…Did you just outright admit that the ends justify the means*? That’s the reasoning of a sociopathic madman. Maybe you should take a good long look at yourself.

*Assuming, of course, that the ends are what you claim they are. But really, when was the last time you were right on ANYTHING?

I can’t resist. Jay, you’ve achieved Jay Tea’s level of stupid. Congratulations.

OK, but one of Those Guys who died was a dangerously Muslim cab driver.

From Jay’s own link:

This fallacy is committed when the person in question is not a legitimate authority on the subject. More formally, if person A is not qualified to make reliable claims in subject S, then the argument will be fallacious.

Is CPO Nance not a legitimate authority on waterboarding, Jay?

Some of the detainees DIED under “questioning.” Would that amount to torture?

Would a judge in any court in America accept a confession obtained by these methods? If not, why not?

The analog to my argument would be: A demolition expert says the towers could have been destroyed with explosives because he has experience blowing up 100-story towers!

Face slap.

Whatever dude.

Heck, I’ll even spot you one, Jay. I’ll give you the name of an ex-SERE instructor who says waterboarding isn’t torture: Oliver North.

Me? I’ll stick with CPO Nance.

Wonderful for you. Like I said, let me know when you have some of your own thoughts on the matter.

Me? I’ll stick with CPO Nance.

Incredible!

The analog to my argument would be: A demolition expert says the towers could have been destroyed with explosives because he has experience blowing up 100-story towers!

And like I said, all it takes is for me to produce one person who either took part or instructed SERE training to say it isn’t torture and then what? What is your response to that?

So which is it? You can’t find any written accounts to back you up? Or you’re just too lazy to look for them?

Wrong, that is not what I said. At all. Crikey.

Go here and educate yourself on the fallacy of appealing to authority:

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-authority.html

Pay close to attention to the 6 points and come to an understanding as to why relying solely on Nance’s viewpoint is not valid in declaring your point of view to be correct.

YOUR LOGIC would dictate that somebody could say the towers on 9/11 were destroyed not by airplanes but by explosive demolitions and why? Because of bunch of architects and engineers said so.

His experience isn’t valid unless all the others who have had the same experience agree?

Dude, do you know how to read? I didn’t say his EXPERIENCE wasn’t valid. I said his VIEWPOINT (or CONCLUSION) isn’t valid simply because he says so. Who else amongst those who have either been SERE instructors or have gone through SERE training have lined up with him to declare that he is right?

You’ve said again and again that there are other SERE instructors who say waterboarding isn’t torture, but now actually looking at what any of these people have to say is a “side issue”?

“Yes, it is torture.”

“No, it is not torture.”

What the fuck is it that you need to examine amongst the differing opinions?

Let me know when you have some thoughts of your own on the matter.

Of course, the left has been screeching, “That’s different! That’s different!” but nobody has actually offered up and reasonable explanation of how “different” it is, and the very people who have been involved with SERE training have said the techniques do not vary.

First, you’re violating youw own standard of evidence–you’re referring to an “authority” because of their firsthand experience with the matters under discussion.

Second, by your (ahem) tortured logic, one commits a logical fallacy every time one refers to the experience of another person. That’s nonsense.

It matters not if CPO Nance’s view is authoritative because in order for his viewpoint to be the one that is acceptable (and therefore render your appeal to his authority to be valid), his view needs to be supported amongst the many (in this case, tens of thousands) of those who have also been part of SERE training.

His experience isn’t valid unless all the others who have had the same experience agree?

Great God we’re through the looking glass for sure! The Mighty Jay offers speculation based on nothing at all but can’t be countered by someone who actually knows what he’s talking about unless everyone else agrees!

One is going to say that it is not torture. The other says it is. What is there to compare? I’m not getting yanked into a side issue.

Wait! What? You’ve said again and again that there are other SERE instructors who say waterboarding isn’t torture, but now actually looking at what any of these people have to say is a “side issue”?

Don’t dary to lecture me about “intelluctual honesty.” You wouldn’t know it if it sat on you.

I never claimed I had the same experience so this is (another) an irrelevant comment.

You want to go down the rabbit hole of high-school debate?

No, I want you to debate an issue with some intellectual honesty and with your own views and analysis instead of relying on what somebody else thinks. If all you’re going to do is say, “Well CPO Nance says it’s torture so nyahh nyahh!” then don’t waste my time. But also don’t expect me to accept that as a valid argument. It matters not if CPO Nance’s view is authoritative because in order for his viewpoint to be the one that is acceptable (and therefore render your appeal to his authority to be valid), his view needs to be supported amongst the many (in this case, tens of thousands) of those who have also been part of SERE training.

You keep asserting these contrary opinions. Let’s see them and compare them with CPO Nance’s testimony.

There’s nothing to compare. One is going to say that it is not torture. The other says it is. What is there to compare? I’m not getting yanked into a side issue. Focus on what we’re discussing and try to discuss it without having to

Holy cats, Jay. The man has first hand experience–and not just once, but hundreds of instances. If you have the same experience, then perhaps I will count your opinion as equal to his.

You want to go down the rabbit hole of high-school debate? There’s a reason “appeal to authority” classifies certain logical fallacies. It’s because some arguments erroneously imply that the “authority” in question is qualified to offer an opinion.

In the instance of CPO Nance, I don’t think we have that problem, do you?

And there are others who say it is not. You keep conveniently ignoring this point.

I’m giving your argument all the credence it deserves. You keep asserting these contrary opinions. Let’s see them and compare them with CPO Nance’s testimony.

No, I’m the one that isn’t playing. Try to debate an issue on the merits yourself instead of pointing to somebody and saying, “But he said _______” and declaring victory.

You say waterboarding can’t possibly be torture because our military did it to Americans. One of the men who actually applied the technique says yes, it is torture.

And there are others who say it is not. You keep conveniently ignoring this point.

No, I’m saying Nance’s opinion outweighs what you say. He has experienced waterboarding firsthand.

Yes, and I’ve read about others who have gone through the same thing and they disagree that it is torture. So you still haven’t done anything other than waste time.

Jay, it’s called “another of Jay’s silly games” and I’m not playing.

You say waterboarding can’t possibly be torture because our military did it to Americans. One of the men who actually applied the technique says yes, it is torture.

But you’re sitting there saying, “Well, you’re wrong because Nance says its torture” and that his opinion outweighs whatever anybody else says.

No, I’m saying Nance’s opinion outweighs what you say. He has experienced waterboarding firsthand.

I can believe him or you.

Quaker, it’s called an “appeal to authority.” It is a logical fallacy.

Source A (Nance) says ________
Source A (Nance) is authoritative
Therefore, _________ is true

If you choose to say, “I disagree” because of what Nance says, fine. But you’re sitting there saying, “Well, you’re wrong because Nance says its torture” and that his opinion outweighs whatever anybody else says.

And like I said, all it takes is for me to produce one person who either took part or instructed SERE training to say it isn’t torture and then what? What is your response to that?

No, I’m engaging the logical fallacy of appealing to first-hand experience. “So and so has actually experienced waterboarding and said it is torture.”

I can believe him or you.

How did waterboarding become part of the SERE program?

I have no idea. It’s irrelevant.

It’s highly relevant. The creators of the SERE program identified waterboarding as a form of–you guessed it–torture practiced by despotic regimes through history. The program sought to give members of our military sufficient experience to withstand such tactics. It’s included in SERE because it’s torture.

Fascinating how an obvious civil libertarian, by vocation and avocation, usually gets pegged as a lefty by Goldwater’s “kooks”. I’ve also been told by these people that Raimondo, Rockwell, and Paul are also lefties. Apparently anything can be rationalized if you’re on the side of ‘wingnut Jesus’.

I have no idea. It’s irrelevant.