Jack's Blog

My name is Jack, you dummies

  Home :: Contact :: Syndication  :: Login
  506 Posts :: 8 Stories :: 1078 Comments :: 90 Trackbacks

Archives

Post Categories

Links

The link:  http://msnbc.msn.com/id/12602098/

Here we have a picture of the humane restraint chair.  I refuse to put that in sarcastic quotes like the fuckwits at MSNBC did, because, the fact is, being tied to a chair is humane.  To quote the article:

“His jailers, U.S. Army military police, said that he was being punished for disrespecting them, and that he would spend 2 hours in the chair as punishment. The suspected insurgent, a juvenile, had earlier been moved to the maximum security section of the prison for 30 days for attacking a guard in another section of the facility.”

So, this person attacks a guard, disrespects guards, and this leads to him getting sat in a chair for 2 hours.  This is “torture?”  Having to sit in a chair and not attack people for 2 hours is torture?  What in the hell are prison guards supposed to do if they can't even force a prisoner to sit down?  This is literally what it's come to.  Our soldiers are trying to control a criminal population.  They're relentlessly heckled and demonized by the press, and by AI.  So, they come up with the adult equivalent of “time out,” and then bring AI in to show them they're being nice, and AI is somehow still upset with it.

This is a broken organization.  they are not interested in preventing torture.  They're interested in trying to undercut the American war effort, to attack American credibility, and to generally damage the world's perception of America, especially as it relates to our foreign policy, as much as possible.

If AI was even marginally serious about its job, it would have an infinite amount of complaints for China, Cuba, all of Africa, all of the Middle East, both Koreas, huge swathes of Asia, Russia, eastern Europe, etc. etc.  If they had any interest in actual mistreatment of prisoners, AI would literally never even have time to notice that American MPs were making prisoners sit down when they attacked people.

And yet, they insist there's rampant torture, and to support this they show a guy in a nice clean jumpsuit sitting in a chair, in restraints.  Do these fucking imbeciles know that if a patient in a hospital or EMT situation is violent they're also restrained?

But that's not the worst of it.  What pisses me off the most about this isn't the utterly transparent political motivations at work here.  The worst part is that AI is basically wasting the credibility of its position to play political games.  This is an organization that is supposed to be fighting torture and unjust imprisonment around the world.  Since they're nominally accomplishing this task, no other such organization is created.  The job is filled, so to speak.  So, not only is this organization spreading lies and misrepresentation to further their own political biases, but they're also denying the world a function which is actually valuable and worth having.  They don't just give us lies.  They deny us a valid watchdog organization as well.

posted on Wednesday, May 03, 2006 9:50 PM

Feedback

# re: Amnesty International Is A Joke... 5/3/2006 9:57 PM Harvey from 24.19.46.198
Indeed. By virtue of their mere existence, they prevent other free thinking anti-torture groups from forming. How dare they?

# re: Amnesty International Is A Joke... 5/3/2006 10:11 PM Jack from 67.166.2.58
Gosh, you're an infant. You really are.

They don't prevent other anti-torture groups from forming. But groups like these function based upon international outrage. AI has absolutely no enforcement powers whatsoever. Instead, they function by bringing attention to human rights abuses, and rallying popular outrage, and thus political pressure on offending governments.

Their politically motivated reports basically do two things... First, they draw attention away from genuine human rights abuses going on in China, the DPRK, etc. etc.

Second, they're "crying wolf." If you keep insisting that the US is "torturing" people by making them sit in chairs for 2 hours at a time, it devalues the strength of the accusation.

Finally, they create an excuse for actual torturers to hide behind. Some third world scumbag can cut the fingers off somebody who looked wrong at him, and when he's accused of torture, he just shrugs, flutters his eyelids and says "I am sorry, I am just doing like my role model, the United States..."

The only reason that AI maintains any credibility at all, is because they serve the needs of people like you, who want to see attacks against the military during a war George W. Bush initiated.

# re: Amnesty International Is A Joke... 5/3/2006 10:44 PM I hate evil doers on the internets from 24.19.46.198
I disagree. They deny us a valid watchdog organization.

But for the most part, I agree. AI needs to increase their attention to China's human rights violation. As you can see from this web page on their web site, they are criminally ignoring the problem: http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/china/index.do

As you pointed out, they utterly drop the ball by failing to note the torture that routinely takes place in ALL of Africa and ALL of the Middle East. It's simply not enough that they report on human rights violations in China, Iran, Egypt and Ethiopia on their homepage. They must be covering for the evil-doers; they hate American patriots and want to make American liberals hate American soldiers.

But let's get to the point.

The US hasn't had a policy of using torture, and even if it had, it would be the right thing to do, because it works. Disputing this is unpatriotic and objectively both pro-surrender and pro-terrorist.

# re: Amnesty International Is A Joke... 5/3/2006 10:51 PM Furthermore from 24.19.46.198
I don't know why we're talking about chair restraints. Perhaps it's because MSNBC is trying to mislead its readers into thinking that Amnesty International is talking about chair restraints.

In their press release announcing the report referenced by MSNBC, they don't even mention chair restraints. Aside from the stock photo used in the article (Getty Images), there is no mention of chair restraints.

According to the Amnesty International press release announcing their report, which can be found here: http://www.amnestyusa.org/news/document.do?id=ENGAMR510702006

..."The heaviest sentence imposed on anyone to date for a torture-related death while in US custody is five months -- the same sentence that you might receive in the US for stealing a bicycle. In this case, the five-month sentence was for assaulting a 22-year-old taxi-driver who was hooded and chained to a ceiling while being kicked and beaten until he died," said Curt Goering[, Senior Deputy Executive Director Of Amnesty International USA]."

MSNBC is misleading.

# re: Amnesty International Is A Joke... 5/3/2006 11:01 PM Correction from 24.19.46.198
The report itself mentions chair restraints, but with the following qualifications:

- "extremely painful" methods of force-feeding which included improper use of a restraint chair and heavy nasal tubing

- In December 2005, AI wrote to the US authorities about a photograph in which a juvenile was shown immobilized in a four-point restraint chair in Abu Ghraib prison, reportedly as a punishment. AI drew attention to international and **US standards stipulating that restraints should never be applied as punishment** and expressing concern that prolonged immobilization in restraints in the manner shown could carry a health risk. (Emphasis added)

- Lawyers for other detainees have told AI that **hunger strikers** had been moved into isolation in cold rooms, immobilized in restraint chairs and deliberately force-fed too much food, causing them extreme pain and, in some cases, diarrhoea. (Emphasis added)

- Kuwaiti national Fawzi al-Odah told his lawyer that on 11 January 2006 he ended his hunger strike after being threatened with force-feeding using a thick tube with a metal edge whilst restrained, and after hearing the screams of other hunger strikers.

---

Enough with the chairs.

Other items noted in the report include:

- Children in Guantánamo

At least three detainees who were under 18 when first detained remain in Guantánamo. They are Mohammed C, a Chadian national picked up in Pakistan, who was transferred to Guantánamo in January 2002 when he was just 15, Omar Khadr, aged 15 when captured in Afghanistan in July 2002, and Yousuf al-Shehri, whose alleged ill-treatment during force-feeding is described above. Mohammed C and Omar Khadr have alleged that they were tortured in US custody, including being beaten, placed in painful shackles, threatened with dogs and subjected to sleep deprivation; Omar Khadr also states he was threatened with rape and had pine solvent poured on him. Throughout their detention, they have been held in the same harsh conditions as adults, including prolonged solitary confinement in Camp V. Neither has been provided with rehabilitation or educational programs consistent with international standards for the treatment of juveniles in custody.

It should be noted that a great deal of the report has nothing to do with any War on Terror -related allegations of torture, but rather discuss apparent human rights violations in US law enforcement and criminal justice system.

# re: Amnesty International Is A Joke... 5/3/2006 11:03 PM Jack from 67.166.2.58
Yes, you've demonstrated your total mastery of snarky sarcasm. I'm impressed, yet again, with your intellect.

Oooh, see that? I was just being sarcastic too! It's really a battle royale of complex and sophisticated humor!

OMG LOL! MORE SACRASISM!

Seriously now. You're a retard. What you need to do is stop trying to be funny, and just state an actual argument that makes some sense. I know you can't believe it, but you're literally not smart enough to fail to be funny AND have a point, at the same time.

For example: "I don't know why we're talking about chair restraints. Perhaps it's because MSNBC is trying to mislead its readers into thinking that Amnesty International is talking about chair restraints. "

Ok, hi, read the fucking article you just linked. That is, the FULL version, linked at the bottom of the page

"In December 2005, AI wrote to the US authorities about a photograph in which a juvenile was shown immobilized in a four-point restraint chair in Abu Ghraib prison, reportedly as a punishment. AI drew attention to international and US standards stipulating that restraints should never be applied as punishment and expressing concern that prolonged immobilization in restraints in the manner shown could carry a health risk. The US authorities informed AI that they had suspended use of the restraint chair in Abu Ghraib, pending a review of procedures."

You don't know why we're talking about chair restraints? I do. I also know why you don't know. It's because you were too busy coming up with unclever shit, and not reading.

Read more, talk less. Please.

# re: Amnesty International Is A Joke... 5/3/2006 11:10 PM What a joke from 24.19.46.198
This guy is a joke.

Amnesty International CLEARLY is not even marginally serious about its job. Otherwise, the "Find Region" button that links to news about torture in Africa, the Middle East, and Europe would have an INFINITE amount of news stories and reports. Not the measely few dozen or hundred. But INFINITE amounts.

http://www.amnestyusa.org/regions/africa/index.do

http://www.amnestyusa.org/regions/middleeast/index.do

http://www.amnestyusa.org/regions/europe/index.do

This organization clearly doesn't really care about human rights. They exist soley to undercut the military and defeat us in the War on Terror. This should be obvious by looking at the information they present on their Internets website.

# re: Amnesty International Is A Joke... 5/3/2006 11:15 PM Talk show from 24.19.46.198
In the interest of full disclosure:

The US authorities informed AI that they had suspended use of the restraint chair in Abu Ghraib, pending a review of procedures.(52) However the restraint chair continues to be used in other US facilities housing "war on terror" detainees, including Guantánamo, where there have been further allegations of ill-treatment involving use of the chair (see below).

# re: Amnesty International Is A Joke... 5/3/2006 11:21 PM No evidence from 24.19.46.198
You also hit the nail on the head regarding Amnesty International giving a pass to Cuba, BOTH Koreas, huge swaths of Asia and Russia.

http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/cuba/news.do

http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/south_korea/index.do

http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/north_korea/index.do

http://www.amnestyusa.org/regions/asia/index.do

http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/russian_federation/index.do

I hope these links prove that AI literally spends too much time noticing that American MPs were making prisoners sit down when they attacked people. Not to mention Rush's frathouse hazing horseplay in Abu Graib. (A few bad apples anyway.)

# re: Amnesty International Is A Joke... 5/4/2006 12:36 AM Jack from 67.166.2.58
First off, let me suggest you cut the sarcasm. When it's all you've got, it starts to get obvious and repetitive. It's also distracting you from making any useful points, or from reading what I write. If you want to actually hear something other than the Howard Dean talking points you spend your days drowning in, then I'd be happy to give it to you. If you want to use my blog as a place to reprint entire libraries of AI documents, and make extremely uninspired attempts at humor, I'd be equally happy to stop responding to you.

Speaking of sarcasm and reprinting, you've now put up two posts of links bookended by "humor" which you direct at a strawman. Yes, I know what a strawman argument is too. Unlike you, I'll tell you why it's a strawman.

See, contrary to your suggestions, I never said AI didn't cover abuses outside of US prisons. Clearly they do. Even you can find the links to it. What I said was that these other instances of mistreatment are infinitely more worthy of attention than the supposed abuses in American prisons.

To be fair, AI pretty much shrieks about anything they see, no matter how mundane, cause that's how they roll. If prisoners aren't getting their iced tea cold enough, AI will cry about it on their behalf. So, I suppose it's a bit ridiculous of me to expect AI to be anything besides comically adherant to a vaguely defined and highly naive set of principles. Really, I should be irritated with MSNBC, and the American media in general, for blowing this up like it actually means something other than "AI still exists, and still has a word processor."

You also need to understand that I don't take AI seriously, and I don't take the prisoners seriously.

AI can call shit torture all day. It may even be torture according to some ridiculous document the UN drafted, and we signed. I'm sure there's UN documents that say we can't frown at prisoners, cause it hurts their self esteem. I'm sure that we, like idiots, even signed onto those documents, and now are nominally committed to zero frown prisons.

We shouldn't do that.

But, even moreso, we shouldn't deny reality. If a prisoner wants to fight, he has to be dealt with, one way or another. It's probably going to be completely impossible to restrain him without giving him a fair beating in the process. If the rules say we can't touch him, then the rules have no bearing on reality. If AI wants to scream and wave the rulebook, then fuck them. They're irrelevant.

I think we both agree that "human restraint chairs" aren't torture. I base that on how you tried to deny that AI had objected to the chairs, before you had to backpedal and correct yourself. You thought I was trying to craft a strawman and falsely accuse AI of getting fired up over comically innocuous restraint chairs. Even you couldn't believe they would, so my allegation had to be false. But, turns out that it's not, and that the US military actually stopped using the fucking chairs at AI's request (in Abu Ghraib, at least). Turns out, to your surprise, that AI is capable of getting fired up over literally ANYTHING, and the US military is still willing to humor them.

These prisoners can claim to have been tortured all day. AQ knows the PR value of such claims, and trains operatives to falsely report torture if captured. I don't doubt that we rough these guys up some, and talk shit to them, and generally make things hard on them. That's prison. That's not torture.

If we're taking a random guy out of his cell for no reason, and beating him to death, that's unacceptable. I don't believe that's going on, and certainly not systematically and with command approval. Maybe you do. I find that liberals claim to support the troops, and then assume the worst of every single one of them.

# re: Amnesty International Is A Joke... 5/4/2006 12:52 AM Nut from 24.19.46.198
- Don't conflate criticism of policy and civilian leadership with attacking the troops.

- You stated that "If AI was even marginally serious about its job, it would have an infinite amount of complaints for" a list of countries aside from the United States. The response was a list of links to just such complaints.

- "some ridiculous document the UN drafted, and we signed" -- the UN Convention Against Torture, signed by the United States, yes. http://www.hrweb.org/legal/catsigs.html

- are you defending the use of these chairs for punishment in contravention of stated US military policy, as noted above? defending the use of these chairs and forced feeding of prisoners on hunger strike?

- are you suggesting that all the reports are false? or ... what? just poo-pooing the whole 'anti-torture' deal?

That would be a convenient position to hold.

# re: Amnesty International Is A Joke... 5/4/2006 1:21 AM Gosh from 24.19.46.198
"Unlike you, I'll tell you why it's a strawman." Ok, I'm still waiting. :-)

In the mean time, here are some of the strawmen that you erected and knocked down.

"If prisoners aren't getting their iced tea cold enough, AI will cry about it on their behalf. So, I suppose it's a bit ridiculous of me to expect AI to be anything besides comically adherant to a vaguely defined and highly naive set of principles."

Yes, it would be ridiculous if AE were crying on behalf of prisoners not getting their iced tea cold enough. Straw man.

"I'm sure there's UN documents that say we can't frown at prisoners, cause it hurts their self esteem. I'm sure that we, like idiots, even signed onto those documents, and now are nominally committed to zero frown prisons. We shouldn't do that."

Another straw man.

"Turns out, to your surprise, that AI is capable of getting fired up over literally ANYTHING" -- "To be fair, AI pretty much shrieks about anything they see, no matter how mundane, cause that's how they roll." -- You call that fair? Then back it up. Provide a "shriek" to something "mundane."

Is this what you meant by mundane, or literally ANYTHING?

- "hunger strikers .. immobilized in restraint chairs and deliberately force-fed too much food, causing them extreme pain and, in some cases, diarrhoea."

- "threatened with force-feeding using a thick tube with a metal edge whilst restrained"

- a 15-year old "states he was threatened with rape and had pine solvent poured on him"

- the US ambassador to Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad (our man, remember), stated that "over 100" detainees found at the detention facility in al-Jadiriyah and 26 detainees at the other detention location had been abused.(5)

- In June 2004, two US marines were sentenced to eight and 12 months’ imprisonment by a military court in Iraq. Both men had pleaded guilty to giving electric shocks to an Iraqi prisoner at al-Mahmudiya prison, south of Baghdad.

- On 23 January 2006, a US court martial convicted a US army interrogator of the killing of ‘Abd Hamad Mawoush and sentenced him to forfeit $6,000 of his salary over the next four months, to receive a formal reprimand and spend 60 days restricted to his home, office and church.

He died after being interrogated while allegedly being rolled back and forth with a sleeping bag over his head and body, and the interrogator sat on his chest and placed his hands over his mouth.

My question for you is: Why are you actually denying that torture has taken place?

To accept that it has happened is NOT to blindly attack the troops. It's simply to acknowledge reality. Why is that so bad?

# re: Amnesty International Is A Joke... 5/4/2006 1:49 AM Jack from 67.166.2.58
I am defending the use of a restraint chair as punishment, yes. I don't consider that torture, at least not if used for 2 hours, and probably not even for more. Words like "punishment" are ridiculous in this context, as are "rules" that use them. Same exact situation, claim it's "for the prisoner's protection," and suddenly it's different and no longer torture? There's an issue with documents that make such unrealistic distinctions.

Please also bear in mind, this is no different that what would be done with a violent patient in a hospital or mental care facility, tough probably in a recumbant position, rather than seated.

As I have already said, the US should not sign on to things it doesn't intend to obey. This is why I thought it wise to refuse to sign onto the ICC. It's very hard to refuse to sign the UN Convention Against Torture, no matter how ridiculously worded it is. Just look at the title.

I am also defending the force feeding of prisoners on hunger strike. Clearly the "right to die" debate still rages in the US, and I would think that a prisoner has fewer rights than a free individual, but regardless, I think it's certainly reasonable to use force to preserve the life of a prisoner. As to whether the force feeding was pleasant or not, I sincerely doubt it could be. Having a tube down your nose into your throat would certainly be uncomfortable.

But, according to reports, the tactic succeeded in restoring the inmates to a healthy weight, and none died as a result. This, in my eyes, is akin to fighting with guards. If you attempt to do harm to yourself or others, the remedy will probably be very uncomfortable, whether it's a spray of mace to the eyes, a choke hold, or a tube down the throat. All of this can be avoided by not attempting to harm yourself or others.

The bottom line, is that I consider the UN, and the documents it drafts, to be useless and irrelevant. The UN demanded 14 times that Saddam Hussein prove that he had disarmed, and he never did. Then the UN was outraged when Bush moved to force Saddam into compliance.

As far as the inmates reports go, I don't think they're entirely inaccurate. I think some probably are, some are truthful accounts of business as usual in a prison, which might seem shocking to free people. AI makes no real distinction between what I'd consider real mistreatment, and what I consider acceptable. To them, it's all "akin to torture." To me, that makes them silly and useless.

"Ok, I'm still waiting. :-)"

No, you're still incapable of reading. You implied I was claiming that AI ignores prisoners outside the US. I did not make that claim. Strawman.

"In the mean time, here are some of the strawmen that you erected and knocked down."

No. These are obvious examples of mockery. You really did try to act like I said AI ignores prisoners outside the US. It's obvious hyperbole to suggest AI objects to the temperature of iced tea. Do you honestly think I expect the reader to buy that AI gets upset over iced tea? A strawman is meant to be believed, not meant to be taken as exaggeration. Seriously, you're wasting my fucking time with this.

"deliberately force-fed too much food, causing them extreme pain and, in some cases, diarrhoea."

Ridiculous. This assumes knowledge of the intentions of the doctors administering the feeding tube. They weren't just feeding the inmates, the were "deliberately feeding too much." Bullshit. Pain? There's a tube down your throat. It can't feel good. Diarrhea? Ok, I'm going to be arbitrary and say that giving somebody diarrhea is really uncool, but still not torture.

"threatened with force-feeding using a thick tube with a metal edge whilst restrained"

If you tell somebody "eat or we will have to force feed you," that's not really a threat, that's a statement of fact. Again, the language is loaded, designed to seem terrifying. AI does this all the time. I realize their goal is to rally public opinion, but they seem to do a lot of embellishing. Also, all this "metal edge" talk is a joke. You think the military had special "hurty feeding tubes" custom made? Or do you think they just get whatever feeding tube is used for these purposes?

Claimed threats of rape aren't rape. They're not even proof of the threats.

The abuse of prisoners by Iraq's Interior Ministry is not an example of American torture "our guy" or not.

"Why are you actually denying that torture has taken place?"

I'm not. Please point to where I am. The use of electric shocks of suitable power to cause serious pain certainly constitutes torture. Since the soldiers involved plead guilty, I believe that they committed torture. I also don't doubt that other examples of torture have occurred in the current war in Iraq, at the hands of our soldiers. I think such things are yet another unfortunate byproduct of war, I think the military is being extremely transparent and cooperative in fixing the issues and punishing the offenders.

Ultimately, I believe that the greater goal of promoting this as an "immoral war" is why the media harps so relentlessly on these issues. Soldiers undergo stress in war. Some will kill themselves. Some will take it out on spouses or children. Some will take it out on prisoners. The fact that these sad realities are used as a political pawn, and not simply understood as the cost of war, demonstrates the agenda of those who hype the torture issue.

My question for you is this: Do you think that the US is more prone to torture, according to the UN Declaration Against Torture, than the other signatories of that document?

# re: Amnesty International Is A Joke... 5/4/2006 2:56 PM Gosh from 12.144.130.7
Quick response this time, but:

In answer to your question -- we are probably more prone to torture at this point in history, due primarily to circumstances, not anything inherent about our people. Indeed, I think we - as a people - generally find torture abhorrent. However, there is a vocal minority of people (see their blogs and punditry) who believe it is a legitimate and even effective technique for extracting intelligence, in spite of evidence to the contrary. And circumstantially, we have a civilian leadership which has explicited reserved the right to use torture techniques, by way of leaving the possibility open as a tool available to the unitary executive/commander in chief, and by way of redefining torture in increasingly narrow ways. Furthermore, we have an army of 115,000 or so men engaged against an urban insurgency.

On a related topic, I would be interested in reading your thoughts on this essay: http://www.newyorker.com/talk/content/articles/060508ta_talk_packer

Take it apart, dismiss it, engage it, whatever -- just curious to read what you'll have to say about it.

# re: Amnesty International Is A Joke... 5/4/2006 3:27 PM Jack from 67.166.2.58
See, now that's a good post, Gosh.

On some level, I agree that we're more prone to torture than some of those signatories, primarily the Europeans.

Now that they're clearly not in the running as military powers, the European nations are trying to remove that hammer from the toolbox. As long as we're here to protect them, they'll never fight in another war. So, they'll also not have prisoners to torture.

But, don't forget, the British are in Iraq in much smaller numbers, supervising much fewer prisoners, and they had their own abuse scandals as well.

That gets back to why I think AI is a joke. When you report every single thing a soldier does wrong, it's too much noise, no signal. AI should focus its attention on clear examples of state sanctioned abuse. I don't think American prisons even remotely fit that bill.

Also, there's other signatories on that list, besides Europe. A quick skim yields a large number of nations that I'd bet a good sum of money are actively torturing people right now. Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Egypt, Estonia, Guatemala, Jordan, Libya, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Romania, Senegal, Somalia, Uganda, Venezuela, Yemen... None of these guys have any problem torturing the shit out somebody.

As far as the Bush administration's response to all this, I think your portrayal is misguided. The left wants to portray Bush as "wanting to use torture." That's not it. He simply can't promise he won't find a need for it later.

A theme throughout Bush's presidency is that he's simply not willing to make promises he doesn't intend to keep when it comes to national security. He's not going to give up power he's expected to use to protect American lives. He's not going to give AI the power to overrule his decisions regarding interrogation. If push comes to shove, American lives are on the line, and torture might save them, Bush is going to approve torture. I support that. Like I said earlier, if you don't plan to honor a rule, don't sign on.

Post Feedback

Title:
Name:
Url:
Comments: 
Protected by Clearscreen.SharpHIPEnter the code you see: