Nothing I just stated came from the TV. Here's some advice for you; stop frequenting the "MoveOn.org" type websites.

__________________
"This is a time for a national imperative not to fail in Iraq." Condoleeza Rice, January 11, 2007

Obstructing justice? There are times when I don't give a crap about obstructing justice. Let's pretend for a minute that the Abu Ghraib idiots didn't take pictures. Let's say they got away with their stupid games. How awful would it be? Considering how those pictures have been used by our enemies, I say we'd be better off. Yep. There are times when justice can take a back seat. At least two of our brave soldiers were tortured, had their eyes gouged out etc. and murdered because of those pictures. Somehow, the feeling of righteousness just doesn't satisfy me.

I have little doubt that if those videos were intact, they'd be swiftly traveling around the world by now. Thank God they've been destroyed.

__________________
Order without liberty and liberty without order are equally destructive. - Theodore Roosevelt

Horse-pucky. It didn't save any lives. This all happened after the fact, remember? Sheesh.... spin, spin, spin-spin-spinnaroo......

So like, JP, what do we actually learn from this information? I mean, from what I know about torture, which is thankfully "not much" first-hand, but I mean, all these special-ops types I've talked to, have kinda told me that the thing about torture, is you have to get to this place in your mind that kinda says, "I'd rather die that talk", and be okay with the concept of dying rather than talking, you know, be comfortable with that, in spite of the fact that you're in ongoing and excruciating pain.

So I mean, what does it tell you, if a guy like KSM only lasted two minutes?

You know, that's like four or five dunks or something like that - that's not even anything "protracted" or "severe", compared to, say, what McCain had to go through in Vietnam.

So, what does that tell you? Well, what it tells me, is that if KSM who's supposedly a "committed ideologue", can't get to that place in his mind that says "I'd rather die than talk", then that tells me he's really not doing it for ideological reasons -

You know, it's like, his American captors aren't "enough" of an enemy, to where he's not gonna share the vital information with 'em if he's in fear of losing his life.

So I mean, you know, OBL would probably have the guy executed on the spot, if he ever showed his face back in Pakistan or Afghanistan or something - and I mean, none of those Gitmo guys wanna go home either, right?

So I mean, you know, I'm a practical man, I look around the world, and I notice things. You know, when the Iranians kidnapped our hostages and held 'em for 400 days, they let the Russians go in three days. Know why? It's 'cause the KGB kidnapped some minor Mullah's daughter, chopped off her ring finger, and sent it to her father along with a nice little note that explained what was gonna happen to the rest of her fingers if the Russian hostages weren't released "soon, and without too many complications".

And lo and behold - voila - a day later, no more Russian hostages.

But I repeat, don't tell me about that stuff. You know, if I find out about it, I wanna find out about it twenty years later when I read some newspaper piece by some clever young investigative reporter. But if you're telling me I'm supposed accept it as an instrument of national policy, my answer is going to be NO.

If it's as justifiable as you think it is, and it's so totally okay for them to torture people, then why did they have to destroy the tape? Why not just show it, and then the proper authorities and the people in whose name this action is being done can judge for themselves.

You guys seem to think it's okay. So why should they hide?

Well, look - that's a good question, and here's my thought on it:

Nothing good, can possibly come of a tape like that, being released to the public.

And that's what would happen, "eventually", right? I mean, some reporter is gonna get hold of it or something, and it's gonna be used for propaganda purposes, it'll be like, plastered on every web site in the whole entire world -

"Look, here's what the USA is doing these days".....

You know, and I mean, the reality of something like that, registering on the little old ladies who form a significant chunk of the Christian conservative voting block, would be like..... you could kiss any hope of a Republican President goodbye, for a long, LONG time to come.

And I mean, this is the CIA we're talking about, right? They deal in issues of national security, and I mean, if someone in the CIA is going to release the fact that such a tape exists (or "existed"), then one of two things is true: either a) he's a whistle-blower, or b) someone told him to do it. And if it's the latter, there's almost "no doubt whatsoever", that such a decision would have to go right up to the very top, which would mean either Hayden or Bushie himself. 'Cause that's political, right? Such decisions don't get made by anyone but the top-dog policy-maker types.

But I rather think that in this case, it's more likely that some clever reporter picked up wind of the existence of "something" at some point, and then once someone got wind that there was something in the wind, they made sure that the odor went away before the breeze got stronger -

So, you know, all things considered, I still think I don't have a problem with this "destruction of evidence", if you want to call it that. I mean, the President of the United States himself (via his direct minions) has admitted that he did the waterboarding, that it actually occurred - and he claims it was useful and it helped - so I mean, yo uknow, what more do you want? The guy admits it happened, so what do we need to see the whole thing in living color? Ain't it bad enough to know that "it happened"? And to have the President of the United States stand there and tell you that it happened on your behalf?

they didn't torture. show some proof. roll the tape

nevermind

__________________
"Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind."
-Dr Seuss
You should have heard what i meant to say (apologies to Thelonious Monk)
"The police are not here to cause disorder....
...The police are here to preserve disorder."
Hon. Richard J. Daley
Chicago, 1968

No torture = No pictures

It was not the act of photography that incensed anyone.

__________________
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.
Marx (G.)

I knew someone would do that, John. Obviously, I blame the Abu Ghraib idiots for what they did. Though I do not believe anything they did constitutes torture, I do think what they did was treason. Allowing the pictures to be published was also treasonous, IMO.

__________________
Order without liberty and liberty without order are equally destructive. - Theodore Roosevelt

"We're bad, just not as bad as them!" I would have thought you'd be against moral relativism. *shrug*

Thats a shame really. Without justice, without moral fortitude, what are we supposed to be proud of America for? There is never a time for our dedication to justice to be relaxed. It is that sort of mentality that is allowing the moral collapse of this country. Justice isn't just important when its convenient, or when its easy. In fact, dedication to justice is even more important when it is hard. That is when our character is tempered, and our values put to the test.

I understand that you're upset at the reaction the Abu Ghraib pictures got. BUT, the pictures didn't leap up and hurt anyone. The pictures didn't hypnotize those men to do what they did. The fault lies in the soldiers that chose to undermine America and torture others, and the men that returned the favor. Don't blame the messenger here.

__________________
DILIGITE JUSTITIAM QUI JUDICATIS TERRAM

I'll save my sadness for something infinitely more important than a terrorist getting waterboarded. Such as whether to have chicken or beef for dinner tonight. Or whether I want to wear blue trousers or black. His testimony lead to the direct capture of other terrorists. While in theory we shouldn't torture, in situations like this I'm willing to look the other way. So much for the "torture never works" argument. I do find the obstruction of justice part a tad bothersome, but on the other hand if whistleblowing (which can be a crime) is considered ok for the common good then the same argument can be made here.

__________________
JMS gets another English lesson:

Quote:

there is no "mostly unique;" thats like saying "sometimes always," its an oxymoron - its either one or the other.

The result:

Quote:

By the mid-19th century unique had developed a wider meaning, “not typical, unusual,” and it is in this wider sense that it is compared. The comparison of so-called absolutes in senses that are not absolute is standard in all varieties of speech and writing.