I have to defer to your wisdom on this one - I don't feel good learning about the torture of another human being, and am apt to feel sicked at the idea that anyone does.

QT

i was watching this greasy doofus this morning as i got dressed and i ended up throwing my shoe.the wingnut argument for torture is absolutely infuriating.in fact,the idea that there IS an argument FOR torture,and its being given on tv by american citizens is truly sad,disgusting and baffling.

whats most obnoxious is the way they presume to understand the argument being made against torture.kilmeade said something to the extent of "why would anyone care if zubaydah suffered or was uncomfortable?"
in other words,anyone opposing torture is doing so because they feel deep sympathy for the bad evil terrorists.they are essentially tying the democratic party to terrorists.they literally do not understand that its not about how awful the terrorist in question is,or what he has done or may do or what bad man he happens to have lived next door to.
its about US.its about the united states.
since when do americans need to behave like angry,vicious animals in order to defend our country.are we not smart enough?

im really sick of being told that im a pussy because i feel like we can protect america without bashing a mans head against the wall,or almost drowning him.

btw...since damn near every single torture tough guy,also would refer to themselves as a christian,i want someone to explain why they believe jesus would approve of torture.

I don't know, Bob... it sure would feel good if it were Kilmeade and Douchey. Me being the torturer of course. /snark

I don't understand this. The United States Does Not Torture. QED.

What is astounding is that the members of the right that are defending torture are inclined to call the left the craven cowards.

Franklin:

"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

I'm absolutely certain that there are people in the world that are going to try with all their might to attack and destroy us. However, when we use torture methods that are identical to those used by regimes we mock and ridicule in every other way, we lose a very essential part of what makes us Americans. This is not a subject on which I accept knee-jerk partisanship.

>>>since when do americans need to behave like angry,vicious animals in order to defend our country

>>>we lose a very essential part of what makes us Americans

>>>The blowback for this behavior will impact generations of Americans. In other words, I suspect the hangover will be far worse in the long run than any of the dangers these policies might have prevented.

let's not forget how this lovely nation was founded. the mentality of "us versus them" will never go away. what was the blowback of the mass genocide of the native americans? a nice new world. i bite my tongue a lot because we are in 2009, america's history is what it is, nothing we can do about it, but for every "we are america. we are better than this." i have to say really?!

As a "Christian nation" as fox wants us to be known as all of the other right wing conservative fundamentalist republicans want us to be known as, I have just a few words to say;

Do unto others, as you have them do unto you.

Jesus did not say that meant only people you liked.
It was a blanket statement.
That is why being a true christian is difficult at times.
A true christian nation does not torture, kill or maim people.

I wonder how Kilmeade and Douchey would feel about the possibility that KSM's kids were tortured as well to discover his location?

My guess is they'd have no problem with it.

jenski - I love that Franklin quote. It's gotta be one of the alltime best lines to shut up people on the wrong side of this issue.

Bob - Spot on...and your examples prove that there's something even beyond the 'morality' argument. In addition to not sacrificing our morals, there's something to be said for simply following our long-term self interest. In addition to 'feeling good' to launch a few warheads at Cuban missile sites , it would've certainly solved the short term problem of "The Cuban Missile Crisis." Of course in the long run, it would've been a slightly more apocalyptic course of action.

Likewise, even if we were to accept the (really stupid) contention that we're getting valuable national security info from this kind of torture... in the long run, it's in America's rational self interest to not foster Anti-Americanism by giving jihadists a valuable recruiting tool, to be able to bring the hammer down on anyone who does this type of bullshit to American soldiers, and like you said, to maintain (what's left of) our moral standing.

Kilmeade is a fascist. His beliefs and behaviors reveal that fact quite plainly.

Many Nazis believed that killing Jews, Homosexuals, and physically and mentally disabled people was the correct thing to do. Nonfascists think that such policies are an abomination.

Kilmeade is an ultranationalist that does not allow dissenting opinions. In his reality the terrorists are not human and therefore they are fair game.

Know your enemy. We are up against Christofascists that believe that we are subhuman sinners and that God is on their bigotted side.

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is very grateful for every liberal's tear-soaked, bleeding heart message of sympathy.

I'm sure that he's exactly the kind of guy you'd buy a few rounds of beer while he wails about his "gruesome" treatment while in American custody. Be sure that the bar that you take KSM to overlooks Ground Zero, formerly known as the World Trade Center.

However, you might just want to ask yourselves if that glistening tear that slides down KSM's cheek is due to his "torment," that somehow left him mercifully whole and alive, or perhaps it's the sight of the Ground Zero crater that is evincing the strong feeling of a "job well done."

Ah, but what does it matter? You liberals were gifted yet another tool with which to bash former President George W. Bush with, and that's all that really and truly matters in the end.

Carry on.

-A

Can this idiot not be banned?

And just to be clear, it's not because I want to ignore his comments for being unable to dispute them. But to read the posts here and STILL say that those who oppose torture do so purely out of sympathy with people like KSM proves him either illiterate or stupid, and we don't need either around here.

For MZ, the truth is that s/he's unable to endure the sight of an opposing opinion.

It's just so awful that not everyone thinks and feels just like MZ does, that not everyone is part of the liberal Obama-Borg Collective. The outrage!

And they call conservatives haters of free speech. Pffft.

-A

So "Atanarjuat", formally known as TruthSerum,

The waterboard is prominently featured in the torture museum of the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia.

1.) You are proud the USA is using the same techniques as the Khmer Rouge?

2.) As a veteran of the military, you are willing to accept the fact that as a captured prisoner of war (and not necessarily by Islamic extremists, but by any other country,) you might well be tortured, and that we will have given up our right to condemn such torture because we use the same techniques?

It's painfully obvious that Atanarjuat is one of those folks who fancies herself an intellectual because she can repeat the faux news talking points.

The truths they can't handle are that (a) torture is ineffective - otherwise it wouldn't take more than one time, and (2) using torture is immoral and hence just another example of their hypocrisy.

BTW, no one who has been tortured is left whole mentally; even the "small amount" endured at SERE scars you and you know they aren't going to kil you on purpose.

A - I suppose you're happy with being just like every other "third world" country you claim moral superiority over. If that's how you see it, fine. That's your opinion.

But you're in the minority when it comes to the uses of torture and the fallacy that it works. Even interrogation experts all agree that torture does not work. You have to be honest with yourself. We don't live in a Jack Bauer/24 world (that coming from a fan of the show.)

And the whole point isn't about having pity or feeling sorry for KSM. It's the fact that if the roles were reversed and an unfriendly nation or enemy of the US had one of our military or a covert agent prisoner, we now have no moral highground on which to stand should said prisoner be tortured. If we can do it, they can do it. It's just as important for the protection of our own people as it is for the rights of the prisoner.

A - It's not that I "can't stand the sight of an opposing opinion". There are lots of those here. But what you said was factually incorrect. It was misrepresenting the opinions that YOU oppose.

You're clearly here to provoke by repeating Fox News talking points, not to discuss at any level deeper than that, and that's why I think you should be blocked.

I dare anyone, Douchey, Kilmeade, A, who says waterboarding is not torture, to endure it just once. Then you can tell me that it's both effective and moral.

Until then, you haven't got a single leg to stand on.

D.C., I never said that waterboarding is not torture. You can go back through the recent torture memo posts and find that I fully acknowledge that waterboarding is torture, and that torture is indeed a hideous practice.

You'll get no denial from me.

What I have gone on to say is that KSM deserved every bit of waterboarding he got, and my only regret is that he wasn't burned or had his extremeties slowly cut away, centimeter by excruciating centimeter. There's not enough pain in the world that can be inflicted on the 9/11 mastermind for all the chaos and loss of life he caused on that fateful day.

Is this clear now, or do you somehow think I'm ambivalent on the topic?

Shorter MZ: I should be blocked because MZ doesn't like my interpretation of the facts.

I'll remember this when I'm on your "free speech" blog, MZ. Meanwhile, feel free to skip over any of my comments that are giving you so many vapors.

Broadway Carl: I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. There are people in the world that need killing, and there are others that need to be punished to the furthest extreme of agony. Such actions don't make us a third world country, and we show our strength as a nation when we smite our enemies hip and thigh, so to speak.

jenski42: I've never been in the military, though I very much admire and respect the service of those who've sacrificed so much to defend our country against all enemies.

The comparison of the U.S. to the Khmer Rouge is literally a red herring (no pun intended), as the U.S. is not sliding into an agrarian collective where communal laws are enforced with fierce brutality. I wouldn't condemn other nations that might capture U.S. military personnel and subject them to torture; that's a waste of time to appeal to such assholes. The time is better spent rooting out the scumbags and killing them, and, at times, torturing them until they beg for death. The only thing these savages in the Middle East understand is the raised hand, cocked into a fist and ready to strike down with the full wrath of a righteous and determined goliath.

-A

A -

I am in no way comparing the state of the U.S. in the last decade to the Khmer Rouge and conditions in Cambodia. All I am saying is that now we share something with that regime. I, for one, am more than a little upset about that.

Also, I would ask that you try and look at the farther implications of this, farther than just beyond the "savages in the Middle East." We're not just giving them permission to retaliate in kind (not that some Islamic extremists would care, I agree,) but we are also setting a precedent for conflicts with any other nation.

I just disagree. We should not torture.

A: Your "interpretation of the facts", dimwit? Go re-read what you yourself wrote up above. You know, the stuff you wrote TODAY and apparently forgot about. I'll remind you:

"Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is very grateful for every liberal's tear-soaked, bleeding heart message of sympathy.
I'm sure that he's exactly the kind of guy you'd buy a few rounds of beer while he wails about his "gruesome" treatment while in American custody."

You see, you moron, that you're misrepresenting what other people have said here on the topic. The commenters above you were making exactly the opposite point: that opposing the use of torture should NOT be equated with sympathizing with terrorists. Then you, being an idiot, went and made that exact equation.
Therefore, you're not paying attention to what other people say, you're just looking for a chance to insert right-wing lunatic talking points wherever you can. That's not discussion, that's not interpreting the facts, that's not even opinion. You contribute nothing but provocation, and therefore you meet the definition of a troll. And trolls get banned.

But just to make it clear that I DO pay attention, I'll also instruct you to read what the OTHER people have written as well. We're taking the long view, considering the consequences of following our impulses and thus controlling them. Y'know, like rational human beings. You, however, clearly just want to follow your knee-jerk (and, apparently, creepily sadistic) tendencies and torture a person (you probably also like the idea of torturing his kids), regardless of what that makes you and what repercussions that behavior has down the line. That makes you an idiot, and idiots get mocked.

Also: I have a "free speech" blog?

Atanarjuat -

Did seeing the Saddam hanging cellphone video not do enough to satisfy your 9/11 bloodlust? Or are you one of the few conservatives in the world who recognize that the two have absolutely nothing to do with one another? I suppose the people in Iraqi prisons had it coming too, because of....their non-involvement with 9/11?

Or what about Maher Arar, a Canadian citizen who was connecting through JFK airport on his way to Canada? He was detained at the airport on suspicion of having Al-Qaeda connections. He was denied access to an attorney, denied access to courts and any form of due process, subjected to a "hearing" that occured during the midnight hours, and sent to Syria specifically for the purpose of being tortured. Then it turns out - whoopsy daisy! He had absolutely zero fucking connection to Al-Qaeda, a fact our government now readily admits. But hey, spending a year in a Syrian prison being repeatedly tortured and not being told why you're there probably builds character. (Anyone interested in this story should check out "Arar v. Ashcroft" on google video - they have the oral arguments from the 2nd circuit courts posted; judgment is still pending...all of this stuff is factual - the federal government's basic contention is "Yeah, all of this stuff happened...but this case involves stuff we did for national security purposes, so we're not liable").

One of the main reasons we have the rule of law (not just in this country, but in all civilized societies) is to specifically avoid community bloodlust. If we don't follow the law, we shouldn't be surprised when other countries don't follow the law (surely a guy like you is familiar with the phrase "city on a hill"). Wasn't one of the big justifications offered for going into Iraq, "Well hell, look at all of these international laws they've broken!"

If the rule of law is being disregarded to satisfy bloodlust, then it ceases to be the rule of law. It wouldn't be "the law" if you could cast it aside when it's inconvenient, or because someone has it coming in this particular case, or because it goes against something you reeeaaallly want to do.

But even disregarding that... the aforementioned cell phone video proves that there's a right way and a wrong way to do everything - even satisfy one's blood lust. Contrary to your implications, nobody here is arguing that KSM shouldn't be locked up like a rat, subjected to (legal) interrogations, put on trial for what he did, and eventually executed.

What we ARE arguing, is that we shouldn't use ineffective torture methods straight outta the Spanish Inquisition before we do all of that, because 1) They don't work from an intelligence standpoint, and 2) It goes against our nation's principles. And Surely you can see what a slippery slope this is. First we're torturing Al-Qaeda operatives....then we're torturing the kids of Al-Qaeda operatives to find out where their parents are...

And if you disagree with us on that...well, that doesn't mean that anybody here wants to have a beer with KSM. And to say so is sheer fallacy and intentional ignorance of where the other side is coming from. QED.

Funny thing, A, protecting America isn't about giving you jerkoff pleasure in watching another human suffer. It's about using techniques that yield useful, actionable intelligence. Torture fails that test.

Also, defending our way of life means actually protecting our way of life. If you want to toss out our values just to give yourself the jollies of watching someone, no matter how evil, then you might as well go join the Khmer fucking Rouge because yes, you are no better than they are.

Does that hurt your feelings? Tough shit!

I love America. I love what this country stands for. I love it so much that I will shout from the mountains and move heaven and earth to make it stays true to the values that it was founded on. We are Americas. We don't torture. If you want to torture, go move to Cambodia, go to Iran, go to North Korea. Because that's where you fucking belong.

If you believe torture is appropriate, in any circumstance, you sure as hell don't belong in America.

Torture is immoral. Period. No exceptions. Not because you think it works. Not because you think the guy deserves it. We didn't torture Nazi war criminals. We didn't torture the Japanese who tortured our soldiers. No, we didn't, because Americans don't believe in torture.

Torture doesn't work. Even after 183 times, guess what? Most of what KSM told his torturers was utter bullshit.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1599861,00.html

MSNBC's military analyst retired Col. Jack Jacobs said that it was an astounding number.

Norah: Are you surprised by the number, two hundred and sixty six time on two terrorism suspects?

Jacobs: It's kind of astounding isn't it? You think after one or two times it didn't work, you wouldn't keep trying. Clearly, if you're doing it that many times it should be obvious to the casual observer that the technique is not working. Usually the information that you can get that's useful, you can get with very easy techniques. I've been in combat plenty of times, captured lots of bad guys and invariably got lots of information out of them using cigarettes, medical care and food. Most of the stuff that you're going to get when you give people a bad time, most of it is going to be information that they're going to give just to shut you up or to get you to stop doing what you're doing to them.

http://crooksandliars.com/john-amato/col-jack-jacobs-torture-i-got-more-out