Fringe site: U.S. prepares to face U.N. on torture as Amnesty report blasts 'war cri

[Larry]

Yep, let's throw wiretapping in there, when it has nothing to do with this story. Proves my point, doesn't it? This crap is false, and indefensible.

1) (I think) it was a joke.

2) Somehow, I suspect that it takes just a bit of partisanship to claim that "someone posting an off-topic joke on extremeskins" proves "the US doesn't torture prisoners".

3) I wasn't aware of any Natural Law that says that "investigating allegations of war crimes" needs to be "defensable".

[Larry]

This thread should be closed.

1) Violates accurate title rule.

2) Violates rule against false/misleading news stories.

1) I'm not aware of any "rule against false/misleading news stories".

2) It will take more than you issuing 20 blanket, unsupported, declarations to even establish that the story is false.

[Teller]

1) (I think) it was a joke.

2) Somehow, I suspect that it takes just a bit of partisanship to claim that "someone posting an off-topic joke on extremeskins" proves "the US doesn't torture prisoners".

3) I wasn't aware of any Natural Law that says that "investigating allegations of war crimes" needs to be "defensable".

1) I realize that, and acknowledged as much approximately 3 posts later.

2) Maybe so, but it's interesting that when I first began to question this story, rather than provide a logical retort, the topic was changed. (And surely you're not going to claim to be non-partisan, are you? I have my biases and so do you.)

3) The original title of this thread was "U.S. charged with war crimes at U.N."

That statement was blatantly false, and THAT was indefensible. (Which is probably why it's been changed. )

[Larry]

Does Amnesty International have an agenda? Yes...

Yes.

Their agenda is to prevent human rights abuses.

Does AI tend to "pick on" countries like the US more than they do to, say, China? That's something that's more of an opinion than a measurable characteristic, but I'd say "yes".

Does this mean AI is "anti-american"? No.

What I'd agree is an uneven treatment of "open" societies is, to me, more indicative of the fact that people complain more in open societies.

AI goes in to China to look for human rights abuses, and every Chinese they talk to smiles and tells them that "eveything fine here". (While glancing nervously at their government escort).

They go to the US to look for human rights abuses, and they discover that every single person in jail says they're innocent, and half of them say they were beaten by the LAPD. (And it's, in fact, likely that several of them were.)

[Teller]

1) I'm not aware of any "rule against false/misleading news stories".

9. False posts or misleading subject titles are prohibited. Deception at the expense of the audience devalues the medium and the content it provides. Violation of this rule is regarded as a serious offense.

(Maybe it's not worded exactly as I put it. But post a created "news" story in the Stadium about Portis being traded to the Saints for the #2 pick and their second rounder and see what happens. And like I said, the original title was GROSSLY misleading.)

2) It will take more than you issuing 20 blanket, unsupported, declarations to even establish that the story is false.

From the original story:

"As of now, the U.S. has yet to prosecute a single official, military officer or private contractor for "torture" or "war crimes" related to its occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, or the "war on terror.""

The truth:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/21/iraq.abuse/

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- The highest-ranking U.S. soldier charged in the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal in Iraq has been sentenced to eight years in prison.

[Crazyhorse1]

9. False posts or misleading subject titles are prohibited. Deception at the expense of the audience devalues the medium and the content it provides. Violation of this rule is regarded as a serious offense.

(Maybe it's not worded exactly as I put it. But post a created "news" story in the Stadium about Portis being traded to the Saints for the #2 pick and their second rounder and see what happens. And like I said, the original title was GROSSLY misleading.)

From the original story:

"As of now, the U.S. has yet to prosecute a single official, military officer or private contractor for "torture" or "war crimes" related to its occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, or the "war on terror.""

The truth:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/21/iraq.abuse/

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- The highest-ranking U.S. soldier charged in the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal in Iraq has been sentenced to eight years in prison.

Honorary Hog. I understand your passion about this matter and appreciate your arguments, but still I've got to point out two things:

The US was charged with war crimes in the UN by the Amnesty International Report. That's just fact. I did not say the UN filed any kind of charges or that criminal charges were filed in a court.

You continually insist that your friend was charged with war crimes, so the Amnesty International report was false. Here is a quote from a link provide about your friend.

" Frederick pleaded guilty Wednesday to five charges of abusing Iraqi detainees. Under a plea agreement, he admitted to conspiracy, dereliction of duty, maltreatment of detainees, assault, and committing an indecent act."

It seems to me that he was not convicted of a war crime, technically. The language of the conviction would contain phrases like "war crimes" or "crimes against humanity" if he had been.

I could be wrong, of course, but it appears to me right now that you stand corrected.

[Teller]

I'm done with the arguments about semantics. I'm completely comfortable with my command of the English language. Read the section of the report regarding torture in Iraq. Read what Chip was charged with. They are EXACTLY the same. I could care less whether it specifially says war crimes. He was charged with PRECISELY what they're ****ing about.

Again, we've done nothing akin to decapitation. Until and unless someone does something about that, I'll chalk this report up to anti-Americanism. It's just sad when it comes from Americans.

[skinfan133]

Therefore, it seems to me that you are trying to manufacture some sort of case against me. Why?

because you're an unamerican ****. ive wanted to that the whole time ive seen your posts, ill say it again sir, YOU ARE AN UNAMERICAN ****! and my kind do not like those types very much...

[skinfan133]

You call Fox a reputable source-- its a national joke

Raw Story features stories it picks up from other sources. It's meant to be the liberal equivalent of the conservative Drudge report. Both Raw Story and the Drudge report are reliable sources; for the most part, they don't generate their own copy, and often pick up material from the mainstream press.

here we go, although you may believe fox to be a conservative outlet, they ARE a reputable source, just because you dont like their news doesnt make them a bad source. the fact you say that some no name website IS a reputable source as compared to an international news outlet proves what a joke you are.

and the final bit of damning evidence; why then is this story found NOWHERE in the washington post, a reputable source that takes a liberal stance????????? i rest my case, the judge may now sentence.

[skinfan133]

Obviously, I'm not going to read that entire novella nor, do I assume, have you. However, in skimming the material there does not appear to be anything new in it. We've known about the "dark sites" in Europe since that information was leaked by a huge donor to the democratic party who happens to also be a member of the CIA. We've known about the aggressive, some say illegal, interrogation tactics being used by US troops since Abu Ghraib (if not before). We've known that the world community is anti-American since God knows when.

I know what you're going to say. Calling the world community anti-American is right-wing rhetoric. If that's the case, why isn't Amnesty International or anyone else pursuing the terrorists organizations that kidnap and decapitate American civilians? What's worse, smacking the soles of someone's feet, or cutting their head off?

I'm not saying TRUE torture is OK. Aggressive interrogation is, IMO. If knocking around a terrorist saves as much as one American life, I have no problem with it. You do not get intelligence information by coddling prisoners. And the intelligence you can get out of them is some of the most valuable available.

Truthfully, I miss the days when we didn't know the strategic details of how our wars are fought. Now, the media, American public, world press, and everyone else have our operational plans ahead of time. Now they know the details of how we obtain information. They claim it's in the interest of humanitarian work, but all it does in reality is make the war tougher for our troops on the ground.

If Amnesty International is not pursuing the terrorists who are slaughtering our civilians with the same or more aggression than they are alleged U.S. "atrocities" they're a joke. If the world community wants to accuse us of war crimes, we should just start decapitating our EPWs, since that is apparently OK.

We may not be perfect, but I'd feel much better being captured by American troops, than kidnapped by those jihadist idiots. And so would you.

And where was Amnesty International, the UN or anyone else when 3000 of my countrymen died on my soil? I'd love to see how the UN would do without our membership and billion dollars a year in funding. What do they do for us?

100% agreement as usual,

but to add, it puzzles me why human rights groups always cry foul when in turn we are actually the ones trying to prevent atrocity:2cents:

also they try and protect the rights of people who really are the culprits and in turn they make it EASIER for them to get away and continue killing innocent people. where is amnesty internation in places like cambodia? if you want a REAL human rights organization with an agenda only for saving and protecting incent people, crazyhorse1, look into Internation Justice Mission, an organization who truly protects those who cannot defend themselves. amnesty international is too busy protecting the rights of terrorists and non-military combatants to see the kind of good work REAL human rights groups do.

torture is wrong, but i say that loosely. the reason i believe that torturing terrorists for information is wrong is SOLEY because it sinks us to their level, i honestly couldnt give a damn second thought for any terrorist who kills MY countrymen, be it 9-11 or in Iraq...

[Midnight Judges]

Amnesty International = Blame America, Appeasing, Defeat-O-crats. Of course they're seeking charges for war crimes... they never wanted us to go to war in the first place. They hoped we would surrender after 9-11 and help build more hospitals and schools in Muslim countries as a token of our respect and and regret for the any actions that might have led to the attacks that September morning. Any questions?

...just in case any of you were not up-to-date on the latest Sean Hannity talking points.

[chomerics]

You have the ability to stop 9-11, but it requires you to torture a terror suspect to get the information out of him. What do you do?

Ummm, you NEVER torture a subject because the information is not valid. Read any number of reports and specifications on the issue. What about the 1000's of people tortured that do NOT hold information? What about torturing those innocent because hypothetically you could hold the one person who A. knows about 9-11, and B. will actually give up the information when tortured. How do you know they wouldn't give out false information? Actually they would.

Torture is NOT how a free country operates, it is how a tyrannical, paranoid and toltalitarian regime operates. It is one of the greatest blunders we have committed, almost as bad as the invasion of Iraq itself. It has DESTROYED our credibility in world opinion, and has weakened our position around the world. This is a freakin joke, and the people who actually defend our barbaric actions, are not thinking rationally, and are thinking with emotion. It is how we ended up in Iraq in the first stinlking place, and how we have sent home over 2000 soldiers in a box and maimed another 15,000+ young American heros. What ever happened to the fact of "we don't nation build"? huh? Just pathetic.

[OaktonSkins/BushFan]

The world, and Amnesty International, is not Anti-American but hopes for higher standards of behavior from any nation state, and especially a democracy. Amnesty and others do not expect terrorist organizations to show even basic standards of decency or to be accountable to what the world community thinks, and so do not pursue them.

What a stupendous rationalization. Did you come up with that all by your little bitty self? Or did the :insane: horse help you out with that one?

Maybe the FBI should stop pursuing terrorists for the same reason, and instead focus on investigating common citizens and bust them for going 5 MPH over the speed limit.

Sheeesh.... Clearly one of the all-time DUMBEST posts ever on this board.

[Prosperity]

What a stupendous rationalization. Did you come up with that all by your little bitty self? Or did the :insane: horse help you out with that one?

Maybe the FBI should stop pursuing terrorists for the same reason, and instead focus on investigating common citizens and bust them for going 5 MPH over the speed limit.

Sheeesh.... Clearly one of the all-time DUMBEST posts ever on this board.

Must be hard to condescend from the ground up

[OaktonSkins/BushFan]

Must be hard to condescend from the ground up

Must be easy to make that statement when your political perspective is turned upside down.

[chomerics]

100% agreement as usual,

but to add, it puzzles me why human rights groups always cry foul when in turn we are actually the ones trying to prevent atrocity:2cents:

Because it is

1. Against International law

2. Completely against OUR constitution

3. Totalitarian and completely against the laws of a free nation

4. Disgusting and barbaric in nature.

5. Preventing an atrocity by commiting your own is no excuse, there are 2 sides to every coin.

The easyiest way to lose support for the war is to start acting like the enemy. What about the 1000's of innocent people that were tortured? Does that make up for it? Nope. it creates MORE resentment towards our great country, and in a case like terrorism, it worsens the problem, not helps it. Look at the big picture instead of the minute black and white one.

also they try and protect the rights of people who really are the culprits and in turn they make it EASIER for them to get away and continue killing innocent people. where is amnesty internation in places like cambodia? if you want a REAL human rights organization with an agenda only for saving and protecting incent people, crazyhorse1, look into Internation Justice Mission, an organization who truly protects those who cannot defend themselves. amnesty international is too busy protecting the rights of terrorists and non-military combatants to see the kind of good work REAL human rights groups do.

So now Amnesty International is a terrorist sympathizer :doh: Just like webnarc stated, this is the next rationalization as to how to justify illegal acts by our government. At what point do you guys not trust our government?

torture is wrong, but i say that loosely.

There is no loosely to it, you were right first, torture is wrong.

the reason i believe that torturing terrorists for information is wrong is SOLEY because it sinks us to their level, i honestly couldnt give a damn second thought for any terrorist who kills MY countrymen, be it 9-11 or in Iraq...

I agree, but you are contradicting your last paragraph with your first 2. You are stating that torture is OK, that AI is a terrorist supporter, but you don't agree with it. You are on AI's side in this matter, if you truly believe in your last paragraph.

[chomerics]

Sheeesh.... Clearly one of the all-time DUMBEST posts ever on this board.

You obviously don't read your posts that often huh :doh:

[OaktonSkins/BushFan]

I'm going to play the world's smallest violin for Chom and The Gang....

:violin:

I want one of you pacificists to post incontrovertible proof that "torture doesn't work". I'm willing to bet that there are some cases in which torture - and the threat of it - have worked. And if it has worked to the extent that it may have lead to some intel that enaled us to prevent another 9/11 or capture a terrorist leader, then it is well justified. Thank God there are rational, pragmatic people in this world who do not operate exclusively in a silly ideological vacuum. And you can say whatever you want about "International Law" and the UN blah blah blah... but all serious politicians know that, in reality, they are meaningless.

Choice:

1) Torture terrorist and obtain criticial intel preventing terrorist attack which could kill hundreds or thousands;

OR

2) Allow terrorist to abuse our legal system, lose out on actionable intel thereby permitting massive loss of life.

Hmmmm... Yes, very difficult decision.

[OaktonSkins/BushFan]

You obviously don't read your posts that often huh :doh:

Ladies and Gentlemen...

Another ad hominem attack brought to you by Chom The Flame Thrower. :dunce:

Why don't you fire up a neuron or two and attack the post, and not the poster?

[Prosperity]

Must be easy to make that statement when your political perspective is turned upside down.

I wouldn't know

[dfitzo53]

Ladies and Gentlemen...

Another ad hominem attack brought to you by Chom The Flame Thrower. :dunce:

Why don't you fire up a neuron or two and attack the post, and not the poster?

In the segment you quoted he's clearly criticizing your posts. He even used the word post. That's not any different than statements you've been making.

[ashburnskinsfan]

What a stupendous rationalization. Did you come up with that all by your little bitty self? Or did the :insane: horse help you out with that one?

Maybe the FBI should stop pursuing terrorists for the same reason, and instead focus on investigating common citizens and bust them for going 5 MPH over the speed limit.

Sheeesh.... Clearly one of the all-time DUMBEST posts ever on this board.

Much as Amnesty International know it's fruitless trying to have a dialog with psychopathic terrorists, ditto for me and OaktonSkins/BushFan. :laugh:

[OaktonSkins/BushFan]

Much as Amnesty International know it's fruitless trying to have a dialog with psychopathic terrorists, ditto for me and OaktonSkins/BushFan. :laugh:

Educate yourself...

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0762415983/qid=1146335040/sr=2-2/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_2/102-2181141-9411357?s=books&v=glance&n=283155

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0674991206/qid=1146335079/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-2181141-9411357?s=books&v=glance&n=283155

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0521349931/qid=1146335130/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-2181141-9411357?s=books&v=glance&n=283155

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0140431950/qid=1146335159/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/102-2181141-9411357?s=books&v=glance&n=283155

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0140444270/qid=1146335394/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/102-2181141-9411357?s=books&v=glance&n=283155

[Teller]

Choice:

1) Torture terrorist and obtain criticial intel preventing terrorist attack which could kill hundreds or thousands;

OR

2) Allow terrorist to abuse our legal system, lose out on actionable intel thereby permitting massive loss of life.

Hmmmm... Yes, very difficult decision.

They won't answer that question as it stands. I already tried. And the reason is that chom and every other lib would beat the holy hell out of a terrorist if it could have prevented 9-11. (At least I hope so.)

[Crazyhorse1]

because you're an unamerican ****. ive wanted to that the whole time ive seen your posts, ill say it again sir, YOU ARE AN UNAMERICAN ****! and my kind do not like those types very much...

I, sir, am a native America ****. You, on the other land, are a squatter who has never learned to respect other people or the land.