Quote:
Originally posted by Not Me
Ty, my point was that I don't need to see the pictures to know and to remember and neither should anyone else. Unfortunately, not everyone is like me.
|
This is unmitigated horseshit, and you lie like a rug. You posted that picture in response to a
post by the Gin Rummy sock in which he posted the pictures from Fallujah. You introduced the picture by
saying:
Quote:
Originally posted by Not Me
Here is another example of torture for those of you who throw that word around so carelessly:
|
Gin Rummy was apparently "responding" (I use the term loosely) to
this post from Sidd Finch:
Quote:
Originally posted by Sidd Finch
The Convention on the Prevention of Torture defines torture as "any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind..."
The Geneva Convention on the treatment of prisoners spefically prohibits "humiliating and degrading treatment."
Given this, your suggestion that anything short of rape or murder does not violate the Geneva Convention is dead wrong. Equally dead wrong is your psycho-brethren's argument that the Geneva Convention does not apply here because the prisoners in Abu Ghraib are "illegal combatants." The Bush Administration and the US military have specifically rejected this contention as to all persons captured in Iraq, regardless of whether they were uniformed or non-uniformed.
Grinning over a dead body is not a violation of the GC, I believe. Making the body dead in the first place is. Photographing yourself with your victim tends to suggest that you did not believe that you were violating orders.
|
Sidd wasn't saying anything about 9/11. He defines "torture" by quoting the Geneva Convention, and you "respond" by posting a picture of someone falling from the WTC. You have absolutely no basis to say that Sidd needs to see that picture to "know and remember" 9/11, and if you said that to him in person you would be at some justifiable risk of physical violence. You disgrace the victims of 9/11 by using them in this way. The conversation didn't have anything to do with 9/11 -- you gratuitously introduced that angle to score cheap points, and you are simply bullshitting about it now because you don't have the grace or common sense to give it up. If you had any sense, you'd slink away, abandon this sock, and come back later with a better act.
