactly where the information was coming from and to weigh it accordingly.

When Ty had made his prior statements, if he had said so and so from so and so said this, then I would have had no complaint. But he made statements of facts, and then when asked for a cite referred to statements like this guy made from ABC. However, usually the cites were to some fringe idiot on a left wing blog.

When I talked about that soliders book I pointed out that many of the people gave reasons why his story should be doubted, but at the time I gave him the benefit of the doubt.

I guess you also missed my subsequent post where I said that if we are to believe that soldier's book then we should not torture but if we believe the guy from ABC we should.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
STP. i had quit the board. Now you draw me back in?

Quit, for what, lunch?

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
it understandable that Penske and i don't read the longer posts, but you should at least read what you post, shouldn't you?

The automoton is counting the headchoppers.

How many heads could the headchoppers chop if we hadn't invaded? We broke it, we bought it.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man

So, you're now saying that the Administration did not believe in the positions the DOJ took in the Hamdi and Padilla cases (and others)?

S_A_M

We already went through these. One of these guys was caught overseas fighting for the enemy. He was shooting at American soldiers and was captured in a combat zone. The other guy was in foreign countrys conspiring with the enemy and then was apprehended right when he entered the US.

If the DOJ has one their cases that doesn't mean that the U.S. government could pick up Slave and I right off the street. It means that if I go to a foreign country and start shooting at American soldiers in foreign countrys then I can't expect the Bill of Rights to bail me out. In addition, if I go to Pakistan and conspire with Al Queda operatives (there by joining an organization whose intent is to kill US citizens), then I might get snathced up when trying to reenter the US and thrown in Gitmo. I can certainly live with that. In fact I think that is a good idea.

In any case, their cases were heard by our court system. And if either of them still has US citizenship our system is screwed up. And if they weren't waterboarded or other serious interrogations used on them to find out more information, then our system is screwed up.

[SlaveNoMore]

Shape Shifter
Perhaps we should invade.
[list]....well as to brief the U.N. Human Rights Council, the global body's top rights watchdog, on torture worldwide.

Watchdog?

Whose members including Algeria, Cuba, China, Indonesia, Malaysia, North Korea, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia?

This is perhaps the most unintentionally funny thing I've read today. Thanks for that.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Spanky
I never said unequivocally that torture has worked and then when asked for a cite used this guys statement to verify it. I also did not say that it has been proven "torture works" Right up front I stated who the guy was and what he said so people would know exactly where the information was coming from and to weigh it accordingly.

When Ty had made his prior statements, if he had said so and so from so and so said this, then I would have had no complaint. But he made statements of facts, and then when asked for a cite referred to statements like this guy made from ABC. However, usually the cites were to some fringe idiot on a left wing blog.

When I talked about that soliders book I pointed out that many of the people gave reasons why his story should be doubted, but at the time I gave him the benefit of the doubt.

I guess you also missed my subsequent post where I said that if we are to believe that soldier's book then we should not torture but if we believe the guy from ABC we should.

Huh?

You were quoting the guy on Fox in order to NOT prove a point?

Well done.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Spanky
What happened to this guy was tragic, and was a royal screw up, and if I were a Canadian I would not be happy. They really need to figure out why they gave him to post 9-11 American authorities saying he was a terrorist. But as a Canadian citizen he is their responsiblity. They washed their hands of him and said he was terrorist.

If they did this to an American citizen then we would have to figure out how the hell this happened. But if the Canadians tell us one of their citizens is a terrorist and deal with it, why would we assume that they have screwed up. Why would we double check their conclusion on one of their citizens.

And if we were going to start second guessing the validity of legal processes of other countrys, I would think Canada would be last on our list. If Russia says he is a terrorist, we double check, but the Canadians? Who would of thought?

This is great. We send a guy off to be tortured, and it's Canada's fault. (Blame Ca-na-da!).

We go to war in Iraq to prevent the mushroom cloud scenario, and it's Britain's fault for telling us the yellow-cake story.

The Commonwealth ate Bush's homework.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Watchdog?

Whose members including Algeria, Cuba, China, Indonesia, Malaysia, North Korea, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia?

This is perhaps the most unintentionally funny thing I've read today. Thanks for that.

Right. The one's who really know torture when they see it.

[SlaveNoMore]

Secret_Agent_Man
If the government had won those cases, Spanky, you and me and Slave would all be in about the same boat as this Syrian/Canadian (in terms of legal rights) if someone had put our names on such a watch list.

You mean they'd be deporting me to Queens, NY?

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
... things really suck in Iraq implying the invasion was a mistake

George Clooney and many liberals are running around saying we should go into Darfur. We should send troops in to stop the Genocide.

For the record, I agree with them.

But what I don't get, is that if we go in the chances of it turning into a complete quagmire are pretty high. Once we invade, then what? We set up a new government? Then how long do we stay? You know after a while the people will turn against us. Insurgents will start killing our soldiers. Darfur is a muslim area so the locals will start resenting the infidel presence. And the minute we leave won't the Arabs come in again and start killing people?

Wasn't the chances of Iraq turning out OK better than the chances a foray into Sudan having a positive end?

What is the difference?

From my point of view the risk is worth it. It may turn out worse, but we can't just stand by and let genocide continue.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Huh?

You were quoting the guy on Fox in order to NOT prove a point?

Well done.

The appropriate response would have been, sorry Spanky, you are right, you stated your sources right up front, and reported what they said. You did not pretend that allegations were accepted fact, (and when asked why your statements should be accepted as incontrovertible fact, you did not use hearsay and anonymous sources as your evidence of their uncontestable validity).

[SlaveNoMore]

Sidd Finch
This is great. We send a guy off to be tortured, and it's Canada's fault. (Blame Ca-na-da!).

Er, remind me again why this poor fellow was on the US terrorist watch list?

The inaccurate description of Arar, a wireless communications engineer who was born in Syria, and his wife as "Islamic extremist individuals suspected of being linked to the Al Qaeda terrorist movement" came from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, which also included him in a diagram titled "Bin Laden's Associates: The Al Qaeda Organization in Ottawa."

Arar's name was placed on a terrorist watch list, and he was detained at John F. Kennedy International Airport in September 2002 while returning from a family vacation in Tunisia.

eta

According to the inquiry’s finding, the Mounted Police gave the F.B.I. and other American authorities material from Project A-O Canada, which included suggestions that Mr. Arar had visited Washington around Sept. 11 and had refused to cooperate with the Canadian police. The handover of the data violated the force’s own guidelines, but was justified on the basis that such rules no longer applied after 2001.

In July 2002, the Mounted Police learned that Mr. Arar and his family were in Tunisia, and incorrectly concluded that they had left Canada permanently.

On Sept. 26, 2002, the F.B.I. called Project A-O and told the Canadian police that Mr. Arar was scheduled to arrive in about one hour from Zurich. The F.B.I. also said it planned to question Mr. Arar and then send him back to Switzerland. Responding to a fax from the F.B.I., the Mounted Police provided the American investigators with a list of questions for Mr. Arar. Like the other information, it included many false claims about Mr. Arar, the commission found.

Oh. Right.

We go to war in Iraq to prevent the mushroom cloud scenario, and it's Britain's fault for telling us the yellow-cake story.

One more time. Lord Butler's report shows that Saddam actively tried to purchase yellowcake from Niger (its only export). As I pointed out to Ty earlier this week, Hitchens recenty wrote an interesting article laying out all the evidence required to connect the dots.