Perhaps they knew people from Lidice...they probably can't sleep well at night either?

Oh DB, please respect the victims.

---

Perhaps they knew people from Lidice...they probably can't sleep well at night either?

Oh DB, please respect the victims.

You corrected your posting to fast, please forget this one.

---

Perhaps they knew people from Lidice...they probably can't sleep well at night either?

That´s what i am talking about. No one has the right, to torture or to kill someone. Offender or Victim. Everyone has human rights.

---

Perhaps they knew people from Lidice...they probably can't sleep well at night either?

Oh DB, please respect the victims.

I am remembering them...it was German soldiers that exterminated the entire village, shooting all 173 men, all the children were gassed using old trucks, and the women were sent to Ravensbruck...they should never be forgoten. They too were a part of the holocaust although they weren't Jewish. I have a real problem for feeling sorry for anyone, who even indirectly, were a part of that organization which was responsible for their torture and genocide.

---

Account frozen...

Perhaps they knew people from Lidice...they probably can't sleep well at night either?

That´s what i am talking about. No one has the right, to torture or to kill someone. Offender or Victim. Everyone has human rights.

If terrorists were about to set off a dirty bomb of 15 Kilograms of Cesium 137 in Berlin, I think that there are many people who would differ with you...the thousands that are about to die. Everything is not always black and white...there are always exceptions. Personally I am against torture of any kind...but there are exceptions to be made in imminent cases of mass murder and genocide if it can be stopped, and time is short.

---

Account frozen...

Perhaps they knew people from Lidice...they probably can't sleep well at night either?

Oh DB, please respect the victims.

I am remembering them...it was German soldiers that exterminated the entire village, shooting all 173 men, all the children were gassed using old trucks, and the women were sent to Ravensbruck...they should never be forgoten. They too were a part of the holocaust although they weren't Jewish. I have a real problem for feeling sorry for anyone, who even indirectly, were a part of that organization which was responsible for their torture and genocide.

So, you are a torture supporter? Do you know, why the Nazis have done that? Don´t misunderstand me. I am not a Nazi supporter, i don´t like them, i am always asking for the reasons.

BTW: What was in Vietnam? Do you remember Agent Orange? Do you support this as well? Sure, you don´t.

Every nation has got his dark history. Don´t talk about that. We run out off topic.

---

Perhaps they knew people from Lidice...they probably can't sleep well at night either?

That´s what i am talking about. No one has the right, to torture or to kill someone. Offender or Victim. Everyone has human rights.

If terrorists were about to set off a dirty bomb of 15 Kilograms of Cesium 137 in Berlin, I think that there are many people who would differ with you...the thousands that are about to die. Everything is not always black and white...there are always exceptions. Personally I am against torture of any kind...but there are exceptions to be made in imminent cases of mass murder and genocide if it can be stopped, and time is short.

No. If this terrorist were caught, they will get a trial and will be arrested for a very long time. Don´t forget: Maybe you got the wrong person.

---

In this report (pdf-file) an interrogator spoke about his experience in front of a court:

...
Some interrogations require only that the interrogator efficiently question an already-willing source. However, other interrogations, especially those of high-value sources, may require that the interrogator adopt an attitude or behavior intended to mislead or deceive the source. Such interrogations require the interrogator to be a skillful role player or actor.
...
9. Without training, personnel serving as interrogators are more likely to believe that physical abuse and inhumane treatment of prisoners are permissible interrogation techniques. Such behavior not only causes needless suffering for the victim and is criminal, it jeopardizes the intelligence collection effort. Once a prisoner has been abused, gaining his or her willing cooperation is often impossible, even for a highly-skilled interrogator. In addition, any information gained during such an interrogation cannot be regarded as dependable or reliable. (Under torture or threat of torture, the victim is more likely to say what he or she thinks the interrogator wants to hear than to speak the truth.)...

That might be still okay - but later he reports:

...
After days (or, in some cases, more than a week) attempting to avoid the "hunter" forces, the soldiers were captured and brought to a central holding facility. Interrogators and military police personnel from various units worked on-site to provide the resistance training. The "prisoners" were often subjected to uncomfortable or harsh treatment, such as stress positions, sleep deprivation, and a number of the other techniques that have recently come under scrutiny. This part of the training was not inflicted in order to obtain information through interrogation. Rather, it was employed to simulate the type of treatment the soldier might experience should he fall into the hands of an enemy that did not follow the Geneva Conventions as strictly as did the NATO forces...

So far I haven't heard of any military forces which cared less about the Geneva Convention than the US military and NATO troops under US leadership!
"uncomfortable or harsh treatment" - these techniques already are torture! Don't they get it?
See the Field Manual 34-52, chapter 3 (pages 50 to 82 of 177, alternative link) to get into what they think to be still okay: The entire manual seems to have been made by ... well I don't find a word fitting to such people... But I've seen similar things in an old Gestapo manual which I found on a flee market a couple years ago!

---

Account frozen...

Perhaps they knew people from Lidice...they probably can't sleep well at night either?

Oh DB, please respect the victims.

I am remembering them...it was German soldiers that exterminated the entire village, shooting all 173 men, all the children were gassed using old trucks, and the women were sent to Ravensbruck...they should never be forgoten. They too were a part of the holocaust although they weren't Jewish. I have a real problem for feeling sorry for anyone, who even indirectly, were a part of that organization which was responsible for their torture and genocide.

So, you are a torture supporter? Do you know, why the Nazis have done that? Don´t misunderstand me. I am not a Nazi supporter, i don´t like them, i am always asking for the reasons.

BTW: What was in Vietnam? Do you remember Agent Orange? Do you support this as well? Sure, you don´t.

Every nation has got his dark history. Don´t talk about that. We run out off topic.

Yes I remember Agent Orange...I was sprayed with it...but that wasn't torture, just stupidity.

---

Account frozen...

...
After days (or, in some cases, more than a week) attempting to avoid the "hunter" forces, the soldiers were captured and brought to a central holding facility. Interrogators and military police personnel from various units worked on-site to provide the resistance training. The "prisoners" were often subjected to uncomfortable or harsh treatment, such as stress positions, sleep deprivation, and a number of the other techniques that have recently come under scrutiny. This part of the training was not inflicted in order to obtain information through interrogation. Rather, it was employed to simulate the type of treatment the soldier might experience should he fall into the hands of an enemy that did not follow the Geneva Conventions as strictly as did the NATO forces...

So far I haven't heard of any military forces which cared less about the Geneva Convention than the US military and NATO troops under US leadership!
"uncomfortable or harsh treatment" - these techniques already are torture! Don't they get it?

I think the author does, thorin, it sounds like NATO troops were being trained to be able to withstand techniques employed by those that do not follow the Geneva Conventions. That's why it says "prisoners", to distinguish that group of NATO soldiers from the group of NATO soldiers acting as interrogators.

See the Field Manual 34-52, chapter 3 (pages 50 to 82 of 177, alternative link) to get into what they think to be still okay: The entire manual seems to have been made by ... well I don't find a word fitting to such people... But I've seen similar things in an old Gestapo manual which I found on a flee market a couple years ago!

Had a quick look and I must've missed the parts you're referring to, I could only find guidelines that stipulate adherence to Geneva Converntions, as detailed on page 13 [1-7]. These are acknowledged again in the section you mention, by the acronyms provided on page 13, for example, at the top of page 63 [3-14]

Everything the interrogator says and does must be in concert with the GWS, GPW, GC and UCMJ.

If this document is authentic, without further and more careful examination, I'm not sure I have issue with it. I'm not saying an interrogation in line with this doc would be pleasant, but I don't think it meets the level of torture, at least under the definition I provided earlier.

Waterboarding does not appear to me to meet the document's standard in Chapter 1

The use of force, mental torture, threats, insults, or exposure to unpleasant and inhumane treatment of any kind is prohibited by law and is neither authorized nor condoned by the US Government.

From what I understand of the Gestapo's methods, there is a clear difference.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

From what I understand of the Gestapo's methods, there is a clear difference.

That being, we have many 'politically correct' documents prohibiting the very methods that are condoned...

Reason being: 'We can't handle the truth'... Or, we're just plain old hypocrites... ;)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

At the German Remembrance Day, i met a former German Soldier form WW2. He told me, that he was captured in the former Czechoslovakia by resistance fighters. They did a pseudo execution to him. As i met and talked to him, he told me that he never can forget, and since that time, he cannot sleep. Every night he got nightmares. He begun to cry and walked away.

Say, for example, what he gave up prevented an ambush and saved the lives of 7 people.

So now, he can never forget, but seven people are ALIVE who otherwise would have been dead. Where is the greater good? His sleeping well at night but seven dead people? Or his miserable sleep and seven living people?

---

Cordially,
Rush

elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com
Remove the obvious...

That´s what i am talking about. No one has the right, to torture or to kill someone. Offender or Victim. Everyone has human rights.

So what about the rights of those that WILL die because you're squeamish?

Something every one of you has evaded, what would you do if you could save the life of the person dearest to you with water boarding? He was caught him red-handed. You don't know he has the information you need, but it's really likely that he does. You don't know it will save them, but you think it will. Water boarding leaves no scars, the pain is minimal compared to other stress positions, mostly the person just panics.

What would you do? Would you sacrifice the love of your life? Just so you could claim some dubious moral high ground? I mean, you would have sacrificed her life for your feelings on the subject.

Is that the moral position?

---

Cordially,
Rush

elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com
Remove the obvious...

So far I haven't heard of any military forces which cared less about the Geneva Convention than the US military and NATO troops under US leadership!

Then, once again, you haven't done any research at all.

"uncomfortable or harsh treatment" - these techniques already are torture! Don't they get it?

They do get it. They simply disagree with you. They don't conflate torture with interrogation. They don't care what you think. And if they do their jobs well, they save the lives of other people. Especially in combat.

See the Field Manual 34-52, chapter 3 (pages 50 to 82 of 177, alternative link) to get into what they think to be still okay: The entire manual seems to have been made by ... well I don't find a word fitting to such people... But I've seen similar things in an old Gestapo manual which I found on a flee market a couple years ago!

Yep, that's it, you finally got it. It's all a plan by the U.S. Army to FINALLY fix the hash of those damn hell ass Jews and that annoying Fronsh Resistance.

---

Cordially,
Rush

elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com
Remove the obvious...

If this document is authentic, without further and more careful examination, I'm not sure I have issue with it. I'm not saying an interrogation in line with this doc would be pleasant, but I don't think it meets the level of torture, at least under the definition I provided earlier.

I didn't read it because Globalsecurity.org is a reputable site. FM 34-52 is the "Interrogator's Bible," so it's likely legit.

But, you got it, it's ALL torture. Nuthin' but torture as far as the eye kin see. Why bother saving the lives of your own troops when you can just hack some unlucky tool to bits?

Why bother trying to save Daniel Pearl when you'll shortly get to see his head cut off LIVE on TV? Nah, don't bother with that, take all the time in the world to just really make a mess out of someone. Really, what could be more important that that?

---

Cordially,
Rush

elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com
Remove the obvious...

From Jyllandsposten, 10. oktober 2007

Information from torture okayed

By The Copenhagen Post
Published 10.10.07 12:00


Denmark officially denounces the use of torture on criminal suspects but welcomes information obtained through other countries using it

The prime minister, justice minister and a majority of parliament have indicated information obtained through torture should be used by the intelligence agency when necessary.

Although Denmark officially denounces the use of torture in all forms, the government believes information obtained through its use is a valuable resource, especially in the war on terror.

‘Denmark emphatically condemns the use of torture,’ the prime minister, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, said at his weekly press conference Tuesday. ‘But all information about terror has to be used.’

Lene Espersen, the justice minister, said she accepts that the domestic intelligence agency, PET, uses information obtained through torture from other countries as evidence in its investigations - despite just last year having recommended to the nation’s criminal law advisory board to issue a formal ban on torture to ‘send a positive signal to the international community’.

‘There are no regulations in the Danish courts precluding the police from preventing and solving crimes using information that may be found to have come from others’ use of torture,’ Espersen told public broadcaster DR. ‘But it’s obvious that if the police have a suspicion the information was obtained through torture, they should be sceptical about its credibility.’

The government’s position is backed up by the United Nation’s special rapporteur on torture, Manfred Nowak. But Nowak said such information must not be used to deport or criminally charge a person.

‘Intelligence agencies routinely work with each other around the world,’ said Nowak. ‘The police in Denmark naturally receive some of their information about individuals from sources where that information may have been obtained through torture.’

The Red-Green Alliance and Amnesty Denmark both strongly criticised the government’s stance Tuesday. Tue Magnussen, spokesperson for the Rehabilitation and Research Centre for Torture Victims, warned that the country’s position indirectly advocates torture.

‘It’s extremely problematic from both a legal and ethical standpoint when Denmark uses information obtained in ways that the Danish police and intelligence service don’t employ themselves,’ said Magnussen.

---

"I'm trying to maintain a shred of dignity in this world." - Me

That´s what i am talking about. No one has the right, to torture or to kill someone. Offender or Victim. Everyone has human rights.

So what about the rights of those that WILL die because you're squeamish?

Something every one of you has evaded, what would you do if you could save the life of the person dearest to you with water boarding? He was caught him red-handed. You don't know he has the information you need, but it's really likely that he does. You don't know it will save them, but you think it will. Water boarding leaves no scars, the pain is minimal compared to other stress positions, mostly the person just panics.

What would you do? Would you sacrifice the love of your life? Just so you could claim some dubious moral high ground? I mean, you would have sacrificed her life for your feelings on the subject.

Is that the moral position?

And if you don't get the information to save that loved one, you'll have the pain and anguish you caused another to console you. Sounds great. What if waterboarding doesn't "soften up" this person, do you reach for the thumb screws, the shock paddles, surely something will get this person to talk? Somebody once said something about fighting monsters, what was that again?

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

If this document is authentic, without further and more careful examination, I'm not sure I have issue with it. I'm not saying an interrogation in line with this doc would be pleasant, but I don't think it meets the level of torture, at least under the definition I provided earlier.

I didn't read it because Globalsecurity.org is a reputable site. FM 34-52 is the "Interrogator's Bible," so it's likely legit.

But, you got it, it's ALL torture. Nuthin' but torture as far as the eye kin see. Why bother saving the lives of your own troops when you can just hack some unlucky tool to bits?

Why bother trying to save Daniel Pearl when you'll shortly get to see his head cut off LIVE on TV? Nah, don't bother with that, take all the time in the world to just really make a mess out of someone. Really, what could be more important that that?

Huh? Did I miss something?

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Why bother trying to save Daniel Pearl when you'll shortly get to see his head cut off LIVE on TV?

Odd that we never see those videos anymore... Did the 'terrorists' run out of video tape? ;)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

And if you don't get the information to save that loved one, you'll have the pain and anguish you caused another to console you. Sounds great. What if waterboarding doesn't "soften up" this person, do you reach for the thumb screws, the shock paddles, surely something will get this person to talk? Somebody once said something about fighting monsters, what was that again?

I don't know, Bobby, that's what I'm asking YOU. Would YOU personally reach for the shock paddles? Sleep deprivation? What would you do, how far would you go, and how would you decide?

If you don't have the answers, then you can see what they have to deal with every single time. It's a delicate balancing act that philosophy and law have little impact on. Additionally, it's not even a lifeboat scenario, those involved have to grapple with these questions every single time.

---

Cordially,
Rush

elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com
Remove the obvious...