-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Torturegate
- Thread starter poncho
- Start date
Tom Bryant
Well-Known Member
I will go ahead and say it. These terrorists have declared war on us and have no compunction against terror and torture against innocents (does the name Daniel Perle ring a bell). So if the US gov't uses torture to get information that will continue to keep this country safe, I'm for it. There, I said it.
Sen. Obama's and the Supreme Courts idea that this is a law enforcement issue is September 10, 2001 kind of thinking.
Sen. Obama's and the Supreme Courts idea that this is a law enforcement issue is September 10, 2001 kind of thinking.
Tom Bryant said:
So we should lower ourselves to their standards? Sad idea.
Torture has been shown to be a very poor way of getting accurate information. With torture a person, upon reaching their breaking point, will tell you anything they believe you want to hear and most often that is not what you are looking for.
It is well known that with torture confessions of guilt can be obtained from almost anyone. The truth of the charge has nothing to do with the confession.
The claim has been made that torture is ineffective but no evidence has been given. I am with Tom on this one.
Doubting Thomas
Active Member
Tom Bryant said:
So what happens when many of the folks our spooks/military round up and torture are not actually terrorists at all but are in fact innocent? Can we then credibly claim we're any better than the terrorists we decry?
KenH said:
I haven't seen anyone advocate such a position.
KenH said:
What we did not see Tom advocate is beheadings televised. Nothing the US has ever been involved in is equal to what the terrorists have done. Broad brushing this whole thing with one single word is a liberal tool to draw sympathy. Maybe we should just stick with reality.
Revmitchell said:
The article cited in the OP mentioned at least 27 deaths that were the direct result of treatment by American captors. Maybe they weren't beheaded, but that doesn't make them any less dead. When we start trying to draw a fine line between what kind of treatment constitutes torture and what doesn't, then we have already crossed the line. It is incomprehensible to me that people who claim to be Christians could so easily advocate torturing prisoners. (Maybe we should try crucifying them!) Up until now Americans have always held themselves to a higher standard, but not anymore. Now, anything goes, and the end justifies any means. :BangHead: God help us!
Tim Reynolds
Timsings said:
You have engaged in hyperbole that matches the op. Why aren't the mainstream liberal media reporting on these so called 27 deaths? What are the details of these deaths? And if we broad brush torture to fit every scenario then we might as well not work to gain any info and even try to capture anyone for it can all be called torture. What this amounts to is the protection of those who want to slaughter Americans. That is what is beyond me.
poncho
Well-Known Member
Reality eh? Okay here's some reality the Nick Berg video is a fake. A psyop to get a gullible population who think of themsleves as being "moral" to frothing at the mouth mad at the phoney intelligence agency "terrorists" so they'll consent to things that were previously thought of as something only savages like "them" use.Revmitchell said:
It was staged to provoke just those feelings you just displayed.."what we did not see Tom advocate is beheadings televised."
You got all worked up just thinking about it and yearned for national revenge on such disgusting animals as these "islamic terrorists"...didn't ya" Course you did...give yourself a Scooby snack before your next trick...
Other than that I'm all for the public hanging of guilty criminals worthy of the punishment. Public beheading is kind of messy though what with all those arterial spurts, and the gushing of blood sometimes five feet from the victim and those arterial fountains that leave "w" shaped splatter patterns on walls and floors...yuk! Big mess.
Unless we could figure out how those "islamic terrorists" beheaded a "live" human with none of the normally expected behavior of blood under extreme pressure from the rapidly beating heart of a frightened victim after an artery has been breached by a sharp object.
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Berg beheading: No way, say medical experts[/FONT]
[FONT=verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]Nick Berg's Killing: 50 Fishy Circumstances, Contradictory Claims, and Videotape Anomalies
You wanted to stick to reality and the reality is you were duped into accepting the torture of "islamic terrorist" prisoners because it's not like any of em are human or anything after all. But you can call it something else if it makes you feel less guilt about being okay with torture. :smilewinkgrin:
See this thread also...Reality is you were duped into believing and accepting alot of things you shouldn't have but you did.
[/FONT]
Last edited by a moderator:
Tom Bryant
Well-Known Member
I don't accept your 27 number, but even if that was true, maybe we talk about the 1,000's of people killed by terrorists bombing in Iraq and Afghanistan.
We are not descending to their level. We are simply responding to a new set of circumstances.
When I was in the Army, we had a man who had left the USSR (then) and talked to us about how the KGB responded to the kidnappings of their people in various countries. They would then find the family, kidnap them and then send the ear of one of the men to the kidnappers, assuring them that their man should be returned or the rest of the person would be sent one piece at a time. The man, in this case a KGB station chief, was returned and no more Russians were kidnapped. I don't agree with that kind of action against the families. But when your enemy uses terrorist tactics, we ought to come back hard and fast against the terrorists.
In the Revolutionary War, our use of militias and guerilla tactics was considered to be un-gentlemanly. At the beginning of the Civil War, the South considered mining the rivers as against the rules of war. By the end of 1863, the rivers had been mined because the northern threat.
When German spies were arrested, they were not given their rights or turned over to the US court system. They were tried by military tribunals. And those who deserved it were executed.
This is an enemy that understands one language. And it isn't the language of former President Carter or Senator Obama.
We are not descending to their level. We are simply responding to a new set of circumstances.
When I was in the Army, we had a man who had left the USSR (then) and talked to us about how the KGB responded to the kidnappings of their people in various countries. They would then find the family, kidnap them and then send the ear of one of the men to the kidnappers, assuring them that their man should be returned or the rest of the person would be sent one piece at a time. The man, in this case a KGB station chief, was returned and no more Russians were kidnapped. I don't agree with that kind of action against the families. But when your enemy uses terrorist tactics, we ought to come back hard and fast against the terrorists.
In the Revolutionary War, our use of militias and guerilla tactics was considered to be un-gentlemanly. At the beginning of the Civil War, the South considered mining the rivers as against the rules of war. By the end of 1863, the rivers had been mined because the northern threat.
When German spies were arrested, they were not given their rights or turned over to the US court system. They were tried by military tribunals. And those who deserved it were executed.
This is an enemy that understands one language. And it isn't the language of former President Carter or Senator Obama.
poncho said:
Berg probably had been killed before the beheading, so to that extent the video is false.
But golly, It must have been the CIA cause some of the captors were stocky, they "moved like westerners", and there was a white plastic lawn chair like the ones at Abu Ghraib!!
By the way, all of the Nick Berg conspiricy theories originated on Arab and Persian websites, Aljazeera.net and Fares.net, just days after the video surfaced. And you know how they love a good CT over there.
One of these days Poncho is going to be right; maybe has been on a few points already.
BUT, just like the little boy who cried "WOLF", at least for me, I don't take anything he says seriously anymore cause everything & everybody is a conspiracy in some remote manner.
Sometime down the road he can say "I told you so!"
Just like the hypochondriac had engraved on her tombstone -- "I TOLD you I was sick!" :laugh::BangHead::thumbs:
BUT, just like the little boy who cried "WOLF", at least for me, I don't take anything he says seriously anymore cause everything & everybody is a conspiracy in some remote manner.
Sometime down the road he can say "I told you so!"
Just like the hypochondriac had engraved on her tombstone -- "I TOLD you I was sick!" :laugh::BangHead::thumbs:
ccrobinson
Active Member
I want to go back to the OP and talk about torture.
Here's a report called "Educing Information".
The Intelligence Science Board testified to Congress about torture.
Here's a quote from the article about the Congressional testimony.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy.../05/16/AR2007051602395.html?hpid=opinionsbox2Here's an op-ed about torture from Charles C. Krulak, former commandant of the Marine Corps, and Joseph P. Hoar, former commander in chief of U.S. Central Command.
Even under questioning without torture, people will admit to crimes they didn't commit, crimes that other evidence proves they didn't commit. Questioning without torture leads to misinformation. Why would we think that adding torture to the equation suddenly provides quality information?
I have yet to see a good argument for supporting torture.
Here's a report called "Educing Information".
The Intelligence Science Board testified to Congress about torture.
Here's a quote from the article about the Congressional testimony.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy.../05/16/AR2007051602395.html?hpid=opinionsbox2Here's an op-ed about torture from Charles C. Krulak, former commandant of the Marine Corps, and Joseph P. Hoar, former commander in chief of U.S. Central Command.
Even under questioning without torture, people will admit to crimes they didn't commit, crimes that other evidence proves they didn't commit. Questioning without torture leads to misinformation. Why would we think that adding torture to the equation suddenly provides quality information?
I have yet to see a good argument for supporting torture.