Scalia Defends Torture: It’s ‘Absurd’ To Say The Gov’t Can’t ‘Smack’ A Suspect ‘In The Face’
Scalia Defends Torture: It’s ‘Absurd’ To Say The Gov’t Can’t ‘Smack’ A Suspect ‘In The Face’
Today in an interview with BBC Radio’s Law in Action, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia defended torture, claiming that it is not necessarily barred by the Constitution:
Is it really so easy to determine that smacking someone in the face to find out where he has hidden the bomb that is about to blow up Los Angeles is prohibited under the Constitution? Because smacking someone in the face would violate the 8th amendment in a prison context. You can’t go around smacking people about.
Is it obvious that what can’t be done for punishment can’t be done to exact information that is crucial to this society? It’s not at all an easy question, to tell you the truth.
The BBC interviewer, however, objected to Scalia’s use of the so-called “ticking time bomb” scenario to justify government torture. “It’s a bizarre scenario,” he said. “Because the fact is, it’s very unlikely you’re going to have the one person who can give you that information. So if you use that as an excuse to commit torture, perhaps that’s a dangerous thing.” Scalia responded:
Seems to me you have to say, as unlikely as that is, it would be absurd to say that you can’t stick something under the fingernails, smack them in the face. It would be absurd to say that.
Listen here:
As the BBC interviewer pointed out, ticking time bomb scenarios — where a detainee has knowledge of an imminent attack — are incredibly rare, despite Scalia’s fascination with them. U.S. Air Force Reserve Colonel Steve Kleinman, a longtime military interrogator, testified to the House in November that torture would be “unnecessary” even in such scenarios. Furthermore, intelligence experts say that torture is “ineffective” because it “often produces false information.”
Sharon at Human Rights First looks at Scalia’s arguments on torture’s constitutionality.
UPDATE: Scalia is also a fan of Jack Bauer.
Transcript:
BBC: Tell me about the issue of torture, we know that cruel and unusual punishment is prohibited under the 8th amendment. Does that mean if the issue comes up in front of the court, it’s a ‘no-brainer?’
SCALIA: Well, a lot of people think it is, but I find that extraordinary to begin with. To begin with, the constitution refers to cruel and unusual punishment, it is referring to punishment on indefinitely — would certainly be cruel and unusual punishment for a crime. But a court can do that when a witness refuses to answer or commit them to jail until you will answer the question — without any time limit on it, as a means of coercing the witness to answer, as the witness should. And I suppose it’s the same thing about “so-called” torture.
Is it really so easy to determine that smacking someone in the face to find out where he has hidden the bomb that is about to blow up Los Angeles is prohibited under the Constitution? Because smacking someone in the face would violate the 8th amendment in a prison context. You can’t go around smacking people about. Is it obvious that what can’t be done for punishment can’t be done to exact information that is crucial to this society? It’s not at all an easy question, to tell you the truth.
BBC: It’s a question that’s been raised by Alan Derschowitz and other people — this idea of ticking bomb torture. It’s predicated on the basis that you got a plane with nuclear weapons flying toward the White House, you happen to have in your possession — hooray! — the person that has the key information to put everything right, and you stick a needle under his fingernail — you get the answer — and that should be allowed?
SCALIA: And you think it shouldn’t?
BBC: All I’m saying about it, is that it’s a bizarre scenario, because it’s very unlikely that you’re going to have the one person that can give you that information and so if you use that as an excuse to permit torture then perhaps that’s a dangerous thing.
SCALIA: Seems to me you have to say, as unlikely as that is, it would be absurd to say that you can’t stick something under the fingernails, smack them in the face. It would be absurd to say that you couldn’t do that. And once you acknowledge that, we’re into a different game. How close does the threat have to be and how severe can an infliction of pain be?
There are no easy answers involved, in either direction, but I certainly know you can’t come in smugly and with great self-satisfaction and say, “Oh, this is torture and therefore it’s no good.” You would not apply that in some real-life situations. It may not be a ticking bomb in Los Angeles, but it may be: “Where is this group that we know is plotting this painful action against the United States? Where are they? What are they currently planning?”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
He should be “smacked in the face”.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:14 pmGuess Scalia has been skipping those CLEs. Torture is against United States law by treaty and statute. That’s right, passed by Congress to the be the law of the land. If conduct is alleged to violate the law, it is the Court’s job, ultimately, to state what the law is. Therefore, the true absurdity here is that Scalia sits as a jurist at all.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:15 pmFrosty, ya beat me to it.
But, I’ll say it anyway.
Would someone, preferably with a mailed fist, please smack this smug prick upside the head?
Justice, my ass.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:16 pmScalia does exactly what the Republic Party constantly rails against-legislating from the bench. But IOKIYAR.
The hypocrisy never ends.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:18 pmI think it’s “absurd” to say that we can’t “smack” Scalia in the face-with brass knuckles.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:19 pmWhat kind of civilized society doesn’t torture. It would be absurd to think we could survive without torturing people?
Sounds a little silly when you put into words what he really means.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:20 pmAntonin Scalia should not sit on the highest court of this land.
He is an embarrassment to all Americans and a threat to the Constitution.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:20 pmSomebody please feed this pig a 5,000 calorie a day diet high in saturated fats for a couple of years.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:21 pm….and this idiot indulging in “I saw in on “24″ scenarios” is the great legal scholar and intellectual of movement conservatism.
All of you Dems who say you won’t vote for X if Y gets the nomination, please pay attention and get over yourselves. This is the man who is McCain’s model of a Supreme Court justice. This election is more important than your hair-splitting differences between two very similar candidates.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:21 pmI’d like to shove something under his fingernails.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:21 pm*smiles to RUC*
Yeah, that fat, ugly mug justs calls out for a smacking, doesn’t it?
February 12th, 2008 at 1:21 pmScalia also wrote an op-ed in which he invoked his Christian beliefs to justify executing innocent people in the name of justice.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:23 pmTony is an utter disgrace to the Supreme Court.
An utter disgrace.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:25 pmFudgy the Whale Scalia , revealing the “brilliance” behind the GOP’s nominating and seating “strict Constitutionalist” judges………..
Joseph Wapner was 100 times more astute than this overweight , incoherent slob…………….
February 12th, 2008 at 1:25 pmThis is unbelievable. From the highest court in the land this dipshit ok’s assault. Smacking somebody would be an assault in most state penal codes. Does he think that those laws should be overturned? Where the hell is he coming from? Does he represent the rule of law? The people getting the information have to be smarter and more persuasive without assaulting someone. I guarantee if someone smacked this poor excuse for a supreme court justice he’d be calling the cops and filing charges for assault. What about kidnapping, which the government is doing with impunity. Does the high court justice approve of that. I mean you have to snatch somebody and hold somebody to smack them around. Whatever happened to the usual requirements of probably cause, search warrants, indictments and arrest warrants? What ever happened to the Habeus Corpus and the required appearance before a magistrate within 24 hours of arrest? Who did this to American and what are we as a country becoming when a Supreme Court Justice flippantly lets this shit roll of his tongue?
February 12th, 2008 at 1:25 pmJust Ice running in this pig’s veins.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:25 pmWhy doesn’t our media ask questions like this?
Answer….Because they are chicken shit and part of the problem and spend far too much time bashing a Clinton than an idiotic judge.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:25 pmhow many were executed during ww2 for water-torture (boarding)?
6 people were found guilty of water-torture (boarding) and EXECUTED because of their WAR CRIMES.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:26 pmWanna bet Scalia has “24″ on his Tivo and Jack Bauer posters on his wall?
February 12th, 2008 at 1:26 pmWe have met the enemy and it is the republicans.
How about we shove a sharp stick up your butt Scalia, would you call that torture, or how about the old iron maiden, or maybe just chop off a finger or two?
Repukes are the sickest subhuman scum on the planet, they are the same as the terrorist beheaders, same mentality, same ethics, same morals.
What repulsive, vile creeps these animals are.
Buck Fush
February 12th, 2008 at 1:26 pmOne has to wonder what kind of treatment Scalia thinks lives up to the “cruel and unusual punishment” standard. He picks and chooses his legal standards as he goes. He’s a disgrace.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:27 pmSentence first, verdict afterwards? Not quite. First you need to figure out they look suspicious. Then comes the fishing expedition, with torture or whatever it takes, and then you’re ready for the sentence and verdict.
“Ten years!” laments a prisoner in Solzhenitsyn’s Gulag Archipelago. “Ten years they gave me, and for doing absolutely nothing!”
“Oh, you must have done something,” a guard replies. “The usual sentence for absolutely nothing is five years.”
February 12th, 2008 at 1:27 pmWhy doesn’t our media ask questions like this?
Comment by Jack Jett — February 12, 2008 @ 1:25 pm
Answer….Because they are more interested in entertainment, ratings, and face time for themselves than they are in getting facts and calling out contradictions.
(There… fixed it for you. :))
February 12th, 2008 at 1:28 pmThe Supreme Court had a good run back in the, oh mid twentieth to late twentieth century.
Before and after that? Pretty much a tool of the ruling elites. Same old, same old.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:28 pmGod help me, but I hate these people!!!!!
February 12th, 2008 at 1:30 pmI suspect that Scalia just wants to smack people in the face and wants to ensure he can legally do so…
February 12th, 2008 at 1:31 pmOn the subject of a REAL legal statesman, I am saddened to report the resignation of William & Mary President Gene Nichol.
I know this is off-topic, but his resignation letter is the most inspiring read I have had in years. I only regret that he didn’t write this sooner to fend off the yawping fundies and keep his post.
http://hamptonroads.com/ 2008/ 02/ william-and-mary-president-gene-nichols-statement-students
Professor Nichol, if you don’t know him, was at the center of the Wren Cross “controversy.” This is a long read, so I’d at least get through at least some of the first paragraphs, but all of it is inspiring if you have the time and patience.
….it is crucial not to surrender to the loud and the vitriolic and the angry — just because they are loud and vitriolic and angry. Recalling the old Methodist hymn that commands us “not to be afraid to defend the weak because of the anger of the strong,” nor “afraid to defend the poor because of the anger of the rich.”
February 12th, 2008 at 1:32 pmScalia says,
“Hey…I smacka you face, and den you swim wit duh fishes unda duh Casciano Bwidge”
February 12th, 2008 at 1:34 pmJack @ 17
Why doesn’t our media ask these sorts of questions?
I don’t know, but what passes for media in the US is pathetic. All entertainment and strumming the CW. The Brits know how to ask hard questions and the pols are prepared to receive them. Here its an embarrassment , like someone farted, to be brutally graphic about it. We operate in a real limited comfort zone. Wouldn’t want to get voted off the island.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:35 pmIsn’t it comforting to know that a Supreme Court Justice reads from the same talking points lists as the President, Congress, Right Wing Radio Hosts and TP Trolls?
You have to admit the right-wing propaganda infrastructure is impressive.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:36 pmSomeone waterboard Scalia until he tells us exactly where in the Constitution torture is allowed.
His brains will become more waterlogged than they are now……
February 12th, 2008 at 1:36 pmThis is just typical of Republican/modern conservative thought. They believe that the law must be obeyed without question by the normal person. Punishments must be severe, forgiveness a rarity and condemnation eternal. However, they have a different standard for those who lead. The law is then flexible to conform to whatever the leadership determines is in the best interest of society. They believe their discretion to be absolute without recourse or review.
Scalia and the other scum seem to be oblivious to the reason for the fifth amendment to the constitution. Coerced testimony through water boarding, slivers up the finger or other pressure tactics are unconstitutional. The conservatives lack a historical perspective to understand that these were the tactics that caused the colonies to revolt.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:37 pmOff topic. I got a co-worker who just told me Obama refuses to salute the Flag, swear on the Bible, and is also a Muslim. How am I gonna de-bunk this guy?
February 12th, 2008 at 1:38 pmMaybe Scalia will go hunting with Cheney again soon.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:39 pmI’ll buy Cheney the beer……
re Wayne at@ 31
Someone waterboard Scalia until he tells us where he hid the Constitution
February 12th, 2008 at 1:40 pmThlis man is clear a NAZI and has no business as a supreme court justice. That’s why Roberts and Alito shouldn’t have been confirmed as well. This man who are sworn to uphold the Constitution is condoning torture and advocates it based on Republican thinking. What he doesn’t realize is this treatment is “A crime against humanity”, and anyone who used or approves of it is equally quilty. The trials at Nuernberg of former German judges showed that hiding behind a black robe doesn’t give a legitimate defend of such a charge. Justice Scalia has opened himself and the leaders of his party up to “War crimes charges”. I for one would support these charges against them. He’s a “War criminal”, who wears a black robe and sits in judgement of decent people whom he’s sworn to give equal justice to. This man has no core and no soul.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:40 pmThe next thing you know he’ll say the police can beat a confession out of people regardless of the facts or innocence of the person. What an A hole!
February 12th, 2008 at 1:41 pm33 - if your friend would buy that, he’d buy anything. you’ll never debunk him, so sell him a piece of sh*t car for three times what it’s worth instead.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:41 pmRepukes are the sickest subhuman scum on the planet, they are the same as the terrorist beheaders, same mentality, same ethics, same morals.
What repulsive, vile creeps these animals are.
Buck Fush
Comment by Buckie Boy — February 12, 2008 @ 1:26 pm
The reason they advocate torture so much is simply because they are sadistic. They sit up in their ivory towers looking down on us as if we are bugs to be squashed whenever they feel the desire. Just look back at all the sex scandals involving republicans. Some of the sickest and downright disgusting escapades known. They love the thought of intimidating someone or everyone for their own gain or political benefit.
I’ll make it real simple on how to gather information and everyone will be happy and no one gets harmed. Just buy a case of beer and a bottle of whiskey and let the detainee drink himself into a stupor and he’ll sing like a bird. Everyone knows a drunk likes to talk and brag. I would trust that method infinitely more than torture because the tortured one will say anything to make it stop. If he knows anything of pertinence he will say “a bomb” is in a certain place in Los Angeles while it is really in New York. He’s prepared to die anyway so while the dumbass, sadistic torturers are looking in L.A. thinking they cracked the case, a bomb goes off as planned in New York. Torture does not work. But it does have numerous benefits, provided you’re a sadistic piece of shit!
February 12th, 2008 at 1:42 pmOff topic. I got a co-worker who just told me Obama refuses to salute the Flag, swear on the Bible, and is also a Muslim. How am I gonna de-bunk this guy?
Comment by ForTruth — February 12, 2008 @ 1:38 pm
tell him to prove it.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:43 pmRepublicans can all be proud of Scalia and his situational ethics, serving on the highest court in the land.
What a fu(king pig.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:43 pmHow am I gonna de-bunk this guy?
Comment by ForTruth
The Repukes have been sending e-mails around filled with outright lies, and your ignorant co-worker has obviously gotten them.
They are outright lies.
Buck Fush
February 12th, 2008 at 1:44 pmAll of you Dems who say you won’t vote for X if Y gets the nomination, please pay attention and get over yourselves.
This is just bogus posturing by some of the more ardent Obama and Clinton partisans. When it gets down to the general election, nearly every Democrat is going to vote for the candidate who gets the party nomination, no matter they claim right now.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:45 pmSomeone waterboard Scalia until he tells us where he hid the Constitution
Comment by DonS — February 12, 2008 @ 1:40 pm
Great, but I have a feeling when he pulls that rolled-up document out from where he stuck it, you’re gonna want to have a new copy made.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:45 pmOff topic. I got a co-worker who just told me Obama refuses to salute the Flag, swear on the Bible, and is also a Muslim. How am I gonna de-bunk this guy?
Comment by ForTruth — February 12, 2008 @ 1:38 pm
Last I checked the Trinity United Church of Christ of Chicago wasn’t a muslum church……
But since the muslum smear fell flat, they have started smearing the church as a “black only, unamerican church”
The Republican slime machine ( and I suspect Hillary’s slime machine ) are working overtime and running scared.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:47 pmOff topic. I got a co-worker who just told me Obama refuses to salute the Flag, swear on the Bible, and is also a Muslim. How am I gonna de-bunk this guy?
Comment by ForTruth — February 12, 2008 @ 1:38 pm
tell him to prove it.
Comment by Fan of Man — February 12, 2008 @ 1:43 pm
No — before you do anything, calmly ask him how he would feel if those rumors were proven false. Would it cause him to see Obama in a new light? Would it cause him to second-guess the next email like this that came his way?
THEN tell him to prove it.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:48 pmWhy are you seriously taking your cues from a FICTIONAL TV SHOW!! You’re a SUPREME COURT JUSTICE, for God’s sake! Christ, it’s all over, isn’t it, America is a failed experiment in democracy.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:48 pmThere’s an old joke about a man who approaches a woman and asks if she would sleep with him for a million dollars. The woman thinks for a bit and then says yes, she would sleep with him for a million dollars. Next he offers the $50. She says “What do you think I am?” He says. “We already established that, now we are just haggling over the price.”
If you will smack someone around to save a city, will you do it to save the life of a child. If for the life of a child, what about the life savings of an old man. If for the life savings of an old man…..
February 12th, 2008 at 1:49 pmVerbalkint; You got the link on that?
I’m not doubting you in the least, but I would like to read that myself.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:50 pmwhat a nice christian man is scalia.
i hope someone does to him what he proposes to do to others.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:50 pmGod help me, but I hate these people!!!!!
Comment by Leftside Annie
I know what you mean and it makes me very sad. I have never hated anyone in my life until the Bush Crime Family and their enablers decided to ruin this once great nation. Now I find myself hating a lot of people because of who they are and what they will do.
This is the reason why I really want to see Obama as our President. I would really like to let go of that hate and find something to believe in again. I would like to have a president who brings me to tears with his words rather than one who makes me cringe every time he opens his mouth.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:50 pmMakes you so darned proud that we have justices like Scalito!
February 12th, 2008 at 1:52 pmhow many were executed during ww2 for water-torture (boarding)?
6 people were found guilty of water-torture (boarding) and EXECUTED because of their WAR CRIMES.
Comment by Fan of Man — February 12, 2008 @ 1:26 pm
February 12th, 2008 at 1:52 pmGood. Sets the PRECEDENT for Bush and Cheney’s WAR CRIME trials, doesn’t it?
.
Of course Scablia suggests that defending the Constitution is absurd.
He didn’t vote for the Eighth Amendment, why should he have to defend what he didn’t vote for?
p.s.
Didn’t the Nazies dismiss the Courts and the Rule of Law so as to better serve the Party and the Homeland?
.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:52 pmComment by Billy Hill — February 12, 2008 @ 1:49 pm
Someone should tell hillbilly that he doesn’t have the intelligence to pull off satire.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:53 pmSomeone should tell hillbilly that he doesn’t have the intelligence to pull off satire.
Comment by bilbobaggins — February 12, 2008 @ 1:53 pm
But then we might not get to laugh at his hilarious pratfalls when he tries.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:54 pmObama rumors continue to get passed around the internet — it is the verison of swift boating that is currently in use.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:55 pmIt’s amazing to me that no matter how much debunking is out there concerning these rumors, that the gossip still has its believers.
I would like to have a president who brings me to tears with his words rather than one who makes me cringe every time he opens his mouth.
Comment by bilbobaggins — February 12, 2008 @ 1:50 pm
I would be happy with a president that would actually follow the Law and not break it. And can speak a whole sentence coherently.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:57 pmThis is just bogus posturing by some of the more ardent Obama and Clinton partisans. When it gets down to the general election, nearly every Democrat is going to vote for the candidate who gets the party nomination, no matter they claim right now.
Comment by VerbalKint
Sorry, but I disagree with you. There have already been a few here who have said that they won’t vote for Hillary if she is the nominee. I don’t remember anyone saying they wont’ vote for Obama if he makes it, though.
I think it is important for us to be reminded of all the harm the Republicans have done to this country so that if any progressive or independent is tempted to either not vote, or vote for a third party, they have to remember what happened in the last 7 years because so many voted for Nader.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:57 pmScalia is an example of why we must not let another repugnican take over the White House. Obama, who is a Constitutional professor, would not nominate a fool like Scalia, or a toady like Roberts or Alito.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:59 pmObama rumors continue to get passed around the internet — it is the verison of swift boating that is currently in use.
It’s amazing to me that no matter how much debunking is out there concerning these rumors, that the gossip still has its believers.
Comment by Marie
Anyone who would choose to believe these rumors probably wouldn’t vote for Obama anyway. It’s just a convenience excuse for them.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:00 pmScalia’s message to the world - “it would be absurd to say that you can’t stick something under the fingernails of American POWs, smack them in the face.â€
sigh…….
Comment by delafield — February 12, 2008 @ 1:58 pm
Yup.
Bush AND the PNAC war criminals have REPEATED history, with the USA as the 4th Reich.
Glorious, ja?
Yeah, right. Remember Bush and Cheney and ALL your supporters:
You CAN’T HIDE from the Almighty. He SEES your EVIL acts and HEARS your EVIL talk.
Good luck when you come up to face Him.
And He asks you if you’ve MURDERED in His NAME…
February 12th, 2008 at 2:00 pmScalia’s message to the world - “it would be absurd to say that you can’t stick something under the fingernails of American POWs, smack them in the face.â€
sigh…….
Comment by delafield
Can you imagine what every parent with a child in the middle east must think when they read something like that? How can we protest when the enemy mistreats our soldiers when we are doing the same? We have lost our moral authority, we have lots our way.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:01 pmOff topic. I got a co-worker who just told me Obama refuses to salute the Flag, swear on the Bible, and is also a Muslim. How am I gonna de-bunk this guy?
Comment by ForTruth — February 12, 2008 @ 1:38 pm
Easiest way is to direct your co-worker here: http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/muslim.asp
This is most likely the e-mail your co-worker got that is forming all his opinions for him.
If your co-worker can’t get to a computer, just give him the short version:
1) Obama has never refused to salute the flag and has never refused to say the pledge of allegiance. Yes, there’s a photograph of him without his hand over his heart during (or immediately after) the playing of the national anthem. There are many more photographs of him WITH his hand over his heart during the anthem.
2) Obama does use the Bible when swearing his oath of office. Those who claim he uses the Quran instead are confusing him with a Muslim Congressman named Keith Ellison who did use the Quran. Obama and Ellison are two different people — they aren’t even from the same state.
3) Obama is a member of the United Church of Christ and has been for over 20 years. That’s a long time to keep up a charade if it’s just to “downplay his Muslim background.”
Hope this helps.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:01 pmIs it just me or does anyone else see in that picture the PERFECT candidate for a little Club Gitmo waterboard spa treatment?
February 12th, 2008 at 2:01 pmUgh.
And he represents the U.S.A in the world Media?!?!?!
February 12th, 2008 at 2:02 pmI am going to defend the concept of torture for a moment. If we knew that someone really knew the whereabouts of the ticking time bomb, would anyone really want to see the individual tried who tortured the suspect and saved the day? No!
The problem is that we do not want to see torture become the common place method of retrieving information and supporting criminal cases. It is not a long path to go from the sure case scenario to the poor German citizen picked up overseas because his name sounded like a terrorist or Canadian citizen tortured without cause. So ask the proponents whether they would be willing to see those who picked out the wrong victim to be subjected to torture be tried for their act. It is the threat of criminal prosecution that stays the hand of overzealous police and government agents from adopting torture as a general tactic. No one would be tried for solving the ticking time bomb. What we do not want is the indiscriminate use of torture when there is time to use appropriate interrogation tactics or against those we just suspect of having information.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:02 pm.
#33 Comment by ForTruth — February 12, 2008 @ 1:38 pm
Tell him a shallow man considers everything he hears to be the truth and a gullible man knows everything he hears IS the truth.
Then ask him what time Rush is on the airwaves, he’ll know.
.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:02 pmThis is more proof that reich-wingers have NO business appointing judges to the highest court in the land.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:03 pmBREAKING NEWS: Senate Preserves Telecom Immunity
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ wp-dyn/ content/ article/ 2008/ 02/ 12/ AR2008021201202.html?hpid=topnews
*** Looks like the telcos are not going to face any consequences for their illegal warrantless spying for over six years.
We’re also one step closer to having all our phone calls, emails etc. spied on for at least the next four years.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:03 pmWhat a good Catholic !
February 12th, 2008 at 2:03 pmScalia will not Scald our constitution forever.
I thought the man was such a poorly paid government employee, why is he still on the court?
February 12th, 2008 at 2:06 pmAll of you Dems who say you won’t vote for X if Y gets the nomination, please pay attention and get over yourselves.
This is just bogus posturing by some of the more ardent Obama and Clinton partisans. When it gets down to the general election, nearly every Democrat is going to vote for the candidate who gets the party nomination, no matter they claim right now.
Comment by VerbalKint — February 12, 2008 @ 1:45 pm
——
Well count me as one of the few. I’m as liberal as all gets out, but Im not just going to blindly go into the voting booth and vote for the guy/gal.
I don’t like either of them, but I MAY suck it up, hold my nose and vote for Obama. If Clinton gets the nomination I’m either leaving it blank or writing in Ron Paul for the lulz.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:06 pmTell him that Bush salutes the flag, swears on the Bible, and claims to be a Christian. All of that still didn’t stop him from breaking the Constitution, breaking the oath of office he swore on the Bible, and acting contrary to the commandments of Jesus Christ (peace and taking care of the needy).
Also remind him that the Constitution prohibits a religious test as a requirement for holding office - so much for the Bible. It’s. In. The. Constitution.
Ask him what’s more important - the flag, or the Constitution?
Ask him to show you evidence that Obama is a Muslim (Rush Limbaugh does not count). Remind him that Romney is a Muslim, Lieberman is a Jew, and many of our founding fathers were Deistst (look it up for him).
If he doesn’t get it, write him off ’cause he’s a moron.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:07 pmVerbalkint; You got the link on that?
I’m not doubting you in the least, but I would like to read that myself.
Comment by Uncle Ho — February 12, 2008 @ 1:50 pm
Sorry, I don’t. It was a long time ago, maybe 5 years. But I distinctly remember him making a long-winded argument about the necessity of the death penalty, and then saying that executions of innocent people was very rare, and worth the cost. He finished up with some cheesy philosophical argument about how as a Christian he doesn’t fear death.
There are two big problems with his arguments: the death penalty brings no benefits, unless you think vengeance is a benefit, and innocent people are executed rather frequently.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:08 pmNow every other corporation will want some sort of immunity for whatever transgression in the name of ‘national security’. This is truly a sad day.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:09 pmWhat’s Danny DeVito doing on the Supreme Court anyway? I take that back. Danny DeVito has much more sense that that pig!
February 12th, 2008 at 2:11 pmI think it is important for us to be reminded of all the harm the Republicans have done to this country so that if any progressive or independent is tempted to either not vote, or vote for a third party, they have to remember what happened in the last 7 years because so many voted for Nader.
Comment by bilbobaggins — February 12, 2008 @ 1:57 pm
There certainly is no harm in constantly reminding us of that.
Everyone, listen to me: vote for the not-a-Republican candidate. If you are unhappy with the result, split with the party in 2010. That is my plan.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:11 pmThis is ESPECIALLY for Scalia:
TRAITOR Bush AND the PNAC war criminals have REPEATED history, with the USA as the 4th Reich.
Glorious, ja?
Yeah, right. Remember Bush and Cheney and ALL your supporters:
You CAN’T HIDE from the Almighty. He SEES your EVIL acts and HEARS your EVIL talk.
Good luck when you come up to face Him.
And He asks you if you’ve MURDERED in His NAME…
Sincerely,
NRA Gun Nut(e)s
February 12th, 2008 at 2:12 pmHope this helps.
Comment by missmolly
Good work there Missmolly - I cannot believe the repukes I have talked with (rarely to I speak to a repuke and I don’t give them any business either) that believe that crap and continue to spout it to others, swiftboating has begun.
Maybe we can email that picture of Bush and McInsane hugging and say that he is gay?
Buck Fush
February 12th, 2008 at 2:13 pmHow am I gonna de-bunk this guy?
Comment by ForTruth
I like Ralph’s idea of getting the guy to commit to a position if it turns out to be a false rumor, then look it up at Snopes.com. It usually takes the “faithful” a few visits to the Snopes well to lend any credence to the de-bunking, but I have found it does help.
At my work it’s the official source of de-bunking. A new email will go around like Proctor & Gamble being satanists and everyone tries to be the first to Snope it.
But I suspect this guy is not looking for the truth, he is looking for reasons to support his pre-ordained position and is backing into why he hates Obama. Kinda like Boy George and Iraq.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:13 pm.
#70 Comment by JMOHR — February 12, 2008 @ 2:02 pm
Here’s the catch that no one gets…
Since the use of torture is NOT 100% reliable and tends to offer the subject relief ONLY when information is divulged, even temporary relief, and torture tends to elicit the information that is sought after, even if not credible, how can anyone present the option of TORTURE as a remedy to acquiring TRUTHFUL information, let alone informative information? And, how can anyone suggest that TORTURING someone would save the lives of others, when the results may be catering toward giving information so as to make the TORTURE stop and not necessary the truth at all, especially if that person being TORTURED doesn’t know all the details?
I mean, if you were torturing someone who YOU thought knew where the latest bomb attack was gonna be and depended upon their knowledge to thwart that attack, say in L.A., and the terror group changed locations to say, Chicago, because of the captured man, how is your use of torture gonna save the people in Chicago when the suspect only knew of L.A.?
It won’t. !!!!!!
.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:14 pmWhat law school allowed this political hack to graduate? I thought that the Supreme Court was above political grandstanding? What country do we live in?
February 12th, 2008 at 2:16 pmIt is a dangerous road. What about if there is a suspect that the police believe has kidnapped someone. According to Scalia, the police should be allowed to torture the suspect because it could potentially save the life of the kidnapped victim.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:19 pmScalia, Mukasey, and Gonzales are judges? Warped minds equal twisted justice. Scalia could be impeached for his hunting trip with Cheney during a pending US Supreme Court decision involving Cheney. There’s no shame in these people.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:24 pm.
Where the interests of the State and Corporations are intertwined… FASCISM!
Corporations are being given more Rights in America than the average American. See, if I wanted to wiretap you, I would be REQUIRED to obtain a warrant, by law and statute, the Fourth Amendment. Now, the shift is toward allowing major multi-conglomerate Telecom Corporations to wiretap you warrantlessly, against the law(immunity) and statute(Forth Amendment).
What is it Congress supports and defends IF NOT the Constitution?
Since when is WARRANTLESS Constitutionally Legal?
.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:26 pm#70 Comment by JMOHR — February 12, 2008 @ 2:02 pm
It’s easy to contrive a scenario where torture, even to the point of death would be justified. IF you knew the person knew where the bomb was, you would be justified in waterboarding, cutting fingers, drilling knees…whatever. But that is a totally contrived situation and hinges on absolute knowledge that you had the right person. Ain’t gonna happen.
And even then it would be illegal. Even homicide is justifiable, but no one is clamoring to make murder legal.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:27 pmFrankie; it’s guaranteed that with goose-stepping brownshirts like you in power, it IS a suicide pact. Now, crawl back into your sewer you fascist pig!
February 12th, 2008 at 2:27 pmI wonder what would happen if just one person, with any hint of integrity, on the inside would spill their guts about what is going on with this administration and the supreme court. I would love to see Scalia, Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rice, etc. on trial for their lives.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:31 pmBut that is a totally contrived situation and hinges on absolute knowledge that you had the right person. Ain’t gonna happen.
And even then it would be illegal. Even homicide is justifiable, but no one is clamoring to make murder legal.
Comment by nanlichi
It hinges on the knowledge that you have the right person and it hinges on knowing that the answer they gave you is the correct one. More often than not, it will not be the correct answer and you will be spinning your wheels going to the wrong place.
There is NEVER any justification for torture. If we want our enemies to not torture our citizens when captured, we cannot, under any circumstances, torture their citizens.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:32 pm#92: Tut-tut. A personal attack. Are you sure you are not in breach of TP’s terms of use?
Comment by Frank M
Now, now, poor little Francine gets her feelings hurt when you call her what she is. I’ll bet she even reported you to TP. Naughty, naughty!
February 12th, 2008 at 2:34 pmIgnore the piss soaked troll, Frank Moron is the lowest of the low, a truly unamerican POS.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:34 pmComment by Frank M — February 12, 2008 @ 2:29 pm
Uncle Ho,
It seems that the TROLLS are let loose again.
Fascist sympathisers they are, seem to think it wiser to give away our freedoms so as to avoid loosing them to our most elusive “COMMON ENEMY” who, like their patron godKing, George W. said, “… they(sic) hate us for our freedoms.” And since the good godKing does not lie, it is far easier and safer to just eliminate those freedoms all together… NO? Least this way the Fascists can claim they won the battle for the destruction of America… RIGHT?
.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:35 pmFrankie; no personal attack-just an obvious observation. Only a neo-Nazi pig wants to do away with the rule of law and replace it with the will of his fuhrer.
DUDE! I WANT MY DEMOCRACY BACK! Where the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are sacrosanct and inviolable.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:35 pmAnything it takes to keep us secure. Even the Constitution is not a suicide pact.
Comment by Frank M
I wonder if Francine really and truly thinks that the Bush Crime Family is keeping us safe. If he does believe that, he is as delusional as George Bush is.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:36 pm“It’s not about who they are, it’s about who WE are.”- John McCain
February 12th, 2008 at 2:37 pm#98Comment by Frank M — February 12, 2008 @ 2:34 pm
Yes… become more like them…
Is that what you truely wish for?
It is what you argue for; The ability to be as bad, or worse than your enemy.
Then what does that make you into?
.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:39 pmGood God Almighty. What is this person doing sitting on our Supreme Court? What can we do to get him off and sent to some deserted island in the middle ot the Arctic Ocean so he doesn’t embarrass the human race anymore. This is just rediculous. I’m writing Pelosi today to start impeachment hearings now to get this idiot out or our lives.
By the way, his doomsday scenario (what if only one suspect knew the key to stopping a catastrophic disaster) is, word for word, the same scenario posed by Chaney countless times to justify torture.
Read this: http://www.hrw.org/ english/ docs/ 2004/ 05/ 24/ usint8614.htm
…so all of you will know just exactly what international law has established about torture. It is as clear and consise and consistant as it can possibly be; i.e., Torture is a criminal act and you will pay if you authorize or do it, period!
Our Forefathers could not have conceived the thought of even discussing this issue, let alone that it would even be an issue up for discussion. When they wrote “no cruel or unusual punishment,” that’s exactly what they meant based on their own knowledge of and experience with the torture practices of England and Europe in general and wanted no part of it. It is as clear as you can possibly make it.
If this issue is not ripped from our national dialogue and all perpatrators immediately condemned or convicted of authorizing tortue and turned over to the World Court(e.g. Bush and gang), then we as a country are doomed. It is that important.
Start shouting this as loud as you can!
February 12th, 2008 at 2:39 pmAnything it takes to keep us secure. Even the Constitution is not a suicide pact.
Comment by Frank M — February 12, 2008 @ 2:24 pm
Not anything.
According to your fascist boss, it’s just a ‘goddamn piece of paper’.
You’re a disgrace to the nation, to the ideals of the founding fathers and to your family.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:39 pmooooohhhh, Frankie the fascist pig reported me. I’m sooooooo scared.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:40 pmMany a people here have tried to get me banned, but since I am not in breach of the rules, the admins have refused. Kudos.
Comment by Frank M
Francine thinks that he is not in violation of the TOS on TP. Well, I disagree. There is a rule against harassment and this showing up here day after day spouting the RNC talking points is harassment as far as I am concerned. It’s too bad TP isn’t like redstate.org. I would love to see them give these idiots the boot after the their or fourth useless post they make.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:40 pmJust keep flagging, Francine.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:40 pmFrank: you do NOT deserve to call yourself an American. You are a despicable coward - and I loathe you with every fiber of my being.
Shame on you. Shame on you forever.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:41 pmIt’s better to be feared than loved.
Comment by Frank M — February 12, 2008 @ 2:34 pm
Pray tell, how does it feel to be neither?
February 12th, 2008 at 2:41 pm“It’s better to be feared than be love.”- comment by Frankie
I’ll bet that probably just exactly what Hitler said.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:42 pmFace it…Scalia wants to take us back to the original constitution and take away rights from women, blacks and everything else the amendments have changed. It is appalling that he was allowed to lie in his confirmation hearings. Disgusting!
February 12th, 2008 at 2:44 pmMaybe we can email that picture of Bush and McInsane hugging and say that he is gay?
Buck Fush
Comment by Buckie Boy
That’s a great idea. But, be sure to use the photoshopped version that shows his left hand on Bush’s crotch. That says it much better!
February 12th, 2008 at 2:44 pmbilbobaggins,
Let me posit a hypothetical, even nonsensical scenario for you. You come home and your daughter (or whatever you love and defend the most) has been kidnapped and Frank M. is in the house demanding you give him crack money or she dies.
I would skin him alive if I thought there was a chance of getting info from him. But I would also be ok with going to prison for torture because it’s illegal.
Torture is absolutely wrong and so is murder. You can’t use hypotheticals to set a standard. The problem is that Bush is guilty of condoning, maybe even ordering torture and the neocon scum are bending over backwards to cover their God Bush’s tracks.
If Bush and the Boyz weren’t guilty, there would be no discussion of whether torture is illegal. It. Is.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:44 pmI’m glad that I”m not the only person who thinks Scalia is scum. This so called “good catholic” is exactly what I’m not one. These people who claim to be christians are the first to condemn, torture and violate the laws this country was founded on. I’m just as tough on terrorism as the next guy, but I’m not a evil human who has to feeling for those whom we accuse of a crime. What happened to innocent until proven guilty? If your torture a person aren’t you convicting them without trial. Oh I forgot Scalia has that “bring the guilty bastard in” reasoning when it comes to justice. He’s never met an innocent man or a government position he didn’t agree with. In his opinion if you appear before the bar, you must be guilty of something. Yet this sick A hole sits on the highest court of the land. Well, like him, I’ve made my decision about him. He is a sick preverted little man, not in stature, but in mind and soul. He’d better say a trillion Hail Mary’s because he’s gonna need them when God sends him straight to HELL. May the devil treat him the same way he’s treated people for years, unfair.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:44 pm“It’s better to be feared than be love.â€- comment by Frankie
If Francine is married (I doubt any woman could stand him, though), I am willing to bet that’s his attitude towards his wife.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:46 pm#98 It’s better to be feared than loved.
Comment by Frank M — February 12, 2008 @ 2:34 pm
Fear fades as courage gains strength.
Love is enduring.
I would much rather be loved than feared.
If I am feared, I loose that respect it demands once courage rises to quell me. If I am loved, the respect it welcomes is eternal.
.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:46 pm“The Constitution is not a suicide pact”?
Do these idiots even read what they type?
Oh well, I guess so much for “strict constructionalism”, huh?
February 12th, 2008 at 2:46 pmLet’s see. Corporation wants profits. Maximized profits at any cost. First you close all facilities in the US and put all the people that worked there out of work. Then the corporation moves all facilities (with the exception of the corporate offices) overseas, preferably to the far east where labor is, shall we say, somewhat less. Then they hire a lobbying firm to grease the necessary politicians to grant them tax breaks so as to further maximize profits. Then the corporation may also set up shop offshore to avoid paying taxes at all. Then the CEO’s gets to basically pay themselves whatever they want and give themselves retirement packages and bonuses in amounts that are bordering on the obscene. Then they have the politicians that they ‘own’ to loosen the laws on toxic waste, water quality, harmful emissions, etc. so they can save even more money and, once again, maximize profits.
So, Frank M, how much is enough? How many fantastic gadgets have the corporations provided for you to be amused and dumbed down like a baby with it’s rattles and balls Frank M? Is that all that matters to you Frank? Just because you’re able to buy something you want, you’re willing to turn a blind eye to all the underpinnings of how you got it? Pathetic.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:46 pmI call them as I see them. I, for one don’t hesitate to call a spade a spade. Frankie’s rants are labled properly for what they are. He may as well be shouting seig heil at the top of his lungs. It’s all there for everyone to see. His bible is Mein Kampf.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:47 pmIt’s better to be feared than loved.
Comment by Frank M — February 12, 2008 @ 2:34 pm
Yeah, but since I think in your case it’s neither one, then what about being laughed at?
February 12th, 2008 at 2:48 pmTorture is absolutely wrong and so is murder. You can’t use hypotheticals to set a standard.
Comment by nanlichi — February 12, 2008 @ 2:44 pm
Abso-fu(kin’-lutely.
We should call this “ticking time bomb” scenario exactly what it is:
situational ethics.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:48 pmI call them as I see them. I, for one don’t hesitate to call a spade a spade. Frankie’s rants are labled properly for what they are. He may as well be shouting seig heil at the top of his lungs. It’s all there for everyone to see. His bible is Mein Kampf.
Comment by Uncle Ho — February 12, 2008 @ 2:47 pm
As I’m sure you’re aware, Frank freely admits to being a fascist.
One wonders then why he is so against the “Islamo-fascists”. Is it because they don’t believe in the same fascism as he does? Or is it because they don’t really exist?
February 12th, 2008 at 2:51 pmResponse to 85, Max-1, and 90, Nanlichi: We are actually on the same side here. I agree that torture should be a crime. I am suggesting that the current law already encompasses the smoking gun scenario by providing an excuse to committing a crime (defense of another.) However, the excusable offense (i.e. justifiable) places the burden on the defendant to come forward and justify his actions. Thus the defendant would have to show that this was the right suspect, that there was indeed an imminent threat to innocent individuals and that there were no other reasonable alternatives. This merely the current state of the law. The Republicans and conservatives are the ones who suggest that we provide an advance immunity (reliance on advice of counsel, aggressive interrogation tactic) that would remove the current inhibitions to such actions.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:52 pmAre all corporate cronies barbarians?
February 12th, 2008 at 2:52 pmFrankie; I think most posters here are in agreement. Instead of posting your Nazi drivel here, go bloviate at Nazi party websites. We are sure they would appreciate you there.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:54 pmFrankie; or, is that why you are here? Did the Nazi websites ban you there?
February 12th, 2008 at 2:56 pmCan someone please tell me what ticking bomb “they” keep referring to? The three men that they admitted to torturing had, in their captors eyes, already perpetrated the 9/11 massacre. Are they trying to make us believe they tortured them to get a future plot’s details out of them?, AND that they were successful? AND that they did indeed, by torturing them, save the city of Los Angeles (which you KNOW no republican would ever care enough to save)?
I don’t understand their logic…
It’s kinda like the shrub and the republicans begging to get the tax cuts made permanent to save the economy. After all, if the tax cuts were so successful, why is the economy such a mess?? Where is the logic?
February 12th, 2008 at 2:59 pmIt’s too bad TP isn’t like redstate.org. I would love to see them give these idiots the boot after the their or fourth useless post they make.
Comment by bilbobaggins — February 12, 2008 @ 2:40 pm
In fairness to Frank, he’s not violating any rules here. And Faiz the other day recommended that one simply ignore the “troll” if don’t like what they have to say, including through your third person responses . Also, I’m sure TP would appreciate it if you wouldn’t take the credit for their professional enforcement of the rules and allowing dissent, because you didn’t construct this site.
February 12th, 2008 at 3:02 pmScalia’s been watchin way too much ‘24′. Pull that Constitution out of your butt, fatass, and memorize it.
February 12th, 2008 at 3:03 pmSeems to me you have to say, as unlikely as that is, it would be absurd to say that you can’t stick something under the fingernails, smack them in the face. It would be absurd to say that.
but ohhh, the outrage if our soldiers had to endure sticks under their fingernails, smacks in their face! Suddenly, it wouldn’t be acceptable, now would it?
(ForTruth, try snopes.com or truthorfiction.com, which have already debunked that asinine myth making it’s rounds, again)
February 12th, 2008 at 3:04 pmNothing infuriates a troll more than plain old ignoring it. Foamy, rasping, crazed rants will surely follow.
February 12th, 2008 at 3:04 pmNino’s a RWA azo, and a man of no principles. I attack one of his other “claims to fame” (from the Beeb article) in a blog post here. I’ll get to a post on his torture crapola shortly….
Cheers,
February 12th, 2008 at 3:07 pmDoes anyone think that after Vietnam, that I should be terrified of anything fascists like Frank have to say or who they report me to?
Hell no. I’ve been to reichwing sites to get in a few good clips in before being banned for not parroting the party line. Most recently at gathering of eagles, redstate, and free republic. I even mailed the White House telling them what I think of them.
They can intimidate you ONLY if you let them. Me, I spit in their eyes.
February 12th, 2008 at 3:08 pmBut what would we do without trolls here that antagonize?
Have meaningful, thought inducing, intelligent conversations, I know, but still, don’t we all deserve a Daryll of Parodyll smashing once in a while to feel a little sense of superiority, even though it’s all just a game for them?
Man, I miss the true moderates that indeed like to debate (hacker bob, exley). Unfortunately, they are few and far between posting here.
February 12th, 2008 at 3:09 pmAnyone who brings up the ticking time bomb hypothesis is arguing on the same level as the rabbit hunters in South Park: “It’s headed right for us!”
February 12th, 2008 at 3:14 pmScalia. Fascist pig today and everyday.
February 12th, 2008 at 3:19 pm#89 Frank M.
Even the Constitution is not a suicide pact.
Quite true. It is, in case you didn’t notice, the law of the land. The people that wrote it were quite aware of foreign threats (having just lived through a revolution to which they pledged their fortunes and even their lives). They wrote out standing armies because they feared militarism more than they feared enemy attack. They insisted on due process for all, and even a right to remains silent, even for those accused of mass murder.
You may think their emphasis wrong, but if that is the case, what you (and Dubya) have to do is amend it, not ignore it and use it for toilet paper.
Cheers,
February 12th, 2008 at 3:19 pmLet’s use this evidence of Scalia arguing in favor of anti-American behavior as grounds for his impeachment and removal from the highest court in the land when we retake the White House in November.
February 12th, 2008 at 3:20 pmno justices before this one ever made public statements of any import whatsoever that were not related to decisions all ready handed down.
February 12th, 2008 at 3:25 pmthe new court is a mouthpiece for something that is attempting to drive policy in their favor.
this is not a justice of the supreme court, and it should be impeached
It’s better to be feared than loved.
Comment by Frank M — February 12, 2008 @ 2:34 pm
And all you ever do is get laughed at… like right now…
February 12th, 2008 at 3:29 pmIt’s better to be feared than loved.
Comment by Frank M — February 12, 2008 @ 2:34 pm
Wasn’t that the Klingon’s saying before they joined the Federation?
SuvmeH ‘ej charghmeH bogh tlhInganpu’ .
February 12th, 2008 at 3:34 pmYou got a Jack Bauer situation and the religious fanatic terrorist you are preparing to work over knows the exact location of the weapon. In other words you managed to catch one of the guys in the cell that had that task. What is more likely:
One, he will lie, delay and otherwise do his utmost to die when the weapon goes off or he is killed during the torture since you don’t know how hardy a terrorist you have.
Two, Jack’s righteous and patriotic ferocity will break his fanatic spirit and he will disavow his beliefs, betray his cause and his fellow terrorists and sing just in time for someone to swoop in and defuse the device or whatever.
Scalia is a freakin idiot
February 12th, 2008 at 3:44 pmI think if someone we loved was in danger, most of us would do anything we could to protect them, if all avenues were exhausted, and time was running out. A mothers natural instinct to protect and preserve her children is a good example. There are times when ethics can be challenged within ones self.
Comment by Southern Man — February 12, 2008 @ 3:32 pm
In insects, animals, humans, and in society in general, the Bio-Survival Brain Circuit is the first to be activated and is always functional.
However, as certain species evolve, some only reaching an Approach-Avoid circuit like sharks, higher ideals kick in like using language, farming, industry, art, culture, socialization, Space travel, mapping of the neural circuits, mapping of DNA, and perhaps the so-called Satori or Cosmic Union. All theoretical of course, but nonetheless worth considering. Did you ever think that certain people/species are only capable of activating certain levels of comprehension? To me torture, war, bullying, and fear are very standard lower forms of evolution, be it Muslims, Christians, Americans, or Arabs. Religion and government try and keep “Everyone the same”, as homogenized as an ant or bee colony, and individualization is scorned upon. Questioning authority amounts to be “Un-American”, and thinking for yourself gets you jailed like a Galileo, Bruno, Socrates, Jesus, Leary, Reich, Joan of Arc, etc.
So back to the Bio-Survival. To protect the species and the individual, there must be programming that will do anything to survive. This is why many people who commit suicide take dangerous narcotics and drink, to actuate more basic brain circuits, and attempt to override the basic instinct to survive.
February 12th, 2008 at 3:48 pmDixie - would you reinstate Prohibition just so you could be “safer” when driving, because you knew no one on the roads was a drunk driver?
Any of us here stands a much better chance of being killed on the highway than we do of being killed by a terrorist act - don’t take my word for it - ask an insurance company actuary.
February 12th, 2008 at 3:49 pmActually the Constitution was and is a suicide pact. When the Founders signed on, they have no way of knowing whether the British would re-group and retake the Colonies and jail and kill all the Revolutionaries.
The Constitution means that real American Patriots would die before they would give up their Freedom to ANYONE - even their own government.
Compared to the Founders, today’s faux-patriots (Hatriots) are truly nutless, gutless wonders - traitors to the Revolution - Tories, royalists and backsliders. Not fit to serve Benedict Arnold his final meal.
Conservatism: Because sometimes being wrong just isn’t enough.
February 12th, 2008 at 3:58 pmDixie - no one ever “did nothing”, and no one ever advocated “doing nothing” - the only times those things have ever been heard have been when Righties were propping up strawmen to curry favor for their own, predetermined, hare-brained schemes to profit from disaster. And, because so many people were suckers for their strawman arguments, they’ve gotten away with it, and tucked away billions of dollars for themselves in the process.
February 12th, 2008 at 4:10 pmIf the United States ever getts serious in restoring its International image, which at this stage is a very ugly one, it has the duty to prossecute it own War Criminals. It has to apply to them the same punishment that was carried out during the Nuremberg trials. Otherwise, Forget it! Assume that is no longer a beacom of Liberty and democracy, but a beacom of the 21 Century FACISM.
February 12th, 2008 at 4:15 pmComment by Southern Man
February 12th, 2008 at 4:18 pmIt’s been covered SM. Refer to post #116 nanlichi stated better than I could.Things such as honor,duty,accountability,competence,and respect of our laws have no place in the current administration.
No I wouldn’t. But why after 9/11 did we finally start scanning passengers? The threat is obviously there and it needed to be addressed. I know I stand a much better chance of dying on the roads or in a pool. But you can’t sit back and do nothing. That’s why the laws are tough on drunk drivers. Don’t eliminate driving, eliminate drunk driving.
Comment by Southern Man — February
February 12th, 2008 at 4:21 pmBut why after 9/11 did we finally start scanning passengers? …
To keep the population sacred, so it is easy to control and destroy its civil liberties. 9/11 was a terrorist act, but it was made in USA and carried out by CIA, Chenney and Bush, and the Oil corporations. Unswer me why a E-4B plane was doing flying over Washington on 9/11, prior to the missil attack of the Pentagon. Explain why NORAD did not perform according to its duty. Explain how two planes crashed into two towers, and three came down in less than 10 secds and had total collapse. Why the War Criminal stood in that classroom, reading ‘My Pet Goat’ looking guilty?! 9/11 was a coup that started with the fake 200 election.
Hey, you want more justices like this Scalia running the supreme court, all you have to do is vote for John McCain or fail to vote for Obama or Clinton. It’s as simple as that.
February 12th, 2008 at 4:43 pmWhen the Democrats are in the controlling majority then they can impeach Scalia for not enforcing the law. Yes, Supreme Court Justices can also be impeached and disbarred. First, Scalia for breaking the law, and then Thomas (if for no other reason then his stupidity). Wasn’t it god RR that put this pig face on the bench?
February 12th, 2008 at 5:04 pmThe old fascist should be smacked in the face. What is this ideological son of Mussolini doing on the Supreme Court of the US? How did this immoral, ignorant, and vulgar, imbecile ever get on the Supreme Court? How did he ver get a law degree? The man is a walking adver