Bush official: we tortured Gitmo detainee

Discuss

64 Responses to “Bush official: we tortured Gitmo detainee”

  1. Cowicide says:

    Hey, you can find out a bunch of admitted stuff with torture!

    Remember, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed? After we waterboarded him and he was somehow led to fear harm may come to his family he admitted to:

    • The February 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center in New York City
    • A failed “shoe bomber” operation
    • The October 2002 attack in Kuwait
    • The nightclub bombing in Bali, Indonesia
    • A plan for a “second wave” of attacks on major U.S. landmarks to be set in the spring or summer of 2002 after the 9/11 attacks, which includes more hijackings of commercial airlines and having them flown into various buildings in the U.S. including the Library Tower in Los Angeles , the Sears Tower in Chicago, the Columbia Center in Seattle and the Empire State Building in New York
    • Plots to attack oil tankers and U.S. naval ships in the Straits of Hormuz, the Straits of Gibraltar and in Singapore
    • A plan to blow up the Panama Canal
    • Plans to assassinate Jimmy Carter
    • A plot to blow up suspension bridges in New York City
    • A plan to destroy the Sears Tower in Chicago with burning fuel trucks
    • Plans to “destroy” Heathrow Airport, Canary Wharf and Big Ben in London
    • A planned attack on “many” nightclubs in Thailand
    • A plot targeting the New York Stock Exchange and other U.S. financial targets
    • A plan to destroy buildings in Eilat, Israel
    • Plans to destroy U.S. embassies in Indonesia, Australia and Japan in 2002.
    • Plots to destroy Israeli embassies in India, Azerbaijan, the Philippines and Australia
    • Surveying and financing an attack on an Israeli El-Al flight from Bangkok
    • Sending several “mujahideen” into Israel to survey “strategic targets” with the intention of attacking them
    • The November 2002 suicide bombing of a hotel in Mombasa, Kenya
    • The failed attempt to shoot down an Israeli passenger jet leaving Mombasa airport in Kenya
    • Plans to attack U.S. targets in South Korea
    • Providing financial support for a plan to attack U.S., British and Jewish targets in Turkey
    • Surveillance of U.S. nuclear power plants in order to attack them
    • A plot to attack NATO’s headquarters in Europe
    • Planning and surveillance in a 1995 plan (the “Bojinka Operation”) to bomb 12 American passenger jets
    • The planned assassination attempt against then-U.S. President Bill Clinton during a mid-1990s trip to the Philippines.
    • “Shared responsibility” for a plot to kill Pope John Paul II
    • Plans to assassinate Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf
    • An attempt to attack a U.S. oil company in Sumatra, Indonesia, “owned by the Jewish former [U.S.] Secretary of State Henry Kissinger”
    • The beheading of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl

    One CIA official cautioned that “many of Mohammed’s claims during interrogation were ‘white noise’ designed to send the U.S. on wild goose chases or to get him through the day’s interrogation session.”

    Ya think?

    Great, we get SHIT intelligence and the nice side effect is we completely lose our standing in the world and endanger our own soldiers in the future and make them far more likely to be subjected to useless torture themselves.

    THANK YOU, BUSH AND CHENEY. WAR CRIMINALS.

  2. Takuan says:

    but proxy torture is OK by Ottawa?

  3. Ugly Canuck says:

    Oh wait…I see, some1, for you “military intelligence ” torture is a-ok, while ‘extra-curricular’ (non-Official,”non-intelligence-related”) torture by prison guards/non-Military-agents is bad.
    End justifies means, eh?
    Put another way, some people ought to be sacrificed, in the Military’s quest for knowledge – I mean, “intelligence”?
    By your qualification of the term “torture” , I see you are in the “some-torture-is-good camp( “a regrettable necessity” , in weasel-speak) unlike those mentally ill unrealistic naive singing-from-the-same-Prayerbook Leftists.
    Changing the subject to the horrid conditions allowed to continue in US privately-run prisons is just a distraction from the issue of this Administration’s guilt in instituting torture(but not in name!)-as-Policy, a “but-look-over-there-!” tactic.
    Let’s argue about the definition of torture!
    Let’s look at how badly others have tortured!
    No. Let’s not.
    Instead, let’s closely examine the Government record to see how these horrors came to be….paying very close attention to names and dates.

  4. Kyle Goetz says:

    @4 Daemon:

    There are very specific requirements to be classified a POW under Geneva. One is that you must fight in uniform and follow the the laws of war.

    If you do not do this, you are not a POW. The blanket term used across the globe for a hundred years for these people is “unlawful combatant.”

    These people may or may not be unlawful combatants; however, the fact remains that “unlawful combatant” is not a BS word, but a cornerstone of international humanitarian law.

  5. some1 says:

    #6, calling someone a troll for no reason is the last refuge of the incompetent. You’ve lost.

    And no, it is no false equivalency. You just want it to be so you can conviniently ignore the moral double standard. It’s up to the authorities to ensure the safety of their prisoners, and they are failing to do so. It doesn’t matter whether or not it’s official policy.

  6. Ugly Canuck says:

    Tak, this ain’t about canada.
    it’s about the Government of the USA.

  7. Ugly Canuck says:

    And how many millions did the Can Gov pay to Mr. Arar to partially compensate him? Has the US shown any respons-ablity to Mr. Arar , or the Can Gov’s views as to Mr. Arar’s rights?

  8. Antinous / Moderator says:

    Epic threadjack. Prisoner abuse is a completely valid topic, but really doesn’t have anything to do with this post.

  9. eustace says:

    She’s making an interesting distinction. Accusing the interrogators of abusing approved methods shifts the responsibility a bit, hmmm?

  10. Takuan says:

    ya know, torture is committed in America on a daily basis in just about every prison. What’s more appalling?

  11. Takuan says:

    Harper has always been MiniShrub, Canada threw away the chance to repair this recently and there is no guarantee they will do any better soon.

  12. Ugly Canuck says:

    I repeat, this is about the USA. You guys would not release Khadr even if we asked for him.
    Even if we did not, how does this excuse torture as Official US military policy, anyway?
    This is about the USA and its use of torture as Official Policy, not about the purity of those who assert that torture is a criminal act.

  13. Ugly Canuck says:

    And so Tak you dismiss an entire Nation!

  14. eustace says:

    All such things must be brought into the light. How many more will be exposed after his Imperial Bushness is gone?

  15. Ugly Canuck says:

    Are torturers limiting themselves to only hearing complaints from Angels?

  16. some1 says:

    Ugly Canuck:

    I take issue with the assumption that Americans are “unconcerned” about torture in their prisons.

    Usually the only time the subject ever comes up is when someone says “I hope he’s put into a cell with Bubba!”

    I also take issue with the “only-leftists-care-about-Official-US-torture” meme.

    I never said that. I said that they only care about Guantanamo because Designated Victims (Muslims) are being tortured there. If they were white people suspected of being Neo Nazis, nobody would care.

    I also do not appreciate the ad hominem. maybe you ought to go skin another cat.

    What ad hominem? You talk like a crazy person, so it’s only appropriate to ask if you’ve taken your meds.

    Oh wait…I see, some1, for you “military intelligence ” torture is a-ok, while ‘extra-curricular’ (non-Official,”non-intelligence-related”) torture by prison guards/non-Military-agents is bad.
    End justifies means, eh?

    I don’t support either of them, and I also don’t support the moral double standard of being cool with prison torture while crying about Guantanamo. The latter isn’t even as bad as the former, making the double standard all the more ridiculous.

  17. Takuan says:

    Some, Ugly, quite apart from any role I may have in this discussion, I remind you to be civil to each other. Please.

  18. Brainspore says:

    I am simply asking why Americans are not concerned about brutal torture in their own prisons, but get all bent out of shape because suspected terrorists are tortured for intelligence by the military.

    I cannot speak for all Americans but I am concerned about all forms of torture, which is why I support Amnesty International and the ACLU.

    As for why the torture of suspected terrorists gets a lot more attention than prison abuse, it comes down to what extent torture is part of our official policy versus sadistic guards working independently.

    In the cases of Gitmo and Abu Ghraib it has become clear that decisions made at the very top levels of our government not only tolerated, but actively encouraged the use of torture on detainees. By contrast, while domestic prison abuse is apalling it isn’t exactly something we hear the vice president trying to justify. The problem may be bad, but it’s nowhere near as systemic as what happened (and may still be happening) at Guantanamo Bay.

  19. Daemon says:

    Well it’s a step in the right direction, albeit a very small one. I’ll be more impressed when somebody officially admits that the concept of an “illegal combatant” is totally nonsensical, and that they are infact POWs.

  20. Ugly Canuck says:

    Who anywhere in this thread above, was “cool” with prison torture? Even better question, why bring it up at all, in the context of a discussion of an Official admission that torture was conducted there by US Agents acting under Orders? Smells like a propaganda tactic in order to change the focus of the “debate”.
    Why the attacks on Canada in this thread? In this context? I suspect similar motives…
    Furthermore, discussions on blogs as to “what to do” about these things, may in the end be yet another way arranged by the Elites for the masses to “harmlessly” work off the cognitive dissonance of supporting with their tax payments the torture impoverishment and destruction of other human beings….such comment threads have more than a whiff of “what’s-the-use” built into a share of the comments, seemingly as a way to dis-spirit the formation of opposition to the Official Line, yet another propaganda technique, yet another manipulation of the crowds.
    It looks like democracy and freedom, but it’s hollow.

  21. Cicada says:

    @4- Nonsensical? Let’s put it this way– if you decide that Russia’s assault on Georgia was unconscionable so you move there, get a job in a hospital, and one day start shooting the patients are you a) a combatant and therefore a Prisoner of War or b) an illegal combatant, i.e. an ordinary criminal?

  22. some1 says:

    #40, it is simply a ridiculous double standard for people to accept and encourage prison torture while complaining about the relatively harmless things going on in Guantanamo. It makes no sense, so the only explanation I can come up with is that it only matters to people because the Guantanamo detainees are Muslims.

  23. Takuan says:

    precisely Dear Brainspore: one is clearly illegal the other, ?

    Ugly: Canada has entered the arena.

  24. Gilbert Wham says:

    #5: You’d be a criminal, and as such, should be tried in a criminal court.

  25. Takuan says:

    “relatively harmless things going on in Guantanamo”?
    I have no idea how you just got there from here. The alumni of Gitmo will all carry crippling scars for life and will, to a man, wish the death and destruction of America for doing that to them. I would, you would, they will. That is why some do not wish to release them. They know what their torture has created.

  26. yrogerg says:

    I take issue with the assumption that Americans are “unconcerned” about torture in their prisons.

    Usually the only time the subject ever comes up is when someone says “I hope he’s put into a cell with Bubba!” Whoa whoa whoa. You’re now equating prison rape, which, while reprehensible, is a crime committed by inmates on inmates, to an admission that torture was ordered and carried out as a matter of official US policy on a “detainee” who was being held without due process.

    YEEAAHHH, no false equivalency issues there.

    I never said that. I said that they only care about Guantanamo because Designated Victims (Muslims) are being tortured there. If they were white people suspected of being Neo Nazis, nobody would care.
    Or, maybe, just MAYBE, both are bad, but the latter is considerably more troubling, since a) these detainees have recieved no due process, and b) it’s being carried out as a matter of US policy, not inmate-on-inmate crime, or even individual abuse by guards (which *is* treated very seriously when it comes to light, BTW)

  27. eustace says:

    TEXTBOOK threadjack! Ya almost wanna frame and hang it…

  28. arkizzle says:

    Some1

    Who “accept[s] and encourage[s] prison torture”?

  29. EH says:

    that’s a curiou conflation of ‘illegal combatant’ and ‘ordinary criminal.’ care to elaborate?

  30. Brainspore says:

    @ #41: OK, now I see that you are just trying to be provocative since nobody in this thread made any comment along the lines of “accepting and encouraging” prison torture. Just because we are having a discussion about one terrible wrong does not imply that we accept another.

    Tell you what: you show us the memo that makes U.S. prison torture part of our official policy and we’ll start a whole new thread just for that topic.

  31. some1 says:

    #2, nd th trtr tht gs n n Gntnm sms vry tm by cmprsn. f mrcns dn’t lk trtr, why hvn’t thy cmpgnd gnst prsn trtr? Prhps thy nly cr bt ppl wh r Dsgntd Vctms n lftst mythlgy (n ths cs Mslms).

  32. Marcel says:

    Moral superiority.

    You never had it.

  33. Ito Kagehisa says:

    Some1: you said “the only explanation I can come up with is that it only matters to people because the Guantanamo detainees are Muslims”.

    Here’s an alternative explanation that might fit the premises you are willing to accept: “the only reason people don’t care that Guantanamo detainees are being tortured is that they are Muslims”.

    Both explanations might improve with the word “some” inserted just before the word “people”.

  34. Tweeker says:

    Either a person is acting as a criminal and should be treated as a criminal with a non military prosecution as any other person would be, or they are acting as a soldier and are a POW. There are no other categories.

    Illegal combatant implies criminal with the first word, violent with the second. We have elaborate well established systems to deal with violent criminals using due process.

  35. mrmule says:

    I hope Bush and Cheney end up in the Hague like Milošević.

  36. noen says:

    some1
    “I am simply asking why Americans are not concerned about brutal torture in their own prisons, but get all bent out of shape because suspected terrorists are tortured”

    We never see it. It’s never reported on in the national media. There are no photos, no documentaries, not even text reports that I have ever seen.

    It isn’t because Americans don’t care. It’s because our masters do not want us to see or hear such things.

  37. Ugly Canuck says:

    Some1 likes and approves of torture of people who are in police custody, for that reason alone…he’s saying “USA Official torture is a-ok, let’s get on with it.” In other words, that there is no prosecution (or protests? or is the question of who is being tortured germane to the determination of whether or not torture is permitted by Law and US custom? Torture of non-American Muslims and US citizens in the (federal?) prison system is a-ok by Some1.) means there’s no crime here.
    Most US prisoners are in there for non-violent drug crime, and why are THEY being tortured? Interrogation? Oh wait it’s to give the guards something to do with their taxpayer-funded time.
    “Designated victims”? By the prison guard ‘community’?
    Or by such exemplars of logic and grace as Some1?

  38. Ugly Canuck says:

    It would appear from that ONLY an International Court will be able to achieve even partial justice in this matter, as it is clear that most Americans support torture as Official US Government policy.
    We (the rest of the World) are old enough to judge by the actions, and not by the words, of the accused.
    Americans are incapable of prosecuting their Leaders for heinous crimes.
    It’s up to the international community.

  39. Ugly Canuck says:

    So the US Government tortures people, they admit.
    We are still waiting for the release of all the rest of the Abu Graib material, both photos and video/audio.
    We wish to see the records (of all kinds) which the Government has kept of these interrogations and how and whether the techniques of coercive interrogation have been refined by the US Government with experience, and to see the training materials used in preparation of the interrogators.
    We wish to know the names of the interrogators, and whether or not they were ‘contratcors’ and if so were they US citizens.
    We wish to know which US Government Officials participated in or witnessed the interrogations while they were ongoing, and whether such participation was by remote video camera and mike, or in person. Were questions or techniques directed by such Officials? Did they enjoy their experience of directing the interrogation?
    Was the denial of urgent medical care one of the techniques used?
    We wish to know whether medical professionals directed or advised the interrogators on which techniques to use, or gave advice as to the modification of such techniques, and if so, what were their names?
    We wish to know all locations where such activities were carried out.
    We wish to know the full accounting cost of these activities.
    We wish to know if any records of these activities have been destroyed.
    We wish to know if any Palestinians seized by US Forces in Iraq were ever subjected to these techniques at the request of any foreign power.
    We trust that any Judge called upon to adjudicate such matters was not appointed by the very people who are accused of any crime in these matters.

  40. Ugly Canuck says:

    PS the Iraq war did not end with the election of Mr. Obama. But US media coverage sure did. Link:
    http://warnewstoday.blogspot.com/
    Americans need to liberate themselves, before ever again worrying about liberating others.

  41. some1 says:

    TAKUAN:

    “relatively harmless things going on in Guantanamo”?
    I have no idea how you just got there from here.

    Compared to what’s going on in US prisons, Guantanamo is indeed relatively harmless.

    YROGERG:

    Whoa whoa whoa. You’re now equating prison rape, which, while reprehensible, is a crime committed by inmates on inmates, to an admission that torture was ordered and carried out as a matter of official US policy on a “detainee” who was being held without due process.

    Of course I am. What did you think I was talking about? Due process doesn’t make any difference in this case because there is no due process involved with prison torture either. Both are illegal.

    ARKIZZLE:

    Who “accept[s] and encourage[s] prison torture”?

    Lots of people, maybe even the majority. Almost every time some heinous criminal gets caught, everyone goes “I hope he’s raped in prison!”

    BRAINSPORE:

    OK, now I see that you are just trying to be provocative since nobody in this thread made any comment along the lines of “accepting and encouraging” prison torture. Just because we are having a discussion about one terrible wrong does not imply that we accept another.

    Was I referring specifically to boingboing users? No, I was not.

    Tell you what: you show us the memo that makes U.S. prison torture part of our official policy and we’ll start a whole new thread just for that topic.

    What does it matter whether or not it’s official policy?

    ITO KAGEHISA:

    Here’s an alternative explanation that might fit the premises you are willing to accept: “the only reason people don’t care that Guantanamo detainees are being tortured is that they are Muslims”.

    Except this isn’t true at all.

  42. dainel says:

    I think Bush put it most succinctly. Either you’re with us or you’re against us.

    Either you help us get all these people guilty of torture, ordering it, abetting it, encouraging it. Or you stand with those sadistic torturers, and we string you up by your toes.

  43. Ryan Waddell says:

    How can you people be against torture at Guantanamo when there are CHILDREN STARVING IN AFRICA???/? :)

  44. Takuan says:

    “relatively harmless” is a meaningless, almost malicious phrase.

  45. Ugly Canuck says:

    #2 Tak: ‘What’s more appalling?”
    Muddying waters, are we?
    As to the question, who cares? Bad is bad.

  46. some1 says:

    #51, mn t ltrlly. <>Cmprd t prsn trtr, Gntnm s hrmlss.

  47. arkizzle says:

    Some1,

    Compared to Gaza, prison is harmless. But does that get us any closer to the truth?

    I don’t think your concern is for the prisoners at all. I think you just don’t like people being concerned over Muslims, let alone ones that could possibly be terrorists.

  48. Bottlekid says:

    “Americans need to liberate themselves, before ever again worrying about liberating others.”

    What? And miss American Idol, or the Stupor Bowl, or the Internet porn, or buying apps for our iPhones, or…?

  49. Ugly Canuck says:

    Still got an income, eh Bottlekid?

  50. grimc says:

    Hey, Some1, I get it. I’ve read your comments about Muslims in other threads. You think they receive unwarranted sympathy, that the British government has a “hard on” for them. You think Christianity is a 21st century religion, while Islam resides in the Dark Ages.

    Simply put, you hate Muslims, it really doesn’t bother you that they’re being tortured, you probably would’ve been better off not saying anything at all but you couldn’t resist exercising your sense of superiority over all the Muslim-loving-leftists, not to mention your persecution complex that drives your previously expressed belief that Muslims receive sympathy they don’t deserve.

    I say, “better off” because now you’re stuck defending an asinine position (Americans don’t do anything about prison torture, so anyone complaining about military torture at Gitmo is a hypocritical leftist Muslim lover) as it crumbles around you.

    Good luck with that.

  51. sworm says:

    Of course they tortured people.

    Of course the oval office knew about it, ad probably ordered it.

    Will they get away with it? Of course they will.

    Is it fair? … USA USA USA. You’re either with us, or against us.

  52. some1 says:

    Ugly Canuck:

    Some1 likes and approves of torture of people who are in police custody, for that reason alone…he’s saying “USA Official torture is a-ok, let’s get on with it.” In other words, that there is no prosecution (or protests? or is the question of who is being tortured germane to the determination of whether or not torture is permitted by Law and US custom? Torture of non-American Muslims and US citizens in the (federal?) prison system is a-ok by Some1.) means there’s no crime here.
    Most US prisoners are in there for non-violent drug crime, and why are THEY being tortured? Interrogation? Oh wait it’s to give the guards something to do with their taxpayer-funded time.
    “Designated victims”? By the prison guard ‘community’?
    Or by such exemplars of logic and grace as Some1?

    Did you forget to take your medication or something? None of this random and confusing babble has anything to do with my post. I am simply asking why Americans are not concerned about brutal torture in their own prisons, but get all bent out of shape because suspected terrorists are tortured for intelligence by the military.

  53. Brainspore says:

    Some1:

    What does it matter whether or not it’s official policy?

    If torture happens in a context where it’s illegal, the guard who does it can be arrested and charged. When it becomes part of standard operating procedure then it reflects badly not only on the guard or even the prison, but on the entire society that put the system into place.

    It’s kind of like the difference between the U.S. soldiers who raped women in Vietnam and the government-run rape camps that the Japanese had in WWII. Of course every rape is an atrocity, but at least the U.S. voters didn’t actively sponsor the act.

  54. Ryan Waddell says:

    And of course, since he was tortured and cannot be sent to trial, he’ll be released, right? Right?

  55. stanfrombrooklyn says:

    Canadians torture too. After all it was one of your very own, Mike Myers, that was responsible for the 2 hours of torture I endured watching “The Love Guru”. And your chief interrogator Celine Dion has tortured me numerous times over the years when I least expected it.

  56. Anonymous says:

    @Some1: Leftist mythology designates all minorities as victims, which will get interesting when WASPs become a minority in the near future. Rightwing mythology designates Christians as oppressed victims (as per “the war on Christmas” and the theocratic raving of megachurch demagogues). Which fantasy is closer to being correct?

    @Takuan: We expect that prison guards will be persons of low character, because the most intelligent and moral of people will find better employment. That’s how it is, and we try to detect and stop the abuses that we know will inevitably occur. We do not expect such behavior of our armed forces, because we want to believe that military culture is rigidly hierarchically controlled by the most intelligent and resourceful warriors (i.e. we want the promotion system to work) and fanatically honorable. We like to think that torture is something that is so frowned upon, so severely punished by one’s superiors and peers, that it will only happen on individual initiative when there is some overwhelmingly good reason for it, such as torturing one man to successfully save a million innocents. If such an individual act occurs one likes to think that the soldier will staunchly accept courtmartial and severe punishment in order to preserve military discipline, culture, and honor.

    When civilian authorities actively encourage torture and reward its use, when they turn a blind eye to “recreational” torture, when General Karpinski is not flogged and hung in front of her troops for allowing the honor of the military to be irreparably sullied, when troops are specially selected for brutality and willingness to do things repugnant to old soldiers, this is far different from the torture of ignorant criminals by other ignorant criminals that (admittedly) goes on in prisons and police stations all over the country.

    We try (unsuccessfully) to control such things in the prisons, knowing full well that it will always happen as long as our educational system, popular culture, and economic system are structured they way they currently are.

    I am sure you can see the difference between this and torture of foreigners by uniformed soldiers acting under orders from the highest civilian authorities in the land.

    –Charlie

  57. yrogerg says:

    some1: Yeahhh, see, when most of us say “prison torture”, we’re referring to abuse committed by guards, or interrogators, or others in a position of authority and power of inmates; not assaults of inmates by other inmates, which, while heinous, are sort of the logical consequence of locking violent criminals up together in a world where perfect monitoring is impossible.

    At very worst, the latter -though still heinous, and still something we should work to eliminate- is a crime of negligence, while the former is an abuse of position and power and a betrayal of the very trust vested in these authority figures, in addition to that whole “assault” thing. Now, take that, and add the “ordered as a matter of official US policy” to the mix, and yeah, totally different issues.

    I know, I know, don’t feed the concern trolls, but yes, this is a rather textbook case of false equivalency.

    As far as the “due process” thing goes, it’s just a minor issue of the fact that WE SHOULDN’T BE HOLDING THEM IN THE FIRST PLACE. It ends up, if you kidnap and assault someone, it’s worse than just assaulting them. Fancy that.

  58. Ugly Canuck says:

    I take issue with the assumption that Americans are “unconcerned” about torture in their prisons.
    To me, your post says “Americans do not care about torture, but if they did, they would/ought-to cease torturing Americans”.
    I also take issue with the “only-leftists-care-about-Official-US-torture” meme.
    I also do not appreciate the ad hominem. maybe you ought to go skin another cat.

  59. Ugly Canuck says:

    Stan, that’s private-sector.
    Canadian gov. policy is against torture, resolutely so, our current gov (which can’t survive keeping Parl. open) excepted.
    As to the newly-installed-by-right-wing-Liberal opp. Leader, he used be for torture, but says he has now changed his mind…

  60. Mojave says:

    Down at Guantanamo there is a room with a large pentagram painted on the floor. The detainees were brought into this room and told they had to kneel and pray to Satan as Satan was their god now. Heard this from someone who knows.

  61. Ito Kagehisa says:

    Thank you, GRIMC, for reminding me that one can examine another person’s comment history simply by clicking on their name.

    It seems to me that argument with reasonable persons may be a way for one (or more) persons to achieve enlightenment, but argument with unreasonable or completely intractable persons (if attempted at all) should only be conducted in hope of assisting the enlightenment of passers-by, and the arguments of reasonable persons should be constructed according to both these principles.

    Sorry to go meta there… I shall go sharpen my saw. Good night all!

Leave a Reply