The subject is torture
After reading your great page today i followed some of the links and
followed some of those links
and I eventually ended up at MSNBC.Com. Over there they had an article
about Santorum (that frorthy mixture....)
defending some comments he made about (mad dog) McCain. I refuse to
comment on anything Santorum.
Suffice to say it was an article about torture.
What really caught my eye was the reaction comments from the readers.
They uniformly adopted the
"lets-all-join-together in saying that torture is never, in any set of
circumstances, acceptable" line of crap.
Well, i really didn't want to do it, but if I didn't point out a few
things to these lock-step morons, who would?
joined up so that I could respond and to do so gave out far more
personal information than really required
and that made me uncomfortable right there (why do they want this stuff
anyway?). I posted the following
(way below), but it never turned up in the comments section. I am left
to wonder if all the seemingly lock-step
comments saying "no torture, ever", are the only ones that get into
this debate over at MSNBC.COM in the
way of a public viewing. Wait, no that can't be right. Our "mainstream
media" manipulating and sanitizing
the news for their own purposes? No, never, not "our media"...
Sheeeesh... Below is what they would have
seen from my key board if the playing field was level.
Over at bartcop.com, the "hammer in chief" often proposes the following
senario to those who insist that
torture is never justified. (What follows is what he offers in general
in my own words). Let's say that you
just got information that a nuclear weapon was going to be detonated in
12 hours in a major U.S. city.
don't know the city, but you believe the information to be reliable.
Let's say that the government has
been watching a group of suspected terrorists and the government has
intercepted messages form this group
that indicate that they have an interest in things nuclear. The
authorities pick up the group and question
them seperately. One of the group blurts out, without any references to
anything nuclear, that "we" should
get ready for something terrible to happen, worse than Hiroshima- and
then refuses to say anything else.
Let's say that you ("you" are one of those against torture) are the
interogator. The clock is ticking.
To save lives, to save a major city, to save the world from the
aftermath of a nuclear bomb detonation,
would you request that "enhanced interrogation" be applied to the
subject in question if nothing else seemed
to be working? I for one would seriously question your loyalities (and
your sanity) if you did not use every
possible tool at your disposal to find out where the bomb was planted -
including torture - in this instance.
Where do you (you that think that torture is never justified) think
your place in history would be if you
failed to use every tool at your disposal to avert such a calamity and
the bomb went off? And if the torture
didn't produce reliable information or no information at all and the
bomb went off, at least (I feel) that
"you" would be able to live with yourself knowing that you used every
available tool to save fellow
human beings. I am personally against torture as a tool of general
policy. However, I feel that in certain
situations it is acceptable and to state a blanket policy of no torture
ever is unrealistic and shortsighted.
As a former service man and a Vietnam Vet, I can state without
reservation that its a good thing for my
country that while in the service i didn't do much and I didn't know
anything. If someone captured me
(in Viet Nam) and they even hinted that they were going to pull one of
my fingernails out with a pair of pliers,
I would have denounced my very own sainted mother if necessary to save
insist that torture NEVER gets us anywhere, to insist that torture
elicits only faulty information,
well, you must never have served (and never been frightened out of your
skull) and as a result, you don't
know what your talking about. And by the by. Do we have any
reliable information on just what the
Distinguished War Hero John McCain said or didn't say when he was being
tortured while in the custody
of the enemy?
hope he was one of the very few that lied and got away with it,
For newer readers, we tried to have a torture discussion
years ago but the debate
never even got started because I was flooded with a tsunami of liberals
wrong in EVERY case.
would not use torture to save the lives of my kids.
not use torture to save the lives of my parents.
would not use torture to save the lives of everyone in my church.
would not use torture to save the lives of everyone in New York."
...and I thought, really?
You would let everyone in New York die
to save one terrorist
fingernail from being
Seems to me one fingernail is
nothing compared to the lives of 8
million New Yorkers,
but the most liberal amongst us wouldn't hear of it - no way, no how. Never! Ever!
I am 99.9 percent against torture and I think that's the position
everyone should take.
Bush & Cheney tortured everyone with a beard - and that's certainly
crazy, cruel and inhumane.
We know they videotaped the torture sessions - the CIA admitted
destroying the tapes.
*I* would only permit torture in the most extreme cases.
What if you found out some Columbine-type handjobs put a bomb on a
but your town has 1,000 busses and
they all have kids on them at this moment - 3 PM.
Would you really be against slapping the scumbags a few times to find
Would you be against the threat of
turning angry police dogs on the scumbags?
You would stick to your principles and let 50 school kids die?
Crazy me, I'd rather have my kids alive and I don't even have kids.
Had we been allowed to have an adult, rational debate on the subject,
maybe one side
could've been persuaded to accept some of the other side's points but
the discussion was
not even allowed to take place by the Never!
Ever! crowd. I was shouted down.
I am 99.9 percent against torture and I think that's
the position everyone should take.
e-mail to Bart
Back to Bartcop.com