Canada places U.S., Israel on torture watch list

[Nono]

Canada places U.S., Israel on torture watch list | International | Reuters

Canada's foreign ministry has put the United States and Israel on a watch list of countries where prisoners risk being tortured and also classifies some U.S. interrogation techniques as torture, according to a document obtained by Reuters on Thursday. (...)

Much as the Harper government hates to call a spade a spade...

[shrike]

Canada takes US, Israel off torture watch list "It contains a list that wrongly includes some of our closest allies. I have directed that the manual be reviewed and rewritten," Bernier said in a statement. "The manual is neither a policy document nor a statement of policy. As such, it does not convey the government's views or positions."

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7...496228,00.html

[nerdvincent]

It's a good thing. Canada finally decided to consider America like a country instead of their boss.

[Nono]

shrike, you can't wriggle out of it that way. Maxime Bernier is a politician, in the government of lapdog-in-chief Stephen Harper LOL. Of course the Harper government is going to disown the document, which was made by civil servants who deal with facts and are supposed to be above politics.

Sorry, try finding a less politicized claim about "wrong" findings.

Quote by: Bernier I have directed that the manual be reviewed and rewritten.

I'll bet! Just as the Iranian mullahs have "reviewed and rewritten" school history books about the holocaust -- eh shrike?

[Charlatan]

What makes something torture? Is it an amount of stress placed on the victim? How about shining a light on them in a dark room? That causes stress, so that is torture too. Is it about pain? Causing pain and stress are both harmful to the victim, and I am sure that either are effective, but when looking for answers one needs to look everywhere, so causing a bit of stress is seen as good, but causing a bit of pain isn't? It is not like they are bringing knives to the victim, so any torture is passable as a need to look for answers that would otherwise result in the wrong thing being put into effect.

When looking for answers one has to think what method to use. Asking nicely isn't feasible, as it will result in the truth version as prescribed by the victim, which could be a lie. When put under stress a victim may not be able to answer in lies, so it is much more effective. Take sleep deprivation, that is stress without the messy pictures prescribed by the media, so while it is effective, it doesn't paint the same bad picture as water boarding, which is also effective, maybe more so. So we are left with either needing to know the truth and not knowing it, or torturing people into telling the truth.

What methods are ok? All methods lead to the same reults, so people should think about which one to use, which one is humane and which is not. Does being humane come into war? That is what this is, it is war. People get shot and die because of war, so maybe a little torture isn't such a bad idea is it? Causing pain to someone is therefore better than killing them, but what are the ramifications to this making of pain? Is it temporay illness? That can be rectified with a bit of sleep and rest usually, and I doubt the government endorses anything permanent. We are at war with the dregs of society, so people need to understand that torture is necessary.

Anyone in the business using the torture will understand the importance of it, and anyone off the street given the task will understand that they now need to get answers, and laws are passed according to the majority, so any majority needing to get answers put into that position with just a few people to deal with will do the same, once not part of the majority. Majorities are made up of minorities, and majorities get laws passed, through their voting for the person that will see them passed, so torture is a method that should be used by any majority also, once out of their comfort zone. That is the trouble, people are sitting in their comfort zones and thinking about things like they can remain comfortable, but once in the shoes of the officails, they would also do anything for the good of their land, even torture a person to tell them the truth.

Would the victims also do the same if put into that place? Before they get into that position they would do the same. The media paints a story that gets the officails into trouble, and without the trouble people would still torture others. The trouble comes from the public, as noone in the officails side is complaining about the people being maimed for life, so there should be no problem. Torturing people is not a moral issue, as the good of the people is at stake, so, like in war, measures need to be taken to ensure the right outcome is reached, and if that means the well being of the majority at the stake of the victim, so it should be reached that the public would vote for it's well being in the greater scheme.

When one thinks that torturing is vital for survival, people might think that survival is crucail to them, and torture the victims as is needed. So what is torture? Torture is about making people talk using umcomforting means, so the majority can have a better life. It should be enforced that causing one discomfort is important in making everyone else more well off. That is why people get tortured, and will get tortured in the future as is needed, in this war.

Torturing people is not socially correct though, as people who get tortured are put in harms way. So when it comes to a socail issue, that is where people get confused, these people have become antisocial, so get treated in an antisocial way, for the good of society. Is war socially correct? No it isn'e, and that is exactly what police and soldiers are in everyday, so for them to be socially correct is ludicrous. Taking away the vital information they need is just going to make things worse for them, and it is unpatriotic to rule that they shouldn't be able to use harsh means to get information, when the times are harsh.

[shrike]

Quote by: Nono shrike, you can't wriggle out of it that way. Maxime Bernier is a politician, in the government of lapdog-in-chief Stephen Harper LOL. Of course the Harper government is going to disown the document, which was made by civil servants who deal with facts and are supposed to be above politics. Sorry, try finding a less politicized claim about "wrong" findings. I'll bet! Just as the Iranian mullahs have "reviewed and rewritten" school history books about the holocaust -- eh shrike?

I understand you take the decisions of Canada government that suits your fringe political view anything that goes against it you just dismiss with no reason

[The Decider]

Quote by: Nono shrike, you can't wriggle out of it that way. Maxime Bernier is a politician, in the government of lapdog-in-chief Stephen Harper LOL. Of course the Harper government is going to disown the document, which was made by civil servants who deal with facts and are supposed to be above politics. Sorry, try finding a less politicized claim about "wrong" findings.

But if the Canadian government disowned the document in question then "Canada" didn't place the US and Israel on a torture watch list. The title of the thread and the article is misleading.

[Nono]

Quote by: Charlatan What makes something torture?

Easy. That's what the UN Torture Convention is all about:

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, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity.

Both the US and Israel have signed and ratified that treaty. That means they both accept this definition, as does the rest of the world.

[Nono]

Quote by: Decider If the Canadian government disowned the document in question then "Canada" didn't place the US and Israel on a torture watch list. The title of the thread and the article is misleading.

No. Completely wrong. There's something in Canada called the rule of law. The government is not free to arbitrarily apply one yardstick to its friends (the Americans, the Israelis, whoever) and a different yardstick to people it doesn't like (a long list here... let's say Iran for example).

Canada is party to the Torture Convention and a good many other human rights treaties besides. So Stephen Harper is full of shit, as usual.

If it's Canada's policy to have a watch list on torture, and if civil servants who are experts in international law put this or that country on that list, Harper (or his creature/minister at foreign affairs) cannot protest just because it rubs them the wrong way. If they do, they're showing contempt for the rule of law.

This demonstrates what a disgrace the current Canadian federal government is (a minority government, I hasten to add).

[shrike]

Quote by: nono Any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental

Well this definition is not absolute. Some may claim that putting someone in jail or calling someone "piece of sh*t in middle of interrogation is mental/physical" suffering i.e torture. So like every law it can be interrupted in various ways.

[Nono]

Well, shrike ol' darling, if it ain't absolute, why did Israel sign and ratify it?

[shrike]

Well, shrike ol' darling, if it ain't absolute, why did Israel sign and ratify it?

Why not? What it have to do what ever it absolute or not? .
Anyway I think the convention is meaningless it doesn’t mention what interrogation techniques the integrators should not use. Even China and Saudia signed it.

[Nono]

Quote by: shrike it doesn’t mention what interrogation techniques the integrators should not use

If you knew anything about the law, you'd know there's an accompanying commentary for that kind of thing.

Even China and Saudia signed it.

Good company for Israel in the Ignorers Club.

[The Decider]

Quote by: Nono No. Completely wrong. There's something in Canada called the rule of law. The government is not free to arbitrarily apply one yardstick to its friends (the Americans, the Israelis, whoever) and a different yardstick to people it doesn't like (a long list here... let's say Iran for example). Canada is party to the Torture Convention and a good many other human rights treaties besides. So Stephen Harper is full of shit, as usual. If it's Canada's policy to have a watch list on torture, and if civil servants who are experts in international law put this or that country on that list, Harper (or his creature/minister at foreign affairs) cannot protest just because it rubs them the wrong way. If they do, they're showing contempt for the rule of law. This demonstrates what a disgrace the current Canadian federal government is (a minority government, I hasten to add).

When the Canadian courts overrule the Harper decision, then "Canada" will have placed the US and Israel on the terror watch list and not before. I hope the courts do exactly that. That said, this thread is premature.

[shrike]

Quote by: Nono If you knew anything about the law, you'd know there's an accompanying commentary for that kind of thing.

Care to give a link?

Good company for Israel in the Ignorers Club.

Israel is not ignoring anything...

[notworthabean]

Quote by: Nono No. Completely wrong. There's something in Canada called the rule of law. The government is not free to arbitrarily apply one yardstick to its friends (the Americans, the Israelis, whoever) and a different yardstick to people it doesn't like (a long list here... let's say Iran for example). Canada is party to the Torture Convention and a good many other human rights treaties besides. So Stephen Harper is full of shit, as usual. If it's Canada's policy to have a watch list on torture, and if civil servants who are experts in international law put this or that country on that list, Harper (or his creature/minister at foreign affairs) cannot protest just because it rubs them the wrong way. If they do, they're showing contempt for the rule of law. This demonstrates what a disgrace the current Canadian federal government is (a minority government, I hasten to add).

So its rule of law to allow bureaucrats to run the government instead of the elected people?

[Chancellor]

Quote by: Nono Canada places U.S., Israel on torture watch list | International | Reuters Much as the Harper government hates to call a spade a spade...

Yes, but Canada's opinions aren't taken seriously by nations with real power.

[Nono]

Quote by: nwbean So its rule of law to allow bureaucrats to run the government instead of the elected people?

Who made these laws, bean? A duly elected government. If the Harper government had the balls to change the law, that would be one thing. But here Harper is just being arbitrary. Arbitrary ain't rule of law.

Also, bean, the Conservative government is a minority government. The Tories got 36% of the votes cast. What does that mean? That means that 64 percent of Canadian voters voted against Harper.

Better rethink yore "electd people" theory.

[The Decider]

Quote by: Nono Who made these laws, bean? A duly elected government. If the Harper government had the balls to change the law, that would be one thing. But here Harper is just being arbitrary. Arbitrary ain't rule of law. Also, bean, the Conservative government is a minority government. The Tories got 36% of the votes cast. What does that mean? That means that 64 percent of Canadian voters voted against Harper. Better rethink yore "electd people" theory.

You've cited the "rule of law" several times on this thread. What Canadian law specifically prevents the Canadian Foreign Ministry from taking the US off the terror watch list? What law, specifically, denies that power to the Canadian executive branch (ie the Harper government)?

[Nono]

OK, D. Article 10 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment says this: "Each State Party shall ensure that education and information regarding the prohibition against torture are fully included in the training of law enforcement personnel, civil or military, medical personnel, public officials and other persons who may be involved in the custody, interrogation or treatment of any individual subjected to any form of arrest, detention or imprisonment."

International treaty obligations are useless if they aren't enforceable domestically. The civil servants who drew up the manual were implementing Canada's international obligations. The Harper government has blocked that, which amounts to a breach of Canada's treaty commitments.

Look up the word "arbitrary".