64 Senators Support Torture

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ned


Kid, you do watch Survivor do you not? They go a long way before they either win or they stop. Now, what permits them to stop?

I don't really watch that, but I'm sure if people were tortured on that show that I would hear about it. What are you talking about? You ask what permits them to stop. What does that have to do with torture. If they are permited to stop than it wouldn't be torture.

[DRoseDARs]

Originally posted by Ned


True. But clearly even while one of these stress endurance tests is underway, any contestant can stop at any time.

The prisoner in the photo is not shackled. He can stop at any time.

Quoted for posterity.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ned
The prisoner in the photo is not shackled. He can stop at any time.

ARE YOU ****ING SERIOUS?! DO YOU THINK HE IS UP THERE FOR HIS HEALTH?!

[DRoseDARs]

No, to win cash and fabulous prizes!

[Ned]

Originally posted by Kidicious


I don't really watch that, but I'm sure if people were tortured on that show that I would hear about it. What are you talking about? You ask what permits them to stop. What does that have to do with torture. If they are permited to stop than it wouldn't be torture.

Now we are talking. If they can stop, it is not torture.

[Ted Striker]

I wonder who Ahmed is going to send to the elimination round next??

Will it be Private Lindy for dragging him around with a dog leash while naked?

Or will it be Specialist Graner for tieing him up and punching the living daylights out of him for no reason!

Let's not underestimate the dog handlers either!!!!

I heard this might break the alliance!!!

[Kidlicious]

Ned, you are so hopeless.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Kidicious


ARE YOU ****ING SERIOUS?! DO YOU THINK HE IS UP THERE FOR HIS HEALTH?!

No. But still he is NOT shackled. He can stand up if he wants to. Why he stays in that position and endures is something we can only speculate about. However, if the pain becomes too bad, I guarantee he will stop.

Now, there at this point, there is no difference between this and Survivor or Big Brother, is there?

When one tortures someone and wants to really inflict a lot of pain, one uses shackles.

[Ted Striker]

Originally posted by Ned


Now we are talking. If they can stop, it is not torture.

So your comparison means absolutley NOTHING.

thanks

[DRoseDARs]

Tribal Council tonight is going to be a b*tch. I've 50 bucks ridding on this in the company pot. Come on Graner! w00t!!

[Ted Striker]

Originally posted by Ned


No. But still he is NOT shackled. He can stand up if he wants to. Why he stays in that position and endures is something we can only speculate about. However, if the pain becomes too bad, I guarantee he will stop.

Now, there at this point, there is no difference between this and Survivor or Big Brother, is there?

When one tortures someone and wants to really inflict a lot of pain, one uses shackles.

You are so ****ing full of it.

If there was not a reason for him to be up there, he wouldn't be there in the first place. Nobody in their right mind would willingly be up there unless they are being coerced.

Stop being a d1ck.

[Ted Striker]

Originally posted by DRoseDARs
Tribal Council tonight is going to be a b*tch. I've 50 bucks ridding on this in the company pot. Come on Graner! w00t!!

[Ned]

Ted, you miss the point entirely. The question is whether this is torture. If he can stop, he is not being tortured. That is what even the people who are on your side of the argument agree upon.

[Ted Striker]

Your definition is not accepted by anybody.

Secondly "people on my side" do not agree with you.

[Ted Striker]

Finally, your argument falls apart completely because you limit coercion as being only possible when someone is "tied down."