|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Quote:
r3x29yz4a said:
Apparently he never read that whole "cruel and unusual punishment" part of the constitution and thinks the CIA should be able to cut loose when they want.
However Colin Powell (the only member of his term term cabinet to actually be in combat) opposes torture on the grounds that it shows weakness and lack of options.
This legislation is being pushed by John McCain, who himself was tortured for about 5 years in Vietnam. This isn't really a partisan issue, many republicans support the anti-terror bill. Of course Mr. Bill O'Reilly (never seen combat like Bush but talks like a hardened veteran with an air of wisdom) disagrees with McCain on the issue of torture.
Now, this isn't a thread to say all Republicans are bad, just these fucks in the white house (and Fox News).
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
|
|
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203 |
Quote:
Captain Sammitch said:
Congratulations! You've just excluded every known government in existence from candidacy!
I think no government to date has really gotten it right. The founding father's came close, they had great ideas and cared about what was right. But we've fucked it up.
We put Church and state together and now support torture.
Bow ties are coool.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
|
|
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801 |
 When did we put church and state together exactly? And once again, the alleged 'victims' of alleged 'torture' are not citizens of the U.S. or of its close allies, thus I am still mystified as to why we should care. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
Quote:
Captain Sammitch said:
When did we put church and state together exactly?
The Repubs have been trying for years
And once again, the alleged 'victims' of alleged 'torture' are not citizens of the U.S. or of its close allies, thus I am still mystified as to why we should care.
Because supposedly you're a human being. A moral one at that or so you claim. Does xenophobia trump morality on your world, Sandwich?
BTW, I'm so glad all those nasty computer viruses don't affect my computer. Neither do adware or spyware. I'm one of the smart ones that owns a Mac! 
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." John Stuart Mill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. Oscar Wilde
He who dies with the most toys is nonetheless dead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,812 Likes: 41
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,812 Likes: 41 |
Quote:
Captain Sammitch said:
...
And once again, the alleged 'victims' of alleged 'torture' are not citizens of the U.S. or of its close allies, thus I am still mystified as to why we should care.
This still always shocks the shit out of me. Torture is for the bad guys. It's a line we don't cross.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
|
|
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801 |
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
Quote:
Captain Sammitch said:
When did we put church and state together exactly?
The Repubs have been trying for years
And once again, the alleged 'victims' of alleged 'torture' are not citizens of the U.S. or of its close allies, thus I am still mystified as to why we should care.
Because supposedly you're a human being. A moral one at that or so you claim. Does xenophobia trump morality on your world, Sandwich?
For one thing, I've noticed we have different definitions of torture here. What's been documented have been 'unorthodox' interrogation techniques that, while possibly a violation of Geneva and unquestionably unpleasant, have still not killed or permanently harmed anyone. Other than that, the rights you've mentioned as being violated are rights extended to U.S. citizens, and any claims of extension of Constitutional rights to the detainees under the circumstances are highly debatable at best.
When people are being physically pushed to permanent injury and death, then it's unquestionably wrong no matter what. When people are permanently scarred by what they go through, then it's definitely time to stop what's going on. A Koran being flushed down the toilet or some embarrassing photos are certainly not very polite things to do to foreign guests, but suspected terrorists who might have information on how to find more of the terrorists? Good luck advocating their rights while actual American citizens continue to die because the bastards won't talk.
Quote:
BTW, I'm so glad all those nasty computer viruses don't affect my computer. Neither do adware or spyware. I'm one of the smart ones that owns a Mac!
What was that? I'm sorry, I was playing a game on my computer. Before that I was writing music on my computer.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
|
|
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801 |
Quote:
Matter-eater Man said:
Quote:
Captain Sammitch said:
...
And once again, the alleged 'victims' of alleged 'torture' are not citizens of the U.S. or of its close allies, thus I am still mystified as to why we should care.
This still always shocks the shit out of me. Torture is for the bad guys. It's a line we don't cross.
Quote:
Captain Sammitch said:
When people are being physically pushed to permanent injury and death, then it's unquestionably wrong no matter what. When people are permanently scarred by what they go through, then it's definitely time to stop what's going on. A Koran being flushed down the toilet or some embarrassing photos are certainly not very polite things to do to foreign guests, but suspected terrorists who might have information on how to find more of the terrorists? Good luck advocating their rights while actual American citizens continue to die because the bastards won't talk.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,203
betrayal and collapse 5000+ posts
|
|
betrayal and collapse 5000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,203 |
What American citizens are dying?
...you tell stories, we tell lies.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
|
|
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,812 Likes: 41
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,812 Likes: 41 |
Quote:
Captain Sammitch said:
Quote:
Matter-eater Man said:
Quote:
Captain Sammitch said:
...
And once again, the alleged 'victims' of alleged 'torture' are not citizens of the U.S. or of its close allies, thus I am still mystified as to why we should care.
This still always shocks the shit out of me. Torture is for the bad guys. It's a line we don't cross.
Quote:
Captain Sammitch said:
When people are being physically pushed to permanent injury and death, then it's unquestionably wrong no matter what. When people are permanently scarred by what they go through, then it's definitely time to stop what's going on. A Koran being flushed down the toilet or some embarrassing photos are certainly not very polite things to do to foreign guests, but suspected terrorists who might have information on how to find more of the terrorists? Good luck advocating their rights while actual American citizens continue to die because the bastards won't talk.
I think we're close on agreement in that respect. It's just if that was the case why is Bush fighting the effort to restrict torture, specifically allowing the CIA doing whatever with practically zero oversight?
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
|
|
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801 |
Maybe he just doesn't wanna know? 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
Quote:
Captain Sammitch said:
Maybe he just doesn't wanna know?
Whe discussing torture here, Sandwich, we don't mean that lady you pay $400 a week to step on your balls!
Image Edited for Work Safety
Last edited by the G-man; 2005-11-10 9:03 PM.
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." John Stuart Mill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. Oscar Wilde
He who dies with the most toys is nonetheless dead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Wall St. Journal: John McCain (R., Arizona) has pushed an amendment through the Senate that would effectively bar all stressful interrogation techniques. The danger for American security is that this would telegraph to every terrorist in the world that he has absolutely nothing to fear from silence should he fall into U.S. hands.
The McCain Amendment is driven by the so-called torture narrative: the proposition that CIA techniques for questioning high-level al Qaeda detainees somehow "migrated" to Iraq and caused the Abu Ghraib abuses.
But the irony is that Congress is proposing this remedial overreaction at the very moment the evidence has become overwhelming that the torture narrative is false.
Former Defense Secretary Jim Schlesinger headed one of more than a dozen major inquiries into detainee abuse, and he explained last year that the Abu Ghraib abuses were simply sadistic behavior by poorly trained reservists on the "night shift." The victims weren't even intelligence targets. If that evidence wasn't conclusive enough, we now have the verdicts of the nine courts-martial that punished the Abu Ghraib offenders, none of which found evidence to support the proposition that the abuses had anything to do with interrogations.
We aren't saying that there haven't been abuses--probably hundreds of them--of detainees in the war on terror. But there have also been more than 70,000 detainees. In other words, the rate of prisoner abuse compares favorably with the U.S. civilian detention system, and it is better than the rate in earlier conflicts such as World War II. Alleged abuses have been routinely investigated, and punished when warranted in courts-martial that have revealed a military willing and able to police its own.
In Iraq at this very moment the military is dealing with a hardened al Qaeda wing headed by Abu Musab al Zarqawi, whose un-uniformed fighters are not entitled to Geneva Convention protections against aggressive interrogation. Neither the McCain Amendment nor the Administration's reaction to it send a message of resolve to win that intelligence war.
Two persistent sources of confusion in this debate have been misreadings of the Geneva Conventions and sloppy (or willfully distorted) use of the word "torture." The Geneva Conventions are very strict about which detainees qualify for the protections of "prisoner of war" status: They must, for example, have fought in uniform and shown some respect for the laws of war, such as avoiding attacks on civilians.
What's more, any form of manipulation, including positive reinforcements such as better rations, are forbidden when it comes to interrogating legitimate POWs. Recognizing guerrillas and terrorists as POWs would be a form of unilateral disarmament, and, worse, would legitimize their behavior. The U.S. was respecting, not skirting, international law when it refused to classify them as such.
As for "torture," it is simply perverse to conflate the amputations and electrocutions Saddam once inflicted at Abu Ghraib with the lesser abuses committed by rogue American soldiers there, much less with any authorized U.S. interrogation techniques.
No one has yet come up with any evidence that anyone in the U.S. military or government has officially sanctioned anything close to "torture." The "stress positions" that have been allowed (such as wearing a hood, exposure to heat and cold, and the rarely authorized "waterboarding," which induces a feeling of suffocation) are all psychological techniques designed to break a detainee.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
|
|
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203 |
i sometimes think you're a really sick person, g-man. how do we get to claim to be a bastion of freedom and then torture people?
its a horrible thing to do. and the Israelies (who deal with Terrorists in their cities nearly every day) don't even do it. they use psychological tactics over hoods and car batteries.
Bow ties are coool.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Quote:
r3x29yz4a said:
i sometimes think you're a really sick person, g-man. how do we get to claim to be a bastion of freedom and then torture people?
Read what I posted again. It wasn't advocating torture. It was pointing out that what's happening with prisoners is not typically torture.
It further points out that things that people think of as "torture" (Abu Gharib) are not occuring in the course of US sanctioned questioning. THey are occuring as the result of isolated incidents of sadistic behavior. And, further, that those incidents are being prosecuted under existing laws.
Quote:
the Israelies (who deal with Terrorists in their cities nearly every day) don't even do it. they use psychological tactics over hoods and car batteries.
Again, you need to re-read and actually comprehend what you are responding to before you respond.
The piece I linked to argues that most of the "torture" being used during questioning of suspected terrorists is, in fact "psychological tactics."
As for your allegation that the U.S. is using "car batteries" to physically torture suspects, I have to admit that's a new one for me. Got a link? I'd like to read up on that.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
|
|
1 Millionth Customer 10000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 14,203 |
Quote:
the G-man said:
As for your allegation that the U.S. is using "car batteries" to physically torture suspects, I have to admit that's a new one for me. Got a link? I'd like to read up on that.
That's my mistake for not clarifying . I meant car batteries as generic torture not a specific U.S. done torture (that we know of).
Bow ties are coool.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251 |
Quote:
r3x29yz4a said:
Quote:
the G-man said:
As for your allegation that the U.S. is using "car batteries" to physically torture suspects, I have to admit that's a new one for me. Got a link? I'd like to read up on that.
That's my mistake for not clarifying . I meant car batteries as generic torture not a specific U.S. done torture (that we know of).
So then you're OK with the US using phychological tactics as long as they aren't using phisical tourture like car batteries and the like? In other words the type of interrogation you condone is EXACTLY what we're doing. I'm glad to see you're finally finding your pro-America and pro-Administration vioce. Welcome to the fold.
Now lets all wait paciently for Ray to contradict something he himslef has said or make up facts out of thin air in order to get out from under condoning US policy.
Putting the "fun" back in Fundamentalist Christian Dogma.
" I know God exists because WBAM told me so. " - theory9
JLA brand RACK points = 514k 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
Look up in the sky! It's a bird, It's a plane! No it's....... SUPERWBAMABLE TO JUMP TO CONCLUSIONS IN A SINGLE BOUND! 
"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives." John Stuart Mill
America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. Oscar Wilde
He who dies with the most toys is nonetheless dead.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,812 Likes: 41
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
|
|
Fair Play! 15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 15,812 Likes: 41 |
Quote:
wannabuyamonkey said:
...
So then you're OK with the US using phychological tactics as long as they aren't using phisical tourture like car batteries and the like? In other words the type of interrogation you condone is EXACTLY what we're doing. I'm glad to see you're finally finding your pro-America and pro-Administration vioce. Welcome to the fold. ...
Considering the recent Washington Post story (secret prisons), we really don't know what the CIA is doing while interegating prisoners. We do know that thanks to the President they can do anything they want to their prisoners.
Fair play!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
ABC News is reporting the "exclusive" story of two Iraqi "detainees" who are alleging that "they were repeatedly tortured by U.S. forces seeking information about Saddam Hussein and weapons of mass destruction." As part of their allegations, which are being brought to light as part of a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union, the men allege that, in July 2003, "U.S. soldiers ...threatened [them] with live lions."
"They took us to a cage — an animal cage that had lions in it within the Republican Palace," he said. "And they threatened us that if we did not confess, they would put us inside the cage with the lions in it. It scared me a lot when they got me close to the cage, and they threatened me. And they opened the door and they threatened that if I did not confess, that they were going to throw me inside the cage. And as the lion was coming closer, they would pull me back out and shut the door, and tell me, 'We will give you one more chance to confess.' And I would say, 'Confess to what?'" However, there's one big problem with the detainees' story: according to various news sources, the lions were removed from the palace three months earlier. Since the detainees' story about the lions is false, it tends to indicate that, perhaps, the rest of their story is false. Even a bit of rudimentary research was able to show the story about the lions was inaccurate. However, neither ABC nor, apparently, the ACLU bothered to conduct that research before making their charges. That failure seems to indicate both organizations are more concerned with their agendas than the truth. We can only hope that this agenda driven story doesn't result in more violence against our troops.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
Quote:
the G-man said:
<a href="http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=1312282">ABC News</a> is reporting the "exclusive" story of two Iraqi "detainees" who are alleging that "they were repeatedly tortured by U.S. forces seeking information about Saddam Hussein and weapons of mass destruction."<P>As part of their allegations, which are being brought to light as part of a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union, the men allege that, in July 2003, "U.S. soldiers ...threatened [them] with live lions."
<blockquote><I>"They took us to a cage — an animal cage that had lions in it within the Republican Palace," he said. "And they threatened us that if we did not confess, they would put us inside the cage with the lions in it. It scared me a lot when they got me close to the cage, and they threatened me. And they opened the door and they threatened that if I did not confess, that they were going to throw me inside the cage. And as the lion was coming closer, they would pull me back out and shut the door, and tell me, 'We will give you one more chance to confess.' And I would say, 'Confess to what?'" </blockquote><P>However, there's one big problem with the detainees' story: according to various news sources, the lions were removed from the palace <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/2932804.stm">three months earlier</a>.<P>Since the detainees' story about the lions is false, it tends to indicate that, perhaps, the rest of their story is false.<P>Even a bit of rudimentary research was able to show the story about the lions was inaccurate. However, neither ABC nor, apparently, the ACLU bothered to conduct that research before making their charges. That failure seems to indicate both organizations are more concerned with their agendas than the truth.<P>We can only hope that this agenda driven story doesn't result in more violence against our troops.
More lies from the swine you work for!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
What makes you think I work for ABC?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
Quote:
the G-man said:
What makes you think I work for ABC?
phjpo
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
|
|
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801 |
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
Quote:
the G-man said:
<a href="http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=1312282">ABC News</a> is reporting the "exclusive" story of two Iraqi "detainees" who are alleging that "they were repeatedly tortured by U.S. forces seeking information about Saddam Hussein and weapons of mass destruction."<P>As part of their allegations, which are being brought to light as part of a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union, the men allege that, in July 2003, "U.S. soldiers ...threatened [them] with live lions."
<blockquote><I>"They took us to a cage — an animal cage that had lions in it within the Republican Palace," he said. "And they threatened us that if we did not confess, they would put us inside the cage with the lions in it. It scared me a lot when they got me close to the cage, and they threatened me. And they opened the door and they threatened that if I did not confess, that they were going to throw me inside the cage. And as the lion was coming closer, they would pull me back out and shut the door, and tell me, 'We will give you one more chance to confess.' And I would say, 'Confess to what?'" </blockquote><P>However, there's one big problem with the detainees' story: according to various news sources, the lions were removed from the palace <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/2932804.stm">three months earlier</a>.<P>Since the detainees' story about the lions is false, it tends to indicate that, perhaps, the rest of their story is false.<P>Even a bit of rudimentary research was able to show the story about the lions was inaccurate. However, neither ABC nor, apparently, the ACLU bothered to conduct that research before making their charges. That failure seems to indicate both organizations are more concerned with their agendas than the truth.<P>We can only hope that this agenda driven story doesn't result in more violence against our troops.
More lies from the swine you work for!
Notice there's no actual rebuttal in here...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251
6000+ posts
|
|
6000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 7,251 |
Quote:
Captain Sammitch said:
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
Quote:
the G-man said:
<a href="http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=1312282">ABC News</a> is reporting the "exclusive" story of two Iraqi "detainees" who are alleging that "they were repeatedly tortured by U.S. forces seeking information about Saddam Hussein and weapons of mass destruction."<P>As part of their allegations, which are being brought to light as part of a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union, the men allege that, in July 2003, "U.S. soldiers ...threatened [them] with live lions."
<blockquote><I>"They took us to a cage — an animal cage that had lions in it within the Republican Palace," he said. "And they threatened us that if we did not confess, they would put us inside the cage with the lions in it. It scared me a lot when they got me close to the cage, and they threatened me. And they opened the door and they threatened that if I did not confess, that they were going to throw me inside the cage. And as the lion was coming closer, they would pull me back out and shut the door, and tell me, 'We will give you one more chance to confess.' And I would say, 'Confess to what?'" </blockquote><P>However, there's one big problem with the detainees' story: according to various news sources, the lions were removed from the palace <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/2932804.stm">three months earlier</a>.<P>Since the detainees' story about the lions is false, it tends to indicate that, perhaps, the rest of their story is false.<P>Even a bit of rudimentary research was able to show the story about the lions was inaccurate. However, neither ABC nor, apparently, the ACLU bothered to conduct that research before making their charges. That failure seems to indicate both organizations are more concerned with their agendas than the truth.<P>We can only hope that this agenda driven story doesn't result in more violence against our troops.
More lies from the swine you work for!
Notice there's no actual rebuttal in here...
Oh you just wait, soon will come a painfully witty remark about G-Mans mom or blow-jobs. Tred carefully, because you risk doing battle with comedic mastermid!
Putting the "fun" back in Fundamentalist Christian Dogma.
" I know God exists because WBAM told me so. " - theory9
JLA brand RACK points = 514k
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Andrew C. McCarthy, a former federal prosecutor, is a senior fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies. He writes in National Review: The McCain Amendment provides that no prisoner held by the Defense Department "shall be subject to any treatment or technique of interrogation not authorized by and listed in the United States Army Field Manual on Intelligence Interrogation."
That manual expressly forbids any use of force, coercion or intimidation in conducting questioning, even if such tactics fall short of torture, even if the prisoner is a terrorist guilty of war crimes, and even in a matter of life-and-death — perhaps thousands of deaths.
Obviously, in the vast majority of circumstances, this provision of the McCain Amendment is also gratuitous moralizing. In general, though we are at war with terrorists against whom intelligence is our only defense, the military does not resort to forcible methods. To the contrary, gushing respect is our customary response to savagery, complete with halal meals, prayer rugs, and literally white-glove treatment for government-issued Korans.
But there are certain circumstances in which high-level al Qaeda operatives are captured in the throes of plotting massive strikes. There are certain circumstances in which such a terrorist might be able to tell us, right now, where bin Laden is, or Zarqawi, Zawahiri, and other leaders who are themselves weapons of mass destruction because they have the wherewithal to command massive strikes.
Understand: If we were to learn where one of those men was, we would attack that target and kill him, and we'd make no apologies for it. By the McCain logic, the killing is fine but the infliction on a terrorist of non-lethal discomfort to obtain the intelligence necessary to do the killing should subject the inflictor to prosecution. That's absurd.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,233 Likes: 1
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
OP
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,233 Likes: 1 |
Quote:
By the McCain logic, the killing is fine but the infliction on a terrorist of non-lethal discomfort to obtain the intelligence necessary to do the killing should subject the inflictor to prosecution. That's absurd.
I love that euphemism. "Non-lethal discomfort". Nice one.
The difference between killing a terrorist about to detonate a bomb, and torturing an unarmed defenceless suspect for information, is enormous.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,233 Likes: 1
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
OP
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,233 Likes: 1 |
Quote:
Captain Sammitch said:
And once again, the alleged 'victims' of alleged 'torture' are not citizens of the U.S. or of its close allies, thus I am still mystified as to why we should care.
How disappointing that your sense of morality is based upon the place of issue of a passport.
Quote:
As for "torture," it is simply perverse to conflate the amputations and electrocutions Saddam once inflicted at Abu Ghraib with the lesser abuses committed by rogue American soldiers there, much less with any authorized U.S. interrogation techniques.
No one has yet come up with any evidence that anyone in the U.S. military or government has officially sanctioned anything close to "torture." The "stress positions" that have been allowed (such as wearing a hood, exposure to heat and cold, and the rarely authorized "waterboarding," which induces a feeling of suffocation) are all psychological techniques designed to break a detainee.
"Break a detainee"? "Exposure to heat and cold"? Efforts to convince someone they are drowning? This is all acceptable to a government?
I'm quite proud to be a Westerner. We have our own views on primacy of the individual over the state and such which other people don't get, but its our fundamental sense of humanity which I like. Strip that out of government, and you're left with the People's Republic of China.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Quote:
"Break a detainee"? "Exposure to heat and cold"? Efforts to convince someone they are drowning? This is all acceptable to a government?
Sounds like a typical fraternity initiation
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,203
betrayal and collapse 5000+ posts
|
|
betrayal and collapse 5000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,203 |
Yeah, I know I always cheer when Americans abroad are tortured... 
...you tell stories, we tell lies.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657
1500+ posts
|
|
1500+ posts
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,657 |
Quote:
the G-man said:
Quote:
"Break a detainee"? "Exposure to heat and cold"? Efforts to convince someone they are drowning? This is all acceptable to a government?
Sounds like a typical fraternity initiation
Just when I think you couldn't make a bigger ass of yourself, you always prove me wrong. Thanks for the consistency, G-man!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,205
fudge 4000+ posts
|
|
fudge 4000+ posts
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,205 |
I'm not sure, but I do think that was a joke. Maybe not an appropriate joke, but a joke nonetheless.
But even then, there's a big difference between frat initiations and actual torture
 Racks be to MisterJLA
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,051 Likes: 31
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
|
|
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,051 Likes: 31 |
Quote:
First Amongst Daves said:
Quote:
Captain Sammitch said:
And once again, the alleged 'victims' of alleged 'torture' are not citizens of the U.S. or of its close allies, thus I am still mystified as to why we should care.
How disappointing that your sense of morality is based upon the place of issue of a passport.
How disappointing that you resort to pretentious displays of pseudo-moral outrage, rather than making a lucid point.
As a condescending liberal once said to me:
Go for the ball, not the man.
Don't attack Sammitch with name calling and assumptions about his person or judgement. Instead make a factual counter-argument to disprove what he said (if you can).
Quote:
First Amongst Daves said:
Quote:
G-man said:
As for "torture," it is simply perverse to conflate the amputations and electrocutions Saddam once inflicted at Abu Ghraib with the lesser abuses committed by rogue American soldiers there, much less with any authorized U.S. interrogation techniques.
No one has yet come up with any evidence that anyone in the U.S. military or government has officially sanctioned anything close to "torture." The "stress positions" that have been allowed (such as wearing a hood, exposure to heat and cold, and the rarely authorized "waterboarding," which induces a feeling of suffocation) are all psychological techniques designed to break a detainee.
"Break a detainee"? "Exposure to heat and cold"? Efforts to convince someone they are drowning? This is all acceptable to a government?
I'm quite proud to be a Westerner. We have our own views on primacy of the individual over the state and such which other people don't get, but its our fundamental sense of humanity which I like. Strip that out of government, and you're left with the People's Republic of China.
The techniques of interrogation the U.S. uses on al Qaida prisoners are those permitted by the Geneva Convention.
Which include exposure to heat, cold, sleep deprivation, and psychological techniques.
Not "torture".
Not "atrocities".
Simply methods specified by the Geneva Convention.
As G-man made clear above, any military personnel who go beyond the Geneva Convention methods face court martial and punishment.
And while the methods of interrogation used are within the parameters of the Geneva Convention (i.e., universally agreed upon permissible methods of humane interrogation) it is not logical to fully disclose what those methods are, so Al Qaida detainees can be prepared for whatever we throw at them.
Quote:
magicjay38 said:
Quote:
the G-man said:
Quote:
"Break a detainee"? "Exposure to heat and cold"? Efforts to convince someone they are drowning? This is all acceptable to a government?
Sounds like a typical fraternity initiation
Just when I think you couldn't make a bigger ass of yourself, you always prove me wrong. Thanks for the consistency, G-man!
Quote:
Chant said:
I'm not sure, but I do think that was a joke. Maybe not an appropriate joke, but a joke nonetheless.
But even then, there's a big difference between frat initiations and actual torture
G-man was referring to what many conservative and Republican voices have said:
That within the bounds of the Geneva Convention accepted methods of interrogation, that what Al Qaida deteinees are exposed to falls short of what U.S. Marine recruits have to endure during basic training, or on the field of battle.
Sleep deprivation, and exposure to heat, cold and psychological harassment are also things endured during fraternity hazing.
I heard Rush Limbaugh make this comparison first. And no doubt others as well, after Limbaugh's initial remark. The remark was clearly intended with some humor.
- from Do Racists have lower IQ's...
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:Sleep deprivation, and exposure to heat, cold and psychological harassment are also things endured during fraternity hazing. I've heard Rush Limbaugh make this comparison first. And no doubt others as well, after Limbaugh's initial remark. The remark was clearly intended with some humor.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,051 Likes: 31
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
|
|
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,051 Likes: 31 |
I also wanted to post this PBS News Hour link to an overview of Senate debate of the McCain anti-torture bill.
And following the overview, also to a panel discussion of two senators who are on the House-Senate Conference Committee that's now hammering out the fate of the McCain amendment, as part of the military spending bill, the first bill that was voted on. Missouri Republican Christopher Bond was one of the nine senators who voted against the McCain amendment last month. And Illinois Democrat Sen. Richard Durbin voted for it.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/july-dec05/torture_11-08.html
Some talking points from the discussion:
SEN. CHRISTOPHER BOND: The first thing we should point out is the United States Government does not condone permit, or accept torture.
I think it's important to know that existing laws already on the books were used to punish and imprison people who did those unlawful things at Abu Ghraib.
They presented us with a black eye, and we punish people who go off the reservation.
We do not permit torture, and the vice president has not come out in favor of torture.
[ On telling detainees in advance (in the McCain bill) what interrogation techniques they can expect : ]
But the point that has to be made is that we cannot set out for detainees, in advance, precisely what kinds of interrogation methods would be used. I have not been fully briefed -- I'm not in a position to get a full brief on what is permitted. But I have talked to special operatives of the CIA who operate under -- and have told me the strict guidelines under which they go and the kinds of things they do, which are no worse than what our troops go through in basic training and in the field.
...[discussing the wording of the McCain bill: ] ...it said we will lay out for the detainees precisely what kind of interrogation they will go through.
And I've talked to operatives who say that when the detainees know precisely what they're going to do, they laugh at them.
We cannot get the kind of information we need to protect our troops in the field.
[ on the limits to severity of interrogation : ]
...We don't use torture. It's not reliable. That's not what this is about. That has been mischaracterized, and it has been used politically to suggest that those of us that believe that the CIA must be able to use interrogation techniques that are no worse than what we put our special forces through in training and what my son, as a Marine recruit had to go through in his training, that's what gets the information.
[on defining "torture", and the use of torture: ] It depends how you define it, and that is the problem.
You could say that the training that our special forces go through is cruel and inhumane, and some of the things that our troops go through when they're going through the basic training is, I would say, inhuman, the kinds of things that they put up with :sleep deprivation, exposure to cold and all kinds of situations.
It does not constitute torture. I'm not going to say what tactics the CIA uses, but they're carefully defined to abide by those principles that my colleague has spoken about that we will maintain, and it does not help to have senators claiming that unless we pass this law, we will tolerate torture. We don't, we haven't, and we won't.
I love the part (at my link, but not excerpted above) where Sen. Bond brings up Sen. Durbin's nationally televised remarks a few weeks ago ( where Durbin compared U.S. military treatment of prisoners to that of the Nazis, Russian Gulags, the Cambodian Pol Pot regime's extermination of over 3 million of that nation's civilian population between 1975-1979, ad nauseum. )
Remarks for which Sen. Durbin received so much heat for the hyperbolic distortion of his own remarks that he finally retracted them.
And in this PBS discussion, tries to deny he even made them.
This is often true of inflammatory remarks by Democrats: that if the remarks are given visibility, it exposes them to be false, and downright anti-American in their partisan rhetoric.
Smearing the reputation of our troops, branding our soldiers falsely as thugs and murderers in the eyes of the world, just to pander to the liberal fringe that is their voter-base.
Liberal rhetoric that is emotionally charged, but devoid of any factual basis.
But when repeated enough by Democrats in Washington, and reported unchallenged by a complicit liberal-dominated media, becomes perceived as fact, although having no factual basis.
A corrosive deception that recent polls reflect.
- from Do Racists have lower IQ's...
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,233 Likes: 1
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
OP
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,233 Likes: 1 |
Ah, my favourite homophobic bigot is still about. Quote:
How disappointing that you resort to pretentious displays of pseudo-moral outrage, rather than making a lucid point.
As a condescending liberal once said to me:
Go for the ball, not the man.
Was that me?
Kind of sounds like me. And, of course, I fit the bill for being both condescending and liberal.
Quote:
Don't attack Sammitch with name calling and assumptions about his person or judgement. Instead make a factual counter-argument to disprove what he said (if you can).
I plead guilty, your Honour.
But using the words "pretentious" and "pseudo-moral" renders you equally guilty of ad hominem attack. ("Pretentious" I generally accept, although in this context it makes no sense and I gather it was just you shooting without aiming : "pseudo-moral" probably means that I maintain a morality which is not yours.)
I at least attacked Sammitch on the basis of being both narrow-minded (admittedly ad hominem) and using casuistry (that a passport would define the difference in someone's worth). Lucid, and to the point, I had thought. Never mind.
Trust that is explanation enough for you to follow it. No doubt you were too busy straining at the leash to fully consider the substance of what I wrote. If you care to rebut me, be my guest. Try to do it in 200 words or less. You are very long-winded and tend to repeat yourself.
Quote:
I'm not sure, but I do think that was a joke. Maybe not an appropriate joke, but a joke nonetheless.
I actually thought G-man's joke was quite funny.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,051 Likes: 31
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
|
|
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,051 Likes: 31 |
Quote:
First Amongst Daves said:
Ah, my favourite homophobic bigot is still about.
Your latest ad hominem attack.
Homophobe is a very subjectively applied term.
Do I not approve of the gay lifestyle or gay activism, which seeks to smother religious freedom, by preventing others from voicing their opposing beliefs about the immorality of homosexuality ?
No, I don't approve, and am thus open to labelling as a "homophobe".
Do I still have friends, co-workers and family members who are gay, who I still associate with and treat no differently despite their views I disagree with ?
Yes, I continue to interact with them, and therefore am not a "homophobe".
And calling me a homophobe is relevant to this anti-torture bill discussion... how ?
Quote:
First Amongst Daves said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
How disappointing that you resort to pretentious displays of pseudo-moral outrage, rather than making a lucid point.
As a condescending liberal once said to me:
Go for the ball, not the man.
Was that me?
Kind of sounds like me. And, of course, I fit the bill for being both condescending and liberal.
Yes, it was you.
And yes, you do fit the bill.
Quote:
First Amongst Daves said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
Don't attack Sammitch with name calling and assumptions about his person or judgement. Instead make a factual counter-argument to disprove what he said (if you can).
I plead guilty, your Honour.
But using the words "pretentious" and "pseudo-moral" renders you equally guilty of ad hominem attack. ("Pretentious" I generally accept, although in this context it makes no sense and I gather it was just you shooting without aiming : "pseudo-moral" probably means that I maintain a morality which is not yours.)
Pseudo-moral means you posture with outrage imposing your intolerant liberal beliefs of morality.
While you spurn and reject true morality, as it is defined by Judao-Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, and various other cultures throughout all of human history.
Quote:
First Amongst Daves said:
I at least attacked Sammitch on the basis of being both narrow-minded (admittedly ad hominem) and using casuistry (that a passport would define the difference in someone's worth). Lucid, and to the point, I had thought. Never mind.
All it really expresses is your arbitrary condescension for his opinion. Even though his opinion represents the law of the land: That U.S. rights apply only to U.S. citizens, and that the other 5.7 Billion or so people in the world do not have the right to illegally immigrate to the U.S. and expect the same rights, only the right to be deported if they violate U.S. borders.
The U.S. has the right to defend its borders, and to only permit legal immigration, that is within levels that do not destabilize the country.
Those among the 5.7 billion who wish to immigrate to the U.S. can apply for legal immigration to the U.S., and move through the proper channels. That is their right.
Quote:
First Amongst Daves said:
Trust that is explanation enough for you to follow it. No doubt you were too busy straining at the leash to fully consider the substance of what I wrote.
Whatever. Your hysteria-driven charicatures at every turn do not undermine the logic of what I've said.
You argue that those without rights in the U.S. should automatically be given rights, despite the fact that they came here illegally.
You argue that murderous terrorists, captured in a war on terror, who represent no nation, should be given the same rights as those in a conflict between nations, in a twisting of the Geneva Convention.
You argue for their processing and release before that war is concluded. So they can go back to wage further casualties on soldiers and civilians of the United States and other nations.
Gee, what you're saying makes perfect sense to me...
It is a classic example of how liberalism argues a perverted sense of idealism, that completely bypasses reality.
Quote:
First Amongst Daves said:
If you care to rebut me, be my guest. Try to do it in 200 words or less. You are very long-winded and tend to repeat yourself.
I repeat no more than you.
( "Bigot, bigot bigot..." )
( "Homophobe, homophobe, homophobe..." )
And at least when I repeat myself, it is because of a solicited response, in correction of the hysteria-driven innacuracies of yourself and others on the Left.
And my response is exactly as long as it takes to counter the flawed assertions you raise.
- from Do Racists have lower IQ's...
Liberals who bemoan discrimination, intolerance, restraint of Constitutional freedoms, and promotion of hatred toward various abberant minorities, have absolutely no problem with discriminating against, being intolerant of, restricting Constitutional freedoms of, and directing hate-filled scapegoat rhetoric against conservatives.
EXACTLY what they accuse Republicans/conservatives of doing, is EXACTLY what liberals/Democrats do themselves, to those who oppose their beliefs.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,281
Tabarnak! 6000+ posts
|
|
Tabarnak! 6000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,281 |
At this point, Wonder fuck...with people like you in the world...I'm starting to feel inclined to suppress 'religious freedom'. If it's your tool to attempt to restrict the freedoms of others, then fuck yeah...I want to see it taken away.
Asshole.
If karma's a bitch, it will be my bitch!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,281
Tabarnak! 6000+ posts
|
|
Tabarnak! 6000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,281 |
Addenum:
I've never advocated the restriction of your right to beleive what you will or live your life as you see fit. The only problem I have with your brand of 'faith' is when you try to make others follow it. That's just fucked. Maybe it's about fucking time, after hundreds of years of your kind imposing your shit on others that you had a taste of your own medicine.
And, Mr. Holier than though, you still need to produce for me the scripture where Jesus said it's cool to go to war.
Asshole.
If karma's a bitch, it will be my bitch!
|
|
|
|
|
