Thursday, September 6, 2007

"Israel" furious over Norway torture claim

The Foreign Ministry has in recent days exchanged "strong words" with the Norwegian embassy in Tel Aviv over a diplomatic document the embassy sent back to Oslo calling for criticism of Israel for allegedly using torture in prisons, diplomatic officials in Jerusalem said Thursday night.

The Norwegian state radio network NRK reported Thursday it had obtained a secret diplomatic document from the embassy urging action by "expressing our concern that torture is still practiced in Israel." According to NRK, the embassy's concern stemmed from a report by the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel claiming that prisoners were sometimes beaten during interrogation, held in painfully tight handcuffs and suffered isolation, threats, humiliation and sleep deprivation.

Complete Article


Anonymous said...

Israel SHOULD use torture against jihadi terrorists. What this UC Berkeley professor of law points out is applicaple to the PLO, Hamas, and the other Philistines JUST as it is applicaple to the Taliban:

(T)he conflict with al Qaeda is not governed by the Geneva Conventions, which applies only to international conflicts between states that have signed them. Al Qaeda is not a nation-state, and its members--as they demonstrated so horrifically on Sept. 11, 2001--violate the very core principle of the laws of war by targeting innocent civilians for destruction.

David said...

The first comment was ridiculous and typical for what I expect from Americans. Note that this person concludes Arab-Palestinian=terrorist . The same logic is used for the prisoners of Guantanamo. The fact that none of these people have proven connections to any terrorist organization or activity never enters into this feeble mind set.

Anonymous said...

The first comment is correct. Terrorists don't care about others' rights.

We owe them nothing.

Anonymous said...

david, your comment is "ridiculous" because you claim "NONE" of the people in Guantanamo Bay have links to terrorists. Well then, how do you explain the convictions?