Iran attacks british forces

[Kerberos]

Looking at the video, isn’t it illegal to take her out of her uniform? What does the GC say about this?

The Geneva Convention forbids unnecessarelly increased in text size as cruel if sadly not very unusual punishment. It also forbids them to make propaganda videos with captured soldiers. I'm not aware of any provisions against taking them out of uniform, and considering that PoW generally don't have spare uniforms on them, I would think that such a provision would be somewhat unsanitary.

 

[Art Vandelay]

The Geneva Convention forbids unnecessarelly increased in text size as cruel if sadly not very unusual punishment.

You mean "unnecessarily increased-in-size text"?

I'm not aware of any provisions against taking them out of uniform, and considering that PoW generally don't have spare uniforms on them, I would think that such a provision would be somewhat unsanitary.

I would think that forcibly removing any clothes, uniform or not, would be a violation of the GC.

 

[Kerberos]

You mean "unnecessarily increased-in-size text"?

Do you suffer from some kind of rare and exotic mental disorder that makes it impossible for you to understand any message that contains the slightest error? Because in that case allow me to extend my condolences. Otherwise you might want to tone down the anal-retentive elements of your posts.

I would think that forcibly removing any clothes, uniform or not, would be a violation of the GC.

I doubt that she has been forcibly undressed. Of cause since the entire video is a GC violation, even I think in the extremely unlikely case she totally voluntarily decided to begin sprouting Iranian propaganda, it’s a bit of a non-issue.

 

[drkitten]

Dogs were used for intimidation (and the handler was convicted for it btw). But I'm not aware of any case in which a dog actually chewed on a prisoners genitals. So this is where you provide an example...

No, this is where you just provided an example for me. You are correct in that dogs chewing on prisoners' genitalia has not been proven. The word "genitalia" is a rhetorical flourish.

However, dogs chewing on prisoners has been (there are published photographs of the dog bites, and as you pointed out, the handler was convicted for unlawfully treatment of prisoners -- I believe, in fact, that two separate handlers were so convicted.)

I stand by my statement. The Americans on this board are in no position to complain of unlawful treatment of prisoners, given the documented history of actual physical injury to prisoners in US custody. To the best of my knowledge, the British sailors have suffered no injury as a result of their captivity -- which puts the Iranian theocracy one-up on the "who treats prisoners better" match.

 

[drkitten]

[Looking at the video, isn’t it illegal to take her out of her uniform? What does the GC say about this?

It says you should stop waterboarding prisoners in your own custody if you expect other people to take your protestations seriously.

 

[Ziggurat]

It says you should stop waterboarding prisoners in your own custody if you expect other people to take your protestations seriously.

Umm... they're holding British sailors prisoner, not US sailors. You're carrying water for the mullahs with this post.

 

[Kerberos]

No, this is where you just provided an example for me. You are correct in that dogs chewing on prisoners' genitalia has not been proven. The word "genitalia" is a rhetorical flourish.

However, dogs chewing on prisoners has been (there are published photographs of the dog bites, and as you pointed out, the handler was convicted for unlawfully treatment of prisoners -- I believe, in fact, that two separate handlers were so convicted.)

I stand by my statement. The Americans on this board are in no position to complain of unlawful treatment of prisoners, given the documented history of actual physical injury to prisoners in US custody. To the best of my knowledge, the British sailors have suffered no injury as a result of their captivity -- which puts the Iranian theocracy one-up on the "who treats prisoners better" match.

You appear to be ignorant, willfully I suspect of conditions in IRan. Allow me to educate you: Amnesty Internationals Iran repport from 2001

Torture/ill-treatment
torture tape graphic
Torture and ill-treatment, including the judicial punishments of flogging and amputation, continued.

* Akbar Mohammadi and Ahmad Batebi were tortured in the Towhid detention centre. Towhid, administered by the Ministry of Intelligence, was closed in August 2000 by order of the judiciary. Akbar Mohammadi stated that his feet were whipped with metal cables and that he was suspended by his limbs and repeatedly beaten. Ahmad Batebi stated that he had been beaten while blindfolded and bound, and ordered to sign a confession. He reportedly wrote that his head was plunged into a drain full of excrement and held under, forcing him to inhale excrement through his nose and into his mouth. The two men were sentenced to 15 and 10 years' imprisonment respectively.

There were continued reports of psychological torture including death threats. No investigation into any allegations of torture - such as those made by journalist Akbar Ganji, who stated in court in November that he had been tortured by prison officials at Evin - was known to have been undertaken.

At least 49 floggings were reported, many for ''depraved dancing'', and 10 amputations, often in connection with theft. However, the true number may have been considerably higher.

http://web.amnesty.org/report2001/webmepcountries/IRAN?OpenDocument

Also I noticed that you meantioned that The US prison guards were in fact punished in. IN contrast let me repeat a passage froim the above "No investigation into any allegations of torture - such as those made by journalist Akbar Ganji, who stated in court in November that he had been tortured by prison officials at Evin - was known to have been undertaken."

So no I wouldn't say that the Iranian theocracy treats prisoners better than the US.

 

[drkitten]

You appear to be ignorant, willfully I suspect of conditions in IRan.

Irrelevant treatment of incomparable group omitted.

So no I wouldn't say that the Iranian theocracy treats prisoners better than the US.

I'm sure you wouldn't. I'm sure you'll be happy to provide numerous other oranges, coconuts, cashews, and small rocks to compare against the apples, too.

 

[Kerberos]

Irrelevant treatment of incomparable group omitted.



I'm sure you wouldn't. I'm sure you'll be happy to provide numerous other oranges, coconuts, cashews, and small rocks to compare against the apples, too.

I'm happy to see that you find torture irrelevant when not perpetrated by Americans, but what kind of irrelevancies are we talking about specifically?

Irrelevancies such as comparing Iranian treatment of British soldiers with American treatment of Iraqis?

Or irrelevancies such as comparing how the Iranians, with the full knowledge of their government treat people in a specific high profile case with how Americans treat people in a case that you have specifically selected because it involves abused, and where the US government might not have known what happened?

ETA question.

 

[rikzilla]

No, this is where you just provided an example for me. You are correct in that dogs chewing on prisoners' genitalia has not been proven. The word "genitalia" is a rhetorical flourish.

That's what you call a lie? A "rhetorical flourish"? Wow, that's cool...maybe that's why the dems haven't tried to impeach Bush? He was merely rhetorically flourishing which is neither a high crime, nor misdemeanor.

However, dogs chewing on prisoners has been (there are published photographs of the dog bites, and as you pointed out, the handler was convicted for unlawfully treatment of prisoners -- I believe, in fact, that two separate handlers were so convicted.)

Please make up your mind. Either we are an evil people who condone torturing poor innocent jihadis, or we are a people who; even though at war; are willing to prosecute our own soldiers for their mistreatment of the prisoners in their charge. You can't have it both ways. Your example shows that we have prosecuted and convicted handlers for the unlawful treatment of prisoners.

I stand by my statement. The Americans on this board are in no position to complain of unlawful treatment of prisoners, given the documented history of actual physical injury to prisoners in US custody.

Seeing as how your own example points to Americans willing to prosecute, convict, and imprison their own soldiers for these misdeeds gives lie to your assertions. But sorry, perhaps you are merely making "rhetorical flourishes". Do you know of any Iranian soldiers or policemen being prosecuted by their own government for say; torturing gay people?? No? Those mullahs....so "progressive"!

To the best of my knowledge, the British sailors have suffered no injury as a result of their captivity -- which puts the Iranian theocracy one-up on the "who treats prisoners better" match.

If someone held you against your will; kidnapped for all intents and purposes; would you consider that you had suffered no injury?? Are we to understand that you are so personally morally stunted that you would hold up to us the Iranian theocracy as an example of mercy and justice???

Just who the hell do you think you are kidding anyway? This is a skeptics board! Go peddle your respect for theocratic thugs where people might actually be stupid, crazy, or traitorous enough to believe you. I hear Barbara Streisand has a forum....

-z

 

[drkitten]

I'm happy to see that you find torture irrelevant when not perpetrated by Americans, but what kind of irrelevancies are we talking about specifically?

International law unfortunately does not control a government's treatment of its own people. TIm McVeigh, for example, is not protected as a PoW. Under international law, the US can do more or less as it sees fit to its own citizens -- and Iran can do likewise.

Of course, I'm sure that you're equally appalled about how the United States has historically treated its own criminals and have for years been protesting, for example, the execution of minors and the existence of the Florence Supermax.

 

[drkitten]

Please make up your mind. Either we are an evil people who condone torturing poor innocent jihadis, or we are a people who; even though at war; are willing to prosecute our own soldiers for their mistreatment of the prisoners in their charge. You can't have it both ways.

Certainly I can. I believe -- although I can't prove it, unfortunately -- that the torture and abuse of prisoners was ordered by the US high command, and that the soldiers who were prosecuted were low-level fall guys whose prosecution was ordered to cover up the overarching patterns of abuse.

That's a pattern that has routinely emerged from interactions with the current US administration. Beyond the Abu Ghraib scandal, there's of course also Scooter-gate and the current US Attorney flap. Of course, it's possible that the same alleged pattern of order-abuse-and-then-throw-the-flunkies-to-the-wolves independently happens in each of these cases, but I don't find that nearly as credible.

Seeing as how your own example points to Americans willing to prosecute, convict, and imprison their own soldiers for these misdeeds gives lie to your assertions.

Wrong again.

If someone held you against your will; kidnapped for all intents and purposes; would you consider that you had suffered no injury??

From Wikipedia : "Injury is damage or harm caused to the structure or function of the body caused by an outside agent or force, which may be physical or chemical."

I would consider myself less injured than if someone then set a dog to chewing on my leg.

So, yes. Words have meanings.

Are we to understand that you are so personally morally stunted that you would hold up to us the Iranian theocracy as an example of mercy and justice???

No. You are to understand that the uniformed neoFascist thugs that you worship -- and by extension, you yourself -- are so morally stunted that you have sunk to the level below that of the Iranian theocrats. You have depraved yourself so deeply that the Iranians, for all their faults, are a substantially better example of mercy and justice.

I have little respect for the Iranians. But I'd really appreciate it if you explained why I should have more respect for people who order others set dogs to attack prisoners than I should for people who (gasp) photograph women in a headdress.

 

[Kerberos]

International law unfortunately does not control a government's treatment of its own people. TIm McVeigh, for example, is not protected as a PoW. Under international law, the US can do more or less as it sees fit to its own citizens -- and Iran can do likewise.

Of course, I'm sure that you're equally appalled about how the United States has historically treated its own criminals and have for years been protesting, for example, the execution of minors and the existence of the Florence Supermax.

Equally appalled? Hardly. I reserve the greater indignation for the greater human rights abuses. You see, I have a moral compass so incredibly finely tuned that it can register more options than good and bad. Rare cases of executing minors = bad, frequent cases of floggings for rape victims, mutilations for petty crimes, torture of inmates and system critics and executing minors (much more common than in the US unless I miss my guess) = much worse. You follow?

 

[rikzilla]

Certainly I can. I believe -- although I can't prove it, unfortunately -- that the torture and abuse of prisoners was ordered by the US high command, and that the soldiers who were prosecuted were low-level fall guys whose prosecution was ordered to cover up the overarching patterns of abuse.

So you have a theory eh?? Do you know Dylan Avery? You two should meet. You have a great deal in common.

That's a pattern that has routinely emerged from interactions with the current US administration. Beyond the Abu Ghraib scandal, there's of course also Scooter-gate and the current US Attorney flap. Of course, it's possible that the same alleged pattern of order-abuse-and-then-throw-the-flunkies-to-the-wolves independently happens in each of these cases, but I don't find that nearly as credible.

...oh and anti-government venom...you have that in common as well...

Wrong again.



From Wikipedia : "Injury is damage or harm caused to the structure or function of the body caused by an outside agent or force, which may be physical or chemical."

I would consider myself less injured than if someone then set a dog to chewing on my leg.

How 'bout rape? I guess that could also be done to you without "injury" as long as the rapist was gentle. So you'd be okay with that as well? Sure sounds like it.

So, yes. Words have meanings.

Yes, you have explained to me with a carefully worded definition that a person may be kidnapped, raped, and by that logic waterboarded without "injury". Damn! You should work for Karl Rove and Rummy, hell you should be the AG seeing as how you just spun the whole "torture" thingy so much more expertly that Mr. Gonzales ever dreamed of doing.

No. You are to understand that the uniformed neoFascist thugs that you worship -- and by extension, you yourself -- are so morally stunted that you have sunk to the level below that of the Iranian theocrats. You have depraved yourself so deeply that the Iranians, for all their faults, are a substantially better example of mercy and justice.

Wow! You are sooooo quotable! So humble little me is now a neocon "worshiper"? The troops are now "neoFascist thugs" and little ole me is worse than the crazy murdering mullas of Iran?? You are clearly insane. Please take some pills and calm down. Physician, Heal thyself!

I have little respect for the Iranians. But I'd really appreciate it if you explained why I should have more respect for people who order others set dogs to attack prisoners than I should for people who (gasp) photograph women in a headdress.

this is your conspiracy theory...not mine. Produce your evidence of conspiracy, then we'll talk. Until then please stay away from open flame. With all that straw you have handy you could spontaneously combust.

-z

 

[drkitten]

Equally appalled? Hardly. I reserve the greater indignation for the greater human rights abuses.

And therefore, you applaud setting a dog to chew on a prisoner's leg -- while being morally indigant about photographing a woman and broadcasting the photograph.

Colour me unsurprised.


(Oh, and if you think that execution of juveniles is "rare' in the States and "frequent" in Iran -- why has USA performed more than twice as many such executions as Iran since 1990? And if you think that torture of prison inmates is bad -- what do you think of the Florence Supermax?)

 

[drkitten]

Wow! You are sooooo quotable! So humble little me is now a neocon "worshiper"?

Yes.

The troops are now "neoFascist thugs"

Yes.

and little ole me is worse than the crazy murdering mullas of Iran??;

Yes.

I apologize. I had thought that you had no reading comprehension at all. I was wrong.

 

[Kerberos]

No. You are to understand that the uniformed neoFascist thugs that you worship -- and by extension, you yourself -- are so morally stunted that you have sunk to the level below that of the Iranian theocrats. You have depraved yourself so deeply that the Iranians, for all their faults, are a substantially better example of mercy and justice.

Really? Tell me does mercy and justice also only apply to the treatment of foreigners? If not I suggest a little game. I'll name Iranian human rights abuses and you name American ones. I'll start: I refer you to the Amnnesty international article above. your turn.

 

[Darth Rotor]

The troops are now "neoFascist thugs"

Yes.

Ah, I see you are from Portland, Oregon.

We seem to have strayed from the deal making that Mr Blair and crew need to undertake in order to get the 15 sailors out of Iran and back to HMS Cornwall.

My bet: Iran is asking them under the table to vote "abstain" or "no" on the latest UNSCR nuke sanctions donneybrook. (Yes, it' a long shot.)

DR

 

[rikzilla]

Yes.



Yes.



Yes.

I apologize. I had thought that you had no reading comprehension at all. I was wrong.

So you don't have any evidence to support your insane assertions of conspiracy? I am similarly unsurprised.

-z

 

[Kerberos]

And therefore, you applaud setting a dog to chew on a prisoner's leg -- while being morally indigant about photographing a woman and broadcasting the photograph.

Colour me unsurprised.

Colour me surprised, I had no idea I believed that, I'm sure you can back that up with quotes from me applauding Abu Graib.

(Oh, and if you think that execution of juveniles is "rare' in the States and "frequent" in Iran -- why has USA performed more than twice as many such executions as Iran since 1990?

Because their population is 4 times as large?

And if you think that torture of prison inmates is bad -- what do you think of the Florence Supermax?)

I haven't heard of Florence Supermax before. but tell you what, as I said i offered the AI article as my move. Why don't you provide an article from an equally reputable source about US abuses for example from Florence Supermax that you feel is equivalent to 49 floggings, many for things that wouldn't be considered crimes in the west, and 10 amputations? Go ahead.