Yeah Karl, they confessed to plots which were supposed to have happened before they were arrested (oh, and the tower he said was to be blown up, was the Liberty Tower. You may say it was a lisp, or something, except that the closeness of those words doesn't exisist in Arabic.
The hypothetical was introduced by Scalia, who averred that a plot, scripted to be foiled, was foiled, and therefore the use of torture is justified.
There aren't, despite the special pleadings of those who are at risk of being tried for war crimes (not in this administration, but like murder, there is no limit to the time at which charges can be brought) any cases which point to derailed plots.
We hear of them, but we hear of them as, "We prevented it." Well, absent real details (which are.... gee whillikers, not provided) it's all smoke and mirrors.
If you are willing to have it done to yourself, or your loved ones, if they are suspected/accused, then, just maybe, you have a morally defensible (though disgusting) position.
But unless you think that, you are talking out your hat.
You say I insult your intelligence, and that you don't take such lightly.
Well your posistions, bad faith arguing, appeals to authority, demands to prove negatives, and the like, inult mine.
Your calling me a fool and a liar insult me personally.
I take those more graciously than I, perahaps should. You don't like my hobby horses, fine... come up with real evidence. Something more credible than the testimony of people with their ass on the line; and a reason to actually lie.
Show me cases where we have more evidence of the plot than a confession gained from torture (who was arrested for the various things which were foiled? What, no one? They managed to prevent them just from getting a confession, from a guy in prison; who wasn't in contact with the other conspirators? Maybe it wasn't a real plot at all... just saying).
But you haven't. You've made appeals to emotion. Said it must work because someone said so. Discounted all the people who say, from experience, that it doesn't.
Hundreds of years of people (no small number of whom had reasons to want it to work) saying it doesn't.
But you say.... "this small handful of people agree with me, so you must be wrong".
Well, no. That some people (even with degrees in disciplines that relate) say evolution is bunk, doesn't mean it is. It means they think so.
They are wrong.
And on this, no matter how insulted you are to hear it... you too are wrong.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: Also shocking...
Date: 2007-06-21 05:56 am (UTC)The hypothetical was introduced by Scalia, who averred that a plot, scripted to be foiled, was foiled, and therefore the use of torture is justified.
There aren't, despite the special pleadings of those who are at risk of being tried for war crimes (not in this administration, but like murder, there is no limit to the time at which charges can be brought) any cases which point to derailed plots.
We hear of them, but we hear of them as, "We prevented it." Well, absent real details (which are.... gee whillikers, not provided) it's all smoke and mirrors.
If you are willing to have it done to yourself, or your loved ones, if they are suspected/accused, then, just maybe, you have a morally defensible (though disgusting) position.
But unless you think that, you are talking out your hat.
You say I insult your intelligence, and that you don't take such lightly.
Well your posistions, bad faith arguing, appeals to authority, demands to prove negatives, and the like, inult mine.
Your calling me a fool and a liar insult me personally.
I take those more graciously than I, perahaps should. You don't like my hobby horses, fine... come up with real evidence. Something more credible than the testimony of people with their ass on the line; and a reason to actually lie.
Show me cases where we have more evidence of the plot than a confession gained from torture (who was arrested for the various things which were foiled? What, no one? They managed to prevent them just from getting a confession, from a guy in prison; who wasn't in contact with the other conspirators? Maybe it wasn't a real plot at all... just saying).
But you haven't. You've made appeals to emotion. Said it must work because someone said so. Discounted all the people who say, from experience, that it doesn't.
Hundreds of years of people (no small number of whom had reasons to want it to work) saying it doesn't.
But you say.... "this small handful of people agree with me, so you must be wrong".
Well, no. That some people (even with degrees in disciplines that relate) say evolution is bunk, doesn't mean it is. It means they think so.
They are wrong.
And on this, no matter how insulted you are to hear it... you too are wrong.
TK