Feel bad for posting this, but... US Islamic TV founder charged with beheading wife

[sycld]

NEW YORK (AFP) — The founder of a US television station aimed at countering stereotypes of Muslims has been arrested and charged with beheading his wife, local media reported.


Muzzammil Hassan was charged with second-degree murder of his wife, Aasiya Hassan, whose decapitated body was found Thursday by police at the Bridges TV station in a Buffalo suburb in New York state, The Buffalo News reported Monday.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp...OXGoovGH427BRQ

Emphasis mine. It looks like he was unsuccessful in his mission...

[Sion]

Thats amazing. The Muslims do more of a job discrediting themselves than any American propaganda artist could ever dream to.

[Chase]

Thats amazing. The Muslims do more of a job discrediting themselves than any American propaganda artist could ever dream to.

well now thats just silly

[no_brains_no_worries]

Thats amazing. The Muslims do more of a job discrediting themselves than any American propaganda artist could ever dream to.

Save for Jack Bauer.

[gwahir]

Well I better not post in this thread or I'll get accused of somethingorother

[Drunkmike]

How stereotypical of him.

[sycld]

Save for Jack Bauer.

Well, what pisses me off about that show is that it presents an unrealistic depiction of torture and makes it seem more effective than it is in real life.

Well I better not post in this thread or I'll get accused of somethingorother

Haha, aww.

The only think I'm accusing you of is hording all that Australian Jewish sexiness. I doubt that there could possibly a much hotter combo than that.

[no_brains_no_worries]

Well, what pisses me off about that show is that it presents an unrealistic depiction of torture and makes it seem more effective than it is in real life.

Seriously. You fucking stab me in the knee cap or blow torch my balls, I'm gonna tell you whatever you fuckin' want to hear, even if it's a pack of lies.

[Infected7]

Well, what pisses me off about that show is that it presents an unrealistic depiction of torture and makes it seem more effective than it is in real life.

I'm curious to know what type of first hand knowledge you have on torture and its effectiveness. Water boarding and sensory deprivation is a great way to meet people and find out new things about them. I have no idea what you're talking about. Not to mention stress positions, it builds friendship

[sycld]

I'm curious to know what type of first hand knowledge you have on torture and its effectiveness. Water boarding and sensory deprivation is a great way to meet people and find out new things about them. I have no idea what you're talking about. Not to mention stress positions, it builds friendship

The problem is that they can still fight back. I find it much more effective to just knock them out completely right at the greeting and then having sex with them. I suppose that some people get turned on by sadism, but they're just weird deviant freaks.

[gismo]

Indeed, it seems that Islam's worst enemy are indeed muslims. So many try their best to promote a version of Islam compatible with western ideals but every now and then one of the flock goes and does something stupid, which tends to get more attention than positive things.

[Infected7]

The problem is that they can still fight back. I find it much more effective to just knock them out completely right at the greeting and then having sex with them. I suppose that some people get turned on by sadism, but they're just weird deviant freaks.

I take offense to that. I'm absolutely not a deviant. The other two are spot on though.

[MrShrike]

That's a lot like being the poster boy for a "meat is murder" vegan lifestyle and then being found out you run an abbatoir.

Whoopsy!

[bacon ops]

Seriously. You fucking stab me in the knee cap or blow torch my balls, I'm gonna tell you whatever you fuckin' want to hear, even if it's a pack of lies.

yeah, because they don't check if information collaborates with related intelligence before going with it.

I hate ur gutz

[gwahir]

if they have such awesome related intelligence then why bother blowtorching a guy's balls

if the answer is "to get information missing from your intelligence" then obviously it's going to be unverifiable

which means there's a high likelihood of getting a lie out of your torture session

what are you, pro-torture? i didn't realise there were any of you left in the civilised world

[gorefinger]

One of the first articles I read about this story contained a LOL photo caption.

"The couple in happier times, before Hassan removed his wife's head"

[gwahir]

hahahahahahahaha

[no_brains_no_worries]

yeah, because they don't check if information collaborates with related intelligence before going with it.

I hate ur gutz

Yeah all information checks out. I mean Sadam had LOADS of yellow cake. That bastard. I mean, he was the strongest link to radical terrorism in the middle east!

/sarcasm.

[sycld]

yeah, because they don't check if information collaborates with related intelligence before going with it.

I hate ur gutz

if they have time "to see if the information checks out," then obviously we're not in a hypothetical "time of crisis" when we have to resort to torture to quickly obtain information. that's what the pro-torture people claim, that if there's an emergency and we need information quickly we should be able to torture, even though there's plenty of evidence to show that information obtained from torture is unreliable. then again, these same people's view of reality isn't constrained by "facts" and "evidence."

[simonj]

if they have time "to see if the information checks out," then obviously we're not in a hypothetical "time of crisis" when we have to resort to torture to quickly obtain information. that's what the pro-torture people claim, that if there's an emergency and we need information quickly we should be able to torture, even though there's plenty of evidence to show that information obtained from torture is unreliable. then again, these same people's view of reality isn't constrained by "facts" and "evidence."

Best right-wing response to a left-wing diatribe on morality concerning homosexuality I've ever heard was "yeah, well you can prove anything with facts.".

[Pepsi]

Best right-wing response to a left-wing diatribe on morality concerning homosexuality I've ever heard was "yeah, well you can prove anything with facts.".

Did dubya say that?

[simonj]

No, it was a cab driver.

[bacon ops]

if they have such awesome related intelligence then why bother blowtorching a guy's balls

if the answer is "to get information missing from your intelligence" then obviously it's going to be unverifiable

which means there's a high likelihood of getting a lie out of your torture session

what are you, pro-torture? i didn't realise there were any of you left in the civilised world

No, I'm against it, but I'm also against using alarmist faggotry to get your point across.
The fact is that it is wrong. Torture is the worst thing the civilized world has ever been responsible for. That said, it does work.

Have the balls to stand up for something just for the sake of saying it's right, and don't use "what ifs" and other bullshit to make your point seem valid.

Torture is a great way to get information out of a person, but it simply shouldn't happen.

TL;DR you're a deluded cock.

[simonj]

The amount of times you get reliable information from someone is far outweighed by the amount of times you get unreliable information from someone.

That's why it doesn't work.

[bacon ops]

The amount of times you get reliable information from someone is far outweighed by the amount of times you get unreliable information from someone.

That's why it doesn't work.

See, hand-wringing-pseudo-facts like these are the reason I made my first post in this thread.
There is absolutely no possible way to no this, and the simple fact is that if you pick up some fucker in Iraq that was shooting an RPK at US troops half an hour ago, he's probably gonna know some terrorist shit.

He's still a human being, and he could've been any of our brothers, though; that is why he should not be tortured. Save your bullshit for someone else.

[gwahir]

Yes. You shouldn't torture because it's wrong, and it's wrong for many reasons (mostly, because its efficacy does not outweigh the horror of the torturing itself).

[MrShrike]

Well it's not that simple. Like torture, killing is also wrong, probably even moreso than torture.

And yet that's not the whole story. Let's look at the idea of "killing is wrong" connection to a hypothetical situation.

Principle: Killing is wrong.

Scenario: You see a man standing over a child, about to kill the child with a blade. There is no-one else around and you are too far away to tackle or stop him. You do however have a rifle, and you take aim and shoot. Perhaps you only meant to stop him by wounding him, but either way, the man is killed instantly. The child is saved.

Questions: Did you do wrong when you killed him? Were you justified in killing him (be it intentionally, or unintentionally)?

I think this example highlights, not that it is ok to do a wrong thing sometimes to achieve a right, but rather that the rightness and wrongness of the consequences of an action, are at least as morally important as the rightness and wrongess of the act itself. And that both of these are in fact more morally important than intent.

[bacon ops]

Well it's not that simple. Like torture, killing is also wrong, probably even moreso than torture.

And yet that's not the whole story. Let's look at the idea of "killing is wrong" connection to a hypothetical situation.

Principle: Killing is wrong.

Scenario: You see a man standing over a child, about to kill the child with a blade. There is no-one else around and you are too far away to tackle or stop him. You do however have a rifle, and you take aim and shoot. Perhaps you only meant to stop him by wounding him, but either way, the man is killed instantly. The child is saved.

Questions: Did you do wrong when you killed him? Were you justified in killing him (be it intentionally, or unintentionally)?

I think this example highlights, not that it is ok to do a wrong thing sometimes to achieve a right, but rather that the rightness and wrongness of the consequences of an action, are at least as morally important as the rightness and wrongess of the act itself. And that both of these are in fact more morally important than intent.

Exactly.

[gwahir]

Well it's not that simple. Like torture, killing is also wrong, probably even moreso than torture.

And yet that's not the whole story. Let's look at the idea of "killing is wrong" connection to a hypothetical situation.

Principle: Killing is wrong.

Scenario: You see a man standing over a child, about to kill the child with a blade. There is no-one else around and you are too far away to tackle or stop him. You do however have a rifle, and you take aim and shoot. Perhaps you only meant to stop him by wounding him, but either way, the man is killed instantly. The child is saved.

Questions: Did you do wrong when you killed him? Were you justified in killing him (be it intentionally, or unintentionally)?

I think this example highlights, not that it is ok to do a wrong thing sometimes to achieve a right, but rather that the rightness and wrongness of the consequences of an action, are at least as morally important as the rightness and wrongess of the act itself. And that both of these are in fact more morally important than intent.

I agree with pretty much everything in this post. The point I and several others have been trying to make is that torture has limited positive consquences because of the unreliable nature of information gathered therefrom. But of course, the point bacon ops is trying to make is (apparently -- correct me if I'm wrong) that torture works.

Naturally no point is going to be effectively made until someone pulls out some trustworthy data, but trustworthy data on the efficacy of information gained through tortue is going to be hard to find.

Also, bacon ops is a repetitive hick.

[bacon ops]

I agree with pretty much everything in this post. The point I and several others have been trying to make is that torture has limited positive consquences because of the unreliable nature of information gathered therefrom. But of course, the point bacon ops is trying to make is (apparently -- correct me if I'm wrong) that torture works.

Naturally no point is going to be effectively made until someone pulls out some trustworthy data, but trustworthy data on the efficacy of information gained through tortue is going to be hard to find.

Also, bacon ops is a repetitive hick.

What I meant was that I agree with what Shrike said.
A wrong is a wrong is a wrong, unless it is justified.
Torturing someone for fun is awful, obviously, but if 1,000 lives could be saved by torturing one man, I'd be for it. Of course, Qwahir's American counterparts bitch and moan about it, but flew flags outside of their houses after 9/11 and supported invading all kinds of countries.

I'm not a hick, Gwahir; you just happen to disagree with my opinions.

You, however are an arrogant sheep.

Anyhow, that's quite enough for one thread.

[Pepsi]

What I meant was that I agree with what Shrike said.
A wrong is a wrong is a wrong, unless it is justified.
Torturing someone for fun is awful, obviously, but if 1,000 lives could be saved by torturing one man, I'd be for it. Of course, Qwahir's American counterparts bitch and moan about it, but flew flags outside of their houses after 9/11 and supported invading all kinds of countries.

I'm not a hick, Gwahir; you just happen to disagree with my opinions.

You, however are an arrogant sheep.

Anyhow, that's quite enough for one thread.

It was enough without your post.

[gwahir]

A wrong is a wrong is a wrong, unless it is justified.

...

[bacon ops]

...

That's the world we live in, man.
I know it doesn't make sense to you, but it's reality. The world is full of grey areas.

efficacy does not outweigh the horror of the torturing itself).

This.


Oh shut up Tidus; making fun of me isn't going to make you fit in with the cool kids.

[sycld]

What I meant was that I agree with what Shrike said.
A wrong is a wrong is a wrong, unless it is justified.
Torturing someone for fun is awful, obviously, but if 1,000 lives could be saved by torturing one man, I'd be for it. Of course, Qwahir's American counterparts bitch and moan about it, but flew flags outside of their houses after 9/11 and supported invading all kinds of countries.

I'm not a hick, Gwahir; you just happen to disagree with my opinions.

You, however are an arrogant sheep.

Anyhow, that's quite enough for one thread.

and through out all of your accusations, you never provided any evidence that torture is effective to refute how others have said that torture is not effective.

how do you know that torture is at all effective?

[Pepsi]

Oh shut up Tidus; making fun of me isn't going to make you fit in with the cool kids.

Oh, I just hate you.

[gwahir]

That's the world we live in, man.
I know it doesn't make sense to you, but it's reality. The world is full of grey areas.

"grey areas" is a gross simplification of the subtleties of ethics

i was just floored by how amazingly meaningless the statement i quoted was

[sycld]

WORLD IS FULL OF GREY AREAS = Torture is a reliable way to extract information from detainees.

Duuuur, that seems to follow to me!

[MrShrike]

Yeah, I was like......um...yeah - so, bacon ops are you going to actually say something soon or do you just like words?

[gwahir]

A wrong is a wrong is a wrong, unless it is justified.

i just wanted to put this out there again

[mutton]

Have the balls to stand up for something just for the sake of saying it's right, and don't use "what ifs" and other bullshit to make your point seem valid.

"what ifs" are crucial for figuring out whether a general principle is right