CIA lied to you

[Jarlaxle]

one is not necessarily still alive at the end of torture....

If any of the al-qaida were, someone fucked up badly.

[Jarlaxle]

A country who uses torture after a minor attack by a group which never had any chance of destroying us does not deserve to survive. The United States is only worth defending when we uphold what is right.


yrs,
rubato

And which minor attack are you talking about? The one that killed about 3000 people?

0.00095 % casualties is tiny. Not even "small", no matter how easily you are personally frightened. Not enough to justify degrading ourselves and acting like worse animals than the ones who attacked us.


George Washington understood that doing the right thing matters when everything is on the line including his own life. Not 0.00095% of everything.


yrs,
rubato

Too bad you weren't one of the casualties. What a despicable turd you are.

[oldr_n_wsr]

oldrSo by your own standards of justification retailiating against is for these actions would be entirely justified?

For what they did on 9/11? yes.

After all you safe ache ing gem and theirs.

Sorry, but I don't understand this.

[Econoline]

This is from Andrew Sullivan at The Dish:

In a civilized society, there really would be no debate over this. And before 9/11, there wasn’t. Ever since, this country has slid and then fallen out of the civilized world and out of the core American traditions of humanity and legal warfare. Krauthammer can be seen as emblematic of that slide – someone whose early abhorrence at torture and defense of it only in its mildest and rarest forms has slowly succumbed to a full-fledged defense of a program that violated every rule he said should be in place to protect us from the abyss.

This is not surprising. When you start to torture, the sheer evil of what you are doing requires that you believe ever more in its value. You can never admit error, because it would mean you have committed crimes against humanity without even the defense of acquiring any useful intelligence. You are revealed as monsters – and you cannot accept that of yourself or of those you know. And so you insist – with ever-rising certainty – that the torture worked – even though that’s irrelevant as a matter of morality and of law, and even though your own internal documents prove that it didn’t.

And so you become the monster you were supposed to be fighting.

Right on.

[oldr_n_wsr]

And before 9/11, there wasn’t. Ever since, this country has slid and then fallen out of the civilized world and out of the core American traditions of humanity and legal warfare.

I would say we fell out of the civilized world and our core values earlier than 9/11. Dresden, Nagasacki, Tokyo, Hiroshima and the thousands of civilians killed, to name a few instances. Were those "legal"?

Torture has been said to have little value, but only by torturing do we find out if that is true or not.

ETA
I think more on the revenge factor anyway. Anyone who had a hand in 9/11 deserves what they get be it torture, or whatever as long as it's very uncomfortable for them.

[Lord Jim]

0.00095 % casualties is tiny. Not even "small", no matter how easily you are personally frightened. Not enough to justify degrading ourselves and acting like worse animals than the ones who attacked us.

That really is truly mind boggling...

I am a student of aberrant human psychology, but I can't even being to wrap my mind around this one...

The mass murder of 3000 innocent people is "tiny", but water boarding three senior terrorists involved in the planning of that mass murder for the purpose of gathering intel to prevent further mass murders, means that we're "acting like worse animals than the ones who attacked us"...

The level of mental confusion and moral obtuseness required to be able to hold those two thoughts in one's mind simultaneously and not see any logical or moral contradictions, is totally inaccessible to my comprehension...

It truly beggars the imagination...

[oldr_n_wsr]

And so you become the monster you were supposed to be fighting.

As I have said before, I have no trouble stooping to their level to achieve vengance. I take what happened on 9/11 very personally just as I would if somone raped or killed or did worse one in my family (and a few close friends). If that happened I would probably wind up in jail for murder (probably first degree if they tied me to these posts). But I would gladly pay those consequences.

And I wonder why they never pick me to serve on a jury.

[oldr_n_wsr]

0.00095 % casualties is tiny. Not even "small", no matter how easily you are personally frightened.

rubato, what numbers are you using to get the 0.00095% casualty number? 0.00095% of what?
And I am not easily frightened. Very little scares me. What scares me is you and people like you who seem take this as not a very big deal. And I am sorry if you did take it as a big deal but your posts seem to indicate you don't take it as a big deal.

Not enough to justify degrading ourselves and acting like worse animals than the ones who attacked us.

I did not ask anyone else to degrade themselves. I did say that those who did the torture can put MY name (MY, as in oldr_n_wsr's name and not anyone elses) as who they did it for.
If you don't want your name attached to their deeds, that is duely noted and you can go and personally say that to our enemies. But don't for one second think that after you go over there and personlly tell them that you condemn the torture that they will some how see your point and make nice. They will grab you and maybe, just maybe they will use a really sharp knife when they behead you.
I know I would use a very dull knife to behead them but only after I made them very uncomfortable for a while.

[Econoline]

I would say we fell out of the civilized world and our core values earlier than 9/11. Dresden, Nagasacki, Tokyo, Hiroshima and the thousands of civilians killed, to name a few instances. Were those "legal"?

Good point (and one that is still debated to this day). You might even say that with "strategic bombing" of civilian targets, the civilized world fell out of the civilized world. Still, acceptance of torture is either crossing a line, or crossing another line--one that is still accepted as immoral in what's left of the "civilized world".

ETA
I think more on the revenge factor anyway. Anyone who had a hand in 9/11 deserves what they get be it torture, or whatever as long as it's very uncomfortable for them.

The use of torture specifically as punishment is a completely different argument (not the one I thought we were having)...and the question then becomes one of legal protections to prevent punishment of innocent people for something they didn't do. (BTW, according to the report--i.e., according to the CIA's own documents--we tortured at least 26 people who were cases of mistaken identity.)

[Econoline]

starving people to death is just enhanced dieting?

Also, rioting and looting is just "enhanced shopping"!

[oldr_n_wsr]

Good point (and one that is still debated to this day). You might even say that with "strategic bombing" of civilian targets, the civilized world fell out of the civilized world. Still, acceptance of torture is either crossing a line, or crossing another line--one that is still accepted as immoral in what's left of the "civilized world".

It then begs the question, "which is less civilized", torturing of a few (ok, 26) which may or may not lead to info that might prevent an attack or prevent the killing of us and ours, or the over the top bombing of civilians which may or may not save some GI's lives by maybe ending the war sooner?

Call me uncivilized but I have no trouble with either.

The use of torture specifically as punishment is a completely different argument (not the one I thought we were having)...

Not specifically as punishment but I do like to think of some of it's usefulness is punishment.
I do think that info extraction is it's main purpose but I do agree with the thought that in many cases that the info gathered may not be the best.
I know if I were being tortured I would probably say anything to get them to stop.
I would like to think that I am strong willed enough to not give any valuable info if I knew any, but until one is undergoing such, one cannot say for sure. If I knew nothing and they didn't believe me and continued on, I would most likely make something up.

[MajGenl.Meade]

rubato, what numbers are you using to get the 0.00095% casualty number? 0.00095% of what?

oldr - population of the USA in 2001 was about 285,000,000. 2,998 deaths would be about .00095%

Neither rubato nor myself has stated that this was "not a very big deal" (although he might, just to be contrary). What he has said (AFAIK) and I have said is that this was not a major attack - it was a rather minor one in its physical damage effect. It was a major psychological blow and a great tragedy for the families of those killed.

At the time, many USians (including myself, as a registered alien guest at that time) were horrified and ready to lash out at anyone remotely resembling "the enemy". We see where that got us (Iraq, Afghanistan to name but two).

There is a huge difference (or should be) between the reaction of a parent who knows that by beating the crap out of XYZ, his kidnapped daughter will be saved - and an entire country having an active policy of torturing people it believes may know something or other.

Would you feel the same way if the NYPD hauled you in on suspicion of knowing who had ... robbed a bank? murdered? ... and decided to beat the crap out of you until you confessed? (And please, "But I'd tell them anyway because I'm a nice guy" just doesn't cut the mustard). What kind of society do you want - one with the rule of law or one where the authorities can haul your neighbor away to torture? After which they come for you.

Try to divorce this issue from your personal horror and anger. Did torturing these scum save even one life? And even if it did, is it justifiable by a moral code other than that of the jungle?

[Guinevere]

You're on fire today Meade. In a good way

I do have a question -- is your opposition to torture based on the scripture you quoted earlier in the thread?

[MajGenl.Meade]

It is based on the belief that torture is morally wrong - and that all morals are universal and (if so) must depend upon a Creator God of which there is only one. Left to myself ... well, oldr and I might make a deadly duo!

paren. isn't Mr. Green supposed to indicate jealousy? I don't use the smilie for that reason - I'm rarely jealous. And if I am I throw a yellow flag and back up ten yards with loss of down.

[Big RR]

Meade--joining this thread late, I agree with Guin. No matter what occurs, I think there are things that we as a people should not do and should not accept.

Oldr--the 9/11 attacks affected a lot of us, I personally lost two good friends can came within 2 days of being on UA 93 when my meeting for that Tuesday morning in San Jose was canceled), so I understand your reaction. But we, all of us, have to be better than responding in kind.

Jim--I think the major information that came out of publicizing this report is that the American public now knows that not one bit of useful information was obtained from the torture of prisoners (the Zero Dark Thirty propaganda notwithstanding). Hopefully, we'll think a little more next time before acting like frightened jackasses (although I doubt we will).

As Shakespeare wrote in the Merchant of Venice:

"Ay, but I fear you speak upon the rack

Where men enforcèd do speak anything."

Even then some understood the futility of torture to gain useful information.

[Guinevere]

It is based on the belief that torture is morally wrong - and that all morals are universal and (if so) must depend upon a Creator God of which there is only one. Left to myself ... well, oldr and I might make a deadly duo!

paren. isn't Mr. Green supposed to indicate jealousy? I don't use the smilie for that reason - I'm rarely jealous. And if I am I throw a yellow flag and back up ten yards with loss of down.

I never associated Mr. Green with jealously, but that could be possible. I like to use him because I'm green (you know, one of those environmental radicals) and because I have green eyes and because its one of my favorite colors.

paren. I do also get jealous. Ask my swede about our last spat.

paren. paren. Maybe don't ask him, just take my word for it.

[Lord Jim]

I think the major information that came out of publicizing this report is that the American public now knows that not one bit of useful information was obtained from the torture of prisoners

It is precisely that conclusion which is deeply, vigorously and widely disputed. It is backed up by basically nothing, and it seems obvious that it was the desire to reach that conclusion that explains why not one single CIA official was interviewed. Based on what I've read, I firmly believe that conclusion is absolutely 100% false.

It is that bogus conclusion that I had particularly in mind when I referred to this report as horseshit.

[Big RR]

Well it's out there for anyone to refute if they have further information; I think the committee reviewed the written record to reach that conclusion, but if someone can prove it wrong, let them go ahead and do so.

eta: Not that it would make any difference to me, as I oppose torture/enhanced interrogation as blatantly immoral and wrong regardless of what useful information it might obtain. But it does cut down on the argument of the apologists who support it as something sadly necessary.

[oldr_n_wsr]

oldr - population of the USA in 2001 was about 285,000,000. 2,998 deaths would be about .00095%

I see, it would have been nice had he said that so as not to confuse my simple mind.

Neither rubato nor myself has stated that this was "not a very big deal"

Well by saying it was a "minor attack" I took it to mean that he and you meant is was "not a big deal". If that is wrong on my part then I am sorry I took it wrong.

It looked like a major attack from my viewpoint.

And by that logic, torturing a few (even if it was for revenge) 0.000000000xxx% of the total number of muslims is even more minor an event.

Try to divorce this issue from your personal horror and anger.

It would be nice if I could get over the revenge/horror/anger part of this, but as I have said, it's my character defect and I am choosing to live with it. If my higher power removes it from me, I will let you all know. Right now I am not asking him to remove it from me.

But we, all of us, have to be better than responding in kind.

There are some things that I would respond in kind, and then some.
Am I morally corrupt on this issue? Seems I am, but I can live with it. I hope it won't damn me to hell when I pass, but if it does, I have only myself to blame and will accept my fate. sure I say that now, will I say the same when I am dead and experiencing hell, I don't know

[MajGenl.Meade]

I think the major information that came out of publicizing this report is that the American public now knows that not one bit of useful information was obtained from the torture of prisoners

It is precisely that conclusion which is deeply, vigorously and widely disputed. It is backed up by basically nothing, and it seems obvious that it was the desire to reach that conclusion that explains why not one single CIA official was interviewed. Based on what I've read, I firmly believe that conclusion is absolutely 100% false.

It is that bogus conclusion that I had particularly in mind when I referred to this report as horseshit.

Why interview the CIA? They lie! Except under torture - Feinstein could have threatened to take 'em home. LJ you equally have no basis other than a series of CIA ex-boss (and current boss) unsubstantiated claims that "we got some useful info".

As I pointed out earlier, they did not claim that torturing anyone did that - just their "aggressive" action, whatever that means.

And it's beside the point - torture is wrong, any time, anywhere, for any reason. Seeking to justify it by nebulous claims of "well, it did a little good" don't cut it.

LJ / Meade agreement - 0%