Author Topic: Geneva Conventions - Torture  (Read 5109 times)

Offline fuzzytomcat

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 530
  • Karma: +238/-3
    • View Profile
Geneva Conventions - Torture
« on: April 29, 2009, 03:53:43 pm »
Hi everyone,

I know many people have different opinions on "torture", what is reasonable and you know it when you see it. There has been many photos and information on torture in the past months and the definition to some including myself seems the goal line has been moving. To some it appears listening to the "Partridge Family" loud for 24/7 could constitute a violation or incests put in your holding cell.

Geneva Conventions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

During WW11 Franklin D. Roosevelt had all Japanese, Germans and Italians incarcerated in camps around the United States one was in Oregon at the "Portland Stockyards" where cattle and pigs were transfered, living in those same buildings with dirt floors, 99.9% of those were innocent having done nothing, was that torture?

What are your thoughts can we be going to far today in the definition of "torture" or not far enough, is this a political knee jerk reaction in todays conflicts and dangers we face or well founded, what should we do ??

I found these Photos depicting what to many could constitute torture to some not, these were taken during the "Geneva Conventions" being in effect.




Regards,
Fuzzy

Offline Quantum

  • Ascended One
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 782
  • Karma: +206/-0
  • Daniel Jackson is looking at you!
    • View Profile
Re: Geneva Conventions - Torture
« Reply #1 on: April 29, 2009, 04:16:13 pm »
Hey fuzzy, I think the specific issues aren't listening to some loudly but rather intentionally not letting someone sleep for well over a week. Also not putting an insect in someone's holding cell, but rather putting them in an extremely crapped stress position, barely able to move and then putting an insect in when you know they're afraid of insects.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to be greatly spinning the facts.

Copied and pasted straight from wikipedia:

Torture, according to the United Nations Convention Against Torture, is: "any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him, or a third person, information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in, or incidental to, lawful sanctions."
Daniel: "This tastes like chicken."
Carter: "So what's wrong with it?"
Daniel: "It's macaroni and cheese."

Offline fuzzytomcat

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 530
  • Karma: +238/-3
    • View Profile
Re: Geneva Conventions - Torture
« Reply #2 on: April 29, 2009, 05:25:12 pm »
Hey fuzzy, I think the specific issues aren't listening to some loudly but rather intentionally not letting someone sleep for well over a week. Also not putting an insect in someone's holding cell, but rather putting them in an extremely crapped stress position, barely able to move and then putting an insect in when you know they're afraid of insects.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to be greatly spinning the facts.

Copied and pasted straight from wikipedia:

Torture, according to the United Nations Convention Against Torture, is: "any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him, or a third person, information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in, or incidental to, lawful sanctions."

Hi Quantum,

I do not believe in torture and I'm glad you placed the definition for clarification purposes, and the photos I posted "No One" was prosecuted that I know of or could find for any prisoner "torture".

{quote}
Torture, according to the United Nations Convention Against Torture, is: "any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him, or a third person, information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in, or incidental to, lawful sanctions.
{end quote}

The problem is highlighted in "Blue", words that are subjective what means something to one person means not much of anything to someone else, like loud unattractive music or one hundred flies for instance. The photos from "Abu Ghraib" prison show up every week with censored nude prisoners and are being called torture by main stream news media like CNN and BBC wanting prosecutions and convictions.  But what do you call the WW11 ship and the Vietnam photo posted ...... I call the WW11 ship photo because of the mass amount of witnesses, man with a club and another with a camera "torture", the Vietnamese being drug behind a Army personnel carrier ( maybe dead ) "torture".

There are many that think there is no black and white to this issue of torture and there are many shades of gray that should be or need to be clarified and put into perspective.

Please forgive me if you think I'm twisting the facts ...... just trying to make a point in a very touchy subject.

Best Regards,
Fuzzy 

Offline Quantum

  • Ascended One
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 782
  • Karma: +206/-0
  • Daniel Jackson is looking at you!
    • View Profile
Re: Geneva Conventions - Torture
« Reply #3 on: April 30, 2009, 03:43:13 am »
o.k, firstly some things are clearly not subjective, like "intentionally inflicted" it either was intentionally inflicted or it wasn't.

I don't know what your focus of past wars is based on? Of course we tortured during these wars, for the same reason authorities have the urge to do it now. But it's about whether we keep trying to stand higher, look at what we did and say "Yes, that went too far" and keep pushing ourselves away from acting on those urges.

"like loud unattractive music" is not torture in of itself. However the act of keeping somebody awake for well over a week will cause severe mental suffering to the average person, no matter how much you can trivialise the method of doing so.
Daniel: "This tastes like chicken."
Carter: "So what's wrong with it?"
Daniel: "It's macaroni and cheese."