captured terrorist in mumbai to be given "truth serum"

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

My wife is studying here and my ears are upstairs so I can't listen to that right now.... but are you saying Bill O'Reilly tortures? I believe that.. his show is torture.

[Amby 490]

My wife is studying here and my ears are upstairs so I can't listen to that right now.... but are you saying Bill O'Reilly tortures? I believe that.. his show is torture.

AJ his show is funny as hell!

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

My wife is studying here and my ears are upstairs so I can't listen to that right now.... but are you saying Bill O'Reilly tortures? I believe that.. his show is torture.

AJ his show is funny as hell!

the only show worse is hannity

[Amby 490]

My wife is studying here and my ears are upstairs so I can't listen to that right now.... but are you saying Bill O'Reilly tortures? I believe that.. his show is torture.

AJ his show is funny as hell!

the only show worse is hannity

ok I think hannity is lame but oreilly is funny as hell

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Keep it pithy!!!!!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The question is surely with whether the methods employed in interrogations are actually effective (which should surely dictate whether or not they are necessary).

How can you protect your own or foreign citizens by doing things that don't work? Is it to actually "protect" people and extract useful information or is it simply about creating an impression that this is the case?

======

First of all ... you are wrong.

torture DOES WORK!

But there is a science to getting and verifying intel gained in any instance.

Sure it does. If you want someone to confess to anything you put in front of them.

There is a huge difference between a "confession" and "information".

It depends on whether your goal is to get information or to get a confession. The specific context you are missing here is that we aren't talking about the US here (at least I'm not). Countries that don't have the means to properly investigate intelligence leads or lack the open cooperation from rival governments tend to use interrogations for the securing politically convenient confessions.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Vengeance is closure. Vengeance is justice.

We're not talking rehabilitation here. We're talking punishment. What is punishment, if not vengeance?

Vengeance and justice are two different concepts. I'm not sure why there is even a confusion about the difference.

Split hairs all you want, but when we put terrorists to death or bomb their camps from the air, it's a bit of both. They don't attack individual people, they attack a society. And when we put them to death and torture them, we do so not merely to punish but to exact vengeance as well.. on behalf of not just the specific victims of their attacks but no behalf of the society they attacked.

For someone who is captured and rendered defenseless, then any acts of violence toward them at that point is vengeance. It's really not that difficult to see the difference.

Vengeance is precisely what they deserve. What do you want to do, rehabilitate them?

The obvious point that's being ignored here is that vengeance/justice or whatever you want to call it takes place within a framework of law which governs the ethical principles by which this society acts toward people who break its laws. You either regard those principles as absolute or you don't.

[웃 910]

My wife is studying here and my ears are upstairs so I can't listen to that right now.... but are you saying Bill O'Reilly tortures? I believe that.. his show is torture.

AJ his show is funny as hell!

the only show worse is hannity

ok I think hannity is lame but oreilly is funny as hell

Speaking of Hannity and Colmes...Alan Colmes is retiring Well he is leaving the show but staying with Fox News, maybe to do a weekend show...

I think Juan Williams would be a good replacement.

Edited December 5, 2008 by Confucian

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Colmes looks like a tortoise without a shell.

[HAL 9000 96]

The question is surely with whether the methods employed in interrogations are actually effective (which should surely dictate whether or not they are necessary).

How can you protect your own or foreign citizens by doing things that don't work? Is it to actually "protect" people and extract useful information or is it simply about creating an impression that this is the case?

======

First of all ... you are wrong.

torture DOES WORK!

But there is a science to getting and verifying intel gained in any instance.

Sure it does. If you want someone to confess to anything you put in front of them.

There is a huge difference between a "confession" and "information".

It depends on whether your goal is to get information or to get a confession. The specific context you are missing here is that we aren't talking about the US here (at least I'm not). Countries that don't have the means to properly investigate intelligence leads or lack the open cooperation from rival governments tend to use interrogations for the securing politically convenient confessions.

Heck PD... now you can imagine why renditions took/take place and why these individual suspects end up in the shadiest of countries with little legal protections against torture.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The question is surely with whether the methods employed in interrogations are actually effective (which should surely dictate whether or not they are necessary).

How can you protect your own or foreign citizens by doing things that don't work? Is it to actually "protect" people and extract useful information or is it simply about creating an impression that this is the case?

======

First of all ... you are wrong.

torture DOES WORK!

But there is a science to getting and verifying intel gained in any instance.

Sure it does. If you want someone to confess to anything you put in front of them.

There is a huge difference between a "confession" and "information".

It depends on whether your goal is to get information or to get a confession. The specific context you are missing here is that we aren't talking about the US here (at least I'm not). Countries that don't have the means to properly investigate intelligence leads or lack the open cooperation from rival governments tend to use interrogations for the securing politically convenient confessions.

Heck PD... now you can imagine why renditions took/take place and why these individual suspects end up in the shadiest of countries with little legal protections against torture.

Wrongful arrest (though rare) is a problem in respect to this kind of thing - especially in light of the fact that in the event of mistakes (as in the example of Mr El-Masri) you often have no legal recourse to bring a case against the government for poor treatment.

Pretty much the same is happening in Britain - with the case of the Brazilian man shot to death on the London Underground. Its a bad state of affairs when plain-clothes officers can burst onto a train and shoot someone multiple times in the head and walk away scott-free and with the barest wringing of hands by politicians.

But we are getting O/T here - this incident took place in India - the suspect would have had to have known that he would be killed, or if captured - subjected to torture or aggressive interrogation.

Edited December 5, 2008 by Paul Daniels

[HAL 9000 96]

Totally sucks... one one side you have the necessity to protect the public good against terror and on the other you have lame-brains screwing up the intelligent fight against it by being completely idiotic and sometimes so, on purpose.

[Heracles 417]

Pretty much the same is happening in Britain - with the case of the Brazilian man shot to death on the London Underground. Its a bad state of affairs when plain-clothes officers can burst onto a train and shoot someone multiple times in the head and walk away scott-free and with the barest wringing of hands by politicians.

You really do have a knack for looking at an incident and describing it based on your bias and preconceived opinions. Definitely someone who will exaggerate a situation that backs your point of view while play down anything negative or contrary to it.

You may want to read up on that incident before acting as if it played out like a scene from "V for Vendetta" or "Children of men".

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Pretty much the same is happening in Britain - with the case of the Brazilian man shot to death on the London Underground. Its a bad state of affairs when plain-clothes officers can burst onto a train and shoot someone multiple times in the head and walk away scott-free and with the barest wringing of hands by politicians.

You really do have a knack for looking at an incident and describing it based on your bias and preconceived opinions. Definitely someone who will exaggerate a situation that backs your point of view while play down anything negative or contrary to it.

You may want to read up on that incident before acting as if it played out like a scene from "V for Vendetta" or "Children of men".

I did read up on the incident - the events are a matter of public record.

[HAL 9000 96]

Pretty much the same is happening in Britain - with the case of the Brazilian man shot to death on the London Underground. Its a bad state of affairs when plain-clothes officers can burst onto a train and shoot someone multiple times in the head and walk away scott-free and with the barest wringing of hands by politicians.

You really do have a knack for looking at an incident and describing it based on your bias and preconceived opinions. Definitely someone who will exaggerate a situation that backs your point of view while play down anything negative or contrary to it.

You may want to read up on that incident before acting as if it played out like a scene from "V for Vendetta" or "Children of men".

I did read up on the incident - the events are a matter of public record.

Exactly. If its PD's personal take on the matter, then its also the take of pretty much everyone else- even in the panel of judges that exonerated the policemen involved as a case of a mistake that will likely run into the millions of pounds if I am not mistaken myself.