Ottawa knew of torture

wulf42 · October 16, 2009

Some of us have seen the problem with Pakistan long before you people even realized there was a problem with Afghanistan. It's only now some of you are taking notice about the crap hole that IS Pakistan.

I always thought Pakistan was a problem....and if Pakistan Government isn t careful and Terrorist's get

to their Nuclear Arsenal, India will deal with it for them!

Sir Bandelot · October 16, 2009

I paint them the way I see them, as being against torture...... mmmmm sometimes.
They're REALLY against it when they can link a government they don't like to it, like the tories, or the Israelis, or the Americans. When the torture is being conducted by anyone else, well, no big deal. Nothing to see here. Move on, please. Move on. Go over there and see what the dirty Jews are doing.

In fact, you write like a conspiracy wacko.

wulf42 · October 16, 2009

Agreed... as to the reason we fight them. No question about it, we must fight extremism because it is a threat to us.
This is not so much why we fight, but how we fight. I generally oppose torture, but if you've got some little bastard who knows something, or who killed a bunch of people and won't talk, you wont see too much sympathy from me if they are executed.

But I would be concerned if they had the wrong person, and thought that they knew something and tortured/ killed them. So we need to have some provisions to safeguards against that possible error. There has to be reasonable evidence. Maybe approval from an outside authority, and reasonable limits to what can be done. There has to be constant monitoring, so that people are not abused or forgotten about. Otherwise we might end up back in the spanish inquisition.

I agree...........you certainly need safe guard's nobody wants to hurt an innocent person,

having said that however i believe we really do need to get as dirty as they are to defeat them!

I know people say that "makes us no better" but we are going after the enemy terrorist's not

innocent people that is the key difference, we need to assassinate key leaders (predator is doing

a good job of that in Pakistan) cut funding to the taliban by wiping out their opium crops everywhere,

bomb them when they are in so called "safe Havens" we need to attack them when they least expect it

and keep them on edge constantly...they should never know when its coming , this in time will play on

their nerves in effect we will terrorize the terrorist's...and of course if need be torture info out of

captured Taliban or Al Qaeda......not pretty but it needs to be done to win!

Edited October 16, 2009 by wulf42

noahbody · October 16, 2009

No, if you don't electrocute their testicles and tear their nails out, its considered coddling.

That's actually what people think of when they hear the word "torture." If you want to evoke sympathy say you were tortured. People will think the worst. It's like calling a spanking child abuse. When you think of child abuse, you think of a beating. At most, a term like 'inappropriate' or 'mistreated' should be used. Just not torture. Save that for people with taserticles.

I think Ignatieff's comments on keeping sleep deprivation separate from torture were bang on. He believed (in 2004 anyways) that it sleep deprivation could be considered acceptable.

Argus · October 16, 2009

No, sorry, you're wrong. Torture and murder and so many other things are always wrong, no matter the perpetrators. The difference is that some of us believe that everyon should be held to the same standards...both Israel and Palestine for example.

Yeah, suuuure you do. It's just that you never seem to notice when anyone else does it, or if you notice, you don't seem to have the time that day to work up much self righteousness and issue a stern denunciation on the internet.

Argus · October 17, 2009

Christ on a stick. Look, I condemn Fidel Castro and every other bastard who either locks people up and tortures them or looks the other way when they do.

You do? Not here you don't, chum. You never have anyway.

Sir Bandelot · October 17, 2009

You do? Not here you don't, chum. You never have anyway.

Well it sounds like he just did. Welcome to today

eyeball · October 17, 2009

Right.........we won't win this war playing by rules or being nice!!
the Geneva convention certainly does not apply to these animals!

to defeat terrorist's we need to use what the military call black op's

which basically means doing whatever it takes to destroy the enemy! War is

a bad thing but if you make the decision to go then you should also make the decision

to win!

That is precisely what they believe too, for the same reason you do.

Rovik · October 17, 2009

I'm shocked at the amount of posters that are condoning the use of torture as a means to a ends.

One has to look at the big picture here. If Canada, a signatory of the Geneva Conventions that protect prisoners from such treatment, is willing to cast aside all of that and torture away than what's to stop less extreme elements from saying "well since Canada, once considered one of the world's foremost peacekeeping nations is willing to torture, well i guess it's ok for us to do as well. In otherwords, what this is telling hostile groups around the world that might have been iffy about torture, that if the so called Western civilized countries with their Geneva Conventions have no qualms about torture, then why should we.

Second, how do we know that a prisoner is absolutely guilty. Who knows? Perhaps the prisoner was captured due to the word of an questionable informant. And what if after torturing, we find out that the individual was indeed innocent. What then? Do we tell him, "sorry old boy, our mistake, you can go home now."

It's a sad reflection on ourselves if we are willing to torture, to inflict often extreme physical and emotional pain without remorse. I guess we are just as bad as the extremists.

bush_cheney2004 · October 17, 2009

...It's a sad reflection on ourselves if we are willing to torture, to inflict often extreme physical and emotional pain without remorse. I guess we are just as bad as the extremists.

Pretty much....because we are also willing to kill them.

eyeball · October 17, 2009

You do? Not here you don't, chum. You never have anyway.

Sure I have. What is it about the word dictators or super-rogues that you people just never get?

eyeball · October 17, 2009

or....?

Yes...go on...spit it out and tell us what else I said Morris.

It seems you know my mind better than you know your own.

eyeball · October 17, 2009

I'm shocked at the amount of posters that are condoning the use of torture as a means to a ends.

What's really alarming is that the political party these will almost certainly vote for in our next election are just itching to convert our justice system into a vengence system too.

I guess we are just as bad as the extremists.

Except that we should know better.

wulf42 · October 17, 2009

I'm shocked at the amount of posters that are condoning the use of torture as a means to a ends.
One has to look at the big picture here. If Canada, a signatory of the Geneva Conventions that protect prisoners from such treatment, is willing to cast aside all of that and torture away than what's to stop less extreme elements from saying "well since Canada, once considered one of the world's foremost peacekeeping nations is willing to torture, well i guess it's ok for us to do as well. In otherwords, what this is telling hostile groups around the world that might have been iffy about torture, that if the so called Western civilized countries with their Geneva Conventions have no qualms about torture, then why should we.

Second, how do we know that a prisoner is absolutely guilty. Who knows? Perhaps the prisoner was captured due to the word of an questionable informant. And what if after torturing, we find out that the individual was indeed innocent. What then? Do we tell him, "sorry old boy, our mistake, you can go home now."

It's a sad reflection on ourselves if we are willing to torture, to inflict often extreme physical and emotional pain without remorse. I guess we are just as bad as the extremists.

Al Qaeda and Taliban do not fight in uniforms and do not fall under the Geneva Convention!

if we truly expect to defeat them then we must be prepared to do whatever it takes to destroy them

otherwise they will get the upperhand...we are at war with a fanatical enemy much like the Nazi's and

every bit as evil, the difference between "us" and "them" is two fold

1. we didn t start it

2. We only want to kill and torture the terrorist's! (not their families and innocent bystanders unlike

the terrorist scum we fight)

So saying "we are like them" is a joke, our war is with just the terrorist's not the people of the country.....why do so many of you not get the obvious??

Edited October 17, 2009 by wulf42

wulf42 · October 17, 2009

What's really alarming is that the political party these will almost certainly vote for in our next election are just itching to convert our justice system into a vengence system too.

If you mean that we actually want it to punish criminals then yes!

ba1614 · October 17, 2009

What's really alarming is that the political party these will almost certainly vote for in our next election are just itching to convert our justice system into a vengence system too.
Except that we should know better.

As it stands now I would indeed vote for the CPC, even though I don't like most of their prison reform policy, and I really dislike the mandatory minimums for weed.

But the NDP is waaaay to far left on social policy for me to consider, and the LPC under Iggy is still the same ole LPC I quit voting for a couple elections ago. They're still as pathetic today as they were 5yrs ago.

I just can't see sacrificing my social policy beliefs so I can smoke a joint on the sidewalk. Mandatory minimums aren't going to do anything to the "average" guy that might have a few plants for personal use, or smokes dubes at their residence.

Voting CPC is currently the lesser of the available evils, IMO.

Argus · October 17, 2009

Sure I have. What is it about the word dictators or super-rogues that you people just never get?

I presume you're speaking about Americans or American allies.

But in any event, you have never specifically condemned Cuba or Castro.

Argus · October 17, 2009

I always thought Pakistan was a problem....and if Pakistan Government isn t careful and Terrorist's get
to their Nuclear Arsenal, India will deal with it for them!

Pakistan is a shithole of poverty and ignorance, run by incompetents, rife with corruption, seething with religious fanaticism.

Last week the Taliban attacked army headquarters. It was a huge surprise, apparntly. Even though Intelligence had picked up word of the attack a week earlier, even though word of that leaked out so that it was actually printed in the paper that Intelligence expected an imminent attack on Army HQ.

Argus · October 17, 2009

I'm shocked at the amount of posters that are condoning the use of torture as a means to a ends.

I do not condone torture. Mind you, I'm speaking of actual physical harm here, not embarrasing them by making them parade around naked.

But this is Afghanistan we're talking about. There is simply no way that a prison system operated by Afghanistan holding insurrectonists is NOT going to have torture. I could and will say the same about any nation in that area. It's inevitable. Complaining about it is like complaining about the heat. I mean, what is the point?

But what else can we do? Start up our own prison system? And who would man it? Maybe the Germans or Italians given they're good for nothing else, but of course, their governments would want no part of that. In fact, none of our cowardly European "allies", bearing in mind the terrirble publicity the US got from operating prisons in Iraq - would want any part of that. So we'd have to build and maintain it ourselves, with what are already drastically undermanned units in the south of Afghanistan, taking them away from combat positions. Nu uh. I'm not going for that.

wulf42 · October 17, 2009

Pakistan is a shithole of poverty and ignorance, run by incompetents, rife with corruption, seething with religious fanaticism.
Last week the Taliban attacked army headquarters. It was a huge surprise, apparntly. Even though Intelligence had picked up word of the attack a week earlier, even though word of that leaked out so that it was actually printed in the paper that Intelligence expected an imminent attack on Army HQ.

Pakistan has launched an all out offensive this morning....they know

that the Taliban must be dealt with now...they let them go to long

and looked the other way now they threaten their own survival.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8311927.stm

Sir Bandelot · October 17, 2009

Pakistan has launched an all out offensive this morning....they know
that the Taliban must be dealt with now...they let them go to long

and looked the other way now they threaten their own survival.

But I doubt those methods will producing anything of value in the long run. Who is a Taliban? What differentiates a Talban from some other pak or afghan... they all wear similar religious dress, turbans. As stated earlier they don't have a uniform, or big sign on their turban says "Kick me I'm Taliban".

So the paki army blows through an area, they run over a bunch of people and then clear out. Tada.

These half measures only increase radicalization. Anyone left standing has a good reason to hate the government forces, and us. It's been proven. In the end the only way to make anything work is to cut deals, as in Iraq.

Edited October 17, 2009 by Sir Bandelot

Argus · October 17, 2009

Pakistan has launched an all out offensive this morning....they know
that the Taliban must be dealt with now...they let them go to long

and looked the other way now they threaten their own survival.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8311927.stm

I would not call it an all out offensive. They are trying to get some control over one area controlled by the Taliban, but are almost completely ignoring other areas - including the one across from where Canadian troops are. The Taliban there are free to continue recruiting, training and planning attacks on Afghanistan.

The difference, of course, is that the Taliban they are attacking are considered to be largely responsible for attacks within Pakistan itself.

Hydraboss · October 17, 2009

Picking on Pakistan may have been a bigger mistake than the Taliban thought. Consider this: They just poked a stick in the eye of a country that could care less about international convention or rules of engagement. If the paki's capture any of them, what do you think the prisoner's chance of surviving without torture would be? It's not like we're going to hear about the lack of human rights given them, or prison conditions not being up to standards. Unlike the US or Canada, there will be little international condemnation of Pakistan's actions, and even if there is, I'm sure they could care less.

This is akin to one drug gang doing a drive-by on another drug gang. Rules don't matter. Revenge does.

Gotta respect the Paki method of dealing with things.

Sir Bandelot · October 17, 2009

Picking on Pakistan may have been a bigger mistake than the Taliban thought. Consider this: They just poked a stick in the eye of a country that could care less about international convention or rules of engagement.
Gotta respect the Paki method of dealing with things.

Unlike the US?

Pshaaww

Hydraboss · October 17, 2009

Unlike the US?
Pshaaww

Yes, unlike the US. If the US used rules of engagement the same way as Pakistan, Omar Kahdr wouldn't be breathing much less trying to get a free pass from Canada.

He would've gotten that well deserved bullet behind the ear.