• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Britain and Torture

Fiona said:
Really? I was under the impression that they were invented by the British in South Africa. Is that not correct?
Click to expand...

How are we defining the term "concentration camp"? Maybe that's the source of my confusion.

Edit: Thanks geni
 
Last edited:
Giz said:
So you think he couldn't have honestly thought that it was the correct course of action and so backed GWB in accordance with that belief?
Click to expand...

He manipulated evidence just as much as Bush. He could think all he wanted. A huge amount of people in the country he was elected to serve in objected to that war.

It seems now that both those gents beliefs were based on religious mumbo jumbo.
 
Travis said:
Somewhere in the world the Dutch have some dudes testicles attached to electrodes so that they can found out what he knows.
Click to expand...
That "somewhere" is Amsterdam, and you can watch it in person for whatever they charge at the door.

Or so I hear... :boxedin:
 
GrouchoMarxist said:
How are we defining the term "concentration camp"? Maybe that's the source of my confusion.

Edit: Thanks geni
Click to expand...
The Germans chose that name as a euphemism for "death camps" for obvious reasons. Now the euphemism has become the definition.
 
Travis said:
Somewhere in the world the Dutch have some dudes testicles attached to electrodes so that they can found out what he knows.
Click to expand...
Do you think of some incident in particular? I know "we" committed war crimes in Indonesia, 60 years ago, and then there's Srebrenica, but there was no torture involved there.

WildCat said:
The Germans chose that name as a euphemism for "death camps" for obvious reasons. Now the euphemism has become the definition.
Click to expand...
To nitpick: the Nazi concentration camps weren't meant as outright death camps. The death camps were called in Nazi parlance "Vernichtungslager" - extermination camps.

As to the OP: yes it's disgusting. Of course, the government will stall with disclosure of further documents - see their claim of the 500,000 relevant documents. I hope some people at the government offices involved grow a conscience and sends copies to the Guardian or makes them public in another way, so it's out for all to see what the government does in your name.

And did Omar Deghayes have that crooked nose before he met MI5 officers or only since?
 
WildCat said:
The Germans chose that name as a euphemism for "death camps" for obvious reasons. Now the euphemism has become the definition.
Click to expand...

Wasn't the reason they named their concentration camps "Konzentrationslager" (as distinct from their extemination camps) because that is what they were known as at the time?
 
Originally "concentration camp" was a British term during the Boer war, a euphemism that sounded better than "prisoner of war camp". The meaning obviously changed with time.
 
Skeptic said:
Originally "concentration camp" was a British term during the Boer war, a euphemism that sounded better than "prisoner of war camp". The meaning obviously changed with time.
Click to expand...

They were not prisoner of war camps, see the article I linked to.
 
ddt said:
Do you think of some incident in particular? I know "we" committed war crimes in Indonesia, 60 years ago, and then there's Srebrenica, but there was no torture involved there.
Click to expand...

No, just my cynical belief that all governments do this.

I mean do you think that Denmark doesn't have a secret unit that tortures people? I do.

What about Finland? I bet they do as well.
 
Travis said:
No, just my cynical belief that all governments do this.

I mean do you think that Denmark doesn't have a secret unit that tortures people? I do.

What about Finland? I bet they do as well.
Click to expand...

Oh, I share your cynical outlook. Even the smallest country has a (not so secret) torture unit. I hear their current leader even once was leader of that unit (link). ;)

Only countries like Denmark, Finland or the Netherlands haven't been much in the position to use torture, unlike the US and the UK or, for that matter, the other permanent members of the Security Council.
 
I do not believe all governments use torture. I do believe they all have the capacity to use it and they may well all have the willingness to use it. But at least in a democracy the certainty that it is wholly unacceptable to the people: and that it WILL bring you down if it is discovered, is the best defence we have

I do not think that a cynical attitude is without consequence: once you accept that all governments do it then it becomes just a teeny bit less unacceptable: that is not logical, but it is a process which seems to apply to many things.

Torture is not acceptable. Not ever. Not anywhere. That has not always been true and it is not accepted as truth everywhere at any time. But that is what we should we strive for. It would be very easy to make it false again in those places where it is currently true. Let's not. :)
 
Fiona said:
I do not believe all governments use torture. I do believe they all have the capacity to use it and they may well all have the willingness to use it. But at least in a democracy the certainty that it is wholly unacceptable to the people: and that it WILL bring you down if it is discovered, is the best defence we have

I do not think that a cynical attitude is without consequence: once you accept that all governments do it then it becomes just a teeny bit less unacceptable: that is not logical, but it is a process which seems to apply to many things.

Torture is not acceptable. Not ever. Not anywhere. That has not always been true and it is not accepted as truth everywhere at any time. But that is what we should we strive for. It would be very easy to make it false again in those places where it is currently true. Let's not. :)
Click to expand...
As I said, the Dutch government, for instance, has not been in a position that torture would be remotely useful in the last 60 years. Neither have the Danish, the Finnish or a host of other governments.

Suppose the Dutch police would find out about a plot to murder Geert Wilders, and have an accomplice in custody. I wouldn't be surprised if, in such a situation, torture would be used. Sure, the ministers and the MPs (save perhaps those of Wilders' party) would condemn it.

It's not a hypothetical I made up; it's Alan Dershowitz' "ticking time bomb" scenario. This so-called "liberal" lawyer condones the use of torture in such situations, and you just have to peruse the many discussions on this board, e.g., on Guantanamo to see that many indeed agree with him. I'm not so positive as you are that democracy is a safeguard that the population will not agree.

I don't share your arguments about the consequence of cynicism in this respect. Acknowledging that man is capable of torture, even moreso when put in a hierarchical organization that has to pursue an abstract cause. Man doesn't change, or at least not in the way either Hitler or Lenin wanted. But acknowledging that doesn't mean accepting it.

And yes, it bears repeating: torture is not acceptable. Never.
 
ddt said:
Suppose the Dutch police would find out about a plot to murder Geert Wilders, and have an accomplice in custody. I wouldn't be surprised if, in such a situation, torture would be used. Sure, the ministers and the MPs (save perhaps those of Wilders' party) would condemn it.

It's not a hypothetical I made up; it's Alan Dershowitz' "ticking time bomb" scenario. This so-called "liberal" lawyer condones the use of torture in such situations, and you just have to peruse the many discussions on this board, e.g., on Guantanamo to see that many indeed agree with him. I'm not so positive as you are that democracy is a safeguard that the population will not agree.
Click to expand...

Not really my point, ddt. I am very well aware of the number of people who are prepared to defend torture and who use these convoluted ticking time bomb scenarios to make that sound reasonable. Couldn't really miss it if you hang around this board for a bit :)

The point I was trying to make was that if we are prepared to condone it in any circumstances whatsoever, we open a door. That a democratic government can be sure that the use of torture is NOT automatic political suicide is one way of ensuring they will at least consider it when it is absolutely convenient to them. The point is not that man is not capable of torture; and even relatively likely to use it in some circumstances: the point, as I see it, is that this is in part self-fulfilling. One effect of cynicism, of the sort we are discussing, is to normalise it. But although I think we are all capable of it we live in a society: the norms and values of that society affect what we actually do: and that applies to government and the military as well as to individuals (though your point about hierarchies is well taken).

I do not think that the narrative is neutral and I do not think it is without influence: to me it seems like another one I seem to see quite often: that man is naturally aggressive and you can tell cos there is always a war somewhere: and so there is. But there is also always a peace in many more places: I wonder why those don't count
 
Last edited:
Fiona said:
I do not believe all governments use torture. I do believe they all have the capacity to use it and they may well all have the willingness to use it. But at least in a democracy the certainty that it is wholly unacceptable to the people: and that it WILL bring you down if it is discovered, is the best defence we have

I do not think that a cynical attitude is without consequence: once you accept that all governments do it then it becomes just a teeny bit less unacceptable: that is not logical, but it is a process which seems to apply to many things.

Torture is not acceptable. Not ever. Not anywhere. That has not always been true and it is not accepted as truth everywhere at any time. But that is what we should we strive for. It would be very easy to make it false again in those places where it is currently true. Let's not. :)
Click to expand...

A fairly common sentiment in the US is that, "everyone does it (torture terrorist suspects) why are we the only ones that get in trouble for it?" So your postulation about it's consequences are valid as I've seen it.
 
Travis said:
A fairly common sentiment in the US is that, "everyone does it (torture terrorist suspects) why are we the only ones that get in trouble for it?" So your postulation about it's consequences are valid as I've seen it.
Click to expand...

You never heard of amnesty international? They have been highlighting these abominations around the world for nearly 50 years. You want to play the poor little America card...go ahead, just dont expect a sympathetic audience
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom