Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
And if torture produced no useful information but useful information was gained through another person by other means? What do you tell the victims?So how many potentially innocent people do you subject to torture until you realize it isnt working? What do yo tell those people, too bad, our intelligence was faulty?Let me know when you subject yourself to water boarding at the hands of an enemy captor and you have no idea whether they will kill you or not.Wrong......I will listen to the 3 POWs who actually know what torture is, because they endured it for years under the socialists...
McCain’s fellow POWs support waterboarding
When I was researching my book, “Courting Disaster,” I interviewed many of them, including Col. Bud Day, who received our nation’s highest award for valor, the Medal of Honor, for his heroic escape from a North Vietnamese prison camp.
When Day was returned to the prison, his right arm was broken in three places and he had been shot in the hand and thigh during his capture. But he continued to resist interrogation and provide false information — suffering such excruciating torture that he became totally physically debilitated and unable to perform even the simplest task for himself. In short, Day is an expert on the subject of torture. Here is what he says about CIA waterboarding:
“I am a supporter of waterboarding. It is not torture. Torture is really hurting someone. Waterboarding is just scaring someone, with no long-term injurious effects. It is a scare tactic that works.”
I asked Day in an e-mail what he would say to the CIA officer who waterboarded Khalid Sheik Mohammed, if he had the chance to speak with him. Day replied immediately: “YOU DID THE RIGHT THING.”
And the other Congressional of Medal Awardee...also agrees......waterboarding is not torture.....
Like Day, Col. Leo Thorsness was awarded the Medal of Honor for extraordinary heroism during the Vietnam War. He experienced excruciating torture during his captivity — his back broken, his body wrenched apart. He says what the CIA did to al-Qaeda terrorists in its custody was not torture:
“To me, waterboarding is intensive interrogation. It is not torture. Torture involves extreme, brutal pain — breaking bones, passing out from pain, beatings so severe that blood spatters the walls . . . when you pop shoulders out of joints.. . . In my mind, there’s a difference, and in most POWs’ minds there’s a difference.. . . I would not hesitate a second to use ‘enhanced interrogation,’ including waterboarding, if it would save the lives of innocent people.”
And the most famous supporter of water boarding......
Another torture victim who supports waterboarding is Adm. Jeremiah Denton — the POW who famously winked the word “T-O-R-T-U-R-E” in Morse code during a North Vietnamese propaganda interview.
It was the first message to the outside world that American prisoners were being tortured. Denton later received the Navy Cross for this courageous and costly act of defiance, for which he paid dearly when his captors figured out what he had done. I asked Denton if he thought waterboarding was torture. He told me:
“No, I think it’s persuasive.. . . The big, monstrous difference here is that the gentlemen we are waterboarding are people who swore to kill Americans. They will wreak any kind of torture just for the hell of it on anybody. When they are captured by the U.S., and we know or have reason to believe that they know of a subsequent event after 9/11, if you don’t interrogate them, more misery will take place.. . . Waterboarding is not an evil. Some of the things they did to us were torture. I passed out a dozen times from torture. We’re not exerting that kind of excruciation.”
It is ironic that, according to one of your quotes, what makes waterboarding “not torture” is defined by who the victim is, not the act. That is seriously warped.
10s of thousands of our military are water-boarded in survival training. It's actually a mental stressor and not likely to cause permanent physical damage.
Waterboarding: A SERE-ing Experience for Tens of Thousands of US Military Personnel | Human Events
On the OP scenario ---
I would have to TRY to break the suspect in order to protect 100s of thousands or millions of lives. Sorry, but when the dirty bomb explodes and radioactively contaminates downtown Chicago for the next 1000 years, I'm gonna regret living if I didn't push for information. I don't know how anybody could live with the guilt of not trying.
There ARE possible scenarios where you need to push for ANY leads. Good, bad or indifferent.
And --- the media and the public will SKEWER the people in charge if it's known they had a conspirator in custody and DID NOT attempt to save those lives and the 1000 years of radioactive Chicago..
What this all comes down to is INTENT and the backlash from the RESULTS.
If the intent of the Torture was to simply inflict incredible pain to someone you have hatred for, then yes, it is simply barbaric.
But, in the scenario of saving life at any and all cost, although still barbarism, it is a case of need and not wanton blood lust. To an absolutist there is not difference, but reality is far different.
The difference is the failure of legal interrogation tactics on a person known to have information that, if given, can save thousands, if not millions of life's.
The faux outrage by some on this thread reminds me of the story of the town drunk who showed up at his usual bar dressed in a fine suit and with a new haircut. He orders Martinis instead of beer and proceeds to get drunk. The bartender asks him "what's up with the suit and Martini's" and the drunk responds that he's running for Congress because it's not what's inside me that matters, it's what you look like on the outside.
I wrote about this on another thread. There would be two results should the United States Government approved this in this specific scenario:
First. The torture (and I will not shy away from the use of the word) gets the desired results and the bomb is found and disarmed.
The news would be filled with stories of just how many life's were saved. Stories of those that would have perished, the single Mother, the Teacher about to retire, the retired, the sick, the poor, the Democrats, the Republicans, Young Married couple with their child. There would be 24/7 coverage of the economic damage the blast would have created and the recession/depression it would have caused, and the administration and those that applied the torture would be applauded as hero's, not only here, but in the entire civilized world as the world wakes up to the now real possibility that this could soon happen to them as well.
Those that opposed the use of torture to accomplish the resulting savings of life would be ridiculed. They would not dare show their face or voice their opinions in fear of looking the fool.
Second: The torture fails and the bomb goes off killing many thousands of people, maybe millions. The economy goes into a tailspin. War is declared on each and every nation known to harbor these terrorist groups, not only by the United States, but by every nation that could fall victim by the same act by those groups. The world becomes a very chaotic place in the matter of days.
What was done to the individual that had the information, but refused to supply it, becomes unimportant as the world try's to come to grip with what happened and tries to restore some semblance of order.
Again, those that oppose the use of torture would not dare to open their mouths as thousands of their fellow countrymen are being put to rest, and thousands more, maybe millions more are being treated and are dying from the fallout that later occurred. The people would be far more interested in where their next meal was going to come from, what was happening with the economy and watching their Sons and Daughters go off to War to seek justice for what just happened.
The dude that was tortured, and the approval of such would lay at roughly 15,000 on the list of concerns that the American people would have at that point and for decades in the future.
If all that is important to you is the appearance of being decent, while those around you die, then those that would oppose the use of torture as a last resort, are no different than the drunk in the bar that I referenced earlier and just as shallow in thought.
Far fewer than die if I don't
And if you have the wrong person?Let me know when you subject yourself to water boarding at the hands of an enemy captor and you have no idea whether they will kill you or not.They are both torture. Quit trying to defend it because it differs in degree.What the Japanese did is not what we did.....you should try to know what you are talking about before you post....
We poured water over a cloth covering their faces, filling their sinuses....the Japanes forced hoses down the throats of POWs filling their stomachs to capcity, then jumped on the abdomens of the prisoners with both feet to force the water out explosively...
do you see what the difference in the two techniques are?
Wrong......I will listen to the 3 POWs who actually know what torture is, because they endured it for years under the socialists...
McCain’s fellow POWs support waterboarding
When I was researching my book, “Courting Disaster,” I interviewed many of them, including Col. Bud Day, who received our nation’s highest award for valor, the Medal of Honor, for his heroic escape from a North Vietnamese prison camp.
When Day was returned to the prison, his right arm was broken in three places and he had been shot in the hand and thigh during his capture. But he continued to resist interrogation and provide false information — suffering such excruciating torture that he became totally physically debilitated and unable to perform even the simplest task for himself. In short, Day is an expert on the subject of torture. Here is what he says about CIA waterboarding:
“I am a supporter of waterboarding. It is not torture. Torture is really hurting someone. Waterboarding is just scaring someone, with no long-term injurious effects. It is a scare tactic that works.”
I asked Day in an e-mail what he would say to the CIA officer who waterboarded Khalid Sheik Mohammed, if he had the chance to speak with him. Day replied immediately: “YOU DID THE RIGHT THING.”
And the other Congressional of Medal Awardee...also agrees......waterboarding is not torture.....
Like Day, Col. Leo Thorsness was awarded the Medal of Honor for extraordinary heroism during the Vietnam War. He experienced excruciating torture during his captivity — his back broken, his body wrenched apart. He says what the CIA did to al-Qaeda terrorists in its custody was not torture:
“To me, waterboarding is intensive interrogation. It is not torture. Torture involves extreme, brutal pain — breaking bones, passing out from pain, beatings so severe that blood spatters the walls . . . when you pop shoulders out of joints.. . . In my mind, there’s a difference, and in most POWs’ minds there’s a difference.. . . I would not hesitate a second to use ‘enhanced interrogation,’ including waterboarding, if it would save the lives of innocent people.”
And the most famous supporter of water boarding......
Another torture victim who supports waterboarding is Adm. Jeremiah Denton — the POW who famously winked the word “T-O-R-T-U-R-E” in Morse code during a North Vietnamese propaganda interview.
It was the first message to the outside world that American prisoners were being tortured. Denton later received the Navy Cross for this courageous and costly act of defiance, for which he paid dearly when his captors figured out what he had done. I asked Denton if he thought waterboarding was torture. He told me:
“No, I think it’s persuasive.. . . The big, monstrous difference here is that the gentlemen we are waterboarding are people who swore to kill Americans. They will wreak any kind of torture just for the hell of it on anybody. When they are captured by the U.S., and we know or have reason to believe that they know of a subsequent event after 9/11, if you don’t interrogate them, more misery will take place.. . . Waterboarding is not an evil. Some of the things they did to us were torture. I passed out a dozen times from torture. We’re not exerting that kind of excruciation.”
It is ironic that, according to one of your quotes, what makes waterboarding “not torture” is defined by who the victim is, not the act. That is seriously warped.
10s of thousands of our military are water-boarded in survival training. It's actually a mental stressor and not likely to cause permanent physical damage.
Waterboarding: A SERE-ing Experience for Tens of Thousands of US Military Personnel | Human Events
On the OP scenario ---
I would have to TRY to break the suspect in order to protect 100s of thousands or millions of lives. Sorry, but when the dirty bomb explodes and radioactively contaminates downtown Chicago for the next 1000 years, I'm gonna regret living if I didn't push for information. I don't know how anybody could live with the guilt of not trying.
There ARE possible scenarios where you need to push for ANY leads. Good, bad or indifferent.
And --- the media and the public will SKEWER the people in charge if it's known they had a conspirator in custody and DID NOT attempt to save those lives and the 1000 years of radioactive Chicago..
And if you have the wrong person?Let me know when you subject yourself to water boarding at the hands of an enemy captor and you have no idea whether they will kill you or not.They are both torture. Quit trying to defend it because it differs in degree.What the Japanese did is not what we did.....you should try to know what you are talking about before you post....
We poured water over a cloth covering their faces, filling their sinuses....the Japanes forced hoses down the throats of POWs filling their stomachs to capcity, then jumped on the abdomens of the prisoners with both feet to force the water out explosively...
do you see what the difference in the two techniques are?
Wrong......I will listen to the 3 POWs who actually know what torture is, because they endured it for years under the socialists...
McCain’s fellow POWs support waterboarding
When I was researching my book, “Courting Disaster,” I interviewed many of them, including Col. Bud Day, who received our nation’s highest award for valor, the Medal of Honor, for his heroic escape from a North Vietnamese prison camp.
When Day was returned to the prison, his right arm was broken in three places and he had been shot in the hand and thigh during his capture. But he continued to resist interrogation and provide false information — suffering such excruciating torture that he became totally physically debilitated and unable to perform even the simplest task for himself. In short, Day is an expert on the subject of torture. Here is what he says about CIA waterboarding:
“I am a supporter of waterboarding. It is not torture. Torture is really hurting someone. Waterboarding is just scaring someone, with no long-term injurious effects. It is a scare tactic that works.”
I asked Day in an e-mail what he would say to the CIA officer who waterboarded Khalid Sheik Mohammed, if he had the chance to speak with him. Day replied immediately: “YOU DID THE RIGHT THING.”
And the other Congressional of Medal Awardee...also agrees......waterboarding is not torture.....
Like Day, Col. Leo Thorsness was awarded the Medal of Honor for extraordinary heroism during the Vietnam War. He experienced excruciating torture during his captivity — his back broken, his body wrenched apart. He says what the CIA did to al-Qaeda terrorists in its custody was not torture:
“To me, waterboarding is intensive interrogation. It is not torture. Torture involves extreme, brutal pain — breaking bones, passing out from pain, beatings so severe that blood spatters the walls . . . when you pop shoulders out of joints.. . . In my mind, there’s a difference, and in most POWs’ minds there’s a difference.. . . I would not hesitate a second to use ‘enhanced interrogation,’ including waterboarding, if it would save the lives of innocent people.”
And the most famous supporter of water boarding......
Another torture victim who supports waterboarding is Adm. Jeremiah Denton — the POW who famously winked the word “T-O-R-T-U-R-E” in Morse code during a North Vietnamese propaganda interview.
It was the first message to the outside world that American prisoners were being tortured. Denton later received the Navy Cross for this courageous and costly act of defiance, for which he paid dearly when his captors figured out what he had done. I asked Denton if he thought waterboarding was torture. He told me:
“No, I think it’s persuasive.. . . The big, monstrous difference here is that the gentlemen we are waterboarding are people who swore to kill Americans. They will wreak any kind of torture just for the hell of it on anybody. When they are captured by the U.S., and we know or have reason to believe that they know of a subsequent event after 9/11, if you don’t interrogate them, more misery will take place.. . . Waterboarding is not an evil. Some of the things they did to us were torture. I passed out a dozen times from torture. We’re not exerting that kind of excruciation.”
It is ironic that, according to one of your quotes, what makes waterboarding “not torture” is defined by who the victim is, not the act. That is seriously warped.
10s of thousands of our military are water-boarded in survival training. It's actually a mental stressor and not likely to cause permanent physical damage.
Waterboarding: A SERE-ing Experience for Tens of Thousands of US Military Personnel | Human Events
On the OP scenario ---
I would have to TRY to break the suspect in order to protect 100s of thousands or millions of lives. Sorry, but when the dirty bomb explodes and radioactively contaminates downtown Chicago for the next 1000 years, I'm gonna regret living if I didn't push for information. I don't know how anybody could live with the guilt of not trying.
There ARE possible scenarios where you need to push for ANY leads. Good, bad or indifferent.
And --- the media and the public will SKEWER the people in charge if it's known they had a conspirator in custody and DID NOT attempt to save those lives and the 1000 years of radioactive Chicago..
And if you have the wrong person?Let me know when you subject yourself to water boarding at the hands of an enemy captor and you have no idea whether they will kill you or not.They are both torture. Quit trying to defend it because it differs in degree.
Wrong......I will listen to the 3 POWs who actually know what torture is, because they endured it for years under the socialists...
McCain’s fellow POWs support waterboarding
When I was researching my book, “Courting Disaster,” I interviewed many of them, including Col. Bud Day, who received our nation’s highest award for valor, the Medal of Honor, for his heroic escape from a North Vietnamese prison camp.
When Day was returned to the prison, his right arm was broken in three places and he had been shot in the hand and thigh during his capture. But he continued to resist interrogation and provide false information — suffering such excruciating torture that he became totally physically debilitated and unable to perform even the simplest task for himself. In short, Day is an expert on the subject of torture. Here is what he says about CIA waterboarding:
“I am a supporter of waterboarding. It is not torture. Torture is really hurting someone. Waterboarding is just scaring someone, with no long-term injurious effects. It is a scare tactic that works.”
I asked Day in an e-mail what he would say to the CIA officer who waterboarded Khalid Sheik Mohammed, if he had the chance to speak with him. Day replied immediately: “YOU DID THE RIGHT THING.”
And the other Congressional of Medal Awardee...also agrees......waterboarding is not torture.....
Like Day, Col. Leo Thorsness was awarded the Medal of Honor for extraordinary heroism during the Vietnam War. He experienced excruciating torture during his captivity — his back broken, his body wrenched apart. He says what the CIA did to al-Qaeda terrorists in its custody was not torture:
“To me, waterboarding is intensive interrogation. It is not torture. Torture involves extreme, brutal pain — breaking bones, passing out from pain, beatings so severe that blood spatters the walls . . . when you pop shoulders out of joints.. . . In my mind, there’s a difference, and in most POWs’ minds there’s a difference.. . . I would not hesitate a second to use ‘enhanced interrogation,’ including waterboarding, if it would save the lives of innocent people.”
And the most famous supporter of water boarding......
Another torture victim who supports waterboarding is Adm. Jeremiah Denton — the POW who famously winked the word “T-O-R-T-U-R-E” in Morse code during a North Vietnamese propaganda interview.
It was the first message to the outside world that American prisoners were being tortured. Denton later received the Navy Cross for this courageous and costly act of defiance, for which he paid dearly when his captors figured out what he had done. I asked Denton if he thought waterboarding was torture. He told me:
“No, I think it’s persuasive.. . . The big, monstrous difference here is that the gentlemen we are waterboarding are people who swore to kill Americans. They will wreak any kind of torture just for the hell of it on anybody. When they are captured by the U.S., and we know or have reason to believe that they know of a subsequent event after 9/11, if you don’t interrogate them, more misery will take place.. . . Waterboarding is not an evil. Some of the things they did to us were torture. I passed out a dozen times from torture. We’re not exerting that kind of excruciation.”
It is ironic that, according to one of your quotes, what makes waterboarding “not torture” is defined by who the victim is, not the act. That is seriously warped.
10s of thousands of our military are water-boarded in survival training. It's actually a mental stressor and not likely to cause permanent physical damage.
Waterboarding: A SERE-ing Experience for Tens of Thousands of US Military Personnel | Human Events
On the OP scenario ---
I would have to TRY to break the suspect in order to protect 100s of thousands or millions of lives. Sorry, but when the dirty bomb explodes and radioactively contaminates downtown Chicago for the next 1000 years, I'm gonna regret living if I didn't push for information. I don't know how anybody could live with the guilt of not trying.
There ARE possible scenarios where you need to push for ANY leads. Good, bad or indifferent.
And --- the media and the public will SKEWER the people in charge if it's known they had a conspirator in custody and DID NOT attempt to save those lives and the 1000 years of radioactive Chicago..
That's a matter of trust. Anti terrorism folks aren't stupid. THere had to be a viable connection or the person wouldn't be that IMPORTANT to the frantic investigation. It's not like they fooled a FISA court into spying on an opposition political campaign and are just fishing. There's no time to waste.
If you don't TRUST their judgement under those exceptional circumstances -- FIRE them all. Don't hamstring them with "ideals" that can end up killing Thousands and/or killing a city for a 1000 years.
Under conditions such as those, no amount of effort is wasted on "maybe" leads.
I think anyone who engages intorture or calls for it should be subjected to it first.
And if you have the wrong person?Let me know when you subject yourself to water boarding at the hands of an enemy captor and you have no idea whether they will kill you or not.Wrong......I will listen to the 3 POWs who actually know what torture is, because they endured it for years under the socialists...
McCain’s fellow POWs support waterboarding
When I was researching my book, “Courting Disaster,” I interviewed many of them, including Col. Bud Day, who received our nation’s highest award for valor, the Medal of Honor, for his heroic escape from a North Vietnamese prison camp.
When Day was returned to the prison, his right arm was broken in three places and he had been shot in the hand and thigh during his capture. But he continued to resist interrogation and provide false information — suffering such excruciating torture that he became totally physically debilitated and unable to perform even the simplest task for himself. In short, Day is an expert on the subject of torture. Here is what he says about CIA waterboarding:
“I am a supporter of waterboarding. It is not torture. Torture is really hurting someone. Waterboarding is just scaring someone, with no long-term injurious effects. It is a scare tactic that works.”
I asked Day in an e-mail what he would say to the CIA officer who waterboarded Khalid Sheik Mohammed, if he had the chance to speak with him. Day replied immediately: “YOU DID THE RIGHT THING.”
And the other Congressional of Medal Awardee...also agrees......waterboarding is not torture.....
Like Day, Col. Leo Thorsness was awarded the Medal of Honor for extraordinary heroism during the Vietnam War. He experienced excruciating torture during his captivity — his back broken, his body wrenched apart. He says what the CIA did to al-Qaeda terrorists in its custody was not torture:
“To me, waterboarding is intensive interrogation. It is not torture. Torture involves extreme, brutal pain — breaking bones, passing out from pain, beatings so severe that blood spatters the walls . . . when you pop shoulders out of joints.. . . In my mind, there’s a difference, and in most POWs’ minds there’s a difference.. . . I would not hesitate a second to use ‘enhanced interrogation,’ including waterboarding, if it would save the lives of innocent people.”
And the most famous supporter of water boarding......
Another torture victim who supports waterboarding is Adm. Jeremiah Denton — the POW who famously winked the word “T-O-R-T-U-R-E” in Morse code during a North Vietnamese propaganda interview.
It was the first message to the outside world that American prisoners were being tortured. Denton later received the Navy Cross for this courageous and costly act of defiance, for which he paid dearly when his captors figured out what he had done. I asked Denton if he thought waterboarding was torture. He told me:
“No, I think it’s persuasive.. . . The big, monstrous difference here is that the gentlemen we are waterboarding are people who swore to kill Americans. They will wreak any kind of torture just for the hell of it on anybody. When they are captured by the U.S., and we know or have reason to believe that they know of a subsequent event after 9/11, if you don’t interrogate them, more misery will take place.. . . Waterboarding is not an evil. Some of the things they did to us were torture. I passed out a dozen times from torture. We’re not exerting that kind of excruciation.”
It is ironic that, according to one of your quotes, what makes waterboarding “not torture” is defined by who the victim is, not the act. That is seriously warped.
10s of thousands of our military are water-boarded in survival training. It's actually a mental stressor and not likely to cause permanent physical damage.
Waterboarding: A SERE-ing Experience for Tens of Thousands of US Military Personnel | Human Events
On the OP scenario ---
I would have to TRY to break the suspect in order to protect 100s of thousands or millions of lives. Sorry, but when the dirty bomb explodes and radioactively contaminates downtown Chicago for the next 1000 years, I'm gonna regret living if I didn't push for information. I don't know how anybody could live with the guilt of not trying.
There ARE possible scenarios where you need to push for ANY leads. Good, bad or indifferent.
And --- the media and the public will SKEWER the people in charge if it's known they had a conspirator in custody and DID NOT attempt to save those lives and the 1000 years of radioactive Chicago..
That's a matter of trust. Anti terrorism folks aren't stupid. THere had to be a viable connection or the person wouldn't be that IMPORTANT to the frantic investigation. It's not like they fooled a FISA court into spying on an opposition political campaign and are just fishing. There's no time to waste.
If you don't TRUST their judgement under those exceptional circumstances -- FIRE them all. Don't hamstring them with "ideals" that can end up killing Thousands and/or killing a city for a 1000 years.
Under conditions such as those, no amount of effort is wasted on "maybe" leads.
The problem is lots of innocent people got swept up and tortured based on weak or faulty information. It is easy to talk about theoretical but it doesnt work that way in practice. There is little to no oversight and transparency.
And if you have the wrong person?Let me know when you subject yourself to water boarding at the hands of an enemy captor and you have no idea whether they will kill you or not.
It is ironic that, according to one of your quotes, what makes waterboarding “not torture” is defined by who the victim is, not the act. That is seriously warped.
10s of thousands of our military are water-boarded in survival training. It's actually a mental stressor and not likely to cause permanent physical damage.
Waterboarding: A SERE-ing Experience for Tens of Thousands of US Military Personnel | Human Events
On the OP scenario ---
I would have to TRY to break the suspect in order to protect 100s of thousands or millions of lives. Sorry, but when the dirty bomb explodes and radioactively contaminates downtown Chicago for the next 1000 years, I'm gonna regret living if I didn't push for information. I don't know how anybody could live with the guilt of not trying.
There ARE possible scenarios where you need to push for ANY leads. Good, bad or indifferent.
And --- the media and the public will SKEWER the people in charge if it's known they had a conspirator in custody and DID NOT attempt to save those lives and the 1000 years of radioactive Chicago..
That's a matter of trust. Anti terrorism folks aren't stupid. THere had to be a viable connection or the person wouldn't be that IMPORTANT to the frantic investigation. It's not like they fooled a FISA court into spying on an opposition political campaign and are just fishing. There's no time to waste.
If you don't TRUST their judgement under those exceptional circumstances -- FIRE them all. Don't hamstring them with "ideals" that can end up killing Thousands and/or killing a city for a 1000 years.
Under conditions such as those, no amount of effort is wasted on "maybe" leads.
The problem is lots of innocent people got swept up and tortured based on weak or faulty information. It is easy to talk about theoretical but it doesnt work that way in practice. There is little to no oversight and transparency.
You don't TRUST these people -- FIRE their asses. I just told you under these circumstances there's no time to WASTE. Actually not any time to sweep either really. This is a case where there is a KNOWN imminent danger and a SMALL LIST of potential targets.
You'd be cool with losing Chicago to a radioactive bomb for 500 or 1000 yrs and killing thousands? EVEN IF in the long run -- one of conspirators WAS FOUND to be in custody and questioned?
I don't think so. Need an answer. And for the WORSE CASE scenario -- all this neglect happened under Trump or some other leader you've been opposing for years. You cool with that? Shooting them at a court martial AFTER the event is FINE with you?
Your assumption that only guilty get caught up in these things is likewise humerous.I think anyone who engages intorture or calls for it should be subjected to it first.
When I plant a nuke in an effort to kill a few hundred thousand folks, I give you my blessings. Hint, I don't think anyone who would do the same, would expect any less to be done to him.
Your justification of treating someone who would kill that number of people, with kid gloves, is actually quite funny.
And if you have the wrong person?10s of thousands of our military are water-boarded in survival training. It's actually a mental stressor and not likely to cause permanent physical damage.
Waterboarding: A SERE-ing Experience for Tens of Thousands of US Military Personnel | Human Events
On the OP scenario ---
I would have to TRY to break the suspect in order to protect 100s of thousands or millions of lives. Sorry, but when the dirty bomb explodes and radioactively contaminates downtown Chicago for the next 1000 years, I'm gonna regret living if I didn't push for information. I don't know how anybody could live with the guilt of not trying.
There ARE possible scenarios where you need to push for ANY leads. Good, bad or indifferent.
And --- the media and the public will SKEWER the people in charge if it's known they had a conspirator in custody and DID NOT attempt to save those lives and the 1000 years of radioactive Chicago..
That's a matter of trust. Anti terrorism folks aren't stupid. THere had to be a viable connection or the person wouldn't be that IMPORTANT to the frantic investigation. It's not like they fooled a FISA court into spying on an opposition political campaign and are just fishing. There's no time to waste.
If you don't TRUST their judgement under those exceptional circumstances -- FIRE them all. Don't hamstring them with "ideals" that can end up killing Thousands and/or killing a city for a 1000 years.
Under conditions such as those, no amount of effort is wasted on "maybe" leads.
The problem is lots of innocent people got swept up and tortured based on weak or faulty information. It is easy to talk about theoretical but it doesnt work that way in practice. There is little to no oversight and transparency.
You don't TRUST these people -- FIRE their asses. I just told you under these circumstances there's no time to WASTE. Actually not any time to sweep either really. This is a case where there is a KNOWN imminent danger and a SMALL LIST of potential targets.
You'd be cool with losing Chicago to a radioactive bomb for 500 or 1000 yrs and killing thousands? EVEN IF in the long run -- one of conspirators WAS FOUND to be in custody and questioned?
I don't think so. Need an answer. And for the WORSE CASE scenario -- all this neglect happened under Trump or some other leader you've been opposing for years. You cool with that? Shooting them at a court martial AFTER the event is FINE with you?
I am not cool with any of it. It is a situation with no correct ethical answer. You choose one and I choose another. It is like my asking you if you are ok or cool with dozens or even hundreds of "suspects" grabbed up in a panic being tortured or killed trying to extract info they may or may not have.
Are you cool with that?
And if you have the wrong person?Let me know when you subject yourself to water boarding at the hands of an enemy captor and you have no idea whether they will kill you or not.
It is ironic that, according to one of your quotes, what makes waterboarding “not torture” is defined by who the victim is, not the act. That is seriously warped.
10s of thousands of our military are water-boarded in survival training. It's actually a mental stressor and not likely to cause permanent physical damage.
Waterboarding: A SERE-ing Experience for Tens of Thousands of US Military Personnel | Human Events
On the OP scenario ---
I would have to TRY to break the suspect in order to protect 100s of thousands or millions of lives. Sorry, but when the dirty bomb explodes and radioactively contaminates downtown Chicago for the next 1000 years, I'm gonna regret living if I didn't push for information. I don't know how anybody could live with the guilt of not trying.
There ARE possible scenarios where you need to push for ANY leads. Good, bad or indifferent.
And --- the media and the public will SKEWER the people in charge if it's known they had a conspirator in custody and DID NOT attempt to save those lives and the 1000 years of radioactive Chicago..
That's a matter of trust. Anti terrorism folks aren't stupid. THere had to be a viable connection or the person wouldn't be that IMPORTANT to the frantic investigation. It's not like they fooled a FISA court into spying on an opposition political campaign and are just fishing. There's no time to waste.
If you don't TRUST their judgement under those exceptional circumstances -- FIRE them all. Don't hamstring them with "ideals" that can end up killing Thousands and/or killing a city for a 1000 years.
Under conditions such as those, no amount of effort is wasted on "maybe" leads.
The problem is lots of innocent people got swept up and tortured based on weak or faulty information. It is easy to talk about theoretical but it doesnt work that way in practice. There is little to no oversight and transparency.
You don't TRUST these people -- FIRE their asses. I just told you under these circumstances there's no time to WASTE. Actually not any time to sweep either really. This is a case where there is a KNOWN imminent danger and a SMALL LIST of potential targets.
You'd be cool with losing Chicago to a radioactive bomb for 500 or 1000 yrs and killing thousands? EVEN IF in the long run -- one of conspirators WAS FOUND to be in custody and questioned?
I don't think so. Need an answer. And for the WORSE CASE scenario -- all this neglect happened under Trump or some other leader you've been opposing for years. You cool with that? Shooting them at a court martial AFTER the event is FINE with you?
And if you have the wrong person?10s of thousands of our military are water-boarded in survival training. It's actually a mental stressor and not likely to cause permanent physical damage.
Waterboarding: A SERE-ing Experience for Tens of Thousands of US Military Personnel | Human Events
On the OP scenario ---
I would have to TRY to break the suspect in order to protect 100s of thousands or millions of lives. Sorry, but when the dirty bomb explodes and radioactively contaminates downtown Chicago for the next 1000 years, I'm gonna regret living if I didn't push for information. I don't know how anybody could live with the guilt of not trying.
There ARE possible scenarios where you need to push for ANY leads. Good, bad or indifferent.
And --- the media and the public will SKEWER the people in charge if it's known they had a conspirator in custody and DID NOT attempt to save those lives and the 1000 years of radioactive Chicago..
That's a matter of trust. Anti terrorism folks aren't stupid. THere had to be a viable connection or the person wouldn't be that IMPORTANT to the frantic investigation. It's not like they fooled a FISA court into spying on an opposition political campaign and are just fishing. There's no time to waste.
If you don't TRUST their judgement under those exceptional circumstances -- FIRE them all. Don't hamstring them with "ideals" that can end up killing Thousands and/or killing a city for a 1000 years.
Under conditions such as those, no amount of effort is wasted on "maybe" leads.
The problem is lots of innocent people got swept up and tortured based on weak or faulty information. It is easy to talk about theoretical but it doesnt work that way in practice. There is little to no oversight and transparency.
You don't TRUST these people -- FIRE their asses. I just told you under these circumstances there's no time to WASTE. Actually not any time to sweep either really. This is a case where there is a KNOWN imminent danger and a SMALL LIST of potential targets.
You'd be cool with losing Chicago to a radioactive bomb for 500 or 1000 yrs and killing thousands? EVEN IF in the long run -- one of conspirators WAS FOUND to be in custody and questioned?
I don't think so. Need an answer. And for the WORSE CASE scenario -- all this neglect happened under Trump or some other leader you've been opposing for years. You cool with that? Shooting them at a court martial AFTER the event is FINE with you?
I am not cool with any of it. It is a situation with no correct ethical answer. You choose one and I choose another. It is like my asking you if you are ok or cool with dozens or even hundreds of "suspects" grabbed up in a panic being tortured or killed trying to extract info they may or may not have.
Are you cool with that?
I dont care what administration it happens under, that doesnt change anything.And if you have the wrong person?
That's a matter of trust. Anti terrorism folks aren't stupid. THere had to be a viable connection or the person wouldn't be that IMPORTANT to the frantic investigation. It's not like they fooled a FISA court into spying on an opposition political campaign and are just fishing. There's no time to waste.
If you don't TRUST their judgement under those exceptional circumstances -- FIRE them all. Don't hamstring them with "ideals" that can end up killing Thousands and/or killing a city for a 1000 years.
Under conditions such as those, no amount of effort is wasted on "maybe" leads.
The problem is lots of innocent people got swept up and tortured based on weak or faulty information. It is easy to talk about theoretical but it doesnt work that way in practice. There is little to no oversight and transparency.
You don't TRUST these people -- FIRE their asses. I just told you under these circumstances there's no time to WASTE. Actually not any time to sweep either really. This is a case where there is a KNOWN imminent danger and a SMALL LIST of potential targets.
You'd be cool with losing Chicago to a radioactive bomb for 500 or 1000 yrs and killing thousands? EVEN IF in the long run -- one of conspirators WAS FOUND to be in custody and questioned?
I don't think so. Need an answer. And for the WORSE CASE scenario -- all this neglect happened under Trump or some other leader you've been opposing for years. You cool with that? Shooting them at a court martial AFTER the event is FINE with you?
I am not cool with any of it. It is a situation with no correct ethical answer. You choose one and I choose another. It is like my asking you if you are ok or cool with dozens or even hundreds of "suspects" grabbed up in a panic being tortured or killed trying to extract info they may or may not have.
Are you cool with that?
None of these interrogation techniques are intended to cause physical damage. They are designed to SPEED up the interrogation process.
Would be less "cool" with it if it happened under an Admin that you despised? I'm pretty sure you would be. The 2nd guessing would be EPIC and pounded by the dissident media. Just like the blame for 9/11 and bin Laden was.
The idea of "sweeps" is patently faulty on it's face. It's a sign of desperation and retaliation. And it not gonna stop any situation as was proposed in the OP. Waste of time and largely a sign of incompetent flailing instead of targeted investigation.
I'm certain that in the OP scenario this person would have been caught with either hard physical evidence, such as providing components, funding, transportation of items intimately related to the suspected plot.
LOLOLSo how many potentially innocent people do you subject to torture until you realize it isnt working? What do yo tell those people, too bad, our intelligence was faulty?Let me know when you subject yourself to water boarding at the hands of an enemy captor and you have no idea whether they will kill you or not.Wrong......I will listen to the 3 POWs who actually know what torture is, because they endured it for years under the socialists...
McCain’s fellow POWs support waterboarding
When I was researching my book, “Courting Disaster,” I interviewed many of them, including Col. Bud Day, who received our nation’s highest award for valor, the Medal of Honor, for his heroic escape from a North Vietnamese prison camp.
When Day was returned to the prison, his right arm was broken in three places and he had been shot in the hand and thigh during his capture. But he continued to resist interrogation and provide false information — suffering such excruciating torture that he became totally physically debilitated and unable to perform even the simplest task for himself. In short, Day is an expert on the subject of torture. Here is what he says about CIA waterboarding:
“I am a supporter of waterboarding. It is not torture. Torture is really hurting someone. Waterboarding is just scaring someone, with no long-term injurious effects. It is a scare tactic that works.”
I asked Day in an e-mail what he would say to the CIA officer who waterboarded Khalid Sheik Mohammed, if he had the chance to speak with him. Day replied immediately: “YOU DID THE RIGHT THING.”
And the other Congressional of Medal Awardee...also agrees......waterboarding is not torture.....
Like Day, Col. Leo Thorsness was awarded the Medal of Honor for extraordinary heroism during the Vietnam War. He experienced excruciating torture during his captivity — his back broken, his body wrenched apart. He says what the CIA did to al-Qaeda terrorists in its custody was not torture:
“To me, waterboarding is intensive interrogation. It is not torture. Torture involves extreme, brutal pain — breaking bones, passing out from pain, beatings so severe that blood spatters the walls . . . when you pop shoulders out of joints.. . . In my mind, there’s a difference, and in most POWs’ minds there’s a difference.. . . I would not hesitate a second to use ‘enhanced interrogation,’ including waterboarding, if it would save the lives of innocent people.”
And the most famous supporter of water boarding......
Another torture victim who supports waterboarding is Adm. Jeremiah Denton — the POW who famously winked the word “T-O-R-T-U-R-E” in Morse code during a North Vietnamese propaganda interview.
It was the first message to the outside world that American prisoners were being tortured. Denton later received the Navy Cross for this courageous and costly act of defiance, for which he paid dearly when his captors figured out what he had done. I asked Denton if he thought waterboarding was torture. He told me:
“No, I think it’s persuasive.. . . The big, monstrous difference here is that the gentlemen we are waterboarding are people who swore to kill Americans. They will wreak any kind of torture just for the hell of it on anybody. When they are captured by the U.S., and we know or have reason to believe that they know of a subsequent event after 9/11, if you don’t interrogate them, more misery will take place.. . . Waterboarding is not an evil. Some of the things they did to us were torture. I passed out a dozen times from torture. We’re not exerting that kind of excruciation.”
It is ironic that, according to one of your quotes, what makes waterboarding “not torture” is defined by who the victim is, not the act. That is seriously warped.
10s of thousands of our military are water-boarded in survival training. It's actually a mental stressor and not likely to cause permanent physical damage.
Waterboarding: A SERE-ing Experience for Tens of Thousands of US Military Personnel | Human Events
On the OP scenario ---
I would have to TRY to break the suspect in order to protect 100s of thousands or millions of lives. Sorry, but when the dirty bomb explodes and radioactively contaminates downtown Chicago for the next 1000 years, I'm gonna regret living if I didn't push for information. I don't know how anybody could live with the guilt of not trying.
There ARE possible scenarios where you need to push for ANY leads. Good, bad or indifferent.
And --- the media and the public will SKEWER the people in charge if it's known they had a conspirator in custody and DID NOT attempt to save those lives and the 1000 years of radioactive Chicago..
What this all comes down to is INTENT and the backlash from the RESULTS.
If the intent of the Torture was to simply inflict incredible pain to someone you have hatred for, then yes, it is simply barbaric.
But, in the scenario of saving life at any and all cost, although still barbarism, it is a case of need and not wanton blood lust. To an absolutist there is not difference, but reality is far different.
The difference is the failure of legal interrogation tactics on a person known to have information that, if given, can save thousands, if not millions of life's.
The faux outrage by some on this thread reminds me of the story of the town drunk who showed up at his usual bar dressed in a fine suit and with a new haircut. He orders Martinis instead of beer and proceeds to get drunk. The bartender asks him "what's up with the suit and Martini's" and the drunk responds that he's running for Congress because it's not what's inside me that matters, it's what you look like on the outside.
I wrote about this on another thread. There would be two results should the United States Government approved this in this specific scenario:
First. The torture (and I will not shy away from the use of the word) gets the desired results and the bomb is found and disarmed.
The news would be filled with stories of just how many life's were saved. Stories of those that would have perished, the single Mother, the Teacher about to retire, the retired, the sick, the poor, the Democrats, the Republicans, Young Married couple with their child. There would be 24/7 coverage of the economic damage the blast would have created and the recession/depression it would have caused, and the administration and those that applied the torture would be applauded as hero's, not only here, but in the entire civilized world as the world wakes up to the now real possibility that this could soon happen to them as well.
Those that opposed the use of torture to accomplish the resulting savings of life would be ridiculed. They would not dare show their face or voice their opinions in fear of looking the fool.
Second: The torture fails and the bomb goes off killing many thousands of people, maybe millions. The economy goes into a tailspin. War is declared on each and every nation known to harbor these terrorist groups, not only by the United States, but by every nation that could fall victim by the same act by those groups. The world becomes a very chaotic place in the matter of days.
What was done to the individual that had the information, but refused to supply it, becomes unimportant as the world try's to come to grip with what happened and tries to restore some semblance of order.
Again, those that oppose the use of torture would not dare to open their mouths as thousands of their fellow countrymen are being put to rest, and thousands more, maybe millions more are being treated and are dying from the fallout that later occurred. The people would be far more interested in where their next meal was going to come from, what was happening with the economy and watching their Sons and Daughters go off to War to seek justice for what just happened.
The dude that was tortured, and the approval of such would lay at roughly 15,000 on the list of concerns that the American people would have at that point and for decades in the future.
If all that is important to you is the appearance of being decent, while those around you die, then those that would oppose the use of torture as a last resort, are no different than the drunk in the bar that I referenced earlier and just as shallow in thought.
Far fewer than die if I don't
I dont care what administration it happens under, that doesnt change anything.That's a matter of trust. Anti terrorism folks aren't stupid. THere had to be a viable connection or the person wouldn't be that IMPORTANT to the frantic investigation. It's not like they fooled a FISA court into spying on an opposition political campaign and are just fishing. There's no time to waste.
If you don't TRUST their judgement under those exceptional circumstances -- FIRE them all. Don't hamstring them with "ideals" that can end up killing Thousands and/or killing a city for a 1000 years.
Under conditions such as those, no amount of effort is wasted on "maybe" leads.
The problem is lots of innocent people got swept up and tortured based on weak or faulty information. It is easy to talk about theoretical but it doesnt work that way in practice. There is little to no oversight and transparency.
You don't TRUST these people -- FIRE their asses. I just told you under these circumstances there's no time to WASTE. Actually not any time to sweep either really. This is a case where there is a KNOWN imminent danger and a SMALL LIST of potential targets.
You'd be cool with losing Chicago to a radioactive bomb for 500 or 1000 yrs and killing thousands? EVEN IF in the long run -- one of conspirators WAS FOUND to be in custody and questioned?
I don't think so. Need an answer. And for the WORSE CASE scenario -- all this neglect happened under Trump or some other leader you've been opposing for years. You cool with that? Shooting them at a court martial AFTER the event is FINE with you?
I am not cool with any of it. It is a situation with no correct ethical answer. You choose one and I choose another. It is like my asking you if you are ok or cool with dozens or even hundreds of "suspects" grabbed up in a panic being tortured or killed trying to extract info they may or may not have.
Are you cool with that?
None of these interrogation techniques are intended to cause physical damage. They are designed to SPEED up the interrogation process.
Would be less "cool" with it if it happened under an Admin that you despised? I'm pretty sure you would be. The 2nd guessing would be EPIC and pounded by the dissident media. Just like the blame for 9/11 and bin Laden was.
The idea of "sweeps" is patently faulty on it's face. It's a sign of desperation and retaliation. And it not gonna stop any situation as was proposed in the OP. Waste of time and largely a sign of incompetent flailing instead of targeted investigation.
I'm certain that in the OP scenario this person would have been caught with either hard physical evidence, such as providing components, funding, transportation of items intimately related to the suspected plot.
The OP scenario is theoretical. It is never thar clearcut in reality. Just look at what happened in Abu Ghraib and the various black sites where we outsourced torture. And innocent people were tortured and little useful info gained. That is the reality of this theoretical game.
And thatbegs the question....were they that radical prior to being rendered through Abu Ghraib? Not all those folks were guilty...in fact many were in the wrong at the wrong time. Was what was done there justifiable?I dont care what administration it happens under, that doesnt change anything.The problem is lots of innocent people got swept up and tortured based on weak or faulty information. It is easy to talk about theoretical but it doesnt work that way in practice. There is little to no oversight and transparency.
You don't TRUST these people -- FIRE their asses. I just told you under these circumstances there's no time to WASTE. Actually not any time to sweep either really. This is a case where there is a KNOWN imminent danger and a SMALL LIST of potential targets.
You'd be cool with losing Chicago to a radioactive bomb for 500 or 1000 yrs and killing thousands? EVEN IF in the long run -- one of conspirators WAS FOUND to be in custody and questioned?
I don't think so. Need an answer. And for the WORSE CASE scenario -- all this neglect happened under Trump or some other leader you've been opposing for years. You cool with that? Shooting them at a court martial AFTER the event is FINE with you?
I am not cool with any of it. It is a situation with no correct ethical answer. You choose one and I choose another. It is like my asking you if you are ok or cool with dozens or even hundreds of "suspects" grabbed up in a panic being tortured or killed trying to extract info they may or may not have.
Are you cool with that?
None of these interrogation techniques are intended to cause physical damage. They are designed to SPEED up the interrogation process.
Would be less "cool" with it if it happened under an Admin that you despised? I'm pretty sure you would be. The 2nd guessing would be EPIC and pounded by the dissident media. Just like the blame for 9/11 and bin Laden was.
The idea of "sweeps" is patently faulty on it's face. It's a sign of desperation and retaliation. And it not gonna stop any situation as was proposed in the OP. Waste of time and largely a sign of incompetent flailing instead of targeted investigation.
I'm certain that in the OP scenario this person would have been caught with either hard physical evidence, such as providing components, funding, transportation of items intimately related to the suspected plot.
The OP scenario is theoretical. It is never thar clearcut in reality. Just look at what happened in Abu Ghraib and the various black sites where we outsourced torture. And innocent people were tortured and little useful info gained. That is the reality of this theoretical game.
No comparison to Abu Gharib. This is an IMMEDIATE danger of unspeakable terms on our soil. The kind that that the massive Federal/State Emergency people PRACTICE FOR constantly. It's a measurable danger. FAR more likely than a meteor impact.
I'll remind you that most of the FOUNDERS OF ISIS were in Abu Gharib. Not all those folks were innocent. And we were entirely stupid for allowing the Iraqis to release them. BECAUSE we screwed up.
Facts are we are dealing with people who cutting off your head and dragging your body around the streets isThere was credible evidence that the person being interrogated had knowledge of an impending terrorist attack involving a weapon of mass destruction? What if that person was an American citizen?
By the way, I resent your implication that partisan politics plays a role in how "cool" I am about a scenario. You and I have argued torture sevetal times over the years, as I have with othets long before Trump. My position has always been the same and it is grounded in my sense of right and wrong, not political expediancy. Torture is wrong, and no matter how you try to make it "clean" and copacetik it is still torture. Once you start to rationale its use in one scenario it becones eadier to rationalize it in others. That is the difference between theoretical and real life.
