"thunder" wrote in message
t...
On Tue, 12 May 2009 15:50:23 -0400, Wizard of Woodstock wrote:


1 - The "dirty hands" dilemma which is really a cost/benefit analysis.
The usual circumstances are the "ticking bomb" scenario in which a bomb
is set to go off and kill thousands of people - the cost of harming one
human life to save thousands of human lives is defensible and/or
excusable. This argument basically states that while morally
indefensible, the end result justifies the means.

If, in truth, there were a "ticking bomb", the torture argument does
become hazier, but the reality is that scenario is extremely rare, and
doesn't apply in this case. This was torture used for plain old
"ordinary" intelligence. When you put people in a violent situation,
there will be torture, and illegal killings. That can be put down as
"**** happens", but when you allow torture as policy, you place this
country on the same level as Pinochet's Chile, Stalin's Soviet Union,
Hitler's Germany...


To me, it isn't whether torture works or not, it's about what it says
about us. We're ****in' barbarians.



Tell me.

Are we as barbaric as a society who beheads innocent people and posts the
video on the internet for all to see including the family of the victims?
Are we as barbaric as a group who sneak into the USA, hijack airplanes and
fly them into buildings in downtown NY city, killing about 3000?
Are we as barbaric as a group who instill lifelong hatred into 6 year old
kids and promote the killing of the "infidels" as a religious honor and
duty?

And that's not considering how they treat their own who don't obey.

Sorry. I have no sympathy for them.

Eisboch