Gauntlet Posted April 27, 2009 Group: Senior Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 7 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 788 Content Per Day: 0.14 Reputation: 4 Days Won: 0 Joined: 03/18/2009 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/18/1979 Share Posted April 27, 2009 You mean like sodium pentethol? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorningGlory Posted April 27, 2009 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 1,022 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 39,193 Content Per Day: 6.09 Reputation: 9,977 Days Won: 78 Joined: 10/01/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted April 27, 2009 That's a thought - why can't they use drugs, like 'truth serums' or is that ineffective? Just wondering. That's a good question....we need a good answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted April 27, 2009 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.75 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.94 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted April 27, 2009 Gator - I really am trying to evaluate things objectively, so I would truly appreciate if you would respond the same with this, OK? ...but she does a good job of showing that torture is not all that effective. Going back to the specifics of the OP ... because this dancing around principles I believe is getting muddied ... From what I have heard, the interrogations they performed did work - i.e. they prevented a planned attack against the Brooklyn Bridge and against something in one of the major southern CA cities (I forget which one) My problem with torture has nothing to do with the terrorist, it has to do with US as a country, and the morals and standards we hold dear. The idea that torture will save a "bus load of children" is taken from TV and it total bunk. It is a nice little story people tell themselves to justify the unjustifiable. What methods would you use to obtain information from the terrorists? From what I heard "the standard handbook" methods weren't working, which is why they utilized harsher methods. As far as the methods that were used, they weren't cutting off fingers, forcing conversions, chopping off heads (things "the other side" is doing - or at least the latter two). I don't bring that up to say, "See, we are better than them," but because I'm trying to understand why you believe water boarding is "being like them." What makes water boarding unjustifiable in your eyes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest yod Posted April 27, 2009 Share Posted April 27, 2009 My problem with torture has nothing to do with the terrorist, it has to do with US as a country, and the morals and standards we hold dear. life? liberty? Preventing the mass slaughter of American civilians at the hands of fanatical terrorists seems to be quite in line with the standards we hold dear Morality is a social standard. If asked, there is no doubt that an overwhelming majority of Americans (and Canadians) would agree with the statement: "It is morally permissable to waterboard an Al Queda operative (or other terrorist group) to prevent another mass murder of civilians" The idea that torture will save a "bus load of children" is taken from TV and it total bunk. It is a nice little story people tell themselves to justify the unjustifiable. Then your arguement is with Obama From the OP: WASHINGTON Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted April 27, 2009 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.75 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.94 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted April 27, 2009 He stated a few pages ago that he supports waterboarding. Oh -right. See . . . I'm getting confused by all these diversions. So - which interrogation methods were utilized that are considered a problem? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthitjah Posted April 27, 2009 Group: Royal Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 1,285 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 17,917 Content Per Day: 2.27 Reputation: 355 Days Won: 19 Joined: 10/01/2002 Status: Offline Share Posted April 27, 2009 He stated a few pages ago that he supports waterboarding. Oh -right. See . . . I'm getting confused by all these diversions. So - which interrogation methods were utilized that are considered a problem? Fuzzy Caterpillars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest yod Posted April 29, 2009 Share Posted April 29, 2009 From Congressman Peter Hoekstra, It was not necessary to release details of the enhanced interrogation techniques, because members of Congress from both parties have been fully aware of them since the program began in 2002. We believed it was something that had to be done in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks to keep our nation safe. After many long and contentious debates, Congress repeatedly approved and funded this program on a bipartisan basis in both Republican and Democratic Congresses. Last week, Mr. Obama argued that those who implemented this program should not be prosecuted -- even though the release of the memos still places many individuals at other forms of unfair legal risk. It appeared that Mr. Obama understood it would be unfair to prosecute U.S. government employees for carrying out a policy that had been fully vetted and approved by the executive branch and Congress. The president explained this decision with these gracious words: "nothing will be gained by spending our time and energy laying blame for the past." I agreed. Unfortunately, on April 21, Mr. Obama backtracked (surprised?) and opened the door to possible prosecution of Justice Department attorneys who provided legal advice with respect to the enhanced interrogations program. The president also signaled that he may support some kind of independent inquiry into the program. It seems that he has capitulated to left-wing groups and some in Congress who are demanding show trials over this program. Members of Congress calling for an investigation of the enhanced interrogation program should remember that such an investigation can't be a selective review of information, or solely focus on the lawyers who wrote the memos, or the low-level employees who carried out this program. I have asked Mr. Blair to provide me with a list of the dates, locations and names of all members of Congress who attended briefings on enhanced interrogation techniques. ...Perhaps we need an investigation not of the enhanced interrogation program, but of what the Obama administration may be doing to endanger the security our nation has enjoyed because of interrogations and other antiterrorism measures implemented since Sept. 12, 2001. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Butero Posted May 2, 2009 Share Posted May 2, 2009 This has got out of hand. Now I am being insulted for standing against torture on a Christian website. I am leaving, I have seen a side of "Christians" I never knew existed, and it saddens me greatly. Perhaps I am in the wrong here, I am clearly in the minority of those that dont advocate torture. whatever the case, my eyes have been opened and I will depart from this forum for a while to reassess. I guess you have reassessed, and have decided to longsuffer some more with us misguided Christians? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts