TORTURE - 100% GUARANTEED TO WORK

[NanceGreggs]

TORTURE – 100% GUARANTEED TO WORK
By Nancy Greggs

While I totally abhor the use of torture in any form, the following are the only tried-and-true methods COMPLETELY PROVEN to be effective in securing the total cooperation of suspected enemies:

CONFUSION: Make a statement, publicly and often, that Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9-11. Repeat it over, and over, and over, until the victim is convinced you are telling the truth. THEN totally switch positions, and INSIST that you never made any such connection between the two.

RELIGIOUS DEGRADATION: Lull victim into false sense of security by promising to amend the Constitution to prohibit gay marriage and abortion. Then completely destroy the victim’s new-found faith in you by never making good on those promises.

BAIT ‘n SWITCH: Assure the victim that you have their best interests at heart. Assure them you will lower their taxes, thereby providing them with more comfort and pleasurable amenities. Once enthralled by such offerings, steal from victim’s own purse and give his last penny to the wealthy in front of his own eyes.

DISORIENT: Tell victim you will keep them safe from all harm, from all external foes who seek their destruction. Then blatantly divert the funds necessary to accomplish same into useless endeavors like a “War on Terror” or similarly useless undertakings.

SENSORY DEPRIVATION: Lead victim to believe you are ‘leveling’ with them at all times, and are presenting the true facts without addition or omission. Then control the MSM and feed them propaganda, 24/7, until they can no longer distinguish the truth from complete fabrication.

EXTREME TEMPERATURE MANIPULATION: Watch victim sweat in record-breaking heatwaves, then decry such things as ‘global warming’ as completely baseless left-wing hysteria.

SLEEP DEPRIVATION: Outsource victim’s job, cut off their health coverage, threaten to repossess their house, rendering even a single good night’s sleep totally impossible.

STRESSFUL POSITIONS: Threaten victim with their own imminent death by way of terrorist attack, dirty bomb, or ‘mushroom cloud’ unless they agree to support your political agenda.

WATER-BOARDING: Force victim to reside in New Orleans or other region likely to be hit by natural disaster, and remind them how quickly you will respond should they need rescue from drowning.

ELECTRIC SHOCK TREATMENT: Allow Dick Cheney to hold ‘secret meetings’ behind the victim’s back in order to set energy policies and prices.

HUMILIATION: Continually cast aspersions on victim’s ‘patriotism’ if they refuse to accept your political views without question. Publicly denounce their ‘weakness’ if they refuse to accept things you consider expedient – like torture.

These are the only torture techniques known to be completely effective in causing a victim to totally relinquish their own will and acquiesce to the will of others. They are known to be successful in that regard, because they have worked on Republican voters for at least the last six years.

[opihimoimoi]

1. K&R'd

[opihimoimoi]

2. Damn, a very good thread....beautiful, sending wine and lobsters

:toast:

[NanceGreggs]

4. The promise of wine and lobster ...

... now THAT'S what would get ME to tell you anything you want to know!

[BelgianMadCow]

3. That is an excellent analogy NanceGreggs! Very good idea

you are very creative, well laid out. R'd.

[donheld]

5. Great post

Kick and Recommended

[ms liberty]

6. K&R - Brilliant! n/t

[exlrrp]

7. The REAL torture

Tie em up and force em to listen to Bush speeches and Tony Blankley

[The Wizard]

8. The real torture

would be demanding a concise interpretation of Bush and Blankley gibberish backed up with facts and logical reasoning.

[nxylas]

37. How to torture a Bushevik

Ask him to defend his president without mentioning or alluding to Clinton.

[ShortnFiery]

9. The Republicans rule by Fear Mongering - It's disgusting

and not just Dear Leader spewing this Orwellian Bunk. :P

[Patrick J Fitzgerald]

10. Tongue Twisting

Release your attack dogs to expose an a covert CIA Operative - threaten to fire anyone caught for doing this - do nothing - allow them to develop bad memories.

http://patrickjfitzgerald.blogspot.com

[madrchsod]

11. once again i bow to your greatness....LOL

another well written post nancy...

[TexasRazor]

12. Poignant

As ex-military I'm especially attuned to opinions on ethical interrogation.
Let's speak about what we are willing to do within the Hague & Geneva
conventions. Please note that while we choose to behave humanely & lawfully
towards all military prisoners, these un-uniformed combatants do not receive
even a small portion of rights that would be given to prisoners of convention
signatories and SHOULD NOT. Geneva treatment does not equal Geneva rights.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TexasRazor]

14. Condone?

Do police torture suspects... Sure they do & Internal Affairs arrests them.
You misread that I condone torture, you simply condemn me because I chose
to serve in the military, while retaining my Democratic ethics. Torture
absolutely does not work because, obviously, they'll say anything.

Proper interrogation techniques that we can instruct the Bush-bots to
follow will gain us the information & be transparent to international observers.

Better?

[myrna minx]

15. Welcome to DU, Texas Razor.

:hi: Thank you for your service.

[TexasRazor]

16. Appreciated

Thanx MM

[Zodiak]

17. I did not make mention of your miltary involvement

so put that strawman to rest. I am not anti-military.

"these un-uniformed combatants do not receive
even a small portion of rights that would be given to prisoners of convention
signatories and SHOULD NOT."

This is what you said. So, if there is no uniform, then they SHOULD not be given basic human rights outlined in Geneva? What a sorry excuse for treating another human geing like an animal and torturing them.

I reject this specious logic that the lack of a uniform allows us to toss the Geneva conventions out.

By the way, signing the conventions means that the SIGNATORY is supposed to uphold these rules, even if the enemy is not a signatory.

[TexasRazor]

22. Once again overlooked context

You still did not read it.

Basic human rights... Yes
Geneva rights as prisoner-of-war... No
Humane treatment due to every person... YES

How do you conclude I am advocating animalistic barbarism?

[Zodiak]

23. Because the only legal way to guarantee these rights is through Geneva

without them, human rights are thrown out the door.

While I can agree that we should set up something outside of Geneva to impart rights to these prisoners, that is not the reality we live in.

As it stands now....if we give Geneva accords to these prisoners, they will not be tortured and will have their day in a fair trail.

If we do not, they are tortured and have none of these rights. That is what Bush wants. That is the substance of the argument as it stands today.

If your opinion is more nuanced, then I am glad I got it out of you, and I somewhat agree. But these principles should carry the weight tof law, and as it is now, the only law is Geneva (our American torture laws are tied to Geneva, see USC 2340A).

If we do not uphold Geneva with these prisoners, there is no legal barrier that prevents their torture. So condoning the loss of Geneva rights is tentamount to condoning torture in today's climate.

Normally dichotomous arguments like this are frowned upon, but in today's climate, it is truly the Bush way or the anti-Bush way. Stripping these prisoners of basic Geneva rights is the Bush way, and that way is indellibly connected to torture.

[TexasRazor]

28. No nuance about it

Geneva and Hague also specify treatment of un-uniformed combatants.

Please read those specifics (especially the firing squad section)
and I'll be happy to respond to an enumerated citation.

Very spirited exchange... Thank you

[Zodiak]

33. We are not signatories on the ICC in the Hague

and our Supreme court has ruled that these people held ARE subject to Geneva rights (Rumsfeld vs. Hamden). That is what this whole issue is about. Or are you talking about the Hague conventions of the 1800's?....the world has come a long way since then.

As far as firing squad goes, are you referring to the accord that spies are given the option to cooperate or death by firing squad? Not the same thing.

"'When you say something down the chain of command like, 'The Geneva conventions don't apply,' that sets the stage for the kind of chaos that we've seen,' said Rear Admiral John Hutson (ret.), who was the Navy Judge Advocate General from 1997 to 2000."

From a human rights lawyer in Australia:

"Military justice, as George Bush - in his decree setting up the military tribunals - decides it, is not justice at all, because it means they're taken before a group of officers who are subject of course to the Pentagon, the Pentagon being the detaining power and being the prosecutor and they're not guided by rules of evidence and they don't adopt a burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt and they have execution by firing squad.

This isn't the kind of proper court that the Geneva Convention requires.

...

But I think what the Red Cross and what Britain and Mary Robinson are also certainly concerned about is this idea that Al Qaeda fighters are not entitled to the Geneva Convention because quite frankly, the argument that they weren't wearing military uniform, no-one has worn regimental braid fighting in Afghanistan for the Mujaheddin for centuries and that's not a reasonable basis for denying them prisoner of war status.

It's a very interesting point of law, but it's nonetheless one that should come down I think on side of giving the Al Qaeda fighters their status, is that they were fighting alongside the Taliban, they were integrated into such military structure as the Taliban had, and they seemed on the evidence - and this is a matter of evidence - but from what we know, they seemed to be taking orders from Taliban generals and at the end of the day were being given their orders by Mullah Omar who was ordering them to sacrifice their lives while he turned tail and saved his, but nonetheless, they were there fighting alongside the army just as the SS in Germany were fighting alongside the regular German army and were accorded Geneva Convention status.

...

The Geneva Convention which was signed not only by America but by Australia - indeed Doc Evatt played a very important part in 1949 - he was the President of the General Assembly and he was one quite instrumental in gaining acceptance and in signing for Australia - it requires that wherever there's a doubt about the status of someone who's arrested on the battlefield, a battlefield combatant, then they must be assumed to be under the Geneva Convention protection until a competent court decides otherwise.

There's a presumption in other words in international law that David Hicks is protected by the Geneva Convention until a court, a court, not Donald Rumsfeld, decides otherwise.

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/stories/s477323.htm

I simply do not buy the argument that Al Queda are spies. I do buy the argument that they are criminals (which means they get their day in court) or an auxilliary to the Taliban forces in Afghanistan, which are to be given Geneva accords.

By the way, we have non-uniformed soldiers in Iraq...marines, I think. Do we want them treated the same as we have prisoners in camp X-ray? Ee are opening ourselves up to that argument by taking this hair-splitting position with basic human dignities.

We should treat ALL prisoners of conflicts as POWs....period. If not, then treat them like criminals and try them for their crimes. Either way, they should enjoy legal protection and protection from waterboarding, stress positions, sleep deprivation, etc.

[KKKarl is an idiot]

18. Great post

[ninkasi]

19. You hit another bullseye

Your rants have perfect aim, they always find their target.

[conscious evolution]

20. great essay

Please keep up the good work.The more people point out the brainwashing techniques the bfee uses to control the population the sooner this nightmare can end.

[JohnnyChill]

21. Torture: not just for terrorists...Speak out? Now you can enjoy it too.

MILITARY COURTS

Bush seeks expanded military tribunal role

The White House is seeking legislation that would allow people not affiliated with terrorism to be prosecuted in military commissions -- with far fewer rights than afforded civilians.

Washington Post Service
WASHINGTON - A draft Bush administration plan for special military courts seeks to expand the reach and authority of such ''commissions'' to include trials, for the first time, of people who are not al Qaeda members or the Taliban and are not directly involved in acts of international terrorism, according to officials familiar with the proposal plan.

The plan, which would replace a military trial system ruled illegal by the Supreme Court in June, also allows the secretary of defense to add crimes at will to those under the military court's jurisdiction. The two provisions would be likely to put more individuals than previously expected before military juries, officials and independent experts said.

The draft proposed legislation, set to be discussed at two Senate hearings today, is controversial inside and outside the administration because defendants would be denied many protections guaranteed by the civilian and traditional military criminal justice systems.

Under the proposed procedures, defendants would lack rights to confront accusers, exclude hearsay accusations, or bar evidence obtained through rough or coercive interrogations. They would not be guaranteed a public or speedy trial and would lack the right to choose their military counsel, who in turn would not be guaranteed equal access to evidence held by prosecutors.

Detainees also would not be guaranteed the right to be present at their own trials, if their absence is deemed necessary to protect national security or individuals.

An early draft of the new law prepared by civilian political appointees and leaked to the media last week has been modified in response to criticism from uniformed military lawyers. But the provisions allowing a future expansion of the courts to cover new crimes and more prisoners were retained, according to government officials who are familiar with the deliberations.

http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/world/15176692.htm

[PurpleChez]

24. regarding religious degredation...

it DOESN'T destroy their faith when the thugs don't deliver on these promises. That's the mind-numbing thing. About two years ago the author of a book with a title something like "What's Wrong With Kansas" was being interviewed on public radio. He talked about how, in one election after another, GOP candidates pander to religious conservatives -- he specified the issues of school prayer and, I think, abortion -- and, even though they NEVER deliver on these promises, the right wingers fall for the ploy EVERY DAMN TIME.

[Demeter]

25. Just Enough Acid to Cut to the Quick

I do so love a good rant on a rainy afternoon. Thank you, Nance!

[quiet.american]

26. Excellent! n/t

[JeffR]

27. Ouch!

Insert knife into soft underbelly of GOP hypocrisy. Twist knife. Repeat as necessary until nation comes to its senses.

:kick:

[Initech]

29. OMG - brilliant!

[thoughttheater]

30. Tongue-in-cheek visual of the Grand Opening of "Tortureland"

See a tongue-in-cheek visual of the Grand Opening of "Tortureland"...here:

www.thoughttheater.com

[hashibabba]

31. Awesome, as usual. Thanks for your wonderful writing abilities. eom

[civildisoBDence]

32. Sarcastic and incisive--you are the surgeon of satire.

Now can you explain to DUUUUUUHbya what "outrages to human dignity" means?

Newsprism

[savemefromdumbya]

34. Jesus would turn in his grave if he knew that Christians were torturing

Bush claims he is a Christian?

[riona]

35. If you read the

LTTE in our area, you would see how effective this torture is. Too many "believers". Scary

[midnight]

36. Good Lord Nance but you have just cracked the GOP code.

Brilliant!!!!!

[berni_mccoy]

38. 100% EXCELLENT! K&R!

:kick:

[immoderate]

39. Hit 'em again, Nancy!

If they only knew how badly you trounce them...

--IMM

[Pierzin]

40. K&R

Great post, I'm adding this to my journal!

[illinoisprogressive]

41. Priceless!

I love this. It's not only hilarious but, soooooooo true.
I wish this could be printed for mass consumption. Like in a bookstore where all people can see it.

[NMMNG]

42. Nance, you are amazing

:applause: