Dealing With the Torture Apologists: A Cheat Sheet

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Bbucko, Jun 6, 2009.

  1. Bbucko

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2006
    Messages:
    7,413
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    58
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sunny SoFla
    This flowchart shows the evolution of torture apologists' line of "reasoning", from denial to justification (and back).

    It's a must-read for anyone attempting to understand how a practice fundamentally abhorrent to our Founding Fathers (and all the precedent that has followed in their wake) has become so entrenched in the hearts and minds of those who choose to use our Constitution and several international treaties (not just the Geneva Conventions) as so much toilet paper in the reflexive fear that gripped the US following the horrific attacks of 9/11.
     
  2. B_Nick4444

    B_Nick4444 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2007
    Messages:
    7,002
    Likes Received:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Antonio, TX
    no

    it trivializes and dismisses the actual gravity and moral ambiguity faced by those put into a position of having to protect hundreds of thousands of innocent lives
     
  3. Phil Ayesho

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    Messages:
    5,595
    Likes Received:
    884
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Diego
    Bullshit Nick:

    WHAT moral ambiguity?

    Are you referring to the kind of moral reasoning that justifies the murder of innocents to further a goal just because you feel the stakes are huge? Because THAT, my friend, is the moral position of the terrorists... that the END justifies the means.

    Seriously... you think it is a valid argument to say we should DEFEND our principles and beliefs by ABANDONING our principles and beliefs?


    There is no moral ambiguity... it is perfectly clear- as it was to the FBI who backed out, that what was being done was wrong.

    You don't commission exculpatory legal "opinions" AFTER you do something unless it has occured to you that you could be prosecuted for what you have done.

    The fact is that you can not torture without torturing innocents. Unlike the mythological ticking bomb scenario, in reality land YOU DON'T KNOW what any suspect does or does not know. If you did know what they know- there would be no need to torture them at all...

    And because you don't know what they know you have no way of ascertaining if the informaiton you get is truthful or not.

    The ticking bomb goes off because in torturing someone you got told 6 different stories and you don't have time to chase down all 6.


    If torture "worked" then it should not have required 87 different sessions to find out everything Zubiyda knew...

    And even if it DID work, that does not excuses it... US courts wil not admit even damning evidence that was obtained illegally.

    Why is that? Because a government that need not follow any laws or rules of conduct is far more dangerous than letting a handful of criminals go, that's why.

    Truth is- we tortured for the same fucking reason EVERYONE has always tortured... because those in power wanted to elicit false confessions to back their agenda... that's why.

    That is the ONLY thing torture is good for- getting folks to swear they are a witch... even when they know they are not.



    Sorry pal- your apology is what truly trivializes and dismisses the issues at hand.

    Wrong is wrong. Torture is wrong.
    It's NOT ambiguous- its one of the founding principles of the Constitution, and This nation has literally HUNG pepople for doing what Cheney endorsed being done.


    And, no, "i was following orders" is NOT a valid defense- it wasn't valid at nuremburg, and its not valid now.



    There is no evidence, anywhere, that torture saved a single life.

    You can not defend moral ambiguity with ambiguous evidence- you must show concrete results... not some TV plotline, to warrant even the notion that compromising the law might be useful.



    Oh- and BTW- game theory proves that torture and vendetta never win in the long haul.

    Never.
     
  4. VeeP

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,787
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    2
    Gender:
    Male
  5. B_Nick4444

    B_Nick4444 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2007
    Messages:
    7,002
    Likes Received:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Antonio, TX
    "Obviously you need to preserve some tools -- you still have to go after the bad guys. The legal advisors working on this looked at rendition. It is controversial in some circles and kicked up a big storm in Europe. But if done within certain parameters, it is an acceptable practice."

    especially if it's done outside our borders, evidently ...
     
  6. VeeP

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,787
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    2
    Gender:
    Male
    Just a hunch, but I'm guessing they don't bother with cutsie flowcharts, either... tee hee
     
  7. sparky11point5

    sparky11point5 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2005
    Messages:
    501
    Likes Received:
    4
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston
    According to Nick??? and Veep, we need to add to the flowchart.

    "Torture is OK, as long as other countries do it."

    Rendition to countries where we expect torture should stop. That does not invalidate any of the arguments against institutionalized torture.

    Thanks, Phil for your post. I really believe that we must push back against these immoral and stupid arguments for torture.
     
  8. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    The fact that someone tries to make a positive link to the word "moral" on a torture debate is without a doubt one of the most laughable things I have ever seen in my life. Someone go find me a waterboard... or a "moralboard" in this case. Let me drown you with morality in the name of America!
     
  9. midlifebear

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2007
    Messages:
    5,908
    Likes Received:
    11
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Nevada, Buenos Aires, and Barçelona
    We could amend the chart (a good one, by the way) and add "Make the enemy read all of Nick666 collected posts."
     
  10. VeeP

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,787
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    2
    Gender:
    Male
    No, Obama added to the flowchart by signing the executive order re: rendition (did you even read the article I linked?). My point (and Nick4444's as well) is that the lefties seem to be content with ignoring the elephant in the room (i.e., Obama supports rendition as an anti-terrorism tool)... not that he'd ever be on both sides of an issue, of course... :rolleyes:
     
    #10 VeeP, Jun 7, 2009
    Last edited: Jun 7, 2009
  11. SEXXXX

    SEXXXX New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Messages:
    312
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    NYC
    that's called BIPARTISAN?
     
  12. HazelGod

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Messages:
    7,531
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    9
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Other Side of the Pillow
    Perhaps you intended to say "moral dilemma"?

    I cannot for the life of me envision any ambiguity in the relative morality of torturing another human being.
     
  13. Bbucko

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2006
    Messages:
    7,413
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    58
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sunny SoFla
    That's because it doesn't exist.

    And, for the record (and because I'm no partisan hack), rendition started under Clinton.

    The fact that the best you apologists can come up with is "your guy does it too" speaks volumes about your values. Denying the elementary dignity of a human being (no matter how despicable) just throws more logs on the fire of injustice anywhere for anybody.

    One's morality isn't measured by how one treats the most deserving members of society, it's in how one treats the least deserving. Because, ultimately, it's not about them: it's about you, and the evil you espouse in any capitulation of your ideals to their own evil.

    I don't understand why a pagan/atheist needs to be explaining this to as pious a Christian as Nick4444 claims to be.
     
  14. Phil Ayesho

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    Messages:
    5,595
    Likes Received:
    884
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Diego
    I can clear that up- Christians are the poster children of moral relativism.

    The bible is nothing other than 10 simple rules to live by... and 1500 pages full of examples of how God demands his faithful to violate those rules... the religion if FOUNDED on the idea that a true believer should be willing to commit murder at God's command.


    So for a group that is willing to endorse religious homicide... what's a little torture?

    Besides... think about it, what group in particular has been the most vocal practitionaer of torture over the centuries?

    That's right... the religious.
     
  15. Phil Ayesho

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    Messages:
    5,595
    Likes Received:
    884
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Diego
    Actually this comment just proves how ignorant you are of "lefties".

    Obama's office has been inundated by angry protest letters from so called "lefties" demanding that he abandon rendition, too. Demanding that he END military commissions...

    UNLIKE the right wing ideologues, who back their team no matter what... Obama CAN and WILL lose support from the left over his concessions to Bush era excesses.

    One of his most vocal critics on this issue is Rachel Maddow- about as leftie a commentator as you will find.
    The criticism Obama has met with from the right ranges from the inane to the outright false...

    You want to hear REAL criticism of Obama's actions, based upon Cogent argument? Turn to Rachel Maddow.


    The difference is this... the left is not EXCUSING their own guy's actions by trying to tar the right.


    And left was not all that happy with Clinton over all kinds of things...
    But he was still a vastly more intelligent president than Bush.
     
  16. Trinity

    Trinity New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2006
    Messages:
    2,682
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Female


    It escapes me how persons can be so holier than thou in their moralistic demand of the comfort and dignity of three terrorists, one of whom admitted to cutting the head of Danny Pearl and in the same being have no moralistic demands for the life, comfort and dignity of innocent babies being tortured in the womb by late term abortionists.
     
  17. VeeP

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,787
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    2
    Gender:
    Male
    Just how much respect do you wish to afford he who readily admits to plotting the incineration of innocents in their office buildings and who, failing that, would saw off their heads?

    Strip away the bullshit and central to the argument is the treatment of three of the most vile "human beings" to ever walk the planet at a point in time when our grasp of Al Queda and it's ability to strike again were woefully inadequate (a point upon which most agree). Yet, invariably it's demagoged by the left as dozens of detainees having been "tortured" willy-nilly beginning in 2001 and continuing presently. Obama's straw man is that he's putting an end to a practice that was already effectively terminated under Bush, meanwhile quitely putting his stamp of approval on a far less controlled practice (i.e, rendition) via the back channels. And yes, I'm aware Clinton started it. You may note that I said Obama supports its continuation (a factual statement devoid of partisan hackery).
     
  18. Phil Ayesho

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    Messages:
    5,595
    Likes Received:
    884
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Diego
    Trinity- I would hardly expect someone as delusional as you to comprehend ethics or morality.

    You want to execute these guys? FINE- the law allows for that, all you have to do is show EVIDENCE that they DID something.

    REAL evidence, because, y'know torture does not provide real evidence... people say ANYTHING you want them to while being tortured... Just ask the Spanish Inquisition...just ask John McCain's torturers...

    THAT IS WHY SHIT FOLKS SAY UNDER TORTURE IS INADMISSIBLE.

    get it?

    You simply can not pull your head out long enough to grasp that this is NOT about treating bad people well... its about ENSURING that the govenrment must provide proof before the public that someone actually IS bad before they can be punished.

    Its about the fact that Bush created a policy that says YOU could be indefinitely detained on his say so alone.
    Its about keeping Despotism and Tyranny in check.

    The fact is we don't know that ANY of these people actually DID anything they are accused of.
    The govenrment will NOT release evidence they "claim" to have.

    Try and wrap your head around that- people being imprisoned and tortured because the government says is has SECRET evidence they did something.
    Does that sound like a good idea to you?

    Funny how the guys who bombed the WTC the First time around were caught, tried and imprisoned without any real difficulty in putting together a case... but after 7 years of limitless resources, there is not one iota of usable evidence against these people...


    And your simplistic and idiotic opinion of babies being tortured in late term abortions... sorry but that's just not good enough. It takes a doctor's order to get such an abortion. It has to be a case of incest, rape or imminent threat to the mother's own life to get such a thing.


    It seems funny to me how concerned you are about OTHER people's unborn and unwanted babies... and yet you have NO concern at all for those already alive.

    Fine with you if folks are tortured and killed as long as you are TOLD they deserve it.

    And yet being told that the life of the mother is in danger is not good enough to allow late term abortion?

    You reveal yourself to be a moral relativist. Claiming religion as a lie to cover your own hatred and loathing of others...

    I am so sick of Christians whose righteous condemnation of others is in direct opposition to the teachings of Christ.

    All your righteousnesses are as filthy rags in the eyes of the Lord.
    Judge not lest ye be judged.

    Where do you get off claiming ANY knowledge about these people's guilt?
    As a citizen you should be DEMANDING the government PROVE its case.

    BTW- taking the Lord's name in vain is NOT a reference to swearing.
    Your particular conceit concerning 'morality' endorsing your agenda of hatred and condemnation in the name of God...
    THAT is taking the Lord's name in vain.
    Claiming to know God's will, claiming to speak on behalf of God or the Godly...
    THAT is taking the Lord's name in vain.


    And I wish you religious jerks would stop doing that.
     
  19. sparky11point5

    sparky11point5 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2005
    Messages:
    501
    Likes Received:
    4
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston
    Great post, Bbucko, I could not have improved upon it.

    To summarize,

    -- We did not torture, because we redefined it!
    -- OK, we did torture, but it was effective!
    -- OK, so it was not effective, but they deserve it!
    -- OK, we did not actually put them on trial, but we know they were guilty!
    -- OK, we actually asked them about an imaginary Iraq-Al Quaeda connection, but it was a ticking time bomb!
    -- OK, we did it many, many times on just 3 suspects!
    -- Yeah, but Obama allows rendition!

    If we actually believe in our own values, we should be prepared to live them.

    Sparky

     
  20. Trinity

    Trinity New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2006
    Messages:
    2,682
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Female
    You appear to be delusional in your negative anti-religious post.

    And while you are trying to school me on what I fail to understand ethically and morally on torture, you failed to either understand or address the ethical and moral point of my post - Abortion is Torture. Abortion is Taking a Life.

    You simply don't like it when ethics and morality (not religion Phil) are used in the abortion issue because some Pro-choice people hypocritcally choose to practice moral relativism concerning abortion but rail on the torture issue.

    One more time for you...

    It escapes me how persons can be so holier than thou in their moralistic demand of the comfort and dignity of three terrorists, one of whom admitted to cutting the head of Danny Pearl and in the same being have no moralistic demands for the life, comfort and dignity of innocent babies being tortured in the womb by late term abortionists.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted