Enhanced Interrogation- from a guy who did it, and saved a lot of lives

[Woobie]

I miss a lot, obviously.

Well, clearly, so do I.

 

[Woobie]

You mean justified homicide ?
None.

We all think torture is wrong. We are just arguing over what constitutes torture.

Now say atm tortures the guy who allegedly kidnaps his dog. Atm is rightly brought up on charges. I get selected for jury duty. The way i vote depends on if the guy did actually kidnap the dog. If atm got the wrong guy well then i vote guilty. If atm saved his dog though im likely to vote not guilty.

Replace atm with the government and im going to vote guilty either way.

So the government is automatically bad, even if you replace the dog with a classroom full of preschoolers? I'm with ATM, I don't like resolving these things emotionally. But it seems that you have started down that path by passing judgement simply based upon who the defendant is, not what they have done.

 

[ATM]

I miss a lot, obviously.

Well, clearly, so do I.

I was just doing a bit of research and having fun.

Still friends?

 

[ATM]

So the government is automatically bad, even if you replace the dog with a classroom full of preschoolers? I'm with ATM, I don't like resolving these things emotionally. But it seems that you have started down that path by passing judgement simply based upon who the defendant is, not what they have done.

The State is guilty, even when it cannot be proven (usually because the State hid all the evidence and thwarted the possibility of investigation.)

 

[foszoe]

I am trying to picture a Byzantine wearing a leather helmet and goggles...scarf of course....pulling down some Swedish Trance by Armin van Buuren....

....I'd say that's enough for a Terry stop.

You have just captured a true image of freedom!

 

[poptab]

So the government is automatically bad, even if you replace the dog with a classroom full of preschoolers? I'm with ATM, I don't like resolving these things emotionally. But it seems that you have started down that path by passing judgement simply based upon who the defendant is, not what they have done.

It has nothing to do with good or bad. I was simply explaining how i would vote if i were on the jury. We already agree that torture is wrong and one should not do it. And if you do it you should expect consequences. I simply hold my government to a higher standard than i hold atm or any other private person because of the power the government holds over all of us.

Also Why describe waterboarding as splashing water on someone's face?

 

[Lex Concord]

Liberty is meaningless to those under constant threat of violence from a superior force.

An ironic post, considering the context of this thread.

 

[Woobie]

So are the approved items on the list "torture." I can respect any viewpoint here. I think it is a subjective word. A Katie Perry concert might be torture to me, but a reward to a tween. Likewise, you might have an idea in your head, or a threshold at which an activity becomes torture. Is it rendering someone uncomfortable? Inducing fear or panic? Permanent disfigurement?

I'm sympathetic to Fargo's position about word games. Don't call it something sugary so people won't think it's bad. But that sword cuts both ways. If Feinstein and PBS call it torture, is it really? Or are they playing word games to score political points?

For the sake of being upfront, I tend to think in terms of moderate and permanent physical, mental, or emotional damage. Cutting out a tongue is torture. Leaving them in the emotional state of a rescue dog is torture. Water boarding someone 30 times is going to leave someone a little jumpy for a while, but not permanently. Making them stand for 18 hours is going to leave them with swollen feet, but not permanently. Cutting them might leave a permanent scar, but that is much less than moderate physical damage.

 

[Trigger Time]

May you never be labeled as such.

If they want me or you or anyone else enhanced interrogation is the last thing you need to worry about.

 

[Woobie]

It has nothing to do with good or bad. I was simply explaining how i would vote if i were on the jury. We already agree that torture is wrong and one should not do it. And if you do it you should expect consequences. I simply hold my government to a higher standard than i hold atm or any other private person because of the power the government holds over all of us.

Also Why describe waterboarding as splashing water on someone's face?

Because that's how we do it. A wet towel and a bucket of water. There is no submerging in CIA waterboarding.

 

[Woobie]

An ironic post, considering the context of this thread.[/I][/FONT][/COLOR]

That was me. Jamil may not want to own that one.

 

[foszoe]

Oh yes, ultimately. But there will be others.

But should you care, ultimately, about the others? Why?

 

[poptab]

So are the approved items on the list "torture." I can respect any viewpoint here. I think it is a subjective word. A Katie Perry concert might be torture to me, but a reward to a tween. Likewise, you might have an idea in your head, or a threshold at which an activity becomes torture. Is it rendering someone uncomfortable? Inducing fear or panic? Permanent disfigurement?

I'm sympathetic to Fargo's position about word games. Don't call it something sugary so people won't think it's bad. But that sword cuts both ways. If Feinstein and PBS call it torture, is it really? Or are they playing word games to score political points?

For the sake of being upfront, I tend to think in terms of moderate and permanent physical, mental, or emotional damage. Cutting out a tongue is torture. Leaving them in the emotional state of a rescue dog is torture. Water boarding someone 30 times is going to leave someone a little jumpy for a while, but not permanently. Making them stand for 18 hours is going to leave them with swollen feet, but not permanently. Cutting them might leave a permanent scar, but that is much less than moderate physical damage.

You have no way to know what will or wont cause long term psychological damage.

 

[jamil]

Shouldn't be any, as that's not murder. I defended your victim and stopped a threat.

You should have stopped.

Seriously. You don't find your scenario a little nutty? I mean, dude, you're showcasing a sense of morality where you're willing to put yourself in a position as moral judge and executioner for someone who is just trying to save their son against someone who initiated the whole thing. The point you're trying to make? You ain't making it.

 

[ATM]

If they want me or you or anyone else enhanced interrogation is the last thing you need to worry about.

Yeah, we're probably not important enough to torture, they'd just boner drone us.

 

[Woobie]

I was just doing a bit of research and having fun.

Still friends?

We never weren't. I get testy about things like "blah, blah." But that's something you can put in your research too. Usually I'm over it before I protest, but it can be useful with some opponents as a way to put them on their heels. I should have known it wasn't a good fit for you.

 

[Woobie]

You have no way to know what will or wont cause long term psychological damage.

I don't, but a psychologist does.

 

[Woobie]

The State is guilty, even when it cannot be proven (usually because the State hid all the evidence and thwarted the possibility of investigation.)

Well, yes. There is that.

 

[poptab]

Because that's how we do it. A wet towel and a bucket of water. There is no submerging in CIA waterboarding.

Is it painful? Do you feel like you are drowning? Is it scary? Would you do it to your kid?

Splashing water on someones face is a game you play at the pool.

 

[Woobie]

But should you care, ultimately, about the others? Why?

Because I am commanded to obey them that have the rule over me. That sometimes comes into conflict. But at those points you and I know Who wins.