Text 11201, 83 rader
Skriven 2009-05-15 22:17:20 av JOHN FITZGERALD (1:123/140)
     Kommentar till en text av DAVE DRUM
Ärende: Torture - A Realistic Vie
=================================
-


 
DD>   And they haven't been scientifically tested.
DD>   What is the problem with that?

JF>   Again, they claim nothing has been scientifically tested,
JF>   so they are in no position to say what works,
JF>   as they attempted to do.
 
DD>   I said that they haven't been "scientifically tested".
DD>   Why do you keep hammering on that? Is it an attempt
DD>   to add credence to your otherwise specious arguments?
 
JF>   No time for your side-winding.  I am addressing what they have
JF> said... not what you have said.  THEY have said none of the Army's
JF> techniques have been "scientifically tested".  
 
DD>  Now who is "sidewinding"? I qouted what the authors said - so it is
DD>  automatically MY words?

  You have a reading problem.  Didn't say they were your words.  Again, 
in the very passage you are, uh. 'responding' to, I said...   
"THEY claim nothing has been scientifically tested..."  


  The 'scientifically tested' claim is a ruse.  What are they going to 
do in a 'scientific test' that they haven't  done already?
Do you even know? 



DD>   Get a clue, John. Or is your love for the expediency of
DD>   torture and inflicting pain so great that you cannot?

  Sure Dave, and all those who support our troops love to shoot and 
kill people for no reason.  So much for your 6th grade analysis. 
If you had any real argument, you wouldn't have to resort to your 
mud-pie throwing.


JF>   From that point on they can't make claims about what 
JF>   works and doesn't work if they are going
JF>   to stick to that original contention.

DD>  Yes, they can. Because they have observerved which methods 
DD>  give reliable information and which do not.

  That's what they claim.   Now ask yourself why would they keep using 
these techniques all of these years if they didn't work.  Duh?



JF>   And just how do you expect to get any info from these
JF>   characters if they know you will never even make them
JF>   uncomfortable, or 'abuse' them in any way?   By boring
JF>   them to death with silly lectures?
 
DD>   Why, John, by winning their trust (or at least tolerance).
 
JF>   You must really think their captives are pushovers and morons. 
JF>   If they know you're gonna goo-goo them and place 'nice', and never
JF>   'abuse'  them, or even take their blanket away, because there's 
JF>   always gonna be some long-nosed pencil-pusher around to see that
JF>   that doesn't happen,  then - WHY - should they turn on their 
JF>   fellow men and go against the  cause they believe in?   
JF>   Can you explain WHY?? 

    As I thought, you can't explain why.  Once again Dave, tell us why 
a dedicated prisoner is going to give up info' by just talking to him. 
Once again Dave, if a prisoner knows you will never "abuse" him, not 
even take his blanket away, tell us why he should turn on his own people.
Your PR piece didn't/couldn't tell us why, so we'll wait for your take 
on the issue.   Tell us why, Dave.  Aside from your cut and paste attempts,
at dealing with this issue your whole approach has been partisan, 
emotional and pathetically naive.

 

---
 *    TALK!   Or I'll ask you more questions!    *
 * Origin: Doc's Place BBS Fido Since 1991 docsplace.tzo.com (1:123/140)