America's Debate on Torture

[Scriptor Ignotus]

Oh, just thought I'd throw this out there:

In the pages of today's newspaper editorials and on this weekend's political talkshows we are debating the use of torture. You know, whether American troops or agents can torture (perform "alternate methods of interrogation") our enemies ("enemy combatants").

I know I'm not alone in thinking that this is unacceptable ("bullshit").



Let's just say it again though: This country, OUR country, is debating whether or not we can TORTURE HUMAN BEINGS.


OK, I don't want to beat this into the ground anymore.

And now back to your regularly scheduled programming. Steelers vs Jaguars tonight, 8:30pm EST.

[TechBear_Seattle]

1. That we are even debating the question of whether torture is acceptable

... demonstrates, to our extreme shame, just how far the United States has fallen under the Junta.

[Scriptor Ignotus]

4. i wish I put that line in my OP

that's exactly what I was thinking when I wrote it.

[JuniperLea]

2. Steelers vs Jaguars is preferred viewing to

Watching the USA loose moral high ground.

[Scriptor Ignotus]

6. true

but if you're a Redskins or Raiders fan you're probably better off watching CSPAN. lol. :7

[annabanana]

3. What's killing me is the push to DEFINE it.

As if human imagination wasn't infinite.

"OK, It says here we're not allowed to sew cheerios under the eyelids of the EC's.. because that would be illegal.." .

"Oh?.. Well, umm...OK... use Cocoa-puffs.. Problem solved"

It's not VAGUE You Idiot... It's fluid, and deliberately so

[JuniperLea]

9. Interesting how we all understood the meaning perfectly for so many years

I guess it's no surprise that DimSon cannot understand, idiot that he is.

[Mojorabbit]

5. I called Bill Nelson's(Fl) office today

to voice my opposition. They wanted to know if I supported the McCain Bill. I said the Geneva Conventions have worked well for years and I don't trust that last minute things would not be added to any bill passed. It upsets me that we need a bill for this. Am I wrong?

[Tanuki]

8. Excellent point---

and what would stop * from adding one of his infamous "signing statements" to any bill McCain or others might pass?

[Mojorabbit]

10. Well it was better than the reception I got from Keller's office

The woman who answered the phone there was rude and then hung up on me and I was nothing but polite

[SeattleVet]

7. The amazing thing is that the entire debate has turned around from

a discussion about whether or not to allow torture to only discussing what types of torture are acceptable. That we will torture seems to be a given; now it's all about HOW to torture.

They've successfully moved the target, and it looks like very few have actually noticed.

[DrBloodmoney]

11. To defeat our enemies, we must become our enemy.

This is a very dark day for our country. We have forsaken the moral highground.

[bigtree]

12. as if Bush was waiting for our response before they do it

They must be laughing their asses off at the Pentagon and CIA over Bush asking permission from Congress AFTER they've already done whatever they wanted.

There must be someone on Bush's tail for him to ask for ass covering legislation. The debate among the public over this makes folks even dumber than stupid for not realizing that crimes have already been committed. We have laws that cover this. They served us through Hitler and the Cold War. Bush can't handle his job so he wants extra privileges to cover his incompetent ass.

[Land Shark]

13. Not too many years ago, virtually all world countries DENIED Torture

was used by them, categorically. This debate is an extreme low water mark

[stellanoir]

14. It is as though

they want to legalize sadism.

I'm wrecthing here and am floored over just how low we've sunk.

[struggle4progress]

15. Let's debate whether the Resistance can apply brutal interrogation

techniques to torture apologists in order to expose the cryptofascist conspiracy that's trying to turn the US into a dictatorship. Surely we can debate this point ...

[Disturbed]

16. Let's face it. The RWing is good at framing any issue.

The Bushooini Regime is desperately trying to avoid prosecution and law suits regarding what they have already done. They want to have what they have done retro-actively legalized to protect themselves. Yeah, it is really that simple. Here we are debating upon what methods should be legalized. It is indeed a shameful event in the history of America.

If the Dems has any sense of decency they would refuse to discuss this and DEMAND for the Impeachment of the Pres., VP, Rumsfailed, Rice and start the prosecution of the Generals and the CIA officers who approved of the abuse and torture of detainees. Also, those in the NSA who spied without Warrents should be prosecuted ASAP.

[struggle4progress]

20. The rightwing practices loud intimidation: if you don't support the

President's policies, you're a traitor; if you don't support the President's war, you're an enemy sympathizer &c&c&c.

Personally, I have no intention of "debating" torture with anyone, but in my previous post I have just suggested a retort to those who want to debate torture: "I suspect anybody who advocates torture of being part of a conspiracy to convert America to a dictatorship, and I wonder whether patriots who oppose such a dictatorship would be justified in torturing suspected conspirators in order to save our Democracy." Personally, I think such aggressive retorts offer just about the only possibility of stunning the nitwits into critical thought.

[Solly Mack]

17. It's worse actually. America is already torturing and pretending with this

"debate" that it's a possibility we will torture if we modify the application of Common Article 3.

But the reality is, modified or not, America has already been torturing and it hasn't stopped....but this debate makes it appear as if it's a question on whether or not we will torture.

So as bad as debating torture is...and it is bad that anyone even has to debate to do it or not....the implied lie.....that it's not already happening....makes it worse.

Another lie inherent in the debate is the "we didn't know" lie. By suggesting the troops and the CIA need "clear" rules, Bush is attempting to claim that the rules aren't clear now so how can anyone be responsible for their actions if they didn't know they weren't allowed to do certain things.

This "debate" has layers upon layers....of bullshit.

[radfringe]

18. abandonment of values

wrap it up in pretty bows and rhetoric, slap a NEW IMPROVED label on it, threaten us with fear and smear - it still comes down to abandoning our values.

Sanctioning torture, no matter how sparkling and shiney the package - it's still torture. We can hardly object to torture of our own people if we endorse it ourselves.

The bush argument is simple - if we don't torture over there we'll have a terror attack here.

We've already surrendered many of our freedoms in exchange for security - now we are being told we have to surrender our values.

I've also heard murmurs of "terrorists torture too" - does this mean we should be adopting the terrorist values? Terrorists also hijack planes and slam them into buildings - should we be doing the same?

To the rubberstamping GOPers and the bushies - HAVE YOU NO VALUES?

[tbyg52]

19. You go right ahead beating it into the ground

Because it needs to be beaten. In *our* country, we (well, "they," anyway) are debating with a straight face the acceptable level of torture.

:puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: