Mancow Does What Hannity Reneged On: Gets Waterboarded

[mykevermin]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUkj9pjx3H0

Will this end the debate? Of course not. It's not like empirical evidence ever got in the way of rigid ideology before.

[UncleBob]

The funny thing about the entire Hannity/Olbermann debacle...

Olbermann is all "waterboarding is not only illegal but is a torturous act", condeming anyone possibly involved with it.

Yet, he's willing to pay to have it done to his competition?

Not that I'd object to something that would shut Hannity's mouth for a few seconds.

Perhaps real torture methods should involve making detainees watch these guys' shows...

[homeland]

Ya I saw this last week, its always nice when morally wrong people wake up and realize they were thinking like an asshole. Still waiting for Hannity to do it.

[RAMSTORIA]

yeah we (me and some friends) were talking about this this weekend, pretty wild stuff. im sure if you could do that to everyone theyd say its torture. but youd still have a group of people who would say that torture is necessary.

[tivo]

^^ I would say we shouldn't take it off the table when dealing with terrorists. this video proves its effectiveness. After 6 seconds he wanted nothing to do with waterboarding. Terrorists are chopping civilians heads off with dull blades, they are taking elementary schools hostage and blowing up hospitals. Non-state combatants do not fall under normal jurisdiction. They have no morals. And I expect my government to do everything in its power to protect her citizens. If this involves getting a few people's shirts wet, then so be it.

[homeland]

^^ I would say we shouldn't take it off the table when dealing with terrorists. this video proves its effectiveness. After 6 seconds he wanted nothing to do with waterboarding. Terrorists are chopping civilians heads off with dull blades, they are taking elementary schools hostage and blowing up hospitals. Non-state combatants do not fall under normal jurisdiction. They have no morals. And I expect my government to do everything in its power to protect her citizens. If this involves getting a few people's shirts wet, then so be it.


Except that I have yet to hear that torture provides actual credible results. Like you said he wanted nothing to do with it. He's ultimately going to tell you what you want to hear not what he knows. Not the best way to learn information. Mancow got poured on 3-4 times. They did it 180 times and still didn't get any proper info.

On one hand you have career politicians like Dick Cheney saying torture is necessary. On the other there are ex Navy Seals, CIA interrogators, and Military officers saying it just doesn't work and infact makes our troops even more unsafe.

So no. The U.S shouldn't be breaking international law, to get bad information that ultimately its product is more people hating the U.S government and its soldiers.

[HowStern]

^^ I would say we shouldn't take it off the table when dealing with terrorists. this video proves its effectiveness. After 6 seconds he wanted nothing to do with waterboarding. Terrorists are chopping civilians heads off with dull blades, they are taking elementary schools hostage and blowing up hospitals. Non-state combatants do not fall under normal jurisdiction. They have no morals. And I expect my government to do everything in its power to protect her citizens. If this involves getting a few people's shirts wet, then so be it.


Dumb and naive thinking. Torture actually puts our citizens at risk because the information obtained this way is never any good. They are going to say whatever they think they have to to get out of it.

If this was happening to you you would say anything, ANYTHING, to have it stop. This includes giving false information.

Did you see Jesse Ventura on Larry king live?
he goes
"[Water-boarding] is torture... It's drowning. It gives you the complete sensation that you are drowning. It is no good, because you -- I'll put it to you this way, you give me a water board, Dick Cheney and one hour, and I'll have him confess to the Sharon Tate murders."
The video is on youtube.

[mykevermin]

^^ I would say we shouldn't take it off the table when dealing with terrorists. this video proves its effectiveness. After 6 seconds he wanted nothing to do with waterboarding. Terrorists are chopping civilians heads off with dull blades, they are taking elementary schools hostage and blowing up hospitals. Non-state combatants do not fall under normal jurisdiction. They have no morals. And I expect my government to do everything in its power to protect her citizens. If this involves getting a few people's shirts wet, then so be it.

I wonder how long you it would take you to declare Barack Obama the greatest president in the history of the United States if placed under the...erm...pitcher.

There's "telling the truth" and then there's "saying fuckin' anything." But please, continue to conflate the two as one equally valid and noble consequence of torture.

"Do you like the film 'Bridget Jones Diary'?"
"No."
*glugglugglug*
"Now, Do you like the film 'Bridget Jones Diary'?"
"No."
*glugglugglug*
"I ASKED YOU IF YOU LIKED BRIDGET JONES DIARY!"
"YES YES YES A THOSAND TIMES YES! LEAVE ME THE FUCK ALONE; GOD I LOVE BRIDGET JONES SO MUCH!"

[Reality's Fringe]

On one hand you have career politicians like Dick Cheney saying torture is necessary. On the other there are ex Navy Seals, CIA interrogators, and Military officers saying it just doesn't work and infact makes our troops even more unsafe.
.

I feel this way about whether or not it IS torture.

Who says it's torture? :
Military officials
CIA operatives
FBI Agents

Who says it's not? :

Politicians who've never been in the military
People who watch the news and espouse editorials like it's their own opinion
Kids on the internet

So it looks like the people who say it IS torture are the people who have done it or had it done to them.The people who say it's NOT torture are the type of people who's greatest danger in life is spilling their Coke at the drive-thru. Isn't that interesting?



Now, whether or not you think it's necessary, moral, wicked balls-to-the-wall awesome, or an affront to what this country stands for; that's beside the point. It's torture, plain and simple.

[Capitalizt]

Here is Christopher Hitchens doing the same thing..only they do it PROPERLY..the way it's done in the field.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LPubUCJv58

[Koggit]

I wonder how long you it would take you to declare Barack Obama the greatest president in the history of the United States if placed under the...erm...pitcher.

There's "telling the truth" and then there's "saying fuckin' anything." But please, continue to conflate the two as one equally valid and noble consequence of torture.

"Do you like the film 'Bridget Jones Diary'?"
"No."
*glugglugglug*
"Now, Do you like the film 'Bridget Jones Diary'?"
"No."
*glugglugglug*
"I ASKED YOU IF YOU LIKED BRIDGET JONES DIARY!"
"YES YES YES A THOSAND TIMES YES! LEAVE ME THE FUCK ALONE; GOD I LOVE BRIDGET JONES SO MUCH!"

exactly.. imo this is the end of the debate

torture only gets people to say what you want them to say.. seems completely useless

[camoor]

^^ I would say we shouldn't take it off the table when dealing with terrorists. this video proves its effectiveness. After 6 seconds he wanted nothing to do with waterboarding. Terrorists are chopping civilians heads off with dull blades, they are taking elementary schools hostage and blowing up hospitals. Non-state combatants do not fall under normal jurisdiction. They have no morals. And I expect my government to do everything in its power to protect her citizens. If this involves getting a few people's shirts wet, then so be it.

The last sentence is bogus. This isn't "getting a few people's shirts wet" this is straight-up torture. Visually it's unimpressive but it's obviously hardcore enough to shut up some grade-A blowhards who put their reps on the line.

If you're going to defend it, at least have the intellectual honesty to describe it accurately.

[HowStern]

Just ignore him. He's trying to act tough by passing it off as nothing other than getting your shirt a little wet. Like he could handle it. Until he puts a video up of him going through it, his opinion = zilch.

On top of that it's what Homeland, Myke, Realitys fringe, Koggit, and I said. You don't get valid information worth a roach shit this way.

[camoor]

Just ignore him. He's trying to act tough by passing it off as nothing other than getting your shirt a little wet. Like he could handle it. Until he puts a video up of him going through it, his opinion = zilch.

On top of that it's what Homeland, Myke, Realitys fringe, Koggit, and I said. You don't get valid information worth a roach shit this way.

I knew someone in intelligence, and his opinion was that you could get better information by using the right type of questioning instead of torture. I wish we could start steering the public conversation in more constructive directions. Like most people, in a Jack Bauer "bomb is ticking" situation I don't want to handcuff an interrogator if millions of lives are on the line. However I think there's no question that the practice has been abused. I fully admit that it is very easy for me to sit here and pontificate knowing that I'm never going to be the guy having to make calls regarding the safety of the greater American populace.

[tivo]

I wonder how long you it would take you to declare Barack Obama the greatest president in the history of the United States if placed under the...erm...pitcher.

There's "telling the truth" and then there's "saying fuckin' anything." But please, continue to conflate the two as one equally valid and noble consequence of torture.


There's using waterboarding as a means to get people to say what you want them to say and then there's interrogation and extraction of information from someone. Getting people to say lies about Bridget Jones' Diary or Obama isn't what waterbording should be about. It should be used if human lives are at stake and if the individual is believed to have info. If a detained terrorist gives false information then the US military would check it out and determine its not a threat. If the information is real then lives can be saved. Sounds better than doing nothing. Why not leave it on the table if there's a possibility to save lives in the future. Terrorists do much worse, both physically and morally. And we don't need to tie another hand behind our back. Treat it as a last resort of interrogation but don't flat abolish it.

[mykevermin]

Only a fool argues that a dichotomy exists that includes torture as an option and "nothing" as its only other choice.

You might as well staunchly argue that at any given restaurant you have two options: a hamburger or a kick in the dick. It's just as logically sound as what you claim.

[Koggit]

translation of tivo's logic: "torture them, they'll say something and it might end up being true."

a low bar. by that standard, if all we want is for them to talk, we should instead drug the fuck out of them. if the guvvamint doesn't wanna get their hands dirty with the good stuff (i think E would be perfect for such a task) they can just get em drunk. really drunk.

[HowStern]

There's using waterboarding as a means to get people to say what you want them to say and then there's interrogation and extraction of information from someone. Getting people to say lies about Bridget Jones' Diary or Obama isn't what waterbording should be about. It should be used if human lives are at stake and if the individual is believed to have info. If a detained terrorist gives false information then the US military would check it out and determine its not a threat. If the information is real then lives can be saved. Sounds better than doing nothing. Why not leave it on the table if there's a possibility to save lives in the future. Terrorists do much worse, both physically and morally. And we don't need to tie another hand behind our back. Treat it as a last resort of interrogation but don't flat abolish it.

Let me join you in action hero fantasy land for a second and pretend there are lives on the line and we need information ASAP or thousands die. By the time we check the info obtained through torture it could very well, and most likely would, be too late.
These people base their beliefs on death being better than life. 72 virgins for being a martyr. Suicide bombing, etc..

Not to mention we've probabl done this to hundreds, maybe thousands, of innocent people. Which not only get us no info but makes us more enemies.

[cochesecochese]

Only a fool argues that a dichotomy exists that includes torture as an option and "nothing" as its only other choice.

You might as well staunchly argue that at any given restaurant you have two options: a hamburger or a kick in the dick. It's just as logically sound as what you claim.

Does the kick come with unlimited breadsticks?

[elprincipe]

^^ I would say we shouldn't take it off the table when dealing with terrorists. this video proves its effectiveness. After 6 seconds he wanted nothing to do with waterboarding. Terrorists are chopping civilians heads off with dull blades, they are taking elementary schools hostage and blowing up hospitals. Non-state combatants do not fall under normal jurisdiction. They have no morals. And I expect my government to do everything in its power to protect her citizens. If this involves getting a few people's shirts wet, then so be it.

What you are advocating is illegal. Our government signed treaties prohibiting torture and they were duly ratified, making them the law of the land. But even if that law didn't exist, it's still morally wrong to torture anyone for any purpose. The ends do not justify the means.

[pittpizza]

I can't agree enough with HowStern's point about torture making us more enemies.

I hate torture. So does almost every other person in the world. We as a nation, promised other nations that we won't tortue.

So lets recap:
1. Torture is uselss.
2. It makes people hate us.
3. Tivo's logic is retarded. As mykevermine clearly pointed out (nicely done).

Everyone in this thread is right but you Tivo. How unusual is that in a Vs. Thread with 20+ posts? Are we learning something yet?

EDIT: On a somewhat related note: isn't there such a thing as truth serum (sodium pentothal) or is this BS? Do you think this is torture? If it is torture, it sure seems like the most humane and most useful form of it.

[HowStern]

Oh, man. Good call on that truth serum stuff I forgot that shit existed. I wonder if they use that or how they consider it.

Ok, I googled about it before finish writing this post and found this.

http://themoderatevoice.com/32002/waterboarding-v-truth-serum/

Haven't read the whole thing yet but it looks interesting.

[paddlefoot]

I never quite understood the argument of whether or not waterboarding is torture. It is used to coerce information, how can it not be considered torture.

You can atleast debate whether torture can acquire vital information. Though, as Myke has stated many times, most experienced military officials feel it is counter-productive.

[dafoomie]

Legality and morality only enter the equation if torture were an effective means of obtaining accurate information. It isn't. It doesn't work.

[bmulligan]

Here is Christopher Hitchens doing the same thing..only they do it PROPERLY..the way it's done in the field.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LPubUCJv58

Hitchens only got the suffocation sensation, not the inhalation of water on top of it. That quad-folded towel only gave him the snuff, not the sensation of water pouring into the mouth and nose while gasping for air. What a pussy.

[JolietJake]

I had a long winded post about what separates us from the terrorists ready, but didn't post it because i'm sure i'd just get blasted for being an idealist or something.

[HowStern]

Hitchens only got the suffocation sensation, not the inhalation of water on top of it. That quad-folded towel only gave him the snuff, not the sensation of water pouring into the mouth and nose while gasping for air. What a pussy.

Oh, cool, so upload your video of having it done. Oh, you don't have one? Oh..You've never had it done?? Oh...

[SpeedyG]

Oh, cool, so upload your video of having it done. Oh, you don't have one? Oh..You've never had it done?? Oh...
I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic.

But I have had it done.... It sucks

[HowStern]

^are you in the military or did you just have it done out of curiosity? or...are...you...a...terrorist??!

Also, going by his previous posts on the site, I don't think bmulligan was being sarcastic. :/

[SpeedyG]

Oh, cool, so upload your video of having it done. Oh, you don't have one? Oh..You've never had it done?? Oh...
I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic.

But I have had it done.... It sucks


EDIT: Odd double post.

But Yes, went through SERE school. Not quite the Academic Prank that the pundits would have you believe.

[thrustbucket]

Will this end the debate? Of course not. It's not like empirical evidence ever got in the way of rigid ideology before.

At first glance I thought you were talking about the recent Cheney vs. Obama (http://www.reuters.com/news/video?videoId=105045) rhetoric.

[HowStern]

But I have had it done.... It sucks


EDIT: Odd double post.

But Yes, went through SERE school. Not quite the Academic Prank that the pundits would have you believe.

ah yeah that's what I thought. How long do they make you do it for?
I almost want to do it out of curiosity but I really don't.

[ToadallyAwesome]

I imagined this as buckets and buckets of water pouring over the person. I had no idea it was a towel and a bottle of water. It is a pretty creative and cost effective form of torture.

I wonder if they accidentally drowned anyone doing this. It only takes a small amount of water.

[Reality's Fringe]

ah yeah that's what I thought. How long do they make you do it for?
I almost want to do it out of curiosity but I really don't.

I'm going into the AF as an aviator, and we're required to attend SERE training (same course as Army,Marines,Navy). I've been told that it's long enough to make you wish you never went.

That's the nature of the training though. From what I've been told, it's essentially several days in the woods trying not to be found by the "enemy" (while learning to eat things you wouldn't want to, normally).The thing is, you're ALWAYS "found"at the end.

And each person I talked to said that when you're "Found", it's not fun. But hey, at least I can say that I was tortured.....as big of a stretch as that will be.

[theloserboy]

Not really related to the discussion about the morality of waterboarding, but rather the first post about Mancow (http://gawker.com/5272691/mancows-waterboarding-was-completely-fake)

[mykevermin]

well, fuck me...

[UncleBob]

Ha. I am amused.

[paddlefoot]

I imagined this as buckets and buckets of water pouring over the person. I had no idea it was a towel and a bottle of water. It is a pretty creative and cost effective form of torture.

I wonder if they accidentally drowned anyone doing this. It only takes a small amount of water.

Nah, just brain damage :roll:

[pimpster4183]

I was listening to Stern the other day on my way to work and former Gov. Jesse Ventura, a former navy seal was on. He was completly against waterboarding and says it is pointless. A terrorist is going to tell you whatever you want to hear when you torture them, so you get pointless information. He also claimed if it does work, why don't we have Bin Laden yet? He said back in the day when he was in the SEALs, they had to get waterboarded in training.

[UncleBob]

>He also claimed if it does work, why don't we have Bin Laden yet?

Wow. If he really asked that, then he's an idiot.

[HowStern]

^How so?

[UncleBob]

"If talking works, why is North Korea testing nuclear weapons?"

The situation is far more complicated than that and anyone who can read a newspaper would know that.

[HowStern]

I disagree. We found Hussein semi-quickly. Since then we implemented the use of waterboarding. If these torture methods were producing correct information then why haven't we gotten Bin Laden yet?
After 8 years of waterboarding people, surely, we should have his whereabouts, no?

(Hint: He's probably dead. Double hint: Torture gathers no viable information.)

edit: Also, who claimed talking works? Ventura didn't say that.

[GuilewasNK]

The funny thing about the entire Hannity/Olbermann debacle...

Olbermann is all "waterboarding is not only illegal but is a torturous act", condeming anyone possibly involved with it.

Yet, he's willing to pay to have it done to his competition?

Not that I'd object to something that would shut Hannity's mouth for a few seconds.

Perhaps real torture methods should involve making detainees watch these guys' shows...

Olbermann is an egotistical ass. All he did was prove that, as long as it meets ones own ends, people will go along with anything no matter how enlightened they may make themselves out to be.

And Hannity should have never opened his mouth without following though. He's an ass too.

I know they both are entertainers as much as anything, but their egos are absurd.

[UncleBob]

Who's to say anyone's actually asked a detainee who was being tortured "Where is Osama"?
Who's to say the detainee actually knows Osama's location?
Who's to say Osama didn't move the *second* the detainee was captured?

I'm not saying torture does produce reliable information. I'm merely saying that his line of decision making is faulty.

And many people have claimed that, instead of sanctions and UN resolutions, we should talk with the leaders of other countries. I didn't mean to imply that Ventura said that, I was just drawing a line of similarity.

[HowStern]

You just helped validate Ventura's point as to why WBing doesn't work.

>Who's to say the detainee actually knows Osama's location?
Who's to say Osama didn't move the *second* the detainee was captured?

[UncleBob]

Not at all.

That's like saying I can't use fire to burn a newspaper just because the things I've used fire on didn't burn.

*If* we had the right individual in custody and got to him before Osama got word he'd been captured, then possibly torturing the location of Osama out of him could have worked. We don't know that it would or would not have worked.

Now, I'm not saying we should just willy-nilly torture every captured individual and ask them the location of Osama. I'm not even saying that we should torture one guy if we know he knows the location of Osama. I'm just saying the assumption is faulty.

[UncleBob]

I disagree. We found Hussein semi-quickly. Since then we implemented the use of waterboarding.

By the way, we captured Hussein (the Iraqi, not the President. ;)) in December of 2003.
Obviously, there's no Wikipedia page to tell me when we started waterboarding, but the hoopla revolving around Nancy Pelosi starts with a 2002 CIA briefing where she claims she was mislead about waterboading.

So we were waterboading before Hussein was captured - for all we know, we could have gotten the info leading to his capture from waterboarding. :)

(I don't think we did, nor do I really think torture is effective or justified.... Just sayin'...)

[rickonker]

Will this end the debate? Of course not. It's not like empirical evidence ever got in the way of rigid ideology before.

Are you suggesting you don't have a rigid ideology? Are there circumstances under which you think torture is acceptable?

[UncleBob]

Are you suggesting you don't have a rigid ideology? Are there circumstances under which you think torture is acceptable?

To throw a wrench in the works (even though this question wasn't aimed at me)... Are there circumstanced under which I think torture is acceptable. No.

Are there circumstances under which I could see myself torturing someone to try and get information? Yes.

It doesn't mean I'm not a good person or that I'm for torture. It means that I recognize my humanity - both its weaknesses and its strong points.

[rickonker]

To throw a wrench in the works (even though this question wasn't aimed at me)... Are there circumstanced under which I think torture is acceptable. No.

Are there circumstances under which I could see myself torturing someone to try and get information? Yes.

It doesn't mean I'm not a good person or that I'm for torture. It means that I recognize my humanity - both its weaknesses and its strong points.
Yeah, good post. Seriously, I appreciate that you can make that admission. I'm sure there are people who would torture in extreme circumstances but would never admit it.

[sp00ge]

Not to stir up the hornet's nest, but once I saw the name Mancow, I kept on walking. He used to be good way back in the day, but once he left 103.5, hit syndication and became a Fox News lackey, he lost all credibility and respect. But of course that's just my opinion.

[Msut77]

You just helped validate Ventura's point as to why WBing doesn't work.

>Who's to say the detainee actually knows Osama's location?
Who's to say Osama didn't move the *second* the detainee was captured?

Depends on what you mean by "work", torture certainly works to get the answer you want to hear. Apparently the point was always to get false confessions just to have something to justify all the garbage that was presented as evidence and rammed through in the run up to the war and afterwards.

[UncleBob]

Yeah, good post. Seriously, I appreciate that you can make that admission. I'm sure there are people who would torture in extreme circumstances but would never admit it.

Sadly, there are those who would condemn me for that statement and not understand my point. But so is life...

[bmulligan]

^are you in the military or did you just have it done out of curiosity? or...are...you...a...terrorist??!

Also, going by his previous posts on the site, I don't think bmulligan was being sarcastic. :/

I was being facetious, not sarcastic. Look it up.

And I am not currently in the military. I do think, however, that their may be extreme situations where this form of "simulated" drowning can be justified. They are very rare, and few and far between. Certainly where time and threat level are of great importance, this method may be useful given certain circumstances.

One single act, on it's own, can be justified if it is used to get information. But any act done for the sake of revenge, or pleasure, or done when it's known that valuable information cannot be reliably obtained is torture. There is always a context, which is something that the Left glaringly glazes over and wishes to focus on the act itself instead of the intent. The Right also like to glamorize the act and pretend the context is always for a good purpose. I think we all know that neither of these situations are absolute truth.

But to repeatedly do this to someone in custody at a facility over months or years is just sadistic form of torture, IMO. Someone who's been in custody for over two years isn't going to give you any information on the positions of a nomadic enemy.

[mykevermin]

Are you suggesting you don't have a rigid ideology? Are there circumstances under which you think torture is acceptable?

Are there circumstances where you think having detainees watch episodes of "Banana Splits" is acceptable?

Acceptable is one part of the equation. Useful and informative is more important.

I think it's acceptable to let detainees watch "Banana Splits," but I don't think we'll get any information out of such an action. Waterboarding/torture is the same way.

The only time I've seen torture work is when I didn't push the "X" button fast enough in Metal Gear Solid.

[JolietJake]

Oh that is going in the sig for sure.

[UncleBob]

The only time I've seen torture work is when I didn't push the "X" button fast enough in Metal Gear Solid.

To be fair, now, how many high level military detainees have you seen tortured?

Just because you've never walked on the moon doesn't mean it didn't happen (did it?).

I like to think I've made my position clear, but I keep finding myself having to point out bad statements. When we're dealing with high level military intelligence and such, I'm sure there's a lot going on that we don't know about. To make a statement along the lines of Ventura's earlier statement that ticked me off: "If torture doesn't work, why haven't there been any 9/11 scale attacks since 9/11?"

I'm not saying it does or doesn't always work. I'm not saying it is or isn't justified. But for those who say it doesn't work, how long do you think you could sit, chained up, with someone pulling your finger/toenails out before you'd tell them where your credit cards are stashed?

I'm sure there are cases where torture would get useful results.

[JolietJake]

I'd probably admit to killing jimmy hoffa if it meant them stopping the torture. That's the point, what wouldn't you say to get them to stop?

[UncleBob]

I'd probably admit to killing jimmy hoffa if it meant them stopping the torture. That's the point, what wouldn't you say to get them to stop?

But would you tell me where your credit cards are?

If you have real information that is useful to me, could I get it out of you by torturing you?

[JolietJake]

Me personally, probably. Then again, i'm not a fiercely convicted fundamentalist either.

Think of it as trying to make Pat Robertson declare that there is no god, he may say it, but do you think he really believes that or is just saying it to make you stop?

[UncleBob]

But the idea isn't to get the detainee to renounce their god. It's to get them to give us useful information. Getting Robertson to declare there is no God wouldn't be helpful to anyone.

[Koggit]

Put yourself in the suspect's position -- I'm a crazy murderer, let's say I'm torturing you and asking where your mom/dad/sibling/loved one is, you know I want to find them and kill them, that's what I do, you don't want me to know where they are, you DO know where they're hiding, so when I torture you what are you going to say?


Yeah, you get people to talk, but you're not gonna learn what people aren't gonna say.

[UncleBob]

Put yourself in the suspect's position -- I'm a crazy murderer, let's say I'm torturing you and asking where your mom/dad/sibling/loved one is, you know I want to find them and kill them, that's what I do, you don't want me to know where they are, you DO know where they're hiding, so when I torture you what are you going to say?


Yeah, you get people to talk, but you're not gonna learn what people aren't gonna say.

But you never know what someone is not going to say until they don't say it.

Let's say I'm the crazy murderer. You know I'm going to kill you anyway. Now, if you tell me where your credit cards are, I can kill you quickly. If you don't, I'm going to torture you until either you do tell me or you die. Are you going to tell me?

[mykevermin]

If you die either way, who gives a fuck about your credit score?

What a positively fucking stupid hypothetical.

[UncleBob]

If you die either way, who gives a fuck about your credit score?

What a positively fucking stupid hypothetical.

To be fair, your spouse could be on the same account. That'd be a crappy way to leave her.

You are correct - it is stupid - because the torture isn't designed to ultimately kill the detainee. So it's a hard comparison to make.

Let's say I'm a crazy robber and I've broken into your home, tied you up and trashed the home looking for valuables that I think you might have. Am I more likely to get them by staring at you or by beating the crap out of you until you tell me? Of course, you might not have any valuables in the home - so either way, I could completely be wasting my time. But if you did....

[mykevermin]

:wall:

[UncleBob]

You are correct. Arguing hypothetical situations is like banging your head against the wall.
I think it's acceptable to let detainees watch "Banana Splits," but I don't think we'll get any information out of such an action. Waterboarding/torture is the same way.

[UncleBob]

To summarize my viewpoints (since they tend to get lost...).

If you're going to argue that torture is immoral, I agree.
If you're going to argue that torture is unjustifiable in the long term, I agree.

If you're going to argue that torture absolutely, positively could never, ever provide useful information, then I think you're crazy.

[JolietJake]

But the idea isn't to get the detainee to renounce their god. It's to get them to give us useful information. Getting Robertson to declare there is no God wouldn't be helpful to anyone.
......I think you've missed my point, but i'm not in the mood to try and explain it further.

[bmulligan]

At least the Mancow got a real waterboarding. Although they poured it on quite thick from what I saw. He would have lasted longer if they hadn't poured so much liquid so fast into his mouth. Very bad technique. It must have been a liberal jugman.

[HowStern]

^The guy that did mancows admitted he had no idea what he was doing and didn't give mancow a proper waterboarding.

http://gawker.com/5272691/mancows-waterboarding-was-completely-fake

Or are you being "facetious" again?

[fatherofcaitlyn]

If we ban torture, who is going to pay for my Viagra?

[mykevermin]

^ the wealthy, foc. the wealthy. they pay for everything, after all.

[perdition(troy]

BLOOMBERG: "One percent of the households that file in this city pay something like 50% of the taxes," explained the Mayor. "In the city, that's something like 40,000 people. If a handful left, any raise would make it revenue neutral. The question is what's fair. If 1% are paying 50% of the taxes, you want to make it even more?"

[nasum]

translation of tivo's logic: "torture them, they'll say something and it might end up being true."

a low bar. by that standard, if all we want is for them to talk, we should instead drug the fuck out of them. if the guvvamint doesn't wanna get their hands dirty with the good stuff (i think E would be perfect for such a task) they can just get em drunk. really drunk.


Only problem with getting "them" drunk is that most muslim authorities dictate that alcohol is akin to sin so "we" would be doing something quite wrong in that way which the ACLU would piss their pants about.

[gmsisko1]

The treaty applies to uniformed millitary men of another country.
The Geneva convention does not apply to terrorists.


What you are advocating is illegal. Our government signed treaties prohibiting torture and they were duly ratified, making them the law of the land. But even if that law didn't exist, it's still morally wrong to torture anyone for any purpose. The ends do not justify the means.

[gmsisko1]

And by the way, we don't know if waterboarding works, because the Obama Admin won't relaease the records. They will only releasethe records that supports their side.

[tivo]

In a related note, closing Gitmo is going swimmingly.

[HowStern]

The treaty applies to uniformed millitary men of another country.
The Geneva convention does not apply to terrorists.

That's cute.

So how do we prove every person detained, and to be waterboarded, is a terrorist?

[mykevermin]

That's cute.

So how do we prove every person detained, and to be waterboarded, is a terrorist?

duh.

uniforms.

We should report gmsisko1 to the FBI, since he/she is probably not wearing a uniform right now?

Me? In order to avoid detection as a possible terrorist, I wear my Cobra Kai gi everywhere I go now.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y77/ypiedra/kaipic.jpg

I can sweep the leg and I'm still protected by Geneva Conventions.

[tivo]

That's cute.

So how do we prove every person detained, and to be waterboarded, is a terrorist?

If you find them in a terrorist training camp, If you find explosives in their home, if they've killed anyone, etc. I'm not saying everyone in gitmo is a terrorist (as numerous people are released w/o charge), but common, shit like THIS (http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=475_1244636707)is happening and some of those prisoners ARE GUILTY.

[HowStern]

duh.

uniforms.

We should report gmsisko1 to the FBI, since he/she is probably not wearing a uniform right now?

Me? In order to avoid detection as a possible terrorist, I wear my Cobra Kai gi everywhere I go now.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y77/ypiedra/kaipic.jpg

I can sweep the leg and I'm still protected by Geneva Conventions.

haha!

In honor of the upcoming ghostbusters game I have my Venkman http://www.slashfilm.com/wp/wp-content/images/ghostbustersuniformtshirt.jpg uniform. I should be safe.

[elprincipe]

You do have to admit the Cobra Kai uniforms were kick-ass.

http://www.valleymartialarts.com/images/CobraKai2.jpg

[mykevermin]

I don't have to admit that the sky is blue, do I?

Then I don't have to admit the inherent, god-given truth that those uniforms are still soopa bad-ass, a quarter century (!!!) later.