If Sleep Deprivation is now to be known as torture, what is cutting off fingers and the like?

[NYcarbineer]

Well according to the lefties on this board everything you do is torture.

Who said that?

 

[Claudette]

Just read back and you'll find it.

Anything you do to a prisoner is considered torture by you idiots on the left.

So. Don't ask questioins and for god sakes to deprive them of sleep, play loud music or heaven forbid waterboard the bastards.

Just sit around and hope they decide to tell you something.

Thats the ticket.

 

[g5000]

If we're going to call 'stress' torture, we're going to need a new word to convey what we used to call torture.

Because they're not the same...

Which means that we can't use stress to convey discomfort... so what word should be used to convey THAT?

Seems that once again, allowing the intellectually less fortunate to speak, causes chaos... .

Are we sure that this is a good idea?

You really need to stop drinking Fox News's piss.

Definition of moral relativism: "Well, at least we don't (fill in the blank)!" Chop off heads, eat babies, etc.

This bogus reasoning is based on the intellectually bankrupt premise that if we can just find someone who is worse than us, we are morally in the clear.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

If we're going to call 'stress' torture, we're going to need a new word to convey what we used to call torture.

Because they're not the same...

Which means that we can't use stress to convey discomfort... so what word should be used to convey THAT?

Seems that once again, allowing the intellectually less fortunate to speak, causes chaos... .

Are we sure that this is a good idea?

You really need to stop drinking Fox News's piss.

Definition of moral relativism: "Well, at least we don't (fill in the blank)!" Chop off heads, eat babies, etc.

This bogus reasoning is based on the intellectually bankrupt premise that if we can just find someone who is worse than us, we are morally in the clear.

That's not a definition scamp, it's an analogy... and a poorly constructed one at that.

The simple fact is that inducing stress is not injurious, and torture is. What's more, stress induced onto an innocent person, for sadistic ends, may be torturous, thus be reasonably concluded to be torture, where such set upon a mass-murderer for the purpose of stopping future murders is perfectly reasonable and humane, beyond any reasonable requirement that such should be treated humanely.

And most importantly, that you need to feel that such is torture and that to do so you must rinse from the equation the mass-murdering component, proves incontrovertibly that you are in fact: a Relativist.

But my favorite part of all that, is that despite your best efforts, you're helpless to offer a contest which on any level could hope to sustain your feelings to the contrary.

ROFL! And how positively SWEET: is THAT?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Well according to the lefties on this board everything you do is torture.

Who said that?

Said it? Or "irrefutably demonstrated it" throughout this and every other of the innumerable threads on the subject?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Specifics are that no one was tortured... period.

So you determine what is torture and what is not, and no one else needs to know all the most important details.

Reason determines what torture is and is not... Which sadly, deals you and your cult out of the equation which determines what torture is. Which is to say that we do not consult the enemy on how the enemy should be treated.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Well according to the lefties on this board everything you do is torture.

Who said that?

Said it? Or "irrefutably demonstrated it" throughout this and every other of the innumerable threads on the subject?

Who here has said that offering privileges in exchange for information is torture?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Specifics are that no one was tortured... period.

So you determine what is torture and what is not, and no one else needs to know all the most important details.

Reason determines what torture is and is not... Which sadly, deals you and your cult out of the equation which determines what torture is. Which is to say that we do not consult the enemy on how the enemy should be treated.

How much reason is required to know that 7 days of forcible sleep deprivation is torture? Apparently more than you have.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Well according to the lefties on this board everything you do is torture.

Who said that?

Said it? Or "irrefutably demonstrated it" throughout this and every other of the innumerable threads on the subject?

Who here has said that offering privileges in exchange for information is torture?

No one that I know of... but why the question? As no one here has claimed that anyone has 'said': offering privileges in exchange for information is torture. What you have said, is that inducing discomfort where information was withheld and there existed a critical need for that information, was torture.

In truth, using your would-be 'reasoning', the inevitable result is anything can be defined as torture. The Anti-theists are implying that someone wishing that they 'have a Merry Christmas', is torture. Such is the discomfort caused by being wished to have a Merry Christmas, that the secular humanists are working to remove the phrase from the Western lexicon.

Which is in keeping with Islam, the political allies of you of the Secular Humanist, Relativist Cult.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Specifics are that no one was tortured... period.

So you determine what is torture and what is not, and no one else needs to know all the most important details.

Reason determines what torture is and is not... Which sadly, deals you and your cult out of the equation which determines what torture is. Which is to say that we do not consult the enemy on how the enemy should be treated.

How much reason is required to know that 7 days of forcible sleep deprivation is torture? Apparently more than you have.

How much reason? LOL! What would be the relevance of volume, where the element of reason is itself, rejected?

That a person failed to be forthcoming for seven days of being deprived of sleep, tells us that the information they're protecting is To THEM, critical to their mission of murdering innocent people. Now given that there is no potential right to murder anyone... reason requires that the individual being deprived of sleep has failed to bear their responsibilities which sustain their rights... thus they have no right to not be deprived of their sleep, while a person who DOES bear their responsibility IS so entitled.

So, where you might rightly claim that the co-ed sitting on the quad at a University which still educates Americans, perfectly innocent of any offense against anyone... who may be dragged into a van, taken to some nondescript warehouse and is forced to remain awake for 7 days, WOULD BE TORTURED through such, the individual who is actively working toward the murder of innocent people, does not enjoy that consideration.

You see, this is called 'discrimination'... it is an essential element of sound judgment, which comes only through the application of sound reason.

NOW, you erroneously feel that it's wrong to discriminate and that it's wrong to judge. And that is how we can know to an absolute certainty that you are an idiot; a simpleton, a moron whose very existence is a threat to the very viability of the culture in which your presence has infected.

See how that works?

 

[The Rabbi]

Specifics are that no one was tortured... period.

So you determine what is torture and what is not, and no one else needs to know all the most important details.

Reason determines what torture is and is not... Which sadly, deals you and your cult out of the equation which determines what torture is. Which is to say that we do not consult the enemy on how the enemy should be treated.

How much reason is required to know that 7 days of forcible sleep deprivation is torture? Apparently more than you have.

Reading your posts i torture. Getting stuck in traffic is torture. A hot day without a shower is torture! Whee! Anything can be torture, kiddies.
Never mnd the legal definition involves permanent damage. And no one suffered that from the CIA.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

"Liberalism is trust of the people tempered by prudence. Conservatism is distrust of the people tempered by fear."

ROFLMNAO!

Now isn't that precious?

The Left trusts the people... every got that? This is why the Left is tapping the phone of every one of 'duh peoples', why the left forces 'duh peoples' to forfeit their property with the death being threatened upon them for not doing so. The Left trusts people and thats why they bankrupt 'duh peoples' who refuse to celebrate sexual abnormality... and why the Left uses the power of the IRS to keep 'duh peoples' from peaceably assembling and exercising their right to speak freely in forming effective political opposition to the Left.

LMAO! Liberals...

 

[Skylar]

Specifics are that no one was tortured... period.

So you determine what is torture and what is not, and no one else needs to know all the most important details.

Reason determines what torture is and is not... Which sadly, deals you and your cult out of the equation which determines what torture is. Which is to say that we do not consult the enemy on how the enemy should be treated.

How much reason is required to know that 7 days of forcible sleep deprivation is torture? Apparently more than you have.

Reading your posts i torture. Getting stuck in traffic is torture. A hot day without a shower is torture! Whee! Anything can be torture, kiddies.
Never mnd the legal definition involves permanent damage. And no one suffered that from the CIA.

And by 'legal definition', you mean whatever you want to make up? Because the USC doesn't mention 'permanent damage' in its definition of torture. But the intentional infliction of severe mental or physical pain and suffering.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

And by 'legal definition', you mean whatever you want to make up? Because the USC doesn't mention 'permanent damage' in its definition of torture. But the intentional infliction of severe mental or physical pain and suffering.

Well, thats probably because the USC doesn't mention torture. If anyone had thought such was necessary, they would have likely added that, but to be fair, there was no way for the founders to know how stupid you people were going to be.

So, well... you see how it is.

 

[Skylar]

And by 'legal definition', you mean whatever you want to make up? Because the USC doesn't mention 'permanent damage' in its definition of torture. But the intentional infliction of severe mental or physical pain and suffering.

Well, thats probably because the USC doesn't mention torture. If anyone had thought such was necessary, they would have likely added that, but to be fair, there was no way for the founders to know how stupid you people were going to be.

Except where it does.

(1) “torture” means an act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control;
(2) “severe mental pain or suffering” means the prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting from—
(A) the intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severe physical pain or suffering;
(B) the administration or application, or threatened administration or application, of mind-altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the personality;
(C) the threat of imminent death; or
(D) the threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical pain or suffering, or the administration or application of mind-altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or personality; and
(3) “United States” means the several States of the United States, the District of Columbia, and the commonwealths, territories, and possessions of the United States.
18 U.S. Code 2340 - Definitions LII Legal Information Institute

But hey, why burden your legal rhetoric with, you know, the law. It works so much better when both you and your audience have no idea what you're talking about. Less well when your audience knows more than you do

 

[The Rabbi]

Specifics are that no one was tortured... period.

So you determine what is torture and what is not, and no one else needs to know all the most important details.

Reason determines what torture is and is not... Which sadly, deals you and your cult out of the equation which determines what torture is. Which is to say that we do not consult the enemy on how the enemy should be treated.

How much reason is required to know that 7 days of forcible sleep deprivation is torture? Apparently more than you have.

Reading your posts i torture. Getting stuck in traffic is torture. A hot day without a shower is torture! Whee! Anything can be torture, kiddies.
Never mnd the legal definition involves permanent damage. And no one suffered that from the CIA.

And by 'legal definition', you mean whatever you want to make up? Because the USC doesn't mention 'permanent damage' in its definition of torture. But the intentional infliction of severe mental or physical pain and suffering.

Yes, the word is "severe." IT has to mean something other than "ooh, that sounds bad." After research the Bush Justice Dept decided on the definition I mentioned: it must produce permanent damage. The CIA's methods of interogation did not produce permanent damage.
If you have research that indicates they made a mistake please post it. Because no one else has discovered any mistake.

 

[Skylar]

So you determine what is torture and what is not, and no one else needs to know all the most important details.

Reason determines what torture is and is not... Which sadly, deals you and your cult out of the equation which determines what torture is. Which is to say that we do not consult the enemy on how the enemy should be treated.

How much reason is required to know that 7 days of forcible sleep deprivation is torture? Apparently more than you have.

Reading your posts i torture. Getting stuck in traffic is torture. A hot day without a shower is torture! Whee! Anything can be torture, kiddies.
Never mnd the legal definition involves permanent damage. And no one suffered that from the CIA.

And by 'legal definition', you mean whatever you want to make up? Because the USC doesn't mention 'permanent damage' in its definition of torture. But the intentional infliction of severe mental or physical pain and suffering.

Yes, the word is "severe." IT has to mean something other than "ooh, that sounds bad."

You said it meant 'permanent damage'. Oddly, the USC doesn't say that at all. So by 'legal definition', you mean whatever you want to make up? If you believe US law requires 'permanent damage', by all means quote the law saying as much.

As I've already quoted the USC with a definition of torture that has nothing to what you made up. Why is the USC wrong on legal definitions......but you're right?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

(other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions)

Oh!! You were speaking of the US Legal Code and misused the acronym USC, which generally refers to the US Constitution.

I highlighted the relevant parts for ya...

 

[Skylar]

(other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions)

Oh!! You were speaking of the US Legal Code and misused the acronym USC, which generally refers to the US Constitution.

I highlighted the relevant parts for ya...

USC....United States Code. Specifically:

18 U.S. Code § 2340 - Definitions

18 U.S. Code 2340 - Definitions LII Legal Information Institute

What did you think I was referring to.....the University of Southern California?

And the USC clearly has something to say about torture. And it doesn't include any of Rabbi's made up 'permanent damage'. But the intentional infliction of severe mental or physical pain and suffering.

Which is a pretty good definition. And, of course, a legal one.

 

[NYcarbineer]

So you determine what is torture and what is not, and no one else needs to know all the most important details.

Reason determines what torture is and is not... Which sadly, deals you and your cult out of the equation which determines what torture is. Which is to say that we do not consult the enemy on how the enemy should be treated.

How much reason is required to know that 7 days of forcible sleep deprivation is torture? Apparently more than you have.

Reading your posts i torture. Getting stuck in traffic is torture. A hot day without a shower is torture! Whee! Anything can be torture, kiddies.
Never mnd the legal definition involves permanent damage. And no one suffered that from the CIA.

And by 'legal definition', you mean whatever you want to make up? Because the USC doesn't mention 'permanent damage' in its definition of torture. But the intentional infliction of severe mental or physical pain and suffering.

Yes, the word is "severe." IT has to mean something other than "ooh, that sounds bad." After research the Bush Justice Dept decided on the definition I mentioned: it must produce permanent damage. The CIA's methods of interogation did not produce permanent damage.
If you have research that indicates they made a mistake please post it. Because no one else has discovered any mistake.

The Bush administration could make up any definition it wanted to.