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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jlallen who wrote (480010)	5/12/2009 12:49:58 PM
From: one_less	Respond to of 1576108

My recommendation, 'don't burn down your house to eliminate the fear of trespassers.' Torture is an abhorrent abomination, in principle and in the eyes of America; so is terrorism. Complicating things further, we do not have a clear case of military combat or of a subdued prisoner so traditional classifications no longer apply. Idealistically, I am against coercive treatment of any sort but we don't live in an ideal world. Society turns on coercive influences. For example your boss might say you have to work through the weekend to get the project under control, and if you want to keep your job you will do it. When it comes to prisoners, the very act or restraining or incarcerating with terms is coercive. So we can't claim prisoners aren't coerced. Interrogation can't be completely separated from the coercive conditions. The question then becomes, where is the line crossed when legally sanctioned coercion becomes torture. It seems to me the Bush Administration were diligent in having the conditions of legal sanction properly established. Unfortunately there is lots of angst from other stuff that is being piled atop this issue so we may need a couple of generations to truly separate our selves from personal bias.