New Bush bill would legalize torture.
By on Sep 6th, 2006 at 4:40 pm
New Bush bill would legalize torture.
Marty Lederman writes that the bill President Bush sent to Congress today is “an attempt to authorize the CIA to engage in the sorts of ‘enhanced’ interrogation techniques — e.g., hypothermia, threats of violence to the detainee and his family, prolonged sleep deprivation, “stress positions” and waterboarding — …and to immunize such conduct from any judicial review.” (Via AS)
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
McCain
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Technology
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Who’s the fascist then?
September 6th, 2006 at 4:44 pmThis goes so well with his moving the prisoners at Gitmo and allowing them to stand trial and the Army handbook being written to specifically what he is aking for the CIA to be able to do. What scum these men are. At least the target has less movement now and things are being defined. Brings them into the light and they have to specifically ask for things that every American should cringe at.
September 6th, 2006 at 4:46 pmThis is all legal backpeddling. How come they haven’t been able just to keep the whole thing secret and just go about what they want to do? Oh yeah, Rummy didn’t take into account the new technology involving the internet, e-mail, digital cameras, and satellite phones.
“I told ya no good would come from those city folk and their internets”
-Rummy
September 6th, 2006 at 4:48 pmHow in the hell do the fools in Bushco justify this with the earlier post that they were going to stop the very thing? I guess it just depends on who is doing the torturing. It is OK for some bigass Rethuglian CIA fascist to do it but a little gal in the military just following Rummy’s orders catches all kinds of hell. At least they are on their way out, but they should be on their way in, in to their own torture chamber. If the United States was really fighting a war on terror it would be another civil war.
September 6th, 2006 at 4:51 pm#3 addition………specifically deny what
September 6th, 2006 at 4:51 pmI want my country back!
September 6th, 2006 at 4:52 pmSo if they are now asking to authorize the torture techniques that they were using before then when they did them they were breaking the law. Right? Someone smite these unholy craven cowards.
September 6th, 2006 at 4:54 pmSecret prisons, gulags where torture is used, secret spy prorgrams without congressional oversight, 200 million dollar military propaganda campaigns by the Pentagon.
Looks like maybe the Russians did win the cold war after all.
-GSD
September 6th, 2006 at 5:00 pmTorture, it’s all in how you define it.
Sigh… sob…
September 6th, 2006 at 5:03 pm#8
September 6th, 2006 at 5:05 pmDon’t you know. The techniques they were using were not illegal. They just want to pass a law to make any questionably legal techniques unquestionably legal. And they want to prevent any potential prosecution for any questionably illegal legal techniques that they had been legally employing illegally.
It’s all perfectly understandable.
Wait until enemies get hold of Americans then watch these hypocritical bastards start crowing the loudest on how unfair the treatment is.
September 6th, 2006 at 5:07 pm11 – my snark meter is busted today. Anyhow, waterboarding, holding in solitarary for long term, exposure to extreme temperatures….these are all named in the Geneva Convention as things that are illegal.
So….What were you saying again? Looks like that’s egg on your face. You want a minute to go & wipe it off?
September 6th, 2006 at 5:08 pmSeptember 6th, 2006 at 5:09 pm
Torture is ineffective because they will always tell the torturer what they think they want to hear — kinda like in 1984.
I
September 6th, 2006 at 5:09 pmBush and his friends in Congress need to take a long, hard look at the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution, and then read over – very carefully – Common Article III of the Geneva Conventions.
The fact is, Common Article III – to which we are a signatory – is a part of the “supreme law of the land” under the Constitution. And, Common Article III applies to all military captures, regardless of whether they are called “POW’s” or are otherwise entitled to other protections under Geneva, and Common Article III bans more than just torture, it bans all forms of cruel and degrading treatment.
So, I fail to see how passing a law to grant the CIA some exemption can override a treaty to which the U.S. is a party.
Then again, that there Constitution never was his strong suit.
September 6th, 2006 at 5:14 pmThis fits right in with the Republican agenda.
September 6th, 2006 at 5:21 pm“…immunize such conduct from any judicial review.â€
This is the key phrase, and it applies to all actions by this administration.
Bush doesn’t want any oversight, any review by anyone, regarding anything he does.
Period.
September 6th, 2006 at 5:23 pmThe Best is yet to come
Eugene Fidell, president of the National Institute of Military Justice, says that Bush’s changes “immunize past crimes.â€
Under the U.S. Constitution and U.S. legal tradition, retroactive law is impermissible. What do Americans think of their president’s attempts to immunize himself, his government, CIA operatives, military personnel, and civilian contractors from war crimes?
This is not a war or terror its basically a war on past Karmas ???? wait for the war on Present karmas
September 6th, 2006 at 5:30 pmIs it legal now for Gangsters to use this technique or only goverments
September 6th, 2006 at 5:36 pmMan I thought 1984 was a Van Halen album.
September 6th, 2006 at 5:37 pmTobey you are one passionate dude. I’m glad that you keep throwing that plan of Bushco’s to try to change the law retroactively out there so we can’t ignore it.
I mean, isn’t there a point where SOMEONE has to just put their foot down and say, “Hey! You can’t do that and we’re not going to let you!”?
September 6th, 2006 at 5:38 pmpolice forces have been waiting for this moment i bet you, 80 year old granny zapped by tazer taken down the police station and waterboarded until she confesses to forgetting to pay for that pint of milk at ASDA
September 6th, 2006 at 5:40 pmWith risk of sounding stupid, I have a question. Keep in mind I’m 17 *pity*. Would a bill like this start it’s Congressional venture in the House or Senate?
Sure, I have a 2 Republican Senators and a Republican Representative, but I think I’ll make a call about this one.
Thank God for Gov. Henry :D.
September 6th, 2006 at 5:44 pmIF this passes, then the US as a democracy is basically finished.
Yegads, the only step left for the PNAC plan to be in full swing now is a suspension of rights and habius corpus for US citzens. And we are getting close to that now.
If the Dems do not fillibuster this or block it, they are complicit with destroying our democracy.
September 6th, 2006 at 5:50 pm25# a bill like this gets passed in the middle of the night when senators and congressmen are sleeping after reading my pet goat, of course Bush , Cheney and Rumfeld have secret keys that unlock the whitehouse doors after midnight then they sign a piece of paper that they thought ( keeps it legal this way) were guestbooks to sign, little did they know or even suspected it was a Bill advocating torture
September 6th, 2006 at 5:51 pmJust looking at Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s picture was torture. So I am supposed to be afraid of that guy? He looks like a homeless guy in town.
September 6th, 2006 at 5:52 pmThis, then, would be the trick up his sleeve.
I think it would be more effective if the baiting and the switching weren’t both done on the same day. Otherwise, we dumbasses that make up the unwashed masses might be able to figure out what’s really going on and make a big stink about it.
September 6th, 2006 at 5:58 pmPrescot Bush bank rolled the Nazi party and Rove’s grandfather built Buchenwald – you have any doubt these bastards want to torture people?
September 6th, 2006 at 6:01 pmWHO’S THE NAZI NOW?
September 6th, 2006 at 6:14 pmMr. von Ebers,
If I recall from my Constitutional Law class correctly, the statute, being enacted after the Treaty, will supplant the provisions of the Treaty.
I just read the bill. My first impression is that it will deprive foreign citizens of the protections of the Geneva Convention; insulate U.S. personnel from war crimes charges; subject foreign nationals to “military commissions” where hearsay evidence will be allowed, and other proceedural safeguards will not; limit appeals to findings of law, not fact; and subject those found guilty to the death penalty.
I hope and pray this bill does not pass. Those who vote against this bill will be voting for basic human rights and the rule of law for everybody, even those whom we consider to be enemies.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:16 pmThe tragedy is that the US can pass whatever they want, the rest of the world will not care. Some grunt gets told to beat prisoners, with the new law he can’t refuse or be prosecuted by Bushco. If he’s identified, he can be picked up later by any country, like the Israelis picked up ex-Nazis, and be tried and executed by those countries.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:23 pm#34, the tragedy is that this can and will be used as an excuse to mistreat our soldiers and other U.S. citizens abroad.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:27 pmAnd as I remember these “tortures” that quite a few servicemen are in Levenworth for right now, the “tortures” that Bush specifically stated “the United States does not torture” are the exact same “tortures” he is asking Congress to approve. Coincidence? I think not. So when those servicemen said they were ordered to do these things, and Rumsfeld and Bush denied that, I guess we know for sure who was lying, …yet again….
September 6th, 2006 at 6:31 pmNote the carefully orchestrated timing?
ABC comes out with this all-out promotion of a fictionalized account of 9/11 that blames Clinton, then Bush gets to “save” us with a new “tough on terrorists” bill.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:37 pmRight or Wrong, the President put this up for debate by calling for legislation, in essence he puts the burden of credible policy on Congress….and therefore have members on record for or against.
It’s a serious issue and I hope it gets serious debate….let members vote their conscience and be judged accordingly by their constituency.
richb
September 6th, 2006 at 6:52 pmOT – sorry
September 6th, 2006 at 6:56 pmI am thinking that Bush will fire Rummy, perhaps in late October, and he will install Joe Liebermann as the new Sec. Def.
That would be a huge political chess play just before election day.
fascism anyone? It seems to be one of the hallmarks.
September 6th, 2006 at 7:05 pmwhatever happened to the Geneva conventions? This guy is getting more dangerous and insane every day – we’re in serious deep dookey now, folks.
September 6th, 2006 at 7:07 pmHe’s definitely going “over the edge”…..anyone see the thread about Bush Sr. worrying about his son’s “mental breakdown”….well……
And the timing of the release of this new relevation?
In other words, just as soon as we can try these people using hearsay evidence gained through waterboarding and other “classified” methods, we can have them executed, maybe even in time for the November elections.
They’ve had these guys in custody and under interroagtion for how long?
September 6th, 2006 at 7:36 pmwhatever happened to the Geneva conventions?
Comment by suggie — September 6, 2006 @ 7:07 pm
The concern about possible future prosecution for war crimes—and that it might even apply to Bush adminstration officials themselves— is contained in a crucial portion of an internal January 25, 2002, memo by White House counsel Alberto Gonzales obtained by NEWSWEEK. It urges President George Bush declare the war in Afghanistan, including the detention of Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters, exempt from the provisions of the Geneva Convention.One key advantage of declaring that Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters did not have Geneva Convention protections is that it “substantially reduces the threat of domestic criminal prosecution under the War Crimes Act,” Gonzales wrote.
That’s what happened.
September 6th, 2006 at 7:48 pmDidn’t you idiots hear the word Anthrax??? Hey if you want to be terrorist huggers then you can volunteer your children to die from the dreadful disease. I would hammer nails into hands to get information out of a monster that plans on killing my children with Anthrax. When will you guys wake up? I guess you don’t love your children like I do.
September 6th, 2006 at 7:52 pmThe Bush administration is without morals. Funny thing how they compare bin Laden to Hitler. Is that projection?
September 6th, 2006 at 7:53 pmPeople like Janet who advocate torture are just like the terrorists.
September 6th, 2006 at 7:54 pmI would hammer nails into hands to get information out of a monster that plans on killing my children with Anthrax. When will you guys wake up? I guess you don’t love your children like I do.
Comment by janet — September 6, 2006 @ 7:52 pm
Well Janet, i guess the answer for most Americans, 70% at last count would be “no” we will not become terrorists , torturers, and murderers to catch terrorists. And Janet, pretty much the world came to agreement on this issue, an agreement the US signed and the Supreme court recently reaffirmed in a decision that said as a signatory to the Geneva conventions they have the full force and become US law. Consequently the actions you espouse are WAR CRIMES punishable by death.
September 6th, 2006 at 7:59 pmWon’t you terrorists pleeeeeeeeeze tell us where the Anthrax is? Oh my golly gee I know that you know when and where so come on I will give you a lollipop.
The Bush administration has sucessfully protected us from terrorists for five years. We only have a few years left to live fear free. If the democrats ever take over, the terrorists will swarm into the U.S.
Democrats want us to pull out of Iraq leaving the second largest oil supply to the Iranian terrorist regime Thats billions of dollars they can use to bomb our schools, malls, homes and churches.
I wonder, will it be Anthrax, a broken economy or a nuclear explosion in a major city that will finally ring the alarm bells in our dense population of idiot liberals?
September 6th, 2006 at 8:04 pmThis is outrageous! Bush needs to be tortured then given a blood transfusion so we can make it last for weeks…
September 6th, 2006 at 8:09 pm2 more years of this crap, we are so f##ked!
#48, Kerry…your arguments are illogical. First the fact that the US hasn’t been attacked for five years doesn’t prove Bush is “protecting us”. OBL wanted the US out of the Bin Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia, ie infidels off Muslim holy ground. Bush closed the base, so really no need to attack the US. Second, anthrax isn’t a significant risk. Cipro, an antibiotic in plentiful supply in every drug store in the US treats anthrax.
September 6th, 2006 at 8:11 pmThere are a LOT more dangerous ways to hurt lots of people than anthrax. Bush went to Iraq because UN sanctions against Iraq were going to end, and the Iraqis were going to flood the oil market with cheap oil, traded in Euros not US dollars both of which would cripple Bush oil buddies, he did not go there to “protect” you or me. And as for alarm bells, you need to get up to speed with what’s going on before getting “alarmed” about the WRONG things.
Bones.
I wonder where you get your 70% number. I have a theory. Polls are being answered by the Americans who are not working, sitting around the house bored, mad at the world. I work 60+ hours a week and don’t have the time to take a poll (they usually hang up on my machine). I have faith in America. I believe you will get a big surprise in November when the real numbers show up in force to hold onto both houses.
9-11 was a war crime. The bombings in Europe and Israel are war crimes. Putting panties on a man’s head is NOT a war crime. Driving nails into ONE terrorist’s hand and hearing him spill out information, giving me info that would save millions of innocent lives, PRICELESS.
September 6th, 2006 at 8:16 pmOnce again #51 (janet) showing the ignorance and willingness to go over the cliff with these A’holes…
September 6th, 2006 at 8:23 pmYou can’t declare war on terrorism because it’s everywhere and has been around since before the Reagan era. What’s the catch phrase for this week,
to instill more fear into the mass morons?
#51, No Janet, as I said @70% of US citizens refute torture. See below:
Findings of US Poll
1. Rights of Detainees Suspected of Terrorism
Americans strongly support according terrorism suspects the civil and human rights provided
by international treaties and U.S. law. These include: the right to a hearing, to a lawyer, to not
be held in secret or imprisoned indefinitely without charges, and to be neither tortured nor
threatened with torture. Americans also believe that U.S. facilities holding such detainees
should be monitored by the Red Cross. By a two-to-one margin most Americans believe that
the rules governing the treatment of terrorism suspects should be the same for citizens and non-
citizens. Americans are divided on the question of whether the U.S. government currently
allows interrogators to torture suspected terrorists to get information.
Support was robust in every case:
September 6th, 2006 at 8:32 pmthe right to request and receive a
hearing where the detainee can make
the case for why he should not be
detained†(73%); “the right to have
the detainee’s home government and
family informed of the detainee’s
capture and his location†(66%); “the
right to have one’s treatment
monitored by an international
humanitarian organization like the
Red Cross†(73%); “the right to not
be tortured†(75%); and “the right to
not be threatened with tortureâ€
(57%). Partisan differences were
minor except for the case of
threatening torture, which was
endorsed by just 50 percent of Republicans but 67% of Democrats.
So basically what we see is that there is about 30% authoritarian fascists who will support even torture and murder , the same number of hard core Americans who support Mr Bush. And the 70% who see this Administration for what it is – evil, incompetent, greedy, and a danger to all Americans.
September 6th, 2006 at 8:37 pmSo what bones. Bush’s job is to protect the American people which means protect our economy. I like my air conditioning. I like feeling safe. I like driving my car. Bush took the war over to Iraq to keep it out of our cities (it worked). He has all the terrorists swarming into Iraq like blood thirsty rats. Those rats are then hunted down by our military men and exterminated. That is what the Iraqi people have become, BAIT. Yet, if the Iraqi people also pledged war against the terrorist, you know informed our military where the rats are holed up, we could drop more bombs down those holes and rid Iraq and the world of these rats forever.
As for Anthrax, gee I hope I can get that Cipro down my infants throat. Anthrax is almost always deadly if not treated early. I don’t have any Cipro do you? Do you really believe the government could
September 6th, 2006 at 8:51 pmget enough Cipro out to the masses to save many lives? Hundreds of tons of Anthrax weaponized would kill millions. Especially in third world countries.
Kerry, again you are 100% wrong. First if you cut oil production out of Iraq, let’s see it’s 30% of pre-war levels, the price on the open market goes up and you pay $3 a gallon. hey that’s great for you and me. The “economy” is good? Are you kidding me? Wages aren’t keeping up with inflation, Americans make less today than they did 5 years ago, the numbers of poor have increased. the economy is good for Big Oil and defense contactors, but not “Americans”. And actually, yes there is sufficient Cipro distributed around the country, and it is easy to get down an infant’s throat. Cardiovascular disease kills more Americans each year than anthrax ever would, but I don’t see people shaking in the corner screaming to get the saturated fats aand cigerettes out of the house.
September 6th, 2006 at 8:58 pmThe problem kerry is Bush needs you to be afraid, of everything. That way you vote for his party of neo-nazis and give up your civil rights, your money, your social security to his wall street buddies, and you behave just like the good little puppet he wants. And if you get out of line, actually insisting you shouldn’t be raped by the swat team that broke down your door by mistake and shot your dog, we’ll send you to somewhere in eastern europe to be tortured by professionals, and we won’t even tell your family or friends we even picked you up.
September 6th, 2006 at 9:02 pmkerry,
You are delusional. Your fear will swallow you whole, and it looks as if you would be satisfied to see this country, and all it used to stand for, destroyed so that you might continue to enjoy your air conditioning and driving your car.
Personally, I would rather die than live in your idea of America.
September 6th, 2006 at 9:05 pmNew Bush bill would legalize torture.
This is not us/US.
This country has become its own worst nightmare. I am ashamed.
September 6th, 2006 at 9:07 pmJanet sounds like kerry sounds like cmx sounds like Diane…
how many people are floating around inside that head?
September 6th, 2006 at 9:11 pmBriseadh na Faire,
Well….it is a really big head. :)
September 6th, 2006 at 9:53 pmBush is laying the foundation for a country to do the same thing to our troops.
September 6th, 2006 at 10:23 pmYou are one sick, hateful man, Janet.
September 6th, 2006 at 10:59 pmAnd what’s next?
Allowing the rape, torture or murder of children in front of their parents to get information?
Anyone who condones, carries out or orders torture is an enemy of the US
Anyone who condones, carries out or orders torture is a complete coward of the most cravenly type
Anyone who condones, carries out or orders torture should be forced to undergo the tortures they’re so quick to fantasize about, to the same extent they support being used on others
Bloodthirsty fools and scumbags, that’s who thinks torture is a great idea
September 6th, 2006 at 11:10 pmNothing that Bush does surprises me anymore > he acts like the son of Adolf Hitler!
September 7th, 2006 at 12:08 am66 – or clone…ohmygod…Hitler’s Mini-Me!!!
September 7th, 2006 at 12:37 amSo, let’s see. Experts on the subject say torture doesn’t work. Bushco says no torture unless lives are at risk, etc. So, we are saving the techniques we have proof don’t work for the cases where the outcome matters the most. Perfect Bushco logic. What incredible morons.
Everybody, pay attention: Torture is about satisfying the deviant urgest of sadists. It has NOTHIG to do with getting good information, especially when it matters, except in “B” movies and the brains of morons who look to Fox News for “inspiration”. The only thing this insane drama proves is that Bushco is populated with sadists, none of whom has an IQ higher than their body temperature. Impeachment, please, ASAP!!!!!!!
September 7th, 2006 at 2:55 amThank you George “Listen to what I say, don’t look at what I do” Bush. Your father teached you very well.
September 7th, 2006 at 3:23 amWow! I am so proud to be an American! I am proud of a president who will protect us from Bin Lauden. I am so proud that he will protect us from future media, that will be fed to us via Bin lauden about the death and destruction and money in Iraq. Thank you president Bush for reminding us that all the trouble in Iraq is the responsibility of Bin Lauden. How can we ever thank you enough! I just remembered something you said a year or so ago and I am confused. I recall that you said something along the lines of, I don’t know where Bin Lauden is and I don’t spend time thinking about him. What are you really thinking ? Why is he suddenly a threat now when for three years you did not care. All recorded for all to see. Yes I am proud of this government for Katrina, for torture, for dismantiling the constitutation, for wire tapping and spying even before 911. I say keep on smiling about the tax cuts for the super rich because children and the elderly are fine getting their meals from the trash. We are like the government at the turn of the century, complete with robber barons and happy rich folk. We should be proud of this government and I have never been prouder tobe an American. Thank you president Bush for all you have done for humanity. Thank you for no child left behind. Thank you forall you have done to get those nasty terrorists in Iraq, I hope you are still getting candy and flowers and hopefully the children are writing you thank you cards for the deaths of family members, again all in the great gift you have given to them with the new found democracy. I am sure that they are so happy that we occupy their country and know that you are making their lives so much better. Bravo Mr.Bush.
September 7th, 2006 at 5:03 amBushco may well become the first party to ‘enjoy’ the results of their own torture bill… when we need to find out the names of all those involved in stealing the elections, heh
September 7th, 2006 at 5:06 am#64
“And what’s next?
Allowing the rape, torture or murder of children in front of their parents to get information?”
The rape of children in front of there parents has already been done. Videotaped too, and those videotapes were shown to select members of congress and the media. One Congressman said the hardest part was listening to an 8 year old boy scream out to his parents for help as he was anally raped. I guess that sounds pretty much the same in any language. The people they sent to Guantanamo were often picked up in sweeps of city blocks where whole families were taken together.
Oh and for the anthrax lady.
That came from an american militairy facility. The bad guy was never found.
September 7th, 2006 at 8:29 amIt is curious that the targets of the attacks were the two most outspoken Democrats against the Patriot Act during the very peak of the debate on that issue.
Well, torturing suspects is a good thing? Suspects? I guess the Republicans have eradicated the whole “innocent until PROVEN guilty” concept of justice. Justice to them is, “We said you did it, so you did it.” Convenient, tidy. Never mind that you may not have the actual guilty person, you have personally punished SOMEONE for the crime, so its all okey dokey. Guilt and culpability are not real concerns. You have a crime, then you pick someone to be punished. Thus there is a balance. Truth is not an issue.
I also note that it is very regular that the neocon apologists present a comment about ‘keeping their power in November’. And THIS is what it is all about to the 30%: keeping power. These are people with a serious power and control complex (fundamentalism breeds this very nicely: most fundamentalists are control freaks). They equate this (as their analogies often show) to sports: one identifies with one’s team, and feels like they are a part of the team because they are the spectator who cheers the team on. The team wins, then each fan ‘wins’, too. Same thing here. The Republican party is their ‘team’, and in sports you cannot play both sides. They are 100% partisan politcs 100% of the time. Their entire world view and daily lives are ruled by the concept of power and control for ‘their party’.
These people are not patriotic Americans, they are party loyalists. There is a grand canyon divide between the two.
September 7th, 2006 at 8:52 am72#
That came from an american militairy facility. The bad guy was never found.
It is curious that the targets of the attacks were the two most outspoken Democrats against the Patriot Act during the very peak of the debate on that issue.
Very interesting , The democrats need to open 911 up again and this anthrax killings…….. to point the finger
September 7th, 2006 at 9:22 amRE: “just a thought” @ #73:
(( Let me identify myself as a far rightist, to set the “tone” of my reply. ))
Suspects, as “unprovenly guilty possible perpetrators of criminal acts” is a concept of that relates to criminal activity, not WAR-like activity.
The folks at Guantanamo are not potential criminals, they are potential warriors (using the term “warrior” very loosely).
To confuse WAR with CRIME is a particularly prevalent pathology of the left.
By the way, I’m all for torturing (in effective and humane ways) the opposition, and would expect to BE tortured (in effective and humane ways) by the opposition were I “captured on the battlefield”.
The reason for this is simple. The opposition will abide by NO RULE to not torture their opposition, in thoroughly unhumane ways (jut for “fun”), so in the spirit of reciprocity, and to show our superiority, we should torture them for information, but do so in effective and humane ways.
If anyone would like to disuss the phrase “tortured in effective and humane ways”, which I’m sure is FAR to un-PC to be considered anything but a complete oxymoron to you leftists, I’ll be happy to oblige. :)
This is an incredibly funny statement coming from a leftist..! :D
Indeed, though,.. it’s true, in the sense that fundamentalism DOES breed “control freaks” who obsess on always gaining more and more power to control systems that that have no business trying to control.
And leftism is THE number one “religion” of overarching maternal/paternal control.
Check your history.
These people are not patriotic Americans, they are party loyalists. There is a grand canyon divide between the two.
Comment by just a thought — September 7, 2006 @ 8:52 am
No leftist can possible BE patriotic, as being patriotic means that you support your nation’s interests above the interests of other nations.
That is a fundamental contradiction with the “leftist commandment” that “the leftist way (’power to the people’, blah blah blah..)” comes before
any national affiliation.
If you’re self-described as a “citizen of the planet”, you can’t also be a patriotic citizen of ANY country.
Now, before you get TOO upset with that, let me say that I don’t believe that very many of you “leftists” are really LEFTISTS, because if you were, you’d be out there actively trying to overthrow the US, and any capitalist country you happen to be in, and I seriously doubt there are that many folks really doing that in these forums.
But, for all you quasi-leftists, those of you with more heart than brains, those of you with a dire need to “punish Papa and Mama for victimizing you” by Mama-ing and Papa-ing others into bending to your will,.. seek help now from a qualified mental health expert (of a rightish persuasion, of course) and stop the leftist pathology before it eats your life whole.
Torture is merely purposefully inflicted pain. Nature inflicts pain for the purpose of teaching. Nature never inflicts pain needlessly, though sometimes it’s hard to see the need. Thus, we are tortured by nature when we disobey natures rules, and when nature has something to show us that we need to see and learn.
To torture is not a sin. Otherwise, nature would sin, as nature does indeed torture. Nature can’t sin, which is more an axiomatic statement than an observation. I choose to believe that axiom, as to not believe that is too painful,.. personally. You may choose as you wish, of course.
But the infliction of pain for no purpose other than “fun” is not torture. It is mutilation. And I do not condone mutilation.
-Iakeo
September 7th, 2006 at 11:20 amWell, firstly, you clearly make my point by your continued and repetitive application of “leftist†to myself, and in the general terms you use to discuss (though, admittedly, we MUST speak in generalized terms to a point). I am not a “leftistâ€. I do not belong to any political party, nor do I endorse ANY political party – political parties have ruined this government. The framers of our constitution never imagined political parties to become the corporations that they (all) are. You disagree with my statements, so you immediately label me to be “a leftistâ€: “the other ‘team’†in your mind. This is YOUR sports mentality (I do not watch any sports). I also vote for people of various parties when I vote – NEVER a straight ticket: because the basis for a democracy to work is to have DIFFERING opinions from those who run the government and for them to ENGAGE each other on their differing opinions, with equal weight to those debating the course of action for the nation. When it is one opinion running a country it is not operating as an EFFECTIVE democracy.
“Suspects, as “unprovenly guilty possible perpetrators of criminal acts†is a concept of that relates to criminal activity, not WAR-like activity.â€
Well, here you have a truth: in WAR one battles enemy soldiers, and enemy soldiers who attempt to kill the enemy they are at WAR with are NOT CRIMINALS simply for wanting to kill the enemy they are at WAR with. However, you want to try these captured soldiers (they are civilians and CRIMINALS, or they are WAR enemies, and thus SOLDIERS : which is it?, as the administration wants to try them as CRIMINALS – you cannot try an enemy soldier for fighting on a battlefield). Are they guilty of “criminal acts†or are they “solidiers fighting a WAR� You seem to want to have it both ways, as long as it suits your preconceived notions.
“To confuse WAR with CRIME is a particularly prevalent pathology of the left.â€
This may be relevant. Many who are politically “left†do not accept war under any circumstances, and thus to them war IS a crime. But you argue that they are enemy soldiers yet are also criminals. Unless these are war crimes under a treaty that we uphold (the administration does not like the Geneva Conventions, and has vehemently argued that it does not apply to these men), then one cannot acccuse them of being “criminal†by those standards. Again, if the Geneva Convention does not apply because they are not enemy soldiers, then the Geneva Convention cannot be used to apply “war crime†status to anything they have done. Either it applies, or it doesn’t: you don’t get to apply it as you choose. So, what ‘crime’ are they to be tried for? War crimes under a treaty that you say does not apply to them? Or criminal codes, which you also say does not apply to them?
“By the way, I’m all for torturing (in effective and humane ways)â€
Language is intended to communicate ideas. It cannot do that effectively without clear definitions or understanding of the language used. “torture†is torture, period. What you MEAN to say is that you are not against “intensive interrogation techniques that are effecive and humane.†I agree, though I am certain that we differ on the definition of “effective and HUMANEâ€. As that statement stands (with the normal, non-politicized definition of the language used) I think you’d be hard pressed to find many who would disagree: effective and HUMANE interrogation techniques are what every sane and normal person wants.
“ The opposition will abide by NO RULE to not torture their opposition, in thoroughly unhumane ways (jut for “funâ€), so in the spirit of reciprocity, and to show our superiority, we should torture them for information, but do so in effective and humane ways.â€
You do not show “superiority†by engaging in the very acts you condemn someone for, even if you try to couch those same acts in terms like “humaneâ€. “Moral superiority†is displayed by denouncing the bad acts, and by REFUSING to engage in those acts. You are applying moral relativism of the playground: the old, ‘He did it to me first†argument, which is not an effective excuse or justification.
“And leftism is THE number one “religion†of overarching maternal/paternal controlâ€
Your partisan loyalty is showing :o .
“No leftist can possible BE patriotic, as being patriotic means that you support your nation’s interests above the interests of other nations.â€
And again, your PARTY loyalty is showing. NO person who holds their PARTY above their nation can BE patriotic. PERIOD. That includes, it would seem, you. But it is good to hear that you are against this whole Iraq debacle.
“(’power to the people’, blah blah blah..)â€â€
Yeah, those damn founders of our contry with their, “We the people…†and their damndable, “Government of the people, by the people, and for the peopleâ€. Yeah, that all is a load of bunk, eh? Power to the PARTY, for you? Or do you prefer, “power to the corporationsâ€?
“If you’re self-described as a “citizen of the planetâ€, you can’t also be a patriotic citizen of ANY country.â€
Nope. Citizen and patriot of AMERICA, as envisioned by our founding fathers. Volunteered for service during wartime and served honorably to defend people like you, so that you are free to voice your opinions, even though it is people like you that wish to take away my voice. Still, that said, I would do the same again because I believe in the vision of America as our forefathers saw it, and I believe in fighting for freedom (even yours) – and my interest is not with the freedom of other countries… not while we still have too many problems at home. When America is a utopia, then we can stick our self-righteous noses in other’s business, without being asked, in order to ’show them freedom’.
“Torture is merely purposefully inflicted pain.â€
Oh, you DO understand what torture is. But you go on to argue that since pain is natural, and we feel pain because of natural causes, and nature is not a moral agent (well, actually, nature is not a thinking entity, and therefore morals never apply), that for a human (thinking entity) to cause pain to another is o.k., as long as it serves some purpose other than “just for funâ€. First off, the “I like pain just for fun†folks would disagree. Second, those who HAVE been tortured against their wills would disagree. The only ones who agree with this are those who feel superior to other human beings, and that that superiority that they feel is justification enough to cause some pain on another being. This is NOT a logical argument. Shall we begin to list other natural things (none of which can be ascribed a moral measure because nature has nothing to do with morals… morals require cognitive action) – incest, natural abortion, the fact that as soon as an animal is in heat it is capable of breeding, etc… By your torture argument, these things are also fine: incest, breeding with a child as soon as puberty hits, etc. Obviously they are not moral. In order to argue something as moral or immoral, one CANNOT point to nature. Nature is beyond moral… it just IS, and it is the boundaries by which we live. You do know that the nazi scientists justified their human experiments as being performed on inferior beings AND that they had a scientific relevance. Are they exonerated, as thie infliction of pain was for a PURPOSE, and agains someone they declared as an enemy?
September 7th, 2006 at 12:21 pmFurthermore, pain is not how nature ‘teaches’ — pain is a natural indication that something is harmful and to be avoided, or that there is an internal problem. It is not ‘nature’s teaching aid’. It is a warning of danger, not a teaching aid. Thus by inflicting pain, one creates the instinctive, natural response that the pain needs to be avoided in whatever manner is possible.
By your nature and pain’ argument teachers should stick needles in children who misbehave: the pain has a purpose: to teach the kid not to do something.
September 7th, 2006 at 1:09 pmRE: #76, Just a Thought:
I’ll wager you don’t PLAY any sports, either. :)
You show your “leftist” tendencies by your anti-competetive verbage.
Of course you DO engage in sport! Your sport is oration.
You have your team (you, and your fellow leftists) and an opposition (me and my fellow rightists, in this case).
I don’t mind being called, or labelling myself, a rightist.
Do you mind being called a leftist, as you SEEM to object to my labelling you thus?
If you do,.. WHY..?
Absolutely agree with you..! :)
And “democracy” is not the goal of government. FREEDOM is the goal of government.
Good government will (nearly always) evolve into some version of democracy if it supplies freedom, but democracy is NOT a precondition to either good government or freedom.
It’s the left that wants to run everything, with their monolithic dogma.
The market (the quintessential model institution to the right [the real right]) is of necessity a chaotic gaggle of individuals with the freedom of intercourse to GET THINGS DONE.
The institution of slavery (master/slave relationship) is the quintessential institution of the left. And it’s job is to GET DONE WHAT WORKS BEST FOR THE MASTER.
Actually, I *DONT* want to try them as criminals.
I want to torture them for information about their comrads, and when done with that either release them back to their families (if they really didn’t know anything) or confine them until their comrads have been subdued and the war is over.
Now, as they have explicitly said that “their war with the US, etc, will never be over”, they may well be confined forever. But that’s their and their comrads decision to make.
But I don’t want it both ways.
They are soldiers, and should be held until the conflict is done.
They AREN’T criminals. They are captured soldiers.
The LEFT is contending that they are criminals.
The Geneva Convention does not apply to these soldiers (they’re NOT criminals) because they do not claim a nation as their “motivator”, other than the ficticious “nation of the Uma”, and they therefore have no “rank status” in an organized military.
The Geneva convention does not recognize “soldiers of the Uma” as soldiers.
This makes the Geneva convention useless when extra-national soldiers are inplay.
They should not be “tried” at all.
They are soldiers of a movement that has stated it’s ground rules as that they can do anything they like to promote their victory over their enemies.
They are more than free to set their own ground rules, just as we are.
As irregular soldiers, they are, in essence, spies, and are therefore “torturable” and infinitely detainable.
Right,.. so we agree then. As long as the interrogation techniques are effective and humane, the interrogation is acceptable.
So is the puposeful infliction of pain acceptable?
We inflict pain when we use handcuffs during arrest.
We inflict pain when we incarcerate.
Are these purposeful inflictions of pain acceptable?
My definition of torture is simply the purposeful infliction of pain in an effective and humane way to ellicit ellicitable information.
Torture is a reciprocal relationship. The torturee is torturing the torturer by withholding information that the torturer needs.
That torture (the torturee’s) is provocation for the torturer to to humanely and effectively apply pain to the torturee to relieve the torturee of the leverage he is using to torture the torturer.
The torturing leverage (of the torturee) is the information that the torturer needs, and by the torturee’s withholding the torturee is torturing the torurer.
Ineffective inhumane torture is NOT EQUIVALENT to effective humane torture.
Need I say that again.
Our opposition uses ineffective inhumane torture for pleasure and propoganda.
We use (or should use) effective humane torture for ethical purposes.
So what?
I state my opinions, and show my colors, so that people have something to interact with me about.
To NOT show your proclivities is the act of a cowering child, or a leftist, who doesn’t want to be held responsible later for taking a stand of any sort.
I would agree entirely..! :)
Prime loyalty goes to what you think, as an individual, is the greatest good.
If this sets you up against other people’s conceptions of “the greatest good”, then you must accept that, and move forward with promoting what you think is the greatest good.
The problem with the left is that they never bring their “greatest good” down to an understandable level.
The problem with the right is that they too narrowly define their “greatest good”.
The reason the word “patriot” is not used by me, and shouldn’t be used by anyone (these days) is that it simply has no meaning for anyone at all.
It’s simply a stick to whack people with.
When a leftist says “power to the people” he means “power to MY people”.
This is fine. We should all promote more power for people that we choose becasue they agree with our greater good.
But,.. the leftist would use the people chosen by him to repeal the ability to choose for all people who don’t agree with him.
That is the tipping point of tyranny.
I love your voice.
To have you silent would be a loss to us all.
It’s the MARKET of voices that MAKES government and society, and the more raucus the better,.. but when this beautiful MARKET is threatened from without, it is encumbent on those in the market to defend their market, and their brethren in trade.
To dull the blade of your fellow marketeer when he’s defending the market is the height of treason, and who’s punishment is to banish the offender out into the wilds, to be without fellows in the company of leftists (the terror).
Nature “thinks” in it’s own way, thus nature is preeminently moral.
So what? They show their “morals” when they would make such assertions.
Who is ever tortured NOT AGAINST THEIR WILLS..!?
The nature of torture is “power over another”. The ethical (moral) burden is reciprocal between the torturer and the torturee.
The torturer’s ethical burden is to most effectively and humanely extract needed information via infliction of pain.
The torturee’s ethical burden is to resist “giving up” to the limits of his personal discomfort.
It’s not the PERSON who feels superior. It’s the CAUSE for which the information is to be gathered that MUST be superior.
No “bag of bones and fluids” is superior to any other “bag”.
But the CAUSES exemplified by the behaviors of the contrasting persons (the torturer and torturee) are very definite reasons for the application of torture.
And WHY are they not moral?
They are not moral because the aggregate “morals and ethics” of the human beings that come into contact with these behaviors (or potential behaviors) have decided FOR WHATEVER REASON that they are not moral/ethical.
An individual can SAY anything is moral or ethical.
The weight of one person’s proclamation of morals and ethics are utterly trivial.
That is the path of abject relativism.
But what does the aggregate say about the morals/ethics of a behavior?
That is where morals and ethics lay.
That is your interpretation.
Mine is that nature illustrates ALL things to us, if we listen.
This includes morals and ethics.
Any small group is free to justify whatever they wish to justify to themselves, but what happens when they come into conflict with a larger aggregation of humanity?
That is the test of morals and ethics. How large a population can you convince that your justification makes sense?
The question of torture is an excellent case of how you define a thing (torture) effecting how others understand what you REALLY mean by the thing.
My definitions ar unclear to you, because if they weren’t unclear to you, you’d be agreeing with me.
Our disagreement is with terms,.. not behaviors.
Unless, you let your misunderstandings rule over your behaviors, which we are all prone to, I’m afraid.
September 7th, 2006 at 2:34 pmRE: #77, JAT
Showing what is to be avoided is one aspect of teaching. Teaching also gives positive rewards, which is a favorite of nature’s acts.
Typical leftist “all or nothing” mentality..!!
Why choose “sticking needles into children” as a behavior, when simply scolding them or laughing at them (humiliation) is so uch better a tactic..?
This goes to why, when purposefully inficting pain to TEACH (or for any other reason) it’s most beneficial to be MOST HUMANE and MOST EFFECTIVE.
The HUMANE part references the idea of using as little pain for as little time as possible.
The EFFECTIVE part references the idea of what kind of pain to apply, and how you know you’ve succeded in getting the needed information.
September 7th, 2006 at 2:44 pmNot “oration†– philosophical debate, which is not a sport, it is an intellectual exercise. Oration is public speaking, and not even debate.
“You show your “leftist†tendencies by your anti-competetive verbage.You have your team (you, and your fellow leftists) and an opposition (me and my fellow rightists, in this case).I don’t mind being called, or labelling myself, a rightist.Do you mind being called a leftist, as you SEEM to object to my labelling you thus? If you do,.. WHY..?”
Because the REASON you want to label me as a “leftist†(and IF your ONLY terms for people are “righty†or “leftyâ€, then I would certainly be more in the left category – funny… I see more categories than just those two) is so that you can, as you admit, DIVIDE people into the two TEAMS you want, and with TEAMS there is no national unity. How can there be national unity when you scream about “those filthy leftistsâ€, and others scream about “those filthy rightiesâ€. What you do with such simplistic labeling is to enable a divide of the AMERICAN PEOPLE – you even encourage it with such behavior. Now, that said, one can certainly disagree… and vehemently so… with those one feels are politically wrong thinking, but to make a very general category (which is, as implied by your statements, anyone who does not agree with your ideologues) you demonize a large number of your fellow citizens, as opposed to just seeing that there are some differences of opinion. When you say “leftistâ€, I suspect it is with a sneer of derision. No? As well as that your general category simply does not apply accurately. List the qualities that you determine a “leftist†by – specifically. I suspect that I will not fall neatly into your prepackaged concept of your “opponentsâ€.
“And “democracy†is not the goal of government. FREEDOM is the goal of governmentâ€
Democracy is A method of government. “Freedom†is a liberal ideal in the political sense. It is also vague as you use it. What do you mean by that statement? What IS this “freedom†in a practical sense? The goal of government is NOT freedom, it is to govern a society. The specific goals are dependent on the origins of that government. If the original ideals that created the government are forgotten by those in power, then it is no longer the government that was created. I’m not talking about legal parsings (such as the ‘torture’ debate, among others)… I am talking about the IDEALS that founded the government.
“It’s the left that wants to run everything, with their monolithic dogmaâ€
That makes no sense – please explain in detail.
“The market (the quintessential model institution to the right [the real right]) is of necessity a chaotic gaggle of individuals with the freedom of intercourse to GET THINGS DONE.â€
“a chaotic gaggle of individuals with the freedom of intercourse†– I’m sorry. You think THAT is how this administration has been running things? Or has this administration been focused on keeping anyone who disagrees with them out of ANY decision making processes? And freedom of intercourse? Like the free speech zones? Like the refusal to answer questions about their activities? Like the immediate removal of any protester at any event? Like the Republican-only closed door meetings on matters of NATIONAL interest? Etc., etc., etc. ?? Your statement is accurate in that that is what a functional democracy requires, but that is NOT what this administration engages in.
“The institution of slavery (master/slave relationship) is the quintessential institution of the left. And it’s job is to GET DONE WHAT WORKS BEST FOR THE MASTER.â€
Nope. Don’t see that. That sounds like some extremist demonizing of one’s perceived opponents. Slavery? Please. Is this from that Rice speech? Justify that statement, as it does not stand on its own. Actually, again, this is exactly what this administration is like. How often have they asked us to “just trust them†because they “know what is best for us� Sorry, but that is the master slave relationship – just trust me, don’t question me, and do what I say. That is this administration from day one.
“I want to torture them for information about their comrads, and when done with that either release them back to their families (if they really didn’t know anything) or confine them until their comrads have been subdued and the war is over.â€
Well, at least you are honest about having no morals about torture. We disagree, but nothing I can say will alter your love of torture. I find is sad that your moral state is SO low that you think it is acceptable that people would be tortured in your name (if it is for your safety, it IS in your name) EVEN IF THEY REALLY DONâ€T KNOW ANYTHING. Well, there goes any “swift actionable intelligence†agument for you. You just want them tortured simply because they were picked up – if that person just happens to have been unlucky enough to have been an innocent who was standing in the wrong place at the wrong time, well he just gets tortured anyway and who cares about him. Nice. Hope you don’t believe in Christianity.
“The Geneva Convention does not apply to these soldiers (they’re NOT criminals) because they do not claim a nation as their “motivatorâ€, other than the ficticious “nation of the Umaâ€, and they therefore have no “rank status†in an organized military.â€
Have you read the Geneva Convention? It applies to all signatories, and the US is one. Also I refer you to your US Constitution, where it states that all treaties shall be the supreme law of the land (that is – the US signs a treaty, and the US is bound by the rules of that treaty as federal law). Thus, while the terrorists are not signed to the Geneva Convention and not bound to it by their law or their honor, the US is bound to it by honor AND (more importantly) by the US Constitution. That the enemy does not apply it is irrelevant. So, if you want to designate them as enemy soldiers, then you are bound by the Geneva Convention to treat them according to those rules, which are, Constitutionally, the supreme law of the land.
“We inflict pain when we use handcuffs during arrest.
We inflict pain when we incarcerate.â€
No, neither moment is acceptable application of pain. If pain is resultant from application of handcuffs it is because of improper cuffing, or it is accidental because of the suspect struggling. It is not acceptable, and not the intention of handcuffing a suspect. Explain how incarceration causes physical pain. Do you know what that word means?
“My definition of torture is simply the purposeful infliction of pain in an effective and humane way to ellicit ellicitable information.â€
Well, there goes your credibility. No infliction of pain is acceptable. There is no (I repeat NO) “humane infliction of painâ€. That is an oxymoron (unless the person is a masochist). Here we go with that language thing. You conceive of “humane†as meaning something that it does not. You and I are not in agreement on this in the least.
“Torture is a reciprocal relationship. The torturee is torturing the torturer by withholding information that the torturer needs. That torture (the torturee’s) is provocation for the torturer to to humanely and effectively apply pain to the torturee to relieve the torturee of the leverage he is using to torture the torturer.The torturing leverage (of the torturee) is the information that the torturer needs, and by the torturee’s withholding the torturee is torturing the torurer.â€
That is a completely assinine statement. At this point, I will finish my response, then I am done with you. I thought that you wanted to have an intelligent discussion, then you jump all the way off the deep end with this – either you mean it, and thus are a truly disturbed person, or you are being intentionally stupid out of lack of respect to me and this discussion. Neither is acceptable for an honest debate. But then, what should I have expected? You are “playing for your teamâ€, and as far as you are concerned America can burn in hell, as long as “you team†“winsâ€. You enable the enemy by dividing our nation.
“Your partisan loyalty is showing :o .
So what?â€
So what, you ask? I suppose that you think that being loyal to “your†party is more important than being loyal to your nation? In my book that rates you a terrorist at best, and a traitor at the worst. People like you are destroying this country.
“Prime loyalty goes to what you think, as an individual, is the greatest good.â€
Then why parrot the rights talking points? Why do YOU stand firmly in a “party†line? You clearly demonize and demean any who are “leftistsâ€. Your attempts to sound middle ground are flailing at best. You come across clearly as a party loyalist (if you are not, then your comments paint you otherwise). But the argument “for the greatest good†is an immoral stance. It does not hold up to any ethical standards (I do not have time to go into a lesson on ethics and morals… do some reading of other than politically focused works on ethics and morals – “for the greater good†is a model that does not work, mainly due to, what you like to do, re-define the terms other than they were intended). Now, apply this moral an torture logic to the terrorists — by YOUR OWN standards, they are doing just fine: they believe (and they do) that what they do is for the greater good of their people. How can you say then that they are evil, when you say it is good to to that? Moral relativism is not moral: morals apply across the board, or they are not morals.
“The reason the word “patriot†is not used by me, and shouldn’t be used by anyone (these days) is that it simply has no meaning for anyone at all.â€
As you seem to have a problem understanding many words, I can see where this is true for you. The administration has abused the word in so many ways that if that is your source of definition then you would be hopelessly confused. The word means what it has always meant. Look it up. There’s a thing called a dictionary that tells you what words mean.
“This is fine. We should all promote more power for people that we choose becasue they agree with our greater good.â€
But you do not think it is fine. You say that the “left†is bad because they want “the greater good for ‘their’ peopleâ€, but then you think the right is good because they want “the greater good for ‘their’ peopleâ€. One thing that irk me senseless is hypocricy. Welcome, hypocrite.
“But,.. the leftist would use the people chosen by him to repeal the ability to choose for all people who don’t agree with him.â€
I have not seen this. Who set up the free speech zones, kicks out dissenters, etc.? I think that is the fundamentalists that want to force their idea of morals on everyone else, and it is clearlyy the agenda of this administration to try to quiet any and all dissenting voices. Hmmm. I see a pattern in your comments. Are you thinking yourself clever by using the “lefty” accusations against the administration to frame your arguments against your sworn enemy “the leftâ€? Intellectually dishonest, disrespectful, and weak arguments. I fear I have engaged discussion with an adolescent. Let me finish this post quickly and go. I don’t argue with children.
You also continually use capitalism as synonymous with American government. They are not the same. To use market anaogies is to imply a marriage of government and corporate. Now, what form of government is that?….
“Nature “thinks†in it’s own way, thus nature is preeminently moral.â€
Unless you are a devout animist— nature does not think. Not in its own way, not at all. “nature†is not an entity, and therefore not bound or even judged by any concept of morals. Morals require cognition.
Your tirade on torture and your concept of morals are very disturbed and wrong. However I will not wast any more space discussing these with you. You have your own definition of many terms and use flimsy or circular logic for your points. Though I responded to you civilly, you returned with some nastiness (though I will note no name calling… very mature… perhaps I cannot say the same for myself…: ) ). Your justifications for torture are not sustainable, but I do not have the time to waste on someone who does not want to engage honestly and openly in debate. Sorry, thanks, it was fun, to a point.
Thanks, admin, for not deleting these long posts. I will do better.. promise…
September 7th, 2006 at 4:13 pmsatellite phones
Do you think many people may consider it?
March 14th, 2008 at 7:36 amTed Williams
Thanks for the blog!
March 17th, 2008 at 12:04 amDistance Learning Teachers Having Sex With Students Very Hot School Girls
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 17th, 2008 at 2:55 amCash Advance
If a family member are small on dollar just effortlessly sign up for an online payday advance that is incomparable, easy, and speedy today!
March 17th, 2008 at 11:10 pmhow to get custody
Well spoken. I have to research more on this as it is really vital info.
March 18th, 2008 at 6:19 pmWeight Loss Low Carbohydrate Diet The Zone Diet
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 23rd, 2008 at 12:33 amCompare Prices Digital Cameras
Found your blog on yahoo – thanks for the article but i still don’t get it.
March 28th, 2008 at 9:20 amWeight Loss Pill Identifier Pills
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 29th, 2008 at 4:11 pmSecret Heart Diet
‘%KEYWORD%’ and more about weight loss
March 30th, 2008 at 6:15 amEric
I found you while searching google today. You’ll be happy toknowyour site was at the top of the results. Anyway. I added you to my Digg bookmarks. Good stuff!
April 2nd, 2008 at 3:28 pmgovernment home business grant
How are you doing? I like your information. Visit this government grants for home buyer page if you have a minute.
April 3rd, 2008 at 10:44 pmDigital Picture Frame Review
I enjoyed reading your blog. It is so interesting reading other peoples personal take on a subject.
April 4th, 2008 at 7:37 pmus government housing grants
Whats up? I just stopped by and I’ve got to say you have a you have a good site. You need to visit my federal government grant housing site.
April 4th, 2008 at 9:07 pmJim Crow Laws Employment Law Us Supreme Court
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 4th, 2008 at 10:05 pmMcLovin
Thanks for the blog!
April 7th, 2008 at 4:31 pmNutritional Supplements Weight Loss Weight Loss
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 7th, 2008 at 6:56 pmAnimal Sex Free Animal Sex Stories Sex With Dogs
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 10th, 2008 at 8:04 amNew Business Grants
Understanding Credit Report Score
April 10th, 2008 at 9:12 pmAaron
This is great
April 11th, 2008 at 8:37 ammost effective weight loss pills
.) Some individuals or companies have abused the TrackBack feature to insert spam links on some blogs (see sping). (Blogger now has
April 11th, 2008 at 1:09 pmEverything For Cash Get Rich Quick Money
Interesting – because that is the same thing I found out last Thursday.
April 12th, 2008 at 12:16 pm