Letter in My Local Paper

[GiovanniC]

It's easy to construct a hypothetical case where only a fraud wouldn't endorse the use of torture.

Assume, for instance, that your toddler is kidnapped by a sadist proven to be a serial killer by DNA evidence. He has in his possession at the time of his capture a package addressed to you demanding that he be paid off and containing your child's toe. He refuses to say where he's buried your child alive.

You'd want him tortured, of course, if it seemed to hold more promise of saving your child than any milder interrogation. So the fact is we all endorse torture. Frauds might say otherwise, but we all know that in the event how we'd act. So the real question, the one the liberal press avoids in order to cheapshot the current president, is when torture should be used.

<snip>

What motivates subjects to talk are the desire to please and their egos. The homicidal religious loonies and torturing filth at Gitmo want, when the hope of release is gone, to suck up to "good cop" and/or to show off that they know something important.

That's how it is in the real world where the false posturing of the hypocritical cheapshot press must necessarily be responded to with bland hypocrisy by decent people. How sad for America. If the media win the next election, tell your children not to go into any tall buildings.


I love how these morons use examples like these... a sadistic murdering psychopath has your child buried alive and the only way to save your kid is to torture him. They then try to equate that to agents of the United States using unmuzzled dogs on naked prisoners, raping children in front of their parents, attaching electrodes to genitals -- all this on people that the International Red Cross said were mostly all innocent! How does that compare to torturing a murderous, sadistic psychopath (proven to be a serial killer with DNA evidence), anyway?

[Kid_A]

1. "Homicidal religious loonies and torturing filth at Gitmo"

Who is he talking about there?

[tjwash]

11. Yeah the lines are a little blurred are they not?

nt

[MASSAFRA]

2. Scenario

is right out of Dirty Harry. Clint Eastwood steps on the suspects shot leg to find the girl he kidnapped. I enjoyed it in the movie but reality is another story. How often does this situation come up.

The government should be better then the dark nature of our souls and uphold the human dignity of all people. How many innocent people would he like to torture or kill to get to the guilty person.

[Toucano]

9. Plus

This is a strange part of the argument but here it goes...

There's no evidence that the torture of Iraqi's SAVED anyone's LIFE, stopped anyone from MAKING a ROADSIDE bomb, or lead to the capture of any terrorists!

So, to complete the author's scenario in an analogous fashion...

You torture the serial killer... and your child dies anyway. Super! Well played.

[ThomWV]

12. Actually Its Even Worse Than That

The real ending to be analogous is ...

You torture the serial killer, your child dies anyway, and then it turns out that the serial killer didn't have anything to do with the kidnaping and may have actually been in pursuit of the real kidnappers at the time of his arrest.

[Toucano]

13. Thanks ThomWV!

That completes it right!

:yourock:

[JHB]

10. Really Dirty Harry

Like many Republicans, Harry conveniently forgot an inconvenient fact: in his case, that he'd already written her off as dead.

The things you can get away with when you control the Script!

[NoPasaran]

3. But the actual scenario

Is that instead of capturing the homicidal sadist the cops istead went to the "bad part of town" and hauled in a bunch of suspects who might be murderers themselves but also might be people who just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. What good does torturing them do?

[kat21]

6. My thoughts exactly!

[Justice]

4. Copied Example From Alan Dershowitz

This was his example, when he said sometimes torture is okay.

It is sickening and ludicrous to offer this example and expect that people will say - okay, I get it when you consider that in Iraq, children were tortured in front of their parents in order to get their parents to speak up.

[GAspnes]

5. simple oversight

The letter-writer forgot to mention that there are two people in captivity, identical twins (hence, identical DNA, appearance and handwriting). One of them was seen miles away at the time of the abduction.

The question is, which one do you torture, or do you torture both? One of them is totally innocent, remember.

[Toucano]

7. Cheap shot?

Why do these people think every logical, well-reasoned, rational criticism of George W. Bush is a "cheap shot"?

They defend him as if he's a mentally handicapped person being harrassed by a group of teenagers.

How about that threat? "Don't go into any tall buildings." Maybe that should warrant a visit from Homeland Security.

[GiovanniC]

8. You're Right

Bush isn't being harrassed by a group of teenagers.