From the NY Times, january 13,
"At the urging of the White House, Congressional leaders scrapped a legislative measure last month that would have imposed new restrictions on the use of extreme interrogation measures by American intelligence officers, Congressional officials say."
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/13/politics/13intel.html?hp&ex=1105678800&en=358e4a1dfc40b382&ei=5094&partner=homepage
Extreme interrogation? Torture they mean.
Any comment?
Greetings
Fjord
Originally posted by fjordTypical and pathetic. Where are all of those "moral values" voters?
From the NY Times, january 13,
"At the urging of the White House, Congressional leaders scrapped a legislative measure last month that would have imposed new restrictions on the use of extreme interrogation measures by American intelligence officers, Congressional officials say."
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/13/politics/13intel.html?hp&ex=1105678800& ...[text shortened]... &partner=homepage
Extreme interrogation? Torture they mean.
Any comment?
Greetings
Fjord
Originally posted by fjordIt will get a lot nastier as the US becomes more desperate.
From the NY Times, january 13,
"At the urging of the White House, Congressional leaders scrapped a legislative measure last month that would have imposed new restrictions on the use of extreme interrogation measures by American intelligence officers, Congressional officials say."
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/13/politics/13intel.html?hp&ex=1105678800& ...[text shortened]... &partner=homepage
Extreme interrogation? Torture they mean.
Any comment?
Greetings
Fjord
Originally posted by mateulose
Well, if the USA accepts torture as a means of law to get ahead in life, then inevitably, in the long run, the USA will suffer more then the people being tortured.
That is a philosophical way of looking at it. But there are two real problems.
Torture is an immoral and inhumane act. If the strongest country in our world will use it as an instrument to find the truth it sets a very bad example for the whole world.
And secondly, with torture you don't get the truth but the story you want to hear. So it can easily lead e.g. to a second WMD-spectacle that is based on sand.
Greetings
Fjord
Originally posted by fjordSure. Whatever works against an enemy with no limits.
From the NY Times, january 13,
"At the urging of the White House, Congressional leaders scrapped a legislative measure last month that would have imposed new restrictions on the use of extreme interrogation measures by American intelligence officers, Congressional officials say."
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/13/politics/13intel.html?hp&ex=1105678800& ...[text shortened]... &partner=homepage
Extreme interrogation? Torture they mean.
Any comment?
Greetings
Fjord
Seems reasonable.
Or you are a silly twit with no clue.
Think it through. "If I have an enemy who recognized no limits... what limits shall I recognize? And if I limit myself, what kind of fool am I?"
Originally posted by ivanhoeMy best guess is that torture is the best way to kill your enemy.
One question is whether torture is a way to obtain the truth or a way to force people to make statements that you want them to make. There is a difference ....... I guess.
But that's just a guess. could be wrong.
When you have a country that sings the praises of free democracy and human rights as the basis of it's foundation, you would expect it to actually practice what it preaches.
If we think all people should have the right to an attorney, why not the prisoners in cuba? It seems hypocitical to say that because they are this or that they are not equal, when the very foundation of the gonverment is that all people are created equal.
Thomas Jefferson wrote those words well. He did'nt say all rich white men are created equal, he said all men. He knew one day that those words would be used to change the world. I wonder what he thinks now?
If democracy and human rights are so wonderful and everyone should follow them I say we should lead by example. Torture is wrong people should'nt torture anyone, did'nt we go through this once with vietnam? Are we now stooping to the level of the viet cong, whom we so damned for thier actions?
If everyone should have freedom, and we're actually fighting wars and killing people in our quest for it, how can we possibly say that a person is'nt allowed freedom because they're not a citizen, or a legal combatant, or any other crap the administration can think up.
You can tell a lot about a society by how well they treat thier prisoners.
Originally posted by StarValleyWySo...
Sure. Whatever works against an enemy with no limits.
Seems reasonable.
Or you are a silly twit with no clue.
Think it through. "If I have an enemy who recognized no limits... what limits shall I recognize? And if I limit myself, what kind of fool am I?"
I presume any enemy of the US is now thinking: "Hey...they're gonna use torture as a tool...we'd be foolish and unwise not to do like-wise."
If one wants to take the moral high ground, then one cannot tolerate such behaviour in one's own ranks.
Originally posted by StarValleyWySaddam had exactly the same viewpoint as you have towards those who opposed him. Perhaps he was a reasonable man after all.
Sure. Whatever works against an enemy with no limits.
Seems reasonable.
Or you are a silly twit with no clue.
Think it through. "If I have an enemy who recognized no limits... what limits shall I recognize? And if I limit myself, what kind of fool am I?"