Point and Laugh for 4/24
Dana says that our enemies do worse, so torture is okay. A commenter who shows some common sense says:
When I was six years old, Dana, my mother taught me that just because someone else does it, doesn’t mean I should do it.
Congratulations, the United States is not quite as bad as the Taliban, despite, you know, torturing helpless prisoners. What a boast to make.
Tags: Delaware, Delaware Blogosphere, Radical Right, torture
Republicans practice situational ethics.
If the Taliban jumps off a bridge, does that mean we’re going to jump off a bridge, too?
If the Taliban discriminate against homosexuals, does that mean we’re going to – oh wait.
The way to get conservatives away from the Dark Side on this thing is to tell them that the DHS has listed right-wing extremists as candidates for torture.
Then they’ll get it.
Nah – Right wing extremists never have any information.
Situational ethics and an uncanny knack of compartmentalizing. When we torture it’s necessary and just. When they torture us it’s criminal and barbaric.
And when they get on their “torture is effective and produces results, my response is… so what? Geez, by those lame standards one could make the same argument for slavery. It isn’t about effectiveness. It’s morally wrong and criminal no matter what!
Right wing extremists never have any information.
Conservatives don’t know that!
Republicans don’t need to know, they just need to feel it in their gut.
Well, perhaps at some point you’ll ask yourselves: if a captured, high-level terrorist probably has actionable information which, if discovered, could thwart a terrorist attack and save innocent lives, is it somehow more moral to leave him alone if he wan’t respond to polite questioning and let those innocent people die?
This, you see, is the conundrum that exists in the real world: Khalid Sheikh Muhammad had actionable information, information extracted by waterboarding, and some terrorist attacks were thwarted. Lives were actually saved because KSM broke under waterboarding.
So, was it worth it? If only one life was saved, the answer is yes, it was most certainly worth it.
Perhaps you have a different number in mind. Would we have to save 10, or 100, or 1,000, or even a million, to justify this for you?
Jack Baurer is a fictional character, Dana.
Torture is wrong, no matter what. There is no justification.
If only one life was saved, the answer is yes, it was most certainly worth it.
We are America, dammit! We don’t fuckin’ torture!
“This, you see, is the conundrum that exists in the real world: Khalid Sheikh Muhammad had actionable information, information extracted by waterboarding, and some terrorist attacks were thwarted. Lives were actually saved because KSM broke under waterboarding. ”
No, they weren’t. This was already addressed in numerous places. The Los Angeles plan was intercepted months before the torture began.
And no, there is no number which would make it OK, Dana. And the fact that you need such a bullshit example to make it all OK in your mind shows you for exactly what you are — a cowering, terrified little sissy.
Thanks Geezer for debunking this. There’s a good piece in the NY Times from an former FBI agent involved in the interrogations.
Dana is ignoring the possibility that some other method of information gathering/extraction would also be effective. Prove to me that torture is the only way that KSM would give up information.
I can punch my son in the face every time he talks back to me, or I can find other methods of changing his behavior. Why don’t I punch him in the face? Many reasons; not the least of which is that it is illegal, immoral and creates other complications in my relationship with him.
Dana believes that a tortured terrorist, who btw is willing to give up his/her life for their cause, will cave and give up everything in the case of a “ticking timebomb”?
LOL! A reasonable person would believe that the suicidal terrorist would give false info in order to give that “ticking timebomb” the chance to go off….
Dana reasons as if he were a child.
KSM was no terrorist mastermind. He was a low-level logistics guy. We didn’t get anything out of him – bin Laden and Zawahiri are still out there. By all accounts, Zubaydah was mentally ill and the info we got from him (KSM) came before any torture started.
Spare me the fictional scenarios. Suppose someone’s adorable toddler was going to grow up to be a serial killer. Would it be o.k. to kill the toddler, after all you’re saving at least one life. Do you see how ridiculous this is?
Tim Noah at Slate works out the stupidity of the KSM disinformation. Note that the timeline is the thing that gives away this wingnut talking point.
I have a feeling that if a Democratic President sanctioned torture the Radical Right would be against it just as we would be.
Hey, I’ve got an explanation on this whole KSM timeline thing, maybe the Radical Right live in a different time-space dimension than us.
nemski@18 — that is why I suggested that right-wing extremists be included in the torture-eligible list.
Har!
Imagine when Hannity does his “waterboarding for charity” event and actually gets it as if he were a real subject!
Of course the rote douchebags believe in half-truths or just lies, so Hannity will go in thinking that it just simulates drowning! Well, no; it simulates death and the subject actually drowns.
Man I hope they keep the camera rolling when he starts panicking, blacks-out, and subsequently releases his bowels!
😈