• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Insiders who complain to politico: please report to the white house office of shut the fuck up.

At some point, the ability to learn is a factor of character, not IQ.

Jack Smith: “Why did you start campaigning in the middle of my investigation?!”

I did not have this on my fuck 2025 bingo card.

Impressively dumb. Congratulations.

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

She burned that motherfucker down, and I am so here for it. Thank you, Caroline Kennedy.

Only Democrats have agency, apparently.

Fight them, without becoming them!

Dear Washington Post, you are the darkness now.

The most dangerous place for a black man in America is in a white man’s imagination.

The Supreme Court cannot be allowed to become the ultimate, unaccountable arbiter of everything.

Oh FFS you might as well trust a 6-year-old with a flamethrower.

“Facilitate” is an active verb, not a weasel word.

Take hopelessness and turn it into resilience.

Never give a known liar the benefit of the doubt.

I’ve spoken to my cat about this, but it doesn’t seem to do any good.

Republicans want to make it harder to vote and easier for them to cheat.

Come on, media. you have one job. start doing it.

Petty moves from a petty man.

Republicans are radicals, not conservatives.

The fight for our country is always worth it. ~Kamala Harris

Disappointing to see gov. newsom with his finger to the wind.

People are complicated. Love is not.

Mobile Menu

  • Seattle Meet-up Post
  • 2025 Activism
  • Targeted Political Fundraising
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • COVID-19
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • 2025 Activism
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • Targeted Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Politics / Torture Amendment

Torture Amendment

by John Cole|  November 6, 20059:47 am| 124 Comments

This post is in: Politics, War on Terror aka GSAVE®

FacebookTweetEmail

McCain is not giving up nor giving in:

Girding for a potential fight with the Bush administration, supporters of a ban on torturing prisoners of war by U.S. interrogators threatened Friday to include the prohibition in nearly every bill the Senate considers until it becomes law.

The no-torture wording, which proponents say is supported by majorities in both houses of Congress, was included last month in the Senate’s version of a defense spending bill. The measure’s final form is being negotiated with the House, and the White House is pushing for either a rewording or deletion of the torture ban.

On Friday, at the urging of Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz, the Senate by a voice vote added the ban to a related defense bill as a backup. advertisement

Speaking from the Senate floor, McCain said, “If necessary – and I sincerely hope it is not – I and the co-sponsors of this amendment will seek to add it to every piece of important legislation voted on in the Senate until the will of a substantial bipartisan majority in both houses of Congress prevails. Let no one doubt our determination.”

Good for him.

(Thanks to an emailer for the heads up.)

*** Update ***

Orrin Hatch and Pat Roberts- objectively pro-torture:

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said he supports the vice president’s efforts to gain a CIA exemption. While contending that the administration opposes torture, Hatch said, “They’re going to everything in their power to make sure that our citizens in the United States of America are protected.”

Appearing with Hatch on CBS’s “Face the Nation,” Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Illinois, said cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of prisoners “is not what America is all about. Those aren’t the values that we’re fighting for.”

Sen. Pat Roberts, the Kansas Republican who chairs the Senate Intelligence Committee, said his vote against the ban doesn’t mean he favors torture. He rejected Durbin’s comments as “not really relevant to what we are trying to do to detain and interrogate the worst of the worst so that we can save American lives.”

Worst of the worst. Where have I heard that before? Oh yeah- that was Rumsfeld describing the detainees at Guantanamo who were in many cases abused and then released because they simply were not a threat and prived NO actionable or useful intelligence.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Camera Question
Next Post: Uprising in France »

Reader Interactions

124Comments

  1. 1.

    Mark-NC

    November 6, 2005 at 10:08 am

    McCain is one of the very few Republicans left with the balls to stand up to the Republician attack machine.

    Or perhaps, the attack machine has discovered that it is backing a losing/dying cause, so they are going easy on McCain and not smearing him 24/7 in defense of the current occupants of the White House.

    I can’t decide.

  2. 2.

    R J Matheson

    November 6, 2005 at 10:20 am

    The Cheney pro-torture Republicans are at odds with the military leadership, rank-and-file, and the pro-military Republicans like McCain and Hagel. President Bush must decide which side to support. Will he be tough enough to stand up to Cheney? Not likely.

  3. 3.

    Mr Furious

    November 6, 2005 at 10:37 am

    Yeah, a guy who survived five years of actual torture in an actual prison camp isn’t going to have the stomach for a political feud on the topic…what the fuck was the Bush Admin thinking? They could intimidate McCain on this?

    RJM is right. Bush is the pussy and he will fail to stand up to Cheney. The question is how many will stick with McCain and abandon the White House.

  4. 4.

    Tony Dismukes

    November 6, 2005 at 10:49 am

    I don’t always agree with McCain, but he’s definitely earning my respect with this fight.

  5. 5.

    ppGaz

    November 6, 2005 at 10:52 am

    Before we elect McCain to sainthood ….

    This is the guy who carried water for Bush in the 2004 campaign …. carried water for the guy who pulled the Black Baby crap on him after New Hampshire in 2000 … carried water for the Torture Administration against a fellow Vietnam Vet …stood silent during Swiftboating.

    Why? Because he calculated that a Bush second term was a better lead-in to his 2008 candidacy than a Kerry first term. He went out pimped the potatoheads, a bunch of people for whom he has little regard, to set himself up to run for president. You might argue that he is largely responsible for the Bush second term.

    Excuse me if I hold off on the Man of the Year award for John McCain.

  6. 6.

    Sam Hutcheson

    November 6, 2005 at 10:59 am

    Excuse me if I hold off on the Man of the Year award for John McCain.

    Yeah, John McCain’s a politician. I’ll wait while everyone drops jaw agape at this stunning revelation. Next thing you’ll tell me is he’s grandstanding about steroids in baseball. Oh ye gods, whatfor shalt thou deliver upon thy humble servant next?!

    In other news, McCain is actually fighting the administration on human torture. Let’s see, sticking with party in 2004 vs. fighting party on human torture now. How will we ever decide what’s more important? If this is “positioning” for a presidential run in 2008, and his “position” is “we will fight the war, but not become the evil we suppose to fight”, well, I think even this liberal will have to give him a look.

    McCain isn’t perfect, but he’s a hell of a lot better than Bush-Cheney and that particular branch of modern republicanism, and I’m not seeing how he’s noticably worse than John Kerry and the Dems attempt to win via a war veteran.

    YMMV, I guess.

  7. 7.

    ppGaz

    November 6, 2005 at 11:03 am

    McCain isn’t perfect

    Language is everything.

    McCain is a political whore who has always been looking out for his own fortunes. I think this is the reason why Bush and his thugs could break his kneecaps in 2000 with a clear conscience. They weren’t sticking it to the war hero, they were sticking it to a guy who puts politics first …. just like they do. McCain and Bush deserve each other. Two jet pilots, one a drunken coward, and the other a fearless warrior …. dancing with each other into their sixties. It’s an ugly sight. This torture thing doesn’t make the picture prettier for me. It’s a no-risk deal for McCain. He can’t lose politically over this.

  8. 8.

    demimondian

    November 6, 2005 at 11:15 am

    I welcome John McCain’s sincere effort on behalf of the Democratic Party, and wish him the best of luck.

    Stop laughing, back there! I’m serious!

    There are two possible outcomes of this fight. In the first outcome, the theocrats, in the person of George Bush, win, and the Democrats can work to peel the economic RINOs away from the core using the hypocrisy meme. In the second outcome, the economic RINOs win this one, isolating the Rovian base, and guaranteeing the far right stays home in the next two elections.

    Either way, this is the best of all possible Democratic strategies. Seeing as how the Republican party has been the more intellectually creative one for the last fifty years, it not surprisising that this idea came out of the Republican race for the presidential nomination in 2008.

  9. 9.

    p.lukasiak

    November 6, 2005 at 11:17 am

    McCain is a perfect example of the broken clock — i.e. even a broken clock is right twice a day.

    But McCain is still part of the GOP machine, and “slightly less insane than the rest of them” isn’t exactly cause for the high praise that JC throws on him.

    (Galloway and Sheehan are also opposed to our torture policies, John. How about throwing a little love their way? :) )

  10. 10.

    R J Matheson

    November 6, 2005 at 11:43 am

    To deflect any criticism of the conduct of the war, the Administration and their media spokepersons fault critics for “not supporting our men and women in uniform”. Now that Cheney is actively promoting torture, the White House has taken a clear position that is contary to the best interests of our “men and women in uniform”. We know where Bush and Cheney stand on this. And we know that 90 Senators have taken a different position. What about Secretary Rumsfeld? And General Pace?

  11. 11.

    Stormy70

    November 6, 2005 at 12:19 pm

    What torture? You guys define torture as pysching some terrorist out by using strippers and the threat of physical harm. This is not a winning issue for McCain. Americans across the board think torturing terrorists is just fine. I am swiftly trending that way with each new atrocity reported. I am fed up with people thinking looking sideways at an Islamic terrorist is torture. I would advocate drenching them all in pig’s blood so they culd not enter paradise for the honor killing of a female reletive, killing of homosexuals, etc. They have no legitimate religious trappings that we should be adhereing to while in our prisons. Why would I trust the idiotic Senate to come up with better techniques than our military? That’s right, I don’t. I want the terrorists to be afraid of being captured, not thinking they made the gravy train.

  12. 12.

    The Cavalry

    November 6, 2005 at 12:26 pm

    You guys define torture as pysching some terrorist out by using strippers and the threat of physical harm.

    I guess torture must be going on in fraternity houses all over the country. Maybe McCain should have Senate hearings about that, too? Hey, if they’re going to do ’em on steroids, then why not?

    All kidding aside, this is a serious issue, though also one that I think has been blown out of proportion. There is a tendency on the part of liberals and some in the media to take every instance of wrong-doing on the part of anyone associated with the administration and try to blame it on the top brass. For example, every misstep made by Brown, every reference to Nordstrom’s and wanting time for dinner, is directly Bush’s fault. Every time a Lindey England goes over the line, it’s Rumsfeld’s fault. Every time Halliburtion overchages, it’s Cheney’s fault.

    So I think that McCain is well-intentioned here but he’s confusing the actions of a few miscreants with an overall administration policy. Let’s face it: we do want tough interrogations, everyone does. The solution to doing this without crossing over into torture is to discipline those who step over the line, not to tie the military’s hands behind its back.

  13. 13.

    The Cavalry

    November 6, 2005 at 12:28 pm

    Americans across the board think torturing terrorists is just fine.

    I’m not sure that’s true. Most Americans support the “ticking bomb” exception of torturing those who have vital and timely information that could save lives, but to say that most Americans “think torturing terrorists” is just fine is a misreading of that attitude, in my opinion.

  14. 14.

    Steve S

    November 6, 2005 at 12:37 pm

    We’re looking at the next Iran-Contra right here. Same situation… Congress voted to withhold funding from the Contras. Reagan continued doing it anyway, under the table, even going so far as to weapons to Iran in exchange for hostages.

    Que 4 days prior to the 1986 midterm elections. Lebanese newspapers leak that US is selling weapons to Iran.

    From there it goes downhill.

    The thing is, in ’86 when Iran-Contra hit the fan, Reagan had a 60%+ approval rating. It came down to 40%, but he was able to apologize and hold back most of the damage.

    Bush is at 35% right now. If Congress votes against this funding, and Bush/Cheney continues to support these Soviet Gulags anyway and it comes out…

    I think we’ll be talking impeachment.

  15. 15.

    The Cavalry

    November 6, 2005 at 12:40 pm

    Dream on, Steve S.

  16. 16.

    demimondian

    November 6, 2005 at 12:44 pm

    Well, Stormy, I’ve got to grant you something: you’ve managed to make “The Cavalry” look rational. Wow.

  17. 17.

    Kimmitt

    November 6, 2005 at 1:01 pm

    All kidding aside, this is a serious issue, though also one that I think has been blown out of proportion.

    Whenever anyone asks why we need to release the pics and videos of children getting sodomized, I cite sentences like this.

  18. 18.

    ppGaz

    November 6, 2005 at 1:11 pm

    What torture? You guys define torture as pysching some terrorist out by using strippers and the threat of physical harm. This is not a winning issue for McCain. Americans across the board think torturing terrorists is just fine. I am swiftly trending that way with each new atrocity reported. I am fed up with people thinking looking sideways at an Islamic terrorist is torture. I would advocate drenching them all in pig’s blood so they culd not enter paradise for the honor killing of a female reletive, killing of homosexuals, etc. They have no legitimate religious trappings that we should be adhereing to while in our prisons. Why would I trust the idiotic Senate to come up with better techniques than our military? That’s right, I don’t. I want the terrorists to be afraid of being captured, not thinking they made the gravy train.

    Ho Chi Minh couldn’t have said it better.

  19. 19.

    rilkefan

    November 6, 2005 at 1:14 pm

    Man, The Tool Maker

    The interrogation proceded with a sledgehammer
    handle, wieldier without the heavy head and more
    suitable for repeated application.
    Why the soldier had a sledgehammer,
    and whether he kept both hands on the handle
    in accord with its design, is not noted.
    About the inspiration behind another tool the report is more
    forthcoming: the soldier’s older brother had,
    as a child, closed him up in a sleeping bag
    and he had found it scary.
    Whether the man inside the bag
    had been informed he was about to be
    questioned with a sledgehammer
    handle, the report also does not make clear.

  20. 20.

    Sam Hutcheson

    November 6, 2005 at 1:15 pm

    Americans across the board think torturing terrorists is just fine.

    First, this isn’t so. It’s a talking point and a hope for administration lackeys, but it’s not the case. Most Americans find the idea of torture abhorrent.

    Second, even if it were so, all that would mean would be that “Americans across the board” are immoral toads who fail the most basic test of their political progenitors.

  21. 21.

    Zifnab

    November 6, 2005 at 1:19 pm

    We’re looking at the next Iran-Contra right here. Same situation… Congress voted to withhold funding from the Contras. Reagan continued doing it anyway, under the table, even going so far as to weapons to Iran in exchange for hostages.

    I mean, the problem here is that under Reagan we had a largely Democratic hold on Congress. There was alot of stalemating and bartering in blood on both sides of the aisle and when the Reagan administration wanted to get something done over Democratic opposition, they decided to go over the heads or under the table of the opposing party.

    Not so with the Bush Whitehouse. Here we’ve got an administration who’s own party has by-and-large turned against them and they doggedly push on. When a bill passes 90-9 under a Republican majority, and a Republican President threatens to veto… ??? We have a breakdown in how Democracy is traditionally viewed as working.

    What’s more, when you have a bill passing by such wide margins in the Senate, but stands to get gutted in the House, you have to A) question how the lower house of Congress is being run and B) question what it means to be ‘party loyal’ anymore. When a bill landslides through the Senate and dies in Congress and both are under Republican control, what exactly is the offical Republican stance on torture in this country?

  22. 22.

    rilkefan

    November 6, 2005 at 1:21 pm

    As Mark Kleiman notes, torture produces wrong intel.

  23. 23.

    demimondian

    November 6, 2005 at 1:22 pm

    rilkefan: nice. IMHO, it is a touch too prosy. At the end, for instance, you could say:

    Did the man in the bag
    know of the tool with no head?
    The report is silent.

  24. 24.

    Zifnab

    November 6, 2005 at 1:24 pm

    I want the terrorists to be afraid of being captured, not thinking they made the gravy train.

    I do have to question Stormy’s perception of reality with a quote like this.

    I can just see the Iraqi soldiers staying up late at night thinking, “Oh jee, I hope a bunch of US Marines find us late at night, put a couple shots in my knee-caps and drag me into an Abu-Garab prision cell. If they’ve gotten rid of that whole torture thing by now, I’ll totally have it made.”

  25. 25.

    Ancient Purple

    November 6, 2005 at 1:29 pm

    Why would I trust the idiotic Senate to come up with better techniques than our military?

    Stormy, were you at all awake during civics class?

    Here is a big, fat, hairy clue for you: in the American Republic, the military answers to a civilian authority.

    Don’t like it? Take it up with the Constitution.

  26. 26.

    demimondian

    November 6, 2005 at 1:30 pm

    The hammer handle with no head
    Was first.
    Headless, better for beating.
    Wieldy.

    The bag with the head within
    Was next.
    Sightless, tight, dark, confining.
    Scary.

    If the head in the bag knew
    of both.
    That the headless tool was coming.
    The report keeps mum.

  27. 27.

    Paddy O'Shea

    November 6, 2005 at 1:32 pm

    As long as Team Torture controls the White House McCain’s attempts to curb this nasty practice will be met with more than he’ll be able to handle. Too many of his fellow GOP Senators share Dick Cheney’s penchant for plugging Islamic fundies into wall sockets.

    I suspect that if John was really serious about capturing the Republican nomination in 2006 he’d get over this and pick up the wire with the rest of them.

  28. 28.

    KC

    November 6, 2005 at 1:34 pm

    I’m glad McCain is doing what he’s doing. If it’s grandstanding, oh well. That torture is a dispicable practice that needs to be stopped is an issue I’d like to think most Americans are in agreement on.

  29. 29.

    Mark-NC

    November 6, 2005 at 1:38 pm

    Before we elect McCain to sainthood ….

    This is the guy who carried water for Bush in the 2004 campaign …. carried water for the guy who pulled the Black Baby crap on him after New Hampshire in 2000 … carried water for the Torture Administration against a fellow Vietnam Vet …stood silent during Swiftboating.

    I haven’t forfotten! And I’m not picking McCain as a saint.

    Just pointing out what many above have stated differently – that the Bush stronghold is breaking, and the slime machine is in watch mode trying to figure out who to character assassinate next, and who they are supposed to protect regardless of the facts.

  30. 30.

    Bob In Pacifica

    November 6, 2005 at 1:39 pm

    Stormy, it’s hard to think you could be so blind as to keep repeating this stupid crap. You repeat shit like, “You guys define torture as pysching some terrorist out by using strippers and the threat of physical harm.” In fact, it’s the Limbaughs of your world who keep repeating this lie. You ignore reports of torture and murder of prisoners in U.S. custody, you repeat the lies that diminish the crime, and then you presume that those who are against torture must define torture the way that the Limbaughs define torture. The frat house pranks.

    This is what happens. You can lie to yourself, but when something like 98% of Argentinians are opposed to Bush and his war and his torture, either you have to admit to what’s going on or you have to invent something else to explain these incongruities of your own reality.

    You guys, Stormy, you guys define torture as threatening the use of strippers. But you guys lie.

  31. 31.

    Bob In Pacifica

    November 6, 2005 at 1:39 pm

    Stormy, it’s hard to think you could be so blind as to keep repeating this stupid crap. You repeat shit like, “You guys define torture as pysching some terrorist out by using strippers and the threat of physical harm.” In fact, it’s the Limbaughs of your world who keep repeating this lie. You ignore reports of torture and murder of prisoners in U.S. custody, you repeat the lies that diminish the crime, and then you presume that those who are against torture must define torture the way that the Limbaughs define torture. The frat house pranks.

    This is what happens. You can lie to yourself, but when something like 98% of Argentinians are opposed to Bush and his war and his torture, either you have to admit to what’s going on or you have to invent something else to explain these incongruities of your own reality.

    You guys, Stormy, you guys define torture as threatening the use of strippers. But you guys lie.

  32. 32.

    rilkefan

    November 6, 2005 at 1:40 pm

    demimondian: – yeah, it’s too prosy, but on the other hand I was going for the blunt awkward ugliness of prose.

    By the way, that post linked to John‘s post here.

  33. 33.

    antimedia

    November 6, 2005 at 1:42 pm

    Umm…the Iraqi soldiers are fighting with the US Marines….

  34. 34.

    Bob In Pacifica

    November 6, 2005 at 1:43 pm

    I don’t know how that last post repeated. I only hit it once. There was a political comedian back in the Sixties, I can’t remember which one, who said, “How many lies do you allow until you become part of the lie?” Stormy is part of THE LIE. The difference between her and Limbaugh is that he gets paid for lying, Stormy will eventually pay. It’s the nature of hierarchy. In dire times, the Stormys get thrown overboard before the real winners in the scam give up.

  35. 35.

    Steve S

    November 6, 2005 at 1:57 pm

    Dream on, Steve S.

    No dreaming here. Just speculating.

    If a blowjob is an impeachable offense, then I’m pretty certain opening Soviet Gulags in opposition to the express wishes of Congress probably qualifies.

  36. 36.

    demimondian

    November 6, 2005 at 2:01 pm

    Rilkefan — That makes sense. I felt like the right idiom was to capture the repeated blows — lots of short jagged words, not much flow.

  37. 37.

    Kimmitt

    November 6, 2005 at 2:05 pm

    Why would I trust the idiotic Senate to come up with better techniques than our military?

    Man, poke a wingnut, find a fascist. Way to reveal true colors, Stormy.

  38. 38.

    Jeanette

    November 6, 2005 at 2:50 pm

    I found this bit of writing I wrote a few hours after the Terrorists BLEW UP THE WORLD TRADE CENTER. I found this scribbled on a napkin from my kitchen with tear stains on it only a year ago.

    My Poem is now copyrighted… although I know not how it would be received considering the liberal bent toward making the world’s prisoners feel good while incarcerated for crimes against humanity.

    Here is my questio… to Liberals and Conservatives alike:
    “Would have you tortured someone to overt the TERRORISM of that day? If you knew they would have been responsible for that act of TERRORISM?”

    Here’s what I wrote in the moments of crisis as I watched those buildings coming down…

    I Am A Terrorist

    I have sequestered the forebearing of my Fathers
    That I might find glory on this earth
    I am the honorer of no man
    I am the evasive recipient of murderous intent,
    and despised…
    A tacit foul whose hatred harms
    I am the undualy scrupulous of displaced persons,
    the vague repute of lesser souls
    I am of the glorious in rhelm…
    Hunted to be punished for the depth and breadth
    of my duty to those who will follow,
    so fears may subside in those who are least.
    I have no fear of reprisal…
    it will pass. But, for it’s pain
    For my glory on earth
    I will seek my reward from Allah in the life hereafter
    The Virgins wait for me.
    I am a TERRORIST.

    by:
    Jeanette D. Sandstrom(McClean)

    I would have torchured someone.

  39. 39.

    Jeanette

    November 6, 2005 at 2:52 pm

    I found this bit of writing I wrote a few hours after the Terrorists BLEW UP THE WORLD TRADE CENTER. I found this scribbled on a napkin from my kitchen with tear stains on it, only a year ago.

    My Poem is now copyrighted… Although, I know not how it would be received considering the liberal bent toward making the world’s prisoners “feel good” while incarcerated for crimes against humanity.

    Here is my question… to Liberals and Conservatives alike:
    “Would have you tortured someone to overt the TERRORISM of that day? If you knew they would have been responsible for that act of TERRORISM?”

    Here’s what I wrote in the moments of crisis as I watched those buildings coming down…

    I Am A Terrorist

    I have sequestered the forebearing of my Fathers
    That I might find glory on this earth
    I am the honorer of no man
    I am the evasive recipient of murderous intent,
    and despised…
    A tacit foul whose hatred harms
    I am the undualy scrupulous of displaced persons,
    the vague repute of lesser souls
    I am of the glorious in rhelm…
    Hunted to be punished for the depth and breadth
    of my duty to those who will follow,
    so fears may subside in those who are least.
    I have no fear of reprisal…
    it will pass. But, for it’s pain
    For my glory on earth
    I will seek my reward from Allah in the life hereafter
    The Virgins wait for me.
    I am a TERRORIST.

    by:
    Jeanette D. Sandstrom(McClean)
    Writer and 67 yr. old Grandmother

    I would have tortured someone.

  40. 40.

    Jeanette

    November 6, 2005 at 2:56 pm

    How that came up twice with a mispelled word I’ll never know.

  41. 41.

    The Cavalry

    November 6, 2005 at 3:11 pm

    Ho Chi Minh couldn’t have said it better.

    I’ve got to agree. Drenching terrorist suspects in pig’s blood is way, way beyond the pale.

  42. 42.

    Ross

    November 6, 2005 at 3:17 pm

    With the whole torture to prevent 9/11, the thing is that the anti-torture faction doesn’t need to answer the question. It’s an impossible hypothetical. We only need to say that in real world situations, ie anything that can reasonably happen, torture is counterproductive/immoral/whatever specific objection we have to it.

  43. 43.

    Perry Como

    November 6, 2005 at 3:21 pm

    Drenching terrorist suspects in pig’s blood is way, way beyond the pale.

    If that’s the worst of what’s being done, why don’t we release the rest of the pictures and video from Abu Ghirab? After all, they were just fraternity pranks. Let’s get it all out in the open so we can have a hearty chuckle about your days in the frat house when you and Rush sodomized children.

  44. 44.

    demimondian

    November 6, 2005 at 3:24 pm

    Drenching terrorist suspects in pig’s blood is way, way beyond the pale.

    You know, lefties, TC is right. I mean, the pig’s blood story is really stolen from Steven King’s _Carrie_, where it really was just a harmless prank, great visual, no harm done to anybody as a result. Horrifying, if it happened in real life, of course, but it’s just a story, John C., so you should just go back to bed.

    And stop reading horror stories before bed. It gives you nightmares.

  45. 45.

    Stormy70

    November 6, 2005 at 3:39 pm

    Okay, Bob. I’ll get mine in the end? It’s the LIE! ACK! Hah.

    When terrrorists are killing Americans, most Americans want them to die, and usually die the hard way. Congress is full of a bunch of media whores who don’t have the first clue about what they are doing. See Mary Landrieu or Cantrell. Congress does have oversight, but I don’t think they are always right. Everything I’ve seen of the military shows they take these types of allegations seriously, and investigate them. Or do we need to throw the book at the whole military to satisfy you guys.

    If you were really concerned about prison torture, you might start with the prisons here in the USA. But I really believe this is a big deal because you want to use it to bash Bush and Republicans. Run on coddling terrorists in 2006, I beg of you. The Dems will not be trusted with National Security for another generation. You can’t even be trusted to go the distance in a war that the majority of your congressmen voted for. If it gets tough, you bail.

    I thought the CIA was above reproach for you guys. Well, if little Miss Covert was running a prison, then it would be ok to burn her, right?

  46. 46.

    The Cavalry

    November 6, 2005 at 3:48 pm

    See Mary Landrieu or Cantrell.

    Are you suggesting that women don’t know how to interogate people? If my wife ran one of those prison, believe me, those guys would give up everything they knew in a heart beat, no torture necessary ;)

  47. 47.

    Perry Como

    November 6, 2005 at 3:53 pm

    Stormy, do you live on a farm? I’m curious how you have such an endless supply of strawmen?

    McCain’s amendment is quite simple. It uses the United States Army Field Manual on Intelligence Interrogation for the guidelines. Since these are the rules that we are already supposed to abide by, why is the administration so adverse to the amendment?

    A good reason is, according to Attorney General Gonzales, McCain wasn’t tortured in Vietnam:

    “…an act to constitute torture, it must inflict pain that is difficult to endure. Physical pain amounting to torture must be equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death.”

    That’s a much higher bar than what OUR ARMY sets.

    As to your deflections about US prisons, terrorist coddling, Plame, etc., keep stuffing the straw.

  48. 48.

    Ancient Purple

    November 6, 2005 at 3:54 pm

    Shorter Stormy:

    “I haven’t a friggin’ clue as to what the U.S. Constitution says, nor do I care.”

  49. 49.

    ppGaz

    November 6, 2005 at 4:10 pm

    Speaking of outrageous disregard for the Consitution, think of this the next time you hear a Potatohead talking about that document:

    You cannot make this shit up

    Because if you did, nobody would believe you.

  50. 50.

    Stormy70

    November 6, 2005 at 4:15 pm

    This crying over the torturing of terrorists will get you nowhere. I believe physical torture is not productive, but I don’t want a captured terrorist to believe our hands are tied.
    I have yet to see proof of widespread physical torture, just psychological techniques which I think work. I have yet to see anything approaching the beheading of innocents that our enemies do. Yet, rarely do any of you chastise the torture terrorists engage in. Nor can some of you call it evil. Somehow, we deserve it don’t we? Oh, and Christians are scarier.

  51. 51.

    Vladi G

    November 6, 2005 at 4:18 pm

    Stormy’s IQ must be on a steady decline, because every single post she makes is more idiotic than the one before. We may have found the stupidest person on earth who can still operate a computer.

  52. 52.

    The Cavalry

    November 6, 2005 at 4:19 pm

    Yet, rarely do any of you chastise the torture terrorists engage in.

    This, I agree with. Why is the media so quick to condemn every misdeed of the US army and so slow to criticize terrorists (whom they insist on dignifying with the word “insurgent”) and so loathe to admit that whatever goes on in Abu Ghraib right now, it’s nothing compared to what went on when Saddam was in power.

  53. 53.

    ppGaz

    November 6, 2005 at 4:23 pm

    Yet, rarely do any of you chastise the torture terrorists engage in.

    It’s statements like this post of yours that belie that “Aw, I’m just a good old Texas girl” bullshit you spread, Stormy. I’ve never believed that about you, and I have no reason to as long as you post things like you have to this thread. All evidence is that you are as nutty as a goddamned fruitcake. Or drunk all the time.

    According to your “thinking”, any American behavior is okay if the people it’s aimed at are “worse than us.”

    Do you actually have a standard, a limit beyond which you are not willing to go? Because I haven’t seen it. What makes you any better than those terrorist shitheads you like to yell about? Because the way you talk here, you’re just like them.

    BTW, your month is up. I am going to call you on your un-American, crazy shit whenever I see it.

  54. 54.

    Perry Como

    November 6, 2005 at 4:30 pm

    This crying over the torturing of terrorists will get you nowhere.

    One of the problems I have with torture is the same that Mr. Cole has with the death penalty: we make mistakes. We have released a number of prisoners from GITMO and something like 2/3rds of the people in Abu Ghirab were not insurgents. In the case of GITMO, either we are in the business of releasing terrorists or those people were not guilty (and I’ll admit some were released by mistake).

    So when you say things like “crying over the torturing of terrorists”, you are either uninformed or disingenuous. Just because the US has detained someone does not mean that person is a terrorist.

    As far as widespread, at least 108 prisoners have died in US custody. I’m really not sure which is worse, being beheaded or being beaten to death. Members of the US military have not done the former, but they have done the latter.

    But once again you devolve into straw, straw, straw. Evil, deserve it, Christians, booga booga. Perhaps one day you can visit the Wizard of Oz and he’ll give you that brain you are wishing for. Then we can have a substantive debate about the issues.

  55. 55.

    Stormy70

    November 6, 2005 at 4:37 pm

    Go ahead and call me un-American, it seems to be a common thread here when someone disagrees. I have been here for years and seen countless “torture” threads where the same thing is said over and over. It never resolves anything since no one here will ever believe in one thing the administration is doing. Do I need to go back to those threads and try to find where someone actually comes out and condemns what Saddam was doing to torture his people? No it is quickly glossed over in the attempt to blame Bush for every vile happening in the world.

    Iraqis have a new constitution, so what? Bush still sucks.

    Islamic radicals behead captured prisoners? Not their fault, just Bush’s. It gets old.

    With each new atrocity, my feelings about physical torture get a little less firm. I, however don’t blame Bush, I blame the terrorists.

    Please, how many of you are more scared of Christians in this country than Islamic radicals. Do I have to search the archives for your views on that, ppGaz?

    Oh, and I’m not drunk. Dang it all.

  56. 56.

    ppGaz

    November 6, 2005 at 4:39 pm

    Iraqis have a new constitution, so what? Bush still sucks.

    WTF does that have to do with torture?

    Oh, and I’m not drunk

    .

    Well you’re doing a fine imitation.

  57. 57.

    ppGaz

    November 6, 2005 at 4:43 pm

    Go ahead and call me un-American

    Defending torture is un-American IMO, and if you do it, I a going to say so.

    If you don’t like it, then stop defending torture.

  58. 58.

    Stormy70

    November 6, 2005 at 4:43 pm

    Members of the US military have not done the former, but they have done the latter.

    Cite, please. Why is it this is the first I’ve heard of this? Oh, and I don’t put my trust in released prisoners who have their trusty Al Qeida handbook with them. Newsweek tried to do a big expose on all this, and all it got them was a tearful Durbin on the Senate floor. I have yet to see proof af all the allegations you throw around. Which is why I am feeling particulary surly on this topic. All I seem to hear are the latest conspiracy theories from the lefty blogs. I don’t see alot of reality from the reality-based community. Nor do I trust the Mainstream press about any of it.

    Also, why do the released Gitmo prisoners come out fatter, and search for the nearest British lawyer? Just someone else trying to get Uncle Sam for some money. Hardly a credible source for torture.

  59. 59.

    Perry Como

    November 6, 2005 at 4:43 pm

    This, I agree with. Why is the media so quick to condemn every misdeed of the US army

    There may be a couple of reasons. The first and foremost being we hold ourselves to a higher standard than we do terrorists. By definition terrorists will do the most horrible things imaginable to advance their cause.

    But I’ve never noticed the lack of criticism of terrorists. It certainly doesn’t exist in the cable channels, when they do actually cover the issues. There is a lack of coverage of the Iraq war these days, what’s actually going on there. When the media was covering the war, it was being slammed for being too negative. Perhaps that’s why we don’t hear much anymore.

    As far as Sadaam and the evils his regime perpetrated, reporting on that is kind of like reporting on the sun rising in the morning:

    Hairdo commentator: “Well folks, the sun has risen again! Please tune in to our sun rising coverage every morning!”

  60. 60.

    Stormy70

    November 6, 2005 at 4:45 pm

    I thought you guys hated the unAmerican slur. Guess not. Don’t get your panties in a wad then when a freeper shows up to call you unAmerican. It is just his opinion.

  61. 61.

    guyermo

    November 6, 2005 at 4:46 pm

    Didn’t JC temporarily ban people like stormy? or is stormy above reproach because of membership to “the correct party”

  62. 62.

    The Cavalry

    November 6, 2005 at 4:47 pm

    The first and foremost being we hold ourselves to a higher standard than we do terrorists. By definition terrorists will do the most horrible things imaginable to advance their cause.

    At a certain point, you have to fight fire with fire. That doesn’t mean lowering ourselves to their level with beheadings and bombings, but it may mean playing some serious hardball with detainees.

  63. 63.

    ppGaz

    November 6, 2005 at 4:50 pm

    I thought you guys hated the unAmerican slur. Guess not

    Well, you haven’t been paying attention.

    Criticizing the war, or a government, is not un-American, and should not be called un-American.

    Advocating torture is un-American, and should be called un-American.

    It’s a simple distinction, Stormy. Even you can make it.

  64. 64.

    Perry Como

    November 6, 2005 at 4:55 pm

    Cite, please.

    http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=us+prisoner+deaths&btnG=Search

    Why is it this is the first I’ve heard of this?

    You’d think the liberal media would have plastered this all over the place, eh? ;)

    Oh, and I don’t put my trust in released prisoners who have their trusty Al Qeida handbook with them.

    The original report was from the DoD.

    I have yet to see proof af all the allegations you throw around. Which is why I am feeling particulary surly on this topic.

    That’s perfectly understandable. I’ll graciously retract my Scarecrow reference. The information probably got buried during the Libby indictment.

    Also, why do the released Gitmo prisoners come out fatter, and search for the nearest British lawyer? Just someone else trying to get Uncle Sam for some money. Hardly a credible source for torture.

    They probably search for a lawyer because they were unlawfully detained. I’d expect no less. If you were imprisoned for something you were not guilty of, denied access to council and not charged with any crime, wouldn’t you retain a lawyer when released? I think that’s a quite reasonable response.

    But GITMO isn’t the major issue here. The Koran flushing non-sense was, well, non-sense. It’s the stuff hapenning on the other side of the globe that is bothersome.

  65. 65.

    The Disenfranchised Voter

    November 6, 2005 at 5:00 pm

    Glad to see you fighting the good fight, Stormy. Keep up the “good” fight for true American values like torture!

  66. 66.

    Stormy70

    November 6, 2005 at 5:01 pm

    Here is another lefty discredited about atrocities committed by the military in Iraq.

    They probably search for a lawyer because they were unlawfully detained. I’d expect no less. If you were imprisoned for something you were not guilty of, denied access to council and not charged with any crime, wouldn’t you retain a lawyer when released? I think that’s a quite reasonable response.

    These guys are not criminals, but combatants picked up on a battlefield. This is why I would not trust a liberal to protect my car, much less the country.

  67. 67.

    Stormy70

    November 6, 2005 at 5:05 pm

    That Google search turned up all lefty papers or Quotes from the ACLU (yeah, right) or documentary film makers promoting their left wing propaganda. The other articles mention investigations by the military into the allegations. Why would the military investigate something that was not against the law? Why do they investigate torture if it is supposed to be such an ingrained policy? That’s right, it is not US policy to torture prisoners, thus the seriousness with which the military takes these allegations. Sounds like the system works to me.

  68. 68.

    Perry Como

    November 6, 2005 at 5:06 pm

    This is why I would not trust a liberal to protect my car, much less the country.

    :yawn: Straw.

  69. 69.

    ppGaz

    November 6, 2005 at 5:06 pm

    What are you saying, Stormy? That there has been no actual torture carried on by Americans in the course of GWOT?

    Or that there might have been, but you don’t care?

    Can you make a clear an unambiguous statement and leave out the “lefty” horseshit?

  70. 70.

    Stormy70

    November 6, 2005 at 5:07 pm

    Glad to see you fighting the good fight, Stormy. Keep up the “good” fight for true American values like torture!

    I have never thought physical torture was acceptable because it does not seem to work, according to most interogaters. If it did work, I would have no problem with it if it saved American lives. I am only stating what most people think, I guess we are all unAmerican by the left’s definition. I can live with it.

  71. 71.

    ppGaz

    November 6, 2005 at 5:11 pm

    I am only stating what most people think

    So, you are okay with torture as long as it “works?”

    And you think that most Americans are okay with that standard?

    I’ve simply restated your previous post, and left out the harangues.

    Is this what you believe?

  72. 72.

    Stormy70

    November 6, 2005 at 5:12 pm

    I am saying that the US does not have a policy that condones physical torture. When allegations are made, the military investigates and tries the people who commit torture. What I find ridiculous is a law that states we cannot use harsh measures that do not qualify as torture to interogate terrorists. This is not paddycakes, as Bill Quick puts it.

    Gotta go do some more unAmerican things like torture the spring clothes in my closet. It’s changeover time.

  73. 73.

    ppGaz

    November 6, 2005 at 5:20 pm

    I am saying that the US does not have a policy that condones physical torture. When allegations are made, the military investigates and tries the people who commit torture. What I find ridiculous is a law that states we cannot use harsh measures that do not qualify as torture to interogate terrorists. This is not paddycakes, as Bill Quick puts it.

    No politician ever did a better weasel job. You should run for office.

    In Texas, of course.

  74. 74.

    whatsleft

    November 6, 2005 at 5:29 pm

    Americans across the board think torturing terrorists is just fine. I am swiftly trending that way with each new atrocity reported

    I have never thought physical torture was acceptable because it does not seem to work, according to most interogaters. If it did work, I would have no problem with it if it saved American lives. I am only stating what most people think

    “She’s my sister, my daughter, my sister, my daughter. She’s my sister AND my daughter.”

  75. 75.

    The Disenfranchised Voter

    November 6, 2005 at 5:34 pm

    I have never thought physical torture was acceptable because it does not seem to work

    So it is unacceptable because it doesn’t work. Not because its immoral?

    Heh, “The party of morals & values” my ass. Enh whatever, I know you’re just a minority in America thankfully. Probably around the same percentage of people that agreed with the government intervention in the Terri Schiavo ordeal agree with torture.

    So what I’m trying to say is that basically, you’re a nutjob.

  76. 76.

    Pb

    November 6, 2005 at 6:18 pm

    Stormy, let me introduce you to a few things that you have likely never seen before, and likely won’t believe anyhow:

    Statistics – what Americans actually think about torture. Probably far more Americans are in favor of it than some here would like to admit, but there is by no means support for it “across the board”. Actually, Republicans are nominally in favor of torture, Democrats are nominally opposed, and the rest of the country is somewhat split on the issue. Note that this poll is a little old, I’d expect the anti-torture sentiment to be a bit stronger now just based on the correlation with political party.

    News – Jose Padilla, an American citizen who has been in held prison for over three years without charge, in direct contravention of the basic principles of our legal system, just for being a suspect.

    News – a British citizen’s first-hand account of his two years in Guantanamo Bay.

    News – a Canadian citizen’s first-hand account of his year of extraordinary rendition and torture.

    News – A letter from Capt. Ian Fishback to Sen. John McCain, detailing what he’s learned in his two combat tours with the 82nd Airborne Division, one each in Afghanistan and Iraq.

    News – Sean Baker, a U.S. military policeman, was nearly beaten to death in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba – because he was in a training exercise where he pretended to be a prisoner there. They only stopped beating him when they realized that he was one of them. If he had been a prisoner, he’d probably be dead, and for nothing. Since he isn’t, instead he just has seizures daily, and is essentially ignored by his own government.

  77. 77.

    Stormy70

    November 6, 2005 at 6:46 pm

    Padilla can be confined according to law. Decision here.

    The Mirror is a left-wing National Enquirer for Brits.

    I don’t believe ex-detainees, either. The CBC is almost as anti-American as the BBC. Almost.

    Are the last two incidences being investigated or do they automatically get a pass like this guy did by the entire media. I guess Mother Sheehan should do a background check of who she is touring with in her anti-military crusade.

    Gotta go, time for the Sunday shows.

  78. 78.

    The Disenfranchised Voter

    November 6, 2005 at 7:04 pm

    Padilla can be confined according to law. Decision here.

    A decision by a federal appeals court. Correct me if I am wrong–didn’t the Supreme court decide Bush could not detain American citizens indefinately?

  79. 79.

    ppGaz

    November 6, 2005 at 7:09 pm

    The CBC is almost as anti-American

    Don’t you ever STOP with the “Look – a jackalope!” deflection bullshit?

  80. 80.

    Ancient Purple

    November 6, 2005 at 7:11 pm

    Don’t get your panties in a wad then when a freeper shows up to call you unAmerican. It is just his opinion.

    It is his right to say whatever he wants, just as it is my right to get my panties in a wad and call him an asshole.

    The difference between you and me, Stormy, is that I treasure the rights in the Constitution for all people. You value your rights and to hell with the rights of everyone who disagrees with you.

  81. 81.

    Stormy70

    November 6, 2005 at 7:23 pm

    The difference between you and me, Stormy, is that I treasure the rights in the Constitution for all people. You value your rights and to hell with the rights of everyone who disagrees with you.

    What are you going on about now? Your rights are not being valued because I disagree with you? The Constitution protects the rights of American citizens, not our enemies in war. I think you have a fundemental misunderstanding of my views. I was not aware I was only valuing my rights and to hell with yours. I can’t get my point across to you, since you seem to fail at reading comprehension, since I never said something like that. The panties in a wad was a line directed at PpGaz, since he decided I am unAmerican tonight.

    PP – Please, it’s something I learned from your Potatohead posts.

  82. 82.

    Stormy70

    November 6, 2005 at 7:24 pm

    Have a good night, sparring partners. Don’t get your rights trampled on by the man!

  83. 83.

    Kimmitt

    November 6, 2005 at 7:32 pm

    The Constitution protects the rights of American citizens, not our enemies in war.

    Red herring, and you know it. Jose Padilla.

  84. 84.

    nyrev

    November 6, 2005 at 7:37 pm

    Paddy O’Shea, if you’re still out there you ought to save this entire conversation to show to your children when they’re older. Forget D.A.R.E. Stormy is a much better way to demonstrate the dangers of drinking.

  85. 85.

    goonie bird

    November 6, 2005 at 7:40 pm

    Our constitution already prohibits crule and unsusial punishments which would mean you could,nt have them sitting through listening to AL GORE blabbering

  86. 86.

    Perry Como

    November 6, 2005 at 7:46 pm

    The Constitution protects the rights of American citizens, not our enemies in war.

    The ideals behind our Constitution apply to everyone:

    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

    Note, it doesn’t say all Americans are created equal. You seem to be willing to the sell the soul of the US down the drain based on some notion of “hey, we’re better than they are”. For some of us, that’s not a good enugh reason to engage in morally reprehensible actions.

    One thing I find interesting about war is every warring nation uses the excuse, “but this time it is different.” Every nation demonizes their enemies as being “the worst of the worst” and “the most dangerous we have ever faced.” And everytime some portion of the population buys into it, allowing the government to take actions that are never morally justifiable.

  87. 87.

    Pb

    November 6, 2005 at 7:59 pm

    Yep, it looks like the Stormy Unreality Field is still firmly in place. Don’t agree with an unpleasant conclusion? Question the source! Then, do no further research. Finally, congratulate yourself on a job well done!

    And no, Stormy, I don’t think that Captain Ian Fishback or Spec. Sean Baker are liars. I also don’t automatically discredit foreign citizens and their first-hand accounts, just because they show up in the foreign press. And what if one of them is a liar? Well after a while you get what they call in the legal profession a “preponderance of the evidence”. However, I’d certainly welcome an investigation of all of these cases. Guess who wouldn’t welcome one.

  88. 88.

    ppGaz

    November 6, 2005 at 8:00 pm

    The panties in a wad was a line directed at PpGaz, since he decided I am unAmerican tonight.

    Actually, you did. Support for torture is not American.

    Americans are not such a bunch of cowering whipped sissies that they have to resort to torture to feel safe from idiots with towels on their heads. Real Americans, I mean, not cowards who thump their chests when people are looking, and then resort to torturing the powerless when nobody is looking.

    Real Americans don’t support torture. You do. Good for you. You are not a real American.

  89. 89.

    Ancient Purple

    November 6, 2005 at 11:46 pm

    What are you going on about now? Your rights are not being valued because I disagree with you? The Constitution protects the rights of American citizens, not our enemies in war. I think you have a fundemental misunderstanding of my views. I was not aware I was only valuing my rights and to hell with yours. I can’t get my point across to you, since you seem to fail at reading comprehension, since I never said something like that.

    The reading comprehension failure is yours. My rights are not devalued because you or anyone else disagrees with me. I never said they were, but you pulled it that out of your ass and attributed it to me. Nice try, but you are wrong.

  90. 90.

    Steve S

    November 7, 2005 at 1:17 am

    I’m so glad the pro-Torture wingnuts are back.

    otherwise this discussion would have been quite boring.

  91. 91.

    Slide

    November 7, 2005 at 5:28 am

    After reading a thread like this I can sympathize with Andrei’s previous assessment of Stormy’s singular personality.

  92. 92.

    Stormy70

    November 7, 2005 at 7:11 am

    After reading a thread like this I can sympathize with Andrei’s previous assessment of Stormy’s singular personality.

    This is why people would rather have their toenails pulled out than comment here. People get slimed for their opinions by such pleasant posters. I am not pro-torture, but I have no problem with cruel, degrading abuse heaped on terrorists if it will get them to break. You guys would rather lawyer them up, and coddle them for the rest of their lives. No way in hell can the Democrats be trusted with National Security. No way.

  93. 93.

    Shygetz

    November 7, 2005 at 8:11 am

    Jose Padilla is a US Citizen accused by the government of plotting to carry out terrorist attacks in a time of war. He is to be presumed guilty and held indefinitely without haebeus corpus.

    Scooter Libby is a US Citizen accused by the government of intentionally obstructing an investigation into the publicizing of secret US assests in the fight against WMD proliferation in a time of war, as well as being named as one of the people who exposed the CIA assets. He is to be presumed innocent and set free without bail pending a trial by an impartial jury of his peers.

    Republicans–Bringing cognitive dissonance to the American people.

    “Many think it not only inevitable but entirely proper that liberty give way to security in times of national crisis–that, at the extremes of military exigency, inter arma silent leges. Whatever the general merits of the view that war silences law or modulates its voice, that view has no place in the interpretation and application of a Constitution designed precisely to confront war and, in a manner that accords with democratic principles, to accommodate it. Because the Court has proceeded to meet the current emergency in a manner the Constitution does not envision, I respectfully dissent.”

    Oh Antonin Scalia, you crazy moonbat! Don’t you know that the new paradigm of the war on terror renders quaint the notions of human rights held in the Constitution? After all, it predates the hopelessly outdated Geneva Conventions by almost 80 years!

  94. 94.

    The Cavalry

    November 7, 2005 at 8:48 am

    Support for torture is not American.

    I agree with this. I think Americans are humane and pragmatic. Many believe that torture is acceptable in the “ticking bomb” case, but I don’t think that very many (other than a couple of commenters here) believe anyone should be tortured under less urgent circumstances, no matter what they may be guilty of.

  95. 95.

    Red Dawn

    November 7, 2005 at 10:02 am

    Americans across the board think torturing terrorists is just fine.

    Stormy honey, I know the thought of torture makes you moist, but I can assure you that you know NOTHING about the Roman Catholic church in this country. While some Opus Dei fascists might agree with you, the other 99.9% of Catholics and 100% of the clergy and nuns would school you VERY quickly as to how wrong you are..

  96. 96.

    Cyrus

    November 7, 2005 at 10:04 am

    Let me ask you something, Stormy. Everything I’ve seen describing the content of this amendment McCain is sponsoring – sorry I don’t have a cite, I’ll one if you really claim you’re ignorant of this – indicates that it only codifies and makes explicit the already-existing policy on torture. People are pushing for the amendment because the applicability of existing policy has been called into question, or just because they believe it has already been violated, but the point is that the amendment is mostly (not entirely) symbolic. So, in your own words, why it is being opposed by the White House?

  97. 97.

    DougJ

    November 7, 2005 at 10:51 am

    Americans across the board think torturing terrorists is just fine.

    I think there’s a typo there. It was supposed to read “If water boarded, Americans will agree that torturing terrorists is fine.”

  98. 98.

    Steve S

    November 7, 2005 at 11:08 am

    This is why people would rather have their toenails pulled out than comment here. People get slimed for their opinions by such pleasant posters. I am not pro-torture, but I have no problem with cruel, degrading abuse heaped on terrorists if it will get them to break. You guys would rather lawyer them up, and coddle them for the rest of their lives. No way in hell can the Democrats be trusted with National Security. No way.

    Oh yeah, well you would rather your mother floated out to sea on a raft with nothing but a bottle of Jack Daniels to keep her company!

    Whatever.

    You don’t get to whine about unfair stereotypes, and then toss out a few of their own.

  99. 99.

    ppGaz

    November 7, 2005 at 11:33 am

    Kevin Drum has about the right take on this:

    Even more, I wish that George Bush opposed state sanctioned torture and told his vice president so in no uncertain terms. So far, though, he has declined to do this. On the contrary, his reaction to last week’s Washington Post expose about overseas “black sites,” where torture of prisoners is apparently routine, has not been to express shock and dismay — or even to feign it — but rather to order an internal inquiry into how Dana Priest found out about it.

    As for Cheney, Laura Rozen has the right idea:

    If he had been supporting the very same policies he is now advocating while representing a regime like Serbia’s, the big man would be in a Hague jail cell. The same support for torture. The same naked contempt for democratic processes. The same contempt for law. The same contempt for their people.

  100. 100.

    nyrev

    November 7, 2005 at 11:35 am

    Americans across the board think torturing terrorists is just fine.

    I am not pro-torture

    Make up your mind, Stormy.

  101. 101.

    DougJ

    November 7, 2005 at 11:41 am

    Come on, don’t you it is possible to be for “cruel, degrading abuse” and yet not be “pro-torture’? The same way it is possible to support a “culture of life” while executing hundreds of people and bombing thousands of civilians. You America-hating traitors are so obtuse.

  102. 102.

    ppGaz

    November 7, 2005 at 11:45 am

    I am not pro-torture, but I have no problem with cruel, degrading abuse heaped on terrorists if it will get them to break.

    Again Stormy manages to channel Ho Chi Minh.

  103. 103.

    The Disenfranchised Voter

    November 7, 2005 at 12:46 pm

    Come on, don’t you it is possible to be for “cruel, degrading abuse” and yet not be “pro-torture’? The same way it is possible to support a “culture of life” while executing hundreds of people and bombing thousands of civilians. You America-hating traitors are so obtuse.

    Ha!

  104. 104.

    Stormy70

    November 7, 2005 at 1:22 pm

    You guys are great. I don’t support the “culture of life” or outright physical torture of prisoners. I do think Americans across the board have no problem with the torturing of terrorists. I never claimed to be one that believed in the physical torture of terrorists, but I believe we can degrade their religion, show them naked women, or present fake blood to them if it achieves our objectives. To some here, if we cut eyes at them, it is TORTURE. Why doesn’t someone here give me a definition of what you are calling torture. I call this torture: pliers, cutting, electrocuting, punching, kicking or drowning prisoners. I am against this, but I guess that is too clear of a statement for you “nuanced” geniuses. Now, will someone give me what constitutes torture, in the general sense, not anecdotes pulled from the Daily Mirror or the Guardian in Britain. I want the general definition, or does it need to be left open so you can continue your outright hatred for all that the War on Terror involves.

  105. 105.

    DougJ

    November 7, 2005 at 1:25 pm

    Stormy, I was talking about George Bush when I said the thing about the “culture of life”, not you.

    Also, I was mocking how you think torture is bad but “cruel, degrading abuse” is okay. What’s the difference? All of your examples of torture fall under “cruel, degrading abuse”. So I think the issue here is your definition of “cruel, degrading abuse”.

    Degrading the prisoner’s religion is a big, big mistake. I thought we were trying to win hearts and minds in the Muslim world, right?

  106. 106.

    Stormy70

    November 7, 2005 at 1:35 pm

    I don’t think we need to win a terrorists heart or his mind. It is too full of hate. Ask Indonesians what wins hearts and minds. It is the humanitarian aid we sent them via our military. That did more good than anything else we have done. You don’t win the Muslim mind by appeasement, ever. That gets you nowhere.

    gotta go now, appt in Dallas. :(

  107. 107.

    DougJ

    November 7, 2005 at 1:42 pm

    When we degrade Islam, it hurts us with *all* Muslims, not just the terrorists. Do you think other Muslims say “It’s okay that they degraded Islam, because they were only doing it to terrorists”?

  108. 108.

    Kimmitt

    November 7, 2005 at 2:29 pm

    You don’t win the Muslim mind by appeasement, ever.

    Declining to torture people isn’t appeasement, it’s decency.

  109. 109.

    nyrev

    November 7, 2005 at 2:59 pm

    What are you, Doug J., French? Don’t you know that all Muslims are potential terrorists? You’ve got to show them who’s in charge! And if the regular, DoD-approved interrogation tactics don’t cut it, Stormy’s band of merry fratboys will be there to dump chemicals in detainees’ eyes, break their legs with bats, and hold their families hostage. It’s the American way, Stormy-style!

  110. 110.

    jack

    November 7, 2005 at 3:12 pm

    And here we are…again.

    There are valid points that are made–and ignored. Many of you ARE strangely silent when talking about the tortures inflicted on Americans. And when someone calls you on this you respond–erroneously–that this point is being made to justify torture by Americans. Why is this erroneous? Because it doesn’t address the question. Why ARE som many of you silent regarding the tortures perpetrated by others? By Castro, right now. By common jails all over the Islamic world? Why is it that our torture sets your teeth on edge–and the continuing torture perpetrated by Muslims and Communists all around the world finds you mute?

    And what will McCain’s rider do? Stop torture? Please. If you believe that you are bigger folls than I’ve given you credit for.

    It will not stop. It is the interrogation technique of last resort. And it works(and to all of you who will rush in to tell me how it doesn’t–with cites and papers, I would point out it’s efficacy was proven on so mundane a television show as ‘Mythbusters’–a simple torture, with an expected result). No one has to LIKE it. Like War, it is not something that we should like. But sometimes….

    The mewling of politicians will not stand in the way of those fighting for survival.

    And lastly, a definition. The ‘practice’ cannot even be defined–what is torture to one is easily endurable to another. And do not think that physical damage works equally well on all people. Ther are those who can hold their tongues as they are being cut into pieces–while they would scream for mercy if tickled. Define torture before you even start thinking about banning it.

  111. 111.

    ppGaz

    November 7, 2005 at 3:18 pm

    Why ARE som many of you silent regarding the tortures perpetrated by others? By Castro, right now. By common jails all over the Islamic world? Why is it that our torture sets your teeth on edge

    Because it’s about us, and who we are. Torture by Castro is about Castro. We don’t control Castro. We control ourselves.

    This is obvious, but apparently not obvious enough for some people.

  112. 112.

    ppGaz

    November 7, 2005 at 3:21 pm

    Define torture before you even start thinking about banning it.

    Nope. I don’t have to define every possible form of torture, nor do so in a way that is acceptable to you.

    The phrase “cruel and unusual” didn’t come with a CD-ROM illustrating its myriad forms, and yet we seem to be generally able to use that phrase to achieve its intended purpose.

  113. 113.

    rilkefan

    November 7, 2005 at 3:45 pm

    Surely some Christian here will opine on whether crucifixion is torture.

  114. 114.

    ppGaz

    November 7, 2005 at 3:50 pm

    Surely some Christian here will opine on whether crucifixion is torture.

    I think it depends on whether it “worked.”

  115. 115.

    Andrew J. Lazarus

    November 7, 2005 at 4:15 pm

    Hey Jack, you don’t know Jack. In a democracy, we’re ultimately responsible for the atrocious behavior of our leaders.

    It would have been nice of you to post a link to the Mythbusters proof that torture works. I have a couple of questions about it. Did they start with a hardened terrorist willing to commit suicide, or a random member of the studio audience? And did they perform a test to check for false positives, which is the real practical problem with torture (leaving morality aside): there isn’t any magic moment where you’ve done just enough torture to know the guy who won’t confess is innocent, and not stonewalling. Are you prepared to argue that right-wing hero Cardinal Mindszenty, who confessed under torture, was really guilty? How about the Iranian Jewish shoe salesman who confessed to being an Israeli spy?

    I have a theory that creeps who don’t object to torture would be the first to crumble. Let’s see, Jack, if our lawyers can prepare some sort of contract. I bet in a month of torutre I can get you to confess to participation in the plot to kill Abraham Lincoln, with Mother Teresa as co-conspirator.

  116. 116.

    Sojourner

    November 7, 2005 at 4:50 pm

    Is Stormy channeling DougJ? These messages lack her twisted sense of language.

  117. 117.

    Kalafan

    November 7, 2005 at 6:17 pm

    If I may…

    You guys really like to focus on small shit, don’t you? That’s probably why your now-pathetic-ass country hasn’t won a war since WW2; you obsess over the smaller shit (on your own side for that matter!) and completely ignore the larger mission at hand. Tell me whether it really matters that we have people getting smacked up and electrocuted in Cuba when at the same time we blow up several dozen apartment blocks via artillery and bomber aircraft. Either way, bitching endlessly about it isn’t going to end the war any quicker.

  118. 118.

    rilkefan

    November 7, 2005 at 7:01 pm

    Kalafan – for whatever reason, crucifying a few people in custody is more likely to result in universal hatred for one’s country than blowing up a few thousand civilians providing cover (perhaps unwillingly) for insurgents.

    Thought experiemnt: you have to take door A or B. Behind door A is a 1% chance of being tortured by Egypt’s best guy for a few weeks then buried alive. Behind door B is a 50% chance of getting shot in your sleep. What door do you take? How does that depend on the probabilities involved?

  119. 119.

    ppGaz

    November 7, 2005 at 8:01 pm

    What door do you take?

    C.

  120. 120.

    rilkefan

    November 7, 2005 at 8:32 pm

    “C.”

    Uh, that’s the door to an eternity as Rush Limbaugh’s sex slave. You might want to reconsider.

  121. 121.

    ppGaz

    November 7, 2005 at 8:36 pm

    Ah, the Darren Kagan door. I must decline then.

  122. 122.

    jack

    November 8, 2005 at 12:45 pm

    Ah, so we don’t even have to know what it is to ban it! I am amazed. And, for the record, should you care to do some research, you’d find that ‘cruel and unusual’ is a very fluid term–one that relies on individual judgement more than overarching statute.

    In democracy we ARE ultimately responsible for the actions taken under our aegis, true, but it we do not win–if we are not there to be responsible…what matters it that we were slain unsullied? Our children are just as dead. Our civilization may be nobler dust, but it is still dust–ground under the heels of those who had no compunction about using whatever it took to survive.

    I will atone after it is assured that my children and my country are both safe. I will do what I can to insure that this type of horror never happens again, that humans are never driven to these awful methods to ensure their survival again. After we’re safe.

    And no, I do not care one whit about the safety of those that would destroy us.

    ppGaz, what many of us are getting at here is that you(some of you anyway) seem to excuse the torture that aids the revolution. You have no problem with the torture that helps your own goals–AND, being here, in the bastion of free thought and speech, you manage to keep you moral hands clean. Torture that furthers leftist and Islamic aims seems to be fine–for, while some of you support those aims, you did not actually ‘elect’ the socialist monster who’s doing the torturing, no?

    Andrew, the Mythbusters episode in question tested the Chinese Water Torture–largely, I think, because it looks so ineffective.

    False positives. This is where the one being questioned gives false information to end the torture, yes? Or is this when they are innocent? Any statement made can be checked–provided that it’s in the future(torturing to get confessions of past crimes is pretty pointless) And I have spoken before of the sadness of what must be done with an innocent.

    However, that being said, I don’t think someone captured on a battlefield qualifies as ‘innocent’.

    Finally, you’re right. Torture would not work on me. It wouldn’t have to. I’d sing like a bird. Did I kill Lincoln? Absolutely. And Mother Teresa held him down while I beat his head in with John Wilkes’ booth. Wow. You win. You don’t understand the situation, Andrew. Agents are TOLD to sing. Objectives have redundancies built into them to provide for the possibility of compromise–and American agents, soldiers and the like KNOW that torture–without anyone complaining about it–is a very real possibility for them.

Comments are closed.

Trackbacks

  1. In Search Of Utopia says:
    November 6, 2005 at 1:12 pm

    Around the Sphere November 6th, 2005

    This is a Republican Fantasy… The reason we lost the last two elections was about the candidate, not the platform. My caption to this photo. “Man I wish these people would learn to speak english!” Meanwhile, the Right continues to…

  2. Balloon Juice says:
    November 13, 2005 at 10:16 am

    […] In this comment on Juan Cole’s blog, the writer says the whole prisoner abuse issue, while serious, has been blown out of proportion by liberals. The comment goes on to state that the McCain Amendment is well-intentioned, but “the solution to doing this without crossing over into torture is to discipline those who step over the line, not to tie the military’s hands behind its back.” […]

Primary Sidebar

On The Road - Winter Wren - Point Lobos State Natural Reserve 3
Image by Winter Wren (7/31/25)

World Central Kitchen

Donate

Recent Comments

  • Martin on GOP Venality Open Thread: May Van Orden Be the First of Many Defections… (Jul 10, 2025 @ 12:47pm)
  • Martin on GOP Venality Open Thread: May Van Orden Be the First of Many Defections… (Jul 10, 2025 @ 12:46pm)
  • Chief Oshkosh on GOP Venality Open Thread: May Van Orden Be the First of Many Defections… (Jul 10, 2025 @ 12:46pm)
  • The Audacity of Krope on GOP Venality Open Thread: May Van Orden Be the First of Many Defections… (Jul 10, 2025 @ 12:40pm)
  • Ruckus on Justice Brown Jackson Will Not Be Silenced (Jul 10, 2025 @ 12:35pm)

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
No Kings Protests June 14 2025

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)
Fix Nyms with Apostrophes

Social Media

Balloon Juice
WaterGirl
TaMara
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
DougJ NYT Pitchbot
mistermix

Keeping Track

Legal Challenges (Lawfare)
Republicans Fleeing Town Halls (TPM)
21 Letters (to Borrow or Steal)
Search Donations from a Brand

Feeling Defeated?  If We Give Up, It's Game Over

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2025 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!