Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Actual left/right wing discussion -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kevin Rose who wrote (6637)	5/22/2007 9:03:53 PM
From: Augustus Gloop	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10087

FUNNY FUNNY FUNNY post of the day Message 23563752

To: Kevin Rose who wrote (6637)	5/22/2007 9:45:16 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10087

I don't think Tim has given his blanket approval on aggressive interrogation. If I remember correctly, he simply noted that there is a difference and that he would consider some forms of interrogation as objectionable without needing to classify them as torture. I can imagine all kinds of treatments to be objectionable that would not qualify as interrogative torture. The circumstance is a consideration as well? So, if it doesn't unduly broaden the topic for others, I would like to know how you all feel about heinous criminals or organized crime members with regards to this topic?

To: Kevin Rose who wrote (6637)	5/23/2007 6:17:43 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10087

I said it wasn't torture. I didn't say whether or not I approve of it even for terrorists. Your jumping to conclusions. As for regular criminals, there wouldn't be too many cases where there would be any justification for it. Edit - Re your comment in a later post "My (underlying) point is that I believe a certain percentage of the pro-torture bloc is actually more attracted to the punitive side of torture." Its a stretch to call me part of "the pro-torture bloc", and to the extent I'd accept torture, or even mistreatment that falls short of torture, in some extreme situations, it wouldn't have much to do with the putative side. Well there might in theory be some reasons for using pain and/or discomfort as punishment. Other cultures have done it, for example whipping someone, or putting them in the stocks for a punishment. It sound inhumane, but it might not be less human than locking someone up in prison for 20 years. I'm not calling for, or supporting such punishments or even seriously considering them, but I don't reject the idea out of hand, after consideration its possible I might totally reject it, or its possible that I might not. I haven't given the idea to much thought, and really there is not much reason to, as in our culture such punishments are considered unacceptable, and there is no serious proposal to move in that direction. I'm just pointing that idea out to be honest and thorough in my response.