It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

is torture acceptable?

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 03:15 AM
link   
I have still never seen where the Milk and Cookies approach will work but I do have a plan.
First we devlope a drug that will make anyone tell the truth. Maybe this would just be fiction but what if it could be done, and would it not stop any other torture.
Next we devlope a gas that will render a whole city helpless and kidnapp the bad guys. This way even if some died from reactions and such it would still be better than killing half a city to get to one guy.
I think before everyone speaks against things they should understand why things are done and come up with something better.



CX

posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 03:25 AM
link   
I agree with the "no torture is acceptable" comments, but i'd be interested to hear peoples opinions on what are acceptable methods of getting information from known terrorists?

Also, where would the line stop for your view that torture is unacceptable?

I thought about this question the other night whilst listening to one of the ATS podcasts, the one where either Springer or SO says that in thier opinion there is no excuse for torture. They stated that if it was a case of they would have to die unless someone was tortured, then they'd probably have to die.

Scenario: You have known terrorist, not just a suspect, a KNOWN terrorrist who is withholding information that unless given, will cause the deaths of thousands of people. Maybe the deaths of loads of your close friends. Sorry for being so personal but what if there was a direct threat to your wife and kids? What would you accept in order to save the ones you loved?

It's ok saying that anyone that accepts torture of any kind should go live in places like N. Korea, but think about the above scenario and re-evalutate what you'd turn a blind eye to.

CX.


[edit on 20/10/06 by CX]



posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 03:45 AM
link   
People are not looking at the reallity of the issue to solve it they just hate Bush and it is blinding so many people now that no one is thinking beyond that.



posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 04:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Let me give you a historical example to refute that notion of "civilized," k?
The Roman Empire was the most "CIVILIZED" empire/nation/country at that time and because they played by the rules of "civilized countries should set the standards for others," they were ultimately defeated and/or overcome and overrun by UNCIVILIZED barbarian tribes. Do you know what followed the fall of the Roman Empire? Europes 'Dark Ages'.


The Roman Republic was civilized, the Empire was not. The Rome fell because of decadence, internal conflict and bloody civil wars. Barbarians only finished them off. Oh, and the Dark Ages was the product of Roman Catholic Church.

As for torture Seekerof, maybe you would quickly change your mind when someone would waterboard you a little. I think this method is now considered legal and is not classified as torture technique.


[edit on 20-10-2006 by yanchek]



posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 04:48 AM
link   
the only torture that should exist is jessica alba torturing me. . .

yeah.



posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 06:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lysergic
the only torture that should exist is jessica alba torturing me. . .

yeah.





Mmmmmmmm, Jessica.



posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 07:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by stanstheman

Originally posted by Strangerous



The BBC? You're kidding right? In the world? Please tell me you're pulling my leg! Ohhh I get it, you were using that ol' English wit to be absurd!


Name one then! Be very interested in your views and reasons.


Well since I've started "fishing" for my news, and by that I mean checking out the internet, different sites, following threads etc, I have learned that most of the MSM including cable news is shallow and untimely. Unfortuately in order to be well informed you have to work for information. Things I read on the internet are usually broadcast on cable news days or weeks later. I do watch some cable news but I find Fox to be the most shallow of the shallow and for the most part the anchors on CNN are surly know-it-alls with superiority complexes. So I cannot name one, I can't name any. If I want to know what's going on in the world I have to go find it.


So you agree there isn't a more respected broadcast network on the planet than the BBC?



posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 07:18 AM
link   
Seeeker, the mistake you are making is the one many make, they think these laws on torture etc. apply only to terrorists, well they dont ,they are applied to the whole population of American and anyone who enters the country. We know from past history that laws are frequently abused by those who enforce them. I dont know how many times I've heard people tell me, if your not guilty of anything you have nothing to worry about. Well how many innocent people have ended up in prison or dead because of mistakes or abuses of law enforcers.

Just think of the Guilford 4 and the Birmingham 6 imprisoned for years and have been found not guilty of commiting any crime. If you now applied these laws to this group of people, they would have been tortured, to admit they did wrong when they did not. I hope you are never on the receiving end of such treatment, but the way things are going in Nazi America one cannot be so sure.

And whats happened to all the technology for spying on people, thats all defunct now is it. Is it going to just be a case of your accused by your neighbour of sedition or on a demonstration etc. then your arrested and tortured to find out if your a terrorist or plotting against the goverment. Due you think you can trust or rely on law enforcers to stay within the law, no I dont think so.



posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 07:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Strangerous

Originally posted by stanstheman

Originally posted by Strangerous



The BBC? You're kidding right? In the world? Please tell me you're pulling my leg! Ohhh I get it, you were using that ol' English wit to be absurd!


Name one then! Be very interested in your views and reasons.


Well since I've started "fishing" for my news, and by that I mean checking out the internet, different sites, following threads etc, I have learned that most of the MSM including cable news is shallow and untimely. Unfortuately in order to be well informed you have to work for information. Things I read on the internet are usually broadcast on cable news days or weeks later. I do watch some cable news but I find Fox to be the most shallow of the shallow and for the most part the anchors on CNN are surly know-it-alls with superiority complexes. So I cannot name one, I can't name any. If I want to know what's going on in the world I have to go find it.


So you agree there isn't a more respected broadcast network on the planet than the BBC?


No I don't, the BBC is a bunch a leftist snobs who couldn't get work at "The Guardian". I didn't mention them in my last post because I never watch them.



posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 07:52 AM
link   
Well, if we are against the torture there must be alternatives



posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 09:28 AM
link   
Oh come on mate, we're talking about terror suspects, meaning if you have an anti-bush picture on your website you can get tortured? Get it!? It's not just Confirmed terrorists, but any SUSPECTS of terrorism.

If it IS a confirmed terrorist, then yeah you can torture him to get out information. As long as it isn't choking them on oil or zapping them then it should be fine, and just because they do it, dosn't mean we have to.



posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 10:35 AM
link   
yes, torture of corrupt government,police, and military people is acceptable.


DCP

posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 11:48 AM
link   
ferretman2, great post. i would like to add is jail torture? Being in a little room not allowed outside when i want. I would say that would be torture.

How about not letting muslim practice their religion, is that torture? Is taking away something somebody loves/likes/think they need is that torture. If not letting a Muslim practice their religion is torture to the Muslim. Then would locking up a pedophile and not letting him have sex with little kids wouldn't that be torture to the pedophile? How about locking up a drug user and not letting him use drugs. Isn't that torture to the druggie. My point is torture is as torture does, anything and everything is torute if it's happening to you.



posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 02:59 PM
link   
DCP Thanks......

Only noone will bother answering any of the questions I posed.

What constitues torture?



posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 03:14 PM
link   
What, if any, are alternatives to "extracting information" from a terorrist other than what the people constitute as torture?
Is that even the issue here or is it the fact a suspected terrorist could turn out to be innocent person? But then, what about confirmed "terorrists"?


This is like Greenpeace activists complaining about nuclear power, without

1: Offering a solution that is cheaper, less harmful and as efficient in the same aspects
2: Doing it without bull#ting
3: Actually knowing an alternative



posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 05:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by ferretman2
DCP Thanks......

Only noone will bother answering any of the questions I posed.

What constitues torture?


Pain or discomfort intentionally administered to an unwilling recipent for the express purpose of obtaining covert information.

How's that?

:edit: changed expressed to express

[edit on 20-10-2006 by nextguyinline]



posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 07:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by ferretman2
What constitues torture?


Lol!…no one is going to answer this in any detail…there might end-up actually being a difference!

No…it is far, far easier to consistently complain, claim conviction and periodically yell “look see!”…rather than opt for spending any time seeking or working on clarity toward a solution…
...of course the knee jerk, tired, expected answer is do not torture at all which could include: tickling ones feet, reading their credit report out loud or forcing one to eat black jelly-beans!….OH!, where's the humanity!!!!

mg



posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 07:10 PM
link   
Untill I know the circumstances and the method of torture intended I'll reserve judgement. There are situations where I believe in the use of torture, but, those situations are few and far between. I think some of the definitions of torture that I have seen here are completely off the wall. Petty harassment and embarassment is not torture. Some time if you want the real definition of torture I'll introduce you to a friend of mine who survived the Bataan Death March. You can tell him your definition of torture.



posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 07:15 PM
link   
Torture is only a version of revenge and debasement. Chemicals can get you all the intel you need. Torture has NO place in this world. Ineffective(I'll tell you I had sex with Carrol Channing with enough torture) and only self serving(revenge). BOOYAH!



posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 07:55 PM
link   
No, torture is never acceptable, rgardless of what information
they may or not have.

However, I am for, well getting the hammered, high and in a
sexual state of arousal, where they tell you the truth.


That's hardly torture, in fact that sounds like fun to me.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join