Czuch: Yes.. and in saying so I included quantum math. It is part of the model you know And yes.. you said you presume your models work until they don't...

.. So.. we are in agreement that the model is that there is no model. No way to predict accurately events. Builders know this. Even if they have a plan, they always have to include an uncertainty principle for things that they cannot control.

And it would be helpful if you remember what you said, that democracy was the main reason that we went to war in Iraq... or was it WMD's??

But then saying you have no higher moral ground would negate such reasons. And then the question is.... why were you tired of Saddam?

(V): And if you knew about quantum physics then you'd know nothing is certain at that level.


i NEVER SAID THAT ANY MODEL WOULD CREATE CERTAINTY.... YOU SAID THAT MODELS DONT WORK, PERIOD! tHEN YOU PROMOTED gODS MODEL....

So, again, which is it for you? If models dont work Chuck, then Gods model must be faulty as well?

Artful Dodger: Good. Then you'd recognise that your whole argument is based on sand?

Czuch: Yes I do, and such a model includes quantum physics. And if you knew about quantum physics then you'd know nothing is certain at that level.

I also include, 6 dimensional space and 'brains and multi verses... big 'brains!!

Übergeek 바둑이: lobodan Milosevic was tried for crimes against humanity, and all he did is in essence the same that American troops have done in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Such as? "Milosevic tortured and killed islamic fundamentalists" ?

Extraordinary rendition is nothing new. It was used during the cold war as the US shifted communist insurgents from one Latin American country to another. For example, Salvadoran communists would be sent by the CIA to Honduras or Guatemala for interrogation and torture. Back then there was no Internet and CNN was in its infancy, so such occurrences, like most Cold War atrocities, went unknown.

The Bush administration did two things that allowed extraordinary rendition to take place. First, it classified all enemies captured during the war in Afghanistan as "unlawful combatants". By exploiting technicalities in the law governing the Geneva Convention the Bush administration made all prisoners of war "unlawful" meaning that their human rights would not be protected by the Geneva Convention.

This is how the Guantamo Bay prison (and later Abu Graib) came to be. To do this the Bush administration needed approval from Congress and the Supreme Court. The appointment of Alberto Gonzalez to the Supreme Court made it possible for such legal manouvering to take place.

Waterboarding is a really old torture technique going back to the Spanish Inquisition. The US developed a modern method during the Vietnam war. It was used as a torture and interrogation technique against the Vietcong. It was further refined through the 1980s in Latin America as political prisoners were interrogated to stop local Communist parties from suceeding in carrying out their revolutions. A good example was Chile where dictator Agusto Pinochet used it against civilians and suspected communists.

Waterboarding used to be illegal. In 1983 law enforcement personnel who used waterboarding were sentenced to 10 years in prison. After WWII Japanese soldiers were sent to prison for using waterboarding against American POWs.

The Bush administration lowered the classification of waterboarding and made it "benign". A torture technique that goes back for hundreds of years became acceptable.

The Bush administration got away with this by getting around the Geneva Convention and by convincing the American public that waterboarding is not torture and is an essential interrogation technique against terrorists.

Well, might is right. The people who held power during the Bush administration are above the law. Slobodan Milosevic was tried for crimes against humanity, and all he did is in essence the same that American troops have done in Iraq and Afghanistan. Milosevic tortured and killed islamic fundamentalists trying to break Serbia apart. If Milosevic had done so during the Iraq war, he would have been ignored just as the world ignored what the Russians did in Chechnya against separatist moslems, or what the Chinese did in Western China against their moslem minority.

(V): Now you have me confused again, with your contradictions..... models dont work except God created a model at creation that bound?????


You have ignored this one.... You say that models dont work, yet you seem to promote the model that God set into place????

(V): So Czuch... you've just blown the reasons you say America started the Iraq war on. Moral high ground.


Wrong again... we started the war in iraq because we were sick and tired of wasting our time and resources monitoring Saddam and paying to feed his people.....

(V): So, we can say the same of USA people that get killed or tortured?


yes, sure you can say that, but Daniel Pearl??? Really?

Which is why one must hold every story of theirs to a powerful microscope. 

http://harpers.org/archive/2009/02/hbc-90004326

gogul:  Ok, now that I've finished that first article I can say that if true, it needs to be exposed because that goes too far.  I'd like to know the truth but I doubt we'll ever know.   There's always another side.  One thing that strikes me is that for a secretive operation there certainly are a great deal of known facts.  That's very odd for something that is supposed to be top secret.   

Just an aside but I'll bet if given the choice, those dudes would have preferred water boarding. 

gogul:  I'd heard about this but to be honest I'm not fully caught up on the ins and outs.  That the ACLU is behind the suit troubles me.  They sue anyone - even the boy scouts.  But I'll look into it and decide.

One thing off the top of my head:  If the US had detained nuns or a couple of pre-school teachers, well then that is something.  But I'm less sympathetic when it comes to terrorists. 

The govts of this world will face their stupidity believe me, they'll have to clean the kitchen und the dust under the carpet a day. As Sarcozy said: too much dust under the carpet means problem in the future.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4611518.stm

This is in german unfortunately, march '09 http://www.dickmarty.ch/Docs/2009326_berlino_cia_bundestag_20min_090326.pdf

Artful Dodger: http://articles.latimes.com/2007/may/31/local/me-rendition31


Obama doesn't want this trial, for the reason it could treat the national security.

gogul:
overwhelming indices would be a place to start.  But it must be backed with some facts etc in order to be accepted.  

Artful Dodger: Do you use the word evidence as in 'clue'? I don't have 'prove' but overwhelming indices *edit: I got the evidence*

Wikipedia: black site

Madrid and New York, that are the events where islamic terror seemed involved. A decade of terror in the western world spots on Madrid and New York. Are all these national security laws since really justified? The answer is a no.

gogul:  I know nothing of such black holes or people dying while being interrogated.  Some evidence please. 

Artful Dodger: A fair trial.

Artful Dodger: The US entertains black holes round the globe, strange flights carry people who disapear in there. Then there are estimations of maybe 100 people died in interrogations in Irak and Afghanistan. To be specific, wouldn't that be the job o a trial?

gogul:  When people speak about actions that qualify as torture, I need to know what specific actions you are talking about because torture to some is listening to loud music over and over.  My neighbors do that and it's lawful here up to 10pm.  So if you speak of torture, you gotta be specific.

Torture is a crime in the US, no matter where it happens. In January, Chucky Taylor, the son on Charles Taylor, was sentenced in Florida to 97 years prison for torture in Liberia. If it comes to US-torturer, US states secrets have priority, the law didn't count much under Obama so far, these trials could be a treat to the national security, so Obama. To me this means the same as if he would say that if we uncover these problems, people will stop trusting the US-government.

(V):  nope and nope and nope.   And I won't waste any more time with you on it. 

GTCharlie: And human bEiNgS have developed the ability to choose and not be bound by animal fear and flight.. Not to act like animals trapped in a corner lashing out.

Czuch: So, we can say the same of USA people that get killed or tortured?

slippery slope.....

Artful Dodger: Only three people.. have you definite proof of that? And what of the other illegal methods of gaining info, which the USA gov and judicial say are illegal to use on their people??

Artful Dodger: Nope.. I answered. And so did Czuch.. and if you agree with Czuch that you needed no moral ground to start using waterboarding, etc then you've dumped your morality full stop.

You cannot have it both ways... only tyrants try that and they fail..

Czuch: So Czuch... you've just blown the reasons you say America started the Iraq war on. Moral high ground.

So we can now say that you finally admit it was an illegal war.

ok????

Übergeek 바둑이:   water boarding has worked every time.   It's not nuns that are captured on the battle field.  It's enemy combatants.  And in all the thousands that have been captured, only three have been water boarded.  And in those cases,  information that was vital to the safety of others was obtained. 

We can create any scenario we want to discredit water boarding.  But the reality is this:  it hasn't been used since 2003 and when used, it was used only on those well-known for their terrorists activities.   In all seriousness, I don't want water boarding to be used as a routine tactic against the enemy.  But I don't want it completely removed from the tool box either.

Notice that beheadings is not being discussed amongst the terrorists with some on one side saying it's a useful tool and others saying it's too cruel.  No, they video tape it and post it on the web. 

I also wouldn't want law enforcement to use this technique without serious parameters.  There are too many loose cannons out there.  But if I had a guy in my custody and I knew that he had info on where one of my grand kids were, the police better hurry.   I may go to jail for it, but I won't stand by and do nothing.   What if I'm wrong about this guy?   I don't act recklessly.   But I will err on the side of my family's welfare.  Every time.

Übergeek 바둑이: But they(we) all do anyways, we humans hide behind self righteous stuff as though we're so civilized. We(the good guys,, the side God is on) never will stoop to bad behavior) and the terrorists say the same thing also but the ugly truth is everyone does what ever it takes to win, and always has.. ever study chimpanzee tribe behavior? humans are just a higher form

Artful Dodger:

> Because one of the arguments for water boarding is that it is to be used
> only as a last resort and only when there is good reason to believe that
> lives are at stake. I have no sympathy for people who want to kills us.

In other words, information obtained under duress is acceptable in order to save human life. It might be inadmissible in court, but it is acceptable because human life has been saved. The right to life of the victims takes precedence over the human rights of the prisoner. "Innocent until proven guilty" does not apply. Waterboard first, ask questions later, because human lives are at stake.

Then, waterboarding has failed and the suspect is still refusing to give us information. It is time for the hot irons and psychotropic drug injections. Since the "method of last resort" failed, should we find another "last resort" after that?

I find the argument that waterboarding is rather benign as somewhat shallow. Who decides what harmful means? A doctor working for the Pentagon tells us that waterboarding is no more harmful than falling in the deep end of the swimming pool and wading to the edge of the pool. Another psychiatrist comes out and tells us that the spychological damage could leave a person scarred for life. Should we wait 50 years and then ask victims how they feel?

On the other hand, the military has sent a clear message to other people around the world. If the military can use dubious interrogation tactics, so can everyone else. Somewhere in the world somebody will be waterboarded and when somebody asks why a government will manufacture evidence and say the person was guilty. We will have to live with that as an acceptable risk.

Terrorist around the world will say "Look at what the American military did. They torture people." Then waterboarding will become a symbol under which terrorists will justify their actions, just as Abu Graib and Guantanamo Bay are used in terrorist propaganda.

Czuch:  Exactly.  I want the military to have all the tools they need to keep me safe.  But if Obama keeps it up, we'll have to Mirandize the enemy on the battle field. 

Here's me:  "You have the right to remain silent.  You have the right to an attorney.  If you cannot afford on, one will be appointed to you.  Please remember that anything you say can be used against you in a court of law.  Do you understand these rights as I've explained them?  Oh and one more thing:  Would you like fries with that?"

Übergeek 바둑이:

Case 1:
The police have caught a thief suspected of a string of
robberies at convenience stores. Since he has refused to confess to his
crimes during interrogation, the police decide to waterboard him to
elicit a confession. He confesses to his crimes and goes to jail.

Waterboarding should not be used to obtain confessions to a crime.  No lives are at stake here.

Case 2:
A
suspected serial killer has refused to confess to his crimes during
normal police interrogation. The police decide to use waterboarding to
make the serial killer confess and disclose the location of dead
victims that have not been found by the police. He confesses and is
sentenced to death.

Same as above

Case 3:
A child serial rapist has
abducted a child. If the police do not find the child it could die. The
police caught the suspect and decide to waterboard him. The suspect
discloses the location of the child and is sent to jail.

Yes, water board the pervert and then let the crowd beat the living crap out of him (after you accidently leave his cell door open).  Some jerk knows the whereabouts of my granddaughter I'm going to start taking off fingers. 

Case 4:
A
communist agitator has been organizing workers to join unions. He is
also suspected of organizing demostrations against the government. The
military capture this man and waterboard him to make him disclose the
location of his associates. The man confesses and he and all his
associates are sent to prison.

Same as number one.  No to waterboarding.

Case 5:
A man is supected of
being a member of the communist party and organizing guerrilla
operations against the government. He is captured and waterboarded to
make him disclose the location of the guerrilla command and all of his
revolutionary comrades. He confesses and is sent to prison. His
comrades were never found.

It depends on whether or not there is an immediate dangers to innocent people.  If you join a guerrilla organization intent on harming the US, and you get caught, don't expect tea and crumpets. 

Case 6:
An radical anarchist is
suspected of carrying out bombings against banks. This has disrupted
the businesses of banks and cost millions in property damage. He
confesses to his crimes during waterboarding and is sent to prison.

No.  Same as case 1

Case 7:
A
man is suspected of being a member of Al Qaida and of having
information in a bombing that could leave hundreds of people dead. He
is subjected to waterboarding, but refuses to confess claiming that he
is innocent. During the course of investigation it is found that he is
indeed innocent and he is set free.

Yes to water boarding.  It's not like they just would randomly pull some guy out of a crowd.  There was good reason to suspect him.  You can't know he's innocent until after a full investigation.   But when lives are at stake, you do what you have to do.  Waterboarding is simply unpleasant.  For some, a trip to the dentist is worse.

I divided my cases as follows:

Case 1: a common criminal
Case 2: a dangerous criminal with no victims in imminent danger
Case 3: a dangerous criminal with a victim in imminent danger
Case 4: a political prisoner not implicated in acts of terrorism
Case 5: a political prisoner suspected of acts against the government
Case 6: a political prisoner commiting acts of terrorism
Case 7: a suspected terrorist who is later found innocent

So my questions are:

If
waterboarding is not torture, why are the police and other law
enforcement agencies not allowed to use it when interrogating prisoners
(cases 1, 2 and 3)?

Because one of the arguments for water boarding is that it is to be used only as a last resort and only when there is good reason to believe that lives are at stake.  I have no sympathy for people who want to kills us.  A bank robber, once caught, poses no more threat.

Why is waterboarding not used to put extremely dangerous criminals away (case 2)?

See the previous answer.

Is waterboarding acceptable to save a human life (see case 3)?

Of course it is.  So is removing some dudes fingers.   Maybe a few other parts too. 

Is waterboarding acceptable for undesirable political views or political prisoners (case 4)?

No

Is waterboarding acceptable for any military action involving guerrilla warfare or insurgents (case 5)?

If lives are at stake -- yes

Are all forms of terrorism (including mere economic terrorism) a good reason to use waterboarding (case 6)?

If lives are at stake, yes. 

What do we do is somebody is subjected to waterboarding and is later found innocent (case 7)?

Buy him ice cream.  Let's face it, they don't pull nuns out of the convent and water board them.  If you join a terrorists organization, and then are suspected of doing something that jeopardizes the lives of others, don't complain when given a bath upside down.  Here's a concept:  get a good job, don't join a terrorist group bent on hurting others. 

I
find that waterboarding is one of those areas that some people see as
black and white, and other see as grey. I am curious to see some
opinions.

(V): Call it what you will, but the fact remains that none of it would be used at all, just the threat would be enough, all they have to do is cooperate, its their own fault, any technique gets used against them.

Unlike beheading Dan Pearl, which is done simply for the fun of it, our interrogations are for a purpose, and can be avoided with cooperation.

(V): no, you didn't answer the question posed. You ducked again. I already know the answer anyway. So it doesn't matter.

(V): Even God is bound (or so they say) by the laws of physical science as they are bound from the moment of creation when all that is was decided to be.


Models don't work Czuch...







Now you have me confused again, with your contradictions..... models dont work except God created a model at creation that bound?????

Übergeek 바둑이: If waterboarding fails it is likely that either nothing else would or the subject has no real information.

Übergeek 바둑이: Waterboarding is not acceptable to get a confession, because people will confess to anything to avoid....

But getting intel is a different story, you cannot make up good intel just to avoid....

(V): And hate creates pain.

(V): So when did someone decide the American spirit has become so weak that it needs to behave as it once said was so wrong??




911

Übergeek 바둑이: I know. police are prosecuted for over using violence and prosecuted and sent to jail.

If a criminal hurts someone they are sent to jail. I've never heard of someone being above the law.. even God is bound (or so they say) by the laws of physical science as they are bound from the moment of creation when all that is was decided to be.

Now if God has to obey the laws, I can see no exception!!

And it appears that the CIA were no longer considered a trustworthy source of intelligence. A total lack of trust in intelligence!!

So.. that made those high up afraid.. they then used that fear to justify torture. And because a certain amount of programming involving "us and them" was inbred into the American political system it created an ability to say "them".

I thought we were all classed as humans.

And it appears that the CIA were no longer considered a trustworthy source of intelligence. A total lack of trust in intelligence!!

So.. that made those high up afraid.. they then used that fear to justify torture. And because a certain amount of programming involving "us and them" was inbred into the American political system it created an ability to say "them".

I thought we</i> were all classed as humans.