posted on June 21, 2004 01:53:53 PM new
New video reveals real torture scandal
Saddam's daily horrors make America's
Abu Ghraib abuses seem almost trivial
Posted: June 21, 2004
1:00 a.m. Eastern
The heated charge that prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib by U.S. service personnel was somehow equivalent to that perpetrated by Saddam Hussein a notion pervasive in the Muslim world and epitomized in the West by Sen. Edward Kennedy's remark that "we now learn that Saddam's torture chambers reopened under new management, U.S. management'' has had ice-cold water dumped on it by a horrific new video.
Screened for reporters last week by Washington's American Enterprise Institute, the 4-plus-minute video clip http://www.aei.org/, reportedly obtained from the Pentagon, captures the routine beating, torture, dismemberment and decapitation that occurred daily at the hands of Saddam's henchmen.
However, only a handful of reporters showed up to see the new video, and even fewer reported on it.
One journalist present was New York Post's Washington bureau chief Deborah Orin, who wrote of "savage scenes of decapitation, fingers chopped off one by one, tongues hacked out with a razor blade all while victims shriek in pain and the thugs chant Saddam's praises."
Noting that "Saddam's henchmen took the videos as newsreels to document their deeds in honor of their leader," Orin added, "but these awful images didn't show up on American TV news."
In fact, Orin mulled, why did no U.S. media "air the videos of Nick Berg and Wall Street Journal reporter Danny Pearl getting decapitated, or of U.S. contractors in Fallujah getting torn limb from limb by al-Qaida operatives," and yet gave saturation coverage, including endless photos, of Iraqi prisoners being abused by U.S. troops at Abu Ghraib.
For that matter, why did no U.S. media air images of American hostage Paul M. Johnson Jr. being beheaded earlier this week by his terrorist captors in Saudi Arabia?
"Because most [journalists] want Bush to lose," AEI scholar Michael Ledeen, who helped put on the video screening event, told Orin.
The sustained fever-pitch publicity over the abuses at Abu Ghraib has included only occasional oblique references to what transpired at the prison under Saddam Hussein's rule.
"Under Saddam Hussein," the AEI website said of Abu Ghraib, "some thirty thousand people were executed there, and countless more were tortured and mutilated, returning to Iraqi society as visible evidence of the brutality of Baathist rule instead of being lost to the anonymity of mass graves."
Present at the screening event were four victims of Saddam's torture. They, along with three other merchants living and working in Baghdad, each had their right hands amputated during Saddam's reign. Fortunately, all seven came to the United States for medical attention and received state-of-the-art prosthetic hands. Four of them spoke at the AEI event, alongside the screening of the video documenting Saddam's horrors.
Culture of torture
Putting the U.S. military's abuses of Abu Ghraib into better context is a recent document from the State Department's Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor. Here's what the official December 2002 report said about the scope and extent of Saddam's abuse of Iraq's population.
"In 1979, immediately upon coming to power, Saddam Hussein silenced all political opposition in Iraq and converted his one-party state into a cult of personality. Over the more than 20 years since then, his regime has systematically executed, tortured, imprisoned, raped, terrorized and repressed Iraqi people. Iraq is a nation rich in culture with a long history of intellectual and scientific achievement. Yet Saddam Hussein has silenced its scholars and doctors, as well as its women and children.
"Iraqi dissidents are tortured, killed or disappear in order to deter other Iraqi citizens from speaking out against the government or demanding change. A system of collective punishment tortures entire families or ethnic groups for the acts of one dissident. Women are raped and often videotaped during rape to blackmail their families. Citizens are publicly beheaded, and their families are required to display the heads of the deceased as a warning to others who might question the politics of this regime.
"Saddam Hussein was also the first leader to use chemical weapons against his own population, silencing more than 60 villages and 30,000 citizens with poisonous gas. Between 1983 and 1988 alone, he murdered more than 30,000 Iraqi citizens with mustard gas and nerve agents. Several international organizations claim that he killed more than 60,000 Iraqi citizens with chemicals, including large numbers of women and children."
'Hopelessness, sadness and fear'
"The Iraqi people are not allowed to vote to remove the government," said the State Department report. (In the last election, there was one candidate. The ballot said "Saddam Hussein: Yes or No?" Each ballot was numbered so any no votes could be traced to the unfortunate voter, who would disappear forever. Saddam got 100 percent of the vote.)
"Freedom of expression, association and movement do not exist in Iraq. The media is tightly controlled Saddam Hussein's son owns the daily Iraqi newspaper. Iraqi citizens cannot assemble except in support of the government. Iraqi citizens cannot freely leave Iraq."
Safia Al Souhail, an Iraqi citizen and advocacy director of the International Alliance for Justice, described daily reality during Saddam's reign this way:
"Iraq under Saddam's regime has become a land of hopelessness, sadness and fear. A country where people are ethnically cleansed; prisoners are tortured in more than 300 prisons in Iraq. Rape is systematic ... congenital malformation, birth defects, infertility, cancer and various disorders are the results of Saddam's gassing of his own people ... the killing and torturing of husbands in front of their wives and children ... Iraq under Saddam has become a hell and a museum of crimes."
The State Department report continues: "Under Saddam Hussein's orders, the security apparatus in Iraq routinely and systematically tortures its citizens. Beatings, rape, breaking of limbs and denial of food and water are commonplace in Iraqi detention centers. Saddam Hussein's regime has also invented unique and horrific methods of torture including electric shocks to a male's genitals, pulling out fingernails, suspending individuals from rotating ceiling fans, dripping acid on a victim's skin, gouging out eyes, and burning victims with a hot iron or blowtorch."
Why didn't more Iraqis complain? Possibly because of Saddam's decree in 2000 authorizing the government to amputate the tongues of citizens who criticize him or his government. The AEI video depicts one such tongue amputation, using a razor blade while the tongue is held with tweezers.
The following, according to the State Department report, were routine in Iraq during Saddam Hussein's rule:
* Medical experimentation
* Beatings
* Crucifixion
* Hammering nails into the fingers and hands
* Amputating sex organs or breasts with an electric carving knife
* Spraying insecticides into a victim's eyes
* Branding with a hot iron
* Committing rape while the victim's spouse is forced to watch
* Pouring boiling water into the victim's rectum
* Nailing the tongue to a wooden board
* Extracting teeth with pliers
* Using bees and scorpions to sting naked children in front of their parents
Saddam also routinely tortured and murdered women. The daily newspaper "Babel," owned by Uday, Hussein's eldest son, contained a public admission on Feb. 13, 2001 of beheading women who were suspected of prostitution.
The Iraqi Women's League in Damascus, Syria, described this practice as follows: "Under the pretext of fighting prostitution, units of 'Feda'iyee Saddam,' the paramilitary organization led by Uday, have beheaded in public more than 200 women all over the country, dumping their severed heads at their families' doorsteps. Many of the victims were innocent professional women, including some who were suspected of being dissidents."
'Too awful to show'
Why, asks Orin, does the world see "photos of U.S. interrogators using dogs to scare prisoners at Abu Ghraib, but not the footage of Saddam's prisoners getting fed alive to Doberman pinschers on Saddam's watch"?
Besides the obvious role of partisan politics in an election year, Orin points to another factor: the fact that Saddam's tortures, like al-Qaida's, are so horrible that they're unbearable to watch, almost too atrocious to describe in words.
But the result of this, notes Orin, is that the media's unbalanced coverage is "worse than creating moral equivalence between Saddam's tortures and prisoner abuse by U.S. troops. It's that we do far more to highlight our own wrongdoings precisely because they are less appalling. ...
"We highlight U.S. prisoner abuse because the photos aren't too offensive to show. We downplay Saddam's abuse precisely because it's far worse so we can't use the photos. And that sets the stage for remarks like Sen. Ted Kennedy's claim that Saddam's torture chambers have reopened under 'U.S. management.'"
Friday, Kennedy and others who morally equate U.S. leadership with Saddam Hussein were joined by one more superstar pop music icon Madonna who declared that President Bush and Saddam "are both behaving in an irresponsible manner."
"Reporters," concludes Orin, "have to face up to the fact that right now, if we highlight the wrongs that Americans commit but not out of squeamishness the far worse horrors committed by others, we become propaganda tools for the other side."
Readers may view the video on the AEI website, but caution is advised. The video is extremely graphic and disturbing, and definitely unsuitable for children.
posted on June 21, 2004 04:18:42 PM new
Bear, I don't see how you can compare the two. Maybe other countries have worse means of torture but it doesn't mean the lesser is less evil. And yes, Saddam was bad. I don't know anyone who thinks otherwise.
Bear, You don't understand the statement. It's like a little kid knocking the window our of your car with a baseball bat and in explanation saying well at least I didn't set it on fire. Knocking the window out is wrong even though he could have set the car on fire or rolled it into the lake
Our kind of torture cannot be excused or diminished by the fact that Saddam's torture was worse.
posted on June 21, 2004 06:47:55 PM new
The point you conviently seem to forget is the disproportionate amount of time the LIBERAL NEWS MEDIA has paid to the claims of American abuse as opposed to the YEARS of abuse inflected by Saddam on his own people for his {b]PERSONAL ENJOYMENT[/b].
Granted, the abuse by a few American soldiers was wrong. But how can you intelectually compare a dozens of instances of abuse by the troops to the thousands of instances of abuse by Saddam.
posted on June 21, 2004 06:56:15 PM new
When a mid eastern despot that we supported for yesrs tortures people it isn't news, e.g., the Sha of Iran, Iraq's Hussien, and the House of Saud. In fact a mid eastern despot that didn't torture would be news. When Americans torture it is news. It is totally against everything our people (well at leats most of us) and nation stand for.
BTW, cutting off heads and hands is also quite normal for Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, and Afghanistan and many other muslim countries.
The head of Iraqi security that we recently installed just said in a news conference that he will cut off the hands and heads of the "insurgents" in Iraq.
The torture by American will saty in the news for another reason. It was not the case of a dozen US Army Privates going wild in a prison. The orders or aquesience to torture came from the Bush administration as the leaked memos show.
The right wants the issue dead because it leads right tio the oval office.
posted on June 21, 2004 07:20:47 PM new
Same principle applies.
We should not evaluate the right and wrong of an act based on the fact that it was done just a few times while someone else did it many times.
One incident of torture is unacceptable and is not ameliorated by saying well Saddam has done it thousands of times. We can't use the number of times that Saddam commits torture to excuse or lessen the evil of using torture with the excuse that it's used less frequently than Saddam.
Of course there is a disproportionate amount of time focused on this story about Americans using torture in American newspapers rather than Saddam's history of using torture. It has current national news interest and has no relevance to liberal newspapers or media.
posted on June 21, 2004 07:22:47 PM new"Granted, the abuse by a few American soldiers was wrong. But how can you intelectually compare a dozens of instances of abuse by the troops to the thousands of instances of abuse by Saddam."
But Bear, that's exactly what the person that wrote the article is doing. He's comparing tortures and surmising one is worse than the other.
posted on June 21, 2004 08:24:05 PM new
So what's worse in this hypothetical scenario; During an interrogation an American soldier slaps a captive, naked Iraqi soldier across the face in an attemt to extract information that might help to save possibly hundreds of lives. Or one of Saddam's henchman amputates sex organs or breasts with an electric carving knife of an Iraqi civilian in an attempt to get the civilian to confess his/her disloyalty to Saddam??
Keep in mind that with the American soldiers this scenario only happened for a few months but with the other part of the scenario with the Iraqi henchmen it went on for years.
In a sense I agree that what the American soldiers did was wrong but it didn't compare to what the Iraqi's did to their own people.
posted on June 21, 2004 08:39:50 PM new
"He's comparing tortures and surmising one is worse than the other. "
Which is a perfectly valid thing to do. If I had a choice between getting naked in a pile of naked Iraqis or having my tongue nailed to a wooden board, point me to the pile!
There ARE varying degrees here, and Abu Graib is small potatos.
No one was killed at Abu Graib. No one was even seriously injured at Abu Graib. Was it wrong? Yes- send those seven people to jail and be done with it. It just wasn't THAT big of a deal.
--------------------------------------
We do not stop playing because we grow old. We grow old because we stop playing -- Anonymous
posted on June 21, 2004 09:04:32 PM new
The point is that a few Iraqi soldiers were for the most part humiliated so therefore I have to conclude that it is allright to just go ahead and say - so what.
We have ways of making you talk, so talk or we will disrobe you and make you play dogpile in the middle of the floor.
posted on June 21, 2004 09:12:14 PM new
Kraft if you can't comprehend the difference, I feel sorry for you.
As I stated before, the liberal media has failed to give as much publicity to Saddams torture tapes as they have to a few photos of Iraqi's standing naked or with a leash.
This is a typical ploy by the left to sway the uninformed public against President Bush.
The true patriotic informed public knows the crap the left based media is spreading is just that & useful for nothing more that fertilizer.
posted on June 21, 2004 09:28:23 PM new
The ghost of George Patton. The truth on abuse.
I will not cut & paste the article, lest you libs be offended and rat me out to the Vendio Political Cops. It's nothing you haven't seen before, not too graphic, but some profanity.
posted on June 21, 2004 11:24:33 PM new
There is NO difference in kind between what our soldiers are accused of and what Hussein did.
Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of S Carolina has said that there is evidence of murder committed by our prison guards. Graham is also a Reservist JAG judge.
Electric shock, murder - there is no difference.
But comparing what Saddam Hussein did is not only irrelevant, but insane.
To say that it somehow mitigates what our soldiers did because Hussein did much worse is pure idiocy.
I live in a constitutional democratic republic, not a despotic animal farm.
The torture described in Taguba's Report cannot be trivilized by comparason to Saddam. Would you support this type of torture practiced on American POW's? You rightwingers are just trying to mitigate the U.S. torture by comparing the United States of America with Iraq and Saddam. That's anti-American. When did the morals and conduct of our country sink so low that they must be compared to those of Saddam Hussein???
```
And don't forget that this torture started at the top of this administration. For example....
Forced to stand on a box with wires attached to your fingers, toes and penis all night long. Just something that Spec. Sabrina Harman dreamed up in Abu Ghraib prison? Think again.
This torture is well known to intelligence agencies worldwide. The CIA documented the effects of forced standing 40 years ago. And the technique is valued because it leaves few marks, and so no evidence.
Forced standing was a prescribed field punishment in West European armies in the early 20th century. The British Army called it Field Punishment No. 1, though the soldiers referred to it as "the crucifixion." The French Legionnaires called it "the Silo."
By the 1920s, forced standing was a routine police torture in America. In 1931, the National Commission on Lawless Enforcement of the Law found numerous American police departments using forced standing to coerce confessions.
In the 1930s, Stalin's NKVD also famously used forced standing to coerce seemingly voluntary confessions for show trials. The Gestapo used forced standing as a routine punishment in many concentration camps. It even created small narrow "standing cells," Stehzelle, where prisoners had to stand all night.
In 1956, the CIA commissioned two experts, Harold Wolff and Lawrence Hinkle, who described the effects of forced standing. The ankles and feet swell to twice their normal size within 24 hours. Moving becomes agony. Large blisters develop. The heart rate increases, and some faint. The kidneys eventually shut down.
The American soldiers performed the torture, but someone taught them the parameters. This kind of torture is not common knowledge, and if it were not for the photographs, no one would know that it had been practiced.
And there you go...comparing our torture with saddam's torture in a pitiful and embarrassing maneuver to make our torture seem OK since it pale's in comparison -- from your viewpoint to torture by Saddam.
But then convoluted logic is your game. How else can you justify such horror.
posted on June 22, 2004 08:20:10 AM new
For those of you who cannot fathom the differences, here it is in black & white:
Main Entry: abuse
Pronunciation: &-'byόs
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French abus, from Latin abusus, from abuti to consume, from ab- + uti to use
1 : a corrupt practice or custom
2 : improper or excessive use or treatment :
Main Entry: tor·ture
Pronunciation: 'tor-ch&r
Function: noun
Etymology: French, from Late Latin tortura, from Latin tortus, past participle of torquEre to twist; probably akin to Old High German drAhsil turner, Greek atraktos spindle
1 a : anguish of body or mind : AGONY b : something that causes agony or pain
2 : the infliction of intense pain (as from burning, crushing, or wounding) to punish, coerce, or afford sadistic pleasure
3 : distortion or overrefinement of a meaning or an argument : STRAINING
posted on June 22, 2004 12:21:03 PM new
Degree does not matter. It's not the real issue. The issue is that our country, the United States of America, that holds itself up as a standard to follow, used such tactics at all. Tactics that, if they were used on American POWs would have the staunchest neocon screaming and protesting. Instead we hear "well they do this" or "Saddam did that" as ways to justify what we did.
It doesn't matter what Saddam did in the past. Did he do horrible things? Yes, he did. But is his standard of behavior really the one you want to base American behavior on?
____________________
We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people. -- John F. Kennedy
posted on June 22, 2004 04:47:53 PM new
taken from the FreeRepublic
Doling Out Kindness to Those Who Would Kill Us
Chron Watch ^ | 21 May 2004 | Frank Salvato
Posted on 05/21/2004 10:06:25 PM PDT by Lando Lincoln
Now political correctness has bled over into how we interrogate terrorists. Great.
Lt. General Ricardo Sanchez has issued an edict that prohibits any and all kinds of coercive interrogation practices in Iraq.
Obviously this comes in the wake of what the media has termed the ''pictures of abuse'' from the Abu Ghraib prison. But what many people seem to have forgotten is the fact many of these ''detainees'' are the same thugs and butchers that used to perpetrate Saddam Hussein's real atrocities. It would seem we are dolling out kindness to those who would kill us.
Before I go any further I will address those who are bound to criticize me for my thoughts on this matter. I am referring to those gentle beings whose peace-loving manner is to immediately place the label of Nazi or fascist onto those who deal in the realm of reality rather than ideology.
While everything would be wonderful, bright and compassionate in a world that played by the rules, the fact of the matter is we live in a world that has evil as one of its components.
This has been proven beyond a shadow of doubt by the intermittent murders of innocents at the hands of those who practice terror. The murders of Richard Pearl, the four Blackwater contractors in Fallujah, and now Nicholas Berg are all examples of the level of barbarism terrorists will use to achieve their goal--which is the domination of the region. The blame for these acts can only rest upon the shoulders of those who actually perform them for after all we do still possess free will as human beings. And when a group of mongrels can use the elimination of human life for shock value, we must all find ourselves in agreement that we are not playing by any set of rules; at least they are not and that is of their own free will.
But for the handful of deviants that played out their pornographic fantasies on film, the United States and coalition forces have conducted interrogations of Iraqi detainees under the guidelines and constraints of the Geneva Conventions.
Conversely, the terrorists that routinely kidnap and murder civilians, wage war from the sanctity of holy sites, and otherwise manipulate what could be described as the moral ethic possessed and employed by the United States Armed Forces do not adhere to the guidelines and constraints of any document, let alone a set of moral ethics. The only rule the terrorists--our enemies--abide by is the rule of ''win at all cost.'' When one looks at both sides in comparison, it is easy to see that the battlefield is extremely skewed.
Now comes the decision to skew the field of battle even more.
The questions need to be asked, how are we--the good guys--supposed to extract information that would undoubtedly save lives from those who are willing to die for the ''glory'' of their cause? How are men and women charged with gathering information that would save lives supposed to achieve that task when they are sent in handicapped from the beginning? Tickle torture? Calling their mothers names? Playing ''keep away'' with their prayer beads?
The American public watches without indignation for Detective Sipowicz from ''NYPD Blue'' to use interrogation techniques that would now have a military interrogator court-martialed if applied to the detainees in Iraq. We accept the premise of sometimes having to augment the rules in an effort to get vital information when the circumstances are that of fiction and entertainment. But when it comes to actually saving the lives of our own men and women in uniform, and consequently our own lives, we fall prey to the constraints of the liberal world and its political correctness.
While the liberal world is chock full of hypocrisies, this hypocrisy will most certainly cost lives. We can only pray that the price will not be extracted in the urban centers of the United States.
Accepted forms of interrogation for detained combatants, as embraced by the civilized free world, are no longer in the U.S. interrogators arsenal of tactics. They are slowly being replaced by the gentle ''coercion'' found acceptable by the liberal-left, the same groups who enjoy portraying our president as a Nazi. The same groups who rail against the very country that affords them the wherewithal to ''rail'' in the first place. The same groups that stood steward to the dumbing-down of our education system. The same groups that have embraced the idea of government sponsored entitlement over the idea of self-sufficiency.
Perhaps it is the all-access way this military operation is now being viewed but it is clear, the generals are no longer the only ''cooks in the kitchen.'' With the war still being fought the interloping of political correctness has entered into the fray.
Politicians in the United States, enabled by the antiwar biased reporting many in the mainstream media have embraced, have made the same mistake they made in the waning days of the Vietnam War. The politicians have somehow found a way into the process. As those of us who were aware at the time of the Vietnam War can testify, no good can come of it.
Politicians are now asserting their influence where the generals should reign supreme. There is trouble in ''River City.''
Ironically, the same people who insisted on the mistakes of the Vietnam Era--Ted Kennedy, Hillary Clinton and John F. Kerry--are the same ones leading the ''mistake parade'' today; the same ones who no doubt perpetrated the idea of political correctness upon the citizens of the United States in the first place. It can be argued that we should not be foolish enough to allow the same mistakes to happen again. We can actually do so by rebuking these liberal bastions of hypocrisy in the upcoming election.
We can do so by voting against political correctness in November.
Frank Salvato is the managing editor for TheRant.us. He receives e-mail at [email protected].
posted on June 22, 2004 04:52:46 PM new
In the most simplistic terminology. the mass Left market media is blowing out of proportion the abuses by American troops to prisoners, when compared to the torture of Iraqi citizens by their RULER.
American troops NEVER did any of the following, unlike Saddam.
The following, according to the State Department report, were routine in Iraq during Saddam Hussein's rule:
* Medical experimentation
* Beatings
* Crucifixion
* Hammering nails into the fingers and hands
* Amputating sex organs or breasts with an electric carving knife
* Spraying insecticides into a victim's eyes
* Branding with a hot iron
* Committing rape while the victim's spouse is forced to watch
* Pouring boiling water into the victim's rectum
* Nailing the tongue to a wooden board
* Extracting teeth with pliers
* Using bees and scorpions to sting naked children in front of their parents
Saddam also routinely tortured and murdered women. The daily newspaper "Babel," owned by Uday, Hussein's eldest son, contained a public admission on Feb. 13, 2001 of beheading women who were suspected of prostitution.
Do you now understand the difference between abuse & torture?
posted on June 22, 2004 05:34:46 PM new
And all this has what to do with how Americans comport themselves?!? I believe I likened this, a few weeks ago, to a man who says "her first husband beat the crap out of her, so it's OK if I slap her around a bit."
____________________
We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people. -- John F. Kennedy
posted on June 23, 2004 05:47:18 AM new
bear: American troops NEVER did any of the following, unlike Saddam.
The following, according to the State Department report, were routine in Iraq during Saddam Hussein's rule:
* Medical experimentation
* Beatings
* Crucifixion
* Hammering nails into the fingers and hands
* Amputating sex organs or breasts with an electric carving knife
* Spraying insecticides into a victim's eyes
* Branding with a hot iron
* Committing rape while the victim's spouse is forced to watch
* Pouring boiling water into the victim's rectum
* Nailing the tongue to a wooden board
* Extracting teeth with pliers
* Using bees and scorpions to sting naked children in front of their parents
And how does the above compare to the United State's execution of prisoners by lethal injection, electrocution, hanging, by a firing squad or the gas chamber?
Yes what Sadaam did to his people was evil compared to what the Americna troops did to the prisoners, however you should be comparing apples to apples. You do not know what those people did to deserve those punishments. When did you become such an expert in Iraqi law?
Re-defeat Bush
------------------------------
June is Gay Pride Month
------------------------------
All animals are created equal, but some are more equal than others.
Change is constant. The history of mankind is about change. One set of beliefs is pushed aside by a new set. The old order is swept away by the new. If people become attached to the old order, they see their best interest in defending it. They become the losers. They become the old order and in turn are vulnerable. People who belong to the new order are winners.
James A Belaco & Ralph C. Stayer
posted on June 23, 2004 04:01:31 PM new
[i]And how does the above compare to the United State's execution of prisoners by lethal injection, electrocution, hanging, by a firing squad or the gas chamber?
posted on June 23, 2004 04:34:06 PM new
Capital punishment has been legalized.
Torture has not been legalized.
Just because it is legalized torture, does that make it any more right? Killing people for whatever reason, whether it is done by a citizen or the state is wrong in my opinion.
There are European countries that have lower crime rates than the US and also do not have the death penalty. The death penalty can not be used a threat in the hopes of reducing crime.
Re-defeat Bush
------------------------------
June is Gay Pride Month
------------------------------
All animals are created equal, but some are more equal than others.
Change is constant. The history of mankind is about change. One set of beliefs is pushed aside by a new set. The old order is swept away by the new. If people become attached to the old order, they see their best interest in defending it. They become the losers. They become the old order and in turn are vulnerable. People who belong to the new order are winners.
James A Belaco & Ralph C. Stayer
posted on June 24, 2004 11:11:37 AM new
Yup, our torture is better than Saddam's.
U.S. Soldiers to Be Charged in Iraqi General's Death
June 24, 2004 DENVER (Reuters) - The U.S. Army plans to file charges against two military intelligence officers in the suffocation death of an Iraqi general during questioning in Iraq in November, The Denver Post reported on Thursday.
The newspaper said negligent homicide and manslaughter charges were being brought against two warrant officers over the death of Iraqi Maj. Gen. Abed Hamed Mowhoush, commander of Saddam Hussein's air forces.
Chief Warrant Officer Lewis Welshofer, based at Fort Carson, Colorado and a member of the 66th Military Intelligence Group, is accused of suffocating the general in a sleeping bag while sitting on his chest and covering his mouth, according to Pentagon documents obtained by the newspaper.
The other soldier, Chief Warrant Officer Jeff Williams, was involved in the interrogation at a U.S. military facility at Qaim, Iraq, the newspaper said.
The general's death was among more than 30 prisoner deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan that the Pentagon said last month it was investigating.
The treatment of prisoners came under scrutiny after photographs of physical and sexual abuse of Iraqi inmates at the Abu Ghraib prison outside Baghdad emerged earlier this year.
The general had undergone more than two weeks of daily interrogations while in U.S. custody, the newspaper said.
The U.S. military said at the time that he apparently died of natural causes after complaining that "he didn't feel well and subsequently lost consciousness." But an autopsy released by the Pentagon in May said Mowhoush died of asphyxia due to smothering and chest compression.
posted on June 24, 2004 11:38:05 AM new Yup, our torture is better than Saddam's.
Lets see, on one hand you have an American trooper in an overzealous attempt to extract useful military info from a ranking Iraqi general. The general dies during interrogation.
On the other hand under Saadams guidance, innocent civilians are tortured & maimed & killed for no reason other than personal amusement.
Yes there is a difference.
"The natural family is a man and woman bound in a lifelong covenant of marriage for the purposes of:
*the continuation of the human species,
*the rearing of children,
*the regulation of sexuality,
*the provision of mutual support and protection,
*the creation of an altruistic domestic economy, and
*the maintenance of bonds between the generations."
