Investigate 911 and the New World Order

Alien Allen said:
well that is a new one

makes little sense that something with that big of an obrit could show up in 2 years and then 2 years later have such greater interference.

sounds like junk science based on the bible to me
Click to expand...

Years ago there was an actual search for Planet X, speculated upon by gravitational anomolies. It eventually led to the discovery of Pluto but it wasn't large enough to account for the anomoly.

Pluto, at it's small size, was discovered by Clyde Tombaugh in 1930 using a blink comparator and glass slides taken with a 16" telescope. I would like to believe that astronomers, with the advancements in technology and digital enhancements, could discover a much larger planet. They are even detecting Jovian planets orbiting suns many light-years away.

Footnote: it was calculated that Planet X would have an orbit very close to the one of Pluto.
 
well technically would there not have to be a declared war for it to be a war crime? ;)
Click to expand...

Allen, how funny would it be if it was your loved on the end of the cattle prod?

Alien Allen said:
I keep seeing it repeated about prisoners murdered at Gtmo. anybody have details on that? some link that is reputable which details what occured?
Click to expand...

I think it was Abu Ghraib where prisoners were murdered at least the ones that are know about. That has been documented but I don't have a handy link.
 
Minor Axis said:
Allen, how funny would it be if it was your loved on the end of the cattle prod?



I think it was Abu Ghraib where prisoners were murdered at least the ones that are know about. That has been documented but I don't have a handy link.
Click to expand...
when you come up with the link let me know

If my loved one was an evil person I doubt I would have a problem with the cattle prod. Evil is evil and if the situation is dire then ya gotta do what ya gotta do.

Keep in mind I did say it would be rare are only under extra ordinary circumstances. Not routine.
 
Alien Allen said:
I can understand that. As I said in my world it would be very rare and used only under extra ordinary circumstances. I can see how some would disagree but if there was intel that said somebody knew the where abouts of a bomb to be detonated or another 911 in the planning I don't want torture off the table. Tis a dicy issue what determines when it could be used and I would know it when I saw it but realize the concern there could be abuse of the practice. I am willing to risk that as long as it does not put somebodys life at risk. Hurt the shit out of em but not kill them.
Click to expand...

you mean terrorize them for a good cause, then.
 
Alien Allen said:
kinda sorta if you want to put it in such a simplistic way.

looks like you ignore my point about it being rare and under extra ordinary circumstances.

it is not black and white for me as it is for some who see there never to be a time when it might require a desperate measure.
Click to expand...

nah...i caught that...it was a good post, bill...honest :thumbup

but YOU, on the other hand, are always deserving of being given a hard time :24:
 
Alien Allen said:
If my loved one was an evil person I doubt I would have a problem with the cattle prod. Evil is evil and if the situation is dire then ya gotta do what ya gotta do.
Click to expand...

Bingo! Point number two- it could be your POW son in the next conflict at the end of the cattle prod. And the U.S. would have no moral standing to object. "Gotta do what ya gotta do" is such a flexible concept. :)
 
Minor Axis said:
Bingo! Point number two- it could be your POW son in the next conflict at the end of the cattle prod. And the U.S. would have no moral standing to object. "Gotta do what ya gotta do" is such a flexible concept. :)
Click to expand...

I guess if the other countries didn't use a cattle prod you'd have an argument but since they already do that argument just blows away in smoke.

Let me remind you; democracies don't go to war against each other.
 
Strauss said:
I guess if the other countries didn't use a cattle prod you'd have an argument but since they already do that argument just blows away in smoke.

Let me remind you; democracies don't go to war against each other.
Click to expand...

If you don't understand or disagree with this argument, then there is really nothing left to say to you. The point is that the moral high ground used to mean something. I know it's tough when you've swallowed the Republican's party method of operating.
 
Minor Axis said:
If you don't understand or disagree with this argument, then there is really nothing left to say to you. The point is that the moral high ground used to mean something. I know it's tough when you've swallowed the Republican's party method of operating.
Click to expand...

No one is suggesting loss of the moral high ground but what you fail to recognize in your "holier-than-thou" attitude is only using the cattle prod in rare circumstances would mean we still occupy the high ground.

You seems to take this tack of "nothing left to say to you" when your arguments are shown to be less than (lets say) well thought out.
 
lumpenstein said:
1984 is a must read. I am preparing an essay explaining what aspects of the book, if any, are manifest in today's society.

Goldstein was a member of the government who's job was to "revise" history to match changes in government policy.
Click to expand...
I was wrong, getting names mixed up. I have lost my copy of 1984 and can't reference it. I think Goldstein was the object of the Two Minute Hate, being labelled as a traitor.
 
Strauss said:
No one is suggesting loss of the moral high ground but what you fail to recognize in your "holier-than-thou" attitude is only using the cattle prod in rare circumstances would mean we still occupy the high ground.

You seems to take this tack of "nothing left to say to you" when your arguments are shown to be less than (lets say) well thought out.
Click to expand...

He's a pilot so put it in words he'd understand.

Minor--how far would you have done (or would go) to disarm a plot on board a plane you are piloting to bring it down?

Your problem (being Minor) is you are too rigid in your application of morality while at the same time recognizing the morality is relative. The latter of course is accurate and once one recognizes that, then one recognizes that different situations call for different measures, whether its discplining a child, or interrogating a suspect.

My personal viewpoint is that infliction of physical pain should not be used, but certainly psychological and emotional tactics used to the extent necessary.
 
Fox Mulder said:
He's a pilot so put it in words he'd understand.

Minor--how far would you have done (or would go) to disarm a plot on board a plane you are piloting to bring it down?

Your problem (being Minor) is you are too rigid in your application of morality while at the same time recognizing the morality is relative. The latter of course is accurate and once one recognizes that, then one recognizes that different situations call for different measures, whether its discplining a child, or interrogating a suspect.

My personal viewpoint is that infliction of physical pain should not be used, but certainly psychological and emotional tactics used to the extent necessary.
Click to expand...

That is what my view is although I did not spell that out.

Where there is a gray area is with something like waterboarding. It is a physical act but not like the cattle prod. And the intent is not to drown or one would just do that. It is torture but I would use it in a heartbeat under one of those rare and extra ordinary situations.

You came up with a new term too. Disarming a plot.
 
Fox Mulder said:
My personal viewpoint is that infliction of physical pain should not be used, but certainly psychological and emotional tactics used to the extent necessary.
Click to expand...

interesting...being a prisoner on foreign soil is itself emotionally and pyschologically trying....so there is certain logic there i like

but i'm still curious about the physical pain part.....in terms of extracting information, why would it be considered the greater of two evils?

i mean, it's all about breaking down resistance, isn't it?.....breaking one's will and pride and determination....to do that through emotional and psychological means would be both a slower process, and one that, in the end, would far more completely realize it goal.

is that "better", if the use of torture is being considered ONLY because of the feeling that the prisoner has information that we need NOW?
 
Fox Mulder said:
He's a pilot so put it in words he'd understand.

Minor--how far would you have done (or would go) to disarm a plot on board a plane you are piloting to bring it down?

Your problem (being Minor) is you are too rigid in your application of morality while at the same time recognizing the morality is relative. The latter of course is accurate and once one recognizes that, then one recognizes that different situations call for different measures, whether its discplining a child, or interrogating a suspect.

My personal viewpoint is that infliction of physical pain should not be used, but certainly psychological and emotional tactics used to the extent necessary.
Click to expand...

That is apples and oranges. A planned, systematic torture is completely different than disarming a terrorist on a plane. What's the difference? You have time to think! With a prisoner to be interrogated you can pause and ask yourself how far are you willing to go to get the information you need. When you are on the plane and the psycho suddenly waves a knife and screams "Praise to Allah!" and charges you have about half a second to react (notice I said react, not think). That is the classic fight or flight scenario and has sweet fuck all to do with any moral code. It's survival; either you fight or you die and in that situation (assuming I had the balls to fight) I would do anything I had to to kill that crazy muther fucker because I know he is crazed not to stop trying to kill me until he is dead himself.
 
lumpenstein said:
That is apples and oranges. A planned, systematic torture is completely different than disarming a terrorist on a plane. What's the difference? You have time to think! With a prisoner to be interrogated you can pause and ask yourself how far are you willing to go to get the information you need. When you are on the plane and the psycho suddenly waves a knife and screams "Praise to Allah!" and charges you have about half a second to react (notice I said react, not think). That is the classic fight or flight scenario and has sweet fuck all to do with any moral code. It's survival; either you fight or you die and in that situation (assuming I had the balls to fight) I would do anything I had to to kill that crazy muther fucker because I know he is crazed not to stop trying to kill me until he is dead himself.
Click to expand...
so you must think that we would use torture for example to find out who is banging somebodys wife eh?

not apples and oranges. again you ignore the rare and extra ordinary part.

if you knew a person had a nuclear weapon others were going to set off in the middle of NYC what lengths would you go to to prevent it going off.
 
Alien Allen said:
so you must think that we would use torture for example to find out who is banging somebodys wife eh?

not apples and oranges. again you ignore the rare and extra ordinary part.

if you knew a person had a nuclear weapon others were going to set off in the middle of NYC what lengths would you go to to prevent it going off.
Click to expand...

Where did you get that first one from? :wtf:
What lengths? I'd make the fucker read every post you have ever made online until the poor bastard screamed for mercy! :p
 
Back
Top