Alta4ever Posted March 9, 2010 Report Posted March 9, 2010 For gods sake it is substantiated fact, that the CIA used torture on afghani's. Also interrogation by the military and intelligence agency is equivocal to torture. If it was "questioning" it wouldn't be interrogation. Interrogation implies coercive use of force and methodologies to derive information which otherwise is not readily accessible. Your post is garbage. Funny nothing you said in your post was substantiated by the article you linked to hence garbage post. If you also noticed this thread is not about the Americans, but I am now going to assume you have america derangement syndrome.. Quote "What about the legitimacy of the democratic process, yeah, what about it?" Jack Layton and his coup against the people of Canada “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” President Ronald Reagan
Argus Posted March 9, 2010 Report Posted March 9, 2010 So, Afghan society is more violent and therefore if evidence comes out (it is already out, but like I said, you the intellectual can't seem to handle truth) it'll be ok because Afghanistan was violent to begin with? Is that how you rationalize the degredation of what we believe to be democratic rights? It's called reality. What we consider human rights aren't necessarily the same as what other people consider to be human rights. Hell, a report the other day said many people and nations believe access to the internet is a basic human right! I'm not unduly concerned, and certainly not shocked to learn that Afghan prisons are violent and unsafe places. Afghan HOMES and villages are violent and unsafe places. We can't change the country overnight and it is pointless and silly to even try. I do think we should do our best to discourage torture. However, I don't think my understanding of the term is the same as that being used around here. Torture, to me, is the systematic infliction of physical pain in order to obtain information or to punish someone for their political, ethnic, religious or mlitary affiliation or association. A guy getting whooped because he mouthed off or acted up is not in the same league, However regretable I might find it that such things happen, they are inevitable, and happen even in prisons in western countries. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted March 9, 2010 Report Posted March 9, 2010 What? How would you know? Tell me, how long were you in university for? But we're not discussing me. My intellectual prowess is unquestioned! And my learned and bitingly insightful pearls of wisdom are always impressive. Yours on the other hand, seem to fail to meet the criteria you set forth in how one obtains a degree. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
nicky10013 Posted March 9, 2010 Author Report Posted March 9, 2010 It's called reality. What we consider human rights aren't necessarily the same as what other people consider to be human rights. Hell, a report the other day said many people and nations believe access to the internet is a basic human right! I'm not unduly concerned, and certainly not shocked to learn that Afghan prisons are violent and unsafe places. Afghan HOMES and villages are violent and unsafe places. We can't change the country overnight and it is pointless and silly to even try. I do think we should do our best to discourage torture. However, I don't think my understanding of the term is the same as that being used around here. Torture, to me, is the systematic infliction of physical pain in order to obtain information or to punish someone for their political, ethnic, religious or mlitary affiliation or association. A guy getting whooped because he mouthed off or acted up is not in the same league, However regretable I might find it that such things happen, they are inevitable, and happen even in prisons in western countries. Human Rights Watch, The EU, NATO, Amnesty International, our own diplomatic corps have all warned that this is happening and it isn't just a guy being smacked upside the head. To me, those are pretty credible organizations. We can't make the place unviolent, you're right about that. However, we have a choice, obligated under the geneva convention and bound by international law, to ensure the saftey of the prisoners we take. We can't just skirt those obligations. As I mentioned above, who cares if a bunch of people have to eat crow. Release the documents to the proper committees and if it comes out that nothing has been happening, I'd much rather be wrong than to have our interntaional reputation ruined, the country embarassed and our democratic values questioned. The problem is, none of these documents have been made available to the opposition, members of the government have continued to lie through their teeth, senior military officials have been on record lying, until documents have been released proving that their previous statements were false. Seems to me to be a bunch of people running around trying to avert this thing from falling on their head when, as the video said, they could've just changed the agreement back in 2007. Quote
nicky10013 Posted March 9, 2010 Author Report Posted March 9, 2010 But we're not discussing me. My intellectual prowess is unquestioned! And my learned and bitingly insightful pearls of wisdom are always impressive. Yours on the other hand, seem to fail to meet the criteria you set forth in how one obtains a degree. Meh, I'm not the one sticking to the faithful party line. Quote
Alta4ever Posted March 9, 2010 Report Posted March 9, 2010 Human Rights Watch, The EU, NATO, Amnesty International, our own diplomatic corps have all warned that this is happening and it isn't just a guy being smacked upside the head. To me, those are pretty credible organizations. We can't make the place unviolent, you're right about that. However, we have a choice, obligated under the geneva convention and bound by international law, to ensure the saftey of the prisoners we take. We can't just skirt those obligations. So if they are so concerned why are they not pursuing war crime investigations against the afgani authorities? Quote "What about the legitimacy of the democratic process, yeah, what about it?" Jack Layton and his coup against the people of Canada “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” President Ronald Reagan
nicky10013 Posted March 9, 2010 Author Report Posted March 9, 2010 So if they are so concerned why are they not pursuing war crime investigations against the afgani authorities? I don't know and I don't care. This isn't about them. It's about our responsibilities. Quote
Alta4ever Posted March 9, 2010 Report Posted March 9, 2010 I don't know and I don't care. This isn't about them. It's about our responsibilities. It is about the afgani's abusing there prisoners isn't? So if they say this is going on why do they not take action with those that are detaining and allegedly abusing these people to improve their situation? Quote "What about the legitimacy of the democratic process, yeah, what about it?" Jack Layton and his coup against the people of Canada “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” President Ronald Reagan
nicky10013 Posted March 9, 2010 Author Report Posted March 9, 2010 It is about the afgani's abusing there prisoners isn't? So if they say this is going on why do they not take action with those that are detaining and allegedly abusing these people to improve their situation? Because it isn't about them. It's about us handing them over to the Afghanis. That's where our obligations lie as stated under international law. Quote
Smallc Posted March 9, 2010 Report Posted March 9, 2010 (edited) . Edited March 9, 2010 by Smallc Quote
Alta4ever Posted March 9, 2010 Report Posted March 9, 2010 Because it isn't about them. It's about us handing them over to the Afghanis. That's where our obligations lie as stated under international law. So you don't care if those in the afgani prisons get beat or tortured? Your concern is purely on who transferred them and when. What a great humanitarian you are. Quote "What about the legitimacy of the democratic process, yeah, what about it?" Jack Layton and his coup against the people of Canada “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” President Ronald Reagan
ToadBrother Posted March 9, 2010 Report Posted March 9, 2010 It's either him or the Taliban. Most believe he is by far the lesser of the two evils. And Karzai can give any order he wants. An order like this is very, very unlikely to be followed. There is simply too much casual, routine violence in Afghani society. I'm not saying we should give the order. I still think the whole prisoner abuse thing is nothing more than a puff of smoke, a veritable mole hill being turned into a mountain. But still, the fact remains that Karzai's regime, the whole edifice really, is there because NATO blood is being shed. If we can't get anything more than a common criminal for a president in that country for the kind of coin we're spending, then I think we should abandon them to the crazies, and just routinely strafe their airspace and bomb their border to keep them from destabilizing Pakistan or allowing terrorists back in. Quote
nicky10013 Posted March 9, 2010 Author Report Posted March 9, 2010 So you don't care if those in the afgani prisons get beat or tortured? Your concern is purely on who transferred them and when. What a great humanitarian you are. This isn't about me either or what I think of torture, it's about the Canadian Government being responsible of handing people over to torture, which under the geneva convention is a war crime. Quote
Army Guy Posted March 9, 2010 Report Posted March 9, 2010 Only the Chief of the Defence staff admitted to it. Again, something you probably already knew. It was in all the papers in December. About a week later Harper shut everything down. Sorry guys been away for a little bit. I've read most of the posts.... Nicky but i'm having a hard time trying to figure out what exactly did the CDS admit to. Could you bring me up to speed please....I've read serveral of the interviews the CDS gave in ref to this topic and i can't find anything that would compromise any laws or conventions.... From what i've read Canadians took into custody a suspected Taliban insurgent, then handed him over to the Afghan police who beat him....Canadian military found out about it and took him back...Did i miss anything... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
nicky10013 Posted March 9, 2010 Author Report Posted March 9, 2010 I'm not saying we should give the order. I still think the whole prisoner abuse thing is nothing more than a puff of smoke, a veritable mole hill being turned into a mountain. But still, the fact remains that Karzai's regime, the whole edifice really, is there because NATO blood is being shed. If we can't get anything more than a common criminal for a president in that country for the kind of coin we're spending, then I think we should abandon them to the crazies, and just routinely strafe their airspace and bomb their border to keep them from destabilizing Pakistan or allowing terrorists back in. Sorry, but the possibility that this country has committed war crimes is more than a "puff." Quote
nicky10013 Posted March 9, 2010 Author Report Posted March 9, 2010 (edited) Sorry guys been away for a little bit. I've read most of the posts.... Nicky but i'm having a hard time trying to figure out what exactly did the CDS admit to. Could you bring me up to speed please....I've read serveral of the interviews the CDS gave in ref to this topic and i can't find anything that would compromise any laws or conventions.... From what i've read Canadians took into custody a suspected Taliban insurgent, then handed him over to the Afghan police who beat him....Canadian military found out about it and took him back...Did i miss anything... CDS lied about it and then when documents came out proving him wrong, only then did he change his story that this person had been abused. As I posted above, the EU, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch our own diplomatic corps and NATO have all warned that torture was taking place. If we're handing over people who are tortured for information and the government knew about it, it's a crime. I've said this at least twice. I want to be wrong, but we won't know until the documents are made public. Edited March 9, 2010 by nicky10013 Quote
Born Free Posted March 9, 2010 Report Posted March 9, 2010 Because it isn't about them. It's about us handing them over to the Afghanis. That's where our obligations lie as stated under international law. Precicely!!! Quote
Alta4ever Posted March 9, 2010 Report Posted March 9, 2010 This isn't about me either or what I think of torture, it's about the Canadian Government being responsible of handing people over to torture, which under the geneva convention is a war crime. So you really don't care about the people just the optics aren't you so wonderful and caring. Pathetic Quote "What about the legitimacy of the democratic process, yeah, what about it?" Jack Layton and his coup against the people of Canada “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” President Ronald Reagan
nicky10013 Posted March 9, 2010 Author Report Posted March 9, 2010 So you really don't care about the people just the optics aren't you so wonderful and caring. Pathetic Isn't trying to stop Canadian complicity in torture helping the people? The less people we hand over, the less they're tortured. Right? Who is really pathetic here? You've got nothing else as you've exhausted your tory talking points so you're trying to paint me as a supporter of torture. Just like I was a supporter of mass murder and genocide. Just like I was Stalin and Mao. As I mentioned before, you really need to come off it. I'm not the one coming off like a jackass here, you are by throwing around those types of accusations. Not only that, but you demean things like genocide, mass killings and torture just to try and make me look bad simply because you can't grasp the tenets of about any argument. As I've said before, I recommend going to Poland, go to Auschwitz and then try to paint people with that kind of brush again. You call me pathetic but at least I've been there and seen that. I'm not the pathetic one. You're the disgusting excuse of a human being trying to look cool by exploiting the deaths of millions of people. Quote
Mr.Canada Posted March 9, 2010 Report Posted March 9, 2010 (edited) Bad guy transfer arangement in place between Canada and the Afgani's. We follow said agreement. Nothing wrong here. Why isn't Afganistan going to be charged with human rights violations? Why isn't Canada? Edited March 9, 2010 by Mr.Canada Quote "You are scum for insinuating that isn't the case you snake." -William Ashley Canadian Immigration Reform Blog
nicky10013 Posted March 9, 2010 Author Report Posted March 9, 2010 Bad guy transfer arangement in place between Canada and the Afgani's. We follow said agreement. Nothing wrong here. Why isn't Afganistan going to be charged with human rights violations? Why isn't Canada? It's against the law if we send them knowing there's a chance they could be abused. Doesn't matter what the agreement says. Quote
Alta4ever Posted March 9, 2010 Report Posted March 9, 2010 Isn't trying to stop Canadian complicity in torture helping the people? The less people we hand over, the less they're tortured. Right? Who is really pathetic here? You've got nothing else as you've exhausted your tory talking points so you're trying to paint me as a supporter of torture. Just like I was a supporter of mass murder and genocide. Just like I was Stalin and Mao. As I mentioned before, you really need to come off it. I'm not the one coming off like a jackass here, you are by throwing around those types of accusations. Not only that, but you demean things like genocide, mass killings and torture just to try and make me look bad simply because you can't grasp the tenets of about any argument. As I've said before, I recommend going to Poland, go to Auschwitz and then try to paint people with that kind of brush again. You call me pathetic but at least I've been there and seen that. I'm not the pathetic one. You're the disgusting excuse of a human being trying to look cool by exploiting the deaths of millions of people. We don't have any evidence that those we have handed over are tortured what there is evidence supporting is exactly what army guy said we handed over one talibani agent he was beaten with a shoe, we took him back into our custody. This is not sufficient evidence to come to the conclusions you assert. If the afgani's are beating their prisoners then something should be done to stop it and reevaluating how we and when we transfer prisoners in committees does nothing to better the current afgani prisoners situation. For some reason logic this seems to escape you. You are much happier on a witch hunt that in the end will mean nothing to the afgan prisoners. Quote "What about the legitimacy of the democratic process, yeah, what about it?" Jack Layton and his coup against the people of Canada “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” President Ronald Reagan
Alta4ever Posted March 9, 2010 Report Posted March 9, 2010 It's against the law if we send them knowing there's a chance they could be abused. Doesn't matter what the agreement says. Really if we know there is the slightest chance they may be abused? Well then obviously we wouldn't be able to detain our own criminals, because there is a slight chance they will be abused. We wouldn't be able to apprehend criminals because there is a slight chance they maybe abused. That is asinine and you are not taking it the context that it is meant. Quote "What about the legitimacy of the democratic process, yeah, what about it?" Jack Layton and his coup against the people of Canada “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” President Ronald Reagan
nicky10013 Posted March 9, 2010 Author Report Posted March 9, 2010 We don't have any evidence that those we have handed over are tortured what there is evidence supporting is exactly what army guy said we handed over one talibani agent he was beaten with a shoe, we took him back into our custody. This is not sufficient evidence to come to the conclusions you assert. If the afgani's are beating their prisoners then something should be done to stop it and reevaluating how we and when we transfer prisoners in committees does nothing to better the current afgani prisoners situation. For some reason logic this seems to escape you. You are much happier on a witch hunt that in the end will mean nothing to the afgan prisoners. Well, the evidence is being covered up. Wouldn't it be great if we could actually see it? Quote
nicky10013 Posted March 9, 2010 Author Report Posted March 9, 2010 Really if we know there is the slightest chance they may be abused? Well then obviously we wouldn't be able to detain our own criminals, because there is a slight chance they will be abused. We wouldn't be able to apprehend criminals because there is a slight chance they maybe abused. That is asinine and you are not taking it the context that it is meant. The geneva convention doesn't apply to civilian law you moron. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.