Talk:Strappado

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article previously included content related to BDSM. Discussion related to that content, and its removal, can be found at Talk:Strappado/BDSM-related content.

'The modern name "Palestinian hanging" might be derived from its use in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict'

Where the heck did you learn that from? I'm an Israeli and I've never heard of this. I understand that it's fashionable nowadays to attribute nazi-like behavior to Israeli soldiers (and to Israelis in general), but I think it's best to keep such nasty political agendas out of Wikipedia. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.228.82.140 (talk • contribs) 10:20, February 18, 2005 (UTC)

There was a link to two forms of torture on the Torture article: strappado, and palestinian hanging. On review they were pretty much identical. Same torture, different historical context. I merged the two articles.

Note the original article did not say a specific side used it. It says "In the conflict". Don't over-react and assume everything is partisan. I merged the two articles on the basis of identical descriptions. My personal assumption is, had it been used by Israeli's, it would probably be called "Israeli hanging". In other words... don't over react. Check your concerns calmly, before shouting foul. Okay? FT2 21:54, Feb 18, 2005 (UTC)

Exactly. I originally wrote the Reverse Hanging article and kept "Palestinian hanging" phrase unattributed to either side because I was unsure of how the phrase came to be (I also wanted to use "reverse hanging" phrase more, because of the nature of the "Palestinian hanging" phrase). I ended up editing it to "alleged use by Israeli forces" following additional information in the recent AP article that's also included in the article. Since it's used by other Middle Eastern countries, I would consider it a loaded word, and I wouldn't be surprised if the phrasing originated from there, similar to the various national attributions of Syphilis, usually to an antangoist.--YoungFreud 22:26, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Funny how an Israeli is so quick to deny that their army uses such techniques before anyone has even suggested that they do. — Chameleon 11:48, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Given all the nonsense that gets talked about the Middle East, a little paranoia is quite understandable and forgivable; indeed, its complete absence would be amazing. After all, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you! Taxwoman 11:59, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Contents 1 Iran 2 Hanoi Hilton 3 United States 4 Image

[edit] Iran

Does anyone have a citation for its usage in Iran, or is it just an edit made by the Bush administration? 69.238.20.35 (talk) 07:00, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I've reviewed the last few days of page history, and it looks like Iran was last added by 66.251.26.61 at 07:06, 1 December 2007. The edit is described as "clarity throughout". ;-) Since there's no citation and the "clarity" editing introduced facts not in the previous version of the page, I added a citation needed tag to the Iran link. I dislike propaganda and warmongering more than I dislike the Iranian government. 69.238.20.35 (talk) 07:14, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hanoi Hilton

I am pretty sure that this particular torture was done to US servicemen captured by the Vietnamese and that John McCain specifically mentions it.--No Sig

[edit] United States

I removed the first paragraph references to the United States and Bush. The article stated that: "has since been used by the governments of Turkey, Nazi Germany and the United States of America under President George W. Bush", using Al-Jamadi as an example. Problem is, since the article also says that the military (presumably the US military) ruled his death a homocide, and that the people involved in his detention have been charged and/or convicted of abuse, you have conflicting statements, as well as quite a stretch to claim the "US government" used it. In Nazi Germany, such treatment was explicitly allowed by the state, and in Turkey, it is often implicitly allowed, or officially covered up. Barring some counter-evidence, the United States has done neither, and its disingenuous to imply that this is official US policy. I suppose you could say military members of the United States used it, or some such work-around, but this form of torture has been used for centuries; does every wiki article have to focus so heavily on recent events in the United States? And to tack on George Bush's name is pure politics, as well as being incredibly ethnocentric. Why didn't it also state "Turkey under President Süleyman Demirel", or "Nazi Germany under chancellor Adolf Hitler"? Wiki isn't about creating a personal sounding board for your own politics. Give these nations equal treatment, or not at all.BuboTitan (talk) 12:35, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image

While there's an obvious difference in intention between the use of strappado in torture and in bondage, what opinion do people hold on using one of the images from Strappado bondage in this article for illustrative purposes – it may be difficult for some to visualise the position. GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 20:40, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

The revealing clothing (and other "gear") the models are wearing in the available pictures would distract from illustrating the position. We do already have a picture on this page that, while fuzzy, demonstrates it adequately.--Father Goose (talk) 20:09, 17 February 2008 (UTC)