Volunteering and having a safe word changes everything. There are a whole host of things people pay dominatrixes to do which would be considered by just about everyone to be legit torture if it was done by foreign intelligence on our troops but is considered enjoyable by participants because they’ve volunteered and have a safe word, e.g. electroshock on the nuts.
If Hitchens enjoys getting dicked by the largest dude he can find in his spare time, does that make it an acceptable interrogation technique?
Just got back from a little vacation, so I missed all the fun.
Anyway I have listened to an expert on the subject who said that it is a myth that the information you get from interrogation is faulty. It is actually quite accurate.
When interrogating people, they use some information they already have, letting them know they know something. Also they know that if they are giving faulty information, the interrogation will start again. This causes them to be quite forthcoming.
And please, if it has any political connection whatsoever, do not get the information from wikipedia. It is best to use as a source to find other sources. And sometimes those other sources are simply political groups with an agenda that should be discounted.
[quote]entheogens wrote:
Moriarty wrote:
If what someone gives you is only 5% truth in an interrogation, that can produce a motherload of actionable intelligence in conjunction with what you already know to be true or false. This stuff works for gathering intelligence, period.
.
Moriarty, how do you know so much about this? Don’t get me wrong. I am not trying to be flippant; I am not challenging your knowledge. I am just curious.
[/quote]
He probably reads books and not op-ed pieces telling him how to think.
He probably reads books and not op-ed pieces telling him how to think.
[/quote]
That may be, but books can tell you how to think, if you’re not critical. As I said, I wasn’t contesting what he said at all. I was just curious what his source of information was.
[quote]etaco wrote:
Volunteering and having a safe word changes everything. There are a whole host of things people pay dominatrixes to do which would be considered by just about everyone to be legit torture if it was done by foreign intelligence on our troops but is considered enjoyable by participants because they’ve volunteered and have a safe word, e.g. electroshock on the nuts.
If Hitchens enjoys getting dicked by the largest dude he can find in his spare time, does that make it an acceptable interrogation technique?[/quote]
Thread probably ought to end right there, but it should be pointed out that Hitchens himself says it is torture:
"You may have read by now the official lie about this treatment, which is that it �??simulates�?? the feeling of drowning. This is not the case. You feel that you are drowning because you are drowning�??or, rather, being drowned, albeit slowly and under controlled conditions and at the mercy (or otherwise) of those who are applying the pressure. The �??board�?? is the instrument, not the method. You are not being boarded. You are being watered.
…
I apply the Abraham Lincoln test for moral casuistry: �??If slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong.�?? Well, then, if waterboarding does not constitute torture, then there is no such thing as torture.
…
Against it, however, I call as my main witness Mr. Malcolm Nance. Mr. Nance is not what you call a bleeding heart. In fact, speaking of the coronary area, he has said that, in battlefield conditions, he �??would personally cut bin Laden�??s heart out with a plastic M.R.E. spoon.�?? He was to the fore on September 11, 2001, dealing with the burning nightmare in the debris of the Pentagon. He has been involved with the sere program since 1997. He speaks Arabic and has been on al-Qaeda�??s tail since the early 1990s. His most recent book, The Terrorists of Iraq, is a highly potent analysis both of the jihadist threat in Mesopotamia and of the ways in which we have made its life easier. I passed one of the most dramatic evenings of my life listening to his cold but enraged denunciation of the adoption of waterboarding by the United States. The argument goes like this:
Waterboarding is a deliberate torture technique and has been prosecuted as such by our judicial arm when perpetrated by others.
If we allow it and justify it, we cannot complain if it is employed in the future by other regimes on captive U.S. citizens. It is a method of putting American prisoners in harm�??s way.
It may be a means of extracting information, but it is also a means of extracting junk information. (Mr. Nance told me that he had heard of someone�??s being compelled to confess that he was a hermaphrodite. I later had an awful twinge while wondering if I myself could have been �??dunked�?? this far.) To put it briefly, even the C.I.A. sources for the Washington Post story on waterboarding conceded that the information they got out of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was �??not all of it reliable.�?? Just put a pencil line under that last phrase, or commit it to memory.
It opens a door that cannot be closed. Once you have posed the notorious �??ticking bomb�?? question, and once you assume that you are in the right, what will you not do? Waterboarding not getting results fast enough? The terrorist�??s clock still ticking? Well, then, bring on the thumbscrews and the pincers and the electrodes and the rack."
[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
etaco wrote:
Volunteering and having a safe word changes everything. There are a whole host of things people pay dominatrixes to do which would be considered by just about everyone to be legit torture if it was done by foreign intelligence on our troops but is considered enjoyable by participants because they’ve volunteered and have a safe word, e.g. electroshock on the nuts.
If Hitchens enjoys getting dicked by the largest dude he can find in his spare time, does that make it an acceptable interrogation technique?
Thread probably ought to end right there, but it should be pointed out that Hitchens himself says it is torture:
"You may have read by now the official lie about this treatment, which is that it â¿¿simulatesâ¿¿ the feeling of drowning. This is not the case. You feel that you are drowning because you are drowningâ¿¿or, rather, being drowned, albeit slowly and under controlled conditions and at the mercy (or otherwise) of those who are applying the pressure. The â¿¿boardâ¿¿ is the instrument, not the method. You are not being boarded. You are being watered.
…
I apply the Abraham Lincoln test for moral casuistry: â¿¿If slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong.â¿¿ Well, then, if waterboarding does not constitute torture, then there is no such thing as torture.
…
Against it, however, I call as my main witness Mr. Malcolm Nance. Mr. Nance is not what you call a bleeding heart. In fact, speaking of the coronary area, he has said that, in battlefield conditions, he â¿¿would personally cut bin Ladenâ¿¿s heart out with a plastic M.R.E. spoon.â¿¿ He was to the fore on September 11, 2001, dealing with the burning nightmare in the debris of the Pentagon. He has been involved with the sere program since 1997. He speaks Arabic and has been on al-Qaedaâ¿¿s tail since the early 1990s. His most recent book, The Terrorists of Iraq, is a highly potent analysis both of the jihadist threat in Mesopotamia and of the ways in which we have made its life easier. I passed one of the most dramatic evenings of my life listening to his cold but enraged denunciation of the adoption of waterboarding by the United States. The argument goes like this:
Waterboarding is a deliberate torture technique and has been prosecuted as such by our judicial arm when perpetrated by others.
[/quote]
It is used by our military on each other during training without prosecution.
Our enemy is mutilating and torturing anyone they capture. This has nothing to do with our waterboarding three people.
The same can be said of ALL information gained in any form of questioning. It is intellectually dishonest to keep introducing this to the discussion.
[quote]
It opens a door that cannot be closed. Once you have posed the notorious â¿¿ticking bombâ¿¿ question, and once you assume that you are in the right, what will you not do? Waterboarding not getting results fast enough? The terroristâ¿¿s clock still ticking? Well, then, bring on the thumbscrews and the pincers and the electrodes and the rack."[/quote]
A phony slippery slope argument.
It is OK to find waterboarding morally reprehensible. It is distasteful for all involved and certainly should not be a regular practice. Thankfully it isn’t and never has been.
All the posturing against waterboarding seems politically motivated. I am amazed how many people buy into it.