| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
 Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2009 8:45 am Post subject: Should Christian terrorists get enhanced interrogation? |
 |
|
(The news item is in dark font, followed by the blogger's commentary.)
| Quote: |
The man charged with murdering a high-profile abortion doctor claimed from his jail cell Sunday that similar violence was planned around the nation for as long as the procedure remained legal, a threat that comes days after a federal investigation launched into his possible accomplices.
A Justice Department spokesman said the threat was being taken seriously and additional protection had been ordered for abortion clinics last week. But a leader of the anti-abortion movement derided the accused shooter as �a fruit and a lunatic.�
Scott Roeder called The Associated Press from the Sedgwick County jail, where he�s being held on charges of first-degree murder and aggravated assault in the shooting of Dr. George Tiller one week ago.
�I know there are many other similar events planned around the country as long as abortion remains legal,� Roeder said. When asked by the AP what he meant and if he was referring to another shooting, he refused to elaborate further.
Since there is no doubt that we have a history of anti-abortion domestic terrorism, and since we know that evangelicals already support torture for everyone, when do we get to start waterboarding this guy? Does he have any children whose *beep* can be crushed? Will we keep him up for weeks on end in stress positions in extremely cold rooms to get him to break? Beat him? All the right made a very good show of how shocked and appalled they were when this man killed Dr. Tiller, so surely they will not object. So when do we get to start torturing this guy?
And of course, the answer should be �NEVER.� Torture is wrong. Torture is immoral. Torture is evil. Torture is illegal. Torture does more violence to our values than it does to the individual being tortured. Torture is unreliable. Torture is counter-productive- everything someone says after being tortured should be treated as suspect.
Just do your job and investigate. No need to become as bad as the criminal.
|
Obviuosly, the question in my thread title is rhetorical. Still, though, sauce for the goose...
link |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2009 3:05 pm Post subject: Re: Should Christian terrorists get enhanced interrogation? |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
(The news item is in dark font, followed by the blogger's commentary.)
| Quote: |
The man charged with murdering a high-profile abortion doctor claimed from his jail cell Sunday that similar violence was planned around the nation for as long as the procedure remained legal, a threat that comes days after a federal investigation launched into his possible accomplices.
A Justice Department spokesman said the threat was being taken seriously and additional protection had been ordered for abortion clinics last week. But a leader of the anti-abortion movement derided the accused shooter as �a fruit and a lunatic.�
Scott Roeder called The Associated Press from the Sedgwick County jail, where he�s being held on charges of first-degree murder and aggravated assault in the shooting of Dr. George Tiller one week ago.
�I know there are many other similar events planned around the country as long as abortion remains legal,� Roeder said. When asked by the AP what he meant and if he was referring to another shooting, he refused to elaborate further.
Since there is no doubt that we have a history of anti-abortion domestic terrorism, and since we know that evangelicals already support torture for everyone, when do we get to start waterboarding this guy? Does he have any children whose *beep* can be crushed? Will we keep him up for weeks on end in stress positions in extremely cold rooms to get him to break? Beat him? All the right made a very good show of how shocked and appalled they were when this man killed Dr. Tiller, so surely they will not object. So when do we get to start torturing this guy?
And of course, the answer should be �NEVER.� Torture is wrong. Torture is immoral. Torture is evil. Torture is illegal. Torture does more violence to our values than it does to the individual being tortured. Torture is unreliable. Torture is counter-productive- everything someone says after being tortured should be treated as suspect.
Just do your job and investigate. No need to become as bad as the criminal.
|
Obviuosly, the question in my thread title is rhetorical. Still, though, sauce for the goose...
link |
Sauce for the goose? You've got someone stating that "evangelicals support torture" without a shred of proof. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2009 3:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| You've got someone stating that "evangelicals support torture" without a shred of proof. |
Well, regardless of whether the supporters of torture are evangelicals or not, the queston still stands...
If you think it is justifiable to use "enhanced interrogation techniques" against Al Qaeda and other Muslim terrorists, do you also think the same techniques should be applied to anti-abortion terrorists? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2009 3:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
And just to clarify...
| Quote: |
| Sauce for the goose? You've got someone stating that "evangelicals support torture" without a shred of proof. |
In my use of the maxim, "the goose" was meant to symbolize Muslim terrorists, and "the gander" was meant to represent anti-abortion terrorists. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sergio Stefanuto
Joined: 14 May 2009
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2009 3:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Should Christian terrorists get enhanced interrogation?
|
Sure, why not? Sounds rather fun |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yawarakaijin
Joined: 08 Aug 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2009 6:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It is a very intereting question. Urban is simply trying to deflect because I suspect he doesn't like what he is seeing in the mirror perhaps.
First of all I think we need to clarify what is and isn't a terrorist. I think any normally fucntioning human with an I.Q above 20 can understand that the religion of the perp alone shouldn't be the determining factor in identifying a terrorist.
In my mind, a terrorist is simply an indivual with intentions on harming innocent civilians in order to push a cause or gain some kind of retribution for perceived injustices against him or his kin.
The question is a great one because it glaringly exposes the hypocrisy and discrimination that goes along with the use of "enhanced interrogations."
It clearly demonstrates the attitude that only "those goddamned sand ni**ers" are eligible for enhanced interrogations in the first place because of what they did to the US on 9-11. It clearly puts the muslim terrorist in a class different from all others.
If we are to break it down to an even more immediate level void of all those t.v drama driven scenarios regarding torturing someone to stop an imminent nuclear attack, the question even more deftly highlights the absurdity of the situation
Situation A: A run of the mill Iraqi insurgent with zeo ties to Al-qaeda has possible information on a small attack about to be carried out on American soldiers in Iraq. It is known that his group doesn't have the means to carry out anything extraordinary but could manage to kill a few Americans in a single attack. Are enhanced interrogation techniques warranted? Huuu RAhhh! USA! USA! Goddamn that situation needs some enhanced interrogation!
Situation B: A "christian" religious extremist is in custody for a murder committed against an abortion doctor in the US, an american citizen. In the coarse of questioning it becomes known that he is just one of a group of 7 or 8 religious wackos who plan on killing more abortion doctors in the summer. Is he waterboarded? No. We are Americans and no matter how perverse his ideology may be, we are a country of laws and rights.
Aren't these American doctors afforded the same level of protection from their government as others? Are American citizens only afforded the full protection of the US government if they are going to be killed by an Arab terrorist? How is this possibly justified?
"Well Mr. Doctor, the group that has decided to kill you really hasn't caused us too many problems in the past so you are on your own. Besides, c'mon it's a christian group."
Face it people. Only dirty Arabs and towelheads get waterboarded. USA! USA! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chris2007
Joined: 20 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2009 7:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Its really a stretch to compare the two groups. The Muslim terrorists killed at least 3000 in one day - and they would gladly kill thousands more, including abortion doctors, if given the chance. But there have been what, 5 abortion doctors killed in the last 36 years by a few random wackos. Probably not a fair comparison. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ManintheMiddle
Joined: 20 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2009 8:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
OTOH:
While I plainly understand your need for consistency in application of the law your comparison lacks any real sense of proportionality. To equate what an anti-abortionist does with what a terrorist organization does is disingenuous at best. Methinks your oft-declared atheism is getting the best of you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yawarakaijin
Joined: 08 Aug 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2009 8:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Still looks like no one is willing to answer the question put forth in the op.
If it is ok to torture to stop a terrorist attack from one group of people why isn't it ok to use it to stop an attack from another?
The op was not equating christian terrorist to muslim ones. Would it matter anyway if he were? Does the kind of terrorist planning to carry out the attack matter? Do we only torture the successful terrorists ( the ones that kill a lot of us ) in order to put an end to their operations while treating others ( ones who don't kill us as often ) more leniently? Retarded. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shifter2009
Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Location: wisconsin
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2009 8:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"I know there are many other similar events planned around the country as long as abortion remains legal," Roeder said. He would not elaborate.
Well, he says there are more attacks on the way, I say its time to bust out the water board. Isn't this similar to the "ticking bomb scenario"? Peoples lives could be at stake here people, we need that info to save them.
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20090607/D98M30JG1.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2009 9:05 pm Post subject: Re: Should Christian terrorists get enhanced interrogation? |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Sauce for the goose? You've got someone stating that "evangelicals support torture" without a shred of proof. |
Right, just like when you said there was not a "shred of proof" that the killer was anti-abortion.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lithium
Joined: 18 Jun 2008
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2009 10:03 pm Post subject: Re: Should Christian terrorists get enhanced interrogation? |
|
|
[quote="On the other hand"](The news item is in dark font, followed by the blogger's commentary.)
| Quote: |
The man charged with murdering a high-profile abortion doctor claimed from his jail cell Sunday that similar violence was planned around the nation for as long as the procedure remained legal, a threat that comes days after a federal investigation launched into his possible accomplices.
A Justice Department spokesman said the threat was being taken seriously and additional protection had been ordered for abortion clinics last week. But a leader of the anti-abortion movement derided the accused shooter as �a fruit and a lunatic.�
Scott Roeder called The Associated Press from the Sedgwick County jail, where he�s being held on charges of first-degree murder and aggravated assault in the shooting of Dr. George Tiller one week ago.
�I know there are many other similar events planned around the country as long as abortion remains legal,� Roeder said. When asked by the AP what he meant and if he was referring to another shooting, he refused to elaborate further.
Since there is no doubt that we have a history of anti-abortion domestic terrorism, and since we know that evangelicals already support torture for everyone, when do we get to start waterboarding this guy? Does he have any children whose *beep* can be crushed? Will we keep him up for weeks on end in stress positions in extremely cold rooms to get him to break? Beat him? All the right made a very good show of how shocked and appalled they were when this man killed Dr. Tiller, so surely they will not object. So when do we get to start torturing this guy?
And of course, the answer should be �NEVER.� Torture is wrong. Torture is immoral. Torture is evil. Torture is illegal. Torture does more violence to our values than it does to the individual being tortured. Torture is unreliable. Torture is counter-productive- everything someone says after being tortured should be treated as suspect.
Just do your job and investigate. No need to become as bad as the criminal.
|
Obviuosly, the question in my thread title is rhetorical. Still, though, sauce for the goose...
link[/quot
Murder is not a Christian belief. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2009 10:13 pm Post subject: Re: Should Christian terrorists get enhanced interrogation? |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Sauce for the goose? You've got someone stating that "evangelicals support torture" without a shred of proof. |
Right, just like when you said there was not a "shred of proof" that the killer was anti-abortion.
|
Anti-abortion groups are distancing themselves from the killer. They've called him a lunatic.
And anti-abortion does not equate to murder of abortion providing doctors. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2009 10:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| yawarakaijin wrote: |
It is a very intereting question. Urban is simply trying to deflect because I suspect he doesn't like what he is seeing in the mirror perhaps.
! |
Kindly keep your amateur armchair psychology to yourself.
Thank you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2009 10:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
And just to clarify...
| Quote: |
| Sauce for the goose? You've got someone stating that "evangelicals support torture" without a shred of proof. |
In my use of the maxim, "the goose" was meant to symbolize Muslim terrorists, and "the gander" was meant to represent anti-abortion terrorists. |
You've missed my point. The blogger said that "evangelicals support torture". In the absence of another qualifier such as "some" or "many" it is generally assumed that this either means '"all" or at least a majority of evangelicals support torture. Why? Because if it were only a minority of evangelicals that supported torture, then it would be a silly thing to take a minority view as the view of said group.
And he provided no proof for this statement. So before answering the question...one should be sure that the question is legit.
As it stands it seems like this is a variant of the question "Have you stopped beating your wife?" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
