Yasiin Bey (aka Mos Def) force-fed under standard Guantánamo Bay procedure – Video

Not in the way we're doing it.

  On 7/8/2013 at 10:36 PM, Friendly Foil said:

Would've been more effective without the silly fast cuts and handheld camera.

Definitely, if they just had one shot showing it it would've been way more effective and disturbing.

  On 7/11/2013 at 8:06 PM, luke viia said:

We can't have systemic scientific analysis of whether torture works, eugene you have said as much previously in this thread. Modeling the behavior, as the ScienceDaily link's study did, is as close as we can get to an answer right now, legally. The torture the US is conducting atm is illegal, how the fuck are they going to get in there and scientifically analyze the causal chain of failed interrogations? I am voicing the concern that these practices need to stop, and keep being met with "well we don't know if needs to be stopped yet" type arguments. wtf is wrong with people? Raping innocent civilians and forcing them to admit to crimes they didn't commit should continue because we don't know conclusively whether it actually works occasionally, but we do know it fails to get valuable information routinely? Really?

 

 

 

good point. if these acts are in fact illegal, this trumps the ethical argument altogether in priority. unless the ethical argument is that codified laws have no place anymore in a post-9/11 world.

  On 7/11/2013 at 8:47 PM, SR4 said:

good point. if these acts are in fact illegal, this trumps the ethical argument altogether in priority. unless the ethical argument is that codified laws have no place anymore in a post-9/11 world.

The fact that's it not policy (public policy) doesn't mean the government hasn't got any influence on situations like this.

 

"In exchange for reduction of sentence, she plead guilty to seven of the nine accusations. On September 26, 2005 she was found guilty on six of seven."

From the Dutch wikipedia article on that Lynndie gal. Kinda worth noting in the context of torture - if this torture is about guilt at all, that is.

Edited July 11, 2013 by th555

  On 7/11/2013 at 9:20 PM, th555 said:

 

  On 7/11/2013 at 8:47 PM, SR4 said:

good point. if these acts are in fact illegal, this trumps the ethical argument altogether in priority. unless the ethical argument is that codified laws have no place anymore in a post-9/11 world.

The fact that's it not policy (public policy) doesn't mean the government hasn't got any influence on situations like this.

 

"In exchange for reduction of sentence, she plead guilty to seven of the nine accusations. On September 26, 2005 she was found guilty on six of seven."

From the Dutch wikipedia article on that Lynndie gal. Kinda worth noting in the context of torture - if this torture is about guilt at all, that is.

 

 

im not quite sure what you are trying to say here...the govt is trying to bend the law? that's to be expected. still doesn't make it right.

Which part of my post do you mean?

  On 7/11/2013 at 9:45 PM, th555 said:

Which part of my post do you mean?

 

lol all of it. i dont mean any offense, im just not quite sure I understood what your point was. Admittedly could be due to my idiocy or failure to read basic english, it just sounded confusing to me.

In regards to government influence, with Abu gharib at least there is clear evidence that the torture went all the way to Rumsfeld's office.

Haha, it could just as well be my failure to translate to basic english..

 

You said "if these acts are in fact illegal, this trumps the ethical argument altogether in priority.", with my reply to that I mean to say that the illegalness of the acts in question isn't entirely certain, and that, even if it is officially illegal, the government could still have an influence on these practices.

 

The wikipedia stuff I thought was funny because one of the problems with torture is that you never know if people are confessing because they've actually dunnit, or just because they don't want to be tortured (well who does, lol).

  On 7/11/2013 at 10:04 PM, th555 said:

Haha, it could just as well be my failure to translate to basic english..

 

You said "if these acts are in fact illegal, this trumps the ethical argument altogether in priority.", with my reply to that I mean to say that the illegalness of the acts in question isn't entirely certain, and that, even if it is officially illegal, the government could still have an influence on these practices.

 

The wikipedia stuff I thought was funny because one of the problems with torture is that you never know if people are confessing because they've actually dunnit, or just because they don't want to be tortured (well who does, lol).

 

ah ok gotcha. thanks (and apologies) for the clarification.

np, it happens.