President Obama, and Torture in the United States

[spartaeus]

A little torture is just the tip of the iceburg. America is run by and for Global Corporations. Citizens have no say so in America. This is a facist country! Corporations fund the election of who they want as their puppet. We are a representative republic in name only.

[threebobs]

Appeal to practicality isn't an appeal at all...except for moral relativism...which is a self-contradictory moral theory by definition.

The only truly rational ethical theory is UPB, put forward by Stefan Molyneux. Good it. I think they're giving away the audio book for free.

[kurtilein3]

threebobs: i dont know much about what stefan molineux says about ethics. but some of what he promotes is just nonsense. let me quote from his website:

"Some people also respond that certain services must be provided by the government, like roads or education or healthcare or old-age pensions. Again, this is utterly irrelevant. If I steal $100 from you, and then send $20 to my grandmother, or use it to pay for a road, this does not absolve me of the crime of theft."

smells like nonsense.

[threebobs]

To Kurtilein3,

You haven't presented an argument against it. Saying "Smells like nonsense" is an ad-hominem.

And, correct, you don't know what he has to say about ethics, so before you attack, research, or present us with your superior ethical framework.

If people are too stupid, or selfish to be trusted to trade voluntarily...how can they be trusted when given a monopoly with the right to use violence to control the property of OTHERS?

That, is an argument.

[threebobs]

continued...

UPB, as an ethical framework, takes ethics out of the subjective and put it squarely in the realm of a scientific theory.

When you read it, you will see why political systems must create wars, poverty and conflict. This is because Statism is a self-contradictory ethical framework.

He also has a shorter, easier to read free audio book called "Everyday Anarchy".

I'd suggest that one first.

It'll take you 3 hours max.

If you'd rather debate me, that's fine.

[kurtilein3]

threebobs:

i consider the 1948 united nations universal declaration of human rights to be the most important document of our age. i really do think that if the human rights would be valued everywhere, we would all be better off.

education and healthcare are human rights. free markets cannot provide these services, and Molyneux is wrong when he claims otherwise. (to be continued)

[kurtilein3]

... continued

the areas that are the closest to truly and fully recognizing all the human rights are also the areas where life expectancy and overall quality of life is the best. and its just a fact that we are talking about states here. to be more precise: representative democracies, where people have many ways to influence the process and governing is difficult, that adopt the human rights and that make things like healthcare and education their top priorities.

[threebobs]

There are many many ways to approach this debate.

I could point out that:

1) the standard of life improvements that you attribute to Statism are the direct result of wealth creation due to free markets.

2) you are making a basic economic fallacy of failing to account for the massive destruction of wealth and freedom due to the face that government is a violent monopoly.

3)that 370,000,000 people have been killed by government "protection" agencies. (100s of times more than private crime)

[threebobs]

4) in the countries you've mentioned above, the state has destroyed 97 % of the value of the currency.

But I won't go there.

The most efficient way to debate this is with axiomatic logical principals that we both accept.

By your own premises, you have disproved your own thesis.

1) If the majority of people in a democracy are wise and willing to vote to pay money to buy these goods/services , then we know that in a free market situation, the majority will STILL want these things.

[threebobs]

2) If people are too stupid or selfish to be allowed to voluntarily solve these problems...how can people be trusted with: 1) voting on the use of OTHER people's property and 2) being in a monopoly that can force payment?

You say "markets can't supply these goods, But that is not an argument, it's just a statement, like "I like blue".

Monopoly is bad for consumers. But you claim there are magic areas where monopoly is fantastic. Where's the reasoning in that?

[threebobs]

If people cant cooperate to solve problems voluntarily, the LAST thing you should do is give a small group of them the right to: use violence to force payment, print money, start wars and monopolize thousands of services.

The state doesnt exist, only people do. The state just a label for people who claim the moral right to use violence to solve problems. But the people in the government ARE PEOPLE too. How can they have moral rights that I don't have?

[threebobs]

Proposing that as an ethical theory is like proposing a theory of gravity that a rock falls up and down at the same time.

If torture is wrong, then it's one the grounds that other people have the right to freedom from violence. But for the state to exist, it must violate this, by definition.

You say you're against torture, but by supporting Statism and taxation, you support the initiation of violence against people who aren't advocating violence against you.

It is an invalid moral stance.

[threebobs]

And finally:

The UDHR is also invalid as a moral code:

How do the following declarations coexist?

"Everyone has the right to life, liberty and property"

"Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free."

Education can't be free. It is a product and service. That means others must be forced (deprived of their liberty and property ) to supply this "free" service.

Until we demand our political thinkers to have the same consistency as a bridge builder, we're screwed.

[MrAlexPlus]

How in the world is a taser a torture device? I would really like to know. I've been tortured before so that I would know the pain the a person goes through and was tasered for a full 5 seconds just as police officers are taught to taser. You have no say in this until you've been tasered before. Yes it hurts and yes it leaves scars but no it is not torture.

[kurtilein3]

you could say the same about whip lashes. you could say the same about burning people with cigarettes.

human rights organisations consider it a torture device, and so do the police officers that use it to cause pain in people to discipline them. they do it as a punishment, to make sure the person got a punishment even if the courts decide that he didnt do anything wrong.

anyway, the whole world looks at your waterboarding and your dogs and your tazers and concludes that the US uses torture.

[celciuszero]

e doesnt equel mc2 any more.

E=$4G

E=people

$=money

4=for

G=government

It wasnt a complete loss Einstein. To bad you got fucked over by a bunch of dumbfucks in 10 cent suites

[peronkop]

say e=mc2!

[Jacobrester]

Fuck dude........go to Africa and see what the Muslims are doing to the christians.....the shit you are talking about is nothing

[karausu]

Or what the Christian are doing the africans .. bleeding them dry.

[Poseidon500]

It is ALL bad man.

Nobody should be tortured.

[enmity666]

fuck obama

[rednxrule]

if you plan to randomly murder innocents, you are lower than dirt, they deserve torture of any kind. and by the way, you sound norweigen, your ancestors liked to give prisoners the "bloody eagle"....look it up.

[Mithcoriel]

I seem to remember he's German.

And it doesn't really matter what his ancestors did. That doesn't change his right to speak up against wrong today. It would be like saying "An American can't criticize slavery cause they used to have it themselves"

[kurtilein3]

mithcoriel:

you are right, the problem is that those people think that they are right, and they dont understand that they in this case actually need arguments that make sense. i constantly hear that my arguments are invalid because of my face, my nationality, my accent, or because im stupid. its unbelievable how so many people can believe that they make a point when they post something like that...

[Mithcoriel]

Oh yeah, lol, I've also heard the argument that I'm wrong cause of my swiss accent (by a german).

(On my other channel, MithcorielDeutsch)

[rednxrule]

if you have to torture a person that plans to murder thousands of innocent men, women and children, nothing is out of bounds. they should stake them out on a red ant den to get the info to save the innocent. there are no gray area's, it's all black and white. hell, they are terrorists, they would understand, they thrive on torture and murder.

[JoeyAP123]

then why keep the documents top secret?

[nosp4rrow]

I am genuinely frightened about the fact that these instances of torture in the US didn't get more media coverage. That particular "don't taze me, bro" incident turned into a pop culture punchline instead of a of a nationwide outrage - and this guy was only exercising his right to free speech! We are kept much more docile in the US than people realize; between religion's brainwashing and the media's lies, we are becoming drooling, impotent, vegetables. Thank you for the excellent video.

[kurtilein3]

media coverage is the problem ;)

there are things mainstream media doesnt like to talk about. human rights violations done by the US are very high on the list of things that US corporate media wont talk about. in china and russia they need to kill journalists and control the media to accomplish this. in US corporate media, you get fired when you say anything that the big lobbies and corporations dont like, because it damages the advertisement revenue. the end-result seems to be the same.

[nosp4rrow]

I do agree, but in addition there is a huge problem with apathy. Going back to that Andrew Meyer incident, there were hundreds of people calmly sitting next to the whole thing as he screamed and begged for help. That was clearly blatant police brutality. There is a complete disinterest in justice! It makes me ill.

[kurtilein3]

yes, you can see it in the coverage about the arrest of that black professor that tried to get into his home.

apparently a court already ruled that speech is protected by the first amandment and therefore cannot be "disorderly conduct". so actually if you insult police officers, they cannot arrest you, "disorderly conduct" needs to be something nonverbal.

so its clear that the police officer acted stupidly and crossed the line... but obama (trained in law) somehow backpedals.

[ShoxAttack]

I call a BS on your disorderly conduct crap. So if i go into wal-mart start screaming at all the black people calling them racist then refuse to listen to police I wont get arrested? You Try it first....

[kurtilein3]

shoxattack:

i call BS on your BS comment, because your example doesnt make sense. "Wal Mart" is a completely different context compared to "your own living room after police officers entered your home without your agreement".

so you are not allowed to criticize police officers in your own living room, after they enter your home using force?

[kurtilein3]

no. torture will turn against US citizen, its already happening, and this will get worse and worse.

if another nation follows your advice, the same would happen in that other nation: after torturing US soldiers, they would start torturing other people as well, torture would become more accepted in that society, and it will happen in that other nation as well. basically, you can describe it like a spreading disease.

but i think some rogue nations might actually follow the US example.

[zebra334]

i don't agree with your 9.11 opinions

But you are "Spot On" on these torture topics... Thanks for "good information" and common humane sense

5 stars!

[kurtilein3]

oh, thanks :)

well, then we can at least agree on some of the important topics.

[Creammacker]

Excellent, new subscriber :)

[Heathenfidel]

Rush Limbaugh still thinks that Abu Ghraib wasn't torture.

[kurtilein3]

recognize evil when you see it.

should be part of being human.

[Heathenfidel]

Wait, huh? I wasn't implying that I agree with him. I have never heard Rush Limbaugh say anything that I agree with.

[SciFientology]

war is hell

[dxarmy94]

As long as we get answers that stop groups of people destroying the world then torture should be an available process to us.

[kurtilein3]

dxarmy94:

torture is utterly ineffective. it just doesnt work. you destroy those people, destroy their body and mind, but its still not that difficult for them to keep their secrets, even if they end up dead or mentally and physically crippled.

do your research. you could start by watching this: watch?v=h4I0zEpSZR0 by the way, the FBI agent is speaking the truth.

torture is just pure unjustified barbarism, trampling your own dignity and the concept of human rights for no good reason.

[dxarmy94]

Then can you give me a better idea to get the answer out of a terrorist when the world will be blown up in 20 minutes if you can't get the answer?

[stewy2711]

Hey FOOL, when has there been a situation when "the world will be blown up in 20 minutes?" Even in that ridiculous situation, torture wouldn't be effective because all that the person would have to do is withstand it for 20 minutes. Stop trying to justify torture you ignorant fool.

[hardsofty123]

he isn't very ignorant, if you look into it, torture is -very- effective...

our memory has evolved through pain, pain is what we remember the most,

and what we seek to avoid at all cost, sometimes even more than death itself. this is incredibly useful to state security, that's y everyone does it :P

[kurtilein3]

did you watch this video that i uploaded earlier? watch?v=3l0gI2PrEDQ watch it.

[kurtilein3]

torture is only effective if false confessions are what you want.

you will get them, they will tell you whatever they think you might want to hear. but it is actually not that difficult to keep your secrets under those circumstances. the strategies that are most difficult to resist do not cause or threaten any pain at all, because they provoke unintentional leaks of information.

[zebra334]

It doesnt work

It is morally wrong

[dxarmy94]

Hahahaha! Thats the only thing you can say "It doesn't work.Ohh,Its morally wrong."If torture means saving and protecting my country from things so horrible you can't even make up in your mind then I would do whats necessary for my country to stay away from harm.

[kurtilein3]

torture doesnt save and protect the US, it turns the US into an evil empire in the eyes of the rest of the planet. and it inspires terrorists: this is precisely the stuff that caused them to attack you in the first place. and it will turn against US citizen, and it is already beginning.

in your nation, torture will be present and people will hate your nation, and other nations where torture is absent will be safer.

[dxarmy94]

In the eyes of the world we look bad? So what ?!? I'd rather look bad to the rest of the nation and save my nation than follow the NWO. Whatever happened to "don't care about what other people think of you?"

[kurtilein3]

in the eyes of the world, you could look bad for reasons like this:

- because the US constantly starts useless wars that kills civilians

- because the US tortures its prisoners to death, and uses similar methods against its own citizen

- because the US government doesnt care about the constitution, its a lawless regime

basically, you will look like the bad guys. the good guys would then be the ones fighting against such an evil empire. the bad guys are the ones protecting it.

[dxarmy94]

First of all, the US started one useless war in the eyes on uninformed people and BTW how was it useless we captured alot of dictators and evil people.Second,the US has never tortured there own citizens,at least not to death and if they have tortured a citizen its because of a reasonable cause.And third,the US DOES care about the constitution,at least the conservatives do.The Liberal Democrats that your saying are great humans like Obama and other elitists dont care at all about the constitution

[dxarmy94]

and if you think I'm lying just look at how all the Liberals want to get rid of the 2nd Amendment and how Obama thinks the constitution is out dated.There the ones who hate the constitution and if they had there way America would a downfalling Communistic cesspool!

[kurtilein3]

"and if they have tortured a citizen its because of a reasonable cause" lol, there NEVER is a reasonable cause for torture. its an inhumane punishment, ineffective as a means to get any information, but it shows everyone what a government we are talking about.

",the US DOES care about the constitution,at least the conservatives do" stupid lie. conservative tactics: warrantless wiretapping, torture, fraud, lies about WMDs, ... the conservatives destroyed the constitution.

[kurtilein3]

dxarmy94:

most US wars are justified and useful in the eyes of uneducated americans, but they are useless in the eyes of informed people. most wars only serve the purpose of investing in bombs and the military industry, instead of investing in more useful things.

",the US has never tortured there own citizens,at least not to death " WRONG, tazer stun guns are torture devices, us citizen died because of those.

[dxarmy94]

Are you a US citizen?

[kurtilein3]

no, but i do have relatives that live in the united states, i know quite a few US citizen, and ive been to the united states. but why would that matter anyway?

however, if not being an US citizen somehow disqualifies my arguments, im sure that i can find some well-respected US citizen like for example noam chomsky that would not only agree with my argumentation, but would be able to put them in much better words at the same time.

[dxarmy94]

Hahaha! I'm not saying by you not being a US citizen disqualifies you from any argument,I'm just saying being a US citizen and being hated and criticized by every country in the world and most people in the world including my own countrymen is not always the most fun situation and another person like you criticizing my country,saying how we make mistakes ALL the time,forgetting what we have done for the rest of the world,really doesn't help.

[kurtilein3]

i dont think you need to identify yourself with your government that much.

if you didnt go to war, and you didnt torture anyone, then this criticism shouldnt affect you. at least if you didnt vote for george w. bush ;) basically, i think we can both agree that the government should act in the interest of the US population, and if it doesnt, then you can criticize one without criticizing the other. the time to identify with your government is when you agree with what it does.

[dxarmy94]

What are your thoughts on George W. Bush?

[kurtilein3]

dxarmy94:

i think the main problems with george w. bush is that he is willing to believe stuff on faith, and that he is a scientific illiterate, and that he is of below-average intelligence. the fact that he managed to be uninformed about so many different important issues also seems to indicate a lack of curiosity, an unwillingness to research stuff and to get to the best information available. thats why the real bastards, rumsfeld and cheney and rice, were so powerful.

[hardsofty123]

you must be able to give him more credit than that... this guy was president, a decision maker, whose information was channel to him through a board of advisors/specialists, etc. Sure, bush may seem unintelligent at times, but he really takes a lot of matters into concern,

Dismissing someone who is entitled (or actually ran as pres) as a "unimformed, below avg. intel" person is simply rediculous, how can one even imagine this?!

[kurtilein3]

hardsofty123:

just look at how he speaks, and look at his decisions. his people start torturing prisoners after september 11, leading to false confessions that connect saddam hussein and september 11, based on this nonsense which has by now vanished into thin air he went to war in iraq, and then proclaimed "we dont torture". either he is evil and the incompetence was just a facade, or he really was incompetent as a president and heavily manipulated by others that made use of his weaknesses.

[hardsofty123]

he didn't go to iraq based on falso confessions lol, this was to garner public support.. the US was looking at iraq long before 9/11 which just happened to come at the right time. Remember yugoslavia, the 'just war' precedent that was set? guess which evil lunitic was next on the list...

Either he is evil? and this coming from an athiest? oh my... satan -must- be pulling the strings, that has to be the only explaination.

plz define this term: 'evil', i dare you., w/o sounding like bush himself

[kurtilein3]

in this case, "evil" would mean that he started this war, knowing that it would displace and kill innocent civilians and US soldiers, knowing that there is no reason other than personal gain of a few to justify it, knowing that this kind of debt could destabilize the US financial system, knowing that all this cost is unnecessary and could simply be avoided by not starting the war. and then spreading lies for years to get it done. thats the alternative to stupidity and incompetence.

[hardsofty123]

well, lets just regard him as 'motivated by self interest' and not evil, so we don't sound like dogmatic christians :P

i'd agree with almost everything u just said about him, apart from: "knowing that there is no reason other than personal gain of a few to justify it", hehe no. practically each and every us citizen will benefit, as well as the world, seeing that iraqs oil has been secured (or stolen, w/e,) any1 who uses oil, or products that consume oil (everything) ....

[hardsofty123]

contributes to the demand of the oil on which the US is yes.. addicted. iraqs petrolium output is already increases, and this works to undermine any of those oil shocks.

self defense, as i see it, cuz having no oil for 2 months can be MUCH worse than a land based invasion... much much much worse.

[hardsofty123]

1. 9/11 is NOT the reason for iraq, nor are those false confessions, those were just to garner public support, and really did not factor into the administrations aspirations with the invasion

2. you're athiest....... wtf u talking about evil for? define this term w/o sounding like the person you are trying to insult. i dare you

[dxarmy94]

I'm just saying,maybe if you were an american then you would understand what kind of pressures we are under everyday and how our country is a confusing,changing,capitalist country that is going through a rough time in economic and world problems.But I guess your just expressing something we love in this country.....Freedom of Speech.

[dxarmy94]

Ok.What are your thoughts on President Barack Hussein Obama?

[kurtilein3]

dxarmy94:

obama appears to be highly intelligent and highly educated, he is maybe an agnostic maybe moderately religious, definitively not a faith-head like bush.

but people expected him to reduce the amount of soldiers at war in iraq and afghanistan, and they expected him to stop torture. and before he was elected, he was for single payer healthcare. people need to wake up because its now clear that obama will need public pressure or he wont do the right things.

[dxarmy94]

What about him saying he'll close Gitmo and then didn't because he knew it was a mistake? Do you think that is something that will be happening throughout his presidency?

[kurtilein3]

i think one of his biggest mistakes is that he does not really want to stop torture. he says so, but he refuses to publish the evidence necessary to put those in prison that raped prisoners and tortured them to death. at least those should be punished.

obama wants impunity, and he wants to keep it secret. i think what will happen during his presidency is that more torture will happen, and it will be embarassing for him and for the united states.

[dxarmy94]

Is the United States one big failure?

[kurtilein3]

the US has some of the best universities, some of the best scientists, some of the best intellectuals, some of the best alternative media, some of the best research facilities, ...

but the political system (in combination with the lobbys, mainstream media, the military industry, etc) probarbly is one big failure. what makes this failure even bigger, is that too many americans are ignorant or apathetic or disillusioned about politics, but it will be an important aspect of their own future.

[dxarmy94]

Do you think the mainstream media might capture more of one side?How is the military industry a failure?Are those ignorant,apathetic Americans more on the right or left?

[Shavarnarak]

I am very disappointed with Obama deciding not to prosecute the torturers.

I wonder though if any of the other candidates would have done so.

[Shavarnarak]

Still, I can't help but feel that under Bush the US slid into a sort of fascism.

Bush and his cabinet and henchpeople should be in jail. But they aren't because the US actually contains alot of fascist voters. (Who scream bloody murder when identified as such (and who probably can't even properly define what a facist is.) And Obama doesn't intend to stand up to them at all.

[kurtilein3]

"I wonder though if any of the other candidates would have done so. "

if he would not have done it, i think he would have been the first president in history that attempts to stop impunity for the actions of the intelligence agencies.

they now know that they have to be better at keeping it secret or that they need to stop it, unless they want to weaken the position of president obama.

[kurtilein3]

... continued

basically, until now obama did not start a conflict of power with the intelligence agencies. history shows that they will probarbly now stop torturing (for a while) and continue all their other dirty practises, but if obama does the right thing and wants to let the courts put them in prison and dig around in their secret stuff, then there would be a massive conflict. they would probarbly try to crucify him in corporate media for being unpatriotic and undermining USAs security.

[kurtilein3]

... third and last comment

but i think if there would be lots of public pressure and international pressure on obama on this issue, he might change his opinion. the price he would pay for REALLY ending torture instead of temporarily ending it is a weakened presidency due to conflicts with the agencies. he will not do it, unless public and international pressure also put a price-tag on his current strategy of refusing to put an end to torture in a more lasting way.

[DeistPaladin]

Torture does have one "use". It's worthless at getting real information that could "keep us safe" as so many neo-cons (American word for fascists) have said. However, it is useful for getting false confessions and generating false evidence.

False evidence like, say, a link between Saddam and Al Qaida?

Maybe that's why the Bush administration wanted to use it despite being advise of how ineffective, immoral and illegal it is.

[kurtilein3]

but as far as i know, the connection between saddam and 911 was simply made up by the us government.

if you keep the torture victims in isolation indefinitely, and if all their fake confessions are being kept secret, then what should be the point of it?

i think the real reason is to get systems in place to use torture more and more often against minorities, activists and journalists, to cause the mixture of fear, apathy, and feeling powerless in society that totalitarian regimes rely on.

[DeistPaladin]

QUOTE: "the connection between saddam and 911 was simply made up by the us government."

Yes. Bush wanted to go to war with Saddam and wanted 9/11 to be his excuse. There was no evidence so they needed to create some.

QUOTE: "to cause the mixture of fear, apathy, and feeling powerless in society that totalitarian regimes rely on."

Good point. For a while, that seemed to work.

[willartrobinson]

I was reading in a newspaper last week. (Should have kept the copy). that insects were also dropped into these small torture boxes you mentioned...did you hear about this? I may be wrong.

G. Orwell would either be laughing or spinning in his grave. Maybe we'll turn future torture into a game show? then we can all instead of throwing fruit, text /vote what cage or creature to use while laughing at our ignorance and acceptance to insanity.

[kurtilein3]

i think you can maybe confirm the stuff about the insects. im not sure, but there were those psychologists that prepared some texts justifying torture and describing in detail how it should be done and what shouldnt be done. they wrote something about insects, saying that its okay if you can assume that the victim doesnt get hurt if he/she reacts in the right way. (how cruel... they could justify scorpions that way) . but i dont know if actual torture victims talked about it.

[Dashes000]

"they could justify scorpions that way"

Actually, no. Dangerous insects were not allowed. Although they did make do with what they had and told Zubaydah (the one this 'technique' was used on) that they /were/ using a stinging insect. The actual insect used was a caterpillar.

That said, the Orwellian Phobia-Box analogy is still quite valid.

I recommend LiberalViewer's video featuring Bill O'Reilly's trademark "fair and balanced [sic]" commentary on the subject.

watch?v=C8ngQZ2AwzU

[kurtilein3]

the first topic in yesterdays episode of democracynow is also worth watching.

its the friday, may 8 episode, the pulitzer prize winning story that has never been reported in mainstream television. youtube wont let me post the link, but im sure you can find democracynows website ;)

[dechha1981]

i almost feel like walking up to obama and saying, "Dude, I've been campagning like hell to get you elected, and now you're making me look like a dick. You were elected by people who hate Bush for EXACTLY THIS SHIT. Just punish someone for it, OK?"

[pyromania152]

It's good to see a politically charged video I can agree with. I love how intensely some congressmen and other "leaders" will try to justify torture. I saw one interview with a supporter of waterboarding in which the interviewer asked "If waterboarding were done on you, would that be torture?" and he replied "Well... I would feel that it was..."

[Dashes000]

You get 2 stars from me for the first time ever. Your main point is right on; but some of your examples and commenter were absolutely asinine. Getting tazered is comparable to getting rapped? WTF??

Then you say this: "i think outlawing tazers is the easiest option. police officers should know how to shoot someone in the leg so that its not that dangerous."

Shoot someone in the leg...yeah, because being shot with a bullet isn't more dangerous than getting hit with a tazer?? Again, WTF?!

[kurtilein3]

dashes000:

i guess i have to change my opinion a little bit, just to freak you out.

its clear that getting tazered is much more painful than getting raped (unless you get raped with a baseball bat or the barrel of a gun or sth like that, unless pepperspray is involved). so in most cases, its quite obvious that tazering someone is worse than raping someone.

[Dashes000]

I cant believe you of all people are actually saying this; it's insane. I'm gonna go out on a limb and say you've never been tazerd OR raped.

Just imagine what the conversation would be like, if you met a rape victim. She tells you how she was rapped in an alley when she was 16, got pregnant, etc.; and you tell her "yeah, totally understand how you feel; I've totally been there. I was tazered once." Just how long before you end up getting slapped??

[kurtilein3]

well, if it leads to pregnancy, (or an infection like HIV or hepatitis) then the situation is obviously different.

diferent example: girl aged 16 gets raped, she didnt get infected with any disease, didnt get pregnant, the person that did it went to jail for along time. or: girl aged 16, got tazered by 2 tazers at the same time for no good reason, the people that did it still run around in uniform.

which event causes more psychological damage, assuming that she stays in the country?

[Dashes000]

First off, as I already said, I completely agree that the people who misuse tazers should, at the VERY least, lose their jobs and be prosecuted. It sickens me that the people in my country who've carried out torture will suffer not even a dock in pay. That said, some things you are saying are still shamefully ignorant.

Lets ditch hypotheticals. Strip out all other variables. Ask a psychologist which is more traumatizing, getting raped or getting tazered, and they'll tell you rape; hands down.

[Sorry2BurstYou]

You'll always have trigger-happy people involved in law enforcement; whether with a tazer or gun. However, using a tazer can SOMETIMES be a much more humane alternative. When a police officer is threatened with a weapon like a knife, it is much better to taze a suspect, than to shoot him/her. Also, an unarmed citizen can still pose a serious threat to a police officer. Indeed you are correct about the courts deciding on each case individually, regarding the specific facts pertinent to the case.

[kurtilein3]

i think outlawing tazers is the easiest option.

police officers should know how to shoot someone in the leg so that its not that dangerous. however, it is always clear that this is a very drastic decision that will go recorded and will later be reviewed and scrutinized and can easily lead to charges against the officer.

when its justified, they do make use of guns. but with tazers, the frequency of incidents just appears to explode, its being used to discipline people making use of the pain.

[Wonko101]

Kurt, I guess I can understand that you feel if you give someone a "nonlethal" option to use on someone they will use it MORE than a gun but reccommending to shoot people in the leg is BETTER than a taser is simply ridiculous. The damage done to tissue and bone is FAR more than what is done by a taser. INSTEAD real punishment needs to be done to those officers AND those who torture. There is NO justification for torture. Would we have accepted this from the Nazis or Japanese in WW2? No.

[kurtilein3]

wonko101:

getting shot in the leg might be more painful in the long run, but the tazer, while its active, is definitively more painful than a bullet wound.

but it doesnt leave the same wound. more pain, less aftermath.

if you want police officers in the united states to continue running around with a torture devicenas part of their equipment, thats your decision, but then dont tell me that you are against torture, because the presence of those devices will make sure that they are being used

[Wonko101]

Kurt,

Have you ever been shot? I have, in the knee. The damage to the bone and tissue was severe, going completely through. I had many surgeries and walk just fine but I can tell you the pain was beyond belief and it took months to recover and walk.

Meanwhile people are tasered, stand up and walk away.

Certainly this device can be used as a torture device. So can water, right?

[Wonko101]

Please don't try to make out to be some sort of "typical American" Kurt. I said that I agree that torturing someone, regardless of the reason, is wrong. I don't need or want to hear from ANY person, such as Dickhead Cheney, that he had some viable reason to torture because their ISN'T a viable reason to torture. HOWEVER, a taser is a TOOL, nothing more. As I said before, WATER is important to life, yet it, too, can be used to torture.

[popebenadict16]

is that thinking inside the box or, thinking outside the box?

[kurtilein3]

which box would be better, a box in which people believe that people that torture go to prison and it rarely happens, or a box in which people believe that torture is not a problem and/or justified, and it happens more and more frequently?

[TheAist]

ive seen 2 of my friends, at different times, but the same cop, be tazered repeatedly for no reason except, the cop is sadistic.

[kurtilein3]

theaist: thats crazy. he should have lost his job as a result to the first event.

[TheAist]

it was a female cop, and you can call me Coz :)

[CognitiveDisonance]

Thank you for the book recommendation:

"Standing up to the Madness"

"Do something"

Great advice! Too bad our courts are also corrupt. The governments of these unites States have been acting with impunity for almost a decade at least. See what happened to this officer: (nothing)

watch?v=SWC7iSGCk-s

also see / subscribe to my playlist;

"Police Abuse and Misconduct"

Thank you again, kurtilein3. Excellent vid as usual.

[GuyInvincible111]

yet another excellent video.

[Roostring]

I agree, this has gone on way too long.

The US is such a violent place anyway, we need all sorts of radical changes, but punishing the torturers - or whoever gave the orders - would send a really important message.

I was pretty disappointed when I heard they were all off the hook.

[metalorg]

About tazers- If the guy is confined or immoble and is tazered to get some information or for pleasure or whatever then I'd accept that.

Same with punching. If a police officer punches a guy in the face in their natural habitat, maybe because he was stealing a purse or whatever, then it should be okay. But if you strap the guy to a chair and punch him in the face a bunch then it should be considered torture.

[kurtilein3]

metalorg:

i think a court needs to decide in each individual case. because the tazer is considered a torture device, in each case of possible torture it should of course be much more likely that it actually was torture if a tazer was involved. tazers are almost exclusively being used against unarmed victims, that could be arrested in a much less painful way by just arresting them oldschool.

and the punishment for using a tazer in a way that constitutes torture should be several years in prison

[ric4567]

IMHO Obama tries to "move on" and this is not the worst Idea: "we made mistakes, lets clean that up and forget about it"

The Examples you gave for tasers are not *that* convincing: there will always be idiots in the police force. As long as we don't give them too much power over regular citizens they will be dealt with. (and that guy in the kerry speech... he wanted to make trouble)

[ric4567]

Its funny how Germans NOW find out how "bad" the US was while we create a surveillance state right NOW. (Schaueble wanted to kill people just because they may be a danger!) Remember when Merkel flew over to brown nose Bush? did any of those Politicians ever see that Iraq was a mistake?

At least America moves on, we are still stuck in the Past. (Merkel visited a Stast-Cell last week)

[kurtilein3]

lol ^^

merkel visited a former stasi-building that now serves as a museum and memorial, as a reminder that should keep us from repeating stuff like this.

we are not stuck in the past, tazers are outlawed in germany, and: WE DONT TORTURE. in germany, there are a few isolated cases, and in those cases, those that did torture go to jail and lose their jobs as the result of fair and public trial.

you are stuck in the past, because in the USA you can get away with torture.

[kurtilein3]

"The Examples you gave for tasers are not *that* convincing: there will always be idiots in the police force."

and you know what happens to those individuals in vicilized nations? they not only lose their job, they not only need to show up in court, they go to prison for years.

and when people that torture go to prison just like rapists, then you can REALLY talk about just a FEW idiots in the police force. otherwise, that would not be convincing for me.

[kurtilein3]

ric4567:

former german minister of foreign affairs Joschka Fischer made it VERY CLEAR that germany is opposed to the war in iraq, and will not participate. i can even prove it, in this video you will see Joschka Fischer speaking out against the war while being in office in the run-up to the war: watch?v=8cV6RCnA5WY

research this.

[ric4567]

I am German ;)

Merkel Visits a Stasi building to remind us that a society of surveillance and censorship must not be repeated. While Ursula von Leyen starts censoring the Internet and all our Internet Communication is recorded. IMHO Actions speak louder than words.

We do not torture? AFAIK Push never came to shove here but just wait when the shit hits the fan: How many RAF guys did it take to challenge our society?

[ric4567]

Why do you belief that American Police forces who use excessive force don't go to jail? At least their actions are permanently recorded, like this Pastor. Is it the same here? (honest question)

I think that Germany has a little higher standards in the selection process but if a cop here wants to fuck you... he can do that too.

[ric4567]

Yes, Fischer was against the war and then Merkel flew over to Bush to tell him that not all Germans are as "Anti American" as Fischer. Where is Fischer today and where is Merkel? Did she ever say that it was a mistake?

[grungeface87]

Obama can do without these sorts of things hanging over his head, he should sort them out now. With so much faith and hope around the world resting on his presidency, this is the last thing he needs.

Well said kurt.