U.S. avoiding 'torture' to describe soldiers' actions

http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2004/05/13/world/torture040513

WASHINGTON - The U.S. military has been careful to make sure none of the seven soldiers charged in the prisoner abuse scandal has been officially accused of torture.

Instead, they're facing charges that include maltreating detainees and failing to protect detainees from abuse.

The United Nations defines torture as "any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted … (to obtain) information or a confession…"

<snip>

Robert Goldman, an expert on the law of war at American University in Washington, says Rumsfeld is being deliberately unclear about what was going on. "Rumsfeld's a smart guy," said Goldman, "this is not fuzzy."

...more...

Guess it depends on what the meaning of "is" is.

And it doesn't help when people are willing to use terms like "torturegate" that have the effect of relegating these war crimes to the level of a mere political scandal.

it not only arose from an effort to undermine democracy, it brought down a presidency.

Yes, ____gates ever since have cheapened the term. But Torturegate does promise to play a role, like Watergate, in bring down a presidency.

Like it or not, '____gate' is now an active part of the American political vocabulary.

And some ____gates SHOULD have already played their roles but could not: Traitorgate (outing of Plume), Weaponsgate, and so on.

Fucking disgraceful, all of it.

other photos to be widely released (of course #1 reason their sensitivity in nature) but I still think this is a reason. Right wing hosts are saying of the pictures that were first released "this is nothing more than college pranks" but what excuse would have to be invented to describe the far worse actions that were depicted in the photos that senators had to view under House or Capitol arrest.

"any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted … (to obtain) information or a confession…"

Perhaps some intrepid reporter will read him this definition and see if he thinks it fits.

it's Christian love, damn it. Get with the program and don't forget to tune in to Rush.

Onward, Christian soldiers, marching as to war,
With the cross of Jesus going on before.
Christ, the royal Master, leads against the foe;
Forward into battle see His banners go!

Refrain

Onward, Christian soldiers, marching as to war,
With the cross of Jesus going on before.

At the sign of triumph Satan’s host doth flee;
On then, Christian soldiers, on to victory!
Hell’s foundations quiver at the shout of praise;
Brothers lift your voices, loud your anthems raise.

Refrain

Like a mighty army moves the church of God;
Brothers, we are treading where the saints have trod.
We are not divided, all one body we,
One in hope and doctrine, one in charity.

Refrain

What the saints established that I hold for true.
What the saints believèd, that I believe too.
Long as earth endureth, men the faith will hold,
Kingdoms, nations, empires, in destruction rolled.

Refrain

Crowns and thrones may perish, kingdoms rise and wane,
But the church of Jesus constant will remain.
Gates of hell can never gainst that church prevail;
We have Christ’s own promise, and that cannot fail.

Refrain

Onward then, ye people, join our happy throng,
Blend with ours your voices in the triumph song.
Glory, laud and honor unto Christ the King,
This through countless ages men and angels sing.

Refrain

but, seeing that it is a Canadian news organization, I doubt that any of the US news agencies will do the same, sadly. I would love if just one would prove me wrong.

Sounds better than torture or abuse.

So, if there really was a rational reason for the actions, then they are torture; but if it was done for fun, then it's abuse.

That's not how most people will see the distinction -- that abuse is an affront of lesser severity than torture.