You, you [string of expletives deleted because of the wonderful Pit policy]. You keep saying ‘well, you say these practices are a horrible affront to the dignity of a human being and a blatant violation of the Constitution, and these guys being paid to justify it say it’s maybe not horrible, so it’s all just opinion and you guys are a bunch of poopyheads for saying it’s bad’. You have repeatedly defended their tortuous reasoning that the United States should torture, mostly because you refuse to believe that the feelings of any other person matter or even exist, because your hero, Ayn Rand, worshiped psychopaths and sociopaths.
http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article/articleview/6038/ Japanese soldiers were found guilty of torture after WW2. They specifically were accused of beatings and water boarding. It was torture until we said, it is now not torture but merely enhanced interrogations. it is torture.
The latest story saying a prisoner was waterboarded 183 times in a month is ridiculous. That would be over 60 times a day. that would be impossible. That would be every 8 minutes night and day.
Your math is doubly bad, dude. Even if it were 60 times in a day, that would be once every 24 minutes, not 8. In any case, it’s about 6 times per day* on average*, which is roughly every four hours on average.
If I am wrong, please clarify. I thought you and others defended the state’s legal right to use torture on enemy combatants because it is an effective method to extract information. Should torture be legal for military interrogations?
Which is a damned shame. Scylla’s always been one of my favorite posters-when he’s not talking politics, some of his stories are hilarious. (I always love hearing about his interactions with his kids)
Since it isn’t torture would you be okay with your daughter being water boarded, dipped in a vat of bugs, banged head into wall, or shipped off Syria for beatings?
If you say no then why not? Keep in mind “innocent” doesn’t matter since there have been innocent victims of this torture.
Answer the question. I’ve asked you three times now. You’re being disingenuous.
Either Kahlid Sheik Muhammed provided the info that fingered Abu Zabeda, or vice versa. At least I recall reading that. Anybody got thier finger on that cite, by chance?
And which one provided the “intel” that connected Saddam with AlQ?
“A wilderness of mirrors” in the words of professional paranoid James Jesus Angleton.
Dishonest? Immature? Nutjob? Strong words. Care to back them up?
In a thread that had nothing to do with a partisan approach to charity.
And this:
is, to put it charitably, creative logic.
TTR’s comment was entirely correct, as many Republican officials, in the mainstream even, approve of the CIA’s conduct over the last several years, which is also the opinion of a majority of self-identified Republicans. You then proceeded to construct a strawman of ridiculous lies and claimed that the two were equivalent.
I will concede that the posts I quoted are not one line long. There is not a significant difference, for the most part.
Well, I wish you wouldn’t be so hasty to judge all liberals the same way. (Don’t turn into a Starving Artist or a Shodan-we don’t need another, please!)