CIA used mock executions etc.

Originally Posted by Aramike

Sure buddy. You seem to be intent upon proving the rest of us that you have no idea what you're talking about, and the whole basis of your arguments are an anti-US bias. Were you abused as a child by an American or something?

Your sense of righteous indignation has no credibility for the reasons I said early on in this thread.

Oh I'm sure the Americans would love to torture me too, I mean they really have this kinky thing about torture.

[AngusJS]

Originally Posted by Aramike

Wrong.

The argument only becomes "basic" when you simplify it out of context. Sorry, but you have no authority to simplify the expression and context of an argument in order to invalidate it. Doing so changes the argument. As such, it becomes YOUR construct, and YOU end up only arguing against yourself.

Dude, give it a rest.

Actually, you repeatedly made the silly argument that becuase the CIA was doing it, it must work. Letum just showed how your reasoning was fallacious. Only later did you expand on it to try and get out of that sinkhole....by an appeal to authority.

Secondly, the argument that torture doesn't work fails heavily when one considers that, if it wasn't working, it wouldn't be used.

History is full of instances when groups of experts have screwed up royally. You have to provide something more than your appeal to the authority of the CIA, how they are in a special position and are therefore suitably immune to confirmation bias, and are not simply the latest in a long line of experts who have been dead wrong. The burden of proof is on you because torture had previously been thought to be ineffective. You have to show why now it magically works and is perfectly justified, now that the US is doing it.

Regarding the charge of hypocrisy against those who decry torture in America but who are supposedly silent when it happens in places like China: baloney. If there was a thread about torture in China, I would register my disgust there. It's only hypocrisy if you oppose it in one instance, while actively supporting it in another instance without suitable justification.

It's just, gosh, I hold the US to a higher standard than the People's Republic, silly me.

Maybe he has too much class to attack an entire nation just because he's irritated with a single individual.

Thank you , that should be obvious
Yet clearly...

Yet he attacks the entire nation instead of me.

...some people can't understand something that simple .
Simple steps to follow , get an adult to help if you get stuck on them Herring
1 Someone writes a pile of crap
2 A scientific report on the subject is quoted and shows that to be a pile of crap
3 It simply shows that the claim was a pile of crap.

Easy isn't it
Unless of course we live in your alternative reality where the steps are
1 You write a pile of crap
2 Someone shows you have written crap
3 As you are from Finland they are obviously showing that they hate Finland and think all Finns are as silly as you are.

So back to the main topic .
Some people have mentioned as a justification the effectiveness of torture for gaining information.
What does the released document from the insector general of the CIA say about the effectiveness?

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Thank you , that should be obvious
Yet clearly...

...some people can't understand something that simple .
Simple steps to follow , get an adult to help if you get stuck on them Herring
1 Someone writes a pile of crap
2 A scientific report on the subject is quoted and shows that to be a pile of crap
3 It simply shows that the claim was a pile of crap.

Easy isn't it
Unless of course we live in your alternative reality where the steps are
1 You write a pile of crap
2 Someone shows you have written crap
3 As you are from Finland they are obviously showing that they hate Finland and think all Finns are as silly as you are.

So back to the main topic .
Some people have mentioned as a justification the effectiveness of torture for gaining information.
What does the released document from the insector general of the CIA say about the effectiveness?

Is it really that difficult for you to stay on topic, tax evader?

[Aramike]

Actually, you repeatedly made the silly argument that becuase the CIA was doing it, it must work. Letum just showed how your reasoning was fallacious. Only later did you expand on it to try and get out of that sinkhole....by an appeal to authority.

Not at all. I was making an argument based upon the idea that it only makes sense that the CIA would act logically. Logically speaking, they wouldn't use the techniques if they didn't work.

Now, if you want to argue that the CIA is illogical then you should provide reasonings and motives.

Letum's argument is a failure (and subsequently, so is yours) because he's trying to reduce a matter of justifiable opinions into an absolute construct. First of all, to even try that is foolish. Secondly, he's only doing it to distract from the actual discussion, because he can't actually counter the point.

History is full of instances when groups of experts have screwed up royally. You have to provide something more than your appeal to the authority of the CIA, how they are in a special position and are therefore suitably immune to confirmation bias, and are not simply the latest in a long line of experts who have been dead wrong.

We're not talking about a behavior being employed with long lasting, unforseeable implications. We're talking about a behavior that either works relatively immediately and verifiably, or does not.

The burden of proof is on you because torture had previously been thought to be ineffective. You have to show why now it magically works and is perfectly justified, now that the US is doing it.

It cracks me up when lefties with weak arguments try to assign a burden of proof. Torture either works or it doesn't. Both are verifiable claims. Therefore, in a debate, the burden of proof falls onto BOTH sides to show why they're right. This isn't a discussion on theism where neither side is verifiable, but only one side is positing a claim.

Regarding the charge of hypocrisy against those who decry torture in America but who are supposedly silent when it happens in places like China: baloney. there was a thread about torture in China, I would register my disgust there. It's only hypocrisy if you oppose it in one instance, while actively supporting it in another instance without suitable justification.

Don't make me laugh. Your reasonings are flawed.

We're not talking about a thread that just magically appeared here - we're talking about a thread that the individual in question started. Furthermore, he's shown a clear bias, and instead of making the general moral argument as a foundation for his disgust, he only frames it within a certain context.

It's just, gosh, I hold the US to a higher standard than the People's Republic, silly me.

Unfortunately your standards don't make the world turn.

Is it really that difficult for you to stay on topic, tax evader?

I hate to break it to ya, but if someone writes....

the US is the fattest nation in the world.

.....in a topic then any response following that on the same issue are on topic
Oh, and everyone avoids tax if they have a functioning brain , therefore I take it that you don't try and avoid tax.

Torture either works or it doesn't. Both are verifiable claims. Therefore, in a debate, the burden of proof falls onto BOTH sides to show why they're right.

What does the report say on the effectiveness of torture?
Surely as you are arguing in support of the CIAs use of torture then their own report backs you up decisively.

Originally Posted by Tribesman

I hate to break it to ya, but if someone writes....


.....in a topic then any response following that on the same issue are on topic

No it isn't.

Oh, and everyone avoids tax if they have a functioning brain , therefore I take it that you don't try and avoid tax.

Tax evasion is a crime.

Back on topic:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8217414.stm

"The US justice department is calling for about a dozen prisoner abuse cases to be reopened, US media say.The recommendation could lead to the prosecution of CIA employees and contractors over the treatment of terrorism suspects, the reports say."

No it isn't.

Simple steps again.
1. someone writes something in a topic
2. someone writes a response to what was written in the topic
Step 2 is on topic because Step 1 is in the topic

Tax evasion is a crime.

Tax avoidance isn't a crime. It is a fundamental right for every person to pay as little tax in as they legally can.
Is that concept simply beyond your grasp?
Or perhaps you just don't understand how the tax systems work and how to use them properly.

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Simple steps again.
1. someone writes something in a topic
2. someone writes a response to what was written in the topic
Step 2 is on topic because Step 1 is in the topic

I think you're confusing the concept of thread with the concept of topic.

But anyway.

Tax avoidance isn't a crime. It is a fundamental right for every person to pay as little tax in as they legally can.
Is that concept simply beyond your grasp?
Or perhaps you just don't understand how the tax systems work and how to use them properly.

Yea it must be that then.

Again, posting something relevant to the thread.

http://www.soaw.org/article.php?id=98

[Jimbuna]

Oh no!!....it's come back to life