[Closed] ISIS: Why we hate you.

It's still the plot-line of a half arsed Steven Seagull B movie.

the use of the letter B was redundant here...

(unless it wasn't a misspelling and there is a half-decent actor named Steven Seagull...) [img] [/img]

What if the Russians were attacking and you had to torture Corbyn to get the nuclear codes?

I would - either way would be a win - torture and he gives up the nuclear codes and you can make sure the ruskies aren't going to benefit from their aggression, or you don't get the codes but at least you make that loser Corbyn suffer for stating that he wouldn't use the nukes and therefore inviting the ruskies to try it on.

and the Stanford example goes on to say that torture, if legalised could not be contained, and if un-contained would be horrific anyway, and the damage to institutions of justice, and the people that work within them and the societies that rely on them, would be incalculable.

nickc

and the Stanford example goes on to say that torture, if legalised could not be contained, and if un-contained would be horrific anyway, and the damage to institutions of justice, and the people that work within them and the societies that rely on them, would be incalculable.

Yep, that's what Sam Harris has said. That torture is untenable for normal situations but with the caveat that all options have to remain open hypothetically for worst case scenarios.

Your evasion of a yes or no answer is a tacit agreement that he's right, even if you set out to undermine him by saying he's pro torture. It would be hilarious if it wasn't just sad since Sam Harris constantly has people try to discredit him by quoting him out of context.

Your evasion of a yes or no answer is a tacit agreement that he's righ

It's nothing if the sort, but it is a reminder not to get involved in thfesds like this.

It's nothing if the sort, but it is a reminder not to get involved in thfesds like this.

nickc

It's nothing if the sort, but it is a reminder not to get involved in thfesds like this.

Yeah well if your idea of getting involved is to post obscurantist ad hominem nonsense then it's probably best you don't.

The Samoan example rather assumes that torture is effective in getting the truth, or even useful information. Plenty of evidence that it isn't.

What if our Samoan is mentally disturbed or delusional hence torture is a sub optimal way to get the truth?

To go back to the bottom of page 2, Dabiq is propaganda; therefore how can you be sure it is what ISIS really believe? How do you know they haven't just written all that stuff to try and get the "West" to turn against all Muslims, and thus help them to create chaos and destruction all over the world? Maybe it is accurate but if you didn't write it yourself, you can't be sure, nor can you be sure why they wrote it.

Why does the bloke have to be a Samoan?

The Samoan example rather assumes that torture is effective in getting the truth, or even useful information. Plenty of evidence that it isn't.

What doesn't work is picking up every Samoan you can find and torturing all of them. Particularly if you're not sure what you're trying to find out.

bainbrge

The Samoan example rather assumes that torture is effective in getting the truth, or even useful information. Plenty of evidence that it isn't.

It actually happened. It doesn't assume anything. It's an example of the "ticking time bomb" scenario played out for real where "torture" in that case a beating actually yielded the necessary information to save the child's life.

gobuchul

Why does the bloke have to be a Samoan?

Because he was Samoan, and more to the point he had a blonde afro/mohawk so a fairly distinct looking person.

Anyway, it's all moot since the whole point of the piece Harris wrote on torture was questioning why it is that people find that collateral damage (dead women and children) is an acceptable cost of waging modern war but that torture is morally unconscionable even in the most dire or specific of circumstances.

Nickc why not follow your own link and read what Harris wrote. Then read the writings of those who tried to discredit him by quoting him out of context then read his clarifications or the same thing but "with training wheels on" to use his terminology.
Once you have done that you will probably have a different view.

Ditto Harris's torture argument. He argues that it should be illegal however claims logically that to have "evidence" such as the case above and not torture is unethical. Its hard to argue against that.

Sam Harris constantly has people try to discredit him by quoting him out of context.

Having just listened to his podcast I find this comment rather ironic!

'Islam apologists' blah blah etc etc. Its a opinionated and persuasive argument rather than the informative dissection he advertised.

Bill you are listening to this podcast out of context!! There is a history to this and as a long time listener/reader of Harris's work there is a back catalogue of detractors and critics who make a living misquoting him.

vickypea

Dabiq is propaganda; therefore how can you be sure it is what ISIS really believe? How do you know they haven't just written all that stuff to try and get the "West" to turn against all Muslims, and thus help them to create chaos and destruction all over the world? Maybe it is accurate but if you didn't write it yourself, you can't be sure, nor can you be sure why they wrote it.

Dabiq isn't new. It's been running since 2014. Has it all been an elaborate exercise in reverse psychology? If you don't think that Dabiq, the ISIS magazine is what ISIS really believe then what do you think they actually believe?

What parts of the manifesto as read by Harris did you think seemed inconsistent with ISIS' world view?

The purpose of it is to inspire and radicalise people who are so inclined. Have you heard of it before now? Do you know anyone who has read it, or reads it regularly?

I'm not making any argument to the contrary. Simply pointing out that he is also engaging in the same method to try and manipulate his audience into line with his opinion.

Torture is wrong. However full access to social media, messanging accounts, mobiles with crackabke encryption is imo a no-brainer requirement and imo far more effective than torture anyway

[quote=jimjam ] nickc
OK, I'm going to take with a pinch of salt the views of some-one who decides moral issues by watching repeats of 24, or the "By citing the ticking bomb scenario" defence.
So nick, you are on holidays in Australia. It's 40 degrees. Your car is stolen from a petrol station, your infant child is still in the car.
A well known criminal is seen on cctv and by witnesses stealing the car. He's 6'4, Samoan, and has a blonde afro.
An hour later police arrest the 6'4 Samoan, but he denies stealing the car. Your child will die if he doesn't tell police the location of the car soon.
Should they beat him up to extract this information in order to save your child's life?

This has a precedence in modern Germany... In this case the threat of torture was enough to gain the information where the kidnapped (but dead) child was. However, the police officer who used the threat of torture did end up in jail, even though it had the desired effect. There is a really good film covering the case. Very sad story.

Some detail in this piece

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/10/world/kidnapping-has-germans-debating-police-torture.html?_r=0

I notice he was very dismissive of the view that Dabiq is propaganda, but I don't understand why. It IS propaganda and seems to be working on him at any rate.

Dismissing Dabiq as Propoganda is dangerous as it trivilaises it and sets you on a path to think that as soon as people "wake up" and see it as propaganda the problem will go away. What he is saying is we must take it seriously, we must understand that very intelligent and indeed critical thinking people read it and agree with what it says and are in fact inspired by it. Its consistent with the equally dangerous view that Jihadists as all "thick and deluded" and somehow all thats required is a decent job and/or some welfare and all will be well.

@welsh what's the name of the film ?

crackabke encryption

LOL

Say goodbye to secure financial transactions and the ability of people to undermine authoritarian states. To be honest, I'd rather legalise torture.

People die, for lots of reasons. There's a line in the sand when trying to stop that becomes an exercise in futility.

No matter how much security you have, how well trained you are, however tough you may be - the bomber always gets through and if you're in the wrong place at the wrong time you're going to die. I think the best thing we could do, is to psychologically accept our potential fates - instead of trying to control the situation all the time.

[quote=jambalaya ]@welsh what's the name of the film ?

Little bit of English

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2374286/

In German in detail

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Der_Fall_Jakob_von_Metzler

Compelling podcast. Has anyone got the stomach to cut and paste the 8 points - I really have no wish to see someone having their head cut off 🙁

Which is why the teach troops to resist torture. Just resist mind - everyone breaks.

We're taught to resist interrogation for as long as is safe, the aim is to return with dignity. It's really that simple.

Has anyone got the stomach to cut and paste the 8 points - I really have no wish to see someone having their head cut off

It's towards the end, on page 80, so just don't go that far.

tbh some of the images are too high quality so that one doesn't seem to look as gruesome as it could.

And that magazine does have a big propoganda slant - images of soldiers with kittens and happy children frolicking because they are growing up in the lands of Islam.

TurnerGuy

Has anyone got the stomach to cut and paste the 8 points - I really have no wish to see someone having their head cut off

It's towards the end, on page 80, so just don't go that far.

It's been reprinted on various news websites. You don't have to read Dabiq to read the points of the article.