You are framing the debate assuming Cheney's claim that torture (of course he doesn't call it that) is effective. Many highly experienced, professional interrogators have spoken out repeatedly about the fact that these coercive techniques do not work. The FBI's experience and techniques have resulted in acquiring credible intelligence from dangerous terrorists without resorting to torture.
The Constitution is not a suicide pact. If there is a ticking nuclear bomb under NYC I'm not going to object to an agent putting a little additional pressure on an interrogation, but not torture. Two reasons for that: 1. Torture is a violation of our moral principles, and 2. It is UNRELIABLE in getting accurate information.
Furthermore, there are credible claims that Bush-Cheney used torture to extract false confessions linking Saddam to Al Qeada. The shame this brings on America is deeply saddening to me.
Now how about that condemnation of Rick Perry?
Flame » in reply to You're desperately ducking the main issue.
I'm avoiding falling into the way you frame the debate
The whole thread (40 posts)
- Party of No finds someting to say yes to: Torture
- Really? Wasn't the Republicans that hauled this issue to center stage.
- This issue goes to the heart of American values. Shouldn't it be debated?
- And on that "inconvenient truth"
- I'm glad your are so proud to support the Grand Old Party of Torutre
- Does whether something's true or not ever make a difference? (n/t)
- Mke that the Grand Old Party of Torutre and Secessionists
- I'm glad your are so proud to support the Grand Old Party of Torutre
- So Cheney never defended the use of waterboarding? Sorry, my mistake... (n/t)
- Really? Wasn't the Republicans that hauled this issue to center stage.