On scandal and excommunication

[Tex]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

You make me laugh. At you. Not with you.

So what about someone who puts a hole into people's tongues. Is that torture, Tex? Labia?

What kind of a question is that?

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Tex

What kind of a question is that?

you said that the act itself, removed from context, is a violation of the law. So I am asking if putting a hole through a tongue is something that will get you prosecuted, or is otherwise against the law.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

you said that the act itself, removed from context, is a violation of the law. So I am asking if putting a hole through a tongue is something that will get you prosecuted, or is otherwise against the law.

I said no such thing. And your comparison is absurd.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

Next, we should answer the question of who should be prosecuted in the military for waterboarding our own soldiers as a part of training.

And let's find that SOB who waterboarded Christopher Hitchens.

And if Keith Olbermann waterboards Sean Hannity, I expect to see him arrested and maybe executed too.

Really? That is where you are going to take your argument? Hitchens was waterboarded in a totally controlled environment where he was told ahead of time that it would stop as soon as he wanted it to (and even then, he blacked out and dropped the safety device and was unable to physically communicate that he wanted the waterboarding to stop). Those are hardly the circumstances to which Bybee opined. Instead, his opinion justified the waterboarding of KSM 183 times in 30 days and was used in circumstances designed to make the subject feel like they were going to die. Indeed, Bybee even noted in his memo that he assumed, in forming his opinion, that waterboarding involved the threat of imminent death.

Waterboarding of the type that you are describing with Hitchens is hardly comparable (his entire procedure lasted two seconds, was voluntarily undertaken, and at no point involved the threat of imminent death and it STILL brought about unconsciousness).

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Really? That is where you are going to take your argument? Hitchens was waterboarded in a totally controlled environment where he was told ahead of time that it would stop as soon as he wanted it to (and even then, he blacked out and dropped the safety device and was unable to physically communicate that he wanted the waterboarding to stop). Those are hardly the circumstances to which Bybee opined. Instead, his opinion justified the waterboarding of KSM 183 times in 30 days and was used in circumstances designed to make the subject feel like they were going to die. Indeed, Bybee even noted in his memo that he assumed, in forming his opinion, that waterboarding involved the threat of imminent death.

Waterboarding of the type that you are describing with Hitchens is hardly comparable (his entire procedure lasted two seconds, was voluntarily undertaken, and at no point involved the threat of imminent death and it STILL brought about unconsciousness).

Right. So as long as you are voluntarily having bamboo shot under your fingernails, and as long as it only lasts 2 seconds, it's totally moral and legal. Got it.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

Right. So as long as you are voluntarily having bamboo shot under your fingernails, and as long as it only lasts 2 seconds, it's totally moral and legal. Got it.

Of course it would be legal, Tex. If I shoved bamboo under my fingernails right now, are you of the opinion it is illegal? If I pay my friend to do that for a youtube video, are you telling me it is illegal? Under what statute? I think you may not know anything about the law. You may want to look up the concept of mens rea.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Of course it would be legal, Tex. If I shoved bamboo under my fingernails right now, are you of the opinion it is illegal? If I pay my friend to do that for a youtube video, are you telling me it is illegal? Under what statute? I think you may not know anything about the law. You may want to look up the concept of mens rea.

Tex knows nothing about a lot of thing of things.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Of course it would be legal, Tex. If I shoved bamboo under my fingernails right now, are you of the opinion it is illegal? If I pay my friend to do that for a youtube video, are you telling me it is illegal? Under what statute? I think you may not know anything about the law. You may want to look up the concept of mens rea.

You're just playing games with the examples. The point is, you seem to think torture is A-OK as long as the person volunteers.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

You're just playing games with the examples. The point is, you seem to think torture is A-OK as long as the person volunteers.

Playing games? You argued that it is illegal for someone to shove bamboo shoots up their fingers or to have someone else do it to them. Are you abandoning that line of argument? Because you know if you do, you must concede the vast difference between what happened to Hitchens and what happened to KSM, and if you concede that, well- you haven't been right about anything in this thread.

IF someone volunteers for "torture," it isn't, by definition, torture until it crosses a line into territory where they have a fear of imminent death (and if the person didn't stop "torturing" them at that point, it would be illegal. So yes, it is legally A-OK to shove bamboo shoots up someone's fingernails if they want you to do it.

[MikeWaters]

I've ripped out people's toenails.

I didn't commit torture.