Kinda casts doubt on the integrity of any professional institution
âStaff Doctor- CIAâ or any similar title should immediately disqualify any doctor from any medical capacity in a hospital or private practice unless those who were specifically involved are brought to justice.
It seriously makes me want to work in a position of power in medicine just so I can make sure they never again work in the field. Theyâre a danger to their patients, as far as Iâm concerned. If they donât have ethics sufficient to keep them from aiding and abetting torture, how can expect them to meet lesser ethical requirements like informed consent?
More generally with regards to the CIA: Burn it all. Burn it all to the ground. Anyone who has read Tim Weinerâs Legacy of Ashes, or any decent history of the agency knows that the whole thing is corrupt to the core. It needs to be uprooted and the ground in which it sits poisoned so that not so much as a weed grows where it once stood.
So much for the Hippocratic Oath.
There really are a lot of people for whom laws defined by the state can trump their own morals.
Iâm frequently caught off guard in my conversations with scientists (friends, colleagues, acquaintances), by how staid in opinion and conservative in outlook their attitudes concerning social issues tend to be.
In my limited experience, they tend to fall victim to a well constructed, reasonable sounding argument such as John Yooâs definition of the legal limit on behaviour potentially definable as âtortureâ.
In that example. it sounds as if there is a strong, legal argument that can be used to define moral culpability but to my ears, his argument constitutes a perfect example of legalese being used to come to a specific, predetermined conclusion, rather than an exploration of actual moral integrity.
Obviously this experience is drawn from a minuscule data set, predicated on the nuances of conversation between us and can be in no way assumed to really even cast light on their true, underlying moral philosophy.
I do, however, get the very strong feeling that a dependence on navigating the education system, garnering investment for research and generally maintaining a public image of conformity puts an enormous pressure on them to emulate what are perceived to be societal norms.
They made $80 million from this. I donât think theyâre worrying about having licenses anymore.
Sounds about right for not having insurance.
Some people have no deep character, no real morality that theyâve developed over their lives. Maybe someone can explain to me what distinguishes these torturers, these depraved human beings, from the people they purport to protect us all from. I sure as hell donât see a difference.
We really are the Empire now, arenât we?
Iâm actually pretty surprised at the number of people that I know who support torture with the argument that âItâs okay because weâre the good guysâ. Actually Iâm also surprised as the number of people I know who support torture, period. This and open racism have done wonders for my holiday card list.
I seem to remember something about ââDo no harmââ. Something that is immoral is still wrong even if some @#$% lawyer say it is okay. ââI was only following ordersââ is not a defense for 'âcrimes against humanityâ.
Yeah, when you support torture, youâre simply not the good guys anymore. When you support torture, you support evil.
I already said elsewhere: âI was only following ordersâ was not an excuse at Nuremberg (at the USâs specific insistence, I believe), so it shouldnât be an excuse now.
I´m sorry to say the Empire from Star Wars has too much charm to be compared to present day America.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
