What is Torture?

Published on January 9, 2005 By Moderateman In Politics

2 entries found for torture.
To select an entry, click on it.
torture[1,noun]torture[2,transitive verb]

Main Entry: 1tor·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

now please do not make me define anguish and agony cause I will........

again I say for the dense..

Making a room 95 degrees is not TORTURE.... its damn uncomfortable.

Playing loud music (90 decibels} is not Torture is just mind numbing

Making a room cold 40 degrees is not TORTURE... it is very uncomfortable.

Making someone stand in place is NOT TORTURE.

Putting a blindfold on someones head is not torture... its scarey period.

I am tired of the left twisting my words so the outcome is as they choose../

for the fainthearted I will now list some torture beware your bleeding heart might rupture.

Slamming slivers of bamboo on fire under your toenails is torture

Pulling your tongue out and cutting it off is torture.... saddam did this on a constant basis.

Cutting someone hands off in stages from the fingers upwards is torture... saddam also did this.

Gassing someone with chemical agents is torture saddam did this also

Cutting off someones ears is torture saddam also did this.

Can any of you bleeders name one instance in THIS WAR where we did anything approaching what I said is torture??

This is why I changed parties.... this is why bleeders make me nuts... they want to compare the horror of abu graves to torture.. its not torture is misguided and criminal for sure... but it does not reach what torture is..

If you look at entry 3 you {the bleeders} will see what YOU DO IS TORTUREOUS ...

Comments (Page 3)

Moderateman

on Jan 09, 2005

Reply By: sandy2Posted: Sunday, January 09, 2005Can any of you bleeders name one instance in THIS WAR where we did anything approaching what I said is torture??Yes, making people stand naked, while being taunted, laughed at etc, and having electrical equipment to electrocute prisoners with, as we did, is A) Sexual Harassment and

Torture, because it is anguish of the mind, and the electrocution of the body.

when did this happen???? electricity applied to prisoners???/ did it happen in sandyland??

Moderateman

on Jan 09, 2005

this must be a "personal" issue with you {see I can make judgements too} seeing yourself standing naked in mirror and laughing {crying} tormenting yourself about how you look??/ hmmmmmmmmmmm???????

cactoblasta

on Jan 10, 2005

Well making a devout man commit a sin that will condemn his soul to all enternity in hell (ie through forcing him to have homosexual sex) is not really torture - after all, after condemning someone to slightly postponed eternal suffering there's not much else you could threaten to do - but I don't think that's relevent anyway. Allegedly games of that kind aren't played any more in US-run Iraqi jails, so discussing it with reference to pursuing a policy of torture-lite doesn't make sense. It's another matter entirely.

Moderateman

on Jan 10, 2005

Reply By: cactoblastaPosted: Monday, January 10, 2005Well making a devout man commit a sin that will condemn his soul to all enternity in hell (ie through forcing him to have homosexual sex) is not really torture - after all, after condemning someone to slightly postponed eternal suffering there's not much else you could threaten to do - but I don't think that's relevent anyway. Allegedly games of that kind aren't played any more in US-run Iraqi jails, so discussing it with reference to pursuing a policy of torture-lite doesn't make sense. It's another matter entirely

religiously DEVOUT men and women DO NOT SLAUGHTER innocents cacto.... killing in the name of GOD is way old way wrong... why do you insist on defending these monsters?

Moderateman

on Jan 10, 2005

Allegedly games of that kind aren't played any more in US-run Iraqi jails, so discussing it with reference to pursuing a policy of torture-lite doesn't make sense. It's another matter entirely.

the whole point is it should be allowed... because its not torture..........

cactoblasta

on Jan 10, 2005

Mainly because in the eyes of the US administration the majority of those held are not criminals, or at least not so criminal that they deserve to be imprisoned. So they're hardly monsters. I agree with you, religiously devout men and women don't slaughter innocents, but not all imprisoned are guilty. Did you even bother to read what I wrote? EDIT: Hmm, the quote didn't add on properly... this is in reference to Moderateman's first comment on my post.

kingbee

on Jan 10, 2005

religiously DEVOUT men and women DO NOT SLAUGHTER innocents cacto.... killing in the name of GOD is way old way wrong

tell that to david koresh (who i believe was being defended in another blog as an example of government zeal gone wrong). or to the pentacostal missionaries whove come close to wiping out the yanomami (as well as the other remnant stone-age tribes throughout the world) in the interest of saving their souls. dont forget the lebanese falangists--and the reverend (hah) richard butler and his church of jesus christ christian. then there are the hindu fanatics who blow up mosques. the list goes on and on.

i'm in no way defending them. religious fanatics of all sects disgust me beyond words. but it's not as if it's something that only exists in the islamic world.

some of the guantanamo detainees may have been unluckily in the wrong place at the wrong time...or turned in by neighbors or members of other tribes for money. you yourself have--in this thread--pointed out quite correctly that the government is hardly infallible (or worse). or did you mean all arms of government BUT the military?

Moderateman

on Jan 10, 2005

Reply By: kingbeePosted: Monday, January 10, 2005religiously DEVOUT men and women DO NOT SLAUGHTER innocents cacto.... killing in the name of GOD is way old way wrongtell that to david koresh (who i believe was being defended in another blog as an example of government zeal gone wrong). or to the pentacostal missionaries whove come close to wiping out the yanomami (as well as the other remnant stone-age tribes throughout the world) in the interest of saving their souls. dont forget the lebanese falangists--and the reverend (hah) richard butler and his church of jesus christ christian. then there are the hindu fanatics who blow up mosques. the list goes on and on.

david koresh is a poor example kingbee he is just another nut job, like that jones fellow that twisted everyones thinking to commit mass suicide.

Zealots of anykind, ie: jewish, christian hindi, muslim, are not devout... just twisted and evil sick people

Solitair

on Jan 10, 2005

I love your use of a dictionary definition of the word torture. Interesting attempt to deflect critism from the real issue.

Why is torture wrong? Because the US has signed legal documents forbidding it's use.

What documents? The Geneva Convention.

What does it actually say?

To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:

( a ) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;

and furthermore,

No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion, may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them information of any kind whatever

Now, you may be willing to spend days arguing about whether terrorists are covered (this is dealt with under the special protocols to the Geneva convention) but the fact remains that whatever you define totrute as doesn't matter. Your list (for the dense) is all illegal under the Geneva convention.

Paul.

Moderateman

on Jan 10, 2005

Reply By: cactoblastaPosted: Monday, January 10, 2005Mainly because in the eyes of the US administration the majority of those held are not criminals, or at least not so criminal that they deserve to be imprisoned. So they're hardly monsters. I agree with you, religiously devout men and women don't slaughter innocents, but not all imprisoned are guilty. Did you even bother to read what I wrote? EDIT: Hmm, the quote didn't add on properly... this is in reference to Moderateman's first comment on my post.

read all you replies cacto.... but as pointed out many times. do you believe the gov. or is it belief in gov. when they agree or backup your personal beliefs?

Moderateman

on Jan 10, 2005

Reply By: SolitairPosted: Monday, January 10, 2005I love your use of a dictionary definition of the word torture. Interesting attempt to deflect critism from the real issue. Why is torture wrong? Because the US has signed legal documents forbidding it's use.What documents? The Geneva Convention.What does it actually say? To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons: ( a ) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; and furthermore,No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion, may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them information of any kind whatever

touche!!

cactoblasta

on Jan 10, 2005

read all you replies cacto.... but as pointed out many times. do you believe the gov. or is it belief in gov. when they agree or backup your personal beliefs?

I haven't got a clue what you mean here. I thought this whole thread was about the fact that torture-lite is acceptable in interrogating suspects because it's not full torture. Apparently I have grossly misread you. If you have the time or the inclination I'd love to know exactly what point the debate was actually supposed to centre around, because currently I don't know if it's supposed to be about the deviousness of government, my own personal hypocrisy or some abstract dictionary definition.

hitparade

on Jan 10, 2005

Watching those who grandstand on pedal stools of self-righteousness in the face of the imminent threat of bloody thirsty killers is a torture that makes me want to poke my own eyes out.

see if id started this by tellin yall the fbi had lied at my trial, i woulda heard bout how that wasnt possible

I missed that... I trust you beat it

Moderateman

on Jan 10, 2005

be back in a few hours to discuss this some more......

kingbee

on Jan 10, 2005

I fear that while the choir boys pick away, the terrorist bide their time in the shadows until... BOOM... 5th Ave is no more & Manhattan is gone

ya know, if the washington times hadnt felt the need to print information it was leaked about bin laden's satellite phone--thus tipping usama off to the fact he was being tracked-- things might be a lot different today. it aint the necessarily the choirboys guys. whomever it was that let that particular cat outta the bag may have done so because he or she felt the manson family was being too cautious and needed a lil push.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!