All Comments (16)

Listen we are not that sexy, because we can squat/lay and let any and every flesh lusting for attention satisfy our craving to stay young and active. Graduate from the cat alley, little child discoveries of sex play. It’s call immoral indulgence. That’s our one a day vitamin (pill) for the day to be sure we get the community terminal diseases OF THE DECADE. We do not need a sex partner to be healthy, feel young and be pursued sexually. That’s called: Sex-a-holic! I’m waiting and watching for a people that can feel great and good about themselves and it does not have to be about a bottle, a drug, sex and not even our gifts and talents. We know who we are and what we have and can live and enjoy the beauty of life in truth, joy and purity. That’s what will make it happen. Love, sex, lifetime partners, it is the true surgery waiting to plastic our hearts. Yes desire a lifetime mate, but just because he/she makes great sex.

Oooowe… cheap, cheap. Feel great, be healthy, look younger and eat proper with a renewed mind, because you are who you are. The rest is just a plus of excellence to add to your qualities. Say this and believe it: “I am everything I need to be with or without a mate or sex”. We don't need kinky, immorality or age to determine the worth of human excellence. Must we be dictated by sex the power of the mind to discipline ones self or depict our well being and life expectancies? Read my blog at www.24-7pray.org. Or write back P.O. Box 7, Baytown, TX 77522-0007.

This is, again, another disingenuous proposal from Thistlethwaite. If she were really interested in the truth (and not a public platform to criticize political leaders) she would also have to be faced with the TRUTH that the waterboarding tactics of the CIA saved lives. After 35 seconds of the treatment, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the architect of 9/11 confessed to other plots that were broken up.

So, "the blatant coverup" of a video tape would probably show an inverted Mohammed (legs probably kicking as he squirmed under the false feeling of drowning) for 35 seconds. With that, the public opinion of torture would probably change in favor of it since it ultimately isn't as bad as it might sound. When the public considers that for this 35 seconds of extreme discomfort and panic, hundreds (if not thousands) of lives were saved.

Not exactly the TRUTH that Thistlethwaite, but I'll take it.

Like the Chinese proverb says, be careful what you ask for.

Thanks, Susan, for your forthright statement. I was in South Africa several years ago and witnessed to the value of such a commission. Unfortunately, we are afraid of the truth. We are afraid of being cast in the same light as those nasty "evil-doer" nations who torture and wreak havoc on the rights and freedoms of their citizens. When will we wake up and realize that we have seen the face of the enemy, and it is us?

Do you accept articles from professors of ethics
and religion who volunteer a text for review? I
am an emeritus professor at Claremont School of Theology and Graduate School. I could send a brief statement about David and Goliath as a back-
story after David was King, and that even a God
annointed King could not save Isreal. It is well to remember that the bonding of religion/politics led to the dispersion of the Irealites across the face of the earth. But their faith sustained them
for almost three thousand years. What America needs is neither a polital or religious hero, but a nation that understands the complexity involved
in sustaining a democratic nation.

Tim: no reality show has ever forced water down someone's throat while hung upside down (the idea is to make sure they can't inhale or swallow the water to breathe) until they lose consciousness, then revive them (which is somewhat easier because, being upside down, they have lost consciousness without actually inhaling too much water to pump out of their lungs). so essentially you drown someone and then do CPR and revive them and then question them while they vividly remember what it feels like to drown.

We convicted the Japanese of war crimes for doing it to our soldiers because it is torture. It's not debatable.

and all we got for it was the names of some other folks to detain. whoppeee.

2008 American bumper-sticker:

WATERBOARD A SECULARIST FOR JESUS

How ironic that this laudable call for truth is posted under the rubric of "faith!"

Ironic and tragic because it is fact and logic that lead to real knowledge, not "faith."

There is not a single instance in the history of mankind where faith by itself has ever -- ever -- produced anything but myths, hogwash, and the illusion of truth, lucky guesses of course not counted.

And I challenge anyone who thinks otherwise to produce one definitive example to the contrary and thereby earn the gratitude of science itself, and of all thinking men, not to mention a possible Nobel Prize.

"We need a Truth and Reconciliation Commission and we need it as soon as possible."

I'd settle for truth, if it came down to a choice. Maybe after the next election we can get some reconciliation.

Anonymous @ December 11, 2007 11:37 PM: You make a valid point. The problem is that Regan also talked about brutal dictatorships (if they were not our friends) and 'authoritarian' regimes if they were. We sank deep in the mud a very long time ago. 'Tim' is actually very much in the mainstream; though he does not realize that our 'interrogation' tactics are no better than what Stalin authorized (his favorite torture technique was ... sleep deprivation).

[[[So let's have the courage to challenge the irresponsible claims of people, like Ms Twit. She wants to put us all in danger based on false accusations regarding legitimate interrogation procedures. Shame on Ms. Twit.]]]

Shame on you Tim. Waterboarding is most certainly torture. It has been considered so by every country, even ours, until the Bush administration. That is the truth and for you to say otherwise is dishonest to say the least. You'll notice by all descriptions the torture revealed in the news lately wasn't even close to the "ticking bomb" scenario we have been beaten about the head with. That's a lie like the rest of the justifications for war crimes.

How low can we go? Do you remember what Ronald Reagan said about human rights and torture? What happened to the conservatives who used to hate the totalitarian and brutal practice of waterboarding and other forms of torture?

I am ashamed of what these people have done to our fine country. We used to be a shining light of freedom, democracy and the preeminent defenders of human rights.

Ms. Twit, what torture are you talking about? Waterboarding? Here is from the Washington Post:

…He described Abu Zubaida as ideologically zealous, defiant and uncooperative -- until the day in mid-summer when his captors strapped him to a board, wrapped his nose and mouth in cellophane and forced water into his throat in a technique that simulates drowning.

The waterboarding lasted about 35 seconds before Abu Zubaida broke down, according to Kiriakou, who said he was given a detailed description of the incident by fellow team members. The next day, Abu Zubaida told his captors he would tell them whatever they wanted, Kiriakou said…..

I fail to see that waterboarding is torture. You see worse than this on the reality shows on TV. No fingers were cut off or other mutilation. Something was done to fake death and it seems acceptable to do this to save many lives. And everyone agrees, that the testimony of Zubaida saved many lives. Zubaida was put to the test but was not tortured.

So let's have the courage to challenge the irresponsible claims of people, like Ms Twit. She wants to put us all in danger based on false accusations regarding legitimate interrogation procedures. Shame on Ms. Twit.

I think that the need for a commission of this sort is urgent. Furthermore, we need both religious and non-religious leaders to be involved. This is an issue of morality, and ultimately a question of whether or not the ends justify the means. Due to the nature of the subject, religious figures will have more to say, yet non-religious figures will keep things less biased. Most importantly, we must look to trustworthy leaders to serve here.

People must realize that the fact that this matter is secular does not necessarily mean that religious figures should be avoided. While I do not condemn a separation of church and state, "maddymappo" goes much further than that. Basically, you are concluding that the fact that someone is a religious figure means they have nothing useful to contribute. You seem to advocate that their role in their church, prevents possible roles in the state and thus determines their role in the state. Therefore, church and state are in fact not separated. We must most importantly look to trustworthy figures and not worry as much about their religious background.

I agree with JM. I also do not think that most religions, in general, have ever been adverse to torture or punishment of a person who is guilty of a crime against innocent people or who intends to commit crimes against innocent people. Why then ask religious leaders to find truth? What would be the criteria for selecting these leaders? And, what would the purpose be? Look at the pictures of bombed and burned out buses and buildings where men, women and children have been killed and mutilated, and tell me why any person of good conscience would be troubled by an act torture that could save the lives and sufferings of countless innocent people? What concerns me, is the proper administration of those acts and accountability for them. But, first, we have to have the honesty to face up to accepting the use of torture, if we really want to get some accountability and demand a clear chain of command. If we remain in denial about it, all the religious leaders in the world strutting their stuff in a grand quest for truth, will not amount to a hill of beans. I admire Senator McCain and others who have experienced torture as prisoners of war and speak out clearly against it. But those acts of sadism, were done to instill fear and dread in the enemy, not to protect innocent lives. We need to draw a distinction. Lumping everything together to satisfy politically or religiously correct ideals, will just lead to empty talk and not give our elected officials and legislaters the hands on ability to set up realistic administrative safeguards in order to protect our fellow countrymen and western civilization.

Actually, we need a war crimes commission and a tribunal. The only people with moral clarity on this issue are liberals and atheists who see the importance of the Nuremberg principles, not cowardly liberal protestants who have been too scared to speak up against their abominable brethren for the last 5 years...

Rev. Thistlethwaite, you give me hope, thank you.

Who would appoint such a commission? What would be the purpose? Does anyone honestly expect there to be a tangible outcome? Finally, why would we want religious leaders to play a role on a Truth commission?