Lawsuit against Rumsfeld for torture

[Icarusintel]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,149102,00.html
Anyone else think this is absolutely absurd? The man wasn;t even over there when the prisoners were allegedly being "tortured." How can the man successfully be sued for something he didn;t do? This lawsuit boggles my mind.

 

[staticprimer]

They are sueing him because they accuse him of ordering the torture. Look at it this way: If I pay a man to kill someone, should I be held responsible? Of course. They are attempting to hold him responsible for the crimes he allegedly ordered. Did he really do it? Personally I think so, but the truth remains to be seen.

 

[GhostFox]

It may or may not be absurd, but that is what courts are for. It should be decided in a legal court, not one of public opinion.

Personally I see it haveing a zero percent chance of sucess, but this group has every right to sue if they feel they were maligned.

BTW, they are not really suing Rummy for the torture. They are saying he is the man that should compenstate them for it.

 

[Icarusintel]

It may or may not be absurd, but that is what courts are for. It should be decided in a legal court, not one of public opinion.

Personally I see it haveing a zero percent chance of sucess, but this group has every right to sue if they feel they were maligned.

but they're a human rights group, the people who were "tortured" aren;t even the ones suing

 

[CptStern]

but they're a human rights group, the people who were "tortured" aren;t even the ones suing

"The suit was filed on behalf of four Iraqis and four Afghans who allege they suffered severe and repeated beatings, cutting with knives, sexual humiliation and assault, mock executions, death threats, and restraint in excruciating positions. The lawsuit says Rumsfeld should compensate the torture victims."

 

[seinfeldrules]

They would have more luck suing the US Gov't, not Donny Rumsfeld.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

Well, since rumsfeld is the higher-up in the chain of command, he is at least a valid person to hold accountable.

This focus on Rumsfeld probably means they've got some specific evidence on him too.

 

[MjM]

http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/NewsStory.aspx?section=Opinion&OID=69350

Utterly shocking. Something should be done.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

mock executions,

... and they're filing a lawsuit?

Should'nt they be dead, Stern?

I'm sorry, I find the logic of this laughable -- not the victims, but the logic.

Joe-Taliban: Ugh, yea, I'd like for you to file a lawsuite for me, Mr. Lawyer man ...
Mr. Lawyer Man: For what? Torture? Rape?
Joe-Taliban: No ... mock executions. They keep doing it to me!

 

[seinfeldrules]

Well I think its mainly this point they are focusing on:

repeated beatings, cutting with knives, sexual humiliation and assault, death threats, and restraint in excruciating positions

Basically torture. I have no problem with Uncle Sam handing these men a big check.

 

[staticprimer]

Mock executions - meaning fake, ie they dont die. They likely used them to terrorize inmates into giving some sort of confession or information. Its truley cruel to make them think their unconcious friend has just been shot in front of them (just as a possible scenerio). Would you want that to happen to you?

 

[K e r b e r o s]

Well, I'm truely appaulled by all conflict and what you have to do for information. But until sharing a cupcake with a Taliban prisoner effectively gets him to tell you the secret location of OBL, then maybe I'll feel better.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

Would you want that to happen to you?

You sign-up. You risk death and torture. ... but you do it anyway.

Would I want it to happen? No. Could it possibly if I join the services? Yes. Is my opinion changed then? Not really -- you get that anywhere you go, because making it easier on your enemy, makes it easier for him to keep information locked deep down inside.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

Well, I'm truely appaulled by all conflict and what you have to do for information. But until sharing a cupcake with a Taliban prisoner effectively gets him to tell you the secret location of OBL, then maybe I'll feel better.

What indication do you have that any information has been learned from these tortures though? No-one knows if these things are working. and even if we did find Osama, would it be worth the price of our humanity?

Look at cases like the one posted by MjM. A completely innocent man is tortured for a year, and nothing is gained from it. That's just one of any number of tortures. Did he 'sign up' for anything? He was just a regular canadian citizen, who obviously had no real evidence against him or they would have used a trial.

So it's not just terrorists being tortured, and it's not getting any results. Add that to the horrible immorality of the entire thing, and you have to wonder why the hell this is still happening?

 

[K e r b e r o s]

Agreed on the perspective of the innocent -- so perhaps a reform is in line?

 

[staticprimer]

Well, I'm truely appaulled by all conflict and what you have to do for information. But until sharing a cupcake with a Taliban prisoner effectively gets him to tell you the secret location of OBL, then maybe I'll feel better.

Maybe that would work! I doubt they have tried that, and as they say, the simplest solution is the best!

 

[No Limit]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,149102,00.html
Anyone else think this is absolutely absurd? The man wasn;t even over there when the prisoners were allegedly being "tortured." How can the man successfully be sued for something he didn;t do? This lawsuit boggles my mind.

Because he was the one that put the policies in place that allowed this to happen.

 

[Eg.]

see, this torture was all kids stuff, more mind teasing then actual pain. real toture, which would work faster, is like cutting of parts of the body and making them eat it. the chinese burn off skin, and the arabic nation like to murder-rape family members in front of you. if anything they should be thinking themselves lucky

 

[No Limit]

see, this torture was all kids stuff, more mind teasing then actual pain. real toture, which would work faster, is like cutting of parts of the body and making them eat it. the chinese burn off skin, and the arabic nation like to murder-rape family members in front of you. if anything they should be thinking themselves lucky

Glad this guy is banned. A message to all conservatives like Bill O'reilly or Rush; when you try to defend the use of torture by saying we need the information and it isn't torture unless organ failure occurs you sound as idiotic as that guy. Sad part is Bush and his administrations approves this (aka they approve torture).

 

[qckbeam]

see, this torture was all kids stuff, more mind teasing then actual pain. real toture, which would work faster, is like cutting of parts of the body and making them eat it. the chinese burn off skin, and the arabic nation like to murder-rape family members in front of you. if anything they should be thinking themselves lucky

So if you'd suffered through severe and repeated beatings, cutting with knives, sexual humiliation and assault, mock executions, death threats, and restraint in excruciating positions you'd think "It could have been worse" when it was all over rather than holding accountable those people that did it to you?

 

[clarky003]

Glad this guy is banned

yup, id say he definately deserved a ban after ridiculous comments trying to condone the bush administrations allowance of torture. I wonder where these people get off thinking like that, *cough* facisim *cough* world war II . do some of us never learn..?

 

[CptStern]

see, this torture was all kids stuff, more mind teasing then actual pain. real toture, which would work faster, is like cutting of parts of the body and making them eat it. the chinese burn off skin, and the arabic nation like to murder-rape family members in front of you. if anything they should be thinking themselves lucky

well then by that logic, the coalition soldiers that are being tortured and beheaded are lucky because they could have received much worse

 

[Absinthe]

see, this torture was all kids stuff, more mind teasing then actual pain. real toture, which would work faster, is like cutting of parts of the body and making them eat it. the chinese burn off skin, and the arabic nation like to murder-rape family members in front of you. if anything they should be thinking themselves lucky

Allow me to paraphrase:

"Other people do worse stuff, so it's okay."

 

[Calanen]

The activities of some US personnel in the torturing and humiliation of detainees was appalling. But its a big leap to say, that these guys were directed to do this from the top.

If my unit was involved in doing this to Iraqi prisoners, I would have ordered the troops to stand down and if they did not, I would have drawn my pistol and told them they would be shot if they did not obey. I would have also thrown it up the chain of command. Prisoners of war are just that - they must be treated with respect and dignity and detained until the cessation of hostilities. You can try and talk to them, perhaps even trick them. But not rough them up, not torture them or anything similar.

Iraqi soldiers, (POWS) are a different thing tho, to enemy combatants.

Enemy combatants are the al quada, perhaps taliban and other terrorists. These guys should be allowed to have pressure brought to bear on them, a lot of pressure, to talk. But not torture. I dont like these guys, and dont have much sympathy for them. But I am not going to condone them being tortured.

The question that is often posed tho, and it is perhaps a realistic one - if we know that a person is involved in a nuclear plot to blow up a city, time is ticking, and we have a person who knows where the bomb is, do we torture them to get the info? Its a difficult question - but, I think that truth serum drugs, should be used on the person. I still would not want there fingernails ripped out with pliars or whatever.

I should say btw - that Al quada got rounded up in New Zealand, planning to blow the Lucas Heights nuclear reactor in Sydney, before the Olympics. It was in the news, but was kept pretty low key. Imagine that?

 

[No Limit]

The activities of some US personnel in the torturing and humiliation of detainees was appalling. But its a big leap to say, that these guys were directed to do this from the top.

Go read up on the memo our new Attorney General wrote about torture. Rumsfeld then applied this policy which is what directly allowed these abuses to take place.

 

[Eg.]

1st off im not banned, and notice how u take the chance to call me stupid?

2ndly, severe beatings. hey, maybe those guards didnt like the iraqis, you know, having shot at american troops and all. and again the rest of the torture was all mind-teasers.

"sexual himiliation" so we are supposed to care about their feelings when we extract information? give them cookies and milk?

"restraint in excruciating positions: refers to how they are captured, they get cuffed and thrown on the ground, wow thats a lot worse then say having your hand slowly cut of piece by piece.

" fake exectutions" again, are we to make them feel happy?

and im not going to say i would hate to be tortured, because thats the point of the dammned pratice. the only thing i find bad about this is that it leaked to the public. as long as its not americans and in war time, then i happy with it.


so im a facist for not caring about non american citizens, yup im a nazi for not liking those that bomb us.

 

[CptStern]

sorry but many experts have said that the torture in the prisons were exactly by the book (torture manual) ..."KUBARK Counterintelligence Interrogation -- July 1963."


"The specific coercive methods it describes echo today's news stories about Guantanamo and the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. At Abu Ghraib, for example, photographs and documents have shown that detainees were hooded, blindfolded, dressed in sloppy garb and forced to go naked.

The KUBARK manual suggests that, for "resistant" prisoners, the "circumstances of detention are arranged to enhance within the subject his feelings of being cut off from the known and the reassuring and of being plunged into the strange."

The 1963 handbook describes the benefits and disadvantages of techniques similar to those authorized for use at Abu Ghraib, such as forcing detainees to stand or sit in "stress positions," cutting off sources of light, disrupting their sleep and manipulating their diet.

And among the manual's conclusions: The threat of pain is a far more effective interrogation tool than actually inflicting pain, but threats of death do not help. "



eg: want to read the link? it wasnt a "few bad apples" torture and abuse are SYSTEMATIC in iraq and afghanistan

 

[Eg.]

i dont care if its systematic. i dont care how we torture them, as long as we get the info, im happy.

and ill say it again, we coudl be buring people alive, yet we have the restraint to use kids gloves on these people

 

[Absinthe]

2ndly, severe beatings. hey, maybe those guards didnt like the iraqis, you know, having shot at american troops and all. and again the rest of the torture was all mind-teasers.

By that logic, enemy combatants should be allowed to severely beat US troops because "Hey, they were shooting at us!".

"sexual himiliation" so we are supposed to care about their feelings when we extract information? give them cookies and milk?

If you had an ounce of humanity in you, you would care. Read up, Eg. Not all of these people are enemy combatants and not all of them have information to extract.

"restraint in excruciating positions: refers to how they are captured, they get cuffed and thrown on the ground, wow thats a lot worse then say having your hand slowly cut of piece by piece.

And how would you know this?

This seems more like cuffing than me.

http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/iraqis_tortured/iraqis_tortured_60min2-o.jpg

" fake exectutions" again, are we to make them feel happy?

Are you supposed to have some compassion for your fellow man? Or how about "innocent until proven guilty"? No, screw that. How about, if you view yourself as morally superior to these people, then act like it.

and im not going to say i would hate to be tortured, because thats the point of the dammned pratice. the only thing i find bad about this is that it leaked to the public. as long as its not americans and in war time, then i happy with it.

I see you haven't lost a bit of your ignorance.

"The only people that matter are the American people."

 

[Absinthe]

i dont care if its systematic. i dont care how we torture them, as long as we get the info, im happy.

First of all, we don't know how much valuable information is being given at all.

Secondly, it is very common for people to point the finger at absolutely anybody in order to relieve themselves of torture. I suggest you read "1984". People would be beaten within an inch of their lives and then confess to anything just so they'd stop being hurt.

Thirdly, do you ever take into account innocent people? Or are they mere collateral damage to you?

 

[Eg.]

By that logic, enemy combatants should be allowed to severely beat US troops because "Hey, they were shooting at us!".

well they have the ability to, but only because they can. you cannot argue with strength. at this point we have strength. think like and adult.

well oops, we dont know that know, better safe than sorry

http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/iraqis_tortured/iraqis_tortured_60min2-o.jpg[/url]



Are you supposed to have some compassion for your fellow man? Or how about "innocent until proven guilty"? No, screw that. How about, if you view yourself as morally superior to these people, then act like it.



I see you haven't lost a bit of your ignorance.

"The only people that matter are the American people."

yep, because im an american. if i were british, i would say the same thing. i am an ignorant fu(%, but at least ill be alive and free

 

[Absinthe]

well they have the ability to, but only because they can. you cannot argue with strength. at this point we have strength. think like and adult.

spelt liek and adult

Your justifications for this kind of behavior are piss poor.

yep, because im an american. if i were british, i would say the same thing. im and ignorant fuc, but at least ill be alive and free

I'll pass on this one and merely roll my eyes.

 

[Calanen]

I know that Australian intel guys were at interrogations of some of these people, and at the moment there is the semantic debate about the difference between and interview and an interrogation. The Australians were there. We are always nearby when America does anything. Call it a friendly chat, interrogation, or interview. We were there.

But were we involved in torture of these guys? I'd be extremely bloody suprised if we were. And if we were, I would come down like a tonne of bricks on the people that did it.

It is in Al Quada's manual to make sure that if captured, to make the most outlandish claims of mistreatment - and the people who were captured, predominantly hated America in any event. They are not a 'trusted source' of information.

There was an Afghan boy who was captured by mistake, sent to Guantanomo, and then let go, and was quite thankful to the Americans for the way he was treated and for learning English, as was his family. So it does not seem he was tortured...... and he has no reason to make anything up, beause he was not a part of Al Quada, just too close to some who were captured. I don't have a source for this, but I think it was publishe in Time magazine and u need to be a paid subscriber to get backcopies, and well, im skint atm....

The other thing to bear in mind, is that in the trials of soldiers defending the abuse - there are no documents coming out in discovery demonstrating that they were ordered to do it. Nor is the defence pointing to orders that they were given to do it. It seems to me that the systematic torture and humiliation of persons, would have included the rider not to video or film it. Which is why it makes it more likely, given the inept way it was handled and implemented and recorded, that it was low level people within the military acting of their own volition - not at the direction from the top.

 

[clarky003]

im and ignorant fuc, but at least ill be alive and free

Thats the first time ive seen a repbulican actually admit their mental state, I respect you for owning up, not alot of others do (correct me if your not a republican supporter ). There's nothing bad about being, alive and free, aslong as its not at the expense of the truth, or another innocent person. Ignorance is another matter, some people say ignorance is bliss, that can lead to some stubborn people with no real want to better themselves outside of material gain, or infact to help better others.

 

[CptStern]

I know that Australian intel guys were at interrogations of some of these people, and at the moment there is the semantic debate about the difference between and interview and an interrogation. The Australians were there. We are always nearby when America does anything. Call it a friendly chat, interrogation, or interview. We were there.

But were we involved in torture of these guys? I'd be extremely bloody suprised if we were. And if we were, I would come down like a tonne of bricks on the people that did it.

It is in Al Quada's manual to make sure that if captured, to make the most outlandish claims of mistreatment - and the people who were captured, predominantly hated America in any event. They are not a 'trusted source' of information.

There was an Afghan boy who was captured by mistake, sent to Guantanomo, and then let go, and was quite thankful to the Americans for the way he was treated and for learning English, as was his family. So it does not seem he was tortured...... and he has no reason to make anything up, beause he was not a part of Al Quada, just too close to some who were captured. I don't have a source for this, but I think it was publishe in Time magazine and u need to be a paid subscriber to get backcopies, and well, im skint atm....

The other thing to bear in mind, is that in the trials of soldiers defending the abuse - there are no documents coming out in discovery demonstrating that they were ordered to do it. Nor is the defence pointing to orders that they were given to do it. It seems to me that the systematic torture and humiliation of persons, would have included the rider not to video or film it. Which is why it makes it more likely, given the inept way it was handled and implemented and recorded, that it was low level people within the military acting of their own volition - not at the direction from the top.

"From a classified report five months ago, one of Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld's closest advisers learned of allegations that a clandestine military task force in Iraq was beating detainees, ordering Defense Intelligence Agency debriefers out of the room during questioning, confiscating evidence of the abuse and intimidating the debriefers when they complained.

The June 25 report -- sent by the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency to Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence Stephen A. Cambone -- is among dozens of documents made public yesterday that allege brutal and sometimes illegal military interrogation methods employed against prisoners in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

In the documents, government witnesses describe the regular use of violence -- much of it inflicted on prisoners by a top-secret task force devoted to capturing "high-value targets" in Iraq -- more than seven months after a fact-finding mission reported to senior defense officials that the unit was beating prisoners.

Other documents describe heated battles in which the FBI and some DIA intelligence officers objected to harsh interrogation methods in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay. One FBI agent, reporting on May 10 to superiors about an earlier conversation with Maj. Gen. Geoffrey D. Miller and Maj. Gen. Michael B. Dunleavey at Guantanamo Bay, said the two men cited Rumsfeld as the source of their authority to use techniques that the FBI regarded as potentially illegal and "not effective or producing intel that was reliable." The author of that report, whose name is redacted, said "both agreed the Bureau has their way of dong[sic] business and DoD has their marching orders from the Sec Def."



source

 

[K e r b e r o s]

This seems more like cuffing than me.

http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/ir...ed_60min2-o.jpg

I'm pretty sure the Shock Value will sell your point -- however, I'd like to point out that arrest and sitting on naked prisoners (who've already been detained) are two seperate things.

That's what does'nt sell it for me.

Your justifications for this kind of behavior are piss poor.

To you, but he's not argueing to change minds. He's simply sharing what he believes and judging by his attitude, he wont change.

So, either believe Karma will have something to do with him (I'm not sure if you believe in that either), or it wont and he'll live just like he said he wanted to live.

 

[Absinthe]

I'm pretty sure the Shock Value will sell your point -- however, I'd like to point out that arrest and sitting on naked prisoners (who've already been detained) are two seperate things.

You're right, and that's my point. I doubt that "restraint in excruciating positions" is referring to handcuffing.

To you, but he's not argueing to change minds. He's simply sharing what he believes and judging by his attitude, he wont change.

So, either believe Karma will have something to do with him (I'm not sure if you believe in that either), or it wont and he'll live just like he said he wanted to live.

And on a public forum where we are discussing politics, I'm free to comment on what he believes. I believe that thoughts and opinions like Eg's are unfortunately all too relevant to world affairs, and the double standards he uses for Americans play a large part in the animosity towards the United States.

If he wants to remain an "ignorant fuc" (which is quite sad IMO), then okay. He can live his life out putting Americans on a pedestal. But if he shares his views here, he can expect replies. Likewise, I expect the same for expressing mine.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

Understood.

 

[GhostFox]

Not necessicaily in this case, but sometimes the charges are exaggerated. I was reading about one case where a terror suspect was suing some govt. for human rights abuses and torture. When you got to the bottom of the article, his claim of abuse was that on the transport plane after his arrest, he was "shackled uncomfortably". Yeah, there is a reason there are no Lay-Z-Boy shackles buddy. They aren't meant to be comfortable. Get over it.

 

[bliink]

When you got to the bottom of the article, his claim of abuse was that on the transport plane after his arrest, he was "shackled uncomfortably". Yeah, there is a reason there are no Lay-Z-Boy shackles buddy. They aren't meant to be comfortable. Get over it.

it still depends on the definition of uncomfortable, like, sure- it might have just been a pair of handcuffs that were a little tight, or he could have been packed into the landing gear cavity