So you would torture too if you were given orders to do so?

[L0oniX]

So you'd rather obey orders and torture people to keep your job? So you are not guilty of torture if you were ordered to do so by your CIA and or military boss? Doesn't this go right along with "Police brutality ...the fun part of law enforcement" which is the printing on one of my "navy" t-shirts? So you are just fine with our government torturing people just like the Nazis? If it isn't like what the Nazis, Russians, Chinese, Japanese or N. Koreans have done then when is it? Where did they get the techniques for torturer? Who did the training? Would you grant a pardon to those who have performed torture? Would you see to it that those that actually did the torture were not prosecuted? Is it your duty to follow orders no matter what moral and or international laws may be violated? We voted for these guys and we allow our government to do these things so are we are complicit in torture? WTF ...this is not my country anymore ...this is not the country I gave my pledge of allegiance to ...this is not the military that once fought to actually defend this country in WW2 ...this is not the law enforcement I trusted when I was young ...this is a government that does not deserve any trust from me. WTF WTF WTF WTF WTF WTF WTF ...WHAT THE FUCK HAPPENED TO MY COUNTRY??? ...WHAT THE FUCK HAPPENED TO THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTRY THAT THEY WOULD ALLOW THIS ALL TO GO UNPUNISHED???

[Kalyke]

1. Dude... it's TORTURE.

Torcher is this:

[L0oniX]

6. corrected ...damned spell check.

[Javaman]

12. Channeling Emily LaTella. nt

[NMDemDist2]

2. torcher???

torture.

[left coaster]

3. hmm

I once carried a torch for someone.. not the same thing I suppose.

[Sanity Claws]

4. Did you mean" torture? "

At first I thought you might mean, "torch her" and that you omitted the space.

[rcrush]

5. The grammar police

[L0oniX]

7. Well certainly the correct spelling is more important than the message.

:evilgrin:

[kestrel91316]

18. Well, the message doesn't make any sense if it's misspelled. So it DOES matter.

[Lex]

10. Umm, no, the spelling police.

nt

[bluestateguy]

8. Depends

If I had Timothy McVeigh or some Nazi/KKKer in custody then yes, I might torture them if ordered to do so.

I mean, what American jury would convict someone of torturing Tim McVeigh?

[nadinbrzezinski]

23. I would

there... I said it

Perhaps becuase I have seen with my own two eyes the results of it... never pretty

[RaleighNCDUer]

9. Burn, baby, burn! nt

[tridim]

11. I could never torture anyone as bad as you folks are torturing yourselves.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

20. You mean the discussion about torture?

Or the discussion about spelling?

The torture discussion is spell-binding.
The spelling discussion is torture.

:hi:

[tridim]

26. It's all torture

Especially the DU'ers who apparently want Obama to fly to Dallas and slap the cuffs on Bush RIGHT NOW.

[GoCubsGo]

13. Nope.

Not unless it was the SOB that had my former employer's federal funding yanked, which got me laid off and has put me through more than two years of bloody unemployment hell, with no end in sight. You're goddamn right I'd torture him.

Otherwise, no I would not.

[KittyWampus]

14. Probably not. I hope not. However, I will not state with absolute certainty I would not

[Toucano]

15. Hell no!

I'm more likely to find myself on the other side of the equation, however, receiving the torture.

[cali]

16. odds are quite good that you or I would torture.

under certain circumstance. I'd like to think, of course, that I wouldn't. After all, I'm a person who has an almost pathological fear of inflicting pain on any creature, but studies demonstrate that most of us can indeed be persuaded to do seemingly horrifiic things to other humans.

Beyond that, I'd like to point out that these people were informed repeatedly that what they were doing did not meet the legal definition of torture. I'm not offering that up as an excuse, it's simply another facet of the whole thing.

[TahitiNut]

25. Indeed. There's really no question about it ... even WITHOUT training and indoctrination.

Anyone in denial of their own propensity, under the 'right' circumstances, to behave in ways they might regard as appalling 'in the real world' is just fucking naive.

[cali]

36. yep. and really it goes beyond naive

it can lead those who deny that part of their nature to do the very things they so rigidly believe they'd never do.

[TahitiNut]

40. Exactly.

:thumbsup:

[TNOE]

51. I disagree.

I know what the studies have shown, but I personally, would never. Not even Bush or Cheney - whose actions I despise. It just wouldn't be worth it to me - I have to live with myself.

[cali]

52. that's exactly the response that I was talking about.

Ir's not a healthy or self-aware one.

[TNOE]

53. How do you know?

I'm quite mentally healthy and very self-aware. I would be willing to bet the people who are afraid of death would be the ones more apt to torture. When you have no fear of death - you fear nothing. And NO JOB or INCOME would be worth it to me to violate myself in such a way.

Have you listened to or heard about the soldiers who "did" participate in Gitmo and torture? They live with regret and are haunted by it.

I think too it depends on how spiritually aware you are. Those who aren't that spirtual no doubt are more likely to do it. I know me - and I know I wouldn't under any circumstances whatsoever. Now, would I shoot to kill if I or my loved ones were in danger - the answer to that is yes.

[stray cat]

17. most studies that have been done suggest that people will

they tested in by determining whether people were willing to deliver a shock to people they couldn't see in a nearby room if they were told to do it. (thats with no putative lives in danger but just because the person got a wrong answer). Would anyone who says they would never torture ever hand Bush or Cheney or Romney over to anyone who might harm them?

[TahitiNut]

22. The Milgram Experiments and the Stanford Jail Studies prove conclusively ...

... that the vast majority of people, even WITHOUT further indoctrination and training, WILL inflict suffering and abuse upon other human beings under the color of authority.

I find it hugely disappointing that even people in THIS DU community are in such denial of this fact. The hubris of viewing one's self as somehow 'exceptional' or 'immune' to behaving in such ways under certain conditions could be laughable if it weren't so serious. When I read posts by the same people that engage in extreme rhetoric regarding persons accused of crimes ... or even just smokers (ferkrissakes!) ... I just shake my head at how totally fucking clueless they are.

[Juche]

32. That is scary, I agree

Until we have the courage to face how vulnerable and malleable we really are we are just going to live in a state of helpless denial convinced that only 'those bad people over there' are the ones who are able or willing to cause problems.

The Milgram experiments also found that there were ways to increase or decrease torture. The vast vast majority of subjects didn't want to torture anyone (so we can take some comfort in that, that people would stop if they weren't being watched and that people didn't enjoy committing torture. Then again the Stanford prison experiment showed people will enjoy becoming bullies. But empathy training can decrease bullying), but they would only stop when the situation gave them permission to stop.

Things that increased complaince were


Peer groups that continued to torture
A single authority figure
A high status institution
Making a person indirectly responsible for the torture (having them wave a card and having someone else push the button)
A nearby authority figure and the victim being far away

Things that decreased complaince

Having direct contact with the victim (putting his hand on a plate vs. pressing a button to shock him in another room) or having the authority figure be far away, ie on the phone rather than in person.

Having multiple contradictory authority figures. In one experiment he had 2 authority figures and one said 'keep shocking him' and the other said 'stop'. When that happened people either stopped at 150 volts or went the whole way.

Having peer groups say 'this is wrong and I won't do it'

A lower status institution (he did experiments involving the experiment being run at a lower status university than Stanford)





So it seems like things such as multiple authority figures or authority figures sympathetic to humanitarian causes, peer groups sympathetic to humanitarian causes, being directly responsible for your actions, the status of the group and the proximity of the victim and the authority figure all play into how much people obey.

Rather than live in denial of these facts, we need to use them to build our institutions to incorporate them. If humans are capable of unspeakable evil but for the most part don't want to be evil, then build authority figures and peer groups into our institutions that make it ok to deviate and resist.

[TahitiNut]

39. I can't help but believe that denial itself is an indicator of some greater propensity.

There's a clear cognitive path worn from 'different' to 'better' to 'justified' ... and it's a path I've seen trod too often.

[nadinbrzezinski]

46. We are seeing the results here... people justifying this on

ahem, legal grounds... after all they did this under the authority of...

Never mind the obey orders meme went out with Nuremberg

The experiments... should be repeated.

I also wonder if life experience will change the tendencies

I am positive I´d not do it, but it has all to do with my life experience... would be interesting to see.

But the extent that some Du'ers are going to justify the decisions is down right mind numbing... after all the justifications could be put in place right smack dab in the IMT and the defense...

[L0oniX]

37. What do you think is the difference between someone who tortures animals...

and torturing people? They say that those that torture animals have a higher chance of becoming a serial killer or Jeffrey Dalmer type.

[TahitiNut]

38. What do I think, personally? Well ...

... I do my best to avoid thinking there's a (material) "difference" between me and "those people." I fear that in believing myself somehow "different" that I might be more likely to fall prey to the notion that "different" means "better" ... and that's a slippery slope I'm not interested in riding.

My life's experience is such that I've been too frequently reminded that I'm fallible. Viet Nam, of course, was a major 'learning experience' in ways I find it's impossible to describe.

[Evoman]

42. It would be interesting to know what t those of us who have read about those experiments. would do.

I mean, I am really interested in this topic. I've read almost everything I could...including articles about authoritarians, the standford and milgram experiment, and even the Lucifer Effect (scary ass book). I would also like to think that that I know so much about the topic, and am so cynical, that I would be exceptional.

But everything I read tells me otherwise.

Who knows, right?

[L0oniX]

56. Could we at least say that those here who responded that they would torture should not condemn...

those who did it, those who gave the orders to do it, the MD's who gave their approval and of course those who did it without orders? In other words according to those that say "everyone would do it under the right circumstances" ...we should all just STFU about it.

[Lilith Velkor]

57. I have direct experience in this matter, from the receiving end

It gives me the dubious luxury of knowing for sure that I would not obey.

However, I would have no qualms whatsoever about inflicting grievous bodily harm on the person who gave the order. In fact, I would immediately seek an opportunity to do just that.

[JohnnyLib2]

19. I think replies 16 and 17 are, unfortunately, accurate.

Like others, I want to believe that I would not. But I also remember the enormous pressure to conform during my military years (Viet Nam era).

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

21. Maybe.

If I were ordered to.

If I were tricked into thinking that the relatively mild forms of torture I was being ordered to perform were not legally torture.

If I were told that innocent people would die if I didn't.

If I were told I was helping the terrorists if I didn't, and that I myself might be tortured if I were refused.

Sure, I can see that possibility.

[Canuckistanian]

29. The Milgram Experiment showed that many would torture

Even though they knew they were causing extreme pain to another human being, they complied willingly solely on the orders of "an authority" they had come to respect.

And, as we all know, "authority" can be corrupt, deluded or downright psychotic.

I don't know how I'd react in every scenario. I'd like to think I'd refuse most times.

[jbnow]

31. It is key that they weren't given order to torture, they were told

it was not torture.

But it is troubling that the CIA could believe it wasn't torture or that it was an effective method to gain true information. Easier to believe of a rookie aoldier than the trained pros we think CIA is made of.

[rucky]

24. Milgram says "yes". n/t

[AndyTiedye]

43. Being AWARE of the Milgram Experiment Might Change The Actions of Some People

Willingness to trust authority varies considerably from person to person,
and the average varies considerably, depending on how recently the "authorities" have sold us up the river.

Being aware of the Milgram experiment might also cause some people to recognize such a situation if placed in it.

[rucky]

47. The most interesting part of the experiment was

the subjects were less likely to comply when the orders were openly questioned by a single participant. That shows how questioning authority may have risked some agents a court marshall, but possibly could've prevented these atrocities. I can't say what I'd do if I were in that position.

[MajorChode]

27. Hooking someone's nuts up to an electrical socket? Who could say no to that?

Geez, they wouldn't even have to pay me.

[L0oniX]

48. Maybe forced tea bagging in a bucket of electrified water?

[MajorChode]

49. Fukcing brilliant!

[Juche]

28. Pretty much everyone would. Look up Stanley Milgram's experiments

[jmg257]

30. I wouldn't mind getting a few 'facial slaps' or 'attention grabs' in on a terrorist.

Maybe combined with a couple acts of my own, like the 'foot to ass kick' and 'Stooges 2-finger eye poke'.

But other then that...

[nadinbrzezinski]

33. No, but I can say this with certainty

unlike most people I have treated victims of torture... (and lied to the wife of a victim, claiming he didn't suffer)

I have interviewed victims of torture, and debriefed them.

I know what that looks like and chiefly... how much it is a tool of the state for terror, and not for information gathering

You want intel... you become a chum... WW II proved that

[tekisui]

34. Never. Never. Never.

[newspeak]

35. The Milgram experiment also proved that some refused

to administer the first shock to subject. Some quit after the first shock was administered. One thing I clearly remember about that experiment was the spokesperson of said experiment kept reassuring the one administering the shocks that they would not be held responsible, that the shockee could take it. Over and over again, they kept telling the shocker, he/she would not be held responsible. I wish to commend those in the experiment who refused to participate in harming another person. The legal precedent was basically telling torturers they would not be held accountable for their actions; therefore, torture away!!!

[nadinbrzezinski]

41. You got it

[rhett o rick]

44. If we prosecute the little fish, it would be much harder in the future for the big fish to get the

little fish to do their bidding. But the little fish were told, the President will look out for you. They meant bush, shame it applies to President Obama also.

[L0oniX]

58. I bet the little fish won't be able to travel abroad without looking over their sholders...

being as how everyone involved with torture broke international law.

[leftstreet]

45. Apparently it depends on who's giving the orders

:eyes:

[Lerkfish]

50. no not me.

they would have to execute me, or even torture me, and I still would not torture another person.

[librechik]

54. evidence shows torture began BEFORE DOJ legal justifications were written

Therefore, why should the CIA officers not be prosecuted?

It's blackmail.

[L0oniX]

55. Yea I just heard that on Democracy Now. It was going on before 2002.