Here's How Arabs INTEROGATE People....

[Immanuel]

[To all] If the U.S. had a terrorist(s) in custody and they knew with reasonable certainty that this terrorist(s) had intel on an imminent attack on the U.S. and failure to get this intel would result in the death of thousands of innocent American lives, would you employ harsh interrogation techniques to gain this intel (thus saving thousands of innocent American lives)?

We all know who would and who wouldn't.

To some, some extreme interrogation is well worth saving U.S. citizens lives.

To others, it is better to let thousands of people die than to have them do something that isn't "acceptable."

I have asked this to other people. To those who disagree with torture, if a kidnapper buried your child - one hour of air left - would you do ANYTHING to the kidnapper to save your child?

I got one honest answer before. They said of course they would. They wouldn't like it, but they would.

How about the rest of you. Kidnapper in a chair in front of you. Your child will die in one hour. How far will you go to get the info and save your child?

I'm one of those who is opposed to the torture of detainees, but in this case, if a kidnapper took my child, buried him/her and left him/her with one hour of air, I'd cut his balls off and feed them to him in order to get the answer as to where my child is.

But in all sincerity, the hypothetical of your post is different than the very real issue of the detainees. In the hypothetical, the kidnapper is in the act of committing a crime and lives are imminently at stake. In the case of the detainees, they are not involved in an ongoing crime and lives are not imminently at stake here. In fact, there is no proof that the detainees have any knowledge of impending strikes or that torturing the detainee will save one single life.

Immie

 

[Burp]

[To all] If the U.S. had a terrorist(s) in custody and they knew with reasonable certainty that this terrorist(s) had intel on an imminent attack on the U.S. and failure to get this intel would result in the death of thousands of innocent American lives, would you employ harsh interrogation techniques to gain this intel (thus saving thousands of innocent American lives)?

We all know who would and who wouldn't.

To some, some extreme interrogation is well worth saving U.S. citizens lives.

To others, it is better to let thousands of people die than to have them do something that isn't "acceptable."

I have asked this to other people. To those who disagree with torture, if a kidnapper buried your child - one hour of air left - would you do ANYTHING to the kidnapper to save your child?

I got one honest answer before. They said of course they would. They wouldn't like it, but they would.

How about the rest of you. Kidnapper in a chair in front of you. Your child will die in one hour. How far will you go to get the info and save your child?

I'm one of those who is opposed to the torture of detainees, but in this case, if a kidnapper took my child, buried him/her and left him/her with one hour of air, I'd cut his balls off and feed them to him in order to get the answer as to where my child is.

But in all sincerity, the hypothetical of your post is different than the very real issue of the detainees. In the hypothetical, the kidnapper is in the act of committing a crime and lives are imminently at stake. In the case of the detainees, they are not involved in an ongoing crime and lives are not imminently at stake here. In fact, there is no proof that the detainees have any knowledge of impending strikes or that torturing the detainee will save one single life.

Immie

We'll have to differ on that one. The CIA said KSM had knowledge and wouldn't tell them until the enhanced interrogation. This was the 9/11 attack in Los Angeles.

Obama stated such also.

 

[Immanuel]

We all know who would and who wouldn't.

To some, some extreme interrogation is well worth saving U.S. citizens lives.

To others, it is better to let thousands of people die than to have them do something that isn't "acceptable."

I have asked this to other people. To those who disagree with torture, if a kidnapper buried your child - one hour of air left - would you do ANYTHING to the kidnapper to save your child?

I got one honest answer before. They said of course they would. They wouldn't like it, but they would.

How about the rest of you. Kidnapper in a chair in front of you. Your child will die in one hour. How far will you go to get the info and save your child?

I'm one of those who is opposed to the torture of detainees, but in this case, if a kidnapper took my child, buried him/her and left him/her with one hour of air, I'd cut his balls off and feed them to him in order to get the answer as to where my child is.

But in all sincerity, the hypothetical of your post is different than the very real issue of the detainees. In the hypothetical, the kidnapper is in the act of committing a crime and lives are imminently at stake. In the case of the detainees, they are not involved in an ongoing crime and lives are not imminently at stake here. In fact, there is no proof that the detainees have any knowledge of impending strikes or that torturing the detainee will save one single life.

Immie

We'll have to differ on that one. The CIA said KSM had knowledge and wouldn't tell them until the enhanced interrogation. This was the 9/11 attack in Los Angeles.

Obama stated such also.

That is fine. Even IF, and that is a big if, the CIA is being truthful, it does not justify torturing detainees simply because they might have information.

I realize that some people do not consider waterboarding to be torture. I respect that opinion, but I disagree with them.

I realize that we could be a lot more violent. We could even stoop to the levels of the terrorists and make detainees pray to be waterboarded instead of whatever else we could do to them, but that does not make it right.

If they get information from one detainee, would that justify torturing 1000 others who have no information? 10,000? I do not deny that torture can be an effective way to get information. But is it justified to torture innocent people on the hope of finding one person that is not so innocent?

I don't want one more innocent American killed either. But we need to face the fact that we are in a war and innocent lives are in danger. Will torture save all of those lives? No, probably not. Some of them? Maybe. But, it is worth the soul of America? Maybe it is. Maybe we've already sold our soul and it doesn't matter.

Immie

 

[Red Dawn]

[To all] If the U.S. had a terrorist(s) in custody and they knew with reasonable certainty that this terrorist(s) had intel on an imminent attack on the U.S. and failure to get this intel would result in the death of thousands of innocent American lives, would you employ harsh interrogation techniques to gain this intel (thus saving thousands of innocent American lives)?

We all know who would and who wouldn't.

To some, some extreme interrogation is well worth saving U.S. citizens lives.

To others, it is better to let thousands of people die than to have them do something that isn't "acceptable."

I have asked this to other people. To those who disagree with torture, if a kidnapper buried your child - one hour of air left - would you do ANYTHING to the kidnapper to save your child?

I got one honest answer before. They said of course they would. They wouldn't like it, but they would.

How about the rest of you. Kidnapper in a chair in front of you. Your child will die in one hour. How far will you go to get the info and save your child?

I'm one of those who is opposed to the torture of detainees, but in this case, if a kidnapper took my child, buried him/her and left him/her with one hour of air, I'd cut his balls off and feed them to him in order to get the answer as to where my child is.

But in all sincerity, the hypothetical of your post is different than the very real issue of the detainees. In the hypothetical, the kidnapper is in the act of committing a crime and lives are imminently at stake. In the case of the detainees, they are not involved in an ongoing crime and lives are not imminently at stake here.

In fact, there is no proof] that the detainees have any knowledge of impending strikes or that torturing the detainee will save one single life.

Immie

I can tell you don't watch Fox News!

 

[Immanuel]

I can tell you don't watch Fox News!

I used to, but, I got tired of being lied to. Now, I can't watch any national news organizations, because you can't trust a one of them. I must admit, it makes it hard to stick with the talking points bullshit at times. Being a conservative, I sometimes sound like a lib, because I haven't kept up with FoxNew's lines lately.

I say what I believe (and believe me when I admit to not always being right) and sometimes find myself at odds with the conservative "lines" of the times. Or maybe it is them that are out of step with me?

Immie

 

[Red Dawn]

I can tell you don't watch Fox News!

I used to, but, I got tired of being lied to. Now, I can't watch any national news organizations, because you can't trust a one of them. I must admit, it makes it hard to stick with the talking points bullshit at times. Being a conservative, I sometimes sound like a lib, because I haven't kept up with FoxNew's lines lately.

I say what I believe (and believe me when I admit to not always being right) and sometimes find myself at odds with the conservative "lines" of the times. Or maybe it is them that are out of step with me?

Immie

well, you had some good points. Real life isn't a hollywood movie or an episode of 24.

And in my book, denying someone oxygen is torture. I don't see anyway to deny that.

 

[jillian]

well, you had some good points. Real life isn't a hollywood movie or an episode of 24.

And in my book, denying someone oxygen is torture. I don't see anyway to deny that.

and i figure if we prosecuted the japanese for doing something, then it's a pretty good bet that WE shouldn't be doing it.

no matter WHAT right wing lunatic, xenophobic freakazoids say.

 

[Red Dawn]

well, you had some good points. Real life isn't a hollywood movie or an episode of 24.

And in my book, denying someone oxygen is torture. I don't see anyway to deny that.

and i figure if we prosecuted the japanese for doing something, then it's a pretty good bet that WE shouldn't be doing it.
no matter WHAT right wing lunatic, xenophobic freakazoids say.

Jillian, Jillian, Jillian.

WE had doctors present. That makes denying someone oxygen, NOT torture.


That's what some wingnuts told me anyway.

 

[DiveCon]

well, you had some good points. Real life isn't a hollywood movie or an episode of 24.

And in my book, denying someone oxygen is torture. I don't see anyway to deny that.

and i figure if we prosecuted the japanese for doing something, then it's a pretty good bet that WE shouldn't be doing it.
no matter WHAT right wing lunatic, xenophobic freakazoids say.

Jillian, Jillian, Jillian.

WE had doctors present. That makes denying someone oxygen, NOT torture.


That's what some wingnuts told me anyway.

the procedures were different also
but you leftwingnuts cant understand that

 

[jillian]

and i figure if we prosecuted the japanese for doing something, then it's a pretty good bet that WE shouldn't be doing it.
no matter WHAT right wing lunatic, xenophobic freakazoids say.

Jillian, Jillian, Jillian.

WE had doctors present. That makes denying someone oxygen, NOT torture.


That's what some wingnuts told me anyway.

the procedures were different also
but you leftwingnuts cant understand that

except you know that I'm not that... particularly when it comes to issues of safety and terrorism.

but if we're as low-life as the bad guys, then they win.

 

[DiveCon]

Jillian, Jillian, Jillian.

WE had doctors present. That makes denying someone oxygen, NOT torture.


That's what some wingnuts told me anyway.

the procedures were different also
but you leftwingnuts cant understand that

except you know that I'm not that... particularly when it comes to issues of safety and terrorism.

but if we're as low-life as the bad guys, then they win.

that last line was directed at red more so than you

 

[Zoom-boing]

[To all] If the U.S. had a terrorist(s) in custody and they knew with reasonable certainty that this terrorist(s) had intel on an imminent attack on the U.S. and failure to get this intel would result in the death of thousands of innocent American lives, would you employ harsh interrogation techniques to gain this intel (thus saving thousands of innocent American lives)?

We all know who would and who wouldn't.

To some, some extreme interrogation is well worth saving U.S. citizens lives.

To others, it is better to let thousands of people die than to have them do something that isn't "acceptable."

I have asked this to other people. To those who disagree with torture, if a kidnapper buried your child - one hour of air left - would you do ANYTHING to the kidnapper to save your child?

I got one honest answer before. They said of course they would. They wouldn't like it, but they would.

How about the rest of you. Kidnapper in a chair in front of you. Your child will die in one hour. How far will you go to get the info and save your child?

Yes, it's pretty obvious who would and who wouldn't. I asked the question because I see much empathy towards the terrorists and their rights, but I don't see much mention of the rights of the innocent Americans who die at the hands of these terrorists. Reading through the many posts on this it comes across as if American lives are worth less than a terrorist's life.

[To all] If the U.S. had a terrorist(s) in custody and they knew with reasonable certainty that this terrorist(s) had intel on an imminent attack on the U.S. and failure to get this intel would result in the death of thousands of innocent American lives, would you employ harsh interrogation techniques to gain this intel (thus saving thousands of innocent American lives)?

We all know who would and who wouldn't.

To some, some extreme interrogation is well worth saving U.S. citizens lives.

To others, it is better to let thousands of people die than to have them do something that isn't "acceptable."

I have asked this to other people. To those who disagree with torture, if a kidnapper buried your child - one hour of air left - would you do ANYTHING to the kidnapper to save your child?

I got one honest answer before. They said of course they would. They wouldn't like it, but they would.

How about the rest of you. Kidnapper in a chair in front of you. Your child will die in one hour. How far will you go to get the info and save your child?

I'm one of those who is opposed to the torture of detainees, but in this case, if a kidnapper took my child, buried him/her and left him/her with one hour of air, I'd cut his balls off and feed them to him in order to get the answer as to where my child is.

But in all sincerity, the hypothetical of your post is different than the very real issue of the detainees. In the hypothetical, the kidnapper is in the act of committing a crime and lives are imminently at stake. In the case of the detainees, they are not involved in an ongoing crime and lives are not imminently at stake here. In fact, there is no proof that the detainees have any knowledge of impending strikes or that torturing the detainee will save one single life.

Immie

But what if we had a terrorist(s) and we knew with reasonable certainty that they did have info on an impending attack that would kill thousands of Americans. Would you support harsh interrogation techniques in that case (thus saving these Americans) or would you say no and let those Americans die? I know it's a hypothetical but . . . 9/11 was just a hypothetical on 9/10.

 

[Red Dawn]

and i figure if we prosecuted the japanese for doing something, then it's a pretty good bet that WE shouldn't be doing it.
no matter WHAT right wing lunatic, xenophobic freakazoids say.

Jillian, Jillian, Jillian.

WE had doctors present. That makes denying someone oxygen, NOT torture.


That's what some wingnuts told me anyway.

the procedures were different also
but you leftwingnuts cant understand that

I've never not once said our torture was "as bad" as saddam's torture, and I challenge you to find a post where I ever said that.

Denying oxygen to prisoners of the U.S. government is torture, and that makes it illegal, and immoral.

 

[Burp]

[To all] If the U.S. had a terrorist(s) in custody and they knew with reasonable certainty that this terrorist(s) had intel on an imminent attack on the U.S. and failure to get this intel would result in the death of thousands of innocent American lives, would you employ harsh interrogation techniques to gain this intel (thus saving thousands of innocent American lives)?

We all know who would and who wouldn't.

To some, some extreme interrogation is well worth saving U.S. citizens lives.

To others, it is better to let thousands of people die than to have them do something that isn't "acceptable."

I have asked this to other people. To those who disagree with torture, if a kidnapper buried your child - one hour of air left - would you do ANYTHING to the kidnapper to save your child?

I got one honest answer before. They said of course they would. They wouldn't like it, but they would.

How about the rest of you. Kidnapper in a chair in front of you. Your child will die in one hour. How far will you go to get the info and save your child?

Yes, it's pretty obvious who would and who wouldn't. I asked the question because I see much empathy towards the terrorists and their rights, but I don't see much mention of the rights of the innocent Americans who die at the hands of these terrorists. Reading through the many posts on this it comes across as if American lives are worth less than a terrorist's life.

We all know who would and who wouldn't.

To some, some extreme interrogation is well worth saving U.S. citizens lives.

To others, it is better to let thousands of people die than to have them do something that isn't "acceptable."

I have asked this to other people. To those who disagree with torture, if a kidnapper buried your child - one hour of air left - would you do ANYTHING to the kidnapper to save your child?

I got one honest answer before. They said of course they would. They wouldn't like it, but they would.

How about the rest of you. Kidnapper in a chair in front of you. Your child will die in one hour. How far will you go to get the info and save your child?

I'm one of those who is opposed to the torture of detainees, but in this case, if a kidnapper took my child, buried him/her and left him/her with one hour of air, I'd cut his balls off and feed them to him in order to get the answer as to where my child is.

But in all sincerity, the hypothetical of your post is different than the very real issue of the detainees. In the hypothetical, the kidnapper is in the act of committing a crime and lives are imminently at stake. In the case of the detainees, they are not involved in an ongoing crime and lives are not imminently at stake here. In fact, there is no proof that the detainees have any knowledge of impending strikes or that torturing the detainee will save one single life.

Immie

But what if we had a terrorist(s) and we knew with reasonable certainty that they did have info on an impending attack that would kill thousands of Americans. Would you support harsh interrogation techniques in that case (thus saving these Americans) or would you say no and let those Americans die? I know it's a hypothetical but . . . 9/11 was just a hypothetical on 9/10.

You won't get a serious answer to this.

Problem is, any "normal" person, who knew that with reasonable certainty, would absolutely do anything they could to save lives.

 

[DiveCon]

Jillian, Jillian, Jillian.

WE had doctors present. That makes denying someone oxygen, NOT torture.


That's what some wingnuts told me anyway.

the procedures were different also
but you leftwingnuts cant understand that

I've never not once said our torture was "as bad" as saddam's torture, and I challenge you to find a post where I ever said that.

Denying oxygen to prisoners of the U.S. government is torture, and that makes it illegal, and immoral.

where did i say anything about Saddam?

 

[Red Dawn]

the procedures were different also
but you leftwingnuts cant understand that

I've never not once said our torture was "as bad" as saddam's torture, and I challenge you to find a post where I ever said that.

Denying oxygen to prisoners of the U.S. government is torture, and that makes it illegal, and immoral.

where did i say anything about Saddam?

Was the intent of our waterboarding to deny our prisoners oxygen, and to induce a feeling of drowning?

Yes or no?

 

[Burp]

I've never not once said our torture was "as bad" as saddam's torture, and I challenge you to find a post where I ever said that.

Denying oxygen to prisoners of the U.S. government is torture, and that makes it illegal, and immoral.

where did i say anything about Saddam?

Was the intent of our waterboarding to deny our prisoners oxygen, and to induce a feeling of drowning?

Yes or no?

I believe the intent was to gain information to prevent further terrorist attacks and save lives.

 

[DiveCon]

where did i say anything about Saddam?

Was the intent of our waterboarding to deny our prisoners oxygen, and to induce a feeling of drowning?

Yes or no?

I believe the intent was to gain information to prevent further terrorist attacks and save lives.

exactly

 

[Burp]

Was the intent of our waterboarding to deny our prisoners oxygen, and to induce a feeling of drowning?

Yes or no?

I believe the intent was to gain information to prevent further terrorist attacks and save lives.

exactly

Why is this so clear to us?

Ohhhh..I know. We don't let hatred for a particular political party/person interfere with common sense and a true desire to protect the citizens of our country.

 

[Immanuel]

But what if we had a terrorist(s) and we knew with reasonable certainty that they did have info on an impending attack that would kill thousands of Americans. Would you support harsh interrogation techniques in that case (thus saving these Americans) or would you say no and let those Americans die? I know it's a hypothetical but . . . 9/11 was just a hypothetical on 9/10.

There are no hard and fast rules in life. Abortion is wrong, but then when the life of the mother is at stake, do you tell her tough shit, this child is coming whether you live or not?

I'd have to be pretty damned certain that 1) the detainee knew something he wasn't telling and 2) that the information he knew was going to save lives. Simply torturing, even waterboarding if it were not torture, a detainee because he might know something does not qualify in my books.

Quite frankly, I don't believe that one can know those two things for certain.

Also, my main concern is not for the terrorist or the detainees but for the soul of this nation. It is my belief that We lose when we become them. Of that last statement, I have no doubt.

Immie