Enhanced Interrogation- from a guy who did it, and saved a lot of lives

[Hop]

Wurds... they used to mean something.

[video=youtube;IasCZL072fQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IasCZL072fQ[/video]

I for sure would have remembered that video as a kid but I think iit's the 1st & only time I've seen it. Blast from the past ATM.

 

[indiucky]

Iris DeMint. Have them listen to Iris for a day. They'll spill everything.

(ps. I happen to like Iris, but her singing is definitely and acquired taste)

Only because you don't have enough Kentucky female relatives singing "I'll Fly Away" while they do laundry...I was conditioned at an early age to voices like Iris...

 

[indiucky]

I think I regret bringing 80s music into this thread.

Maybe not yet...But you will....

[video=youtube;cVikZ8Oe_XA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cVikZ8Oe_XA[/video]

[video=youtube;La4Dcd1aUcE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=La4Dcd1aUcE[/video]

[video=youtube;lNYcviXK4rg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNYcviXK4rg[/video]

 

[poptab]

Is it really equivalent? Show me the research.

Is what equivalent? My analogy?

Here is an article:
The Lingering Effects of Torture ? The Center for the Study of Human Rights in the Americas (CSHRA)

 

[poptab]

There's a youtube video of Steven Crowder being waterboarded. I think he lost a bet or something. Don't remember. Kinda shows you how it's done though.

It's a pretty long thread and you may have missed my post about what the guy who interrogated KSM said about waterbording. He said that KSM was waterboarded something like 15 times in the years he interrogated him. According to him, and counter to what the CIA said, the waterboarding was ineffective on KSM. They used other EIT with classical conditioning to get him to talk.

Those were rhetorical.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

It is always wrong not to recognize the image of Christ in another person and fail to treat them as such.

Sin is sin. There is no degree of sin.

It is always wrong to kill. It is always wrong to torture. Whichever wrong I commit I will have to submit to the Lord's mercy and any attempt to justify one over the other means I am replacing God as judge.

It's always wrong to MURDER; it's not always wrong to kill. We have a God-given right to self-defense and He doesn't tie our hands by limiting us to "hurting" our attackers. The biblical injunction is against murder, not killing.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Because they volunteered to experience it and could stop it anytime they wanted?



Which bad guys, the guilty ones?

Yes. You get caught violating the Rules of War on a battlefield, you have indeed "volunteered." You have no protections under the Geneva Conventions. You can be tried as a criminal, or tried by a court-martial and summarily executed; you can be imprisoned for the rest of your life.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Ask the nations the U.S. has invaded. We are the bully of earth.

I'm not certain the citizens of Georgia (the country) or the Uikraine or Taiwan would agree with your assessment. The citizens of Kuwait might take issue with your opinion; so might the older citizens of Panama and Grenada. The Vietnamese might be torn between us and China (who invaded them most recently) and the Israelis might have a different opinion as well.

 

[ATM]

Yes. You get caught violating the Rules of War on a battlefield, you have indeed "volunteered." You have no protections under the Geneva Conventions. You can be tried as a criminal, or tried by a court-martial and summarily executed; you can be imprisoned for the rest of your life.

Rules of war, written by whom? War is hell, and hell is the strength of the State.

Hell has its own rules and victimizes whom it pleases, no need to volunteer.

 

[ATM]

I'm not certain the citizens of Georgia (the country) or the Uikraine or Taiwan would agree with your assessment. The citizens of Kuwait might take issue with your opinion; so might the older citizens of Panama and Grenada. The Vietnamese might be torn between us and China (who invaded them most recently) and the Israelis might have a different opinion as well.

I don't care if they agree with my assessment, it is correct.

 

[Woobie]

For fuller context, I quoted the surrounding verses. I am not sure why you are talking about the leaders of countries when trying to determine if torture or killing is justified. Are you saying that if you follow orders, God holds the person giving the orders accountable and not you absolving you of any responsibility? I may be way off in understanding what you are saying.






God is not the author of sin. The wars in the OT were between gods. God also commands "Thou shalt not kill"

It seems to me though that unless you are saying God is ordering us today to kill and torture other human beings, that this question is not under the scope of this thread. Are you making that claim?

Should we live according to the OT Law?

However, would anyone have died had there been no sin? Death is the mercy laid upon us due to the fact that sin exists.

Was God's revelation of his plan complete in the OT or still unfolding? If there is an apparent contradiction, and people hold to this all the time, I can love the God of the NT, but not the God of the OT, how are we to interpret this? i would suggest we interpret the OT in the light of the NT.

All those that died in the OT received the message of Jesus Christ and had opportunity to accept him.

Now, does that mean I understand all the actions of God? No. The key difference here, is we both agree that these accounts are in Scripture. So we must accept them and try to understand them in the best way we know how.

Today many people kill and claim it is because God told them to do so, yet we look upon them as crazy. It's perhaps easy to do if they are a radicalized Muslim, but what about when they are Christian? What if they claim they are killing homosexuals or doctors performing abortions because the OT sanctions this killing and the voice of God commanded them to do so. Would you or I accept that morally? If our leaders said we are going to attack, I don't know, a Muslim country because they are killing human beings and God said kill the infidels? Would we accept that? I don't think we would. Why? I would maintain part of the reason is that we recognize that there is a New covenant.

I do carry a sidearm. It I am ever forced to deploy it, I know that I will answer for whatever happens. I do know that I won't try to justify taking someone else's life. It would still be a sin and i will still need to confess it and beg God to have mercy upon me for whatever actions I take. It would be much easier for me to use it defensively to save a family member, friend, or victim than to use it to save myself. That does not however, make it more or less right.

Killing is not natural. That is why when soldiers and police kill, many struggle with the aftermath. I believe that telling someone it was okay or it was justified is morally wrong, even if its legally declared so. You did the right thing is also not true. That is why many want to be forgiven not justified.

If I ever kill another human being, I won't want to hear that I am justified or that I did the right thing. I will go and confess this sin to God and I will rely on his mercy to forgive me and then I must accept his forgiveness, but I will NEVER for a moment believe i was justified or I did the right thing.

The context of the OT was brought up to illustrate the fallacy that all killing is sin. God would never have commanded His people to sin. We know this. So if He commanded to kill, then there exists particular instances in which killing is not sin, or God is a liar.

Protecting innocent life is the right thing to do. I have only scraped the surface of scriptures backing that statement up.

You and I will disagree that death is the merciful relief from sin. There is no scriptural basis for that. Indeed, it was God's proclaimed punishment for sin, and the ultimate punishment is the "second death."

Nowhere have I said we blindly follow government authority. But they are tasked with the safeguarding of the citizenry.

 

[Woobie]

Is what equivalent? My analogy?

Here is an article:
The Lingering Effects of Torture ? The Center for the Study of Human Rights in the Americas (CSHRA)

You said rape is a form of sex, and people have sex for fun. You drew a parallel between that and water boarding for fun vs. as an EIT. I question that these are equivalent circumstances.

And this is not research. It is a human interest piece by ABC that admits multiple times that there has never been any conclusive research to back up the notion that these techniques cause long-term issues. Essentially they quote two scientists who think they might be on to something. Swing and a miss.

 

[foszoe]

The context of the OT was brought up to illustrate the fallacy that all killing is sin. God would never have commanded His people to sin. We know this. So if He commanded to kill, then there exists particular instances in which killing is not sin, or God is a liar.

Protecting innocent life is the right thing to do. I have only scraped the surface of scriptures backing that statement up.

You and I will disagree that death is the merciful relief from sin. There is no scriptural basis for that. Indeed, it was God's proclaimed punishment for sin, and the ultimate punishment is the "second death."

Nowhere have I said we blindly follow government authority. But they are tasked with the safeguarding of the citizenry.

I will be brief because inauguration!

Should man have been allowed to continue sinning after the fall without any end? That is why Death IS a mercy.

Without the fall there would have been no sin and thus no death. The bible clearly states this. This also means no killing. Because of man's sin, death entered, not God.

If God intended that there be no sinand death,

then it follows that death was not God's Intent.

Anything that is not as God intended is sin.

Killing is Sin, whether legally justified or not.

 

[Woobie]

I will be brief because inauguration!

Should man have been allowed to continue sinning after the fall without any end? That is why Death IS a mercy.

Without the fall there would have been no sin and thus no death. The bible clearly states this. This also means no killing. Because of man's sin, death entered, not God.

If God intended that there be no sinand death,

then it follows that death was not God's Intent.

Anything that is not as God intended is sin.

Killing is Sin, whether legally justified or not.

Ah, I see. Death is not mercy to the sinner, but creation. I can get on board with that.

I still disagree somewhat on your description of sin. I would say that sin is anything that does not meet God's approval, not necessarily intention. Otherwise we would have to say God Himself has sinned, and that He has ordered His servants to sin.

 

[foszoe]

Ah, I see. Death is not mercy to the sinner, but creation. I can get on board with that.

All of Creation fell. I would gently nudge you to see that the fear of death can be a powerful motivator to the sinner to repent. Just about every altar call I have heard or fire and brimstone message makes great use of death as a motivator to repentance. All creation INCLUDES the sinner.

I still disagree somewhat on your description of sin. I would say that sin is anything that does not meet God's approval, not necessarily intention. Otherwise we would have to say God Himself has sinned, and that He has ordered His servants to sin.

I am using the definition of sin as in the original languages prior to any scholastic theology from post 12c theologians.

from Wikipedia

[h=2]Hamartia in Christian theology[edit][/h]Hamartia is also used in Christian theology because of its use in the Septuagint and New Testament. The Hebrew (chatá) and its Greek equivalent (àµaρtίa/hamartia) both mean "missing the mark" or "off the mark".[SUP][9][/SUP] There are four basic usages for hamartia.

1. Hamartia is sometimes employed to mean acts of sin "by omission or commission in thought and feeling or in speech and actions" as in Romans 5:12, "all have sinned".[SUP][10][/SUP]
2. Hamartia is sometimes applied to the fall of man from original righteousness that resulted in humanity's innate propensity for sin, that is original sin.[SUP][11][/SUP] For example, as in Romans 3:9, everyone is "under the power of sin".[SUP][12][/SUP]
3. A third application concerns the "weakness of the flesh" and the free will to resist sinful acts. "The original inclination to sin in mankind comes from the weakness of the flesh."[SUP][13][/SUP]
4. Hamartia is sometimes "personified".[SUP][14][/SUP] For example, Romans 6:20 speaks of being enslaved to hamartia (sin).

 

[Woobie]

All of Creation fell. I would gently nudge you to see that the fear of death can be a powerful motivator to the sinner to repent. Just about every altar call I have heard or fire and brimstone message makes great use of death as a motivator to repentance. All creation INCLUDES the sinner.



I am using the definition of sin as in the original languages prior to any scholastic theology from post 12c theologians.

from Wikipedia

Hamartia in Christian theology[edit]

Hamartia is also used in Christian theology because of its use in the Septuagint and New Testament. The Hebrew (chatá) and its Greek equivalent (àµaρtίa/hamartia) both mean "missing the mark" or "off the mark".[SUP][9][/SUP] There are four basic usages for hamartia.

1. Hamartia is sometimes employed to mean acts of sin "by omission or commission in thought and feeling or in speech and actions" as in Romans 5:12, "all have sinned".[SUP][10][/SUP]
2. Hamartia is sometimes applied to the fall of man from original righteousness that resulted in humanity's innate propensity for sin, that is original sin.[SUP][11][/SUP] For example, as in Romans 3:9, everyone is "under the power of sin".[SUP][12][/SUP]
3. A third application concerns the "weakness of the flesh" and the free will to resist sinful acts. "The original inclination to sin in mankind comes from the weakness of the flesh."[SUP][13][/SUP]
4. Hamartia is sometimes "personified".[SUP][14][/SUP] For example, Romans 6:20 speaks of being enslaved to hamartia (sin).

I understand what you are saying about the fear. But I would submit that death is still the punishment, and the fear of death is the mercy.

Yes, sin is missing the mark, the mark of God's standard, His Holiness. But is killing missing the mark, if He has commanded His servants to do it? In fact, since disobedience is sin, then in some instances He has made killing an act of obedience, and sparing an act of disobedience. And since He has done so, while a difficult reality, we can no longer paint killing with a wide brush. There must be instances in which it is not sinful, even though it is not what would have been done prior to the fall. Otherwise, God has in the past put his servants in an impossible dilemma. Sin by killing or sin by disobeying. But "God is not tempted, neither tempteth He any man."

 

[Alpo]

Is continuing to talk about religious philosophy a form of "enhanced interrogation"?

Wasn't one thread enough for y'all?

 

[Woobie]

Is continuing to talk about religious philosophy a form of "enhanced interrogation"?

Wasn't one thread enough for y'all?

You're right, it has gotten away from the subject some. We could probably move this discussion elsewhere. But I will say someone with the capacity to spare the innocent is horribly wrong for not doing so.

Or to recap, I will counter the aggression of ongoing operations to commit great harm to the innocent with enough violence to end that aggression.

Also, I'm still not seeing torture on the approved list.

 

[foszoe]

Is continuing to talk about religious philosophy a form of "enhanced interrogation"?

Wasn't one thread enough for y'all?

If one believes in living a compartmentalized life where politics, religion, work, etc all inhabit their own spheres and are not allowed to intersect then perhaps.

I gave my opinions which was what I interpreted other responders to the OP doing...been awhile and i didn't go back and check on it though. If someone chooses to interact with my answer, then having a conversation is a normal thing to do.

For me and how i understand the message of the Bible, I have a worldview that is based on Christ and his teachings through his Church which informs all my other positions for that is what i am called upon to do.

 

[foszoe]

I understand what you are saying about the fear. But I would submit that death is still the punishment, and the fear of death is the mercy.

Yes, sin is missing the mark, the mark of God's standard, His Holiness. But is killing missing the mark, if He has commanded His servants to do it? In fact, since disobedience is sin, then in some instances He has made killing an act of obedience, and sparing an act of disobedience. And since He has done so, while a difficult reality, we can no longer paint killing with a wide brush. There must be instances in which it is not sinful, even though it is not what would have been done prior to the fall. Otherwise, God has in the past put his servants in an impossible dilemma. Sin by killing or sin by disobeying. But "God is not tempted, neither tempteth He any man."

Without the Fall would there have been killing?