[Intelforum] Intelligence & Interrogation Derived by the LawfulState

[Christopher Farmer]

Mr. Young,

[Those who advocate use of torture should experience it firsthand, of the 
same type and duration. According to those who have experienced torture it 
is practised by those least experienced on the receiving end along with 
those most supportive of its unfettered use, and for that reason are able 
only to grasp its pleasurable effectiveness of applying sadistic power and 
pain asymmetrically.]

Using your idea, I will substitute "torture" for "terrorism" and we get:

"Those who advocate use of terrorism should experience it firsthand, of the 
same type and duration. According to those who have experienced terrorism it 
is practised by those least experienced on the receiving end along with 
those most supportive of its unfettered use, and for that reason are able 
only to grasp its pleasurable effectiveness of applying sadistic power and 
pain asymmetrically."

Would that seem reasonable to victims of terrorism?

Face it John, there are many competitors that want U.S. Intelligence 
capability neutered perpetually, going beyond the scope and intent of the 
Church Committee. When the United States is critiqued by special interest 
groups for simply capturing a terrorist and imprisoning them (the gulag 
label), you know that U.S. Intelligence has its hands full trying to crack 
through that unnatural sympathy and justify why terrorism is the predominate 
threat to our way of life.

You also know that it is the responsibility of intelligence organizations 
created by the nation-state to gather information. No one is advocating 
torture, but interrogation is not torture, nor is the capturing of prisoners 
of war by U.S. personnel rendering those terrorist combatants to gulags. 
Competitors want the United States isolated in the war against terrorism, 
they do not want our allies working with us on prisoner of war rendition so 
that our allies are isolated from U.S. advancements of counterterrorism law 
and have no stake in policing their own neighborhoods, and now there is an 
emerging proposal in Europe that terrorists are not really terrorists, but 
are merely "protestors" using bombs.

Let me ask you this John, if the United States captures a terrorist, does 
the United States have the lawful right as a sovereign state to interrogate 
them?

Christopher Farmer


>From: John Young <jya at pipeline.com>
>Reply-To: intelforum at his.com
>To: intelforum at his.com
>Subject: Re: [Intelforum] Intelligence & Interrogation Derived by the 
>LawfulState
>Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 09:55:17 -0700
>
>Those who advocate use of torture should experience it firsthand, of
>the same type and duration. According to those who have experienced
>torture it is practised by those least experienced on the receiving end
>along with those most supportive of its unfettered use, and for that reason
>are able only to grasp its pleasurable effectiveness of applying sadistic
>power and pain asymmetrically.

>John Young
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>IntelForum mailing list
>IntelForum at lists101.his.com
>http://lists101.his.com/mailman/listinfo/intelforum
>-