• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

UN Officials Demand Prosecutions for US Torture

Threegoofs said:
Just to inject reality...rectal feeding is not a medical procedure
Click to expand...
Wrong. Your reality is not reality.
While not the norm or often done, it is a medical procedure.
 
Excon said:
Where the **** do you get this "jamming" crap from?
It is a medical procedure.
Show they didn't use lubrication.

That is pretty much all you have done from the get. Spin what actually happened. Just stop.



:naughty
No.
That is what you get for relying bad unquoted sources.
At least five. The five cited.
That doesn't mean more than five. :doh
Had there been more than five, this biased report would have been sure you had been informed of it. Duh!

The CIA forced the nutrient enemas on two detainees who attempted hunger strikes, a third who “partially refus[ed] liquids”, a fourth “without a determination of medical need”, and a fifth whose case details are not divulged.

Controversial 'rectal feeding' technique used to control detainees' behaviour | US news | The Guardian​

The forth and fifth have not been determined if there was a medical need.
Doesn't mean it didn't exist. And since they didn't interview all involved making it a biased, flawed and meaningless report, you can almost rest assured that there was reason.



You really need to cease with the childish personal attacks.
And no, it isn't relevant to this discussion.
Click to expand...
Are you saying rectal feeding is a medical procedure yes or no
 
Excon said:
Where the **** do you get this "jamming" crap from?
It is a medical procedure.
Show they didn't use lubrication.

That is pretty much all you have done from the get. Spin what actually happened. Just stop.



:naughty
No.
That is what you get for relying bad unquoted sources.
At least five. The five cited.
That doesn't mean more than five. :doh
Had there been more than five, this biased report would have been sure you had been informed of it. Duh!

The CIA forced the nutrient enemas on two detainees who attempted hunger strikes, a third who “partially refus[ed] liquids”, a fourth “without a determination of medical need”, and a fifth whose case details are not divulged.

Controversial 'rectal feeding' technique used to control detainees' behaviour | US news | The Guardian​

The forth and fifth have not been determined if there was a medical need.
Doesn't mean it didn't exist. And since they didn't interview all involved making it a biased, flawed and meaningless report, you can almost rest assured that there was reason.



You really need to cease with the childish personal attacks.
And no, it isn't relevant to this discussion.
Click to expand...
Partially refused liquids what does that mean
 
Libertie76 said:
Partially refused liquids what does that mean
Click to expand...
Why don't you ask the authors of the report? They are the ones who know what their spun wording actually means. Not that they would tell you the truth though.
 
Excon said:
Where the **** do you get this "jamming" crap from?
It is a medical procedure.
Show they didn't use lubrication.

That is pretty much all you have done from the get. Spin what actually happened. Just stop.



:naughty
No.
That is what you get for relying bad unquoted sources.
At least five. The five cited.
That doesn't mean more than five. :doh
Had there been more than five, this biased report would have been sure you had been informed of it. Duh!

The CIA forced the nutrient enemas on two detainees who attempted hunger strikes, a third who “partially refus[ed] liquids”, a fourth “without a determination of medical need”, and a fifth whose case details are not divulged.

Controversial 'rectal feeding' technique used to control detainees' behaviour | US news | The Guardian​

The forth and fifth have not been determined if there was a medical need.
Doesn't mean it didn't exist. And since they didn't interview all involved making it a biased, flawed and meaningless report, you can almost rest assured that there was reason.



You really need to cease with the childish personal attacks.
And no, it isn't relevant to this discussion.
Click to expand...

Tell me they didn't use lube is that a sick joke?

Medical need? They attempted a hunger strike were they in such a bad condition they required it during their hunger strike? Or did the cia just get mad at them for not eating...
 
Excon said:
Why don't you ask the authors of the report? They are the ones who know what their spun wording actually means. Not that they would tell you the truth though.
Click to expand...
Maybe they partially refused the water boarding liquid...
 
Excon said:
WTF?
It was a medical procedure.
Prove they didn't use lubrication.
Click to expand...
If I jammed a 20inch long dildo in your ass without permission could I suggest it's not rape because I used lube?
 
Libertie76 said:
If I jammed a 20inch long dildo in your ass without permission could I suggest it's not rape because I used lube?
Click to expand...

There you go with the bs "jamming" again.

Obviously you are trying to have some sort of emotional argument here.
That doesn't fly.

I get that you don't like it, but rectal feeding is not torture and was not done to extract information.
End of argument.
 
Excon said:
There you go with the bs "jamming" again.

Obviously you are trying to have some sort of emotional argument here.
That doesn't fly.

I get that you don't like it, but rectal feeding is not torture and was not done to extract information.
End of argument.
Click to expand...
It was done to show dominance not a lame medical excuse

It's not only an emotional argument it's the fact that is tax dollars paid for it and seriously no one got indicted or even fired... What's even more emotional for me is that people actually make excuses to scapegoat it to happen
 
Libertie76 said:
It was done to show dominance not a lame medical excuse
Click to expand...
Wrong. It was done to feed/hydrate.
Everything else was found to be a secondary benefit.


Libertie76 said:
It's not only an emotional argument it's the fact that is tax dollars paid for it and seriously no one got indicted or even fired... What's even more emotional for me is that people actually make excuses to scapegoat it to happen
Click to expand...
Yes your phrasing was clearly emotional as is your argument.
There is and was nothing wrong with it.
 
Excon said:
You have already been corrected.
You are wrong.

Nutrient enema - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Is rectal feeding an actual modern medical practice? | The Rundown | PBS NewsHour


As I said; While not the norm or often done, it is a medical procedure.
Click to expand...
Did you read your articles?

The first one says it hasn't been used since the 19th century abd that it's because it's humiliating and most enzymes aren't absorbed as she said

And here's one of many quotes "But doctors dispute that. They say the practice is almost never used, that it’s humiliating and not the best way to rehydrate a patient."

There are many more like that in your second article
 
Excon said:
Wrong. It was done to feed/hydrate.
Everything else was found to be a secondary benefit.


Yes your phrasing was clearly emotional as is your argument.
There is and was nothing wrong with it.
Click to expand...

Yea because the cia had no idea forcing a rod to shoot food up people's asses would cause then humiliation and psychological torture

So then it's ok to be used in hospitals then?
 
Libertie76 said:
Did you read your articles?

The first one says it hasn't been used since the 19th century abd that it's because it's humiliating and most enzymes aren't absorbed as she said
And here's one of many quotes "But doctors dispute that. They say the practice is almost never used, that it’s humiliating and not the best way to rehydrate a patient."

There are many more like that in your second article
Click to expand...
Clearly you have trouble making the connections with what has been said.

1. Irrelevant to what I stated.
As I said; While not the norm or often done, it is a medical procedure.​

2. Wrong. As it was used. D'oh!
And I seriously doubt that they have access to all the records over time when it has been used.

Bottom line, it is as I stated: While not the norm or often done, it is a medical procedure.
 
Libertie76 said:
Yea because the cia had no idea forcing a rod to shoot food up people's asses would cause then humiliation and psychological torture
Click to expand...
Emotional argument noted.
 
Excon said:
Clearly you have trouble making the connections with what has been said.

1. Irrelevant to what I stated.
As I said; While not the norm or often done, it is a medical procedure.​

2. Wrong. As it was used. D'oh!
And I seriously doubt that they have access to all the records over time when it has been used.

Bottom line, it is as I stated: While not the norm or often done, it is a medical procedure.
Click to expand...
Ok if you break your leg and a group of people hold you down against your will and amputate your leg is it torture or just a medical procedure?
 
Excon said:
Emotional argument noted.
Click to expand...
... childish ignorance documented and ready to be turned into to the Senate report on fall of western civilization
 
Libertie76 said:
Ok if you break your leg and a group of people hold you down against your will and amputate your leg is it torture or just a medical procedure?
Click to expand...
Irrelevant emotional argument noted.


Libertie76 said:
... childish ignorance documented and ready to be turned into to the Senate report on fall of western civilization
Click to expand...
Nonsensical emotional childish argument noted.
 
Excon said:
Irrelevant emotional argument noted.


Nonsensical emotional childish argument noted.
Click to expand...
Is your name Excon because you're arguments were even more ignorant then neo cons so they Kicked you out?
 
I see the jihadists have no shortage of gullible dupes willing to spread their anti-American propaganda. Blame it on the PC, multi-culti public "education" system, in which anti-American degenerates from the '60's have for forty years been indoctrinating the millions of profoundly ignorant dopes who are now taking up space in this once-great country. If Pearl Harbor were to happen today instead of when it did, these specimens would do very little but prattle homilies about peace and wring their hands. They would be out in the streets lecturing us about how the Japanese view moral issues differently because of their cultural milieu, and urging us to show restraint by not answering violence with more violence, because, after all, force never solves anything.

Meanwhile they'd be claiming the Japanese were the real victims, while denouncing the U.S. for provoking these beautiful, peaceful, brown people through our white racist arrogance, which made them feel so icky and invalidated that they finally acted out inappropriately. And of course these fine citizens would refuse to fight, since they believe this wretched, overbearing country, spawned by white male slave owners and guilty of innumerable sins against minorities ever since, is hardly worth saving.
 
matchlight said:
I see the jihadists have no shortage of gullible dupes willing to spread their anti-American propaganda. Blame it on the PC, multi-culti public "education" system, in which anti-American degenerates from the '60's have for forty years been indoctrinating the millions of profoundly ignorant dopes who are now taking up space in this once-great country. If Pearl Harbor were to happen today instead of when it did, these specimens would do very little but prattle homilies about peace and wring their hands. They would be out in the streets lecturing us about how the Japanese view moral issues differently because of their cultural milieu, and urging us to show restraint by not answering violence with more violence, because, after all, force never solves anything.

Meanwhile they'd be claiming the Japanese were the real victims, while denouncing the U.S. for provoking these beautiful, peaceful, brown people through our white racist arrogance, which made them feel so icky and invalidated that they finally acted out inappropriately. And of course these fine citizens would refuse to fight, since they believe this wretched, overbearing country, spawned by white male slave owners and guilty of innumerable sins against minorities ever since, is hardly worth saving.
Click to expand...
Then why are we allied with the Saudi government whose done more religious based atrocities then Isis
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom