Thread: "The US Does Not Torture"

Omnius Deus was trying to point out that if our government can't be certain of the guilt of the people it tortures, it shouldn't torture at all. Every report I've read, for example, about the inmates at Guantanamo indicates that the vast majority are very likely innocent and a substantial number have proof of their innocence, but since they don't have habeas corpus rights, they can't bring their case to trial to prove their innocence.

The practice of kidnapping such people has led to nations such as Britain and Italy bringing cases against the CIA for violating their laws. It has also led to the extraordinary rendition case of the innocent, Pakistani software programmer who was captured at the U.S.-Canadian border, sent to Syria to be tortured(do we really trust the Syrians to tell us what they learn from terrorists?) and was finally released after a year of torture. Canada apologized, but the U.S. government has refused to apologize as of yet. The man has not been able to bring charges against the U.S. government because the courts have ruled that doing so would jeopardize state secrets.

If one man could be innocent, so could many of the thousands of others being tortured in secret prisons and sent to other governments to be tortured.

It seems that it is not the government that is confused on the hijackers' identities. It is the public. Also, there is a very big difference between saying who a person is because of a fake ID and taking a terrorist off a battlefield or out of a terrorist training camp.

The Pakistani you are talking about claims he is innocent, of course. The U.S. government is not buying it.

Where do you get that most of the people in Guantanamo are innocent? That is not the general report.

If the government didn't accept the innocence of the Pakistani man, why is he free?

Maybe you're right about the Guantanamo prisoners, but it's impossible to tell if they are never tried for their crimes.

What about the Marin Taliban, Universal Mind? An American that grew up in California went to Afghanistan to study the religion and converted to it, then came back and got 20 years. He went to a school near mine.

That example proves this goes way beyond picking people up in training camps. They're picking people up for their religious beliefs.

Originally Posted by R.D.735

If the government didn't accept the innocence of the Pakistani man, why is he free?

Maybe you're right about the Guantanamo prisoners, but it's impossible to tell if they are never tried for their crimes.

Being a member of a terrorist organization and being believed to have knowledge of a pending terrorist attack is not illegal. However, it is justification for interrogation.

Originally Posted by Omnius Deus

What about the Marin Taliban, Universal Mind? An American that grew up in California went to Afghanistan to study the religion and converted to it, then came back and got 20 years. He went to a school near mine.

That example proves this goes way beyond picking people up in training camps. They're picking people up for their religious beliefs.

Show me proof that he was imprisoned for his religious beliefs. Can you? If he got twenty years, he was convicted by a jury for a crime. That requires evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.

Oneironaught unlike juroara I do not wish to give you a big essay response on what I mean by love and how to deal with someone like hitler. You need to do your own growing up. I'm just saying what I know. Since your so closed minded you will automatically believe that I am saying something wrong as you do not like the sound of something that your in illusion about. I am under no illusion what love can do. Anything you doubt about what I said is because of your uncertain insecurities. Your skull picture makes you look silly. Just like, your dead or something. It's seems dumb to me. Just my opinion though. The tarot on the other hand is one of the most intelligent systems of language known to man. Only a fool would disregard the potential.

You have a lot of unearned faith in our judicial system, um.

Originally Posted by Oneironaught

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

This is the kind of low level thinking that really discredits you. All this rubbish you are talking about. It is not reason or logic at all. Firstly because cuddling is an action. And one that has no relevance to terrorism. And a lollipop dream would involve someone like yourself who thinks if you want to protect yourself, you can't do it with love. Well no, that's how most parents protect their children. That's the entire reason you would live. So I think you sound a bit silly calling something like love, a lollipop dream compared to the power of terrorism. It actually makes you sound like a total nutcase. Clearly love is one of the most important things in life.

Originally Posted by Omnius Deus

You have a lot of unearned faith in our judicial system, um.

That does not qualify as an answer.

Universal mind when does your paycheck come in. What if you fail to win the debate do they still pay you?

Originally Posted by Mystic7

Universal mind when does your paycheck come in. What if you fail to win the debate do they still pay you?

I must know to whom I am speaking when I answer such a question for someone who is not aboard an Illuminati saucer in the Bermuda Triangle. Is this you?

Quick try and ridicule me. It's your only hope. lol.

To late for that jackass.

My whole view on the subject is that America does use some forms of torture to get information, but I think that what we need to know (if there is anything to know) justifies the punishment, as long as it's not TOO extreme like a lot of it IS. If they need to rough the guy up to learn where the weapons of... cloaking weapons are... you get the point.

Originally Posted by Mystic7

Quick try and ridicule me. It's your only hope. lol.

Oh, sorry. I forgot that you are above use of ridicule and being an unresponsive jackass.

You've been awfully quiet about the issue of how the U.S. should go about interrogating terrorists. What is your suggestion on what methods should be used to get necessary information from terrorists?

Originally Posted by Mystic7

Torture is bad, mmmmkay? Now you denounce Al Qaeda.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

What is your suggestion on what methods should be used to get necessary information from terrorists?

Terrorists is a categorization. We are talking about defeating terrorism. So the question is what method to get information to defeat terrorism. This includes predators like yourself that go around internet forums being intellectually dishonest for a paycheck. Now you may have herd of this thing called technology, guns, and self defense. You may also have herd the terms education. Transparency, and freedom of the press and economy. You don't need to torture anyone. Infact torture is terrorism so your a maniac.

Originally Posted by Mystic7

Terrorists is a categorization. We are talking about defeating terrorism. So the question is what method to get information to defeat terrorism. This includes predators like yourself that go around internet forums being intellectually dishonest for a paycheck. Now you may have herd of this thing called technology, guns, and self defense. You may also have herd the terms education. Transparency, and freedom of the press and economy. You don't need to torture anyone. Infact torture is terrorism so your a maniac.

*NOT AN ANSWER*

Scenario: Khallid Sheik Muhammed, the orchestrator of the 9/11 attack strategy, is captured in Pakistan. He is Al Qaeda's chief terrrorist attack (irrational targetting and killing of innocents) orchestrator. How should interrogators go about getting him to reveal information about terrorist attacks in the making? Remember that I am not asking you to tell me what they should NOT do. I am asking you for your best suggestion on what they SHOULD do. Well, what do you suggest?

After you come up with something that sounds nice, I will tell you what actually did work.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Scenario: Khallid Sheik Muhammed, the orchestrator of the 9/11 attack strategy, is captured in Pakistan.

I don't agree he is the orchestrator of the 911 strategy. So false premise.

Originally Posted by Universal mind

He is Al Qaeda's chief terrrorist attack (irrational targetting and killing of innocents) orchestrator. How should interrogators go about getting him to reveal information about terrorist attacks in the making? Remember that I am not asking you to tell me what they should NOT do. I am asking you for your best suggestion on what they SHOULD do. Well, what do you suggest?

After you come up with something that sounds nice, I will tell you what actually did work.

Your entire story is made up for the benefit of your twisted ideology. I wasn't born yesterday. This is totally irrelevant to the fact torture sucks and should not be used on humans or endorsed.

Funny how I'm the one being accused of personal attacks by a mod because I said you guys are full of shit. But, in reality, I've been personally attacked more than once in this thread... Mystic7 anyone?

Originally Posted by Mystic7

You need to do your own growing up. I'm just saying what I know.

I actually need to slow down - or dumb down - my growth. You know, to give you a chance to catch up. *Waits for a very, very long time. Finally gives up; gets tired of waiting forever.*

Since your so closed minded you will automatically believe that I am saying something wrong as you do not like the sound of something that your in illusion about.

I "believe" it's wrong because I have a little thing called common sense. I've seen that kissing your enemy's ass doesn't work and continues to fail: repeatedly. You can not reason with people who are hell-bent on your total destruction. We've been kissing those peoples' asses for at least decades and that's not stopped them has it? The rest of the world has kissed their ass for millenia. That hasn't stopped their aggression, has it? Huh, maybe sometimes "love" isn't the solution. Drastic times call for drastic measures.

I am under no illusion what love can do.

Your posting begs to differ.

Anything you doubt about what I said is because of your uncertain insecurities.

It's called learning. You should try it sometime. You might find that you enjoy its benefits.

Your skull picture makes you look silly. Just like, your dead or something. It's seems dumb to me. Just my opinion though.

Huh, my Halloween avatar makes me look dumb? O....K.... Well, what's your excuse? Oh, I know: your words.

The tarot on the other hand is one of the most intelligent systems of language known to man. Only a fool would disregard the potential.

Well, and this. You're going to put your faith in random picks from a deck of mystic cards. O... K... Whatever. Like I said, I believe in rational thinking, not pipe dreams and incredible leaps of logic. Unlike "some" people.

Originally Posted by Mystic7

This is the kind of low level thinking that really discredits you. All this rubbish you are talking about. It is not reason or logic at all.

What? Think with your head, man. Learning from the past is "low-level thinking"? No, learning from the past is what enables future success. Unlike the repeated failure that results from NOT learning from the past. Only a fool steps in front of a moving car twice. An idiot does it repeatedly. The smart person learns that you can't do that without getting your ass stomped.

Firstly because cuddling is an action.

Get it straight: I said "cOddling, as in treating our enemies with kid gloves.

makes you sound like a total nutcase.

Back atcha'

Clearly love is one of the most important things in life.

But love is trumped by brains. You have misguided "love"; I have brains. I'll win every single time because I focus love where love should be.

Originally Posted by Mystic7

Quick try and ridicule me. It's your only hope. lol.

Actually, you're doing a pretty good job at that yourself. You're making yourself look like a naive child who's setting himself up for great failures in life.

To late for that jackass.

Personal attack count: What's that 4, 5 now?

Originally Posted by Oneironaught

Funny how I'm the one being accused of personal attacks by a mod because I said you guys are full of shit. But, in reality, I've been personally attacked more than once in this thread... Mystic7 anyone?

Ok, since we want to make a public scene about it.

Mystic, Oneironaught and Universal mind:

All of you are (unless I'm giving you more credit than you deserve) intelligent enough to make your points without resulting to all the personal attacks. Seriously. It's kind of sad to see people that are so passionate about their points of view result to all the name-calling and sarcasm that I've seen coming, at some level, from everyone. Just tone it down a bit, if you don't mind.

And Gh, you have made many more personal attacks than just saying "you guys are so full of shit," so don't assume that that was the only post I was talking about, or that you are any more innocent than the others.

If you guys disagree with each other, disagree. No need to be assholes to each other about it.

Carry on.

We're passionate about what we say and obviously can't understand how anyone could think differently about what seems so obvious to each of us.

But:

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

If you guys disagree with each other, disagree. No need to be assholes to each other about it.

Carry on.

... fair enough. I'm tired of arguing about political crap anyway. No one is ever going to change any one's mind. So, see ya'.

I don't strive to change anyone's mind, I just try to present the best argument I can to make obvious to people that read through this mess. Like the Who will you vote for thread probably presents the best reasons to vote for Ron Paul thanks to Universal Mind and the people willing to argue with him.

I agree that I may have crossed the line here. Oneironaught sorry if I seemed out of line. Your avatar is fine i can see the value in it and it's actually kind of kool the way it's transparent or highlighted light that.

I think I'll leave the name calling and futile stuff out of this. It's a bad mistake. Now that I reflect I'm actually kind of ashamed that I ended up indulging in that. I seemed to think for a second it was ok like it didn't matter in the moment. But now I see that's crazy and significantly childish for me to be arguing like this. Hopefully won't happen again.

Sorry to the administrators or anyone that had to read it. And universal mind I'm not going to judge how honest you are. You may have a radically different 180 degree view on most things compared to me. But I should be giving you the benifit of the doubt and entitling you to your opinion without accusing you of stuff. So I admit lately I have being in the wrong in this regard. Now I'll just move on and correct that mistake and not make it again hopefully.

Well if you look at the poll most here thinks we torture people. Which brings us back to the orginal question, why does the government try to act like they dont, when we are all fairly sure they do? Infact they admited many times they have tortured people, its only their offical stance that says they don't.

There are two serious problems here. One that we are torturing people, and two our government is trying to lie to us.

and I've explained that because our intelligence sucks beyond comparison we are probably torturing a whole lot of innocent people.

Google John Walker Lynn. I could link this webpage but everyone is too lazy to link me with their evidence so why should I do them any favors?