Should CIA 'torture' staff be prosecuted? [Archive]

View Full Version : Should CIA 'torture' staff be prosecuted?

RSS News

17th April 2009, 12:50

CIA staff who used harsh interrogation techniques will not be prosecuted, US President Obama says. Do you agree?

(Feed provided by BBC News | Have your Say (http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/2/hi/talking_point/default.stm))

Wakizashi the Bolshevik

17th April 2009, 13:51

Of course I don't.
Those CIA bastards should be severely punished for their crimes.

Bitter Ashes

17th April 2009, 14:25

I wonder what would happen if the CIA ever discovered that somebody that works for them had developed morality. Dangerous stuff is that morality. It paves the way for socialist thinking. I'd imagine that the CIA would go out of thier way to make sure any such individuals would face face harsh backhanded penalities. Of course, the CIA operative in question would know this too. Guess it'd make it very important for thier personal safety to hide such moral thinking from thier employers.
Should they be punished? I'm not sure. I'd leave it up to the aggreieved individuals to deciede what the motive was this person bieng under duress, or not. As wounded as these tortured people may be, I trust them to have an honest intrest in ensuring that blame is allocated in the right places, whether that's towards the torturers, or those that gave them thier orders like GW.

lcdenom

17th April 2009, 14:31

It's utter madness, as if offering them permission to do whatever they like. However, it's not exactly unexpected. I'd like to think there aren't too many people that think the decision is actually correct.

Hoxhaist

17th April 2009, 14:45

Of cousre they should be punished but of course they wont be because it is not politically palatable in the US to bring home the consequences of American actions abroad

Bandito

17th April 2009, 14:54

This was so expected.

Rjevan

17th April 2009, 16:54

Haha, looks as if Newsbot has stolen the show from my thread. :lol:
Oh well, here are some links again:
Article from Alternet (http://www.alternet.org/rights/137056/it's_official:_obama_will_not_prosecute_cia_tortur ers/)
Obama's statement (http://rebelreports.com/post/96914298/just-in-obamas-complete-statement-on-release-of)
Washington post report (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/16/AR2009041602768.html?hpid=topnews)
New York Times (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/16/secret-interrogation-memos-to-be-released/?hp)

I agree, this wasn't unexpected, but I still hoped that Obama would take action against the CIA torturers, simply to keep up his image as a liberal humaistic enemy of President "catastrophic failure of leadership (Obama on Bush)" Bush's actions.
But obviously this isn't necessary for him anymore.

Arise!

17th April 2009, 17:11

They shouldn't be prosecuted, just publicly tortured.

Pinko Panther

17th April 2009, 17:39

How about we take everyone who says that waterboarding isn't torture, and waterboard them? Amusing (for us) and informative (for them).

Hiero

17th April 2009, 17:44

The CIA should not exist.

Andropov

17th April 2009, 17:48

They should be executed for crimes against humanity.

Patchd

17th April 2009, 17:57

There's a very "macho" sentiment here of kill kill kill or of corporal punishment in order to teach these CIA torturers a lesson, you aren't bigger men for wanting their deaths. I'm sort of split on this issue, on the one hand, I realise that there's a lot of anger built up in the working class, including myself. For example, I don't think that, if I was given the opportunity, I would judge a police officer without bias. There's a need to vent out our anger at times, but I'm wondering if torture, or even imprisonment without rehabilitation is what we should be advocating.

Afterall, someone who can go to work one day, and cause tremendous pain and suffering to others, or even kill them, is not mentally healthy. They need treatment and rehabilitation. Perhaps instead of advocating death, torture or imprisonment to these people, we should advocate sedation, treatment and/or rehabilitation over a period of time.

I'm not apologising for the actions of these people, I think they're absolute dickheads and fucking mentally ill if they can do this, but that is all the more reason to treat them.

I'm not the best of people on this either, I myself have called for punishment of certain people, like everyone in the police force for example. Simply, when I move back and look at this rationally, I usually see my position as wrong one. So I admit that I am a hypocrite on this issue.

Andropov

17th April 2009, 20:53

There's a very "macho" sentiment here of kill kill kill or of corporal punishment in order to teach these CIA torturers a lesson, you aren't bigger men for wanting their deaths.

Its not macho, its justice.
The CIA are scum, you realise this yourself, and IMO for the crimes they have committed around the world they warrant execution.
No machoness, just revolutionary justice.

NecroCommie

17th April 2009, 21:00

I would give them a chance to publicly apologize for their behaviour in exchange for slightly milder punishment, and for those torturers who stand behind their actions I would have a firing squad ready.

This I consider mercyful to say the least.

Patchd

17th April 2009, 21:37

Its not macho, its justice.
The CIA are scum, you realise this yourself, and IMO for the crimes they have committed around the world they warrant execution.
No machoness, just revolutionary justice.

"Justice", "Revolutionary Justice", it doesn't make it just simply because you put "Revolutionary" in front of it mate, what makes executing them "justice"? Why must you resort to the upmost extreme? Execution is an easy way out of everything, rather than solve a problem, you get rid of it. Something perfectly viable say, during a revolutionary period, but what about in a post-revolutionary situation?

Thing is, even if we call for execution in the present day, we are neglecting the fact that this would simply be the state's easy way out, it will be scapegoating by the state, would you rather Obama order the execution of these people? Killing is only a logical option during times of crisis or revolution, not when a system is stable, whether that's under Capitalism, Socialism or Communism. If we begin advocating execution during times of stability, then we open up a threat to our own movement as well as seeming to be barbarians.

Yes, what they did was criminal, and it is something which a mentally ill person would undertake. They need rehabilitation or sedation, the real criminals are the state who is responsible for dehumanising them and making them commit such criminal acts.

skki

17th April 2009, 22:03

The hypocrisy makes this situation almost impossible to comprehend. There are foreign Iraqi and Taleban fighters imprisoned in the US for following abhorrent orders from higher-ups. The justification is from the Nuremberg trials; that people must be held responsible for their actions, regardless of whether or not their actions came as the result of an order from a higher ranking official.

"it is our intention to assure those who carried out their duties relying in good faith upon legal advice from the Department of Justice that they will not be subject to prosecution."

Of course, no one in the mainstream will point this out.

Rjevan

17th April 2009, 22:26

The CIA should not exist.

They shouldn't be prosecuted, just publicly tortured.

How about we take everyone who says that waterboarding isn't torture, and waterboard them? Amusing (for us) and informative (for them).

They should be executed for crimes against humanity.
:thumbup1:

There's a very "macho" sentiment here of kill kill kill or of corporal punishment in order to teach these CIA torturers a lesson, you aren't bigger men for wanting their deaths.
I'm very much aware of this fact, some even say that it makes me a lesser man but still, even if so, this is not macho this is my opinion on justice!

Afterall, someone who can go to work one day, and cause tremendous pain and suffering to others, or even kill them, is not mentally healthy. They need treatment and rehabilitation. Perhaps instead of advocating death, torture or imprisonment to these people, we should advocate sedation, treatment and/or rehabilitation over a period of time.
It's this discussion again, and again I'm asking: is it really that hard to believe that some people are actually evil, just really evil but totally sane? I don't think that "evilness" is some sort of madness. And even if you think it is; what assures you that it can be healed?

I'm not the best of people on this either, I myself have called for punishment of certain people, like everyone in the police force for example. Simply, when I move back and look at this rationally, I usually see my position as wrong one. So I admit that I am a hypocrite on this issue.
If you think your former calls for punishments were wrong and feel sorry for them now, you are no hypocrite. ;)
But no matter how rationally I look at this: Even if they just followed their orders like stupid mindless sheep, they still are guilty and Bush and his government are even more guilty but I still want them to be punished, too.

Andropov

17th April 2009, 22:28

"Justice", "Revolutionary Justice", it doesn't make it just simply because you put "Revolutionary" in front of it mate, what makes executing them "justice"?
It is justice because they have committed abhorent crimes willingly.
Simple as that mate.

Why must you resort to the upmost extreme?
Im not resorting to anything, I just see it as justice, no resorting at all.

Execution is an easy way out of everything,
Its just a pleasant co-incidence that it is easy aswell as just.

rather than solve a problem, you get rid of it.
My only problem is that these people need justice, that is all that needs to be solved.

Something perfectly viable say, during a revolutionary period,
Indeed.

but what about in a post-revolutionary situation?
You will have to detail the context more for me to draw a conclusion.

Thing is, even if we call for execution in the present day, we are neglecting the fact that this would simply be the state's easy way out,
Ehh no, you are just imposing justice on its willing pawns.
I never said that we should not deal with the state also.

it will be scapegoating by the state, would you rather Obama order the execution of these people?
Now you are talking like they are innocent.
They are not scapegoats, they willingly chose to carry out their crimes.
And of course I want accountability all the way to the top aswell but that does not mean I am going to molly coddle those on the bottom or dismiss thema s scapegoats.

Killing is only a logical option during times of crisis or revolution, not when a system is stable, whether that's under Capitalism, Socialism or Communism.
There is an element of truth in that.
So I will say in a Revolutionary situation these people should be executed or if they are executed by the Capitalists during stability, even better as it will reflect badly on them.

If we begin advocating execution during times of stability, then we open up a threat to our own movement as well as seeming to be barbarians.
Indeed.

Yes, what they did was criminal, and it is something which a mentally ill person would undertake.
That is just pure speculation.

They need rehabilitation or sedation, the real criminals are the state who is responsible for dehumanising them and making them commit such criminal acts.
Both the state and their willing pawns deserve justice IMO.

Patchd

17th April 2009, 23:45

It is justice because they have committed abhorent crimes willingly.
Simple as that mate.

I didn't add the word "mate" onto the end to antagonise you, sorry if you took it personally. Also take into account that I'm still sitting on the fence on this subject here, I'm trying to get to my position by debating others and seeing different points of views on this.

I'm more for the idea that free will does not exist, and all actions are predetermined by preceding causes, psychological, biological, social causes. So every act deserves a rational and humane treatment. Also, to the poster above you, no, I do not think that a human simply be "evil", yet sane. If someone commits an act like the CIA agents in question have, then there have been predetermined factors for why they have done so, which have had an adverse effect on their psychology; their dehumanisation.

Its just a pleasant co-incidence that it is easy aswell as just.

Killing is not a just act unless it is the only option to bringing about a greater good. If something else can be done to achieve that greater good then you take that option, if that means rehabilitation, or even sedation, then fine. If we are to create an egalitarian and humanitarian society, then we better start thinking in humanitarian ways rather than just saying killing will solve everything in this circumstance. It won't, especially if it's the Capitalist state that's doing the punishing.

My only problem is that these people need justice, that is all that needs to be solved.

Need?! When did justice become a necessity?

Now you are talking like they are innocent.

No I'm not. They're not innocent of the crimes they committed, what they are though are victims of the same system that brutally oppresses us, which they are very much a part of the oppressing apparatus, yet at the same time, the only benefactors within Capitalist society, are Capitalists themselves.

What person in their right mind believes that torturing someone is rational, or is something which a human in their right mind would do? While in the CIA, they have been dehumanised, taught, or even indoctrinated into not carrying any emotions while carrying out those tasks, and indoctrinated into believing that what they were doing was right. They need to be sorted out mentally if that's a possible option, otherwise, if they can't be sorted out, then they need to be removed out of society until they do get sorted out.

They are not scapegoats, they willingly chose to carry out their crimes.

With threat of punishment if they didn't carry out those orders. In addition, what you're suggesting as a solution is to kill a killer, where do we stop or draw the line? If you're the person holding the gun when a CIA agent is shot and there are other options available, then I would see you as an irrational and mentally ill person.

And of course I want accountability all the way to the top aswell but that does not mean I am going to molly coddle those on the bottom or dismiss them as scapegoats.

Don't even begin to suggest that I'm siding with them for one bit mate. Rather, I can see a number of possible solutions to the problem as opposed to simply killing them. Even imprisonment is a better, although not the best, option.

So I will say in a Revolutionary situation these people should be executed or if they are executed by the Capitalists during stability, even better as it will reflect badly on them.

No it won't, if the Capitalist state executes these people, all it will do is strengthen hope and trust in the system, just as it did after the Nuremburg trials and the subsequent punishments dished out by them. People have been taught that the easy way out to things is by dishing out harsh punishments, I don't see how we are to create a humane society if we uphold this notion of punishment without treatment or rehabilitation. Rehabilitation is punishment because you will have to be removed from society until you have been treated.

That is just pure speculation.

Really? If you were given a stick and told to beat someone until they gave you some information, would you do it? I'd guess in most circumstances, the answer would be no. What conditions would have to be met before you do carry out that task? You'd have to be pretty fucked up in the head to do it. Is that not mental instability?

Dimentio

17th April 2009, 23:46

Patchd

17th April 2009, 23:50

I think they should be hugged.

And given cookies and lemonade so they become nice.

:)
I hope that wasn't a hit at my posts. I'd rather see someone reformed and accepting of what they did as wrong, and did as much as they could as a result to better things, than to simply put a gun to their head. Yeh, it's harder, and no, it's not as profitable, but I would imagine as Communists, we don't care so much for how tough, time consuming or unprofitable something is.

Afterall, most of us here support the idea of democracy, which can be less profitable, more time consuming and extremely pedantic.

Dr Mindbender

17th April 2009, 23:51

Pogue

17th April 2009, 23:55

I think they should be punished for doing this, you simply can't let people get away with such things.

Dimentio

17th April 2009, 23:57

Seriously, I think that if we should prosecute anyone, we should prosecute Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz, and the generals who thought that was a great idea.

The main problem is... that is politically impossible.

If Obama did so, he would split the Republic, and cause massive riots as well as a massive surge of right-wing extremism.

RebelDog

18th April 2009, 00:00

Obama is trying to have his cake and eat it. He wants to be seen as different and more civilised than Bush whilst he gives immunity to the state institutions that carried out Bush's crimes and will carry out his. All this really says is the CIA and the wider US imperialist strategy is above all accountability. But I suppose the powerful do have their cake and eat it.

Patchd

18th April 2009, 00:02

I think they should be punished for doing this, you simply can't let people get away with such things.

Like I said, rehabilitation is punishment, but it's a punishment coupled with a solution, and a humane solution too. You don't rehabilitate someone without keeping society out of harm's way from that person in the mean time, so it's like imprisonment for a period, while treatment is given. As opposed to simple retribution, something which is based on violence itself, and what is so inherent in Capitalist society too.

The bourgeoisie have no interest in rehabilitating, they'd rather get rid of the problem and not have to worry about it again. As Communists, I hope we're not that individualistic.

PRC-UTE

18th April 2009, 00:12

Like I said, rehabilitation is punishment, but it's a punishment coupled with a solution, and a humane solution too. You don't rehabilitate someone without keeping society out of harm's way from that person in the mean time, so it's like imprisonment for a period, while treatment is given. As opposed to simple retribution, something which is based on violence itself, and what is so inherent in Capitalist society too.

The bourgeoisie have no interest in rehabilitating, they'd rather get rid of the problem and not have to worry about it again. As Communists, I hope we're not that individualistic.

Making examples can work wonders.

Andropov

18th April 2009, 00:13

They're not innocent of the crimes they committed, what they are though are victims of the same system that brutally oppresses us

After reading this, ive lost all will to reply to your post constructively.
There really is no point.

Pogue

18th April 2009, 00:13

Making examples can work wonders.

Any examples?

Pogue

18th April 2009, 00:14

After reading this, ive lost all will to reply to your post constructively.
There really is no point.

Oh good, could you just scuttle off quietly then please?

Andropov

18th April 2009, 00:16

Really? If you were given a stick and told to beat someone until they gave you some information, would you do it? I'd guess in most circumstances, the answer would be no. What conditions would have to be met before you do carry out that task? You'd have to be pretty fucked up in the head to do it. Is that not mental instability?

Not at all.
If I was told a pedo was about to rape my sister and his friend knew where he was I wouldnt just beat him with a stick, id ask for a second stick.
Thats one situation off the top of my head.

PRC-UTE

18th April 2009, 00:17

Any examples?

the communist position is that terror should ruthlessly be applied to smash any possible resistance to workers power. not rehabilitation.

read Marx and Engels critique of the paris commune some time.

Andropov

18th April 2009, 00:17

Oh good, could you just scuttle off quietly then please?

Still bitter after yesterday, ehh?

http://ourkitchensink.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/crying-baby-party-56800676.jpg

Pogue

18th April 2009, 00:18

Still bitter after yesterday, ehh?

How did you know that I lost at FIFA twice? :(

Pogue

18th April 2009, 00:19

PRC-UTE

18th April 2009, 00:20

Not at all.
If I was told a pedo was about to rape my sister and his friend knew where he was I wouldnt just beat him with a stick, id ask for a second stick.
Thats one situation off the top of my head.

ooooohhhhh dreadful.

imagine what Che would say? YOu know that he dealt with Batista's torturers by reading to them right?

Andropov

18th April 2009, 00:22

How did you know that I lost at FIFA twice? :(

http://i.ehow.com/images/GlobalPhoto/Articles/2199531/cough2-main_Full.jpg

Patchd

18th April 2009, 00:22

Making examples can work wonders.

Really? People still commit crimes, murder is still prevalent in bourgeois society, even though murderers are "made examples of". In addition, considering that we won't see the punishment of these CIA agents in the meantime, realistically they will only be punished in a revolutionary period, why would we need to "make examples" out of them?

After reading this, ive lost all will to reply to your post constructively.
There really is no point.

kthxbai

It's funny considering I even stated that my position on this matter has not been cemented yet, and this debate was a means for me to find my position on this matter, so I don't see why there won't be a point.

Not at all.
If I was told a pedo was about to rape my sister and his friend knew where he was I wouldnt just beat him with a stick, id ask for a second stick.
Thats one situation off the top of my head.

Yeah, you're barbaric, inhumane, and is a philistine. Rather than make sure your sister is protected and prepare to stop the paedophile, you'd rather go to their house and beat them?

PRC-UTE

18th April 2009, 00:23

Read what I wrote, some time.

Unfortunately I have.

Pogue

18th April 2009, 00:24

Unfortunately I have.

Clearly your not very clever then.

Pogue

18th April 2009, 00:25

Pogue

18th April 2009, 00:26

http://i.ehow.com/images/GlobalPhoto/Articles/2199531/cough2-main_Full.jpg

haha that made me laugh out loud

well played

Dimentio

18th April 2009, 00:28

Andropov

18th April 2009, 00:28

Yeah, you're barbaric, inhumane, and is a philistine. Rather than make sure your sister is protected and prepare to stop the paedophile, you'd rather go to their house and beat them?

No, your scenario was this.

Really? If you were given a stick and told to beat someone until they gave you some information, would you do it? I'd guess in most circumstances, the answer would be no. What conditions would have to be met before you do carry out that task? You'd have to be pretty fucked up in the head to do it. Is that not mental instability?

And my reply was this.

Not at all.
If I was told a pedo was about to rape my sister and his friend knew where he was I wouldnt just beat him with a stick, id ask for a second stick.
Thats one situation off the top of my head.

So as you can see, I would beat the information out of him for where his pedo friend was about to rape my sister.
Then I would stop the pedo and bludgen him.

Patchd

18th April 2009, 00:29

the communist position is that terror should ruthlessly be applied to smash any possible resistance to workers power. not rehabilitation.

read Marx and Engels critique of the paris commune some time.
What gives you the right to tell others what the "Communist" position should be? You treat Marxism as a fucking religion, Marx and Engels' words aren't holy.

In addition, deal with my posts, I've already explained that during a revolutionary period that would be necessary, as it would be necessary in achieving a greater good, post-revolution, when workers do have the power, we should spend time in rehabilitating these people. Violence is engrained in Capitalism, seems like there are some on here who still hold onto this bourgeois mentality.

RebelDog

18th April 2009, 00:30

PRC-UTE

18th April 2009, 00:30

Really? People still commit crimes, murder is still prevalent in bourgeois society, even though murderers are "made examples of". In addition, considering that we won't see the punishment of these CIA agents in the meantime, realistically they will only be punished in a revolutionary period, why would we need to "make examples" out of them?

Two very different situations. Murder has a diverse amount of social causes. International agencies that kidnap and torture for the bourgeoisie are another story. It's idealist to believe that rehabilitation of probably highly educated sociopaths will change anything.

However, organised terror has worked. It's what revolutions are made of. Read Orwell's accounts of revolutionary Spain. Toff's were too scared to go outside dressed in anything bur workers' clothing. It's a shame that situation didnt' last.

Dimentio

18th April 2009, 00:30

What gives you the right to tell others what the "Communist" position should be? You treat Marxism as a fucking religion, Marx and Engels' words aren't holy.

In addition, deal with my posts, I've already explained that during a revolutionary period that would be necessary, as it would be necessary in achieving a greater good, post-revolution, when workers do have the power, we should spend time in rehabilitating these people. Violence is engrained in Capitalism, seems like there are some on here who still hold onto this bourgeois mentality.

Could you both cut the crap and start talking about the subject thanks? ^^

PRC-UTE

18th April 2009, 00:32

Clearly your not very clever then.

If you're going to say a comrade isn't clever, at least make words more cleverest.

Patchd

18th April 2009, 00:34

So as you can see, I would beat the information out of him for where his pedo friend was about to rape my sister.
Then I would stop the pedo and bludgen him.

You realise paedophilia is a mental disposition? They can't help their feelings, what you can do however is to stop them, and society should try and treat them. So that involves you stopping the rape, yet at the same time, try not to bludgeon the person, is that too hard for you, or does the kill kill kill mentality make your penis seem larger?

Andropov

18th April 2009, 00:36

You realise paedophilia is a mental disposition? They can't help their feelings, what you can do however is to stop them, and society should try and treat them. So that involves you stopping the rape, yet at the same time, try not to bludgeon the person, is that too hard for you, or does the kill kill kill mentality make your penis seem larger?

No you see unlike the nonce my penis doesnt get bigger around kiddys.

Bitter Ashes

18th April 2009, 00:39

R6WstddMJZQ
I got to 5 minutes 42, before the video crashed on me and kept crashing. It's really intresting stuff, dont get me wrong there, but I was wondering how it related to my post, or was there something really important that I missed in the last 3 minutes? :)

Dimentio

18th April 2009, 00:43

I got to 5 minutes 42, before the video crashed on me and kept crashing. It's really intresting stuff, dont get me wrong there, but I was wondering how it related to my post, or was there something really important that I missed in the last 3 minutes? :)

A former CIA man turned socialist.

Anyway, about punishment.

Punishment is basically a sort of revenge dealt out from society. I think it is overtly emotional and regressive, and gives the impression that it is "ok" to act out on angry emotions regarding people who are deemed in need for societal correction.

What I think is that we should stop using the word "punishment", with its moral and judeo-christian overtones, and instead focusing on correction or isolation.

Regarding crimes like torture, murder and so on, we should really put the delinquents under mental care. If necessary for life (then it becomes a matter of isolation from society).

If they see that as a punishment, it should be noted that is supposed as a by-effect, not as the purpose of the procedure.

Patchd

18th April 2009, 00:44

No you see unlike the nonce my penis doesnt get bigger around kiddys.

Hmm... I wonder if you would say the same for homosexuals too. You know, if you swap a few words around, keep the slanging tone, and keep the fact that people have no effect over these sexual attractions, we can end up with something like this:

"No you see unlike the poof my penis doesnt get bigger around men."

I find your mindset disturbing, lemme ask, do you get a boner over Stalin?

Andropov

18th April 2009, 00:47

Hmm... I wonder if you would say the same for homosexuals too. You know, if you swap a few words around, keep the slanging tone, and keep the fact that people have no effect over these sexual attractions, we can end up with something like this:

"No you see unlike the poof my penis doesnt get bigger around men."

I find your mindset disturbing, lemme ask, do you get a boner over Stalin?

I cant believe you are comparing homosexuality to peadophilia, that is an insult.
You do realise a child cannot consent to sex and man can?
Im a little bit surprised by this outburst Palachinov.

Bitter Ashes

18th April 2009, 00:52

I can believe you are comparing homosexuality to peadophilia, that is an insult.
:blink:
He's gay. He's really not going to suggest that is he! Freudian slip, or spelling mistake?

edit: I just noticed you edited it while I was posting this, so, I guess you noticed that too. lol

Andropov

18th April 2009, 00:54

:blink:
He's gay. He's really not going to suggest that is he! Freudian slip, or spelling mistake?

Good on him for coming out, it takes courage.
But I cannot condone the defensive of pedos, I find repugnant tbh.

Andropov

18th April 2009, 00:55

edit: I just noticed you edited it while I was posting this, so, I guess you noticed that too. lol
:lol:
No bother.

Patchd

18th April 2009, 00:56

I cant believe you are comparing homosexuality to peadophilia, that is an insult.
You do realise a child cannot consent to sex and man can?
Im a little bit surprised by this outburst Palachinov.

I am a homosexual, I don't find what I said insulting, I'm pointing out a fact. Think about it rationally too, why would anyone choose to sexually abuse children if they don't feel sexually attracted to them? What I was comparing the two on was that both are sexual attractions which people do not choose, thus highlighting your bigotry.

Yes, I do realise that also, which is why I think paedophilia has to be restricted, and treated. Not bludgeoned to death as you would have it. :mad: It's not their fault they're sexually attracted to pre-pubescent humans, they need help, not victimisation or "bludgeoning".

Anyway, I'm tired and am not staying up any longer for people like you. I'll reply tomorrow if this thread continues.

Pogue

18th April 2009, 00:57

Good on him for coming out, it takes courage.
But I cannot condone the defensive of pedos, I find repugnant tbh.

Its not defending phaedophilia, he is simply trying to understand it and see how we can prevent it.

I also think we need to differentiate between phaedophillic thoughts/desires and then abuse/rape.

Andropov

18th April 2009, 01:02

I am a homosexual, I don't find what I said insulting, I'm pointing out a fact. Think about it rationally too, why would anyone choose to sexually abuse children if they don't feel sexually attracted to them? What I was comparing the two on was that both are sexual attractions which people do not choose, thus highlighting your bigotry.
I dont care what they feel tbh.
They can feel all they want as long as their feelings do not impinge upon children.

Yes, I do realise that also, which is why I think paedophilia has to be restricted, and treated. Not bludgeoned to death as you would have it. :mad:
I would restrict that for those who have raped children or were in the process of raping children.
I dont care what a person finds arrausing aslong as it doesnt affect children.

It's not their fault they're sexually attracted to pre-pubescent humans, they need help, not victimisation or "bludgeoning".
No its not, but it is their fault if they molest a child.

Andropov

18th April 2009, 01:03

I also think we need to differentiate between phaedophillic thoughts/desires and then abuse/rape.

Absolutely.

Bitter Ashes

18th April 2009, 01:05

Actualy getting back on track then. It's not a defence of pedophilic actions, it's pointing out that pedophilic feelings exist. You're right to point out that kids cant give informed consent, but that only applies if they act upon thier feelings. I sympathise with them tbh that they are attracted to people that they can never interact with in a way that can ever be moraly right. That's go to be shittest situation to ever be in, either repress your "sexuality" (I cant think of how else to describe it), or abandon your morality. The ones that keep thier morals and fight thier pedophilia I think must be immensly courageous individuals.

STJ

18th April 2009, 01:50