And the DC political circus gets even more ridiculous

**The Man** · 07-01-2005, 05:41 PM

I'm under the impression they're playing it at 110 dB or higher. I can't remember the threshold of pain offhand, but repeated exposure to loud music can cause sustained hearing loss over an extended period of time. If you think it's fine to systematically remove someone's hearing without their consent, you're entitled to your opinion, but it doesn't seem like the sort of thing the United States should be standing for.

Incidentally, there's an editorial in today's Washington Post from George H.W. Bush's presidential physician condemning the torture at Gitmo and elsewhere. (Note that registration is required to read it).

**Raistlin** · 07-01-2005, 06:04 PM

The threshold of pain, according to two internet sources, is roughly 120 dB. However, there are other factors(i.e., sensitivity of the ear) where this could vary. Also, the sound begins to give damage to the ear at 85 dB(for 8 hours - this time gets less as the dB raises).

This is all a moot point, since we don't actually know how loud the music's being played. However, if they are playing it above 100 dB for hours at a time, this could be constituted as torture, because not only could it be causing pain, but it definitely would be physically harming those forced to listen to it.

**Cloud No.9** · 07-01-2005, 06:24 PM

it is not what it is played. it is when it is played. in what manner is played. if i played loud music 24/7 for a week so loud you couldn't sleep like is reported to happen in quantanamo then it is torture. sleep depravation is torture. making a man crap himself is humilation and degrading and so is torture. stress positions are painful and so are torture. also the human rights act says all men should be allowed to practice their religion freely. for many muslims this means not to shave. forceful shaving of them and not giving them the necessary equipment to do so (water when doing the prayers, matts, the quran etc.) is not torture but is a breach of human rights.

i can choose to hang myself here and now but i wouldn't be best pleased if just because i can do it means the government can come over and do it for me. sleep depravation by creating an environment such as loud noise where you cannot sleep is torture as plainly defined. temperature control can also cause health problems.

gnostic yevon seems to be using the US's (and only the US's) definition of torture. which doesn't work anyway due to the nuremburg principles (number 5 i beliver) which says that making it legal in your country does not make it legal as internation law still governs it.

and you want another example other than begg of a man not on a battelfield but taken by american forces?

Maher Arar was a canadian man going to come back from holiday in america. he was arrested while changing planes at JFK (nowhere near iraq or afghanistan). he had worked with a man who had a brother called Abdullah Almalki who america suspected of having links to al-qaeda (almalki had signed arar's rental lease) on this basis arar was arrested in america. was he taken to a pokice station? placed in jail? nope he was deported. to canada where he was a citizen? nope he was deported to syria where he was racially profiled to come from. note that arar was not an immigrant in america but was deported by them anyway. a month later the canadian government were informed.

syria as we all know isn't a very nice to be held in jail. they practice torture (international law forbids the sneding of anyone to a country which is suspected of carrying out torture). it is known as torture by proxy. america now has a nasty habit of it. it send them away to somewhere like syira or uzbekistan. have them tortured for a while then have them sent back to cuba

back to the story. arar was tortured in syria for a year. and was forced to sign a false confession.

he was released back to canada 374 after his detention at JFK.

he tried to sue the american government but the american government used the State Secrets Privilege and stop the motion.

so yeah another man, innocent, tortured (by proxy this time) and nowhere near a battlefield.

**Gnostic Yevon** · 07-01-2005, 07:11 PM

it is not what it is played. it is when it is played. in what manner is played. if i played loud music 24/7 for a week so loud you couldn't sleep like is reported to happen in quantanamo then it is torture. sleep depravation is torture. making a man crap himself is humilation and degrading and so is torture. stress positions are painful and so are torture. also the human rights act says all men should be allowed to practice their religion freely. for many muslims this means not to shave. forceful shaving of them and not giving them the necessary equipment to do so (water when doing the prayers, matts, the quran etc.) is not torture but is a breach of human rights.

i can choose to hang myself here and now but i wouldn't be best pleased if just because i can do it means the government can come over and do it for me. sleep depravation by creating an environment such as loud noise where you cannot sleep is torture as plainly defined. temperature control can also cause health problems.

You have really weird notions of what constitutes torture. Now if a prisoner has to shave (so as to remove lice and bugs), we're torturing him. If we don't hand them prayer rugs and korans and a proper water basin, it's against the law. Well, those "religious artifacts" are perfect places to hide weapons, which is absolutely that last thing you'd want as a guard in a prison. If the guy can't sleep at night, this is torture? This is absolute nonsense. You can't force somebody to fall asleep. I can't even force myself to fall asleep. And I'm pretty sure you'd be against tranquilizers too.

Stress positions are pretty bad, I guess. I really have no idea what this is all about. If it's possible not to do that, then we shouldn't, but I'm not sure that we can get intelligence from them without it. And unless we get the intelligence, Americans will die.

I really wish there was a better way, but I don't see one. And reallity being what it is, we need to find out where and when the next attack is. If not, more attacks will happen. That's the real world. It stinks, but that doesn't mean that you can simply deny what is going on. I don't see much fairness in asking a mother to give up her child or a child to give up her father just for a treaty. That would be quite frankly cruel. And all of this thinking of "It's the law" is to my mind asking Americans to do just that. Give up safety and please a few international lawyers. Although as stringent as international law is, I doubt that any POW camp could ever meet such standards.

And at least you have one other name other than Begg.

**The Man** · 07-01-2005, 07:24 PM

Originally Posted by Gnostic Yevon

You have really weird notions of what constitutes torture. Now if a prisoner has to shave (so as to remove lice and bugs), we're torturing him.

Forcing them to shave violates freedom of religion, and therefore, the First Amendment.

If we don't hand them prayer rugs and korans and a proper water basin, it's against the law. Well, those "religious artifacts" are perfect places to hide weapons, which is absolutely that last thing you'd want as a guard in a prison.

How hard is it for guards to examine them for weapons themselves? You act like finding hidden weapons is rocket science.

If the guy can't sleep at night, this is torture? This is absolute nonsense. You can't force somebody to fall asleep. I can't even force myself to fall asleep. And I'm pretty sure you'd be against tranquilizers too.

um. Sleep deprivation is listed as torture in most definitions I've ever read.

Stress positions are pretty bad, I guess. I really have no idea what this is all about. If it's possible not to do that, then we shouldn't, but I'm not sure that we can get intelligence from them without it. And unless we get the intelligence, Americans will die.

I really wish there was a better way, but I don't see one. And reallity being what it is, we need to find out where and when the next attack is. If not, more attacks will happen. That's the real world. It stinks, but that doesn't mean that you can simply deny what is going on. I don't see much fairness in asking a mother to give up her child or a child to give up her father just for a treaty. That would be quite frankly cruel. And all of this thinking of "It's the law" is to my mind asking Americans to do just that. Give up safety and please a few international lawyers. Although as stringent as international law is, I doubt that any POW camp could ever meet such standards.

see, I have a different opinion on how to deal with the whole War on Terror. That position is: Stop pissing off people in other countries. The war on Iraq has done absolutely the reverse of that. Despite what you constantly hear on right-wing talk shows, Al-Qaeda and other groups object to America's imperialism and its blind support of Israel (even when Israelis are guilty of exactly the same atrocities the Palestinians are accused of), not something intangible like its freedom. Remove their reason to hate us and you remove the source of their attacks on us. Somehow that seems a much more solid defense than trying to get intelligence through torture, which is just going to make more people hate us.

**lordblazer** · 07-01-2005, 07:28 PM

Originally Posted by The Man