Rush Limbaugh Speaks; The Time Bomb Scenario

[bryant69]

Poll question: Rush Limbaugh Speaks; The Time Bomb Scenario

Rush was talking about the Gonzolez confirmation hearings and mentioned that Arlen specter had proposed the Time bomb scenario. I.E. you capture a terrorists, he has a time bomb somwhere in the city, do you torture him to find out where?

Rush says that if you would consider torturing in that situation, it more or less automatically means you are open to all torture.

These guys and all the Democrat senators have spent all day saying, "Torture is horrible. Torture is rotten. Torture is not American. Torture is against the law." The president cannot override U.S. statute and authorize torture. The president can't even authorize torture and then grant clemency to the person who commits it. He can't even do that. "What, gentlemen, would you say about using torture during the ticking time bomb scenario?" And Admiral Hutson, the former JAG in the Clinton administration -- none of these guys would answer the question. None of them would answer the question. They came in there so damn sure, so damn sure, "We don't ever use torture! It's un-American! It's not who we are," but they would not say you wouldn't use it. They didn't even want to answer the question. I heard more legalese gobbledygook. I heard more elitist professorial gibberish than I have heard in 30 minutes in my life at one time. In fact, there was one slip-up. Admiral Hutson said, "Well, if you have to, but it shouldn't become who you are and it shouldn't set a precedent," and I said, "Well, your whole argument is out the window, then, admiral, because if you're going to authorize torture in the ticking bomb scenario, you're authorizing torture."

So there it is. What do you think?

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

Poll result (72 votes)
I could see torture in a "ticking time bomb" situation, and therefore all torture is ok with me	(1 votes, 1%)	Vote
I could see torturing in a ticking time bomb situation, but that doesn't excuse other torture	(4 votes, 6%)	Vote
I really don't know what I would do in a ticking time bomb situation, but either way, that doesn't excuse other torture.	(12 votes, 17%)	Vote
I wouldn't torture in a ticking time bomb situation, but torture is probaly ok in other cases (you might have to explain yourself on this one)	(0 votes, 0%)	Vote
I am opposed to all torture, ticking time bomb or no	(49 votes, 68%)	Vote
I like to vote	(6 votes, 8%)	Vote

[ElectroPrincess]

1. Somebody cut off Rush's Oxycotin Connection ... Please!

I would love to see that man prosecuted to the full extent of the law and be some big lugs "girl friend" (the polite term) in prison.

Imagine: Rush dancing' around in a skirt drooling all over himself doing anything for just a few more illicit pain killers?

What a waste of intelligence ... and dangerous (spewing propaganda and hate) to all that is moral and human ... all that we treasure from being known as Americans ... or at least told to value as children (kind, generous, always humane).

[MsConduct]

25. Somebody cut off Rush's media connection, that would solve

a lot of problems.

[chelsea0011]

2. It's not that you may be torturing someone who knows of a bomb

it's that you torture someone who doesn't know what the hell you are talking about. How many have been tortured, raped, and killed who haven't a clue about bin Laden, al Qeda or anything related? that's the problem. Hell, Randi Rhodes has been saying the past couple of days that bin Laden's body guard has been released from a German prison and the US has removed his name from a terrorist list. Isn't he the guy you want to torture she states? So who are we torturing if bin Laden's body isn't one of them?

[Warren Stupidity]

7. actually

if we are talking about the same shlep, he was some pashtun nobody who got paid to drive a car for bin laden. He knew nothing, except perhaps where bin laden was when bin laden was openly a guest of the taliban. So we kept him at gitmo for like two years putting him through the gonzales approved regimin of everything short of the pain associated with major organ failure in order to find out where osamma went for lunch.

The problem with torture, even under the ticking bomb scenario, is that you get out of the victim whatever it takes for you to stop inflicting pain. How that correlates to valid information is a question that the advocates of a modern inquisition simply refuse to answer. Perhaps we should torture the perpetrators of this vile practice until they admit that in addition to being simply evil, it doesn't even work.

In my opinion torture is primarily used by the state to validate its arbitrary and unjust actions by obtaining admissions of guilt from those people the state has chosen to victimize. It is used to sanction injustice.

[ginnyinWI]

3. torture doesn't work--all the experts say it doesn't. n/t

[TN al]

4. This one is so easy...

...'cause if Rush thought it up you know it is full of crap. Besides if there is a time bomb ticking it won't be ticking for long before it goes off. He won't have to withstand the torture for long.

What about the administration's promise to keep us safe? Does Rush admit the possibility that * and Dick (a description, not a name) could possibly get us into that situation?

[StClone]

5. Rush fabricates

A scenario to justify his perverted views for torture.

O.K. Rush you can use torture only in the instance that you describe. What a bag Bushit.

[Warpy]

6. Torture doesn't work

The ticking time bomb scenario presumes the guy wants to get out alive. Such a guy, if questioned anywhere near the ticking time bomb, will eventually cough up the information. If the guy doesn't expect to get out alive, then no amount of torture will get anything out of him but bogus information. People will waste their precious time on wild goose chases instead of performing a systematic search. There is no way to tell which group the guy is in.

Torture was abandoned for decades pre Bush because it simply doesn't work. People undergoing torture will say anything just to make it stop. It becomes a guessing game, trying to figure out what your tormentors want to hear so that one can get them to quit.

Barbarous fools who enjoy the pain of others will always try to justify torture. That is why we had LAWS against it. That Bushco think they are above all laws of this country should be reason enough to remove them.

[sportndandy]

8. Stop trying to scare us with ticking time bomb scenarios!!!

I don't believe a goddam thing I hear anymore!

And what a stupid scenario. Hi I am a terrorist. I have planted a bomb in the city and I won't tell you were it is unless you torture me! Nyah nyah!

[underpants]

9. Was there a ticking time bomb? I think Rush is an idiot

[WildClarySage]

10. Lets face it, there's torture and there's torture.

Beating the shit out of someone in an interrogation is one type of torture which results in information you can't actually act on because there is no reason to believe that the person will tell you the truth rather than just saying anything to make it stop.

Torturing someone by humiliation is not about learning anything, it's about trying to teach your enemy that that they are powerless and exist at your whim- again, not a method of extracting accurate information and certainly not a quick method of gaining anything usable.

Torturing someone by threatening to harm their families if they won't cooperate is simply more evil than anything 'they' can throw at us. It won't serve us to become more vile than our 'enemies'. And it's an excellent recruiting tool for groups opposing us. So why engage in that?

Torture only makes sense to masochistic assholes who get their rocks off by hurting others.

[Tace]

19. I Think You Mean "Sadistic Assholes" : )

[KG]

11. why do some believe the type of mind-set the produces suicide bombers

would give up info under torture?

beside this senario is so farfetched as to be a ridiculous arguement for torure.

[CornField]

12. The problem with the argument

Two things:

1) To do so, places the person doing the torturing (and those ordering it and allowing it) in the position of playing God. All are essentially saying that one life overrides another life.

2) As someone else has already stated, it isn't that one person "in the know" would be tortured for the bomb information. Every Joe and Jane who might know about the bomb will be tortured. And, once the nod has been given to torture techniques, how far does it go? Where does it stop? Body scars? Life-threatening wounds? Organ failure? Death?

[demgurl]

13. This totally confuses me......

Are we talking about a real time bomb? If we are, are we saying that it is *? Should we be toturing Rush and Rummy until they admit * is a time bomb about to go off? So many questions and it just confuses me more and more. <g>

[Cats Against Frist]

14. I think Rush's argument is a logical fallacy (or several):

or a couple of them:

Fallacy of Converse Accident:

Definition:

An exception to a generalization is applied to cases where the
generalization should apply.


http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/convacc.htm


Fallacy of the False Dilemma:

Definition:

A limited number of options (usually two) is given, while in reality there are more options. A false dilemma is an illegitimate use of the "or" operator.
Putting issues or opinions into "black or white" terms is a common instance of this fallacy.

http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/distract/fd.htm


Fallacy of Irrelevant Conclusion (ignoratio elenchi):

Definition:

An argument which purports to prove one thing instead
proves a different conclusion.


http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/irrelev.htm

[femme.democratique]

15. Why does everyone forget a simple dose of truth serum?

Would work better than any physical means IMO.

[TahitiNut]

20. There is no such thing as "truth serum" - never has been.

Myth. Why not just talk about hypnosis? Same mythical crap.

[femme.democratique]

26. Sodium pentothol exists, is not marketed as "truth serum"

but as a short-acting barbituate is effective makes people very suggestive and much more willing to talk. It doesn't GUARANTEE the truth but puts the "victim" in a suggestible psychological state. Sorry, but that doesn't quite fit your "myth" assertion. It exists and has been used effectively, though under legal review has been deemed as a method of "torture" because it is a means of physical coercion. However, this as a last resort is much preferable to beatings, etc.

[TahitiNut]

27. Why not eradicate the Fifth Amendment while we're at it?

I don't care how great the catastrophe or certain the interrogator might be - unleashing government to trample on individual human rights isn't worth it. No way. No how.

Do something like this and kiss Roe v. Wade goodbye. Trespass on such boundaries and no person can ever be reasonbly secure in thier body ever again.

[femme.democratique]

28. Like I said, as a last resort, and by that I mean last resort...

an ABSOLUTE last resort and by that I mean if you knew millions of people were going to die (and possibly you and everyone you love would die as well) would you feel the same? I think you should reflect on that, and REALLY imagine what it would be like before you castigate me from your moral high ground.

And you really think we're secure in our bodies now? Thats just an illusion.

[TahitiNut]

31. Here's the equation, as I see it.

Throughout history, many millions of people have sacrificed their lives to gain the rightful freedoms of others.
It's a perversion to take away freedom merely to gain lives.

If there are not things more dear than life itself, then life itself becomes meaningless.
In good conscience, I would not want my own life to depend on the violation of the human rights of any other.
Thus, I am obliged to act on that maxim to which I would have all others comply.

I guess if it were easy then it wouldn't be called 'life.'

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

16. Hitler considered the Jews a ticking time bomb.

There are always justifications for torture and murder. They've been around since Cain whacked Abel.

[Osamasux]

17. You left off my choice:

Rush Limbaugh Is a Big Fat Idiot

[TahitiNut]

18. Why would a law stop someone so certain of the goodness of that act?

If I were certain that an illegal act on my part would save lives, why would I worry about sacrificing my freedom for 10 years? I don't understand the moral calculus. This isn't about some yet-to-be-seen case where torture is seen to be the "lesser evil" ... it's about licensing sadists. It's detestible.

[baby_mouse]

21. A ticking time bomb. TICKTICKTICKooooohscary

A "ticking time bomb".

What is a ticking time bomb? What terrorists use ticking time bombs? What real villains tie their captives to chairs and monologue at them and set up TICKING. TIME. BOMBS?

Ohhhh, scary. Tick tick tick.

That would be MOVIES, Rush.

Is he that much of a simpleton?

There ARE NO ticking time bombs.

It makes a good dramatic device for cinema but it's a little silly, really, isn't it? Mostly you would just SHOOT the enemy.

Another good thing about the ticking time bomb fantasy is that it means you are allowed to TORTURE PEOPLE! YEAY! It's SO scary that we get to be SADISTIC!

We get to be the good guys and do BAD THINGS AT THE SAME TIME! We don't have to think, we get to just ACT, we can throw away the consequences of our actions, we can pretend that other people don't matter and just HURT them if we want, instead of having to DAMN WELL SIT on the sadism, we can just LET ALL OUT, HUUH, RUSH?

Well, that's all shit, I'm afraid.

And there's no place on this planet for things that are ALL SHIT.

Put away your dirty little fantasies or someone might try out one of their dirty little fantasies out on YOU...

Or worse, somenone might decide to clean you up.

But I might be wrong.

So bring me an example of a ticking time bomb scenario, and I'll be generous, it doesn't have to be a bomb, even. Something from any war you like, it just has to be real war rather than one from a movie or a TV show.

When has the ticking time bomb scenario ever ACTUALLY HAPPENED?

Of course, there has to be someone you can torture to get the information out of to stop the ticking time bomb as well...

They don't want to be able to torture people so they can deal with ticking time bomb scenarios, the WANT TICKING TIME BOMB SCENARIOS SO THAT THEY GET TO TORTURE PEOPLE.

[Gyre]

22. case law in the US

has explicity and consistantly held that:

1) you cannot use any such confessions in a criminal prosecution.
2) if you (the govt) doesn't care about making a case, but are more concerned about finding either, a body, a weapon, a WMD, you can do whatever you deem necessary. But if you go there you (the govt) may be liable for violation of a person's civil rights with no statutory immunity for individual participants in the extra-legal extraction of information. (There are certain exceptions to liability where there is "clear and convincing" evidence that the person being tortured is in possession of such evidence and there are exigent circumstances.)

So you see, it really isn't the problem Mr. Anal Polyps (the excuse bimbaugh used to get a Vietnam 4F status) claims it is.

Gyre

[baldguy]

23. We can survive a bomb.

America survived 9/11. Japan survived Hiroshima & Nagasaki. Indonesia, Thailand, India, & Sri Lanka will survive the tidal wave.

If we succumb to the evil of torturing another human being, we won't survive.

[Cats Against Frist]

24. But What If

Aliens have planted a time bomb, but they claim that the only person who knows where the time bomb is is George Bush -- that they "implanted" the information in his head, and also "implanted" a program to make him deny it furiously, and a program that will tell you where the time bomb is, IF and only IF you sever each one of his limbs.

The bomb will probably kill 3,000 heterosexual evangelicals with giant cars.

Questions to consider:

1. Are 3,000 Middle American lives a good trade off for keeping alive the President, who is now under the control of aliens?

2. Do you "deal with the aliens" and return their secret recipe for "Intergallactic pancakes?"

3. Do you trust the aliens? Or do you put all of your trust in your fearless leader, despite other plausible information that he's from a rich oil family but poses as a rancher, that he's a dry drunk and near senile, that he is under the control of aliens, or that he is a deserter chickenhawk that was too busy cavorting at elite Ivy League institutions to bother serving in the military?

4. If you agree that it is OK to sever the arms and legs of the president in order to save 3,000 people from a time bomb, in that case is it ALWAYS OK to sever the arms and legs of the president?

5. What if they implanted the information in Bush's brain, and then found it inhospitable to information, and planted it in Laura's "little pickle," where it will never be found, so long as Condi's alive? Would it be permissible to go into Laura Bush's vaginal canal to retrieve the time bomb information? If yes, would it always be permissible to check inside Laura Bush's vaginal canal for other possible reasons that may benefit the state?

Tough questions, Rush.

(Just so people know, this is satire, and is most likely a slippery slope fallacy, amongst others -- however, I'm not trying to convince a bunch of dull freepers to continue being pawns of their elitist intellectual, right-wing statist masters. That would be the difference.)

[satya]

29. ROFLMAO! Love your username, too! n/t

[dave123williams]

30. Show me an instance where torture diffused the ticking time-bomb...

This rationale is as old as torturers; they're torturing people to 'save the country' or some such nonsense.

[yankeedem]

32. This is Rove's weekly talking point

Hannity, Oxyrush, Levin and the others all have been using it this week.

[two gun sid]

33. The time bomb scenario

is a totally bogus argument. I think Arlen has been watching to many episodes of "24".

[Jack_DeLeon]

34. I think certain types of torture are acceptable...

I never really read up much about Gonzales's memo, so I dont know what he said was alright.

But I dont see much wrong with certain "pyschological" torture like sleep deprivation, hunger, and stuff like that on people that are being interrogated.

Stuff like breaking fingernails, the bamboo stick things, or cutting off someone's balls, yeah those shouldnt be legal.

Not that I couldnt see that such torture would have its merits, if someone killed a loved one of mine I would probably like to inflict such torture on said person, however I wouldnt fool myself into thinking its legal.

[hollowdweller]

35. Who Cares? Rush is trying to use that to make people think it's justified

any time.

[hollowdweller]

36. Rush needs to think about the Grace and Messages God is giving him

He had/has that hearing disease that could make him deaf, but he can still run his radio show. He had that painkiller addiction he could have died or gone to jail for and so far he is ok with that. Yet he still is spewing hate and trying to soften the resistance to torture??

God has given him two warnings to change his ways. Still he persists in his pride. I fear the third thing that will happen to him will reveal Gods judgement on him for his pride and his failure to heed the biblical exhortation to love ones enemies.

[Liberal In Texas]

37. They should torture FatBoy to find his drug cache

[paulie5]

38. Torture is wrong !

Even a five year old child knows this.

FLUSH RUSH !


P5

[mattclearing]

39. Ticking Time Bomb Torture is only okay when Jack Bauer does it.

eom

[bluestateguy]

40. Real life is not an episode of "24"

First of all I do not trust this gang in Washington to define what a "ticking bomb" scenario is. They lied this nation into war. They cannot be trusted to make decisions about war.

That said, I feel that the following conditions would have to be met for torture to ever be permissable.

1) The threat must be clear and immediate; that is, there has to be no doubt that the threat is real, not "possible", but incontrovertible. The threat must be immediate, not long term or months or years down the road.

2) The threat posed must be to a substantial loss of life. We have to be talking about a threat to an entire city, not a single battalion of soldiers.

3) There must be evidence beyond reasonable doubt that the suspect has information that would stop a substantial terrorist threat; that is, it must be information that, if extracted, would most likely stop the act of terrorism from taking place.

4) A warrant to torture should have to be issued by a judge independent of the military, itelligence agencies or political branches of government.

Again, I do not trust this Administration to make these decisions, but a good Administration could do so in my judgement.

[Swamp Rat]

41. I like to vote

Rush is a lunatic alien lizard, and he's still fat.