Comments on: Torture Still Qualified at NY Times

By: 3645

3645 — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 19:22:39 +0000

No; I really don't agree. No one ever knows what they'll do under extreme circumstances but they can determine in advance what they would HOPE they would do. I hope that if someone had a bomb that was going to kill me, or my loved ones, or both of us, and only torture would persuade him to say where the bomb was, I would have the courage and the faith to say, "Don't torture him".

Torture is dehumanizing not only for the one tortured, but even more for the one doing the torturing. I don't want to live at the cost of dehumanizing other people. I don't want to be alive knowing that my life or the lives of those I love came at the cost of someone else's agony.

I am sickened daily at the thought that the taxes I pay are paying for someone else's screams and whimpers.

By: Sister Begonia

Sister Begonia — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 16:35:02 +0000

The NYT should be waterboarded 183 times!

By: jhm

jhm — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 13:10:34 +0000

Pace eurail pass, and the Times ("Mr. Mohammed's initial defiance toward his captors set off an interrogation plan…."), I thought that it was revealed that KSM gave all of his meaningful information prior to being tortured, and mostly meaningless drivel (along with increasing resentment afterwards. I have no link, but am I mistaken, or were these reports debunked?

By: eurail pass

eurail pass — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 03:01:17 +0000

My question to the opponents of these harsh methods is – I support the decision that torture should NOT be used on detainees. That only reduces the US to their level. HOWEVER…

In the case of KSM, where he had sure knowledge of pending attacks against the US – and mild coercement did not work, whjat would they have done instead, lectured him to death or begged him to talk?

It's a catch 22 but these desperate times do call for desperate measures and there is an exception to every rule.