No, the people whose opinions I agree with just happen to be the people who backed their side up with cites and the statements of people who were involved in the field we are discussing - interrogators.
In terms of actual cites, the side I’m disagreeing with has provided what, exactly?
Don’t overanalyze it. I’ve already explained what I meant.
A willingness to face the issue, which you have still not shown.
It was quite obvious why you chose to use the word murder instead of killing.
Dude, wtf does that even mean?
Do you think that the the professionals involved are folks who also are unwilling to “face the issue”?
Willingness to face an issue made up entirely of smoke and mirrors? Some achievement.
You have failed to argue as to the logic of your side. This is Great Debates, not Great False Dilemmas.