"A society should be judged not by how it treats its outstanding citizens but by how it treats its criminals." Fyodor Dostoevsky

Tax breaks for the rich, breaking the backs of the poor, torturing the indigent.... Hurray for the USA!

Is there really any point to carrying on? I've yet to see any real evidence that a terrorist is, or has ever been, as much of a threat as a militaristic nation-state armed with whatever. A terrorist attack against the usa happens how often? Kills how many? The rate of people killed by other americans each year is vastly greater than the number of yanks who've died from terrorist attacks. 9/11 was spectacular, but the average terrorist strike kills dozens of people, not thousands. Torturing them for information doesn't provide you with better intelligence, it just makes you look really really bad.

If you really want to throw away the rule of law in order to deal with a small group of psychos, I can't stop you. Even though I know you'll regret the idea later, probably after some 'terrorist' suspect gives the police your name as a potential suicide bomber.

You have said you're an EMT, up here most EMT's know one or two police officers, would you mind telling me what the police officers you work with say about this issue? Do they think torture would give them the ability to make the world safer? And if so, don't be surprised that foreign tourists no longer want to visit.

No, I tried some of that SM stuff and lost the key to the handcuffs.

Captain of the Vincenes claimed a decending aircraft, not responding to normal communication. His wife had a pipe bomb go off in the van a few months later. She lived. The Captain talked to my old unit many years ago. very impressive guy.

Skip- the Japs were fighting for the Japanese empire and the emperor. Based and trained in Japan. The 9/11 terrorist were based and trained in the Sand Stan. Again no argument with you on the troubles with the Saudis their money is being used for Lobbying and expanding radical forms of Islam. The taliban and Bin laden were allies I'm sure money changed hands, assistance, support all that.
Yes the FBI did some Laden family flights. To bad the USS Vincenes was in port.

All great police stories you wrote about, its like watching COPS with my five year old. Skip- mass murder and economic ruin terrorist can do, a murderer of one or two people while tragic and concerning does not rise to that level. It requires elevated methods comparable with the threat.

Do we go another column of what?

Gee, Jon not posting anymore? Realized you shot yourself in the foot, eh?

Almost funny, have I given you the idea that I'd submit to you? Ummm, no.

Proper police work has, does and can uncover terrorist plots before they happen. 9/11 could have been prevented if the FBI had done their jobs. (way too many other people have written about this, let's not rehash it again.) A few months ago a group of nutters in Ontario were caught by the police when they stupidly bragged about their idea and other muslim's called the cops on them. Of course nothing in the world is perfect, Air India lost two planes flying out of Canada because the RCMP fucked up royally. Worse yet they botched the prosecution of the crime and the son's of bitches who murdered a whole lotta civies got away with it.

The military might be able to prevent a preemptive attack launched by a foreign state, but boy oh boy did they ever drop the ball on 9/11. Then again they didn't do so well at preventing an attack on 7/12/41 either. A nation that swore never to be 'Pearl Harboured' again was pearl harboured, again. As for informants, why the hell didn't the guy's running that flying school contact the police about someone who wanted to learn how to control a large aircraft but didn't care much about landing it?

[Not an issue with torture, we capture them we question them torture or not their plan goes foward.]

Then why torture in the first place if it won't prevent the attack? After the fact, there's always nuts who come forward to claim responsibility for whatever crime gets committed. Here in Edmonton we've got a murder trial going on, before the cops found the nut who was carting around dead bodies in his truck, the police checked out some interesting tips from the snitch line. The most amusing was the guy who had a rent dispute with his roomies, none of whom had anything to do with the crime. Imagine what would happen if we paid people to find 'terrorists', uhhh, right you did, how many people are still at gitmo who were turned in for money, and cause they had disputes with roomies and neighbours???

And back again to the point of the article, how often do the police in one town or another find someone who's innocent of a crime but with a little good cop/bad cop routine get a confession. Not even needing real torture, both of our nations have put innocent people on death row and executed them. Not only is that an injustice for the victim of the crime and the innocent who's being found guilty in court; but the bugger who committed the crime is free to kill again. We don't live in a perfect world, torture just makes it worse.

[In combat yes, we kill them they kill us. The getting there is what is different. [snip]
That Navy ship fired on a Jumbo Jet that was trying to land and on top of a crusier. We just got them down to the ground quicker.]

The USS Vincenes shot down an Iranian Airbus that had taken off from Iran and was climbing when your ship shot a missle at it. Moreover the aircraft was still in Iranian airspace. No excuse for that oops, buddy. None at all.

[I have never understood this. Who cares where they were from. They were banded together into a fighting force in Afghanistan with funding from the Taliban. ]

So, following that logic, that it doesn't matter where the funding and people came from, on 7/12/41 FDR should not have declared war against the Japs, who manned, funded and then declared war against you...

The Taliban didn't fund al-Queda. Saudi Arabia and the Bin Laden family did. The Taliban and the Northern Alliance were groups fighting a civil war for control of post USSR Afghanistan in 2001, they were two groups of Mujahideen who were originally funded by - among other nations - Ronald Reagan. And the members of the Bin Ladin family who were in the USA on 9/11 were on a special flight out of the country on 9/12, without anyone in the FBI or CIA thinking about questioning them - let alone waterboarding them - to find out what they knew.

History matters. The reason most people on earth don't like torture is because it has a history of failure. It has never done the job of preventing terrorism, it fuels it. It rarely finds the truly guilty, it finds scapegoats.

Bondage man--The police will do a wonderful job, examining evidence, Firefighters will rush to the scene, Paramedics (like me) will tend to the injured. FBI and ATF will stand around the cameras and look busy. Your right skippy they will do a wonderful job.

After I'm dead.

The idea for the military is to pre-empt attacks, Going to where they plan, train and hide. Your Japan example, is an example of what I'm talking about,(six or seven people still died) Reacting to an attack. The police went into action after the fact. The shooter of the CIA front gate (three people died) , The FBI captured him in Pakistan a few years later, again after the fact. In the world of nuclear and bio weapons (with terrorist having more of a chance of getting one) we just can't wait around for one to go off. Pre-emption requires the military and intelligence assets.This leads back to the interrogation debate, intelligence assets are better for that. The law and stuff, that is the basis of the argument. That is why the issue is current because of the election this year. Judges are the key to this debate, their say on the matter is what will matter in the coming years .

"The world now knows beyond doubt that the usa will torture people it captures. Were I OBL, I would use this against you by sending people who thought they knew about real plots and hope you captured them. You'd find out about nonexistant 'plans' to dump sarin gas in the subways, and spend money in an effort to prevent that attack

Not an issue with torture, we capture them we question them torture or not their plan goes foward.

"The end is the same. The tactics are indistinguishable. Both the usa and al-queda use fear as well as weapons. Where one group uses a knife to decapatate a dead man, another uses a bomb to decapitate living ones. The terrorist plants a bomb on an airliner, the US Navy uses missles to shoot down a civvie airliner."

In combat yes, we kill them they kill us. The getting there is what is different. Congress allowed funds for that bomb, Congress has to answer to a population, Congress speaks to the military and intelligence people for the situation on the ground. Bin laden reads the Koran and bingo lets kill the infidels. I see a big difference.
That Navy ship fired on a Jumbo Jet that was trying to land and on top of a crusier. We just got them down to the ground quicker.

"But we don't. The Saudi Gov't has tons of oil, they have links to the people who are said to have attacked you on 9/11. 15 of the terrorists who took control of those planes were from Saudi Arabia. Who did bush launch a war against? Iraq"

I have never understood this. Who cares where they were from. They were banded together into a fighting force in Afghanistan with funding from the Taliban. That is where we started rolling them back. Yes Saudi has extreme forms of ISalm being taught, they also have a well funded lobbying group in D.C. That is where the problem is.

See Ya Just call me MASTER you Slave

The problem with using the military to fight terrorists is that the terrorist is nothing more than a cowardly crook. They are not a nation state against whom you can declare war and expect to see a peace treaty signed. As stateless creatures they can infest any location on earth, from the backwoods of Alberta to the sands of Saudi Arabia. As long as they don't attract your attention, you'll not know they're there. Moreover, terrorism is warfare on the cheap. As you know it costs a heck of a lot of money to destroy something using an army, terrorists can blow bridges, buildings and airliners using unpaid volunteers.

How do we deal with murderers? We call the cops, and the cops catch them (hopefully), then they're sent for trial in an open court. Bush's greatest error was not in invading Iraq, it was to recognise officially that the terrorist was a state. In spite of the fact that they haven't got a country to occupy, nor a government that can surrender.

The world now knows beyond doubt that the usa will torture people it captures. Were I OBL, I would use this against you by sending people who thought they knew about real plots and hope you captured them. You'd find out about nonexistant 'plans' to dump sarin gas in the subways, and spend money in an effort to prevent that attack. (note, when terrorists in Japan tried such an attack their results were nothing like what happened on the battlefields of WWI, or in Iraq for that matter)

Damn, I'm getting off track. Cut and paste time.

[ Islamic-terrorism is what this post is about. How we treat, interrogate, and fight islamic-terror. IRA and Latin American troubles are interesting, I admit terrorism related, but do not apply to the situation in Gitmo and the future American president.
I would love to read indepth about how the UK solved the problem with Ireland. ]

They're the exact same thing. Terrorists who are Islamic radicals use the same methods as those who ran the death squads in latin america. When Chile and Argentina used torture to fight insurgent groups in their countries, the world reacted with condemnation. The peoples of those country's started to side with the people who were being tortured. Eventually the dictators who ruled those country's had to hide from foreign courts, as well as the courts of their own country.

[ Attacks and Riots after the pope comments or the Danish cartoons. That is evidence of an enemy bent on death and oppression. ]

Mob's which are dealt with by police, not the army. Have the Dane's or the Dutch resorted to torture to find those responsible for organising the riots? No, they used standard policing techniques that have workied for years.

[Is it true that parts of the UK have strict islamic laws in place? ]

Not at all.

[that is where the oppression is. Please admit that when you get on a subway or an airliner in the UK. The threat to your life would come from terrorism and not the US. ]

Oppression is something a government or workplace engages in. Individuals who are violent use terrorism. When in the UK I had some concern about the IRA planting a bomb where I might pass by, but I did not let it stop me from walking where I wanted to go. Nor did I hope that the police were somewhere pulling the fingernails out of a mick in hopes of finding out their dastardly plots.

[Your argument is absurd that a rational person compares the tactics of the US to that of the terrorist.]

The end is the same. The tactics are indistinguishable. Both the usa and al-queda use fear as well as weapons. Where one group uses a knife to decapatate a dead man, another uses a bomb to decapitate living ones. The terrorist plants a bomb on an airliner, the US Navy uses missles to shoot down a civvie airliner.

[Paying terrorist creates more terrorist, your right, kill them instead.]

I agree. But avoid killing the freaking civvies around the terrorist. Remember what the Mossad did to the terrorists who attacked the 72 Olympics? They sent out small teams of agents to hunt them down and kill them, they also insisted that the agents not kill people who weren't involved. It wasn't glorious, you couldn't show it on TV, I doubt any of them saw the inside of a court. And yes, it was also a crime, for which the agents would have been prosicuted had they been caught. The Isreali Gov't did try to extridite those terrorists before they sent out their own death squads. That is something the us gov't has rejected doing as it would 'comprimise state security'. Rubbish.

[The need for oil, all true, we put oil in stuff to make it go(and for Exxon to make record profits, beat you to the punch on that one).If Terrorist have access to lots of oil, we need to focus on that. ]

But we don't. The Saudi Gov't has tons of oil, they have links to the people who are said to have attacked you on 9/11. 15 of the terrorists who took control of those planes were from Saudi Arabia. Who did bush launch a war against? Iraq.

[ Losing soldiers because a Mosque cannot be taken until the Iraq soldiers do it for us, is what I was refering to. PC style of warfare.]

You're implying that you'd have no trouble with a group of Hindu soldiers raiding a Christian holy place? Sending soldiers from a country that calls itself a christian state into a mosque is going to provoke a response from people who would otherwise support your aims. That's not PC, it's common dog that you don't shoot yourself in your own foot.

[Remember the terrorist don't care if they die, so whatever weapon is available they will use, Sarin or whatever.]

The terrorist will also learn from past failures. Look into the ASI terrorists who used Sarin against a civvie target in Tokyo. They didn't achieve the massive death toll they wanted, the police caught them in a few weeks, no torture was used to get witnesses to cooperate, an open court sentenced the guilty, no one was made a martyr.

[Back to "aggressive interrogation" I've stated before, if having pizza with detainees works than do it, if waterboarding works than do it.]

Offering pizza is within the traditional bounds of the rule of law. Waterboarding is using torture. You'd have the state break the law in order to enforce the law. Don't you see the trouble there? Would you really like to allow the police in your hometown to search each house, business and individual on a weekly basis in order to route out the drug dealers and users? Have you ever seen a home after the police have searched it? The cost of that sort of operation would not result in any savings of lives, the destruction of property wouldn't make the innocent feel any better that the druggies were off the streats, nor would you rid your town of druggies in the end.

[ Let the professionals decide, ignorant people like you and me never get all the facts to come to a real ability for a decision.]

Those 'professionals' are paid. They have an interest in continuing to be paid. I loath the idea that I can't have an opinion because some 'expert' says they know more than I do about the benefits of torture.

I've been involved the practice of torture, from a purely perverted point of view of course. Either I volunteered for it, or someone volunteered to let me do it. I've been a member of a BD/SM group for a number of years, and so know a bit about the issue thanks very much. Should you want to know my real name do a search for Mr. Edmonton Leather 2004. (evil grin)

Skip- Ok squid, I was a former corpsman, UK military did have the best food in the field.

Let us focus our discussion. Islamic-terrorism is what this post is about. How we treat, interrogate, and fight islamic-terror. IRA and Latin American troubles are interesting, I admit terrorism related, but do not apply to the situation in Gitmo and the future American president.
I would love to read indepth about how the UK solved the problem with Ireland.

Skip- The early problems in the UK and France. Attacks and Riots after the pope comments or the Danish cartoons. That is evidence of an enemy bent on death and oppression. Is it true that parts of the UK have strict islamic laws in place? that is where the oppression is. Please admit that when you get on a subway or an airliner in the UK. The threat to your life would come from terrorism and not the US. Your argument is absurd that a rational person compares the tactics of the US to that of the terrorist.

Iran-Contra and Afghanistan were solutions to problems at the time. I guess you can look 25 years later and see problems with decisions. At the time they were American Victories. I have read about the delay with returning the hostages, I have no idea about the truth on that.
Paying terrorist creates more terrorist, your right, kill them instead.

The need for oil, all true, we put oil in stuff to make it go(and for Exxon to make record profits, beat you to the punch on that one).If Terrorist have access to lots of oil, we need to focus on that.

Skip- you need tell the Media that casuality rates are low in comparison to other conflicts. "The right" have been screaming that for years. Losing soldiers because a Mosque cannot be taken until the Iraq soldiers do it for us, is what I was refering to. PC style of warfare. Remember the terrorist don't care if they die, so whatever weapon is available they will use, Sarin or whatever.

Back to "aggressive interrogation" I've stated before, if having pizza with detainees works than do it, if waterboarding works than do it. Let the professionals decide, ignorant people like you and me never get all the facts to come to a real ability for a decision.

Jonthenet, have you seen combat? Is your attitude a response to seeing or doing things that anyone sane would find reprehensible if they weren't convinced that they were on the right side of the conflict, and that the enemies were wrong, evil, and out to get you and your family?
Terrorism will never completely disappear because there will always be some crazy, disturbed, or evil people in the world. The people here propose solutions that would stop most of the rest of the people from turning terrorist, though. If people in other nations had more to lose, options like terrorism, much less suicide bombing, would be far less attractive.
I hope you find healing for your hate clouded vision.
Craig

see, jonthenet, you don't even have to read the first hundred pages, just read skippyagogo's most recent post. and THEN, try answering all the questions directed toward your narrowed thought process.

Jonthenet - you appear to enjoy bashing the enemy -whether the well meaning folks on commondreams or the 'terrorists.'
So perhaps your viewpoint is from a military perspective and as such you are right - a soldiers job is to kill and destroy the enemy.
We are talking about defending our nation so you have a right to be emotionally attached to your argument and you seem confident of your position to shoot or torture first and then sort out the innocent/guilty later.
But perhaps you ignore life outside of the battle field.

But then again there was a time when I argued in support of the Nixon 'Domino' theory of Communist containment. :-)

You seem to confuse the role of the military with the role of our Government and its citizens.
If you are not convinced that mankind has created laws and systems of justice (and given up vigalentism) motivated by our own self-interest then beware of the nighmarish world you propose.

A world where our Government becomes the judge, jury, policemen, torturer and executioner will require us to stand down anyone that challenges our government's interests - and who knows one day you may want to stand up to say 'enough' but then it will be too late as you might be the next 'terrorist.'

My advice is to keep reading Commondreams and to stay informed and not to be too gullible about the 'War against Terrorism' and 'Islamofascists' - just in case your Government is playing you for a fool.

Jon, I'm ex-navy. That's the major reason I'm opposed to torture, it's 'common dog' in the service I was in as we know that to fight whatever enemy using their nastier methods only prolongs the conflict. Moreover it does nothing to guarantee victory in any struggle. Had Hitler gone into the USSR as a liberator rather than as a conquerer he'd have won WWII. Speaking of conflicts, who is this evil enemy that is 'bent on death and oppression'? From outside the usa it looks like that is a description of your own government. If you say it's nation's that support terrorism, check out the clause of your own nation's constitution that gives Congress the right to issue letter's of Marque (that's what Queen Elisabeth gave people like Drake, before Drake sailed off to capture Spanish Galleons in the 1500s), or permission to commit acts of piracy. If the us gov't really wants to stamp out all terrorists, why are they not arresting terrorists who planted bombs in the UK before fleeing to the USA? I'll just mention that there are also quite a few people running around free in the states who planted bombs which killed a lot of civvies in Latin America over the last few decades. Seems awfully convieniant that it's only the terrorists your president doesn't like who are being chased. Awfully fishy that these terrorists have billions of barrels of oil under their feet too.

There's a nasty gap between the rhetoric used by the us gov't and the reality of us foreign policy. That's true for many, if not all, countries; yet it's your country that claims to be the shining city on the hill. You claim to be for freedom of speach, yet to speak out these days could cost you your freedom. To be a member of the 'wrong' political party can cost you your job. Bush just spoke out against the Castro brother's for fixing elections in Cuba, ignoring what his own brother did for him when Governor of Florida. (I can't wait for when the article written about that gets posted here)

I'm surprised you'd refer to Afghanistan as a victory for any side. The collapse of the USSR in the way it fell did none of us any favours. The Russian people are still not free, their government still has the same sort of authoritarian mindset that has ruled that part of the world since the days of the Mongol Horde. The radical muslim's believed that it they alone who defeated one great satan, and gave them the idea that the other one was ripe for the picking. The cold war kept a heck of a lot of smaller conflicts from breaking out; Yugoslavia suffered under communism, but they started to slaughter each other once that government fell. In the end the USSR was nowhere near a credible threat to the 'western' way of life. If attacked they'd defend themselves - as the Nazi's found - but they never had the moxie to rule the world. I think their own leader's realised that.

Iran-Contra a success? You paid danegeld in an effort to rid yourself of the Dane. Something that's long been known not to be a good idea. (Danegeld is what a guy named King Ethelred the reedless paid in the 900s in an effort to stop the viking raids in England) Paying terrorists only encourages more terrorism. Moreover, the guy who paid that danegeld did so to keep US hostages in confinement until he was sworn in as president. Not such a great way for Reagan to start his presidency.

Nicaragua. Why is it such a concern for your government what other country's get up to in their internal affairs? At the end of WWII, the western powers made a heck of a fuss about ending colonialism and allowing nationstates the right to self-determination. If they fuck up their own country, who really cares? If they improve the lot of their citizens, why not emulate the best of what they try to accomplish and avoid the fuckups.

Your comments about the 'PC' way of fighting war are way off the mark. The first time the west used 'real' chemical warfare was in 1915, used by the Germans against French Colonial troops and the PPCLI (Princess Pat's Canadian Light Infantry) You want to talk about losing too many soldiers, what does our generation really know about losing soldiers. Since the end of WWII western powers haven't lost that many soldiers. It took how many years of fighting for the USA to lose 60,000 soldiers in 'Nam? Canada lost that in three years of fighting WWI; six years of WWII. Let's all face it, we've not fought an army that is a match since the days of the Wehrmacht; thank god, as that war would have turned nuclear. The wars fought since the end of WWII have all been wars for and of Empire. Believe it or not only the militaries of the world can use things like Sarin gas effectively, civvie terrorists fuck up when they try to play with crap like that. Considering that the use of chemical and biological weapons kill friend as well as foe, they're not too popular in military circles. Trust me, everyone on Earth knows that any state that was stupid enough to use that crap against the usa would be nuked, so it's not a credible threat.

Back to the point of the article, practicing torture does not enhance our security. It gets someone to tell you what you want to hear. If done right, you would - were you tortured - claim to be Jesus, the devil and the Real Mastermind of 9/11. Should your torturer decide that's what he wanted to hear. Heck man, if bush himself was tortured he'd confess to being a real live mommyshagger before the first drop of water hit his face. But that wouldn't be enough to hang him, and by torturing him you'd lose the moral highground needed to hang him as the warcriminal he is. You make the point that you don't want to argue with people who agree with you, yet to torture someone just forces them to do that very thing. Check out a bit of Machiavelli's writings, he warned the princes of the world to beware of the tales told by expats, for damn good reason.

Lino I can't reply to insults, Where is you diversity and tolerance. Now read how skippy does it. One little jab at the beginning, then to some facts to respond to. Good job skippy.

Now your first part. I have never been to any right-wing site. It is boring reading how everybody agrees with you. Out here where the enemy lies is the real test of your abilities. Iron sharpens Iron type deal.

Yes we supported, Saddam, We helped the afghans in the 80's
Iran- Contra yes that to. All victories for our side. Defeating the enemy that was in front of us. USSR support of Iran and the invasion of Afghanistan would have given them an oil supply and more importantly a warm water port for naval activities (persian gulf) Our enemy was the USSR and defeating their expansion was vital. Never let it be said that combat and warfare are nice and neat. That includes interrogation methods, allies that turn to enemies, armed support for a questionable country. Defending a country is not just to be done on theory or what is hoped for or what feels right. A military must destroy the enemy in the most effective way.

We lost too many soldiers trying it the PC way. I know alot of you hate the current military, fine, I'm not proud of everything that has happen. But I know there is a evil enemy bent on death and oppression, you call it the GOP. I have read the e-mails from our guys, various sources saying that if given the chance they would hit us here. I don't want to see one American civilian dead from Sarin gas. With my luck it will somebody I know.

jonthenet, before this article heads to the archives, go back thru hear, count how many questions you've been asked by various posters with much more to offer than you. then, if possible, try to answer half of them. granted, you might be able to get by with a simple yes or no. hell, you could even fake it if you wanted to. throw in a couple of three or four syllable words just to impress us. uh, try to impress us.

better yet, as i've previously suggested to morons sharing a similar i.q. as yours, go read michael ruppert's "crossing the rubicon". you don't even have to read all 600 pages (i doubt that you could even if you wanted to). just read the first 100 pages. give yourself a dose of reality and help pull yourself out of the time warp you reside in.

you are, in fact, a shining example of what is wrong with our country, with our military and with our system of social injustice. your head is where it is because, a long time ago, it was picked clean and filled full of mic propoganda.

never has there been a better representation of the concept that stupid people shouldn't breed.

Yep, freerepublic must be offline. Or the mutual admiration society of nutballs is missing their jon.

Jon, your country supports terrorism. Has since the days when the Fenians launched attacks against Canadians from the northern states. You've supported members of the IRA, your republican hero's bribed Iran's Khomeni, the poison gas Saddam droped on his own countrymen was made in the USA, Reagan and Bush I were the people who helped the Taliban and Osama bin Laden with the commie problem in Afghanistan.

Why on earth do you think torturing people will bring you victory? Did the bombs dropped by Hitler on London force the English to abandon WWII? Did the Irish win freedom for Northern Ireland by planting bombs everywhere, or the English stop the terror campaign there by torturing people?

What strength are you talking about? The usa occupy's Iraq, yet you still fail to control what goes on there. The longer the occupation of Afghanistan goes on the less NATO controls the territory; indeed NATO might just collapse as the rest of the alliance is starting to recognise that your nation has become the new USSR.

Ah, but I see I have made a real mistake by being obviously not a yankee. I take it you'll ignore my questions, or call me a terrorist.

Lino, the standard Liberal, hate your countrymen more than the Terrorist. Cheer for military defeats and terrorist wins. Pray for surrender and retreat, Withdrawal from strength accept weakness. No Lino my head belongs where it is, to fight the good fight against enemies abroad and to correct my fellow countrymen (with respect) from their ignorance and feelings

siouxrose, you are so right. "fully programmed visitor". pity the soul who can't think for himself/herself.

jonthenet, "and off goes the head..." they would probably be doing you a service. i know it would certainly benefit mankind.

Learnfromthepast-- I like your name, Vigilante justice, violation of laws, treaties. 1st law in combat is send the lawyers to the front lines. Then it is alot easier to fight and win.

You guys justify what they do to us. You hype up incidents of questionable American actions. Forget what has happen to us going back to the 70's. I don't like when we kill civilians, we don't target them. Usually a terrorist is behind them trying to kill us. Terrorist hide in the mix of civilians because they know you "Libs" freak if we take them out along with their family and friends, What would you have us do, Lawsuits!!!!

No, Lino if I get captured they would really torture me, meaning welts, cuts, severe blood loss, and yes off goes the head, then strap my dead body with an IED to take out more soldiers once they find me. That is not right-wing propaganda even Katie Couric reported that.

Again it is a stupid argument, to ask me to feel what the terrorist felt during interrogation. I'm not an Islamic-Terrorist don't plan on becoming one, therefore I'm not going to kill hundreds of Americans. If others don't want the same treatment, again don't become a terrorist.

Kernel- "thousands of innocents" you can do better than that, according to Jane Fonda are up to hundreds of thousands of dead civilians. Really, as a former member of the military it is an insult that we would kill that few in 5 yrs of conflict. Give us some credit

NAMASTE: Gracias, and great post!

LEARN FRPM THE PAST: Excellent point to rebut our little right wing fully programmed visitor.

jonthenet,one can only hope that if you are still active military, you get captured and are then treated in the manner that you so self-righteously support. better yet, see how you feel were one of your "three kids" captured and treated to the "aggressive" interrogation techniques you support, all for the sake of obtaining information from them on what a sorry excuse of humanity you really are.

other than the one post suggesting you to be reasonable and intelligent (on what level?), your support here is non-existent. make you feel like a real man? the few? the proud?

jonthenet___your stupid remark that we treat our captives ok while they? cut off the heads of our people is sick. In the first place, what we are doing is strictly a policy of our so-called government, while the people you referred to were mixed up bands of sects that felt justified in almost anything after the ruination of their country and killing of thousands of innocents for no reason, except to make the Bushies happy.

If our methods were so pure, as befits a Christian nation, why did so many detainees try to commit suicide, and why have so many died in their confinements in various places where they were sent for interrogation? Maybe you should lock yourself up in a dark basement for four or five years and get treated worse than an animal and see if you still think it is such a noble way to be treated.

Johthenet - you seem a reasonable and intelligent person.
Perhaps you can agree that vigilante justice does not work in family relations nor our neighborhoods so why should it work in the international sphere?
When you decide to be the judge, the jury and the executioner you put yourself above the rest of us - and when you ignore existing treaties, laws and courts of justice (no matter how imperfect) you cannot expect your friends, your family or the rest of humanity to be kind to your hubris

btw - the rule of law over the rule of power comes in handy for even the 'powerful' so don't wish too hard for a 'pre-emptive' world order

purvis ames;
Actually this little jontroll is quite amusing. Not half as psychotic as some I've read, I'm sure he's just as cute as a fluffy bunny. (grin)

Jonthenet:

"Shawn I have a nagging feeling that you would debate with the likes of Castro, he has alot more time to blog now."

Wow, you certainly base your judgements on a lot of info. doncha? One sentence and you have already figured out how I believe? One thing for certain, you have most certainly proven me correct.

Shawn I have a nagging feeling that you would debate with the likes of Castro, he has alot more time to blog now.

Goebbel- Interrogation facts have already been presented. Info was obtained through various means, aggressive and non-aggressive ways. Terrorist plots were prevented because of info brought to us from captured terrorist among other sources. Lives were saved. Lets us defeat these people's ability to make war, then we can have the peace we all want.

Unfertilized egg contains 23 chromosomes, which is not a human being, conception puts 46 chromosomes together which is classified as a human being. Same number of chromosomes You and I have even the terrorist have.

Forced-birth supporter that is a new one. That make you a kill them anytime you want supporter.

Jonthenet:

"What is wrong ,purvis, no stomach for debate. Just want to read other like-minded stuff. This is a political web site, guess what, we debate on political issues."

Why is it that I have this nagging feeling that you do your political debating with the likes of Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh?

Jonthetroll sez: " ... we debate on political issues. Can you handle being told that you are wrong?"

Sure. Can you handle the responsibility of contributing a fact or two to support your alleged "debate" position? Whatever it is?

Hey Jonthenet,

Since you wrote ".."group of cells in a uterus" amazing your use of terms..." I assume you are one of those who supports forced births. If this is indeed the case, maybe you can explain why many forced-birth supporters assume that a human individual begins at conception. Why does not the human individual begin at the unfertilized egg?

Dr. J everybody in this country gets health care, you eventually need to pay for it. If you want to pay for my three kid's health insurance I'll send you my address for your check. That will save me about a grand a month, thanks

"group of cells in a uterus" amazing your use of terms. Dehumanize your enemy, we do that in the military, you just did it above.

What is wrong ,purvis, no stomach for debate. Just want to read other like-minded stuff. This is a political web site, guess what, we debate on political issues. Can you handle being told that you are wrong? If you are so right in your opinions then challenge me. Don't run and hide

SIOUXROSE -- Wonderfully well said.

I was just re-reading and old fav of mine, Methuselah's Children by Robert A. Heinlein (in 1941), where he painted a future possible world where the news media was restricted to use of non-emotively charged words that maintained the objective (non-propaganda) nature of reporting the facts.

The protagonist (Laz Long) noticed how pegged the reporting had become, just prior to the gov't's reversal of long established record of human rights (after the 2nd America Revolution).

Here's a story written 67 years ago, discussing a future 2nd constitutional crisis, that we're peering into today. Wouldn't it be fantastic if the news automatically changed from green to red in color, as the propaganda level maxed out?

Namaste … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … Mahatma Gandhi … … … … … … … … … …
« We must be the change we wish to see in the world »
« There is a sufficiency in the world for man's need but not for man's greed »
« We adopt the means of nonviolence because our end is a community at peace with itself » — ML King

The posts by Phobos and Siouxrose are such heartfelt and accurate responses to Jonthenet. However, because of the allusion to "the unborn," I would like to add an observation. It appears that many in the "anti-abortion" movement are anything but pro-life. Here, we are talking about torture. But, on so many other issues, the anti-abortion crowd displays their true colors. For example, when the bill to renew the State Children Health Insurance program was before Congress, Sister Carol Keehan, the president of the Catholic Health Association of the U.S.
said, "Reauthorizing SCHIP represents the most humane and pro-life opportunity the Congress and this president will have this year, to ensure millions of children, born and unborn, that they will receive the health care they need." We all know what happened with that bill.
Given the events unfolding across our nation and around the world, it is indeed tragic that for some people the only life that counts is a group of cells in a uterus. Once
you're born, you're on your own.

Stop feeding the jonthenet troll please.

While it is important to point out that most of the people in Guantanamo are innocent of any crime, we should base our opposition to torture on the simple proposition that it is wrong and uncivilized to torture people (or animals).

It is also the law of the United States of America.

So anyone who condones torture is apologizing for something that is immoral, uncivilized and illegal.

No excuses.

Jonthenet: You do not really deserve a response, but I will provide one anyway. Does the notion of "innocent until PROVEN guilty mean anything to you?" Do you have any understanding of the way innocent people were essentially drift-netted into the terrorist prisoner camp just because they maybe had the right sounding name, looked the part, or like the witch hunts of prior centuries, were on someone's shit list. Do you realize bounties were offered and poor people will be given to make such human trafficking transactions when desperate enough?

This notion that we are the good guys is the stuff of comic books, not rational thinking. Are you one who believes Saddam was behind 911? Are you one who believes the US is over there to bring democracy? Over there so that "they don't kill US over here?" Do you have any idea about the many lies USED to CREATE a case for war? That this war is mostly about oil, about profits for the military-industrial complex? Are you at all intelligent enough to recognize how media sculpts the minds of the impressionable (the way athletes train muscles) so that many fall into the idea that the world IS divided into teams of good and bad people? Do you realize the degree to which religious zealots of all three religions are playing significant roles in bringing about a potential 3rd world war, and/or Armageddon? Do you think this is god's will, or that End Times is a viable outcome? Do you understand the checks and balances writ into the US Constitution to ensure that no president act as a king, or make "war at his pleasure"? In short, do you think for yourself at all, or have you become so full of the Fox news/hate radio equivalent of data, as the kid pumped up on sugar setting himself up for obesity and Diabetes due to such an impoverished diet as per genuine nourishment?

Maybe you're here to learn something. Some are teachable. Some stumble upon the type of truth that takes the board away from their own eyes. For a better realization of US action as per its historical record, try reading Howard Zinn.

Every nation has a few people that believe torture is acceptable.They reject its corrosive inhuman effects on the torturer as well as the tortured and argue expediency.Since 2001 people of that ilk have been in control of our policy.This nation has never allowed torture as an official policy, until this administration. Indeed, we have been a leader in opposing torture in our basic laws and in international treaties.Let's hope on November 4 we wash this sin away with votes and our nation's honor will begin its restoration.

Hey Phobos in you don't want to be tortured by the US. Don't become a islamic-terrorist and kill Americans, in short Don't screw with us!!!

Just imagine to be tortured... Just imagine for one sec. Please all those people who justify torture... just imagine what it means to be tortured for one sec... Imagine... Imagine... Some guy holding your hands on your back and another one in front of you kicks your guts out of your belly... Imagine... A radio with heavy metal crap fully blowing in your ears for 24 hrs and you are handcuffed... Every time when you fall asleep, if possible at all, someone waters you allover with a high power fire hose... or his urine... And you do not know what it is... is it day or night? Where is my family? Are they still alive? how did that thing look like they called the sun? Will I ever feel it on my body again? This is going on for days... years... ages... You feel like dying... You would like to... And then the waterboard... Blindfolded, naked, and handcuffed you are waiting there for what will happen next... Your mouth is covered with cloth and you hear some asshole shouting... he is pouring water on the cloth and you feel close to dying... You would like to, but your body resists and the pain.. that pain... is running deeply through your oesophagus until your stomach and lungs explode out of your body... you can only think of stopping this... stopping this... stopping this... all this that is done out of the name of the United States of America...

Scalia didn't say "justafiable," he said torture might not be "unconstitutional." Apparently Scalia doesn't know that the United States is a signatory to the Geneva Convention which specifically bans torture and that he is bound by the Constitution to uphold all treaties of the U.S. government. This despraved, degenerate, so-called "Justice" is lining himself up for a date in the Hague.

As a public service, I like to periodically translate propaganda for the masses who lack experience in critical thinking. Sort of a restitution for my earlier transgressions, if you will.

Purina sez: ""Americans will have to ask themselves, 'Do you trust the intelligence community more than you trust Democrats who are beholden to their left wing?'"

Translation: "If you don't believe this sentence makes me sound like an idiot, then YOU are an idiot and deserving of contempt from your Fuehrer. And keep those Republican votes coming!"

ctrl-z February 19th, 2008 12:08 pm:

"Gee, a ban on torture would force them to stop torturing. Talk about your unintended consequences."

Well said.

Jonthenet February 19th, 2008 1:12 pm:
""

Jonthenet, you sound more like what the world has become accustomed to hearing out of the US than most posters on this site. Thanks for reassuring me that CommonDreams is not entirely disconnected from that other America.

D O N ' T F E E D T H E T R O L L .

Let's see, about 700 + detainees at Gitmo, we are finally bringing 6 to trial, eventually as many as 10!!!!! How many of the other 700 + were unjustly tortured, or at the very least significantly mistreated??? How many were completely innocent of any crimes??? Haven't we quietly returned over 500 of them back to other countries with no charges filed????

It's kind of like the death penalty - once you've f----d up, it really doesn't matter how many times you say you're sorry.

Torture - isn't that what happened to Jesus?

Great idea, be nice to the terrorist they will be nice to us. We don't cut the heads off of the guys at Gitmo, they cut the heads off of our guys, so your thinking is wrong.

What is wrong with you guys, it is about information gathering. An officer at Gitmo used 3 months of pizza to obtain info from a terrorist, with the mastermind of 9/11 we waterboarded him, both ways worked we obtained info.
Just let the interrogators use what works per terrorist.

It is real easy just think of the terrorist, like you guys think of the unborn.

Any torture -- of itself -- creates the allowance (actually permission) of such to be perpetrated upon our own people (soldiers).

Therefore, "Support our Troops" literally means no torture.
The victim you save, may be yourself

Namaste … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … Mahatma Gandhi … … … … … … … … … …
« We must be the change we wish to see in the world »
« There is a sufficiency in the world for man's need but not for man's greed »
« We adopt the means of nonviolence because our end is a community at peace with itself » — ML King

How do these people spell morality?How do they spell the law?Scalia is an asshole and is full of shit;pun intended and we are supposed to respect people like this?I always thought that respect was earned. Tony

"White House officials insist a ban on waterboarding would force the CIA to shut down its program of enhanced interrogation of terror suspects."

Gee, a ban on torture would force them to stop torturing. Talk about your unintended consequences.