|
Chamale posted:When did the transition happen for so many people to start thinking like that? I vaguely remember a time when torture was something bad people did. Obviously that attitude changed somewhere between 9/11 and the end of the Bush Administration, but when the first reports of torture came out were people outraged about them? I guess it was split between the people who said "support the President no matter what" and the other 50% of the country. Torturing people is definitely something that Bad People do, but this isn't torture, it's 'interrogating' terrorists, and because terrorists are Bad People, it's ok to interrogate them, so we can stop them doing terrorism, if we didn't, they would do lots more terrorism and maybe kill some of us, so instead we should interrogate them, and us, sometimes, to make sure to stop terrorism. Alternatively: Torturing is something Bad People do, but it's not the torturing that makes them bad, they're just intrinsically bad and torturing is just proof of that, also they do it for fun. It's OK for not-bad people to do torture for reasons. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 06:23 on Dec 14, 2014 |
#
¿
Dec 14, 2014 06:17
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 06:41 |
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:Well I always comfort myself by understanding that the world is more peaceful and prosperous then it has ever been, and people from as short as hundred years ago or so would consider it a paradise exempting countries like Syria. It's all relative. Though arguably with the increase in human population over the last century we are now at the point where the total number of people suffering and dying for stupid reasons at this moment is an appreciable fraction of all the humans who have ever lived. Never before in history has there been quite such a torrent of human suffering taking place in the world at once. But we do have videos of cute foxes on youtube I guess which helps counterbalance it somewhat. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 07:11 on Dec 14, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2014 07:06
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:Point: The CIA should be disbanded. Are freedoms? Terrorism! Sleeper cell over there not over here, enhanced interrogation? Protecting freedom "necessary evil" what about the guilty we released.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2014 22:23
|
|
|
twodot posted:That seems most likely to me given what we know. There's obviously other ways to gather inadmissible evidence, they probably also have some hearsay evidence where they can't or aren't willing to produce the actual person for testimony. I'm unclear on the admissibility of evidence gathered without a warrant/probable cause oversea. I think the issue that you may be missing is that the reason evidence obtained through torture is not admissible in court is because it isn't actually evidence.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2014 23:42
|
|
|
Kazak_Hstan posted:Instead of disbanding the CIA, why not aim for a more achievable target? Name and remove torture participants. It is somewhat overlooked that the people who did this are largely still with the agency. They've promoted up, they should now be in management positions. One reason it's certain this will happen again is that people who did it will be quite literally running the place. Can't do that, would compromise national security.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2014 23:50
|
|
|
twodot posted:This is just denying reality. Torture coerced confessions are evidence. They are bad evidence that is frequently wrong, and we should assume they are wrong, but even if we had some corroborating fact telling us one was right, we still shouldn't admit them in court, because torture is immoral, and the exclusionary rule is there to influence law enforcement policies, not because it could be wrong. It's pretty well documented that torturing people doesn't produce actionably accurate information, it produces whatever the torturer wants to hear so that the torture will stop. The best you can achieve with torture is confirming your pre-existng bias, and if you want to do that there are much cheaper ways to do it.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2014 23:52
|
|
|
twodot posted:Right I agree torture is bad/stupid. We were talking about whether or not things people say after they are tortured qualifies as evidence, and why such evidence wouldn't be admitted at trial (it is because the exclusionary rule is attempting to force law enforcement to act morally/within the law, not because the exclusionary rule is attempting to make law enforcement use effective policies). My point is more that if the justification for holding them is that we have evidence, but it wouldn't be prosecutable, possibly 'we tortured him until he said he did it so we'd stop' isn't really the best example of 'we all know he did it but we can't bring it to court'
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2014 00:00
|
|
|
twodot posted:If I'm wrong on point 1, why do you think the government is holding those people? (Your later post suggests you are simply incapable of reading, I don't know what to make of your posts anymore) You're a little bit difficult to follow, every time you rephrase it it still sounds like you're saying the government is doing the right thing.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2014 17:39
|
|
|
twodot posted:Please quote anything I've said that said the government is doing the right thing instead of the government believes it is doing the right thing (which is what I've actually said). Keep in mind that I've said multiple times that we shouldn't torture people, that there are no good reasons to hold people without charge, and that the best benefit of the doubt I'm willing to give the government is that they aren't literal comic book super villains. When you say stuff like: twodot posted:Perhaps I should state this more directly, I believe two things: 1) The government believes it is justified in holding these people indefinitely, and 2) They believe their reasons for believing that are legitimate. I propose that 1) is true, but 2) is badly reasoned. Do you have an issue with that? It's confusing, because it sounds like you're saying you agree with the first one but not the second. Because the alternative is that you're saying you believe that your belief that the government believes that they are justified, is true, which... frankly is much harder to parse than it needs to be.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2014 18:10
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 06:41 |
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Surely getting the people who compromised our national security by providing false intel obtained through barbaric methods that created enemies around the world could only help national security. That's why you need a bigger national security budget next year, duh.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2014 19:13
|
|
