"The US Does Not Torture"

I'm sure most are aware of the microwave-generating crowd-control device that is was developed for the military. It may not end up being used on crowds or rioters, because of the severe pain it causes, but it would be a welcome addition to any torturer's toolkit. As long as it leaves no marks, the torturer can claim he never laid a finger on the victim.

If psychological trauma is allowed to be used as a coercion technique, it would only be a heavy incentive for torturer's to hide the damage their techniques inflict. Once the victim has been driven insane, he cannot testify against his torturer or plead innocent, and makes an excellent scapegoat. No one can prove he had ever been tortured at all, even if they could prove his innocence.

I would still like my question answered by one of the pro-torture people.

If we can't even get half the identities of the 9/11 hijackers right how are even 1/10th of the people being tortured in secret prisons right now even remotely related to terrorism?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Omnius Deus

I would still like my question answered by one of the pro-torture people.

If we can't even get half the identities of the 9/11 hijackers right how are even 1/10th of the people being tortured in secret prisons right now even remotely related to terrorism?

---

We got the 9/11 hijacker identities right, and with very impressive speed.

What do you suggest we do? That is a serious question I would love to see you answer. What do you suggest we do?

Ok UM now your just lying. Your dishonesty is getting very transparent and obvious. You ask another futile question. We are not so predictable. Notice that lately?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

We got the 9/11 hijacker identities right, and with very impressive speed.

---

Yeah, I have to ask where you got this information?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shark!

have you ever considered america creates enemies faster than they can kill them?

---

Interesting twist of logic there. Have you ever considered that our enemies choose to be enemies? We didn't create the evil they participate in.

Your suppose to love your enemies, not torture them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

Your suppose to love your enemies, not torture them.

---

Aww, isn't that sweet :smitten: :roll:

You know, your first responsibility is to protect yourself and those who depend upon you. If others mean you harm then they must be dealt with accordingly. Giving a Valentine's day card to a blood-thirsty lion won't cause him a change of heart, no matter how much you believe in the power of love.

Oneironaught Skull head for an avatar. Let me explain something to you. Love is way more than giving someone a valentine's day card. If you knew what it was you would already know how it protects you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oneironaught

Interesting twist of logic there. Have you ever considered that our enemies choose to be enemies? We didn't create the evil they participate in.

---

Our policy created the evil they participate in. Our policy and the underhanded tricks of governments in the middle-east. Let me ask you, after 9/11 did you feel like you chose to become enemies with the terrorists, or more like they chose you? This attack and repercussion cycle creates enemies for each other. 9/11 made the whole world hate bin Laden, they didn't choose to hate him, they felt obligated. Just the same our oppression made them hate us.

You people are so full of shit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

Oneironaught Skull head for an avatar. Let me explain something to you. Love is way more than giving someone a valentine's day card. If you knew what it was you would already know how it protects you.

---

It never ceases to amazes me just how out of touch with reality you are. You really think a kind word will stop them assholes? If so, then tell me why the hell all of these YEARS - no, decades... no: MILLENNIA - of trying to peacefully appease those assholes has gotten us NO CLOSER to coexistence with them? I'd love to hear your Bullshit answer to that.

PS, that's real cute about the "Skull head for an avatar" jab. Yeah real cute and funny "Mr. bullshit tarot card for an avatar". No wonder you're convinced that we are the ones in the wrong... what with believing in tarot bullshit and all. I'd like to discuss this with someone who doesn't believe in fantasy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Omnius Deus

Let me ask you, after 9/11 did you feel like you chose to become enemies with the terrorists, or more like they chose you?

---

Well, let me tell you, Mr. Deus (and I can't believe you actually need to be told this): They choose to be enemies with us. If I run up to you and punch you in the face did you choose me as an enemy? No, I chose you as an enemy. It's really quite simple... and obvious.

If you don't like our peaceful policies then leave us the hell alone. You want to pick a fight, YOU choose to make an enemy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

Yeah, I have to ask where you got this information?

---

Every news source I ever came across. That does not include left wing hate spin web sites, in case anybody is wondering.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

Ok UM now your just lying.

---

What sources say we got the hijacker identities wrong?

Do you have any videos of the "real" people with those identities on the news going, "Hey, I'm not dead!"? Cool. Please post a bunch of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mystic7

You ask another futile question. We are not so predictable. Notice that lately?

---

The question of what we should do is futile? Only because you don't have an answer for it. Your evasiveness is very predictable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Every news source I ever came across. That does not include left wing hate spin web sites, in case anybody is wondering.

---

Does that mean you included right wing hate spin web sites? :wink:

Ok, so, digging around for the past few minutes, this is what I've gotten so far.

These bring up the possibility of ID theft.
BBC News
LA Times
Islam Online
CNN

This one, though, does say that they used their real names (never saw this one before).

Looks like a bit of a gray area, to me. What news sources did you check?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

Does that mean you included right wing hate spin web sites? :wink:

Ok, so, digging around for the past few minutes, this is what I've gotten so far.

These bring up the possibility of ID theft.
BBC News
LA Times
Islam Online
CNN

This one, though, does say that they used their real names (never saw this one before).

Looks like a bit of a gray area, to me. What news sources did you check?

---

I saw the faces of the hijackers, along with their names, very soon after the 9/11 attacks on several news stations, who have everything to lose by making things up, as illustrated by Dan Rather's career crash. I can't remember if it was the next day, but it was right away.

It looks like there may have been confusion about whether some of the 19 hijackers may have used a stolen identity. Some sources say there is confusion about six, while some say there is confusion about one. It looks like the claim is still a matter of speculation.

Considering the fact that names are very common, there are of course going to be other Saudi citizens with the same names. Google your real name (first and last names together), and you will see that you are far from being alone with that name, unless your parents were completely original. I am too, and I have never met anybody with my first and last name combination. I will be surprised if I ever do, but I have seen on Google that there are many of them in the country.

I began the post with the past knowledge that there was uncertainty on whether or not the hijackers were properly identified, but after finding the final link that I posted, I wasn't sure. I posted them all because I only thought it to be fair that I posted everything, in light of the new information that I found. So I concede that you could be right about their being properly identified. Until I spend some more time on finding some sort of consensus, though, I can't say you're right or wrong, either way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oneironaught

You people are so full of shit.


It never ceases to amazes me just how out of touch with reality you are. You really think a kind word will stop them assholes?

---

I'm with the other crazy guy :)

I think you're the one who's out of touch with reality. Kind words doesn't = love. Love isn't just words, pretty cards or holding hands. Love is action that benefits both parties. There is always a loving action that can be done to solve a critical situation, but it's hard to even consider or think about if you are in a hateful state of mind. Love isn't out of touch with reality. Reality is out of touch with love.

It is beneficial for both the terrorists, AND ourselves that we destroy the root of terrorism. We can't however do this if we have the mentality that terrorists are 'evil', thus we destroy the terrorists and not terrorism.

To be able to prevent this terrorism from happening again we have to first look at the terrorists as human beings, in the human condition, reacting to their environment the way a human would. To treat them as evil inhumane monsters and the reason why this is happening to us, will escape us. Maybe some are genuinely born 'evil', but they are more likely to be the leaders and not the sheep.

It is necessary for the government to have the peoples best interests in mind. That means protecting us, and protecting us from attacks. But how can it protect us from future terrorists in this area if we don't prevent that from happening?

Exactly Um, names are confusing in arab, that was the FBIs excuse for putting the wrong pictures up, not that the terrorist stole identities. God, didn't you read any of the 9/11 debunking links you gave me?

So if the FBI confuses names of people that ALREADY attacked us how the fuck are they getting any names right for their rendition?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by juroara

I think you're the one who's out of touch with reality.

---

No, actually I embrace rational, realistic thinking - not feel-good, "let's coddle those who actively seek our complete and utter destruction" lollipop dreams.

Quote:

---

Kind words doesn't = love. Love isn't just words, pretty cards or holding hands. Love is action that benefits both parties.

---

I agree with that. But we (as a nation) cannot afford to make the mistake of thinking that evil can be soothed just because WE think it should be able to be.

Quote:

---

There is always a loving action that can be done to solve a critical situation,

---

True. But, unfortunately, sometimes tough love is in order. Why do you think so many of today's youth are in a state where they're shooting up their schools and committing other acts were once the stuff of fiction? I'll tell you why: We've grown so damn afraid of tough love (you know, the kind of love that actually works) that we try to appease our way out of every uncomfortable situation. Well, you see how well that's been working for us.

Quote:

---

but it's hard to even consider or think about if you are in a hateful state of mind.

---

Call me hateful all you want. The fact is that I understand the difference between in-vain pleasantries and realistic action.

Quote:

---

Love isn't out of touch with reality. Reality is out of touch with love.

---

Poetic, but irrelevant.

Quote:

---

It is beneficial for both the terrorists, AND ourselves that we destroy the root of terrorism.

---

True. But, in the meantime, we must deal with the problem at hand and quit trying to go through life with blinders on, thinking that if only we are nice enough then we'll receive the same in kind. They don't want us to be nice; they want us dead. You can't reason with that no matter how hard to try and no matter how many times you blow kisses at them.

Let me repeat that most important point: They don't want to peacefully coexist. They want us dead.

Quote:

---

We can't however do this if we have the mentality that terrorists are 'evil', thus we destroy the terrorists and not terrorism.

---

You see, that's the thing that really peeves me about all this lovey-dovey politically correct crap. When you are too damned afraid to identify the enemy you are doomed to fall by their hand. I call a spade a spade. Until you have the courage to stand up and identify evil as evil you stand zero chance of defeating them. They damn sure have no problem calling us "evil", "the devil", and any other hateful term they can spew forth.

Yet, are we the one's committing random acts of blowing up innocents? Are we the ones actively trying to bring about the return of the 12th Ahmad? Are we the one's on an active journey to hasten the biblical "end times"? The answer: NO, we are not the ones doing these EVIL acts. So, until you can justify their acts of evil you have not a leg to stand on to claim they they are anything other pure evil.

And remember, they are doing this crap all over the world, not just in America. So, what exactly has the rest of the world done to make enemies with them? Huh? Please teach me, oh wise one. It's a matter of deeply-held ideology. It doesn't have anything to do with us "being big fat meanies".

If you somehow find the absurd rationale to justify their behaviour then please - oh pleeeease - tell me exactly how you define evil. If genocide isn't evil then what the hell is? If intending to exterminate everyone who thinks and believes differently from yourself isn't evil then what the hell is? If raising your children to believe that every non-Muslim (especially Jews) is "swine" and should be killed by your sword isn't evil then what the hell is? If preaching that "honor" is killing yourself for the sole purpose of murdering as many innocents as possible isn't evil then what the hell is? If the ideology that the greatest thing one could do for their god is to murder others simply because they believe differently isn't evil then what the hell is? I could go on and on.

And what I find even more absurd - and frankly, disgusting - is how some of you are going out of your way to defend evil, instead of standing up for good. Very disappointing, to say the least.

Quote:

---

Blah-blah....Maybe some are genuinely born 'evil', but they are more likely to be the leaders and not the sheep.

---

If you perpetrate and embrace evil you are evil. There is no gray area.

Quote:

---

It is necessary for the government to have the peoples best interests in mind. That means protecting us, and protecting us from attacks.

---

And what do you think they are trying to do? The way to protect is to confront the problem. Hope and ignoring the problem doesn't get the job done.

Quote:

---

But how can it protect us from future terrorists in this area if we don't prevent that from happening?

---

That's the age-old question. But I can tell you what won't work. What won't work is to continue pretending we can talk our way into a friendship with evil. I wonder how you would have liked to handle Hitler... You'd want to sit down to a nice glass of tea and exchange love letters and fishing stories. "I caught one this big!" Sad, sad indeed.

:)

you misunderstood me

I AM talking about 'tough love'. Not sitting down and talking our way into a friendship.

now you've asked me a couple of questions, but I'm not the one who's proposing they only hate america.

as for being afraid to define evil - no, I'm not afraid to define evil. But part of evil is to control people, and mislead people into believing something is either evil or not. There IS GRAY AREA. To believe there isn't evil wins.

Just look at what Al Queda is doing, it's lack of tolerance for the gray area. He is labeling anything that is not easily associated in the west as 'holy', as 'evil'. That's what happens when there is no 'gray', you get intolerance.

Look at genocide. Look at american slavery. Look at what happened to the Jews. This was all spawned from the mentality that the world is either black or white, that its either good or evil - lack of tolerance and lack of acceptance of the gray area.

do I believe in evil? yes, do I label it, yes. But the evil I believe in is not a group of people, or even a person or entity such as the devil. Evil is a state of being - and this state of being is sooooooo wicked, so evil, that it is capable of making those in this state of being believe, they are righteous and holy. If Bin Laden believes he is a holy prophet, I would not be surprised anymore if he believed he really was a cowardly psycho.

That's why labeling these people as evil and destroying them in my opinion does not get rid of the evil that ensnared their minds to begin with. This 'evil' is capable of creating more terrorists were it lose the ones it has. These people you have labeled 'evil' are mere puppets for the evil I am talking about.

Don't get caught into the religious war mentality. Even if this is a war between good and evil - the good and evil parts are not defined by the government or country of origin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oneironaught

I wonder how you would have liked to handle Hitler... You'd want to sit down to a nice glass of tea and exchange love letters and fishing stories. "I caught one this big!" Sad, sad indeed.

---

I would have kept Hitler locked up. But his life is his own and no one has the right to take it away. And if he wanted to end his life, I would have handed him a gun.

I specifically said love in action that benefits both parties - not romantic letters. Yet you keep wanting to imagine I am talking about fluffy words that do nothing. Obviously, that is neither action and benefits no one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Omnius Deus

Exactly Um, names are confusing in arab, that was the FBIs excuse for putting the wrong pictures up, not that the terrorist stole identities. God, didn't you read any of the 9/11 debunking links you gave me?

So if the FBI confuses names of people that ALREADY attacked us how the fuck are they getting any names right for their rendition?

---

What makes you so sure it happened? It looks to me like you are jumping to conclusions based on speculation, as usual.

Quote:

---

Well, let me tell you, Mr. Deus (and I can't believe you actually need to be told this): They choose to be enemies with us. If I run up to you and punch you in the face did you choose me as an enemy? No, I chose you as an enemy. It's really quite simple... and obvious.

If you don't like our peaceful policies then leave us the hell alone. You want to pick a fight, YOU choose to make an enemy.

---

We punched them in the face first. That part of history was just erased from the media.

UM: I say again read one of the 9/11 debunk sites you refer to. They people claimin 9/11 is not a conspiracy say the reason that some of the hijackers on the list are still alive is because the names are so confusing.

Fo fucks sake if names confuse the FBI for dead hijackers how on earth are they sorting through millions and millions of arabic names and coming up with the right ones?

You said it yourself, the news wouldn't have posted those pictures if they weren't positive, well that means the FBI was positive these 19 were it, but they got the names wrong. Now they're bringing people in and torturing them because they think something.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Omnius Deus

UM: I say again read one of the 9/11 debunk sites you refer to. They people claimin 9/11 is not a conspiracy say the reason that some of the hijackers on the list are still alive is because the names are so confusing.

---

The links I provided were access to a whole universe of 9/11 debunking links. I didn't say I agree with everything they all say. I was just giving Mystic access to the counterarguments he was looking for.

But I know you are not basing your entire conclusion on what one of those hundreds of links you disagree with said. So again, tell me why you are so sure the government was wrong about the identities of the hijackers.

Because that's what they said. That was their excuse that they gave the debunkers, after the supposed hijackers started appearing on television guaranteeing everybody they didn't blow up any buildings. Same pictures as the people, meaning even the pictures were wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Omnius Deus

Because that's what they said. That was their excuse that they gave the debunkers, after the supposed hijackers started appearing on television guaranteeing everybody they didn't blow up any buildings. Same pictures as the people, meaning even the pictures were wrong.

---

It has not been established yet, I thought. When did the hijackers appear on television? Can you post videos of that?