Why blow up the Brooklyn Bridge?  Isn’t it more effective to just sell it?
(After all, if it was good enough for Bugs Bunny, it’s good enough for me!)

JG, you are funny.  You blindly accept that “inside-job-Israel-connection-conspiracy” garbage about 9/11 (first propagated from the Arab world in the days immediately following the 9/11 tragedy), yet you just as rigorously deny that another major landmark and artery could be targeted.

Is it that you just don’t believe that Al Qaeda and the Taliban are capable of planning and executing attacks against the US?

Moineau and Jersey: You all are too angry and bitter. Why, I do not know. But there has to be something in your theories that puts you both on the defensive.

Just a helpful hint. Try treating people with respect. You’ll get your points across better.

Jersey: Yes, my mind is made up that 9/11 was not American made. But, hey, if you have any compelling evidence I would be more than glad to see it. But, and I mean no disrespect, I have never found a single person with that same theory that can produce even a tad bit of evidence to support the theory. Honestly, do you ever ask yourself why that is?

JtBlack: Nothing I could present to you would convince you that 9/11 didn’t happen as the govt told you it did.  If you haven’t questioned the events of that day and all the strange “coincidences”, then there is no need to further discuss it with you. Your mind is made up.  I don’t have the answers to 9/11, I just have hundreds of questions as do others which have not been answered by the whitewash commission.

ANd I stand by my own opinion that the brooklyn bridge story is propaganda and torture should never be used in our name by the government.

Sorry, you don’t like those answers but they are my answers and I’m not asking you to adopt them as your own.  You asked, I answered.  Now onward and upward…

lovely. go forth and torture. screw you.

Moineau: In each post on this subject you have found ways to attack me personally. If you can take part in dialog, with respect, I’ll be more than happy to take respond in kind. Lump all on the Right or Left into neat and easy to handle political boxes, cast aspersions with wild abandon, and we’ll never be able to hold an open discourse.

Casting aspersions only serves to devide people. You will never get your point across that way. For me personally? I’ll never try to see your point of view and never follow-up on information you try to share here. The vast majority of people will react the same way.

You don’t have to dare people in your belittling manner. In fact you don’t have to belittle people at all. Talking and sharing information is much more effective if you want someone to see your point of view. Your way makes any normal human turn their back and close the door to anything you have to say.

------

Jersey: I don’t subscribe to the “9/11 was an inside job” theory. I have actually long since dismissed the theory and lean toward things I can actually prove. But, in all fairness, if you have some compelling information for me I would be happy to look at it. But, please, calling any theory other than your own “a fairy tale” is argumentative and divisive. I’m not interested in that at all.

I mean no offense but, you’re awfully close to writing like the horrendous bigot, Cyrena. Just treat people with respect. The same respect you wish for yourself.

------

Moineau and Jersey:  If you drop the attacks on others and share real information with respect you’ll get a good deal further with people.

Jblack:  The brooklyn bridge false flag and the people involved is minor compared to the 9/11 false flag. OR if you believe the 9/11 fairytale, it is minor compared to 19 hijackers with box cutters hijacking 4 airliners and defeating the entire u.s. defense system.

j-how could you have previously seen what i suggested? mayer’s completed book came out yesterday and her interviews were on democracy now! and grit tv yesterday. therefore, you have not seen her completed argument. what was offered in the past were but parts of investigative journalism. now we have the whole. so why won’t you give up an hour?

it appears to me that that is the difference between those leaning toward the right and those leaning toward the left. the left will sit through testimony by those on the right, those they don’t necessarily agree with, but the right will not do the same. they get most of their information filtered for them by others on the right.

thus, the ivory tower of which i spoke.

Wind: I followed your point the first time. As I said, I simply disagree with how you characterize the subject. I saw no need to comment further.

------

Moineau: I’ve already stated that I had prior seen the two sources of information you wanted me to see. I was not compelled to change my opinion.

-------

Jersey: You seem to be firm on the idea that the failed Brooklyn Bridge attack is all White House propaganda. But the bulk of my information on the foiled attack came mainly from the democratically controlled Senate Armed Services Committee, the New York Police Dept. and the FBI. It was the New York police that foiled the plot. Not the White House.

What you are essentially saying is that hundreds of people in the Senate, the NYPD and the FBI are all lying about the plot. That’s a fairly big ring of conspiracy. The democratically controlled Senate Armed Services Committee, the NYPD and the FBI all got together and devised this lie? I’m sorry but I can’t buy into that.

JBlack, July 18 at 10:20 am #

Wind: While I disagree with much of your characterizations you at least answered my question. You would use the technique to save lives.
*************************************************

You miss my point, J. It’s not that I wouldn’t use it, it’s that I ACCEPT that I will have a pay a heavy price for using torture, even imprisonment and dishonor. 

You also miss the more important point: our society does not accept vengence and rage as valid retribution.  That’s why the investigators and prosecuters and judges and juries must all be disinterested parties, seeking, (supposedly) the truth and nothing else.  Punishiment is pre-determent and dis-interested (which is not UN-interested) parties decide what is best for our society.

Therefore, me, torturing a prick to save my family, have chosen a path in which I will have to pay a heavy price.

As I quoted: “Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time!”

c’est juste, inherit. bravo.

“But if they do, then the torturer should consider it SO important that he is willing to accept two consequences of his actions:

1) the torturee, even if guilty of a crime is, BY A TRUE INTERPRETATION OF OUR CONSTITUTION, un-convictable.  He walks.

2) You, the torturer WILL go to jail for various forms of assault and kidnapping.  As you deserve.

Is your cause that brings you to torture sufficient to suffer these consequences? If the answer is “no” then torture cannot be justified.  Soldiers put their bodies and lives on the line for their country.  Are you willing to put your personal freedom on the line for it? No? Then, if you STILL think torture is justified but you won’t pay the price, then you are a coward.”

oh, and i’m done with this commentary. it’s obvious that the twain shall not meet here. HOWEVER, the courts will eventually decide, not you nor i.

mr. black:
waterboarding is not illengal because no one will say it is? listen to mayer answer that issue!

i’m still waiting for you to answer my dare to watch mayer on democracy now. it’s not a question of adult or child, it’s hearing both sides. i’ve sat through ashcroft, feith, gonzales, wu and addington. but you have not heard the whole mayer story from the horse’s mouth.

so continue to live in your ivory tower, mr. black. but i suppose the ivory tower is preferable to guantanamo, abu ghraib and baghram. if you were an innocent and being held interminably, i’m sure you’d feel the same way you do now…

it’s not a question of personal choice, it’s a question of government policy… you speak with the same emotionalism as the administration after 9-11. that does not equate to a legal rationale.

JTBlack: I’m against torture.. Period, end of story.
There’s no sense in arguing back and forth about it.

As for the Brooklyn Bridge plot being broken up the use of torture. Nope, do not buy it.  It’s more bs propaganda. The accused is probably some poor sucker they framed. This administration is all about catapulting the propaganda.  They spend millions doing just that.

Sorry for not reading all your posts. I’d like to have time to read everything everyone posts but I just don’t have that luxury.

Jersey: Just to light heartedly poke a bit of fun. Perhaps a better question is; how is that you’re unaware that there was a plot (thwarted, in part, by using water boarding) to destroy the Brooklyn Bridge?

I think it’s important to pay attention to such things. Do you disagree?

Jersey, Have you been reading my posts? I argued some of the same things you did and I had already covered the matter of the Brooklyn Bridge. To answer one of your questions. No. I do not believe the Senate Armed Services Committee (they) lied about thwarting an attack by employing water boarding.

The killing of your family is not unlikely at all. It’s not ridiculous. It happens each and every day right here in the U.S.. It happens to hundreds, if not thousands around the world. You can always revise your answer if you like.

JtBlack:  They used torture to save the Brooklyn Bridge? Who says..and why do you belive them?  You really think “they” don’t lie?

Waterboarding is not the same as some fraternity hazing.. though some of those have caused death and have been banned on most campuses because of it.

When you are captured by the “enemy”,death is not a game.  You know your captors are serious and do indeed intend to kill you.  So as I know that you know, there is a HUGE difference between the two.

As far as someone being tortured to save my family.  Come on, that is unlikely to the point of being ridiculous.

Closer to the truth would be my own government torturing my family for not going along to get along.  THAT is the dilemma we are faced with.  For if a government is willing to use torture to extract information from prisoners of war who have not been proven guilty of any crime, then what would they be willing to do to their own citizens who protest their policies in order to shut them up?

Jersey and Wind: You both talk of torture as if I advocate torture. I did not.

Water boarding can be torturous to some, yes. To others it’s a frat passage used for over a hundred years here in the U.S.. What’s the difference? One is a prank used in fun and the other a genuine fear of drowning. But, I must add, there are many who claim the technique has saved many American lives and prevented an attack on the Brooklyn Bridge. It’s not so simple as to say, “it does not work”. There is empirical evidence that it does work.

So, Jersey, you would allow your family to die for your steadfast morals. My hat’s off to you for sticking to your beliefs in the face of death to your family. I’m not strong enough to sit so idly by. I admit I am weak.

Wind: While I disagree with much of your characterizations you at least answered my question. You would use the technique to save lives.

Oh and, water boarding is, as of today, not illegal.

JBlack, July 18 at 7:34 am #

Would you water board an individual to save the life of your Son, Daughter, Mother or Husband or Wife?
*************************************

You bet your @$$ I would. And I’d do it knowing full-well I’d probably go to prison for 20 years or more.  And saving the lives of my wife and kids would be worth it, a bargain. Because I wouldn’t be a disinterested party.

But I wouldn’t try to cheat my way out of paying the price. Our society cannot and should not tolerate such behavior.  That 70’s show “Beretta” had the line “Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time.”

jersey girl, July 18 at 7:26 am #

JTblack:  Waterboarding just doesn’t work.  People who are being tortured will say anthing to make it stop. If you don’t believe that, perhaps after Ashcroft, we should try it out on you.
***********************************

For once, Jersey Girl, I agree with you completely.  The torturer’s argument is always “But what if by torture you can prevent a hundred million-zillion people from dying?” These situations NEVER come up.

But if they do, then the torturer should consider it SO important that he is willing to accept two consequences of his actions:

1) the torturee, even if guilty of a crime is, BY A TRUE INTERPRETATION OF OUR CONSTITUTION, un-convictable.  He walks.

2) You, the torturer WILL go to jail for various forms of assault and kidnapping.  As you deserve.

Is your cause that brings you to torture sufficient to suffer these consequences? If the answer is “no” then torture cannot be justified.  Soldiers put their bodies and lives on the line for their country.  Are you willing to put your personal freedom on the line for it? No? Then, if you STILL think torture is justified but you won’t pay the price, then you are a coward.

The idea of not having to pay for your actions is a completely Rethuglican one--see Bear,Stearns and FannieMae/FreddieMac.

Jtblack: My answer is absolutely not.  I’m one of those who believes torture, including waterboarding does not work. 

As for saving the country, the bush crime family had every opportunity to stop the “terrorists” and didn’t.

I personally don’t believe the official fairytale of 9/11 and want a new un-whitewashed investigation started. But if you do believe 19 arabs brought down our entire defense system on that day, then you also know, bush & his cronies did nothing to prevent it.

jersey girl, According to numerous sources waterboarding does and has worked.

Maybe it works on some and not others. It may be that some believe it works and some do not. We’ll have to allow that it’s in dispute. Can you at least allow for that?

But I still wish an answer to my questions.

To stop a plot meant to kill over 20,000 people would you use water boarding to prevent that type of disaster? Would you water board an individual to save the life of your Son, Daughter, Mother or Husband or Wife? Or would you let them die?

moineau, no need to dare me. We’re adults.

I’ve seen both those news sources and a good deal more from many sides of the subject.

According to the democratically controlled Senate Armed Services Committee water boarding helped to stop an attack on the Brooklyn Bridge. According to the Senate Armed Services Committee water boarding has saved many American lives.

War is ugly. It’s painful. In times of war people die. To win a war one must kill. It’s awful and it’s even wasteful. And to win a war one needs immense strength. YES I would hope I posses the strength to water board any man to save 20,000 human lives. His discomfort is worth 20,000 souls.

I’ll ask this question of the entire group here. Would you water board an individual to save the life of your Son, Daughter, Mother or wife? Or would you let them die for your moral sensibilities?

JTblack:  Waterboarding just doesn’t work.  People who are being tortured will say anthing to make it stop. If you don’t believe that, perhaps after Ashcroft, we should try it out on you.

jblack, take a look at today’s democracy now, http://www.democracynow.org or laura flanders’ http://www.grittv.org for interviews with jane mayer and then answer this question: what good did waterboarding and other extreme interrogation procedures do? NADA, buddy. false information given to stop the torture even entered powell’s un speech on iraq’s “weapons of mass destruction” (without his being told about the intelligence community’s doubts). beyond the abhorrence and universal criminality of torture (see geneva), it just doesn’t work.

the answer to your question, from me, is NO WAY, and with cause! torture or techniques edging on torture just lead to more torture. take down the restraints of geneva, and people will die, as they have in afghanistan and iraq.

i dare you to watch the mayer interviews! then come back here and give a response.

Purple Girl, andrushka, jersey girl, and Wind.

One question: You’re the President of Liberaland and your job is to protect and defend your nation. To stop a plot meant to kill over 20,000 people would you use water boarding to prevent that type of disaster? If that’s what it would take to stop the plot would you order it done? For myself I can say; that’s a very firm yes. I would give someone discomfort to save tens of thousands of lives.

I ask this because the 1993 TWC bombing was originally designed to topple one WTC building into another. The plan was to kill 20,000. What are you each willing to do?

with jane mayer’s new book “the dark side”, phillipe sands’ “the torture team”, and michael ratner’s upcoming “the trial of donald rumsfeld”, i am becoming more and more hopeful that all these arrogant administrators will face charges on behalf of the american people and those detainees who were tortured and murdered. i just hope, as does vincent bugliosi, that it will be an AMERICAN courtroom. no justice, no peace!

Since our Congress and SCOTUS are complicite in these crimes, it is time for the International Community to take the matter of prosecution on.
Add the accomplices in Both Houses, The ‘Highest Court’ and the private Corps who facilitated these High crimes. Then we must begin trials for Treason against those who have blocked US from taking this Orgnaized Crime Syndicate down- along with Pelosi & Reid (and a good number of other so called ‘Dems’), covert operatives of the CheneyCo Regime.

I agree with both posts above.  Mr Ashcroft should definitely try it for himself to be able to have a VALUABLE judgement. Every other debate is pointless and a waste of time.  In fact every proponent of those kinds of treatment “torture”? should be invited to experience it. Bush and co too.

Let’s waterboard Mr Ashcroft and see what he calls it when they let him come back up for air.

Our elected government sits and debates on whether torture, expressly forbidden by several amendments, is legally torture.

A nation that prides itself as the bastion of freedom, as the anti-dictatorship, debates the merits of torture.

How could we have sunk so low?