-
Shah Na Na
June 17, 2013 | 23 comments
-
Religious Upset Over Drones
June 3, 2013 | 24 comments
-
Boy Scouts Embrace Dull Conformity
May 28, 2013 | 149 comments
-
Soros Funds Anti-‘Torture’ Report
May 17, 2013 | 117 comments
-
Transsexual Flights from Reality
May 3, 2013 | 91 comments
The Nation's Pulse
Religious Fretting Over Waterboarding
So what if President Bush, like any chief magistrate of a nation, had a moral responsibility to protect his people.
Former President George W. Bush has famously declared in his new memoir any lack of regret for waterboarding three al Qaeda killers in 9-11’s immediate aftermath. He plausibly asserts that their waterboarding produced actionable intelligence saving lives from impending terror international attacks. Of course, all three al Qaeda operatives remain imprisoned and are reportedly in good health. Despite the passage of eight years, the waterboarding of three beastly mass murderers still excites selective outrage, especially on the Religious Left.
The National Religious Campaign Against Torture (NRCAT), which includes a host of Mainline Protestant denominations, left-leaning, Catholic orders, liberal evangelicals, and the Islamic Society of North America, naturally is indignant. Responding to Bush’s recollection, it wants a “comprehensive investigation of our nation’s use of torture” and asks: “Should we as a nation hold accountable those who violated U.S. law and our most fundamental moral standards?” NRCAT presumably wants formal charges against President Bush.
Like most such religious groups, NRCAT’s interest in “torture” is focused almost entirely on the U.S. and its aggressive interrogation of al Qaeda prisoners in the hair-raising months after 9-11. Ongoing and less ambiguous torture polices by various communist and Islamist regimes, widely practiced against political and religious dissidents rather than terrorists plotting murder, do not much interest NRCAT.
National Council of Churches (NCC) chief Michael Kinnamon, whose group belongs to NRCAT, even penned an aggrieved column in the Huffington Post contrasting President Bush’s “claimed” Christian faith with his approval of “torture.” Kinnamon helpfully quoted Jesus’ Golden Rule: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you,” as an ostensible command against waterboarding.
Personally, if I were so demonically possessed as to plot the vicious mass murder of innocents, I would much prefer to be waterboarded into revealing the scheme rather than some day stand before God responsible for such horror. But Kinnamon admits no moral complexity. And in typical fashion, like most of the Religious Left, which is essentially pacifist, he confuses Gospel commands for nonviolence by believers against personal enemies with the divinely ordained punitive obligations of civil states.
President Bush, like any chief magistrate of a nation, had a moral responsibility to protect his people, by force when necessary, against the depredations of foreign enemies. Christ’s apostles specifically affirmed the state’s divinely ordained vocation to “wield the sword” against evil doers. But the pacifist Religious Left shuns these Scriptures and instead insists that cheerfully turning the other cheek is the state’s virtuous response to aggression and murder.
“Bush’s prideful defense of torture in his new memoir, Decision Points, is utterly incomprehensible to me,” Kinnamon tut-tuts, referring to the waterboarding recollection. “It’s also unrecognizable to the fundamental values of this country, and of Bush’s own professed Christian faith.” The church official claims the admissions extracted from the three waterboarded terrorists saved no one and actually “cost the lives of both American soldiers and civilians.” He offers no evidence for either assertion. And even if Kinnamon admitted their information had saved lives, would he then refrain from criticizing Bush? Almost certainly not. Confronted by the “sad and shameful moment” of a U.S. President having “acknowledged ordering torture,” Kinnamon insists President Bush “has left us no choice” but to hold him “accountable” under “our own laws” against “torture.” So like NRCAT, Kinnamon seems to want Bush prosecuted for waterboarding three conspiring al Qaeda killers eight years ago.
Also writing for the Huffington Post, former National Association of Evangelicals lobbyist Richard Cizik, now working for the reputedly George Soros-supported New Evangelical Partnership for the Common Good, similarly excoriated Bush in an open letter to him. Cizik ominously asks: “Should we as a nation hold you personally accountable for violations of U.S. law and our most fundamental moral standards?” Evidently also hoping for a show trial of Bush, Cizik’s answer is clearly YES!
Cizik asserts waterboarding is “unquestionably torture,” more than a “mere dunk in the water,” and intended to “scare the victim into a desperate condition where he would reveal critical information.” For Cizik, of course, the “victim” is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the al Qaeda plotter behind 9-11, the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center, the 2002 Bali nightclub bombings that murdered over 200, the beheading of Daniel Pearl, and other grizzly crimes that Cizik, Kinnamon, and NRCAT prefer not to describe.
Evidently Cizik has been very embarrassed during his travels to North Africa and the Middle East, where “ordinary citizens, “with a “pained expression,” purportedly have asked poor Cizik: “‘Do you know that your government, allegedly a ‘Christian country,’ is conducting torture? You should be ashamed.’” Cizik does not mention whether he asked these offended North Africans and Middle Easterners about their own regimes’ far more vigorous, ongoing and undisputed torture policies.
Largely uninterested in torture elsewhere, Cizik wants a “Commission on Inquiry” to really get to the bottom of “torture” in America. He scoldingly concludes: “Messrs. Bush and Cheney, you brought us to this place. Shame on you!”
Such scolding purists insist that all waterboarding is “torture” and therefore a grave crime whose perpetrators from the Bush Administration must be punished. Even if waterboarding does meet this definition, does the simulated drowning of three mass murdering terrorists eight years, all of whom are very much alive and well, rank as one of our century’s great outrages, as critics seem to believe? How far back in history would their “Commission on Inquiry” go? Perhaps President Franklin Roosevelt’s quick 1942 secret trial and execution of six Nazi saboteurs, who had yet even to commit their planned terrorism, should also be examined.
And in the interests of clarity, religious critics of waterboarding should directly articulate their seeming theology. Preferably thousands of innocents should die anguishing deaths before one terrorist must endure even a few moments of simulated drowning. Such clarity would help us understand their arguments better.
About the Author
Mark Tooley is president of the Institute on Religion and Democracy in Washington, D.C. and author of Methodism and Politics in the Twentieth Century. You can follow him on Twitter @markdtooley.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (188) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Mark Tooley
More Articles From The Nation's Pulse
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/11/19/religious-fretting-over-waterb
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Booger | 11.19.10 @ 6:24AM
From the desk of the Reverend J. Wright:
To: Amerikkka
Oh, I see y'all are at it again, the united states of KKK is torturin' and killin'. And who do we have preachin' it? That crazy old George Bush Jr., that's who! How many times do I have to tell y'all to stay out of da bushes?
Look here, Amerikkka is damned, and that's in the Bible! All dis bidness about torturin' and drownin' some poor Muslim brothers is pure craziness. Don't you know that your fate is already sealed? Dis here country is full up of nothin' but racist, bigoted, redneck, garlic-nosed, jewish ofays and honkeys! And any country full up of folks like that is damned, and that's in de Bible!
Listen here, George Bush Jr. was doin' nothin' but tryin' to put off the judgment that's already decreed against dis here racist country. Y'all all hate black folks. On top of dat he tried to stop abortion! Abortion oughtta be a holy sacrament, and dat's in de Bible! He opposed gay marriage! Well, dat's a holy union, and dat's in de Bible too!
Don't you blue-eyed, albino devils know anything? All you do is set aroun' worryin' about abortion, an' gay marriage, and terrorists, when all of these things are proclaimed in de Bible! Why can't you get on de bus? Or at least get down here under de bus? Because you won't admit what you are and what you deserve, dat's why!
So quit all dis frettin' about de terrorists and just take your punishment like you ought to. I used to tell Barry dat all de time, but here lately dem jews won't let me near him. Well, now dat times are rough for him, all dem jews are jumpin' ship. I bet right soon here y'all are gonna see Barry invitin' me up to de "White" House to be his spiritual mentor again! And then you really will see dat Amerikkka is damned! And dat's in de Bible!
Very Sincerely,
The Reverend J. Wright
http://beautifulletters-bls.blogspot.com/
Louis Jenkins| 11.19.10 @ 8:47AM
Booger, you crack me up.
Ken (Old Texican)| 11.19.10 @ 11:05AM
Booger,
A splendid excursion into ebonics.
Reagan Loyalist| 11.19.10 @ 2:13PM
My favorite so far - nice!
Alan Brooks| 11.19.10 @ 5:09PM
What Bush did to Scooter Libby is worse than all the waterboardings done in the last decade combined.
How do you spell ingratitude?:
G_W_B_U_S_H
Margie| 11.19.10 @ 9:19PM
"Git behind me, de Satan!"
de Bro Satan | 11.20.10 @ 6:08AM
You Got Enough Behind Fo De Both Of Us, Pork Ass, de Other White Meat.
Tim*| 11.20.10 @ 6:28AM
I got $ 1000.00 that says that post is mine.
Alan Brooks| 11.20.10 @ 9:03PM
"Git behind me, de Satan!"
Nothing wrong with religion, but please, no white trash religion.
Lullabys, Legends and Lies| 11.19.10 @ 7:51AM
Thank God in Heaven above, that the US Military doesn't attract people with this type of mindset, otherwise we'd still be a British Colony. Just keep pretending that our current enemies, and their warped religious philosophy, are people you can negotiate with, they're not. It's War, don't you get that? Did you forget what happened on 9/11? I didn't, and I won't!! Islam today, like the Nazi's and Japs before them, pushed a Peace loving Nation too far, and now they're surprised that we don't want to take it lying down. What would it take for these American pacifist to get enraged by? San Francisco getting nuked? A biological attack is Seattle? I could care less about waterboarding, even if it sucks to have it done to you, if it stopped just one attack on us, it was worth it. You've got to ask yourself one question, whose side are you on? Don't hide behind your religion as your excuse for outrage, it gets old, just admit that you're a pussy.
IzeHavitt| 11.19.10 @ 9:21AM
Let's be clear about who the so-called "Religious" left are, folks. They are false prophets. Period. They DO NOT speak for the True God. Again, the oldest trick in The Book is to mix the truth with a lie. Don't fall for it, America. It is these people who not only have historically distorted the truth of the Word of God, but the truth of the closest thing to holy writ in terms of a civil document there has ever been- the Constitution of the United States. Pay no attention to them.
Margie| 11.19.10 @ 12:49PM
Indeed so. Point in fact: The corrupt National Council of Churches Chief dude quoted "Jesus' Golden Rule"?
Well.. uh... it isn't in the Bible!
Proving once again that the Left gets to make up their own stuff.
They have no fear of the true God.
elixelx| 11.20.10 @ 7:46AM
Margie, you correct, babe,you cain't read it in de Bible---but you can read it in the Talmud....BUT, and it's a BUT as big as the one Satan's behind, it's not expressed as a positive, but as a negative--A NEGATIVE GOLDEN RULE!
The Sage Hillel, formulated a negative form of the golden rule. When asked to sum up the entire Torah (THE ENTIRE TORAH!!) concisely, he answered:[47]
That which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow. That is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation; go and learn.
—Talmud, Shabbat 31a, the "Great Principle".
So, if I punch you, is it because I want to be punched? That's the Christian Way, and of course if I kiss you and you don't kiss back, was I expecting that you would? Is that why I kissed and punched you so that you would do to me what I had done to you? Do I have to always hurt the one I love to prove my love?
All this ties in nicely with the "salvation thru suffering" meme that is so beloved of the Catholics...
Now look again at Hillel: If it pleases me I share it with you; if it doesn't I don't.
All the rest is commentary and kisses! I hope you enjoyed it! I did!
Alan Brooks| 11.20.10 @ 9:04PM
Junk religion.
Alan Brooks| 11.20.10 @ 9:06PM
Bad religion for BillyBob to lap up.
Alan Brooks| 11.20.10 @ 9:09PM
Chump-change white trash religion!
Eat it up, boy; eat it up.
canuckistani| 11.19.10 @ 10:12AM
I resent when anyone conjures divine inspiration for anything. War is man's enterprise, God has nothing to do with it.
It is the same hypocrisy when we suggest we are at "war" with Islam but get indignant and willing to sacrifice freedom for security when the "war" actually hits home in sensational but pretty limited ways. Are we at war or not? or is it just a macabre video game?
We've managed to sanitize war for the citizenry to such an extreme that attacking even more countries without provocation has become a mainstream option rather than a perversion reserved for the Dr. Strangeloves among us.
We have no right to moral superiority when discussing wars of choice, and claiming a divine preference puts us directly in league with the Chrysanthemum throne of 75 years ago. Funny how the same melody continues to repeat itself - even amongst us pius right thinkers.
If your incensed by the moral equivalence I make, then maybe there is some doubt in your mind.
Eric Cartman| 11.19.10 @ 10:52AM
Maybe people are incensed because you have electricity and an ISP facilitating your posting of gibberish so they have to take the time to scroll past your gibberish, not necessarily at the gibberish you and other Liberal Aholes spew - we expect that from Liberal Aholes. Maybe it's the space you take up they resent. Think about it.
Charles Martel| 11.21.10 @ 2:12AM
You said it, Cartman: a waste of valuable bandwidth.
+++
Doctor Right| 11.19.10 @ 4:01PM
Western civilization is AT WAR with Islam.
Islam is a a false faith, a brutal and misogynistic philosophy of lies built on a foundation of deceit.
Islam and Western civilization are therefore incompatible. And if you don't believe me, fine...Just ask the Mullahs, those goat-diddling illiterates in Afghanistan, or the medieval cretins who run Iran.
"Allah" commands all good Muslims to make war with the "infidels". "Allah" also commands Muslims to infiltrate the infidel's homeland, and insinuate themselves within the infidel's world as preparation to strike. Muslims in the west try very hard to sanitize this, and in many ways, they've succeeded. But in many ways, they have not. The toothpaste is, so to speak, "out of the tube".
The difference between the West and the Islamic world is that we really don't care if the Muslims want to stay home in Craplakistan and practice their abhorrent beliefs...Just don't bring them into our world. If you come here, you MUST obey OUT laws, NOT Sharia. Islam, however, has NO tolerance for people of other faiths who live within their borders.
That's because Islam is a lie, and a sham. It is NOT a "religion of peace". It's a philosophy of death.
Islam declared war on the west almost 20 years ago, but the west did not respond until after 9/11. Well, once we get rid of this miserable stealth-Muslim in the White House, we'll be ready to respond again.
Islam will be defeated.
Todd not Boeckman| 11.19.10 @ 8:09AM
I always laugh at the peacenik christians (small c intentional) and their whimpification of Jesus Christ. They conveniently forget all about one of my favorite parts of the Gospels: The Cleansing of the Temple.
Did Jesus weep and whine "I can't believe you would act this way in the Temple. Could you please pack up your things and leave?" uhhhh NOPE. This big strapping carpenter, probably with some pretty significant guns (biceps for those of you in Ann Arbor) thanks to the manual labor he did prior to his ministry, forcibly removed the offenders by overturning and throwing tables and swinging a whip. I would imagine that for one man to do that to any number of people more than 3-4 he had to be both pretty angry and intimidating as well as not real polite. Heck, its the last act that drove the Pharisees to decide to have him killed since it cut into their graft.
Translate to now: We are called as Christians to fight evil whereever we confront it. So, those so-called Christians who want to take the pacificst route...admit your cowardice and/or corruption. But don't wrap it in what is isn't....true Christianity.
Old Soldier| 11.19.10 @ 12:34PM
Complete agreement here!
I've seen true evil - Special Republican Guard Officers we held over for the Kuwaitis to try for rape, (real) torture, theft, and mass murder during their time in Kuwait City.
CalMark| 11.19.10 @ 3:25PM
Very true!
Funny, how you don't hear about that particular Gospel passage very much anymore.
Robbins Mitchell| 11.19.10 @ 8:11AM
Well,having experienced waterboarding myself as part of our Cadet training at the USAF Academy years ago,I can assure the readers that it is NOT 'torture'....there was no physical pain and no body damage at all...but I was so traumatized by it that the next day,I had to go into Colorado Springs and consume and entire large pepperoni pizza and 2 pitchers of Coors to recover from the ordeal.
Reagan Loyalist| 11.19.10 @ 2:23PM
KHL and his buddies were put in US military private jet and limousined to GitMo where they're still on the mend at taxpayer expense. Too bad we couldn't throw a pizza and a 6 pack at them instead of a Koran and a Muslim menu.
maximumrandb| 11.19.10 @ 4:50PM
Ah, Colorado Springs! Pepperoni and mushroom pizza at Guiseppe's East and a pitcher of Coors. Am I dating myself (USAFA '75)?
Robbins Mitchell| 11.20.10 @ 5:58AM
That depends...did you ever indulge yourself by eating a "Pike's Peak" at Michelle's Ice Cream Parlor in C Springs?
Ted R.| 11.19.10 @ 8:34AM
The impulse that favors torture is one of the basest, most dishonorable impulses that human beings can have. It vitiates the essential dignity of both perpetrator and subject. It is, in short, barbaric. I'm not suprised to find conservatism giving a full-throated endorsement of torture, though. The core motive of conservatism is power, domination of others, by whatever means is most readily available for the times. Throughout history, that has been the root-purpose for which torture has been used. Terror.
Conservatism's unapologetic endorsement of torture-practices (which are unconstitutional, by the way - all you Originalist-happy interpreters ought to consult the 8th amendment) is essential evidence that conservatism is fundamentally incompatible with freedom. If you are a proponent of torture, you are an enemy of freedom, and you deserve to be stripped of the honor of American citizenship.
"Saint" M | 11.19.10 @ 8:40AM
President Bush, one ofthe greates Presidents this country has ever had, knew what had to be done to protect the lives of innocent folks. The left wing nuts appearing on Huffington Post, Move On.Org, etc who claim the information from water boarded terrorists saved no one have no clue as to the information obtained or the actions taken as a result of the information. I guess the left believes it is better to let innocent folks die than it is to obtain information with waterboarding, which, as the Air Force Academy student said, really isn't torture in the truest sense of the word. For a definition of torture read what the Nazi's did to people to obtain information, or read about the atrocities Sadam H and his sons did to the people of Iraq or what Stalin did to the Russian people. President Bush did the right thing and I am proud to say I love him for it. PS my wife and I are Charismatic Christian members of the Anglican Church in North America.
Frank | 11.19.10 @ 10:29AM
'President Bush, one ofthe greates Presidents this country has ever had, knew what had to be done to protect the lives of innocent folks.'
There's so much to laugh at in this sentence except or course it's so tragic. Apart from the obvious fact that GW Bush is the about the worst ever POTUS, he failed to protect the lives of those lost on 9/11, and wiped out countless innocent people in Iraq and Afghanistan (and thousands of US troops). That's a true Charismatic Christian for you I guess.
Vic | 11.19.10 @ 3:29PM
I would opine that the current occupant of the WH has beaten ol George to the worst POTUS award. I dare say ol George was twice as good as Jimmh.
Whack job secular humanist illogic I suppose.
WAKE UP| 11.19.10 @ 6:23PM
Ted, Frank, listen up: one day you'll realise that it was Bush's actions that keep the country safe enough for the likes of you to (a) be ungrateful (b) write nonsense (c) elect the most dangerous President the country has ever had.
Then again, maybe you won't realise it. So be it. Just get out of the way while the real men get on the the job.
"Saint M" | 11.20.10 @ 1:17PM
Frank wve them released.rote that GWB was worst ever POTUS. He seems to have forgotten the debacle of Carter and the American hostages in Iran and the failed military rescue attempt; or the sky high intere rates. It took the a great POTUS, Ronald Reagan to to have them released.
Frank seems to have forgotten that the aislamofasciest have been killing Americans for years - TWA hijacking in Lebanon before Frank was probably born, the bombing of the Marine barracks in Lebanon, the USS COLE. He cries over the loss of life in Iraq and Afghanistan. Well the Islamist started this war -GWB protected our homeland from further attack. He blames GWB for not stopping 9-11. he seems to forget that GWB had only been in office for 8 months. Clinton should have seen 9-11 coming and if he hadn't had interns giving h im a blow job in the Oval Office he migh have.
Anthony| 11.19.10 @ 9:51PM
GWB was a better president than some, but nowhere near the greatest. Washington, Adams, Madison Jackson, Tyler, there were some impressive men who've held the office. Let's not forget that old GW ducked Vietnam ( I know he was in the reserves, that's how some rich, connected boys ducked the draft), and his game plans in both Iraq and Afghanistan were poor at best. He was lucky to have chanced upon Gen. Petreus to bail him out for a time. We also have to remember he actually was the president when 9/11 occurred, eight months in, and he was caught somewhat flat-footed. I won't go into his mortgage plans, his cozying up to Putin, illegal immigration, China, etc.. No, I don't think we can call him the "greatest", better than some, maybe, but nowhere near the top of the list.
The One Who Runs Like a Duck| 11.19.10 @ 9:19AM
We took a shellacking, Ted R. I got game baby. Those evil Republicans want to water-board these guys to get information to save Americans. That is so wrong. I really hate them making the poor brown detainees listen to loud music. You are supposed to blow them up with Predator drones. Get a couple family members while you're are at it. That is the progressive way. Hey it is an overseas contingency operation, #^%* happens. Using the "legal" system in dishonest ways to go after the enemy should only be reserved for Republicans like Scooter Libby. Have you been following the Geert Wilders' trial? That is what I'm talking about. I wonder if we could do that to John Boehner before I have to play him in golf. He is going to kick my butt. Thanks for being real quiet about the predator drone stuff. We have to look out for each other. Nobody really believes you are sincere about civil rights anyway. We're closing gitmo soon, trust me.
Ted R.| 11.19.10 @ 9:35AM
Gitmo is an international disgrace - foreign observers refer to it as a "reverse statue of liberty" - a powerful symbol to the world that undermines our legitimacy. But extra-legal detention is one thing; torture is another (though reportedly some inmates at Gitmo were tortured under the Bush administration).
As for the predator strikes, those occur in countries whose governments have sanctioned their operation. It's true that innocents have gotten caught in the crossfire of such operations, but that is practically inevitable in combat operations. The deliberate - with malice aforethought - degredation and terrorization of another human being (sometimes unto death), is different from predator strikes, by an order of magnitude. Your pathetic defense-of-torture-by-cheeky moral equivalence, is beneath contempt. Worthy of a conservative.
Gandolf| 11.19.10 @ 9:53AM
Go away, little Hobbit and tend to your little garden while the adults do serious things. Your infantile morality is fit for a 9 year old taking his first CCD class.
The One Who Runs Like a Duck| 11.19.10 @ 10:02AM
We took a shellacking, Ted R. I am with you brother. Screw America, the chickens are coming home to roost. Hit that reset button, baby. It is time to take to the streets. Where has democracy gotten us anyway? I like to talk like this before I hit the links. It lifts my game. Water-boarding will eventually loose its effectiveness but if we were to read your preachy sermons to your average innocent muslim at gitmo they would be screaming for mercy between 30 and 45 seconds. You're the man. By the way I like "the other countries let us do it so it must ok" argument. You are quite a thinker, very nuanced. Oversees contingency operations are hell. Gitmo is good now. It must be, I am never criticized for it at all. By the way we will be marketing our Free Gailani tee shirts on the Obama website. This could be bigger that Mumia. Bush, Cheney and Haliburton made me do it, baby.
chris| 11.19.10 @ 10:33AM
teddy, you are obviously a left wing zealot trying to provoke arguments. you cannot be serious that Gitmo is a disgrace or that conservatism is the root of power, domination, then torture. maybe you just forgot about communism (a left wing ideology responsible for over one hundred million deaths) or national socialist party(Nazi for short). Gitmo really compares to this. Or you can go back the French Revolution, all the killings in the name of justice, equality, and fraternity. i guess your answer is that these were not true socialists or true communists. you are still waiting for the true commnists and left wing nuts to establish heaven on earth.
if you cannot have a serious discussion go back to the huffington post or daily kos.
if gitmo is so bad, why hasnt obam/reid/pelosi shut it down?
you are not a serious person. another left wing
idealogue. grow up.
Eric Cartman| 11.19.10 @ 10:58AM
"Foreign observers "??? OH! WELL! Foreign observers say that! Well, everyone, Teddy has whipped out the "foreign observers " card. We're doomed. Your arguments will wither in the face of the Liberal Ahole's "foreign observers " argument! Let's just give up right now. "Foreign observers" is just too powerful to counter. How can we ever match the "foreign observers " argument?!
John| 11.19.10 @ 11:07AM
Ted, so it is ok for obama to use predator strikes that kill innocent civilians because the governments of those innocent civilians say it is ok. But is is a moral outrage that leaves you foaming at the mouth for Bush to approve waterboarding three terrorrists who provided valuable information that saved American lives. I understand that, makes sense to me, for I am a lefty that hates Amerika like you. See you at Rev .
Wright's next sermon, and my next vacation in the worker's paradise in Cuba. While we are in Cuba we can get some of that great free medical care.
WAKE UP| 11.19.10 @ 6:25PM
Ted, at some point (which is becoming increasingly clearly denoted), inaction and self-indulgent chardonnay soliloquising as yours actually becomes cowardly, treasonable and collaborative with the enemy.
WAKE UP| 11.19.10 @ 6:27PM
PS, Ted, re "foreign observers": I am one, and I can tell you, the WHOLE WORLD is watching, and we know who the patriots are - and who aren't. Beginning with Obama.
Margie| 11.19.10 @ 1:23PM
I protest! Let me rephrase. In truth...
"The impulse that favors Liberalism is one of the basest, most dishonorable impulses that human beings can have. It vitiates the essential dignity of both perpetrator and subject. It is, in short, barbaric. I'm not suprised to find Liberalism giving a full-throated endorsement of "make a deal" with the terrorists, though. The core motive of Liberalism is power, domination of others, by whatever means is most readily available for the times. Throughout history, that has been the root-purpose for which Alinskyite tactics have been used: Terror.
Liberalsm's unapologetic endorsement of Alinskyite-tactics (which are unconstitutional, by the way - all you Revisionist-"Living Constitution" happy interpreters ought to consult the Federalist Papers) is essential evidence that Liberalism is fundamentally incompatible with freedom. If you are a proponent of compromising with the Enemy, you are an enemy of freedom, and you deserve to be stripped of the honor of American citizenship!"
Amen & Amen!
Go back to your drawing board Liberal Reader, you must start all over again.. we're no dupes here, dude.
Barbara| 11.19.10 @ 11:58PM
Who was running Hanoi Hilton, Lubyanka? Who cut Dr. Mengele et al their paycheck? Left-wing, statist tyrannies that's who.
No conservative is advocating torture. It's all in the imagine of Alinskyite devotees suchbomb-throwing Bill Ayers.
Sorry - he didn't advocate torture, just the elimination of the 25,000,000 American who failed reeducation.
Most would call Mao's "reeducation" techniques torture. Wonder what "techniques" Ayers and his Weathermen pals would have used?
Mike| 11.20.10 @ 10:27AM
Ted,
Please go back and read the 8th Amendment. It does not prohibit torture. It prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, not unpleasant interrogation. Of course once the left has defined looking cross at a terrorist suspect as torture they can then claim the right supports torture.
Mike Johnston
SFC USA (RET)
Todd - not Boeckman| 11.19.10 @ 8:40AM
I agree with you whole heartedly Teddy-- except that waterboarding is not torture. Intimidation is not torture. Inflicting physical harm, yes.
Ted R.| 11.19.10 @ 8:52AM
So you're reduced to parsing the degree and type of harm inflicted, to defend torture? It's one thing to just come out and admit that you don't care about the essential dignity of certain other human beings. But it's EVEN WORSE to acknowledge that torture is wrong, and THEN proceed to try some slick sophistry that says waterboarding ISN'T torture, when the Geneva conventions cleary define it as such. Despicable.
Todd - not Boeckman| 11.19.10 @ 10:33AM
Parsing. Thats rich coming from a left wingnut. What part of WATERBOARDING IS NOT TORTURE don't you understand.
Eric Cartman| 11.19.10 @ 11:12AM
Okay! I'll admit it! Some human beings have no "essential dignity". They are really just scum washed up on land from a pond billions of years ago who have grown arms and legs. They deserve to be not only tortured to see if they have any information concerning my family's safety, but shot after I'm through with them. I have no trouble with it. You Liberal Ahole hand-wringers can stand by while the scum rape, torture and kill your family. I really don't care. I'll take care of mine. Wimp.
victor| 11.19.10 @ 11:33AM
Ted R.:
"waterboarding ISN'T torture, when the Geneva conventions cleary define it as such."
Which Convention would that be, eh Ted?
ReConUSMC | 11.19.10 @ 5:34PM
Just for the record Seals , Marine ReCon and Special Forces are Water Boarded as are many Foreign CIA Agents and Secret Service agents
as well ..... No big deal unless it's during those Minutes of being water boarded .
In Truth our Training is far more severe and dangerous than water boarding ..... Believe me !
Days without Food ,Sleep and little Water .... being in Hot and Cold climates pushed beyond limits .
We should do what ever it takes to save Americans .........Anything !
Margie| 11.19.10 @ 9:16PM
Those double spaced periods and exclamation points just keep giving you away, Timmy*.
Now why is it that you are such a Troll?
Who pays you, anyway?
Interesting trying to get my husband to agree to "doing anything", you're so freaking busted.
Oh, and don't even bother calling me paranoid you two bit loser.
Tim*| 11.20.10 @ 6:20AM
I got a $ 1000.00 that says that's not my post You Paranoid Fanatic Get A Lifer Mistress Of Trolling, Victor-Margie.
Now, Put Up or Shut Up Again.
victor| 11.21.10 @ 8:02PM
I got a $ 1000.00 that says that says You are a Paranoid Fanatic who should Get Life.
Now, Shut Up and Shut Up Again.
Tim*| 11.21.10 @ 10:00PM
Let's See Ya Make Me Apocalyptic Crank Lady Victor-Margie.
Barbara| 11.20.10 @ 1:23PM
http://www.hrweb.org/legal.cat.....espicable.
Part 1. Article 1. (1) uses the words "severe pain or suffering".
Note the words "State Party" meaning nation, I suppose, are the ones in charge of defining and enforcing what constitutes torture. Guess why Iraq and other régimes (Libya, Saudi, etc.) can get away with ltorture but Bush is vilified.
Article 16 charges State Parties to "prevent other acts of cruel, inhuman, degrading treatment or punishment which do not amount to torture". Sad that Afghans who gang rape women to punish a male relative aren't condemned as roundly as Bush.
Isn't terrorism a violation of international law? Yes, but only when Irish Catholics do it.
Louis Jenkins| 11.19.10 @ 8:44AM
Get on track people! The Muslims want to work us over again and again. And the TSA pats down or x-rays everyone? I have said it before, time to work on the real enemy! Not grandma or her grandchildern. Waterboarding is benign. Let's think about the lash, pulling out finger nails, carpet shredders, and then you'll understand. Waterboarding is light weight compared to what other nations do.
Ted R.| 11.19.10 @ 9:02AM
Again with the two-wrongs-make-a-right fallacy. And you apparently are not very aware of what modern torture-practices involve. Extreme mental anguish can be inflicted even with "no-touch" torture practices (dreamed up by the Soviets during the Cold War). These practices have reportedly been used against subjects that the people of the United States have renditioned to foreign governments; they are bad enough that they often lead subjects to try to commit suicide. Maybe you simply believe that some people are suspected of crimes so heinous that they simply don't deserve to be given basic civil protections, and can literally be treated like animals. I guess that's what makes you a conservative.
Ken (Old Texican)| 11.19.10 @ 9:55AM
Folks,
I once had an on-line discussion with a pacifist. I finally got him down to basic "individual" cases, and asked him what he would personally do if a gang of men bent on rape and murder crashed into his own home with his wife and daughters there. (He owned no guns.)
He thought quite a while before answering.
Finally he came back to say: "I would protect my family behind my own body."
I wrote back and asked if he would try to do so bare-handed.
He never answered.
Folks we are in a world war with suicidal fanatics that can't seem to wait for their 72 virgins.
Sadly, we have a lot of cowards in this country, hiding behind the auspices of "pacifism", and tut tuting us who protect them.
I just sadly ignore them in their cowardice...or utter "double think".
They would have been eaten by lions many generations ago...and not even exist.
They forget the respect and generousity Jesus showed the Roman Centurion....uh soldier.
Bojean| 11.19.10 @ 10:11AM
It’s not about two wrongs making a right. These individuals had already committed acts of war against us and were hell bent on doing so again. This was about preventing that and saving the lives of the thousands of innocents they would kill. What about that is so hard for you to understand?
What do the torture practices ‘dreamed up by the Soviets during the Cold War’ that you are concerned will lead to suicide have to do with anything about this case? What evidence do you have that they’re so traumatized by this that they are going to off themselves? This happened eight years ago. These monsters have not been ‘treated like animals’. They are remarkably healthy and have it a whole lot better than most of the hardened criminals in our prisons even though they are responsible for far more carnage than even the worst of those inmates.
Explain to me, please, why you would prefer to see my children and grandchildren massacred than to see three monsters frightened into wetting their pants and giving up information that saves thousands of innocent lives. I truly do not understand. And yes, that is precisely what this comes down to.
JP| 11.19.10 @ 10:13AM
You're huffing and puffing over a procedure that has been used only three times. "Civilized" nations from time immemorial have used "torture" to save thier civilizations. You are a dunce.
But you Lefties do have a point; we will lose thie war. I figured the war was lost way back in 2004. In 2004, the Army Rangers killed an Al Qaida operator in the hills of Afghanistan. This operator ran a small cell of terrorists who murdered both Islamic and UN aide workers. During the autopsy doctors discovered an orthopedic hip implant which had to be done by American or European doctors. After conducting an investigation, the DIA discovered that this operator was captured in 2002, sent to Gtimo where that taxpayers footed the bill (some $90,000) to have his war injuries treated -a hip replacement included. Twelve months later, under pressure from the State Department and the Red Cross, the CIA released him. Within 2 months he was back at murdering for Allah. Dozens of private organizations claimed he was mistakenly and illegally apprehended by US special forces.
NavyBrat | 11.19.10 @ 1:16PM
Ted R. Writes:
"Extreme mental anguish can be inflicted even with "no-touch" torture practices (dreamed up by the Soviets during the Cold War)"
Like reading your pathetic screeds? You're right. I'll do anything to make you stop writing this crap. Aww, we don't wanna hurt anyone's FEELINGS? Is THAT it? Putting these murdering schmucks (with fears of stinging insects) in a small room with caterpillars & telling them that the caterpillars ARE stinging insects is now "torture?" Gimme a damned break. I suppose if we just ask nicely where the next attack is coming, they'll just truthfully answer outta the goodness of their hearts. After all, they have human decency, right?
People as naive as you make this world a VERY dangerous place. Ted R, you're WEAPONS GRADE STUPID.
Margie| 11.19.10 @ 1:36PM
The ability to reason escapes the Ted R.'s of this world.
They have to be called out for what they truly are: Voices from the depths of Hell.
JimH| 11.19.10 @ 9:17AM
If you really want to piss off the terrorist prisoners, bring in a chaplain during the waterboarding and perform a baptism.
RacerJim| 11.19.10 @ 11:00AM
^5 (high five)
Beezelbub| 11.19.10 @ 9:29AM
I am pleased to see that so many Americans are in favor of this sort of behavoir.
RacerJim| 11.19.10 @ 11:13AM
I am pleased to see that you are pleased that so many Americans are in favor of this sort of behavoir when the information garnered therefrom saves American lives.
Old Soldier| 11.19.10 @ 12:37PM
I've seen your servants of Earth and was pleased to do the Lord's work by sending off for Judgment.
Anthony| 11.19.10 @ 10:27AM
The left and their allies in the leftist religious community are nothing more than anti-American hacks of the first order.
In their Orwellian perversity, the left managed to twist the meaning of "torture" to include a non believer holding a copy of the Koran without proper protection.
Waterboarding is not torture. It leaves no marks and creates no pain. It does manage to create a realistic reinactment of drowning, but so what!!!
Now, pulling finger nails and other forms of extreme physical pain are indeed torture. However, the left is not about perspectives or common sense, they are about the surrender of America and the West.
Frankly, I'd like to see about 100 D pols in Washington get waterboarded, on national T.V., starting with Pelosi. Then a few Hollywood types, Algore, MoDo, Krugman, and a whole host of lefty academics. Then send them all to Iran and chain them to nuclear reactors as Human Shields.
I've really had it with these people.
Herb Tarlek| 11.19.10 @ 11:16AM
We should implement an oath of allegiance to America, Refuse to take the oath, get waterboarded.
bill carson| 11.19.10 @ 10:38AM
Just remember that all those Leftist "Christians" are not Christians at all. They are Leftists, first and always. They have discovered that their voices carry further if they call themselves Christian ministers. Don't fall for their scam.
Beezelbub| 11.19.10 @ 11:17AM
It is good that you decide who is & is not Christian.
Old Soldier| 11.19.10 @ 12:39PM
It is typical of you to cloud the mind, muddy the waters, and blur the boundaries so the weak-minded can't tell the difference.
G. Tracy Mehan, III| 11.19.10 @ 11:16AM
I normally agree with Mr. Tooley on most issues; but reading this article, his basic position comes down to simply this: the ends justifies the means-if one assumes that waterboarding is torture. This is flawed reasoning which can only lead to terrible consequences. What's next? Torturing family members to get the miscreants to speak up? A more reasonable argument is whether or not waterboarding is torture. On that point, history is against Mr. Tooley. Americans demonstrated their revulsion to this technique as far back as the Phillipine insurrection. Or ask yourself, how would Americans react if any of our soldiers were captured and subjected to such treatment?
RacerJim| 11.21.10 @ 11:18AM
History proves that our captured soldiers have always been subjected to far worse treatment than we have subjected captured enemy soldiers to.
Tim the Enchanter| 11.19.10 @ 11:28AM
Nice to see that we now have professional organizations for Mobys.
Chris| 11.19.10 @ 11:34AM
Asssuming for the sake of argument that waterboarding is torture, so what? In war we used atomic bombs on Japan. That saved American lives and Japanese lives in the invasion that would have occurred had Japan not surrendered. We bombed Dresden and killed thousands of civilians . We fought a Civil War that killed civilians during Sherman's march to the sea. We bombed Serbia during the 90's, killing Serbian civilians, to assist the ungrateful muslims.
So, is torture worse than killing? If is is ok to kill your enemy, they why the hand-wringin on torture? Our soldiers were tortured by the Japanese in WWII. And what do you call the airplanes crashing on September 11? If that is not torture then what is?
Don't answer by saying two wrong do not make a right, because you then assume that measures on our defense are a wrong, which remains to be proven.
If you want to be morally consistent they you have to oppose all measures, and be a pacifist.
Michael L. Hauschild| 11.19.10 @ 11:35AM
"ordinary citizens, "with a "pained expression," purportedly have asked poor Cizik: "'Do you know that your government, allegedly a 'Christian country,' is conducting torture?”
They had to “ask” being unable to write since someone had lopped of their arms with a machete.
Pat| 11.19.10 @ 11:39AM
On the scale of “Things That Make Every Person Feel Good”, righteous indignation is rated much below telling your fathead boss what you really think of him but, conversely, rated somewhat higher than discovering the waiter made a $1.10 mistake in your favor when adding up the meal tab. And there are two parts to righteous indignation – the righteous part meaning I’m explaining why I’m a much better person than you are and the indignation part – I’m pretending to be angry to prove I’m a better person than you are.
Like that cheap Mendocino county marijuana the pot heads in Portland and Seattle are so fond of, RI provides a brief, not very satisfying high; you have to keep going back and rolling another righteous indignation joint followed quickly by another one. So, if you’re in France and a person of French persuasion approaches you, the first thing out of his (or her) mouth is likely to be: “Your country tortures people”. The same thing will happen to you again in London or Antwerp – righteous indignation knows no boundaries.
Smile broadly and nod in agreement which really upsets the Frenchie (Limey or Belgie) because you’re expected to be upset, ashamed and angry – the correct emotional response and anticipated reward for the person puffed up with righteous indignation. While smiling and nodding, think to yourself: This Frog (or Belgie) probably hasn’t bathed in at least two weeks and during the next war will panic and promptly surrender before the enemy has even crossed the border. If it’s a Limey, you’ll no doubt be thinking: This Brit probably hasn’t bathed in at least a week and during WWII his grandfather bombed women and children out of simple revenge while telling anyone who would listen they were enemy combatants.
Here in California, we usually get our daily dose of righteous indignation from the East Coast friends of Hollywood celebrities who are pretending to be Frenchies, Brits or Belgies. A few years back, Proposition 114 was passed by California voters but was then overturned by the 9th Circuit Court, much to our collective disgust. This Proposition made it illegal for people from the entire state of New York, all of Massachusetts and certain parts of Connecticut to move to California – they bathe often enough but we couldn’t stand their righteous indignation.
Ken (Old Texican)| 11.19.10 @ 12:09PM
Pat,
That was a good one. Well spoken, well framed.
Herb Tarlek| 11.19.10 @ 12:41PM
I don't see why anybody has a problem waterboarding anybody the government calls a terrorist.
Barbara| 11.19.10 @ 1:24PM
Herb? That was meant to be sarcastic?
There is a loonie Catholic writer who claims any Catholic who equates waterboarding with abortion and insists that torture is a "core belief" of the right. Sure - 50,000,000 aborted babies = 3 living mass murderers. HUH?
Ted R.| 11.19.10 @ 2:21PM
Torture IS a core belief of the Right. The Right's whole worldview is Hobbesian: life is a zero-sum struggle for survival; the goal in life is to get and keep as many toys as possible; other people are either means to these ends, or obstacles that must be run over. Domination for its own sake is the name of the game for you Cons - and a fervent belief in the de-humanization of others (including the use of cruel and unusual punishment against them) who won't submit to you, is simply a corollary of your core beliefs.
It's disgusting. It's barbaric. Conservatism appeals to the WORST human instincts. You Cons have merely given another proof of it today.
Margie| 11.19.10 @ 2:37PM
I protest! Once again, let me rephrase. In truth:
Lying IS a core belief of the Left. The Left's whole worldview is Hobbesian: life is a zero-sum struggle for survival; the goal in life is to get and keep as many toys as possible; other people are either means to these ends, or obstacles that must be run over. Domination for its own sake is the name of the game for you Leftists - and a fervent belief in the de-humanization of others (including the use of cruel and unusual punishment against them) who won't submit to you, is simply a corollary of your core beliefs.
It's disgusting. It's barbaric. Liberalism appeals to the WORST human instincts. You Leftists have merely given another proof of it today, with each and every post!
Ted R.| 11.19.10 @ 2:41PM
Spoken like a good parrot.
Margie| 11.19.10 @ 3:18PM
Teddy want a cracker?
TSA Official| 11.19.10 @ 3:30PM
Now Marge behave yourself. Ted is a fellow TSA screener. He just passed his "enhanced pat-down" seminar. This evening he will let his fingers do the walking over lord knows how many victims. Don't want to upset him too much.
Margie| 11.19.10 @ 3:51PM
You mean he's gonna try and "Reach out & Touch someone?" Aaaaahhhh.
No, wait! Send him to Gitmo!
victor| 11.19.10 @ 9:35PM
Ted R.:
"waterboarding ISN'T torture, when the Geneva conventions cleary define it as such."
Which Convention would that be, eh Ted?
Or are you trying to deliberately confuse water torture and water boarding, which are two completely different things?
But of course you are.
Deceit is your middle name.
Liberal Deceitful Troll.
Robert| 11.19.10 @ 2:48PM
Waterboarding is not torture. It doesn't even cause any physical injury or stress. Every year, in hundreds of college fraternities across America, kids go through worse 'torture' than waterboarding. Its call an initiation or hazing or whatever and doesn't seem to cause any noticable damage. When I was in the Navy, we went through something like that when we crossed the equator. It was unpleasant, but not that big of a deal, certainly it was not 'torture'. The people who cry about waterboarding just want to hinder the military in carrying out its mission. Since almost no one in the military is a lib or a 'rat, the cryers would rather see them get killed anyway.
Les Nesman| 11.19.10 @ 2:54PM
I wonder why waterboarding was considered a crime back in the day when it was done to our servicemen by foreigners.
Robert| 11.19.10 @ 3:06PM
It wasn't and it isn't. The Geneva Convention only applies to Americans and Brits, everyone else ignores it.
Mr Carlson| 11.19.10 @ 3:31PM
http://www.antemedius.com/cont.....risoners-0
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterboarding
Used to be a hanging offence if you did it to a GI.
Vic| 11.19.10 @ 6:21PM
I couldn't help but notice that the sheriff arrested by the Reagen administration was not water boarding prisoners to get wartime intelligence, but to get confessions. So are we not comparing apples and oranges here?
Mr Carlson| 11.19.10 @ 10:06PM
point is, in US law, waterboarding is illegal. Used to be a hanging offence if you did it to a GI. What you guys call torture is irrelevant. The law is clear. Pick the wrong lawyer & you go to jail. Yoo was a poor pick.
Ted R.| 11.19.10 @ 3:10PM
I can't believe this. You are actually trying to equate the procedure with fraternity hazing, or with part of the training schedule for enlisted men. Waterboarding has been used for a long time, as an instrument of terror to force confessions. It definitely meets the definition of 'cruel and unusual punishment,' and is defined as torture by the Geneva conventions, of which the U.S. is a signatory.
Trying to give a legalistic defense of waterboarding, one that abstracts away from all context in its real-world, operational employment, is a pathetic rationaliztion of an INHERENTLY un-American act.
JP| 11.19.10 @ 3:22PM
Ted, we are all impressed with your superior morality. I just have one question: are you for or against Abortion on Demand?
Ted R.| 11.19.10 @ 3:32PM
Abortion ends a human life and I am against it. I am for reversing Roe. State legislatures should get to decide the legality of abortion. I support the partial-birth abortion ban, but I am uncomfortable with criminalizing abortion outright. I would like to see serious constraints on its availability, beginning with parental consent laws. I also think that the state should be willing to step forward with subsidies to help low-income women bring their children to term.
The United States desperately needs a robust ethic of life governing matters of public policy. That is why, for starters, I am for universal health care.
Margie| 11.19.10 @ 3:56PM
Liberal Reader aka Nate aka Ted R. says he's for Universal Health Care, eh? Oh but of course! It covers cover abortion.
And parental consent? So as long as the parents says abortion's ok, it's ok? Despicable!
End ObamaCare Now!
Vote Republican 2012.
JP| 11.19.10 @ 4:52PM
Thanks for your nuanced and measured response. Essientially you are against the gruesome, hideous practice of murdering an innocent child before it is born. But, you do not wish to criminalize abortion. But criminalization is the only way to save the 1 million or so unborn from this violent and tortorous medical procedure. If only the unborn were 19 year old foreign born terrorists!!!
Before the end of today another 4000 unborn will be scraped, vacuumed, mutilated, and torn to pieces -all while they are still alive. Where I live a person can face up to 5 years for torturing his pet. And you worry about waterboarding a terrorist? But, feel it unwise to criminalize the truely inhumaine procedure known as abortion?
Like I said earlier, it is unfortunate the unborn do not recieve the same due process protections as terrorists. But, hey Liberal Christians are so sophisticated, nuanced, credentialed, and morally pristine. I'm sure us knuckle dragging ingrates are incapable of thier moral superiority.
Ted R.| 11.19.10 @ 5:08PM
As I suspected, you are more attached to your own self-righteousness than any point of principle.
Abortion in America has been fairly described as a Holocaust. If you think there is no nuance whatsoever to this issue, why aren't you taking vigilante action? That's the only rational, moral response, given your "principles." Or are you just more attached to posturing? The first person you should address your answer to this, is the person in the mirror.
The One Who Runs Like a Duck| 11.19.10 @ 4:53PM
We took a shellacking, Ted R. The "ethics of life" stuff was great. Coming from somebody who has sat by and watched 50 million babies get offed without ever having any effect on the Democratic Party is Clintonesque. We have mostly run the pro-lifers out of the party and never let them speak and you never let on what a phony you are. Bold. You are what the Democratic Party is all about. Laurie David lecturing somebody about driving an SUV and then flying across the country in a private jet to go shopping, Al Gore telling people they need to change while living like a sultan in various mansions, Michelle lecturing people on eating well when right behind her is every order of french fries she has ever come across (you would think that we didn't have a mirror in the White House), this is what we are about. We are a collection of all the phonies in America. I really like your style. It brings to mind what my Indonesian nanny used to say, "I am right behind you." Don't ask, don't tell forever, baby.
CalMark| 11.19.10 @ 3:36PM
Observation: waterboarding is coercion, not torture. There is a difference. Funny, the same liberals who condemn conservatives for "black and white" resort to same to support immoral and treasonous ranting.
Question: Ted R., how much is the Evil, Inc. (a Soros/Obama Joint Venture), paying you to troll here?
Ted R.| 11.19.10 @ 5:27PM
Sure, waterboarding is coercion. It is coercion under acute duress, causing extreme physical stress and inducing mortal fear in those who are subjected to it. Repeatedly. Its purpose is to dehumanize, to strip of its target what is essential about their humanity: their freedom of conscience.
The fact that your aim here is to split hairs over whether this kind of "coercion" meets the definition of torture, says more about you than it does anything else.
None of you Cons get it. Torture is not primarily about its target. It is primarily about the moral worth of those applying it. Any of us can be put in a situation where we would be tempted to dehumanize and subject another person to cruel treatment. It is a test of character, to resist this temptation. Even your opinion on whether or not torture is justified, is a test. All of you on this site are failing this test, miserably.
All you originalists - go back and read the 8th amendment. All of you who are enthusiastically endorsing its violation - you are all breaking your oath to the Constitution.
CalMark| 11.19.10 @ 5:50PM
Your outrage might be marginally tolerable if you directed a fraction of the heat and outrage at Muslim torture and murder of "infidels."
Oh, sorry, I forgot: "That's just the way they do business," and, "We can't become like them."
In your book, simulated drowning is "morally equivalent" to hacking off limbs, gouging out eyes, or electrical current to the genitalia. Yeah, yeah, the old "intent" argument. Simulated drowning that our own military undergoes in training, then return to duty with no reported harm, has the SAME intent as permanently maiming someone and making them unable to earn a living.
As for Constitutional oaths, your pet leftist judges long ago forbade citizens from having to (gasp!) swear an oath of loyalty to their country. Might offend someone, ya know.
So, let's sum up: the West is morally equivalent to the primitive savages who wish to destroy us, and an oath to the Constitution is valid only when refuting conservative positions.
WAKE UP| 11.19.10 @ 6:32PM
They start early, destroying the genitals of helpless young girls. Bloody savages.
The One Who Runs Like a Duck| 11.19.10 @ 6:03PM
We took a shellacking, Ted R. Ted R., I wish you would have argued for the summer of recovery, or the Chevy Volt, or wind farms. You sling it pretty good. I like the attempt at making the Bill of Rights the rights of the world. You never were very good with geography. It is kind of funny. I mean I am totally ignoring the Constitution with respect to American citizens and you are trying to apply to every foreigner with bad intentions. We are quite a pair. Oh well I have a weekend of golf ahead of me. I must be ready for Boehner. Cap and trade, baby.
Barbara| 11.20.10 @ 12:10AM
I believe it is a moral worthy act to use waterboarding to train those in the military. If these same men use it to get information from terrorists they are unworthy and deemed torturers?
Get back to us with better arguments. Drop the ad hominem attacks' they're antithetical to intelligent discussion.
Ted R.| 11.20.10 @ 9:26AM
Are you serious? Waterboarding that is part of a regime of training, something willingly entered into by a participant, has the same moral status as waterboarding used operationally to coerce confessions? Are you really THAT naive?
It is essential to an intelligent discussion, to call things by their true names. Torture is barbaric and Unamerican. If you endorse torture, you ally yourself with the barbaric impusles of human nature. All I'm doing is calling you out.
jstwndring| 11.19.10 @ 5:08PM
"Responding to Bush's recollection, it wants a "comprehensive investigation of our nation's use of torture" and asks: "Should we as a nation hold accountable those who violated U.S. law and our most fundamental moral standards?" NRCAT presumably wants formal charges against President Bush."
----------------------------------------------------------------
Based on what EXISTING UNITED STATES or international law? President Bush broke NO LAW. So, what in the hell are you talking about?
Also, seeing as how you have the Islamic Society of No. America as part of your group, your claims of a humanitarian interest fall flat. Zero crediblility. You are a joke of an organization.
----------------------------------------------------------------
"Bush's prideful defense of torture in his new memoir, Decision Points, is utterly incomprehensible to me," Kinnamon tut-tuts, referring to the waterboarding recollection. "It's also unrecognizable to the fundamental values of this country, and of Bush's own professed Christian faith."
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry, but, maybe you should read the Old Testament where God intructed the Jews to annihilate the Canaanites--completely. Seriously, it's in the Bible. Shocking, no? Actually, not at all. There are certain types of evil that should not be tolerated and Islam certainly qualifies as a type that should be confronted brutally and forcefully. Besides, waterboarding didn't fall under the internationally defined category of torture. You sore losers are just peaved that we've pretty much had our way with these little bitches and have been able to use their knowledge against your friends in Islam. Hah! Eat it.
I'm personally of the opinion that the instigators of a war set the rules of engagement. They attacked civilians, fine, we'll attack civilians--muslims. They torture, fine, we'll torture. I'm talking actual torture, not the kid gloves we've used to this point. You wanna dance? Let's dance. :)
J.C.Eaton| 11.19.10 @ 5:45PM
Ted, simmer down. You are swinging wildly and to no good end. You tried to make your point, you met with the predictable resistance, and you continue to screed to no purpose. You haven't and will not convince anyone....so let it go. Find another thread, another site. Your tenacity has gotten old. Not only that, your broke-kneed response to the abortion issue is just lame. The day before Roe was decided, 44 states had stats criminalizing abortion. The ultimate torture for Heaven's sake. Push on. Thank you.
WAKE UP| 11.19.10 @ 6:30PM
Ted, I too am surprised you're still here!
Please see my remarks further back up the thread.
Ted R.| 11.19.10 @ 6:55PM
Well, I don't expect to convince you. People typically don't change their minds because of one conversation. But I will speak out for what I know is right. Interesting that you're trying to discourage me from doing that. You want to end the conversation. Either like a true conservative you can't stand real opposition, or maybe - just - what I've said is getting on your conscience.
The One Who Runs Like a Duck| 11.19.10 @ 7:16PM
We took a shellacking, Ted R. Nice. Trying to generate pity for KSM is almost unbelievable. I mean he did a couple minutes of simulated drowning and we saved hundreds of lives. Only a total idiot would agonize over this. You are so bold and nuanced. This must be one of those enemy of my enemy is my friend things. Who would spend an ounce of their time worrying about that guy? You hate Americans more than I do. I mean sure he wants to kill Republicans but frankly he likes killing anybody. He is a graduate of a traditional black college. I am so conflicted. What college basketball team does he like? If it is the Chicago White Sox then I am on his side. I am closing Gitmo by 2132, baby.
Ted R.| 11.19.10 @ 7:49PM
This issue is a test of your integrity. You are failing it. Not that I am surprised.
The One Who Runs Like a Duck| 11.19.10 @ 9:08PM
We took a shellacking, Ted R. I don't have any integrity; I am a progressive. We murder our children and call it choice. We let criminals back on to the street to harm our neighbors. We take other people's money and give it to our friends. We screw up other people's lives with all kinds of bad advice just so we can gain a little political power. We rev up racial hostilities for votes. We have tried to make nice with fascists, communists, Muslim terrorists and just about anybody who hates our country. This is who we are, Ted R. You lost your integrity a long time ago. There is only one thing to do Ted R and that is to learn to play golf. It offers some real cheating possibilities. Wear some sun screen; you have been in your parent's basement for a long time. This was the summer of recovery, baby.
Ted R.| 11.20.10 @ 8:51AM
The suggestion that all Republicans are against abortion access, and that all Democrats are for it, is self-serving tripe.
"We take other people's money and give it to our friends." Of course you do. Why be ironic about it? Your ex-politician lobbyist corps is all about shovelling the corporate welfare. But hey, money giveaways to the rich are all right! They deserve it!
"We rev up racial hostilities for votes." Ah, once again, the irony. Racial animus is at the CORE of the Republican conservative worldview. Take almost any issue: Welfare spending (black Americans). Terrrorism (brown-skinned ferreners). Immigration (you get the idea). The White ethnic obsession with race, is the subterranean force binding all of these issues together in your noxious ideology. And you accuse US of race-baiting. INcredible.
And all of you marshall all these hypocritical arguments for - what? For the sake of a little two-wrongs-make-a-right two-step; so you can violate the Constitution, and treat any human being that "hates our country" like an animal. You should be ashamed to call yourself an American.
The One Who Runs Like a Duck| 11.20.10 @ 11:37AM
We took a shellacking, Ted R. We 're Democrats. We were for slavery before we were against it. In fact we are only retroactively against it. Now we rev up the other side. The KKK was a Democratic organ. Now we have the Reverend Wright, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and many others. We are the race obsessed ones and our party has a long proud history. Yesterday the KKK, today the Nation of Islam. We have always played for the ignorant base vote. That is why when someone criticizes me my mind numbed followers always trot out the race card first. You are exhibit A. I love you for it. We will ride this to the end and if some of us get rich doing it who should complain? As you said those white people deserve it. I am a little worried about your money scheming and that is why I am considering the Bush tax cuts. When you think of it, we are parasites living on others productivity. We don't want to kill the host. When I am playing golf, this is all a lot clearer to me. Remember the class warfare stuff is like the race stuff. We only do it to get elected and make a little dough for our friends. We are not serious about anything except abortion and gay marriage and of course making a little graft and corruption for our friends. Everybody here knows you are a phony. You need to go to the inner city to sell your hokum. We are going to make everybody a homeowner, baby.
Ted R.| 11.20.10 @ 1:16PM
Thank you for this textbook example of the Right's obsession with race. How pathetic it is, that you have to reach back to the 19th century, for your 21st century talking-points against Democrats! As long as you're living in the past, reflect on this one: the Black American vote used to be Republican. What did you guys DO to lose it to the party of former slave-owners? How incompetent is THAT?
I'm all up for the truth: Is it healthy for the political process, that the blacks basically vote en bloc for the Democrats? No, it isn't. Are blacks too caught up in grievance politics? Yes, there are. But these developments have a history, and they are not entirely the responsibility of the black community.
Part of that history, is that the South has ALWAYS been solid. The South is the home base of American populism and social conservatism. These populists have always harbored racialist animus; when the Democrat part turned its back on this populist legacy, starting in the 40's, Southerners left the party. And opportunistic Republican politicians, through the cultural upheaval of the 60's and 70's, catered to their white ethnic insecurities, their perennial desire to "take their country back," and snapped them up into their own coalition. Blacks weren't ignorant of this change, and of the rhetoric Republicans used to make it happen. The South is as Solid as it ever was; why should blacks look favorably on the party that has such a favorable reception there? Despite what you whites think, the blacks - including the president - are not fools.
(Blue-collar whites who rabidly insist for tax breaks for rich employers that are cutting their benefits, on the other hand...)
Hank| 11.21.10 @ 4:42PM
Duck, you know you are a racist scumbag and a complete ignoramus, don't you?
The One Who Runs Like a Duck| 11.21.10 @ 9:29PM
We took a shellacking, Hank. Duck? I am the One Who Runs Like a Duck and don't forget it. I can handle adversity. I got game. My gay Indonesian nanny used to tell me that my troubles are all behind me now. In a way I was a scumbag if you must rub it in. I also don't care for white people so technically you are correct. I love Ted R. He sure tries hard to sell a line of you know what. Oh yea Al Gore Sr. and Lester Maddox are what black people were looking for. That is pretty good. Bill Clinton couldn't even tell one like that. You know, now that I think about it, George Wallace was pretty popular with my people. I guess you promise some crumbs and you're the man. Hell they like me and look what I am doing to the economy and who is most affected. I just need to promise some crumbs while I give my pals in the solar industry some big money. It is mystifying how middle class whites figured out that we grab class warfare money, ruin the economy and throw them crumbs. It irritates me when they are on to us. I hate it when people would rather have jobs than cheesy hand outs. Just because the government grabs the money doesn't mean anything good is going to happen unless you are the manufacturer of the worthless high speed trains or of unsustainable wind mills. Then it is pretty good for you. Those terrible evil Republican governors are getting out of the high speed train "business". That means a reduction in kick back money in the future. Oh well. I got so much on my mind with the inevitable match up with Boehner on the golf course. All I can do it get out on the course everyday. My slogan for the next election is, 10% unemployment is good, it could be a lot worse or I am going to bring the economy of the Soviet Union to the United States five year plan by five year plan. I have seen the future and it works. Who said that anyway? Probably some brilliant, nuanced leftist thinker. Lets go to Venezuela and play golf, baby.
WAKE UP| 11.20.10 @ 12:21AM
I'll tell you what would get on my conscience Ted. Failing to do my duty and protect that which is near and dear to me: my country, my family, my culture.
WAKE UP| 11.20.10 @ 12:22AM
I'll tell you what would get on my conscience Ted. Failing to do my duty and protect that which is near and dear to me: my country, my family, my culture
Ted R.| 11.20.10 @ 8:55AM
And you are accusing me of NOT being interested in the well-being of my country, my family? Is that what you're trying to say? All because I take the 8th amendment seriously?
As far as "being ashamed" for failing to protect "my culture" - well, THAT certainly has a chilling ring to it.
Barbara| 11.20.10 @ 1:36PM
He didn't say you had to be ashamed, just that he would. Why be offended? You have to use facts and reason with us - not left-wing propaganda talking points.
You condemn originalism in reading the Constitution. Who says your method of reading the Constitution is better? Ah yes, the Supreme Court - those dead white men who ruled in favor of slavery and separate but equal.
Ted R.| 11.20.10 @ 2:16PM
And what unreasoning, propoganda talking-points would those be? You don't get a free pass at a charge like that. Bring it out, HOW what I've said is "antithetical to intelligent discussion."
I don't believe there is any such thing as an authentic "Originalist" approach to the Constitution. Enthusiasts of 'Originalism' are really are just trying to get their own agenda implemented by reading their own policy preferences back onto the Framers.
I am definitely an adherent of the "living document" school of Constitutional interpretation. And the fact is, that that approach must begin with the text. But our resources for interpreting the text do not END there. We have to make guesses as to the Framer's intent, and beyond that we have to consider the general principles articulated by the text (and related documents, and subsequent Amendments and Supreme Court precedent), in order to best adjudge the text's significance for novel problems that the Framers, in their time, could never have considered.
But on the issue of "cruel and unusual punishment," the Framers left little room for ambiguity (though you Cons try to exploit it for all it is worth). The 8th prohibits torture. NOTE: It doesn't guarantee protection AGAINST torture, it PROHIBITS it. The only recourse that gives our own home-grown fascists, is to claim that "enhanced interrogations" like waterboarding are somehow not torture, that forcing confessions by placing subjects under servere psychological duress, is not cruel and unusual punishment.
The fact is, you can lie to yourselves all day long about what the Constitution requires here. But as a nation we have sold our soul in the name of "protecting our families and our culture" - not unlike another country I can think of, that succumbed to Fascism.
RacerJim| 11.21.10 @ 12:03PM
The fact is, Teddy boy, you wouldn't lift a finger to save your own family, much less your country.
WAKE UP| 11.20.10 @ 9:47PM
Ted, stop projecting. I'm not accusing you of anything. I'm telling you how I feel - something, despite your torrent of words, you clearly will never understand. So I'm stopping right here.
WAKE UP| 11.19.10 @ 6:18PM
Did NRCAT ever have anything to say about Sadaam Hussein?
Les Nesman| 11.19.10 @ 10:16PM
This has been an interesting discussion. My take away from this has been, that if you are a subhuman Muslim anarchist Nazi communist terrorist as declared by the US government you've got what is coming to you. Waterboarding = dunk in the water. Geneva conventions are for other people. The Old Testament should guide our foreign policy especially for the damned Canaanites. I can get behind a movement like this. What we need is a leader that can tell these truths so the liberal subhumans will acquiesce & yield. Then we will have some leibenstrausse. I have my brown shirt on, who is with me!
Mr Carlson| 11.19.10 @ 10:29PM
Tone it down a little, Les.
What we can all agree on is this:
1. Found in a US occupied country carrying a gun while brown = terrorist.
2. Don't believe in Jesus = guilty right there.
3. 1 + 2 = Old Testament on your ass.
4. In US and #2 = no fly list for you especially for the brown for the travelling convenience of real Americans so we don't have to get felt up or glow in the dark.
5. Foreign treaties don't apply anymore because this is America & stuff especially the Geneva conventions. That's European.
CalMark| 11.20.10 @ 1:42AM
To describe the very un-funny WKRP poseurs above, I offer a tautology (redundant phrase) : Nasty liberals.
Capital N, small l.
general summeral| 11.20.10 @ 12:46AM
Way up above in here, Doctor Right made a comment about letting the toothpaste out of the tube. Somewhere on the web someone typed in that Mohammed (justice be on him) in a Koran surah or in a hadith told his followers to brush their teeth with a sugarbush stick. Somewhere a mullah must be telling his students that infidels Must be killed for using the wrong kind of toothbrush. CAIR will probably make a nondenial denial about that. OBL supposedly was driven into his ongoing fury after he once saw a bellydancer's breast in Beirut.
Yosemeti Sam| 11.20.10 @ 12:12PM
Um, can we have a Hollowwood rating system for defining torture?
Would 26 Alphabet characters be sufficient?
Barbara| 11.20.10 @ 1:40PM
http://www.newsrealblog.com/20.....acebook-1/
Funny and useful.
Paul Ashley| 11.20.10 @ 2:07PM
Regardless of whther it is true or not that Soros is funding "The New Evangelical Partnership for the Vommon Good", that organization is clearly of the Left. Just take a gander at their policy pages.
http://newevangelicalpartnership.org/?q=node/10
Wayne | 11.20.10 @ 3:15PM
I have trouble with any group that is fine with groping 3 years but has problems with waterboarding known killers. They absurdity is that they have no problem with the fact that Obama does not even take prisoners. He either kills them or sends them to a place where torture is acceptable.
Hank| 11.20.10 @ 3:21PM
Yes. Let's not do anything like fret over waterboarding. That's tantamount to thinking critically about it! As we all know, we should simply ask Dick Cheney about any moral question that presents itself to us and await his answer. Why people like to cudgel their brains over these questions and spend all that time mulling over these questions is beyond me. It's so much easier to just have your answers dictated to you!
John| 11.20.10 @ 3:58PM
It seems that if we do not agree with the lefties' assertion that waterboarding three terrorists is torture, then we are all evil fascists. but is is ok to use predator drones to kill terrorists. Killing terrorist is ok but waterboarding three of them to obtain information to save americans is very, very bad. This is nothing but cheap lazy reasoning. According to Supreme Court Justice Ted, the 8th amendment prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, and waterboarding is torture, so therefore we cannot use waterboarding against enemy terrorists. Well killing them is more cruel, maybe not unususal, so Ted, are we then not allowed to kill the terrorists? If we cannot, then Obama has been guilty of war crimes for the past two years. I know you prefer to indict Cheney, but Obama, a fellow lefty Democrat, has kept open Gitmo, used predator drones, and has ordered the assasination of an American citizen, without trial-civil or military,(If you don't knw., the Muslim cleric who inspired the Fort Hood terrorist).
It would be nice to see some moral clarity and consistency from the lefty liberal bombthrowers who troll this websit spitting out their hate of America disguised as concern for the three terrorists who were waterboarded. They are quick to call anyone who disagrees as a fascist, when they do not even know the meaning of the word. These lefties cannot accept any disagreement and if you diagree you are a bad person who must be stripped of American citizenship and re-educated. These lefties are the true fascists who need to impose their views on the rest of us. They do not have to power, yet, to do it violently as in the old USSR, China, North Korea, Cuba, and the rest, but you can see their desire to dominate and control in the vicious language they use in these posts.
Hank| 11.20.10 @ 7:11PM
I'm not sure about your analogy here. Killing terrorists whom we've not captured is perfectly reasonable and perfectly moral, with drones or any other weapons system. (Drones do have drawbacks, but not if they hit the right target.)
Water boarding and other tactics that cause detainees extreme anguish -- I'll not call it torture, if you prefer -- raise important moral questions, and I don't think the Bush administration's response to these questions -- "the lawyers" say it's fine -- is adequate or good enough for a country that has for over a hundred years prided itself on the highest standards when it comes to these issues. Maybe water boarding does not cross the line. But I wouldn't discount critics that say that it does so easily.
Put it this way. I'd rather live in a country where most people are extremely disturbed if not made completely irate by the prospect of government agents water boarding or otherwise tormenting detainees with no oversight be the courts. Furthermore, I'm proud as hell that some of the most vociferous complaints about these methods have come from within our MILITARY. Men of honor generally don't like this sort of thing, and that's one of the reasons why we honor them. You can call me a "lefty" or a "fascist" or whatever you want, but frankly anyone who throws those kinds of words around doesn't seem all that serious or interesting to me.
Ted R.| 11.20.10 @ 4:34PM
Well, I say there is a moral difference between the extra-judicial killings of terrorist suspects in actual theaters of operation (especially when these are sanctioned by the local governments), and taking a person suspected of terrorist activity in hand - where he can pose no potential threat to you - and subjecting his body and mind to extremes of punishment for the ostensible purpose of extracting a "confession" from him.
Context is a defining consideration here. Oh, I know that context is far too complex a factor to weigh for you rock-ribbed (-headed?) "moral clarity" types; but it really comes down to the systematic attempt to apply principles to facts on the ground. On the ground, if we have a group that would only be where it is, outfitted as it is, if it were part of a terrorist insurgent network, then it would be morally negligent not to attack. But, on the ground, if we have a man, a human being, in our custody and no evident threat to anyone, it is not any ordinary protocol of war, but instead and act of barbarism, to torture that man.
Gitmo is a not just a moral disgrace - it is also a legal nightmare. Cheney and his crew, not Obama, is responsible for this global blight on our reputation. Obama's hands are obviously politically tied when it comes to Gitmo. After years of extra-judicial incarceration (including reports of torture under the Bush administration), just letting the detainees go en masse, or giving them a fair trial, could cause more even more problems than just continuing to hold them. Obama is certainly pragmatic enough to grasp this, even if you are not. What we can and should do, is empty Gitmo and take these people to prisons in the U.S. We should at least clean up our own mess with this one, and take the responsibility for incarcerating them on our own soil. Why are so many Americans - including conservatives - too cowardly to step up to this?
You've got it wrong, John. We don't hate America. We hate YOUR America - the America that perpetrates crimes like Abu Grahib, and then, instead of being ashamed, CROWS about it. THAT'S the sort of thing that Fascist states do, and that's why you Cons deserve the label.
RacerJim| 11.21.10 @ 12:13PM
Well Teddy boy, We hate YOUR Amerika - Communist, Socialist, Marxist Amerika.
Hank| 11.21.10 @ 12:30PM
*Yawn.
John| 11.20.10 @ 6:16PM
Well Ted, you certainly have all the excuses for your lefty soulmates. After two years it is still Cheney's fault. Obama is just pragmatic to not clean up Cheney's Gitmo. It doesn't matter that the Democrat Congress from 2006 on could have defunded the wars and defunded Gitmo. Who is crowing abot Abu Grahib? You are still obsessed with it, there were trials of those involved, remember? But you have to glory in it because it makes America look bad. So you believe our America is a fascist state, why not move to Cuba?
The Monk| 11.20.10 @ 7:19PM
"He who gives up the ESSENTIALS OF LIBERTY to purchase temporary safety neither Liberty or Safety"
Benjamin Franklin
RacerJim| 11.21.10 @ 12:21PM
"A Republic, if you can keep it."
-- Benjamin Franklin
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
-- George Santayana
Julianne Wiley| 11.20.10 @ 7:24PM
As a longtime Mark Tooley fan, I must confess I am disappointed by this column.
Firat, there is the attempt to trivialize the objection to torture by using words like "fretting," "tut-tutting," "scolding." Surely the people who oppose watrerboarding do so because they have a moral judgment against torture, even if they are wrong in classifying waterboarding as such. This is not a ninnyish scruple: it is a serious moral judgment; and if it is based on misinformation, it needs to be seriously refuted, not trivialized.
I am neither a pacifist, nor a leftist, nor a liberal-religionist. I am convinced, via U.S. law, interntional law, NaturalLaw, and the Catechism of the Cathoilic Church, that torture is a wrongful act. The Catholic philosopher Elizabeth Anscombe --- one of the most classically conservative philosophers of the 20th century ---put ithe prohibition of torture in her very, very short list of "exceptionless norms."
If these sources are correct, then torture cannot be defended by consequentialist reasoning, any moe than sodomy or massacre or abortion could be so justified. So it is urgent that we determine exact boundaries to arrive at a reasoned definition of what torture "is", because, properly so called, it is morally prohibited.
Hank| 11.20.10 @ 7:38PM
Wow. I wish I could erase my posts above and add, "What Julianne said."
Ted R.| 11.20.10 @ 8:35PM
Torture can certainly be defended by consequentialist reasoning, if you do not take, as an end in itself, the individual autonomy and freedom of conscience of others.
RacerJim| 11.21.10 @ 12:31PM
Waterboarding can definitely be defended by common-sense reasoning...it's temporary discomfort for them vs permanent elimination of us.
Ted R.| 11.21.10 @ 12:52PM
It is not "temporary discomfort." It is an act of terror. You cannot legitimately claim that terrorizing another human being is done for the trade-off of saving other lives, because you DON'T know if the torment you're inflicting will be of any use at all. You don't know that your target has the sensitive information you seek; all you've got are your own suspicions. So what it comes down to, is that you're willing to torment another person just on your own hunch. Such an act is unworthy of a real American citizen.
RCV| 11.22.10 @ 1:45PM
I guess then that you think it would be legal under international law for other states to waterboard our soldiers to extract information?
J.C.Eaton| 11.20.10 @ 7:56PM
Zounds Ted! 24 hours and still going strong. No, you won't convince me of your correctness on this topic with one or a million and one conversations. You aren't persuasive enough on the former and not interesting enough on the latter. In all events, indulging you, Julianne for an instant, at best we have a theological conundrum. If waterboarding is the black moral sin you suggest, then the insouciant allowance of the murder of hundreds if not thousands of people because of the government's timidity in employing it is so much the blacker. You sleep with your conscience, I'll sleep with mine. As for you, Hank, I wish you could just erase your posts too:-]
Hank| 11.20.10 @ 11:48PM
Well....you'd still have Julianne's to contend with, and you haven't done so here. I think if you read more carefully she was not saying that its a "black moral sin" -- she was careful to avoid such Manichean terms. I realize everything would be much nicer for you if all you ever had to do was read or hear things with which you already agree. I'm just trying to imagine the ghost of Eisenhower returning from the grave to witness agents of the US government pouring water over a man, rendered totally helpless by incarceration, to simulate drowning. It's just unmanly, cruel, and weak. It's embarrassing and shameful. You just don't do it.
Ted R.| 11.20.10 @ 8:27PM
Alright, J.C. We've established that you don't put any stock by the 8th amendment, if adhering to it potentially threatens the lives of your fellows. You're on record then, as willing to set aside the Constitution, for what are in your view more important ends.
Now - let's go a little further. Let me get this straight. You think that's it's morally permissable to torture another human being, as long as you believe that that person is witholding information which - if you were privy to it - might save the lives of others? Is that the whole threshold that needs be crossed, in order to torture someone? Because if it is, that's an awful damn low threshold - low enough, in fact, to vitiate the very PRINCIPLE of civil liberties. Now, I'm not saying I'm surprised at this - I've always held that conservatism is fundamentally illiberal (small i). But your evident disregard for basic civil liberties, is an Exhibit A proof of my point.
Barbara| 11.21.10 @ 12:42PM
We've long since settled the issue; waterboarding is not torture.
The 8th Amendment deals with the right of a US citizen to be free from cruel and unusual punishment.
You appear to be substituting incarceration for interrogation. Forcus, Ted, you are accusing conservatives of using waterboarding as an interrogation technique, not as a punishment in lieu of or or part of incarceration/imprisonment.
Irrational emotionalism isn't proof.
Sorry but the classic definition of open-minded and generous applies to conservatives. The French use the word libéral in that sense. Too bad the statist, leftists have hijacked and misappropriated the word.
What is your point? It isn't torture when the Marine Corps. used waterboarding to train its men but if a Marine is waterboarded when captured he can go crying to the UN that he was tortured?
Or, we're e mean because we don't apply the 8th Amendment where it is not only (1.) inapplicable and (2.) not recognised in international law.
Cutting off a hand for theft is cruel and unusual but go complain about Saudi criminal just to... Oh, that's right that don't have a Bill of Rights - just a nasty version of sharia.
Ted R.| 11.21.10 @ 1:12PM
"We've long since settled the issue; waterboarding is not torture." And who, pray, would the "We" be? The people of THIS site? Who's feeding you YOUR propoganda? Waterboarding has been an acknowledged instrument of torture for centuries. Sorry, if you're going to claim that it isn't torture sister, the burden of proof is on you.
"The 8th Amendment deals with the right of a U.S. citizen to be free of cruel and unusual punishment." As usual, you Cons need to learn to read. That's not what the 8th stipulates. It PROHIBITS American citizens from participating in cruel and unusual punishment.
What I am accusing conservatives of, Barbara, is of trying to give moral cover for their revenge-fantasies against Muslims. Just pay attention to what you people are saying on this page, in post after post. You're not pleading that torture is a necessary evil to avoid greater harm; instead, the refrain that comes through, again and again, is: "these animals deserve it." You automatically assume that if someone is a candidate for torture, they are already guilty of what they've been accused of. And if they're guilty, they deserve to be brutalized. This is an absolutely Un-American attitude. What it is, actually, is an attitude steeped in irrational emotionalism.
Conservatism is at its dark heart an illiberal and authoritarian paradigm. It is a Hobbesian worldview, to the core. It constantly tempts the worst instincts of human beings: dogmatism, intolerance, selfishness, the demonization of those different from you. Those are all attitudes inimical to democratic life. And your endorsement of torture is just a supreme proof of it.
Chris| 11.21.10 @ 5:09PM
hank/ted: The eight amendment prohibits the federal and state governments, not citizens. If you want to be a lawyer, maybe you should read the Constitution.
The waterboarding was done to KSM, who masterminded the 9/11 attacks, remember? He supplied infromation to stop other attacks. Is that not important to you?
You sound as if the US just selected three muslims at random to waterboard for fun. These were three terrrorists, remember? Stick to the facts. You have no problem with killing terrorists with predator drones, air strikes, etc. but waterboarding a terrorist to obtain information, not for fun, offends you. If you really believe this then you should be consistent and oppose killing terrorists, be a complete pacifist.
Judging by your comments about conservatives, "tea baggers" etc., it appears you hate conservatives, your fellow Americans who disagree with you, and you would torture them if you had the chance and the power. Admit it.
Hank| 11.21.10 @ 1:32PM
I'm not sure you have this right, Barbara.
There is standing federal law and treaty obligations that prevent any citizen from engaging in torture, whether it's intended to gather intelligence or punish or for any other reason.
Water boarding has a long history of being treated AS torture. Indeed, the much cited practice of training our troops to endure water boarding was an anticipation that, if captured, this would be a part of the torture inflicted upon them by enemy troops. (The Soviets used water boarding regularly, as did the Japanese, Chinese and the N. Koreans. Are these really the governments we want to emulate?)
I'm fine with leaving off the designation "torture," if it helps us have an actual national debate about these issues. But I refuse to sit back while people who ask legitimate moral questions about the advisability of allowing agents of the state to treat detainees in this manner are scoffed at or dismissed. A free, self-governing society must be able to debate issues like this in good faith. I doubt if Washington, who prided himself on establishing the humane treatment of prisoners by our military, would scoff at this debate.
Hank| 11.21.10 @ 1:36PM
B. -- you may be confused about how the Constitution works. The Constitution does prohibit "cruel and unusual punishment," but it does not prohibit the Congress from enacting other statutes vis a vis the treatment of prisoners or detainees.
Truth to Power| 11.21.10 @ 1:45PM
*Yawn.
Hank| 11.21.10 @ 3:42PM
I have no doubt like most tea baggers you get bored by any discussion of what's actually in the Constitution. Too much like book-learnin'!
Truth to Power| 11.21.10 @ 6:21PM
What is the fascination of most lefty men with homosexual acts? Yawn. All too typical. I guess Hank had a funny relationship with his mommy and daddy.
WAKE UP| 11.20.10 @ 9:56PM
" Drones do have drawbacks, but not if they hit the right target."
Words fail me.
Hank| 11.20.10 @ 11:50PM
That much is clear. Try reading more. It's the best way to gain mastery of the language.
WAKE UP| 11.21.10 @ 8:45PM
It's not your language that's the problem, Hank - it's your hypocrisy.
burningbush | 11.20.10 @ 11:50PM
If you condone killing and or torture for ANY reason, you are not a follower of Christ and are perverting scripture. Mark Tooley comes off as Roman not one who knows Jesus. I am praying for you Mr. Tooley
Barbara| 11.21.10 @ 2:10PM
Here we go again. Waterboarding isn't torture. Am I right in thinking I'm allowed to kill someone trying to kill me? I don't kniw - if Jesus hasn't been tortured and killed would we be saved? While were at it why did Jesus choose to suffer and die in suich a horrific manner?
Knock it off with the anti-Catholic bigotry. For all you know Mr. Tooley is a Protestant allied with the Paisley crowd, as in the only good Catholic is a dead Catholic. Share Paisley' sentiments do you? Fabulous example of Christian love.
Hank| 11.21.10 @ 3:40PM
Barbara, You sound morally insane. I hope you're not presenting these ideas as Catholic teaching. Because Jesus was tortured, we are justified in torturing? And how does your right to physical self defense give government agents the right to torture someone rendered utterly harmless and helpless by incarceration? As for water boarding not being torture: Who told YOU so? Water boarding has a long history of being considered torture by law, treaty, and court interpretation. I'm not saying this certainly makes it so, but there's no question -- at least -- that there's a debate to be had, and I hope the people who engage in that debate are capable of more Christian charity than you seem to be. Get you to church, foolish woman.
Yosemeti Sam| 11.21.10 @ 10:09AM
And now - a word or two - from the 50 million or so (you know who) who've had first hand experience from GENUINE torture.
To sort of counterbalance the weight of sensitivities for 3 - what may one say, RASCALS?
Hmmm: of water and swimming:
Why risk a snout full of water and - torture oneself!
NEGRO X| 11.21.10 @ 5:12PM
Say no to waterboarding terrorists, Say yes to beheading them!
Chris| 11.21.10 @ 5:17PM
hank/ted: The eight amendment prohibits the federal and state governments, not citizens. If you want to be a lawyer, maybe you should read the Constitution.
The waterboarding was done to KSM, who masterminded the 9/11 attacks, remember? He supplied infromation to stop other attacks. Is that not important to you?
You sound as if the US just selected three muslims at random to waterboard for fun. These were three terrrorists, remember? Stick to the facts. You have no problem with killing terrorists with predator drones, air strikes, etc. but waterboarding a terrorist to obtain information, not for fun, offends you. If you really believe this then you should be consistent and oppose killing terrorists, be a complete pacifist.
Judging by your comments about conservatives, "tea baggers" etc., it appears you hate conservatives, your fellow Americans who disagree with you, and you would torture them if you had the chance and the power. Admit it.
Reply to this
Hank| 11.21.10 @ 9:49PM
Chris --
First, it WAS the federal government doing the water boarding, not a state.
Second, states ARE bound by the eighth amendment.
Third, they're people we SUSPECT might know something about terrorism. They're not being interrogated because they're terrorists per se.
Lastly, where on earth do you get the idea that people who oppose water boarding would "torture" tea partiers if they had the chance? That's ridiculous.
You sound as if you don't know ANY of the relevant facts.
There's your reply.
Ted R.| 11.21.10 @ 11:40PM
Thanks, Hank. Always succinct and even-handed.
Now, Chris - the scenario that Cons like you love to supply (over and over) to justify torture, is the specious "ticking time bomb" scenario where we: 1) have a suspect in our custody whom we KNOW has knowledge of a future attack 2) the only means of getting him to talk to us is by torturing him 3) what he tells us under duress will be reliable information.
When, IF EVER (outside of your "24" fantasies), have these conditions been satisfied? And in general, HOW is it that we KNOW that a suspect in fact IS harboring sensitive information? Fact is, we almost never do. All you're proposing, is that we crap indiscrimiately on our ideals and values as Americans, purely on the chance that we'll get reliable intelligence (from individuals, once again, who typically are only SUSPECTED of terrorist ties). As for KSM, I know of NO significant actionable intelligence that was got from him by torturing him.
Once again, you are willing to throw away the principle of basic civil rights, for the purely hypotehtical prospect of "saving lives." You may have yourself fooled, but that's as far as it goes.
Your real motive is as plain as day: revenge. Doesn't matter if it can't be shown beyond a reasonable doubt that the people you target were involved in attacking us; guilt by association will do just fine.
As for your incessant complaints about the drones, both Hank and I have already addressed this, above. Why don't you come back with an actual response, instead of merely re-stating your arguments? The fact is, that using military-grade force against combatants who are not in uniform, does pose some moral challenges, especially given the likelihood of innocents being caught in the crossfire. Unfortunately, civilian victims of war are a practically inevitable part of modern warfare; this fact does not morally compel us in the direction of pacifism.
In general, there is nothing incompatible with being categorically opposed to torture, and supporting the concept of a just war. Once again, I figure that that's too much nuance for you...
Bob Menzies| 11.21.10 @ 8:28PM
It would appear many support the "water boarding" of Muslims. It would also appear that many agree that it is not torture per se.
That stated then one might ask if water boarding is an effective tool to extract reliable information from suspects.
If the answer to that is YES then water boarding must be extremely beneficial.
If you agree with the above then it would also follow that it would be beneficial if such tools were available to be used on domestic suspects.
Why should people have the right to remain silent when they may have info on the likes of a Timothy McVeigh etc.
Whether we like it or not Americans have killed more Americans than Muslims ever have.
I say anybody suspected of withholding information that could prevent social violence should be immediately water boarded until they fess up with every bit of info the have.
Many domestic crimes could be nipped in the bud if water boarding was introduced accross the board.
Also today America is in deep financial poo. It is estimated that a great number of US citizens understae their incomes and overstate their expenses.
If America is going to pull itself out of this financial mess then everbody should be honest when stating their incomes etc.
Anybody supsected of cheating should be water boarded until they declare the true and correct amount they earn.
After all this is not torture; as such it should be used accross the board to not only help fight the terrorists but also fight the dishonest and violent Americans that make the lives of us honest folk a misery.
Water boarding will bring truth and honesty back to the USA, and make us all safe from terrorists and each other.
Bring it on...
Theodore| 11.22.10 @ 7:54PM
Very intelligent. You must be a democrat. Since you want to torture taxpayers I assume you work for IRS. A democrat at IRS.
J.C.Eaton| 11.21.10 @ 10:37PM
Teddy, re-read what I wrote in amazement at your persistence....my argument is exactly what you said it was not: I do think waterboarding is preferable to sanctimoniously sacrificing a couple thousand of innocent people. Hank, I don't really know what you're crabbing about, Julianne WAS writing about comparative evil[that's what a theological conundrum usually involves] and presumably can take care of herself. Yes, I do advocate and will perform waterboarding to save innocent life. And here's one for you: I will shoot the miserable bastard that kidnaps my child in the knees if I have to in order to recover her. Now that, Bub, IS torture.
Ted R.| 11.21.10 @ 11:44PM
Ohh Yeahh! Another Con who's been watching TOO many episodes of "24."
laundrybasketcollapsible | 11.22.10 @ 2:50AM
I say anybody suspected of withholding information that could prevent social violence should be immediately water boarded until they fess up with every bit of info the have.
Jay Pitsby| 11.22.10 @ 9:00AM
Oh, goody! More useful idiots on the Evangelical left. Just what's needed.
Christopher| 11.22.10 @ 11:15AM
"ted/hank,etc"
Last comment, have to return to work.
You keep saying "torture" when the issue is waterboarding of three known terrorists to obtain information. You want to debate torture, that is not the issue, and i might agreee on torture. The waterboarding was approved by the justice dept. that may not mean much to you, but laws passed by congress and presidential regulations are presumed constitutional until a federal court, and ultimately the supreme court, declare it unconstitutional. to date there has not been a court declaring the waterboarding of KSM and the other two, under the specific facts of those caes, to be unconstitutional in violation of the 8th amendment.
now you can call the waterboarding of KSM to be torture, and you can believe it, but that does not make it torture, and most Americans do not agree with you.
you have constructed your little fantasy world of calling waterboarding three terrorists torture, and then mocking/belittling anyone who disagrees with your silly views. if the waterboarding of the three terrorists was torture, and you sincerely believe that, then you should start a legal defense fund for the three to sue the US government.
Hank| 11.22.10 @ 2:02PM
Isn't this part of the problem, Chris? The courts -- and even military tribunals -- are REFUSING evidence gotten by "enhanced interrogation" on the grounds that it the poisonous fruit of torture.
Again, there's plenty of standing precedent for regarding water boarding as torture.
How you can call the point of view we're articulating a "little fantasy world" is more than ridiculous. A HUGE number of people in government, in the military, in the academy, and in governments around the world AGREE with what we're saying. Now that doesn't mean you have to agree with it. I'll admit (as most of my opponents here will not) that there's a DEBATE to be had. I think there are competing claims here that are worth letting play out. But the notion that we're just spouting some "fantasy" is -- well, you know what I'm going to say, don't you? It's just not that "fair and balanced." And you know all about "fair and balanced," don't you?
Christopher| 11.22.10 @ 2:08PM
Ok ted/hank, please supply the names and citations of the united states court cases that have held that waterboarding, as done in the specific cases of the three terrorists, is "torture."
And name the people who agree with you that the waterboarding done to the three terrorists is "torture."
You will need to find the legal definition of torture.
For a change, stick to facts and logic, and not smarmy insults.
Bill| 11.23.10 @ 6:57AM
Waterboarding is NOT torture. Hot pokers, thumb screws, the rack, etc, leave lasting physical damage. Waterboarding cleans out the sinuses. C'mon folks get over it. btw ... Bush was not the greatest President ever, he was a disaster. Yet, not as big a disaster at GW Bush #2 Obama. Bush was the 1st Obama; Obama is the 2nd GW Bush.
Robert Pentangelo| 5.15.11 @ 11:07AM
You and your neo-con friends as usually have it assbackwards-what proof does Bush give us that to use neo-con speak "actionable intelligence" was gathered by torturing these individuals.
By the way, on another topic: what role do you understand the Jewish leaders in Palestine had in the passion and death of Jesus Christ?