Waterboarding

Sorry, Mr.FixIt. I have to disagree with many of your statements.

Quote:

---

Hate me if you will. But these people hate you more, and have for hundreds of years. They declared war on us hundreds of years ago, and we still haven't woken up to realize it and face it. They will kill themselves to kill you, your families, your children. So what is a little torture? We're not killing them or their families, right? Their women, their children, and their men are trained to strap bombs to themselves and blow themselves up, in our airplanes, in our football stadiums, in our high school graduations--whatever event that might have a solid impact on the fear of our nation (Is this not torture?). Why? Because they hate us. Period.

---

You paint with a broad brush here. The vast majority of "these people" are simple, peace-loving, hard working human beings who deplore much of the atrocities which are being committed in their names. It's only a handful of Muslim extremists who are trying to terrorize the rest of the world simply because their beliefs are in the minority. And let's not forget, it's us (Christians) who started this mess by launching the Crusades.

Quote:

---

Now, imagine that you didn't get that hose out because other people might think it's too cruel. Could you live with your action...or lack thereof?

---

So, we should torture anyone we even think might be a threat, based only upon their religion, or the color of their skin, or perhaps the color of their hair, or eyes? Or maybe anyone who doesn't speak English? That's absurd! Do you really think that kidnapping some poor farmer from his fields, transporting him thousands of miles from his home, then torturing him for hours and hours is going to get you information? The guy doesn't know anything! He's just a farmer! But you would go right on torturing him until you've either killed him or turned him into a vegetable, just because you THINK he might know something? That's nuts!

Quote:

---

Imagine that you are in an airplane (Flight 93 Maybe?) and you know that you are headed for the side of a building. Imagine that you had the choice of water boarding the fucker with the plan in mind and you chose not to because you had a little moral dilema with the whole issue. Imagine that you could have prevented the whole situation for all of the American families involved, but you chose to do the "right thing" and now you have to live with your weak-assed, humanity lovin', PC (politically correct) decision for the rest of your life. I say, "Let's Roll!"

---

This is a completely different story. Here you are not looking for shadows under the bed, you have a tangible threat right in front of you. Yet you would rather torture some guy while his cronies fly the plane into the building? Fuck that! "Let's Roll" indeed! Charge the cockpit, try to regain control of the plane, just as those heroes on Flight 93 did. With luck, you capture and/or kill the terrorists and regain the plane. At worst, as really happened, the terrorists fly the plane into the ground, preventing even worse loss of life. But torturing a guy to get the plan while the plane is diving on the building isn't going to accomplish anything.

Quote:

---

Imagine that Timothy McVeigh had been water boarded during interrogation prior to the incidents at OKC. (The attack that claimed 168 lives and left over 800 injured). How might that have changed history?

---

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but was McVeigh suspected of being a home-grown terrorist prior to his actions? I don't believe so. So you're saying we should have tortured him anyway, just in case? That would justify our government being able to pick anyone up off the streets, including your wife, or your daughter, and allow them to torture them just in case they were planning a terrorist attack. Which brings us to:

Quote:

---

Imagine that you knew that your next door neighbor intended to mutilate, rape, and destroy your family simply because of his extremist religious beliefs, and you had no defense against it. Would you water board (regardless of the congressional definition of torture) the mother-fucker to prevent it from happening, or would that be taking it easy on the poor defenseless son-of-a bitch?

---

What proof do you have that he's planning on doing this? Has he threatened you? Or them? Has he been recruiting people to help him attack your home? Has he done anything other than spout what you consider to be "extremist religious beliefs"? If so, then you have a right to defend your family. So kill the bastard! Or turn him over to the police. What's the point in torturing him if you already know what he's going to do? Or perhaps you only suspect he's planning this? Then the obvious course of action is to torture his wife and his children to learn what he's planning. They may not know anything, but what the hell! You're protecting your family!

Quote:

---

Bear in mind that we do not send video tapes of torture to the families of the poor slobs after the water boarding, like our families have the privilege to watch the torture and beheadings of our loved ones on CNN (Chicken Noodle News), or youtube (where you can watch the beheading of Saddam).
You're damn right we're better than them! And you're damn right we're the good guys.

---

How does emulating our enemies make us better than them? You say that we don't show tapes of the torture and murder of our victims, yet you advocate doing just that! That doesn't make you one of the "good guys", that makes you one of them!

Quote:

---

I say, whatever it takes to protect my family, my freedom, and my life is acceptable by me, and I support the honorable efforts of the soldiers that are risking their lives to ensure our American freedoms. Fuck the PC movement!

---

I, too support the honorable efforts of the soldiers. I especially support those honorable men and women who are leaking information about the atrocities committed at Guantanamo Bay, in my name, by a government which is getting out of control. I can love my country without loving the people who are leading it. I have always honored those soldiers who have sacrificed so much in the defense of freedom. Even during the Viet Nam era, when it was "fashionable" to harangue and insult soldiers returning from war, I supported them and praised them for the work they did.
I do not support, will never support, those political and business leaders who allow such atrocities to happen, who send those young men and women out to fight a war to insure their profits, who permit and encourage illegal and immoral acts in the name of National Security.
And as for religious extremists, I am far more concerned with the actions of the Christian Right Wing fanatics right here in the US than I am with some poor Muslim store clerk in Baghdad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thorne

How does emulating our enemies make us better than them? You say that we don't show tapes of the torture and murder of our victims, yet you advocate doing just that! That doesn't make you one of the "good guys", that makes you one of them!

---

I think you misunderstood this one.....no one is advocating sending tapes out to families...the point to this was to say that when they torture our soldiers, their families must live through that torture as well, because tapes are sent out to them, and it's posted on the web. We don't do that. And think about what is on THOSE tapes....electrocution, cutting, amputation, beatings, hammers used to smash limbs, torches used to burn the flesh. They are not just torturing one person, they are torturing the person's entire family. We're not talking about the store clerk here. We're talking about extremists.


i KNOW how these people feel about us-even Mr. Store Clerk, who flies out of the airport to his homeland, carrying thousands of dollars-enough that they must declare it, which means more than $10,000...it's going where our oil money is already going! Store Clerk looks at me across the counter, and solemnly berated the country where he has gained this mass amount of money(as well as the gold rings that he has on all of his fingers, his watch, and his wife's adornments), berated me for being an infadel, and cursed my children. All after i'd gone the extra mile to treat him with respect and serve his needs as my customer. Think he's an anomole? Wrong, i've got countless stories of the same nature from the year and a half that i worked at the airport.
EVERY one of them has treated me like i'm a piece of shit--in MY country, on MY terf, paying with MY country's currency that they saved up with the help of MY government-no taxes due for 5 years because they opened a business here. i saw one man once a week, carrying at least 10 grand in his wallet-wonder how much was in his suitcase? But he's just taking ALL of that to care for his poor family back home.


Waterboarding is frightening. Sure. But we could do MUCH worse. If the schoolyard bully gets after you at school, and you tell on him, he's gonna beat you up...but if you knock him out, he'll leave you alone. These guys don't care if you knock them out, so long as you go down with them. Kind and gentle does no good. If it did, we would be doing that instead, since you can catch more flies with honey, and diplomacy goes a long way....except when they believe that you're the devil, and have since biblical times.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stripedangel

I think you misunderstood this one.....no one is advocating sending tapes out to families...the point to this was to say that when they torture our soldiers, their families must live through that torture as well, because tapes are sent out to them, and it's posted on the web. We don't do that. And think about what is on THOSE tapes....electrocution, cutting, amputation, beatings, hammers used to smash limbs, torches used to burn the flesh. They are not just torturing one person, they are torturing the person's entire family. We're not talking about the store clerk here. We're talking about extremists.

---

Mr.FixIt said in his post, "Put it on a reality TV show--Like snowboarding, rock climbing, or tornado chasing, or whatever. I'd watch it. It would be better entertainment than "Fear Factor" or "Survivor!" While not the same as sending it to their families, how is it any different than posting it on the web?

As for your experiences with these people, I agree, that there is a serious problem here in this country with our immigration laws. We let these people send, or take the money away without penalty. Almost any other country in the world it would be against the law, resulting in long term imprisonment. That doesn't make them terrorists, any more than gay-bashers are terrorists, or anti-semites. They could be terrorists, but that has yet to be proven. Besides, when they are treated like shit just because they are Muslim, why should we expect them to treat us any better? What goes around, comes around.

Quote:

---

Waterboarding is frightening. Sure. But we could do MUCH worse.

---

That would be like kicking a guy in the head to put him in a coma, then saying, "Hey, it's not that bad! I could have killed him!"
Either way, it's wrong. Especially since the majority of those people being tortured down in Cuba are not proven terrorists or sympathizers. Many of them are just ordinary people who happen to be Muslim.

Quote:

---

If the schoolyard bully gets after you at school, and you tell on him, he's gonna beat you up...but if you knock him out, he'll leave you alone. These guys don't care if you knock them out, so long as you go down with them. Kind and gentle does no good. If it did, we would be doing that instead, since you can catch more flies with honey, and diplomacy goes a long way....except when they believe that you're the devil, and have since biblical times.

---

Again, that sounds all well and good, but make sure you take out the real bully, not some guy who lives in the same neighborhood. Part of the problem with dealing with terrorists as that its damned near impossible to take them out without a lot of collateral damage. It's not like being at war with a country and dropping bombs indiscriminately on the enemy cities. While they may not like us, might even hate us, most of the people in those cities hate the terrorists just as much, until we move in and start throwing our weight around, virtually forcing them to side with the terrorists.

Remember, now, I'm not saying we shouldn't interrogate the prisoners. All I'm saying is that torture has historically been shown to be the worst method for gathering intelligence. Especially in modern times, drugs and psychology can get you more reliable information, more quickly, and with less negative feedback than torture. Then, once you've gotten the information and proven that the subject was a member of a terrorist organization, go ahead and kill the bastard! Just do it humanely. Most of us wouldn't treat a rabid dog the way we treat these suspects.

And also remember, once we allow our government to virtually kidnap people off the streets and lock them away for interrogation with no evidence against them other than their race or color, we are opening the doors to having ourselves and our families treated the same way, for any reason some government agency might concoct, or for no reason at all. That way lies totalitarianism. And the end of the United States as we know them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thorne

Sorry, Mr.FixIt. I have to disagree with many of your statements.

You paint with a broad brush here. The vast majority of "these people" are simple, peace-loving, hard working human beings who deplore much of the atrocities which are being committed in their names. It's only a handful of Muslim extremists who are trying to terrorize the rest of the world simply because their beliefs are in the minority. And let's not forget, it's us (Christians) who started this mess by launching the Crusades.

---

It's the (handful of?) extremists that I'm referring to here. The handful that will proudly kill you, me, our families, etc. I do not believe that "peace loving, hard working human beings" are being water boarded. Let's focus on what and whom we are talking about here.

"Cursades?" What the hell do you call a gihad? I didn't start a gihad, I'm sure that you didn't start a gihad, did you? But let's not make this about religion. Please note that I didn't mention religion (or musims in particular) at any point in my response. Why would you assume that I was talking about muslims? I was talking about the same "handful (tens of thousands) of extremists" that you were talking about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thorne

Again, that sounds all well and good, but make sure you take out the real bully, not some guy who lives in the same neighborhood. Part of the problem with dealing with terrorists as that its damned near impossible to take them out without a lot of collateral damage. It's not like being at war with a country and dropping bombs indiscriminately on the enemy cities. While they may not like us, might even hate us, most of the people in those cities hate the terrorists just as much, until we move in and start throwing our weight around, virtually forcing them to side with the terrorists.

---

You're exactly right! That's why we're water boarding one fucker, and not bombing the whole town!

as convincing an argument proponents here on this site (of both sides of this issue) are making i think it shall perhaps not be resolved any time soon, our government seems to be just as deadlocked on the legality of it and or its effectivness, and its clearly a non-partisan debate, no one party wholehaertedly supports eaither side of the argument, sure the president is for it, but the man representing his party in the next election is adamantly against it, of course he (McCain) is a former pow, no wonder he dislikes the very idea of we americans commiting acts of torture

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr.FixIt

It's the (handful of?) extremists that I'm referring to here. The handful that will proudly kill you, me, our families, etc. I do not believe that "peace loving, hard working human beings" are being water boarded. Let's focus on what and whom we are talking about here.

---

It's easy to believe that innocent people aren't being tortured, but the fact is that the majority of those being held in Guantanamo Bay have not been proven to be terrorists. We would like to believe that they are there because they did something which makes us believe they are terrorists, but it's my belief that some of them are there simply because of their race or religion. That is unacceptable to me. I should be unacceptable to all of us. That's what our country was founded upon.

Quote:

---

"Cursades?" What the hell do you call a gihad? I didn't start a gihad, I'm sure that you didn't start a gihad, did you? But let's not make this about religion. Please note that I didn't mention religion (or musims in particular) at any point in my response. Why would you assume that I was talking about muslims? I was talking about the same "handful (tens of thousands) of extremists" that you were talking about.

---

I used the Crusades to explain part of the reason why things are the way they are in the Middle East. And why going in there and blasting away indiscriminately will not solve the problem, only make things worse. And let's face, at this time the biggest terrorist threat to the world does seem to be Muslim fanatics. It has nothing to do with true religion, though, just happens to be a fact.

Quote:

---

You're exactly right! That's why we're water boarding one fucker, and not bombing the whole town!

---

But that's my whole point! We've selected one person from the town and are torturing him to find out things he doesn't know, while the real threat is back home rousing the rest of the town against us for our inhumanity. And planning his next strike against us. All I'm trying to say is, make sure the guy you've arrested and are holding (illegally, by the way) is one of the bad guys, and not some innocent bystander.

God! Some of the stuff I've read here is mind boggling!

In no particular order:-

Waterboarding is not an acceptable interrogation technique: it's torture. And it can cause death. "Interrogation Technique"!!! I ask you .... Say what you bloody-well mean, don't tart it up with pretty words.

Could you compare flying a couple of planes into the WTC with the British/US carpet-bombing of Dresden, or the American bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki? The targets were the same: non-combatants. Yes, I know Britain and America were at war with Germany and Japan at the time of Hiroshima and Dresden. But they were both already defeated by then. If any pother countries had done that, we'd have called them war crimes.

Moslems hate us? No more than Christians and atheists in Russia and Africa do.

Arabs hate us? Well, those we have invaded for no valid reason might. Those who live in anticipation of unprovoked invasion fear us. But as a people, they are noble and do not hate us.

Jihads were a Moslem response to the Christian invasion of the Holy Land, not the other way round. Before the Crusades, Christians and Jews lived more or less peacefully with Arabs in Palestine. OK, some Christians were slaves, but slaves who could rise to high status within Ottoman society (cf St John of Damascus). The Crusades were wars against Islam, not against Arabs

As for America being the best country in the world, what's so great about xenophobia and paranoia? USA is a good country there's no denying that, but it's no better than many many other countries. France, Holland, Sweden, and Australia are all just as "good". Germany, Canada, Japan are just as "free". They are not as rich, that's all.

If USA wanted peace inthe Middle East, it would stop nurturing moslem totalitarian states like Saudi Arabia the one hand, and it would stop invading moslem totalitarian states like Iraq on the other. It would deal with them even handedly, and if it wished to influeence their political systems, it would do so peacefully. If, however, it wished to stop genocide within those countries, it wouldn't wait until oil prices rose too high ...

I'll stop here: if I say anything else, I'll be accused of flaming ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MMI

Moslems hate us? No more than Christians and atheists in Russia and Africa do.

Arabs hate us? Well, those we have invaded for no valid reason might. Those who live in anticipation of unprovoked invasion fear us. But as a people, they are noble and do not hate us....

I'll stop here: if I say anything else, I'll be accused of flaming ...

---

Well said, and I didn't sense any indicaiton of flaming here. Apparently you stopped at exactly the right point!

Please allow me to clarify my standpoint by reitterating myself. I don't believe that I ever claimed that Arabs, Muslims or otherwise hated us. But if I was unclear, I appologize. I intended to state my belief that the religious extremist terrorists hate us. I do appreciate the history lesson--it really was quite informative, and please don't think that I have any intentions of sarcasm. However, I had nothing to do with the crusades. My (ancient) ancestors started this one, and I refuse to pay for it.

I don't believe that we're grabbing up some poor inocent random fellow at his place of business, only to water board him for things that he has no involvement in. If we are, then the fuckers that are responsible should and will burn in hell for their irresponsible actions. If such attrocities are occuring, then I am certain that my descendants will pay for it like we are now paying for the actions of the crusaders.

But how else do you propose that we get information that might save our lives? Someone previously, here, proposed the use of drugs. I believe that what we're talking about is "Truth Serum". So, let's take a look at this "Truth Serum" that has been suggested as a more humane alternative to things such as water boarding.

From Wikipedia.com:
Barbiturates are a class of drugs that act on the GABAA receptor in the brain and spinal cord. The GABAA receptor is an inhibitory channel which decreases neuronal activity and the barbiturates enhance the inhibitory action of the GABAA receptor. Barbiturates, benzodiazepines, and alcohol all bind to the GABAA receptor, but the barbiturates bind with the highest affinity with longer receptor binding half-lives. This explains why overdoses of barbiturates may be lethal whereas overdoses of benzodiazepines alone are typically not lethal. Another explanation is that barbiturates can activate GABA receptors in the absence of the GABA molecule, whereas benzodiazepines need GABA to be present to have an effect: this may explain the more widespread effects of barbiturates in the central nervous system. Barbiturates have anesthetic, sedative, and hypnotic properties. Barbiturates do not have analgesic effects

Uses:

Anesthesia
Thiopental is an ultra-short-acting barbiturate and is most commonly used in the induction phase of general anesthesia. Following intravenous injection the drug rapidly reaches the brain and causes unconsciousness within 30–45 seconds. At one minute, the drug attains a peak concentration of about 60% of the total dose in the brain. Thereafter, the drug distributes to the rest of the body and in about 5–10 minutes the concentration is low enough in the brain such that consciousness returns.

A normal dose of thiopental (usually 4-6 mg/kg) given to a pregnant woman for operative delivery (caesarian section) rapidly makes her unconscious, but the baby in her uterus remains conscious. However, larger or repeated doses can depress the baby.

Thiopental is not used to maintain anesthesia in surgical procedures because, in infusion, it displays zero-order elimination kinetics, leading to a long period before consciousness is regained. Instead, anesthesia is usually maintained with an inhaled anesthetic (gas) agent. Inhaled anesthetics are eliminated relatively quickly, so that stopping the inhaled anesthetic will allow rapid return of consciousness. Thiopental would have to be given in large amounts to maintain an anesthetic plane, and because of its 11.5–26 hour half-life, consciousness would take a long time to return.

In veterinary medicine, thiopental is also used to induce anesthesia in animals. Since thiopental is redistributed to fat, certain breeds of dogs, primarily the sight hounds can have prolonged recoveries from thiopental due to their lack of body fat and lean body mass. Thiopental is always administered intravenously, as it can be fairly irritating; severe tissue necrosis and sloughing can occur if it is injected incorrectly into the tissue around a vein.

Medically induced coma
In addition to anesthesia induction, thiopental was historically used to induce medical comas. It has now been superseded by drugs such as propofol.

Thiopental has a long Context Sensitive Half Time (CSHT) meaning infusions saturate peripheral compartments (Fat, muscle etc). When the infusion is stopped, the drug re-distributes from the peripheral tissues back into the blood, prolonging the effect.

Thiopental also exhibits zero order kinetics at higher doses. The rate of clearance becomes fixed which slows elimination from the body.

Patients with brain swelling, causing elevation of the intracranial pressure, either secondary to trauma or following surgery may benefit from this drug. Thiopental, and the barbiturate class of drugs, decrease neuronal activity and therefore decrease the production of osmotically active metabolites which in turn decrease swelling. Patients with significant swelling have improved outcomes following the induction of coma. Reportedly, thiopental has been shown to be superior to pentobarbital[5] in reducing intracranial pressure.

Euthanasia
Thiopental is used intravenously for the purposes of euthanasia. The Belgians and the Dutch have created a protocol that recommends sodium thiopental as the ideal agent to induce coma followed by pancuronium bromide.

Intravenous administration is the most reliable and rapid way to accomplish euthanasia and therefore can be safely recommended. A coma is first induced by intravenous administration of 20 mg/kg thiopental sodium (Nesdonal) in a small volume (10 ml physiological saline). Then a triple intravenous dose of a non-depolarizing neuromuscular muscle relaxant is given, such as 20 mg pancuronium dibromide (Pavulon) or 20 mg vecuronium bromide (Norcuron). The muscle relaxant should preferably be given intravenously, in order to ensure optimal availability. Only for pancuronium dibromide (Pavulon) are there substantial indications that the agent may also be given intramuscularly in a dosage of 40 mg.

Lethal injection
Along with pancuronium bromide and potassium chloride, thiopental is used in 36 states of the U.S. to execute prisoners by lethal injection. A megadose is given which places the subject into a rapidly induced coma. Executions using the three drug combination are usually effective in approximately 10 minutes, but have been known to take several times this length. The use of thiopental alone is hypothesized to cause death in approximately 45 minutes.

Truth serum
Thiopental is still used in some places as a truth serum. The barbiturates as a class decrease higher cortical brain functioning. Psychiatrists hypothesize that because lying is more complex than telling the truth, suppression of the higher cortical functions may lead to the uncovering of the "truth". However, the reliability of confessions made under thiopental is dubious; the drug tends to make subjects chatty and cooperative with interrogators, but a practiced liar or someone who has a false story firmly established would still be quite able to lie while under the influence of the drug.


Psychiatry
Psychiatrists have used thiopental to desensitize patients with phobias, and to "facilitate the recall of painful repressed memories."One psychiatrist who worked with thiopental is Professor Jan Bastiaans, who used this procedure to help release trauma in victims of the Nazis.


Metabolism
As with all lipid soluble anaesthetic drugs, the short duration of action of STP is almost entirely due to its redistribution away from central circulation towards muscle and fat tissue. Once redistributed the free fraction in the blood is metabolised in the liver. Sodium thiopental is mainly metabolized to pentobarbital,[9] 5-ethyl-5-(1'-methyl-3'-hydroxybutyl)-2-thiobarbituric acid, and 5-ethyl-5-(1'-methyl-3'-carboxypropyl)-2-thiobarbituric acid.


Dosage
The usual dose range for induction of anesthesia using thiopentone is from 3 to 7 mg/kg; however, there are many factors that can alter this. Premedication with sedatives such as benzodiazepines or clonidine will reduce requirements, as do specific disease states and other patient factors.

Side effects
As with nearly all anesthetic drugs, thiopental causes cardiovascular and respiratory depression resulting in hypotension, apnea and airway obstruction. For these reasons, only suitably trained medical personnel should give thiopental in an environment suitably equipped to deal with these effects. Side effects include headache, emergence delirium, prolonged somnolence and nausea. Intravenous administration of sodium thiopental is followed instantly by an odor sensation, sometimes described as being similar to rotting onions. The hangover effects may last up to 36 hours.

Although molecules of thiopental contain one sulfur atom, it is not a sulfonamide, and does not show allergic reactions of sulfa/sulpha drugs.

Drug interaction
Co-administration of pentoxifylline and thiopental causes death by acute pulmonary oedema in rats. This pulmonary oedema was not mediated by cardiac failure or by pulmonary hypertension but was due to increased pulmonary vascular permeability.


History
Sodium thiopental was discovered in the early 1930s by Ernest H. Volwiler and Donalee L. Tabern, working for Abbott Laboratories. It was first used in human beings on March 8, 1934, by Dr. Ralph M. Waters in an investigation of its properties, which were short-term anesthesia and surprisingly little analgesia. Three months later, Dr. John S. Lundy started a clinical trial of thiopental at the Mayo Clinic at the request of Abbott.

It is famously associated with a number of anesthetic deaths in victims of the attack on Pearl Harbor. These deaths, relatively soon after its discovery, were due to excessive doses given to shocked trauma patients. Evidence has however become available through freedom of information legislation and has been reviewed in the "British Journal of Anaesthesia". Thiopentone anaesthesia was in its early days, but nevertheless only 13 of 344 wounded admitted to the Tripler Army Hospital did not survive.

Thiopental is still rarely used as a recreational drug, usually stolen from veterinarians or other legitimate users of the drug; however, more common sedatives such as benzodiazepines are usually preferred as recreational drugs, and abuse of thiopental tends to be uncommon and opportunistic.

Sounds like perfectly humane stuff, right? How many injections should I give my child when I think he's lying to me? Or would that not be appropriate?! Of course, water boarding my child would not be appropriate either, but to suggest that water boarding is wrong and drugging is better is simply incorrect. But if you want to feel better about yourself, just forget about the whole thing...Forget that we started this hundreds of years ago, Forget that they hate us, Forget that they flew planes into our buildings and killed thousands of us, Forget that they will do it all over again--given the opportunity. Just forget about it all while you drive your brand new SUV that gets 18 GSM (gas stations per mile), because we're the best country in the world! Right?! And that kind of thinking will lead us to the next wake up call that won't wake us up either.

If water boarding is wrong, then certainly drugs are wrong too! So, now what action should we take that is politacally correct, favorable to all, that does not cause controversy for you while you tank up for a cruise in your SUV? Tickle torture maybe? I know, let's make them watch America's Funniest Home Videos, or America's Funniest Pets till they fucking puke!!! Actually, I really like this concept!!!!!!!!

And to further clarify myself--

I am not proposing that we should video tape or publicly broadcast our torture (self preservation) tactics--that was sarcasm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MMI

Moslems hate us? No more than Christians and atheists in Russia and Africa do.

---

Yeah, but i haven't heard of either of those countries using our planes as missiles...and why did Russia back down? Because of a deterrent called nukes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MMI

As for America being the best country in the world, what's so great about xenophobia and paranoia?

---

No one is fearful of strangers, it's the ones who come here illegally, and deplete our welfare systems, and use our tax dollars to defend themselves in court when they break the law....and use our own technology to learn our ways, use our own belongings to kill nearly 4,000 people in one shot. As for paranoia-sheeesh, man, the whole world is paranoid to one extent or another. Everyone has hightened security now....wonder why? It's not like the USA is the only country that's been hit. They're going after those who are not our allies as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MMI

If USA wanted peace in the Middle East, it would stop nurturing moslem totalitarian states like Saudi Arabia the one hand, and it would stop invading moslem totalitarian states like Iraq on the other. It would deal with them even handedly, and if it wished to influence their political systems, it would do so peacefully. If, however, it wished to stop genocide within those countries, it wouldn't wait until oil prices rose too high ...

---

Absolutely, cuz you can do that-treat them all the same, because they all behave the same, right?

Waterboarding is still far less serious than the tactics that the extremists are using against our soldiers. But how about the hostages that they take who are nonmilitary--like Christians who are there on missioanry status, with permission of their country's government? They torture them as well, and broadcast it for all to see...because of who they are- and they're not all from America.

There is no kind way of doing this. There is not a great solution. i hate that these issues must be debated-whether or not to torture someone. But if you want to run with the big dogs, you have to, at least, be able to keep up with them. You can't just expect everyone to be good lil girls and boys, and if you dealt with them with a soft hand, what deterrent is there?

"oh, yeah, the people at the USA facility were really nice, they got me high and asked me some questions...i lied and the idiots believed me and then they let me go."

Since drugs are unreliable, and waterboarding is out, what? What do we do? Just sit back and wait for them to attack us again? Then, who do we go after? Well, we kinda have to find that out through interrogation and investigation.

How about the tens of thousands of boys who are signed up for the extremist training facilities? They are taught to hate us-it's becomming a tradition. They are fed and clothed and given guns-when you're desolate, those camps make a mighty nice alternative, don't you think? Peaceable folks, tho.

AND did you ever think about the fact that we usually only get one side of the story-the media there wants everyone to think that we are just big bullies. The media here hates Bush and will do whatever it takes to slam him (not that i think he's a great leader-he's a COD). No one ever watches the 700 club, i take it...maybe you should check out their news segment for about a week-you'll get the rest of the story.

As for the jackasses who had such a great time humiliating and abusing prisoners at Abu Ghraib....i don't even know what to say about this, except that they should be publically horsewhipped for that crap.

Quote:

---

Well said, and I didn't sense any indicaiton of flaming here. Apparently you stopped at exactly the right point!

---

I did, didn't I? <deep breath ... count to 10>

Quote:

---

Please allow me to clarify my standpoint ... I don't believe that I ever claimed that Arabs, Muslims or otherwise hated us. But if I was unclear, I appologize.

---

You were perfectly clear. You referred specifically to acts perpetrated by Al Qaeida, a group commonly understood to be moslem terrorists, and I do not believe you did that unaware of the west's - particularly USA's - dread of militant Islamic fundamentalists. Don't insult our intelligence by pretending otherwise.

But you DID mention gihads (sic) in a later post. A specifically moslem religious duty. And quickly withdrew from wanting to talk about religion. Forgive me if I think you were being disingenuous there.

(You did also refer to McVeigh, who wasn't a religious terrorist, but you did so separately.)

Quote:

---

I don't believe that we're grabbing up some poor inocent random fellow at his place of business, only to water board him for things that he has no involvement in. If we are, then the fuckers that are responsible should and will burn in hell for their irresponsible actions.

---

To meet this criterion, you must try the wretch lawfully and establish his guilt before you can waterboard him. Nevetheless, I agree with your sentiment. After all, we're the good guys, aren't we, and we have standards to maintain.

Oh! Does that include the Americans in who rounded up the hundreds of poor farmers, tourists, students and non-combatants in Iraq and Afghanistan on suspicion of being terrorists ... no not even that; just because they were in the wrong place ... and deported them to a concentration camp outside the reach of US law or any other, kept them there - in cages - without charge or right of hearing (let alone appeal) for years and years and years. Who were frequently subjected to "disorientation Techniques" (another euphemism). Who, because they couldn't decide if they were prisoners of war (entitled to be treated with proper respect as captured soldiers and to be released as soon as the war was over), or criminals (entitled to know the charges against them, and to be able to put forward a defence to a properly constituted court without unreasonable delay). And who were then, for nothing more than political reasons, released without hearing, apology or compensation. If you were imprisoned for years without knowing why, and then let go without explanation, you'd expect an apology and compensation, wouldn't you?

Does it include the victims of "extreme rendition" - yet another euphemism for getting others to do our dirty work for us?

And what about the ones who ordered/condoned it?

Quote:

---

But how else do you propose that we get information that might save our lives?

---

I don't know. Maybe we'll just have to take more care. But torture (waterboarding IS torture, and CAN kill, despite what you say) on any level in order to obtain information is totally unacceptable. What you are saying is, if you think there's a possibility that some American soldiers might face jeopardy, then it is legitimate to torture anyone just in case he knows whether that possibility is a reality. How many people are your prepared to torture before you get to the one who has that information? All of them? And how will you know? Information gained under torture is notoriously unreliable. People's safety might easily be jeopardised by acting on it.

And, as someone else has already said, that approach gives your opponents carte blanche to do exactly the same without fear of criticism from you.

Quote:

---

Someone previously, here, proposed the use of drugs. I believe that what we're talking about is "Truth Serum". So, let's take a look at this "Truth Serum" that has been suggested as a more humane alternative to things such as water boarding.

---

Wasn't me, so let's not bother. I don't condone that any more than waterboarding.

PHP Code:

---

[PHP]Quote:
Originally Posted by MMI  
Moslems hate us? No more than Christians and atheists in Russia and Africa do. 


---

Yeah, but i haven't heard of either of those countries using our planes as missiles...and why did Russia back down? Because of a deterrent called nukes.[/PHP]

Whatever! If you mean the Bay of Pigs incident, USSR also had nukes. But Kreuschev blinked first, and we only have Kennedy's word that he would have destroyed the developed world in order to stop missiles being landed in Cuba.
Nevertheless, USA never dared attack USSR any more than USSR would have dared attack the West.

PHP Code:

---

Quote:
[PHP]Originally Posted by MMI  
As for America being the best country in the world, what's so great about xenophobia and paranoia? 


---

No one is fearful of strangers, it's the ones who come here illegally, and deplete our welfare systems, and use our tax dollars to defend themselves in court when they break the law....and use our own technology to learn our ways, use our own belongings to kill nearly 4,000 people in one shot. As for paranoia-sheeesh, man, the whole world is paranoid to one extent or another. Everyone has hightened security now....wonder why? It's not like the USA is the only country that's been hit. They're going after those who are not our allies as well. [/PHP]

Sounds like xenophobic paranoia to me.

PHP Code:

---

[PHP]Quote:
Originally Posted by MMI  
If USA wanted peace in the Middle East, it would stop nurturing moslem totalitarian states like Saudi Arabia the one hand, and it would stop invading moslem totalitarian states like Iraq on the other. It would deal with them even handedly, and if it wished to influence their political systems, it would do so peacefully. If, however, it wished to stop genocide within those countries, it wouldn't wait until oil prices rose too high ... 


---

Absolutely, cuz you can do that-treat them all the same, because they all behave the same, right? [/PHP]

"Even-handedly" doesn't mean "exactly the same". But any nation will respond appropriately to the way it is treated by another.

PHP Code:

---

Waterboarding is still far less serious than the tactics that the extremists are using against our soldiers. 


---

Doesn't justify anything

PHP Code:

---

But how about the hostages that they take who are nonmilitary--like Christians who are there on missioanry status, with permission of their country's government? They torture them as well, and broadcast it for all to see...because of who they are- and they're not all from America. 


---

... and your argument is, waterboarding will stop this?

PHP Code:

---

There is no kind way of doing this. There is not a great solution. i hate that these issues must be debated-whether or not to torture someone. But if you want to run with the big dogs, you have to, at least, be able to keep up with them. You can't just expect everyone to be good lil girls and boys, and if you dealt with them with a soft hand, what deterrent is there? 


---

Torturing someone is not "running with the big dogs" it's making one insignificant person suffer degrading, humiliating, treatment for no particular reason than to get non-specific information which is probably false. A mug's game.

PHP Code:

---

AND did you ever think about the fact that we usually only get one side of the story-the media there wants everyone to think that we are just big bullies. The media here hates Bush and will do whatever it takes to slam him (not that i think he's a great leader-he's a COD). No one ever watches the 700 club, i take it...maybe you should check out their news segment for about a week-you'll get the rest of the story. 


---

We get the West's version of the story, even if it's slanted against Bush. Go to Al Jazeera for another viewpoint. Or go to Islamic websites for a full blooded exposition of why the West is hated. You'll be shocked at how differently people beyond your borders see us. And they consider that THEY are the "good guys".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MMI

I did, didn't I? <deep breath ... count to 10>



You were perfectly clear. You referred specifically to acts perpetrated by Al Qaeida, a group commonly understood to be moslem terrorists, and I do not believe you did that unaware of the west's - particularly USA's - dread of militant Islamic fundamentalists. Don't insult our intelligence by pretending otherwise.

But you DID mention gihads (sic) in a later post. A specifically moslem religious duty. And quickly withdrew from wanting to talk about religion. Forgive me if I think you were being disingenuous there...

---

You are forgiven for thinking that I might ever be disingenuous, but then you don't know me yet, and therefore I understand. Occasionally, when I give instructions to my occupational subordinates that may seem to them to be unusual or out of the ordinary, they ask, "Are you sure?" I always respond in the same manner, "I don't say anything unless I am sure--I may be wrong, but I am always sure." So, I will respond to you, now, in the same manner, as I would respond to anyone else whether they agree with me or otherwise. I, (genuinely), have no issue with any specific religion, nor do I take issue with any religion. For all I care, the terrorists of 9/11 may as well have been southern baptists--the religion of the terrorists makes no difference to me, and is not the matter that I have any issue with. Who gives a good cod damn what religion the fuckers were. We might as well be arguing what astrological sign they were, or what hobbies or interest they had, or--Hell, if you want, we can take up Clinton's debate of the meaning of the word "IS"! Airplanes smashing into the side of buildings is not a religious matter, it's an extremist, political activist, terroristic, chicken-shit sucker punch of a matter that killed thousands.

I understand, however, how you might think that I am, "insult(ing) (y)our intelligence by pretending otherwise." Most Americans don't think like I do, but I am not most Americans. I am Me, and I speak for Myself--and I don't pretend shit!

I previously asked, "But how else do you propose that we get information that might save our lives?"

You replied, as anyone else might, "I don't know".

So let's suppose that now YOU (you meaning whomever might be reading this thread) are ultimately responsible for making such decisions, and you are now responsible for the outcome of thousands of innocent individuals, the fate of families, the fate of nations and the fate of a few fuckers that publicly proclaim to hate us and publicly proclaim their intent to kill us. What would you do?

Would you, strategically and politely, ask them to pretty please tell us all about the details of their devious intentions? I don't think so.

You see, it is easy to pretend that we might make the most moral and humane decisions if we were in charge--while we are sitting here on our computers, in our air-conditioned homes, while our BDSM slaves are fixing drinks and preparing our dinners (you know, the whole armchair quarterback theory), but if you REALLY put yourself in the shoes of the fucker in charge, you would probably think a little differently.

Ask me to wear the shoes of the fucker in charge, and I will still say WATER BOARD ON! (Then I will ask myself why I am wearing someone else's shoes!)

I've made my points here already, so I'm not jumping back into the waterboarding issue. But I have to comment about one statement you made.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MMI

Could you compare flying a couple of planes into the WTC with the British/US carpet-bombing of Dresden, or the American bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki? The targets were the same: non-combatants. Yes, I know Britain and America were at war with Germany and Japan at the time of Hiroshima and Dresden. But they were both already defeated by then. If any pother countries had done that, we'd have called them war crimes.

---

Regarding the firebombing of Dresden, and some other German cities, I would probably have to agree with you: it did nothing to end the war sooner, and if we had lost the war, instead of winning, our military leaders would probably have been tried as war criminals. Winners make the history, after all.
But Hiroshima and Nagasaki were something quite different. Although the Japanese military forces had been thoroughly trounced by then, they did not, and would not surrender. We had two options: drop the bomb and scare them into surrender, or invade the home islands and crush them. The problem with the latter is that the Japanese people, not just the military, were preparing to fight to the death to stop us! Dropping the bomb saved thousands of American lives, and probably saved millions of Japanese lives in the long run. In my opinion the US has nothing to apologize for in those instances.

Many of you seem to be staunchly against water boarding, but no one has suggested an a viable or reasonable alternative.

lets see ,sir, hummm, well formulating more "soft" intellegence assets through covert means, on the ground, ie buying people off to spy on each other etc to include the spread of pro american propaganda as well as the development of friendly auxilleries would have to be number one,,
more tech coverage, better aplication of field intellegence to begin with, our ucav's and other spy satcom type of tech is only good if deployed, lol,, yu should really have this conversation with my husband he was an AF resistence training survival instructor (which means he really really knows his torture and phycological manipulation skills)and he would be the first to tell you that u dont have to torture someone at all phisically to break them and or extract wonderful intellegence,
in fact he told me the only reason they water board prisoners is cause its much faster and thats the only thing it is,much more accurete information is extracted through more subtle phycological manipulation, but that takes more time, so basically they water board for the sake of time and money alone,
the info is less accurate, shrugs what can i say:
more over we the USA doesnt ned the bad rep as a country that will torture you if you surender practicality speaking: during desert storm you never hear about us torturing people becuase we didnt have too, they surrendered in droves, we out teched and intelled them,we also had a very good reputation back then
it was garenteed we wouldnt torture u in fact the oppiste was true, we would feed cloth and shelter you, of course by that argument we would have to give all the insurgents welfare lol,
but really sir, if we continue on this path our credibility is shot, we have hardened our enemies against us with each and every step in the direction we have been taking that led up to 911 and recently within the invasion of iraq
, vietnam was a stain on or honnor for a reason,and to ignore the historical parrelles of the two is to court our own folly again
if things dont change this will be a second vietnam or worse, its allready spread into two countries and is being suported through iran and syria if not suadia arabia, i am not saying cut and run, i am saying we need something different and if i knew what it was i would be wearing stars and bars instead of a collar sir , winks and hugs for you and stripey

Quote:

---

Mr Fixit: I previously asked, "But how else do you propose that we get information that might save our lives?"

You replied, as anyone else might, "I don't know".

So let's suppose that now YOU (you meaning whomever might be reading this thread) are ultimately responsible for making such decisions, and you are now responsible for the outcome of thousands of innocent individuals, the fate of families, the fate of nations and the fate of a few fuckers that publicly proclaim to hate us and publicly proclaim their intent to kill us. What would you do?

Would you, strategically and politely, ask them to pretty please tell us all about the details of their devious intentions? I don't think so.

---

First of all, I object to your use of the word "fuckers" in this context. It's perjorative and does you no credit.

So let us now suppose I am in the situation you describe. Would I order someone to be tortured? Well, I would start in the knowledge that torture is illegal and immoral. Am I prepared to break the law and betray my moral standards. I am certain that I would not, unless I was compelled to. What would compel me?

I would have to know (I would accept "high probability" - at least 51% probability, but I would still be hesitant at that level) that there was vital information to be had. By vital I mean significant life or death information. "Significant" is intended to imply (very) many lives at risk.

Now, how many individuals do you suppose are in possession of information about a forthcoming atrocity that would take away so very many lives? Supposing there was such an atrocity pending, how do I tell if the man I am considering putting to the torture actually knows about it? (The key to terrorism is to operate in small cells so that each individual knows only one or two other members, and is aware only of his role in whatever plans are laid at the last possible moment.)

I would have to be virtually certain - say 97%+ that the individual being considered for torture possessed that information.

I would then have to assess what forms of torture would be effective against the intended victim and how much resistance I could expect: would the amount of pain necessary to be inflicted exceed my ability to inflict it? Or would the victim accept painful death rather than part with the information? (Because, if so, waterboarding would be a waste of everyone's time.)

Next, I would have to assess whether the information to be extracted from the "subject" would be reliable. Was I wrong? Does he know nothing, but will give me the information he thinks I want anyway, just to escape the torture? Or does he know everything I want to know, but gives me false information to misdirect me?

And as in all probability, my answers to those questions would be against proceeding with the torture, I am sure I would not give the order in the end.

You ask for a reasonable alternative. There is none. Only ones that are unreasonable and inhuman.

That is, after all, why torture was outlawed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thorne

I've made my points here already, so I'm not jumping back into the waterboarding issue. But I have to comment about one statement you made.

Regarding the firebombing of Dresden, and some other German cities, I would probably have to agree with you: it did nothing to end the war sooner, and if we had lost the war, instead of winning, our military leaders would probably have been tried as war criminals. Winners make the history, after all.
But Hiroshima and Nagasaki were something quite different. Although the Japanese military forces had been thoroughly trounced by then, they did not, and would not surrender. We had two options: drop the bomb and scare them into surrender, or invade the home islands and crush them. The problem with the latter is that the Japanese people, not just the military, were preparing to fight to the death to stop us! Dropping the bomb saved thousands of American lives, and probably saved millions of Japanese lives in the long run. In my opinion the US has nothing to apologize for in those instances.

---

Why cities? Why not military targets?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MMI

Why cities? Why not military targets?

---

Actually, they were military targets. According to Wikipedia, "During World War II, the Second Army and Chugoku Regional Army were headquartered in Hiroshima, and the Army Marine Headquarters was located at Ujina port. The city also had large depots of military supplies, and was a key center for shipping."

And Nagasaki's "main industry was ship-building. This very industry would eventually make it a target in World War II, since many warships used by the Japanese Navy during the war were built in its factories and docks."

However, doing some research on this to determine the kinds of targets, I found some disturbing information. Apparently, Truman's military advisers didn't think dropping the bomb was necessary, that carpet bombing and embargo could have forced a Japanese surrender, especially if the Allies would have backed off of their unconditional surrender stance. It may be that Truman's primary reason for dropping the bombs was to frighten Stalin. I find this quite disturbing.

On the other hand, though, carpet bombing, even with conventional weapons, would probably have resulted in far more casualties, and infrastructure damage, to the Japanese than these two bombs.

This discussion probably should be moved to a separate thread, though, if the moderators agree.

Hi Thorne, this thread drift is fine. I actually find thread drift kind of interesting, but perhaps if you were to start a new thread (under a new heading) it might attract many more people who may be specifically interested in this topic that's evolved? :)

true this thread has a drifting eye,, but then again any debate of this length has a tendency to ebb and flow, i just hope we all remember its a debate, not a pecking on each other in the chicken coop thing lol, hugs to all

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr.FixIt

Many of you seem to be staunchly against water boarding, but no one has suggested an a viable or reasonable alternative.

---

No, I don't have an alternative to this torture.

I think it's all totally barbaric and inhuman.

I mean can you honestly sit there and tell me that you believe that bitch Lindy English and her sadistic cohorts tortured those prisoners for the purpose of: " ...saving my family, my neighbors, my neighborhood, my city...." ?

And, please, don't try to tell that was an unfortunate or isolated incident. Google, Guantanamo Bay or Abu Ghraib and you'll come up with some of the most sicken stories of real life torture you're ever likely to read about. Is it necessary? Or, is it perhaps just a way of venting and acting out some kind of self satisfying revenge?

Oh sure, throw up September 11. I know we're told that torturing of prisoners has only come about in the USA since then, but does this really justify it? Is it really acceptable that while other countries are dealing with a legacy of torture by declaring "Never again!", that so many Americans should quell their guilt by crying "Never before"?

I don't see the need to move the A-bomb digression to another thread. It's probably finished now anyway. I accept Thorne's statement of the facts.

Conventional bombing of cities was routine in WW2, although that wouldn't have had the desired effect in this case. If carpet bombing had been used instead, we would have just had another Dresden - another war crime.

I just feel it was wrong to A-bomb 2 cities when exclusively military targets could have been used.

Look, folks, no one believes that torture is anything less than barbaric, and inhumane. It has been a "tactic" used for centuries. But then, carpet bombing, A-bombing, and embargo (as well as other sanctions) are also cruel and unusual. Starving a whole country till they cave...sounds like MASS torture to me.

So, then it comes down to the question of sacrificing the few to save the many. Right here, in small town Texas, there is a known terrorist sleeper cell. They are located all over the US....and Britain, and Germany, and so on. No one can do a thing, though, until they come out into the open and cause mass harm...unless they slip up and grab the attention of authorities. Maybe one of the sleepers works at the city water dept. Maybe the beef packing plant...or pharmaceutical company.

In a perfect world, we have no need to worry...but this world isn't perfect. i don't trust GWBitch to run a garden hose, much less a country. And i do believe he is ordering and allowing WAY too much. It's his personal vendetta, IMO.

That little cunt English and all of her friends should be placed in a glass box on display, holding a sign that says, "i deserve to be tortured too and humiliated too....but it's too cruel"

i am one who has no idea of how to stop terrorist acts before they get a good start. Apparently, no one else here has a better solution, either. i'm out, have nothing else to say on this topic, and hope that everyone can get past a thread and still treat each other with respect, even with the differing opinions.

Those of you who enjoy debate (arguing)..........****ay on!

...ONE more thing.......denu, i agree with your points, absolutely- But remember, the net was still very new back then. Now, they can broadcast much more than they did back then. Everyone was not informed of the things that happened "off screen" like they are now. However, i do believe that if Stormin Norman had been the general in charge of this crap they call a war (because of GWBitch's declaration without the backing of congress), things might have been handled MUCH differently.

Much love to ya, denu, i don't believe a debate or difference in opinion should cause hard feelings! xoxo

Myself, I love debate. I'll debate things I don't believe in, just for the hell of it. I'm here for the duration.

But I DO believe in what I have said here, and I acknowledge others see things differently. That's why I keep posting: to try to make them see how wrong they are and how right I am. They reply with a similar purpose in mind.

Having said that, I want to address stripedangel's comment about the "known terrorist cell" that the authorities can do nothing about. The reason they can do nothing is, presumably, because, although the cell has an association with illegal organisations, it has not actually done anything wrong yet - at least, so far as anyone knows. To lock the members up because they condone something that is generally unacceptable is a form of thought control, and I don't think anyone is in favour of that.

It seems to me that torturing a suspected sleeper would be counter productive, because the sleeper would have almost nothing to say except he was waiting for orders from his handler, whom he only knows as "Big Al". But Big Al would notice the sleeper had disappeared and would realise the game was up. So he'd vanish to his hideaway and start making fresh plans.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MMI

Myself, I love debate. I'll debate things I don't believe in, just for the hell of it. I'm here for the duration.

But I DO believe in what I have said here, and I acknowledge others see things differently. That's why I keep posting: to try to make them see how wrong they are and how right I am. They reply with a similar purpose in mind.

Having said that, I want to address stripedangel's comment about the "known terrorist cell" that the authorities can do nothing about. The reason they can do nothing is, presumably, because, although the cell has an association with illegal organisations, it has not actually done anything wrong yet - at least, so far as anyone knows. To lock the members up because they condone something that is generally unacceptable is a form of thought control, and I don't think anyone is in favour of that.

It seems to me that torturing a suspected sleeper would be counter productive, because the sleeper would have almost nothing to say except he was waiting for orders from his handler, whom he only knows as "Big Al". But Big Al would notice the sleeper had disappeared and would realise the game was up. So he'd vanish to his hideaway and start making fresh plans.

---

LOL dangit, MMI, now i gotta reply!!!

No one knows what/when they will make a move-which is why no one can do a thing...but in the meantime, they are able to slide by under the law's radar and learn our systems, our ways, and blend in quite well. In the USA, we accept aliens and i (believe it or not) don't believe in being prejudiced about it all- everyone deserves their shot.

My experiences with most folks of middle eastern heritage has been bad...with the exception of a family from India, who i met while on a trip to Dallas. These people were absolutely wonderful to me and my son. They treated us like family, even though they knew us for a whole 20 minutes. We were welcomed with hugs the minute the door opened to us, given all sorts of treats and the family matriarch stroked my son's face and told him that she hoped he would never forget her. She fed him multiple times-"here, try this," and "oh, you'll like that" He won't forget her. Smiles and peace filled their house, which was also very lovely. i could have stayed in that house forever, and been so very happy. The matriarch told us to come back and visit any time we wish, and if we ever need anything at all, please, to let them know, "we're all family on this earth ."

i can't say that any American-born citizen has ever treated me quite so well. I wish the whole world behave in such a manner. i hate war. i hate wondering if i'm going to wake up tomorrow to the radio telling me that we are under attack, like i did on 9/11, or hear that we're all gonna die because some chicken turd has spiked our water supply three days ago. And i wish i knew what to do to prevent it all.

MMI, i fully understand your position and support it, just like i support and understand Master's opinion. Trying to change someone's mind about such things will take much more than words. Everyone's experiences create their opinions. Master has a Government Job, and He sees, almost on a daily basis, some of the evidence and intel that you and i don't. Right or wrong, His opinion is not just based upon what He THINKS might be happening.

This is absolutely my last post in this thread-i really do hate to argue...no, really!

It's a shame you are withdrawing. If it's not because they haven't broken any laws, I'd like to know what your Master thinks the reason is for not rounding up those cell members.

Let me reassure you, Americans as individuals are considered as hospitable as any other national.

well it seems like we have really said just about all we can say about some topics, yet we keep chugging away dont we,lol i believe we are all here posting becuz we care about this subject, i personally love to debate different issues, heck i will even play devils advocate for the sake of debate, you are all a really nice bunch of people here, and i respect you and your beliefs, your statments and most of all your veracity, i am sad to hear that some of you feel negativly about certian types of people, i myself was born in beruit and am of mixed racial heritage so i am no stranger to discrimination paticularly post 911, but my father was an american marine and pow so ive allways lived on both sides of the divide so to speak,,
there was a study done about prison gaurds done back in the 70's if i remember correctly which found that even people chosen at random weather they were assigned a position as a gaurd or a prisoner: all began to behave along certian stereotypes after a specific time period up to and including prisoner abuse which ultimately led to the experiments end
could it be a natural inclination or human phycological function to mis treat those captured that are considered enemy?
i think we in the bdsm comunity would tend to disagree vehmemently with such a proposal,(outside of histories prevelant examples )where as our own personal ethics are in consideration
but we are of course much more experienced with the paticulars of dealing with a person under ones power so to speak

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MMI

It's a shame you are withdrawing. If it's not because they haven't broken any laws, I'd like to know what your Master thinks the reason is for not rounding up those cell members.

Let me reassure you, Americans as individuals are considered as hospitable as any other national.

---

As requested MMI...

In WWII, after the bombing of Pearl Harbor, the US Government rounded up all of the Japs (as they were referred to at the time) and put them in prision camps (similar to Hitler's concentration camps) where hundreds of thousands were mistreated through unheard of interrogation tactics--probably water boarding too--but chicken noodle news (CNN) wasn't there to report their (unbiased?) opinion on it, were they? Only now, decades later, has the true story of the mistreatment of these legally immigrated Japanese-American Citizens leaked out. And to my knowledge, correct me if I am wrong, no super secret intel was gathered from the captivity and torture of any of those Japs. At this same same point in the US history, we still, even long after Lincoln's Emancipation Proclomation and the US Civil War, were mistreating African-Americans simply because of their skin color (and they didn't even attack us!) And, I could go on and on about the genocide that we inflicted on the American Natives (Indians)! Or we could talk about the burning of innocent women and men during the Salem witch trials. We're not the good guys, we have a horrible history. If I have left out any religion or nationality that has been historically mistreated by my government, I assure you it was simply an oversight.

Now that this dark era in American history is general public knowledge due to the freedom of the media (and their abuse of that freedom), and through our own history of atrocious mistreatment of numerous groups of people, surely our government knows that public knowledge of such attrocities would not fare well in the media. So, the prisoners at Abu Ghraib (and other camps as well) were fed food appropriate to their religions, allowed the freedom to practice their individual religions within reason, and were within reason officially treated with dignity and respect. But, all it took was for a couple of ignorant backwoods fuckers (yes fuckers, just as I referred to the 9/11 terrorists in a previous post as fuckers) to fuck it all up and ruin the reputation of our well intentioned government. Now the whole water boarding thing is public knowledge too. To my knowledge, we haven't water boarded thousands of suspects randomly as some here have suggested. Surely this type of tactic has been reserved for a specific few that, based on credible intel, have implicated that use of such an extreme tactic would prove beneficial to uncover further life saving credible intel. If my certainties are wrong, then I lay down my entire argument, and the latest reality show "Water Boarding for Intel" should be cancelled before the pilot even airs!

I work for the US Government in a security occupation, If I tell you who I work for they will have to kill me! :) The actions that we take on a daily basis are specifically related to the intel that we are provided. But the public is, and should be for national security reasons, ignorant of most of said intel. Therefore, the public assumes that our security processes are ignorant because of their lack of knowlege about the rationale. I can only assume, based on my specific experiences, that the same applies to our lack of understanding in the water boarding debate and the consequential public outcry.

Based on American history, what do you think would happen if we started rounding up sleeper cells--no matter what wonderful, humane, and comfortable living accomodations might be intended--for the purpose of imprisionment? At this point, how well do you think that it would go for the popularity of the US Government in this politically correct atmosphere that we have forced upon ourselves? Not to mention--it's an election year with a lame duck president in the driver's chair. And as anyone who has served a day in the military knows, nothing goes well in an election year! As you requested, that (IMHO) is why we are not currently rounding up the known sleeper cell members.

lmao, sweet post Mr Fix It,,my owner and i paticularly loved the chicken noodle news parody,is it possible that sleeper cells are allowed to continue as an intellegence resorce? like we watch who and what they do to lead us to other cells etc?

Also not to be confused,, i personally am against torture for any reasons( but hey i am a girl with a pow dad), my owner however says torture is a grey area in practical aplications especially on the battle field,
the whole water boarding issue (which my owner says is preformed for training purposes on our some types of our own troops like combat controllers and other wet work spe******ts) sounds like something the cia would do with spys and the like without anyones sensibilities getting in an up roar like under the table ,
He and I personally believe that between the White House especially the VP and his former boss Sec Def rumsfield, that the iraq issue was broached because both chenny and he wanted to invade the first time and got shot down by bush sr,
the use of water boarding was probably presented by the cia too the military and for reasons of cost and expediency (as i allready mentioned in a previous post) it was utilized as one of the most humane ways to extract intell, at least my owner says it is,, the other cheap way is to expose them to extreme cold tempuratures for short periods of time (which according to hubby we do to our own troops in basic survival resistence training to show them how easy it is to be broken)
after limited sleep deprivation, suposably if the body reaches a certian tempurature in the right conditions a person will do practically anything to get warm including betraying their "fucker" buddies, shrugs, go figure its a basic human response to be warm allmost as basic as breathing , and of course for legality reasons gitmo is a lot cheaper and closer than shiping the people off to alaska in the winter

i sure wish in some ways that some things were more like they were in the fifties or earlier as regards my knowledge as a public citizan of the things my government does, weather its genuinly on my behalf or to push some other agenda, but the world is what it is, we shape it by our actions today, i only hope we do a better job for our posterity than the baby boomer generation apears to be doing for us

i kinow it sounds like i am flipping my position but i am not, i really wish we didnt do some of the things we do, it seems weve lost our honor recently in this country for the sake of what? even higher gas prices? some people think we should nuke em all and be done with it but thats just crazy talk, personally i think we should choose our responses to terrorists with more care, i am sure some military statagos must have warned our leadership of the problems associated with trying to track down an enemey that has no single country and wears no uniform etc,, i just think the politicians over ruled that advice so they could say they acted they did something during thier watch , which of course means they are more electable, but hey isnt a politician just another kind of "fucker"