So You Want to Be Tortured?
by Leigh ScottThis “torture stuff” is complete and utter nonsense. Everyone, take a look at the Al-Qaeda torture handbook, you can read it here. Now, ask yourself why every pundit, Berkeley student, news reporter, and radio DJ is willing to be “waterboarded” and not willing to be subjected to any of the torture techniques listed by our good friends at Al-Qaeda? To determine what is torture, in a non-legal sense but in an emotional sense, isn’t the only scientific way to test it against something that we KNOW and all agree is torture.
So, for those of you willing to be “tortured” by a training procedure used on our own Navy SEALs, allow me to personally invite you to my soundstages in Louisiana for a little scientific experiment. First, waterboarding. Next up, you can pick any of the torture methods from the Al-Qaeda book you like.
May I recommend “Eye Removal” or “Blowtorch to the Skin”? Those are two of my favorites.
After that, you can look at the camera and tell America that waterboarding is torture and that Dick Cheney is evil for using it to save YOUR life. Deal?
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
254 Comments
EXCELLENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You, are a great American!
Thank you for this!
(In my best Marv Albert voice): YES!
so, for the record, YOU are willing to be water boarded?
Because I will personally volunteer to do it to you.
Only you won't know when or where it will happen.
And you won't have any friends their in case you get a little scared and decide not to gothrough with it.
In fact, you won't have anybody there who could help you at all.
I'll let you up just as soon as you admit it is indeed torture.
Or maybe not.
Maybe I'll keep you there a while longer.
See how it feels to be water boarded a few times.
After some sleep deprivation of course.
And being kept in the dark.
And having loud, abrasive music blasted non-stop for a few days.
sound good?
You ready to volunteer for that little experiment?
Any of you who don't think it's torture ready to do that?
Just give a little info- like where you work/live, and I'll make it an experience you'll never forget.
I'll be waiting for your reply.
Excellent article.
So an act that is eqivalent to college hazing and is supervised with a doctor standing there is torture??
Soon liberals will define hurting someone's feelings as torture.
As long as there are no blow torches, eye removal, wood chippers, or beheading, I'm cool.
*MissQuinn*
Surely this would count as a threat? Aren't they illegal?
On the subject of torture, I'd say that waterboarding probably is torture. But that may be because I desperately fear drowning. I think some far more pertinent questions are whether it works and whether, if it does, the fact that it saves lives justifies scaring the living daylights out of terrorists. I can't answer the first question, but my answer to the second is an emphatic yes.
"Is it Safe?"
~ marathon man
The "their methods are worse, therefore it's right when we do it" defense.
Good thing for the Intertubes, or else you'd be standing in the park with a megaphone, annoying hell out of the brown-baggers.
How about rape? Is that torture, or is it just good clean fun? Because apparently we tried that method, too:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northam...
You probably also think that every pro-lifer tries to shoot abortionists.
Of course, none of us was captured on the battlefield, planting an IED, with a computer containing al-queda plans, schematics, etc., carrying C-4 with target information.
Perhaps you could get information from them by inviting them to a halal dinner and having a nice chat and showing them how "enlightened" you are?
Remind me not to depend upon you to help keep our families safe. No loud 'nonstop' music. No being kept in the dark. No sleep deprivation. Wow, I wish WE could come up against an enemy as "tough" as you. But, alas, we're actually dealing with terrorists here and they don't do pillow fights.
Seems to me that taking an indented bowl, placing it on the stomach with a rat under it, and placing hot coals on top of the indentation, forcing the rat to claw its way away from the heat through the stomach would be far more torturous than waterboarding.
Hank, the libs will only be interested in the feelings of minorities and special interest groups.
You know why torture is wrong? Because it's ILLEGAL!
Saint Ronald Reagan said so:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1079/is_n2...
Why do bretbots hate Reagan?
The United States signed the Convention Against Torture in 1988, and the Geneva Convention Against Torture of POWs in 1950. It doesn't matter that Al-Qaeda didn't sign it, we did,we have to honor it. Debating the effectiveness of torture is a non-starter. Torture is illegal. Period.
gb8898 –
I'm sure you and your friends in the SWAT valley really believe the 'pork' your peddling. You're pathetic.
"In fact, you won't have anybody there who could help you at all"
Complete lie……there is a doctor present during waterboarding sessions. As long as people like you continue to spout lies and hysterical nonsense, the terrorists will never be afraid of us.
How does it feel to know that you are a friend of terrorists?
It is interesting to notice that the recovery time from the waterboarding techniques and the methodologies shown in the torture handbook have very different recovery times.
I think that everyone agrees that mutilation or bone breaking or leaving scars is torture. Waterboarding and i'm sure others are very unpleasant. I don't know if they are torture. I think we are having trouble defining that magic line between unpleasant and torture. I don't think tea and crumpets is the correct approach in all cases either.
I'm glad i don't have to make these decisions.
Americans need to ignore what others do when we ask ourselves what is right or wrong.
Conservatives are amusing. Say that other civilized countries have nationalized health care, they tell us that isn't relevant.
…but just say we shouldn't waterboard and they'll say: "duhhhh, but the bad guys torture, so why can't we…"
Dick Cheney IS evil and he's going to jail. The smearing of Our America is over.
http://weblogs.newsday.com/sports/watchdog/blog/M...
Way to miss the point there chief.
The point was to put the word torture in perspective. Gouging out someone's eye or taking a blow torch to someone's back is torture.
Dunking someone while a doctor is standing there is not.
in some of the relased documents they described using a catterpillar on a man who was afraid of insects. I don't know of many people who would think this is torture. But since it was something that the man specifically feared, it was a potent tool to employ, should they decide to.
Your fear of drowning might enhance water related methods.
I don't see any logic in your post at all
They already have.
"the bad guys torture, so why can't we"
Who has ever said this?
are you saying that the AlQueda handbook is what we use?
As a fighter to receive the POW benefits under the Geneva convictions you must be
(a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
(b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;
(c) That of carrying arms openly;
(d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.
So in other words, if no uniform is worn and blowing up civilians while concealing your arms from enemy forces hidden amongst civilians you are not afforded POW status under the Geneva conditions.
As a pro-lifer myself, no.
wonder if your kids know that you – truth – will not protect them?
be sure that your kids/wife/boyfriend reads your little America hating rant – I am sure they will feel safe when your buddies – AQ, the real torture crew – hits next time
party on, garth
cuz, your prez is going to give you the chance to defend your inane emotions on America's defense in the future
party on – truth the America hater
No, we use a handbook developed by communists and used against our soldiers during the Korean War.
But I guess that makes it ok.
Count me in! That sounds like a walk in the park…compared with having my eye removed or a blow torch to my face.
We should be using torture on whoever came up with your screen name……jeez……
The sheer fact that people are WILLINGLY allowing themselves to be waterboarded – should in and of itself let you know that it isn't torture. Sounds like a pretty quick & easy test. If you are willing to "check and see" – it isn't torture. Period, end of discussion.
Torture is being forced to have posts from Huffington Post blogs read to you until you beg to have your eardrums removed with a corkscrew.
The Supreme Court ruled that the Geneva Conventions apply to the detainees. Give it a rest already.
Or maybe you're one of those people who thinks the president alone makes and interprets the law. If that's the case, perhaps you could find gainful employment in the Obama administration.
he might. If he doesn't give up the information, start with the regular interogation methods and work up from there.
update: the deleted coment refered to the suspect in the abortion doctor shooting.
No, but i'd beleive a pro-lifer like yourself would also understand that the Supreme Court doesn't always get it right.
And that's the problem. Here you have all kinds of armchair quarterbacks second guessing the decisions of professionals.
They did their jobs. Period. And none of us has ever had to make the decision to do anything even remotely like this. Some people just think it's "icky" and throw a blanket condemnation on it. Others realize that these decisions are very difficult, but ultimately had to be made.
I'm glad that someone did make those decisions.
People are willing to 'check and see' because it doesn't sound like a big deal. "Water on the face? How bad can that be?"
The folks who do undergo water-boarding ultimately can't handle it and call it torture. Look at Mancow.
To clarify, this is what I think Cheney supporters are trying to say:
"There is nothing wrong with water boarding (or other torture methods people like Cheney consider OK) and the reason we should do it is because the terrorists do things that are much worse."
Sorry, I do not agree with that. The US leadership spent 8 years writing their own rules & it was damaging and harmful to the country. Cheney did a miserable job in "keeping us safe" but there will always be those who will dispute that.
This is exactly what I've always felt. I can't call waterboarding torture because I would be willing to experience it in order to know what it's like. I would not be willing to "try out" any Al Queda techniques.
Better stay away from that dirty Huffington Post. Be sure and read and listen to conservatives only. An open mind is something to avoid at all costs.
You wouldn't know the truth if it were dressed in a pink tutu and bit you on the butt. I've been waterboarded as part of SERES. Sleep deprivation? Try 30 days on the Syrian frontier wondering if the next bullet has your name on it. Kept in the dark? Part of life in the military genius. Try it sometime. I guess my point is that we may well have been better off if we treated the terrorists in a manner actually proscribed by the Conventions. Which is to say summary battlefield execution.
The whole reason for the Geneva Conventions was to reduce the number of civilian casualties in war. Giving the enemy these rights without requiring them to abide by its conventions only increases the number of civilian casualties and negates The Geneva Conventions whole prupose.
Counter offer: I personally offer to tie your arms behind your back and hang you by them so your shoulders are dislocated, emasculate you, stab you with needles after they've been pushed into dung, chop off your hands, blowtorch your face, and finally cut your head off in front of a camera. If you accept my Al Qaedian counter proposal, I'll let you waterboard me for a month.
I won't be holding my breath.
The abuses at Abu Ghraib weren't done by interrogators. No one disputes that those were criminal acts, and the soliders involved have been prosecuted and jailed. This is not the same thing as someone waterboarding KSM for information about planned attacks.
I once stupidly walked through an "invisible fence" while carrying the dog collar it activated. The collar ended up about twenty feet away. It was very unpleasant, but I almost tried it again, just to see if it was the pain or the surprise that really got me. Am I a masochist? I don't think so, because I didn't do it, and if I had it wouldn't have been for pleasure.
When Harrison Ford volunteered to have his chest hair waxed to raise awareness of the rainforest, was he tortured? Are women being tortured all over America when they get waxed? Why do they torture themselves?
A question for Mancow: Suppose you were guaranteed a permanent doubling of your ratings if you were waterboarded again. Knowing what waterboarding feels like, would you even think about agreeing to that? I submit that if you'd even have to think about it, it's not toture.
Because something is unpleasant, and indeed not something to look forward to DOES NOT MAKE IT TORTURE! Go back to Berkely.
Tonight when you are getting ready for bed, get down on your knees and THANK GOD there are people out there willing to safeguard you and yours.
You're basically making the "to save the village we must burn it to the ground" argument.
We either abide by the law or we acknowledge that the government can make up whatever rules it wants and disregard them at any time. Are you sure you're not a lefty?
Ok, that dispenses with it – Oily_Taitz has spoken! Never mind the legions of government officials, attorneys, constitutional scholars, etc. on both sides of the issue. "Oily" hath proclaimed the issue closed.
Whew. I say we proclaim June 2, 2009 "National Oily Day".
[...] So You Want to Be Tortured? by Leigh Scott [...]
(Part 1)
Waterboarding was used on a grand total of 3 people–people whom we *KNEW* had information that was critical to saving the lives of American citizens. Even if we say waterboarding is torture (which is in dispute, but let me grant that for the sake of argument), saving the lives of American citizens is MORE IMPORTANT than not torturing someone we *KNOW* has information. And since we didn't use waterboarding to find out *IF* these people had information, but rather we used it after we already *KNEW* they had information that we needed, then I would say we had a moral OBLIGATION to use whatever force is necessary to save innocent lives.
(Part 2)
In attempting to remain "moral" by declaring such things as unnacceptable, you've given up your moral reasoning. The fact of the matter is that if someone has information that another person is going to kill an innocent person, the moral obligation is on that first person to divulge the information, and if he does not do so he is morally culpable for the death of the innocent person. He does not have the right to keep this information to himself; he is morally obligate (even if not legally obligated) to give it. And if we know that he has that information, then we are morally justified in using whatever force is the *least* amount of force needed to get him to divulge that information. That's why we don't START with waterboarding; we use it after all other methods have failed.
(part 3)
If you disagree with this reasoning, you are in effect arguing that your own right to life is less important than the rights of someone who knows another is trying to kill you. You are saying that an innocent person who has committed no wrong has fewer rights than someone who is committing moral evil by witholding information about an injustice that is about to be committed upon you. Think about that.
And for the record, why the hell can some people post a freaking novel and I have to break up the above in THREE sections in order to get it to post? BH needs to fix this!!!!
For all you lefties' claims that YOU are into "nuance" whereas the right is black and white, are you sure you're not a righty?
You speak as if there's no debate on the issue — we're not "making up" rules. We believe waterboarding terrorists does not violate the rules.
Funny, I didn't realize we're burning the village to the ground by pouring water over the face of the guy who masterminded the killing of 3,000 of YOUR and my fellow citizens.
Of course, I wonder if there is another factor in this debate that we overlook – the motive behind our method. We only used the technique on a limited number of people within a limited timeframe to obtain information we were almost absolutely certain they possessed. Contrast this with the guy above who seems to think it's peachy-keen fine to arbitrarily waterboard anyone for no reason at all, and to do so for as long as he can keep those people in his power to waterboard them.
The terrorists also employ their torture techniques on our captured servicemen and women and civilians simply to inflict pain and suffering similar to the motives of the individual above. Personally, I think I would have to decline his offer because once I was in his power, there is no guarantee that he would confine his sadistic impulse to waterboarding alone. He might bring out those blowtorches and eye removal devices.
I agree with you 100 percent. We need to completely ignore the people who tell us defending our citizens is wrong.
As for nationalized healthcare/socialized medicine, no one says the other countries are irrelevant – on the contrary, they are VERY relevant. We look at them and see the disasters there, the shortage of doctors, the long wait times, the shortage of equipment (MRI's are almost impossible to find in Canada), and the incredibly high taxes everyone pays, and we say NO THANK YOU.
And waterboarding? Nobody says "Well the terrorists are worse!" What we DO say is that a terribly uncomfortable, but harmless procedure can and should be used against terrorists in certain circumstances (3 to be exact) in order to save American lives.
I don't see anything wrong with that.
Cheney is evil and going to jail? You just put all your eggs in one basket with that stupid assertion. So your stock just went down. Waterboarding isn't torture. It usually lasts no more than 30 seconds before said dirtbag starts spewing information. They only used it on 3 people and got information. I'm all for it. But I'm sure you'd rather be holding hands with them, cry with them and try to understand why they didn't take their school counselor's suggestion for a career and ended up terrorists. If they are made to feel very, very uncomfortable for 30 seconds, without loss of life or limb, I'm all for it.
By that logic, you should be willing to have your eye removed too. Or perhaps we can convince you to let someone take a blowtorch to your skin … No? Don't you want to personally check and see if they're torture?
Waterboarding flips the panic switch, and that's all it does. The things listed above do far, far worse. You might call having your panic switch flipped "torture," but I beg to differ. It's easy to recover from having that done to you and it leaves no lasting effect.
It must be whiney libs day out today.
Are you saying that waterboarding is equivalent to being raped? Mind you, the miscreants behind the abuse at Abu Graihb are in jail right now, making your argument is baseless. We've obviously delineated them as incorrect and outrageous, anyway. I'm just outraged you would equate rape to getting water poured over your head!
To a lib, a day without whining is a day without sunshine
Yeah, the Huffington Post is full of open minds. What a joke. I'll tell you what you'll find more of those over here.
The Supreme Court also said there's a separation of church and state, which is not found anywhere in the Constitution.
That Kriskey's right on AGAIN!
Especially if there's a doctor standing by…..
I was just curious to know if you were actually foaming at the mouth when you wrote this tripe…..
Is it not possible that torture is an umbrella term for all manner of abusive treatment? From waterboarding to dismemberment? Not to equate the two, but to sort of put them all in a zone civilized people won't approach?
the TRUTH: Feel free to stop by 42nd St. and 11th Ave in New York City to get me…ANYTIME. I'll even bring the suplies for you. I'll be the Marine with 2 combat tours – who actually HAS been waterboarded before – with a big grin on my face. May I suggest Ground Zero as our demonstration location??? Good luck leaving NYC once I'm done with you…
Anyone else on this forum ever notice how big and tough the liberals talk…yet they only "think about serving our country", just like their Chosen One???
I thought the whole point was to be better than the people we're fighting. Why would we even refer to their handbook when deciding what we're going to do? That seems like a great way to get a lot of people to hate us for more than just our freedoms (And I know most here don't care about our image around the world, but that hate adds up to us being attacked, everyone admits that). So the new rules should be: see what the enemy does and use that as your limit? That isn't America. We're better than that. We set our own standard and we always have. Using our enemies techniques as a benchmark is an ignorant way to persecute a war, and a lot of real progress is made through interrogative methods that don't involve badly treating someone. Wouldn't we rather, just for our own peace of mind, be that country and not the one that "tortures" people?
I think you're making a leap here. No one is suggesting that we ever compared our methods to those used by terrorists.
In this narrative AQ's handbook is being used a reference point to define what torture really is.
"Wouldn't we rather, just for our own peace of mind, be that country and not the one that "tortures" people?"
This is the heart of the problem. You would rather "feel" better if we didn't waterboard. I would rather "feel" better knowing that we have people doing a very difficult job to make sure no one else flies planes into buildings and murders people for the crime of showing up for work that day.
You can't go back to pre 9/11, that is asking for another attack.
"Is it not possible that torture is an umbrella term for all manner of abusive treatment?"
That is certainly what it has become, and has thereby cheapened and changed the meaning of the word. Waterboarding, unpleasant though it may be, is not torture.
You're one of those who worries about what people think of us? Europe's always cried and whined for us to take care of the problems in their back yards because they won't. The people who flew planes into our buildings did BEFORE waterboarding or Gitmo! No one's saying that we should benchmark our methods by what others do. What they are saying is that we have a lot of hand-wringers who are so worried about the discomfort of a person who saws off a person's head on video or orders his thugs to fly planes into our building. Waterboarding isn't torture. There is a segment of our society that thinks yelling at someone or poking them with a round ended stick as torture.
Here's a question for you:
If you had 3 bad guys that you knew for a fact had information about an impending attack in your neighborhood, what would you do to get them to talk?
I'm not trying to be beligerent here, I really want to know the thought process behind some of your statements.
No, he just got off the open minded HuffPo and the hate they spew over there was spilling over. That or he's ready to cuff Cheney for those alleged war crimes.
"Why would we even refer to their handbook when deciding what we're going to do?"
To put what real toture is in perspective for people who are much to eager to use the word.
"That seems like a great way to get a lot of people to hate us for more than just our freedoms (And I know most here don't care about our image around the world, but that hate adds up to us being attacked, everyone admits that). "
I think the best way to make people hate us, is to unfairly categorize and equate ourselves with real terrorists and torturers. Nothing gives your enemies ammo quite like criticizing your own team.
"So the new rules should be: see what the enemy does and use that as your limit? That isn't America. We're better than that."
We aren't using their techniques, we are using much more effective and humane ones.
You're quite obviously unfamiliar with Just War Theory, which is what this country used to believe in when it came to warfare.
The point is to stay alive.
We don't refer to their handbook when deciding what to do. We make our own decisions based on our own analysis. The author of this article is just pointing out the naivete of those who call making a terrorist profoundly uncomfortable while keeping him unharmed, all in order to save American lives, torture.
They used all other methods available to them, and the 3 terrorists who were waterboarded wouldn't talk. So we progressed to more enhanced methods in order to protect innocent lives. There is nothing wrong with making a terrorist uncomfortable in order to do that.
As for their hatred being the cause for their attacks – Their hatred is irrational, based on religious zealotry, jealousy, or whatever else their twisted minds use to justify killing innocent human beings. They will hate us whatever we do. Therefore, we simply cannot allow fear of their hatred to dictate how we protect ourselves.
I hope you can see that.
What is your definition of "Civilized People"? Like the Europeans who let genocide go on in their back yard because they're too cowardly to stop it (Bosnia and Germany come to mind)? People can be civilized and take necessary steps to avoid being terrorized or killed. The people that do these waterboards aren't like the picture above and they do know if their methods aren't working.
I'm a righty, Bobbo. And the rules are actually pretty clear in this case. Water-boarding was long considered torture by the U.S. government. We even used such behavior as evidence against Japanese war criminals after WWII. The Republican nominee for president who had it done to him has called it torture.
Mr. Bush may have issued signing statements saying he didn't believe he should follow the law because, in his opinion, we'd be less safe, but that doesn't trump the law. That notion should freak out conservatives, especially in light of Mr. Obama's administration focusing on "right-wing extremists."
We "burn the village" when we sacrifice our morals and our ideals in the name protecting those same morals and ideals.
Very well said.
Mancow would probably go for the blowtorch to the skin thing for doubled ratings. So would Olbermann. Offer a 10 percent bump instead and get some really interesting answers.
who would willingly agree to getting beat up? What a foolish point. However, if I am at war with and I am captured then I would expect to be interrogated. If (unlikely) given the option between the blowtorch, etc and what you describe, I would choose your method.
So by yours and Leigh Scott's standards the Khmer Rouge, Imperial Japan and the Gestapo are all off the hook.
Please, the mere threat of waterboarding could get you to admit that you dress up like Madonna and dance in front of a mirror.
===See how it feels to be water boarded a few times.===
Obviously you didn't do any keg stands in college.
Water boarding, sleep deprivation, being kept in the dark, and loud abrasive music is torture? You must live in a better neighborhood than I do, because that pretty much sounds like a normal day at my house. Add to that a nagging wife and constant severe body aches due to various injuries from years of hard living, and you pretty much have a typical day for me. Life must be pretty easy for you, you should count your blessings.
As for my life, drowning would be an improvement. And I live far better than most of the people we're fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. The daily lives of people in those countries would be considered "torture" by your definition.
Perhaps you have a better technique for extracting life saving information from someone who has never owned much of anything, spends most of their time in scorching heat by day and frigid cold by night, lived under a regime that truly tortured and killed people for not voting for the "correct" president, or because their neighbors suspected that they were up to something. I'm sure that one of these people, who has already resigned themselves to death in order to destroy a few enemy soldiers or innocent civilians, and who sees no greater glory than suffering the life or death of a martyr, would be quite willing to give up whatever information you asked of them for nothing more than warm coffee, a couple donuts and some pleasant conversation.
One of the problems with people who have life easy is that they forget just how hard the world we live in really is. Of the 6+ billion people who inhabit this planet the vast majority live in poverty, don't have a reliable job, don't have a home with indoor toilets (let alone toilet paper), and go to bed hungry most nights. They know what it takes to fight for survival, they do it on a daily basis. They understand that when lives are in jeopardy there are often hard decisions that need to be made. That life is beyond the comprehension of most U.S. citizens, since we have it so easy. We complain when the government does "nothing" and 3000 citizens die in one single terrorist attack, and we complain when the government tries to do everything within reason to avoid this happening again. We want it both ways.
Toughen up! Either just suck it up and learn to live with terrorist attacks, or learn to live with what is necessary to avoid them. We've had it far to easy for far too long, it's time we come back to reality. The free ride is over, so I hope you enjoyed it while it lasted. Our enemies laugh at us arguing over issues like this, and see nothing but weakness in it. Soldiers know that being tortured by the enemy is part of the job, it always has been and it always will be. They don't like it, but they do understand it. Go rent the movie "Bravo Two Zero" and you'll get a glimpse of what the real world is like. It's real easy to sit on the sidelines and complain, it's a whole lot different to jump into the ring and start trading blows with a heavyweight champion.
I didn't CHOOSE to kill innocent people in terrorist attacks. Your argument is all wet. Sorry about the pun.
Who gives a damn what they do to those Islamic-goons. If it’s someone in my family that’s in peril lets go medieval. I hope if Barry is faced with saving American lives and giving a nasty Jihadist a bath go for it, who cares, and if not guide those bombs into the enlightened liberal enclaves, you know they’re morally superior and all.
Read the information. There were interrogators raping prisoners.
Where did I equate the two? I'm simply asking where we draw the line.
Hey civics genius, the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment prohibits the establishment of a national religion by the Congress or the preference of one religion over another, non-religion over religion, or religion over non-religion. The absence of the phrase does not mean that it is an invalid concept or that it cannot be used as a legal or judicial principle.
According to these people, the point is to be liked like Stewart Smalley because gosh darnit we're good people. Here's a news flash for you – We ARE good people. We spend more money around the world helping out other nations with poverty, AIDS (Bush was the biggest giver), military support, etc. If we're seen as something other than that, it's because we have America hating citizens and other lefties that portray us as such.
Your name should be "The Dope"
Hard to believe you're a righty, or that you care one whit about "our morals and our ideals," given your glib and hateful post above about "rape" in the context of this discussion about waterboarding — please show me where that was an official government policy and not the result of some sick individuals who likely have been prosecuted for their crimes.
You probably believe Bush/Cheney masterminded 9/11, too.
Hey genius that says that the government can't endorse or establish a religion. It doesn't say that a person can't put a plaque up in a government building. Moron.
There is no line if my family is involved, and by extension a perfect strangers families life are involved. Do you love your children, or would you moralize their lives away.
Figures, the TRUTH has let over 2 hours pass and is afraid to answer to the replies. I guess he was serious about waiting for the replies…it didn't mean he was going to answer them 'cause he can't.
Hey Leigh
Cheney didn't save my life or yours.
You know torture doesn't work. Cheney knows torture doesn't work. Everyone knows torture doesn't work. But you guys continue to play games and pretend that it does. It's odd because frankly no one wants the terrorists to win or be set free. We all want to keep America safe – but you can do that without torture.
And he still approves of it being used.
*MissQuinn*
Wrong.
Who said anything about letting those people off the hook?? You're just making hysterical comparisons based on nothing but nonsense. It says that you really don't know what you're talking about. You just use the standard liberal "over the top" procedure to derail the discussion. Weak dude, just weak….
So I'll ask you the question no libs have the grapes to answer honestly: If you had a couple bad guys in your custody that you knew for a fact had information regarding an impending attack on your neighborhood, what would you do to make them talk?
I imagine you'd dress up like Madonna and dance in front of them……..I'd rather be waterboarded…….
Gad, you missed the point again. Tell you what…read the article three times and try to open your mind to what he's saying.
One thing for sure, torture to get information in a time of war…I believe I can almost go with that and sleep well at night. Torture just for the sake of it, like what the jihadists do, is what's evil. Do you think that the US soldiers captured and tortured in Iraq were asked for any valuable info? I doubt it. They were tortured and beheaded and multilated because the jihadists liked it.
Waterboarding isn't torture. Even our lefty AG, Holder, couldn't give a firm definition of why he might think it is. Reason being is that it ISN'T!
The "ticking time-bomb" scenario almost never happens, you know that, yet that's about the only excuse people use to support torture. If you can take your argument to the extreme, then I can ask if we should rape in the name of security.
Never mind the fact that interrogators say torture more often yields false information instead of valid intelligence.
It's almost useless to argue the point with these limp-wristed liberals. To them, torture is not being able to receive NPR in their Volvo.
You must be logged in to post a comment.