[lit-ideas] Re: Is torture wrong by definition?
- From: JimKandJulieB@xxxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 03:49:36 EDT
They *will*? A day late and a dollar short.
<<Now I want to say that you and Robert are right to
be concerned about the potential for abuse. People
like you guys will always prevent empowered wackos
from going too far>>
Julie Krueger
========Original Message======== Subj: [lit-ideas] Re: Is torture wrong
by definition? Date: 4/7/06 1:25:18 A.M. Central Daylight Time From:
_eyost1132@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (mailto:eyost1132@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) To:
_lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (mailto:lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) Sent on:
Andreas wrote: I am talking about the consequences
for the US. How will this affect American society?
Every war affects society adversely. In your heart
of hearts, you don't believe we're at war, so you
want to discuss adverse consequences as if it were
the trumping concern. I believe we're at war, and
see defeating various terror groups and franchises
as the trumping concern.
I demonstrated that you were wrong about the value
of confessions extracted by torture, at least in
the case of KSM.
Now I want to say that you and Robert are right to
be concerned about the potential for abuse. People
like you guys will always prevent empowered wackos
from going too far. Your concern for freedom is
laudable, and it's not my intention to "defend"
torture per se or the sadism of prison guards.
Yet I think we're at war. It doesn't make me
happy. I wish it were not so, but I will not go
into denial about it. You seem to dismiss the
whole thing as a scam by Bush. I think Bush
certainly may have manipulated parts of the terror
war to benefit his cronies and his party, but I
also think the war is real.
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
