ISIS is turning Christian churches into torture chambers where it forces believers to convert to Islam

ISIS is turning Christian churches into torture chambers where it forces believers to convert to Islam… and funding its terror mission by selling stripped artefacts to Western collectors 

Islamic State militants are turning Christian churches into torture chambers where they force attendees to convert to Islam, it has been reported. 

The fanatics are also said to be stripping the former places of worship of ancient relics, which they are smuggling to Western collectors to help fund their terrorist activity. 

Christians were reportedly being held captive in make-shift torture chambers set up in raided churches in Qaraqosh, Iraq. 

An expert told the Jerusalem Post that the terror organisation's goal was to 'wipe out Christianity.' 

'This is why they are crucifying Christians — which includes children — destroying churches and selling artifacts,' he told the newspaper. 

'The reality is, this group will stop at practically nothing to raise funds for its terrorist mission.' 

Jihadists have pocketed around £23million from the sale of stolen artefacts in Nabaq, Syria, according to the Christian Post. 

It was not known what relics had been stolen during the raid on churches. The news comes as it has been revealed that militants captured a Jordanian pilot after his warplane crashed while conducting airstrikes over Syria

The US Military Waterboards It's Own Troops

It Has Also Been Reported 

The American Military 

Gave Khalid Sheikh Mohammed a Golden Shower

Here's a fact that somehow had completely bypassed my consciousness:

In a discussion on MSNBC's Hardball program about whether the government ought to consider prosecuting people involved in enhanced interrogation techniques used on some terror suspects, former U.S. Rep. 

Duncan Hunter, a Republican from California, argued that the issue really comes down to waterboarding. "And," he said, "waterboarding is not torture." 

In fact, said Hunter, a Vietnam veteran and former candidate for president, "We waterboard, incidentally, hundreds of our own military personnel. They waterboard themselves in training to toughen themselves up." 

He added, "The Geneva Convention .. .was analyzed by the lawyers in place, and they came to the conclusion, especially about waterboarding, because that's the primary thing, that, since we do it to our own soldiers, by the hundreds, incidentally, and it doesn't hurt them, and they — and it makes them tougher, and it doesn't hurt anybody — Khalid Sheikh Mohammed gained weight after he was waterboarded — we decided that, since we do that to our own soldiers in training... we‘re not going to consider that torture. " 

Hunter later challenged host Chris Matthews saying, "But the point is, if we do it, are we torturing American soldiers? You have to answer yes if you consider waterboarding to be torture." 

Matthews said the difference is that U.S. service people know they are in training. They know they aren't going to be killed. "That captured person who is one of our enemies has no idea what we‘re doing when we submit him to water torture." 

Said Hunter: "If we use it with our own soldiers in training, as we do waterboarding, then it should be allowed with people who have killed thousands of Americans."

Now, Politifact says this is slightly misleading. Here's why:

But while the techniques may have been derived from SERE training, a different, more intense brand of waterboarding was used on terror suspects, according to recently released CIA documents. 

According to a May 7, 2004, CIA Inspector General special report on interrogation techniques used on terror suspects, which has some parts redacted, 

"OIG’s (Office of the Inspector General's) review of the videotapes revealed that the waterboard technique employed at (redacted) was different from the technique as described in the DoJ (Department of Justice) opinion and used in the SERE training. The difference was in the manner in which the detainee’s breathing was obstructed. At the SERE School and in the DoJ opinion, the subject’s airflow is disrupted by the firm application of a damp cloth over the air passages; the interrogator applies a small amount of water to the cloth in a controlled manner. By contest, the Agency interrogator (redacted) continuously applied large volumes of water to a cloth that covered the detainee’s mouth and nose. One of the psychologists/interrogators acknowledged that the Agency’s use of the technique differed from that used in SERE training and explained that the Agency’s technique is different because it is 'for real' and is more poignant and convincing." The report also says the CIA's Office of Medical Services has characterized the SERE waterboarding as "so different from the subsequent Agency usage as to make it almost irrelevant." 

The office said its frequency and intensity raised questions about whether it was effective or medically safe. 

So we think Hunter misleads a bit by equating waterboarding in training of military personnel with the technique used on terror suspects. According to the CIA inspector general's report, the technique used on the suspects was more powerful and convincing. 

And in the case of one terror suspect, it was used 183 times, often in rapid succession. So to argue the technique isn't torture because it is used on American servicemen as part of training ignores that it was not used in the same way. 

Still, Hunter is correct that the U.S. military has waterboarded servicemen as part of survival training. And so we rule his statement Mostly True.

Donald Rumsfeld Can Be Sued?

While we had our eye on the train wreck of Wall Street following the downgrade of the credit rating of the United States, THIS happened:

'Tortured' US citizens allowed to sue Donald Rumsfeld

Two former US security contractors may sue former Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld for his role in their alleged torture in Iraq, a court has ruled.

US citizens Donald Vance and Nathan Ertel said they were held for months by US troops under harsh conditions.

They said they were detained in retaliation for efforts to reveal illegal activities by their employer.

A federal appeals court on Monday ruled that former Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld had no immunity in the case.

"Plaintiffs have alleged sufficient facts to show that Secretary Rumsfeld personally established the relevant policies that caused the alleged violations of their constitutional rights during detention," the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, based in Chicago, ruled in a 2-1 decision on Monday that upheld a decision by a lower US district court.

'Nightmarish scene'

The decision is the second this month in which US judges have ruled Mr Rumsfeld may be sued by US citizens who alleged torture in Iraq at the hands of US troops.

Last week, a US district judge in Washington ruled separately that a former American military contractor who also claims he was tortured in Iraq could sue Mr Rumsfeld.

The government said the contractor was suspected of helping pass information to the enemy, although he was never charged....

[...]

War 'second-guessed'

But the court said it remained to be seen whether Mr Rumsfeld had actually done so.

In a statement, a lawyer for Mr Rumsfeld said the decision to allow the suit "saps the effectiveness of the military, puts American soldiers at risk, and shackles federal officials who have a constitutional duty to protect America".

"Having judges second-guess the decisions made by the armed forces halfway around the world is no way to wage a war," David Rivkin said in a statement.

The US justice department could appeal against the ruling to the full panel of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals or to the US Supreme Court.

Can attempted litigation against George W. Bush be far behind?

CIA destroyed 12 harsh interrogation tapes

AP
3/6/2009

WASHINGTON – The CIA destroyed a dozen videotapes of harsh interrogations of terror suspects, according to documents filed Friday in a lawsuit over the government's treatment of detainees. The 12 tapes were part of a larger collection of 92 videotapes of terror suspects that the CIA destroyed. The extent of the tape destruction was disclosed through a suit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union against the government.

Heavily redacted papers filed in the case indicate a dozen destroyed tapes show so-called "enhanced interrogation techniques."

Let's see, the Enhanced Interrogation Techniques are:

1. The Attention Grab: The interrogator forcefully grabs the shirt front of the prisoner and shakes him.

2. Attention Slap: An open-handed slap aimed at causing pain and triggering fear.

3. The Belly Slap: A hard open-handed slap to the stomach. The aim is to cause pain, but not internal injury. Doctors consulted advised against using a punch, which could cause lasting internal damage.

4. Long Time Standing: This technique is described as among the most effective. Prisoners are forced to stand, handcuffed and with their feet shackled to an eye bolt in the floor for more than 40 hours. Exhaustion and sleep deprivation are effective in yielding confessions.

5. The Cold Cell: The prisoner is left to stand naked in a cell kept near 50 degrees. Throughout the time in the cell the prisoner is doused with cold water.

6. Water Boarding: The prisoner is bound to an inclined board, feet raised and head slightly below the feet. Cellophane is wrapped over the prisoner's face and water is poured over him. Unavoidably, the gag reflex kicks in and a terrifying fear of drowning leads to almost instant pleas to bring the treatment to a halt.

Oooooh.................

Not a single machete or blindfold in the list.

Continuing on,

The CIA's enhanced interrogation methods are secret, but they once included waterboarding, which simulates drowning. (Simulates drowning?)

Secret? I got the list from ABC. Which by the way, was written in an article back in 2005.

As part of the Bush administration's response to the 2001 terror attacks, the CIA held fewer than 100 prisoners at secret sites and used harsh interrogation methods on about one-third of them, according to agency officials. Former CIA director Michael Hayden has acknowledged that waterboarding was used on three suspects.

So enhanced wasn't HARSH enough for you. Had to change the wording to get your point across, I guess.

The criminal investigation includes interrogations of al-Qaida lieutenant Abu Zubaydah and another top al-Qaida leader.

Oh please!

Please Mr. Jihadi man, tell me everything you know. I have a nice cup of tea for you.....

Seriously, these are NOT US citizens. They are NOT your common criminals. They do NOT care if they die. The above techniques are NOT harsh. The jihadis spend some of their time in training learning how to overcome these pansy techniques. They whine about them when they know someone is listening. And yes, unfortunately their are those in our country who want these maniacs out on the street. The ignorant lefties who need to grow up and STOP smelling the flowers.

We're dead meat.

France: Ilam Halimi's case reloaded

You will remember the case of Ilam Halimi, a French young man, who was brutally tortured during more than a month, and then abandoned near a railway to his death. Now the victim's name is Mathieu Roumi, and he was tortured only during nine hours and a half by some admirers of the gang which killed Hallimi, The Barbarians. Mr. Roumi survived the sexual and sadistic torture he was subjected to. In this case he is not only a Jew: he is also an homosexual. However, both the motivation and the manner they did it is very similar to what happened to Ilan Hallimi.

Happily this time, the "dirty Jew" survived to tell what the "youths" had done to him.

Palestinian Scholars take time out for Torture

While at the University of Florida, there is much concern over the supposedly fanciful, and free speech-abusing, claim that Radical Islam Wants You Dead, life in Palestine shows the true complexity of things. Maybe it is actually the Radical Marxists who want you dead:

Classes at Birzeit University, in the West Bank, were suspended on Tuesday after escalating violence between Palestinian political groups on the campus.

Tension has been rising between supporters of President Mahmoud Abbas’s Fatah movement and the radical Marxist Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine over a West Bank security crackdown in which militants in the Popular Front, known as the PFLP, have been arrested by Fatah-dominated security forces.

The university’s administration decided to suspend classes and evacuate students from the campus after a Fatah-affiliated student was assaulted in his dormitory room, apparently by four men from the PFLP. The student, Ahmad Jarrar, was treated at a hospital for severe injuries suffered as he was apparently being tortured.

The assailants used charcoal to burn Mr. Jarrar’s face. They also hammered nails into his feet, according to eyewitnesses. Fatah gunmen then arrived at the campus and threatened to kill PFLP supporters.

It seems like student politics are taken much more seriously over there. A sign of too much free speech?

All kidding aside, here is yet another nightmare example of the kind of people whom all good opinion makers in the West want the Israelis to trust as "peace partners". Tonight there was a story on the CBC (Canadian national) television news showing some Palestinian reaction to George Bush and Condi Rice's Annapolis Peace Show. The thing was, these "Palestinians" were rather sane and intelligent-looking residents of East Jerusalem who are all of a sudden scared that a peace agreement, conceding East Jerusalem to a new Palestinian state, will mean they lose all the benefits of life in Israeli society, such as well-funded schools and hospitals, not to mention relative freedom and security. The "Palestinian" couple being interviewed couldn't quite bring themselves to say they were against East Jerusalem becoming part of "Palestine", but they were suddenly planning to relocate to another part of the city.

Isn't it nice how reality gets an occasional day in the news?

Female genital mutilation: more than 7.000 girls in danger in UK

Following the plea of the London police, which is going to give a £20,000 reward for information to bring to justice any culprit or involved in this terrible crime, I have written about what means for the girls and women this brutality. You can read it here.

What? No "Panties On The Head?"

While a lot of people who apparently don't get out a lot railed and screeched over Abu Ghraib's famed "panties on the head" abuse of prisoners, very few of these pseudo-intellectuals can be bothered to comment about the genuine bloody torture that is occurring on the battlefield of the Long War.

The Smoking Gun describes the instructions contained in an al-Qaeda torture manual found by US troops in a raid on a safe house in Iraq. (Warning graphic drawings)

In a recent raid on an al-Qaeda safe house in Iraq, U.S. military officials recovered an assortment of crude drawings depicting torture methods like “blowtorch to the skin” and “eye removal.” Along with the images, which you’ll find on the following pages, soldiers seized various torture implements, like meat cleavers, whips, and wire cutters.

What? No humiliating body searches by women or the disrepectful handling of Korans?

Silence on Torture: Silence is complicity, you know. (Instapundit)

For somebody who loves torture stories to death, there’s lots of silence about this from Andrew Sullivan who’s busy slamming Catholics, sniffing out homophobia, rooting about with Ron Paul and showing the view from somebody’s window. It’s just work, work, work, for Andrew.

Don Surber asks and answers: What was Amnesty International’s reaction? — cricket chirp

“Given the media’s fascination with what American soldiers were doing at Abu Ghraib, is it safe to assume that the same level of attention will be given to what our enemy is doing? Or, would that be too much like journalism?” (Newsbusters)

Source

The media, and the less bright bloggers, appear to be fixated on the exaggeration of the sins of coalition forces, and completely blind to the actual horror that is being faced by the western world. These self-lobotomised bloggers and journalists were all over Abu Ghraib, but since looking at the real threats to civilisation might upset some of their "readers," they choose to ignore the real problems.

Respect them? What is there to respect?