The dirty task of defining Torture

[jimmoyer]

Perhaps questioning the detainee could cause mental
turmoil ?

Perhaps not scheduling permission to question
could unduly upset the integrity of the detainee?

Perhaps only certain hours for questioning, if allowed itself is allowed, could upset the mental balance of the detainee ?

Perhaps insinuation or ugly tone of voice would
hurt the mental health of a detainee ?

Perhaps refusing a practicing Christian a Bible would
also constitute a change in what he or she is used to ?

Perhaps limiting the number of friends and family
visitations qualify as torture ?

Perhaps bargaining for any extra privileges is
coercive and therefore deemed as torture ?

Perhaps challenging a statement by the detainee
is mentally cruel ?

 

[no1important]

RE: The dirty task of def

Reference Guide to the Geneva Conventions

That site should answer all your questions.

 

[jimmoyer]

You posted that before, and I cannot find the
answer to the questions I posted at the top of the
thread.

 

[peapod]

Hey jimmy, what do you think the CIA was doing in that secret prison they were running afghanistan. U.S.-based human rights watch just plublished. Scantly clad women...ya think. Wow! you gotta wonder why the big secret eh? Defining torture, oh my, how civilized and cerbral of you.

 

[jimmoyer]

Actually, slow down for a second.

It's an ugly task to define what Torture is because
you got to define it for the morons who handle
detainees, and you better get it spelled out, or abuse
will sneak through the loop holes of interpretation.

Not cerebral.
Not neo-con idiocy.
Not ideological.

Practical.

 

[neocon-hunter]

RE: The dirty task of def

I think it is an absolute disgrace that a first world country and so called leading country of the free world, would stoop so low to participate in torture like their buddies in Saudi Arabia. They should set and lead by example and show these other countries that torture is an unacceptable practice.

 

[jimmoyer]

Well I agree with you, but you aren't answering
the questions posted at the top of the thread.

 

[neocon-hunter]

RE: The dirty task of def

Personally none of those things would be considered torture that you listed, as long as they were not physically abused or mentally abused and none of your points or thoughts would suggest either of the two.

Pounding the table and yelling at a POW is not torture, nor is denying a bible, but denying religious services is.

I don't see a problem questioning a POW at any time of day or night unless it is some form of sleep deprivation.

 

[jimmoyer]

Well that's a valid attempt at defining the more
gray areas.

Because the parameters need defining for
the morons in charge of detainees.

We don't want to leave it up to them to interpret
the boundaries on their own, do we?

Can you also see that those questions imply that
some people might also look at those situations as
torture and accuse it as such ?

And they might even disagree with your definitions.

 

[neocon-hunter]

RE: The dirty task of def

The simplest thing is not to practice torture.

Interrogation is a complex and tricky thing and there are very few people I believe that are actually skilled at it, without having to result to torture.

Can you also see that those questions imply that
some people might also look at those situations as
torture and accuse it as such ?

Yes I can.

 

[jimmoyer]

Dirty business these definitions are.

And we can't leave it to the morons to define them.

 

[no1important]

RE: The dirty task of def

Who are the Americans torturing now? sigh........

 

[jimmoyer]

Well that could be a matter in the other threads.

And I TOTALLY AGREE with you about the horror
of American immorality on this matter.

But I was also hoping that this thread would stay
on the difficult matter of definitions and seeing
how the Geneva Convention actually has enough
broadness that leaves it up to dangerous interpretation.

Most people avoid these questions at the top
of this thread choosing to speak easily in general.

 

[Karlin]

De-humanising.

Isn't that enough of a guidleine for what is torture??

In response to your questions, it is not de-humanising to do these:
-challenging a statement by the detainee
-questioning the detainee
- not scheduling permission to question
- only certain hours for questioning
- refusing a practicing Christian a Bible
- limiting the number of friends and family visitations
- bargaining for any extra privileges
- insinuation or ugly tone of voice

I propose that these acts not be confused with torture, so that the worst abuses are not permitted by association, as you suggest.
Maybe "de-humanising" isn't a complete guideline, but its a good start.

Inflicting extreme pain is dehumanising. So is killing their family in front of them to get them to talk. Etc etc - I think you can tell the difference.

 

[Jo Canadian]

 

[ElPolaco]

While I was in Vietnam, there were other troopies who would tell me about participation in "interregation" such as pushing one prisoner out of a chopper to get the other one to talk and cutting breasts off women. They would tell me these things without blinking an eye, as if it was something that was supposed to be done...as if it were "within acceptable limits".

 

[jimmoyer]

Granted, perhaps there is some circumstance under which torture would be warranted, perhaps even required; but only under the most exigent and dire of circumstances. In such a case, in Canada for example, the House of Commons could vote to take such action notwithstanding the Charter. So long as they damned well don't get used to the exercise.

--------------------------FiveParadox-------------------------
Perhaps questioning the detainee could cause mental
turmoil ?

Perhaps not scheduling permission to question
could unduly upset the integrity of the detainee?

Perhaps only certain hours for questioning, if allowed itself is allowed, could upset the mental balance of the detainee ?

Perhaps insinuation or ugly tone of voice would
hurt the mental health of a detainee ?

Perhaps refusing a practicing Christian a Bible would
also constitute a change in what he or she is used to ?

Perhaps limiting the number of friends and family
visitations qualify as torture ?

Perhaps bargaining for any extra privileges is
coercive and therefore deemed as torture ?

Perhaps challenging a statement by the detainee
is mentally cruel ?

 

[Skye]

Um, No i dont think so ..
I think torture is a bit wrong out side of the bedroom