Shephard Smith probably wishes he could take back an exchange he had yesterday on Fox News. The anchor got, shall we say, a little heated during a discussion with Trace Gallagher and Andrew Napolitano.
He said, and we quote, “We are America! I don’t give a rat’s ass if it helps! We are America! We do not f*cking torture!”
Immediately after the outburst, Shep got very quiet. We imagine his director must have been screaming some equally color language into his earpiece.
We have one question for you, Mr. Smith. If torture is not allowed in America, how does Keith Olbermann stay on the air?
Source: Fox News via NewsBusters.com
Subscribe, tweet, share, tell a friend!
Browse before and after this article
OLDER: GE shareholders erupt in anger over MSNBC’s leftwing biasNEWER: Secret United Arab Emirate torture tape shows Americans what real torture is all about.
Related Posts
- Monday: UK Home Secretary Jacqui Smith says she’ll fight Michael Savage’s libel claim. Tuesday: Smith resigns
- Secret United Arab Emirate torture tape shows Americans what real torture is all about.
- North Korean defector would like to show Nancy Pelosi what real torture looks like
- Harry Smith throws his panties and room key at Al Gore
- Obama’s post-racial America turns out to be most-racial America
{ 1 trackback }
{ 33 comments… read them below or add one }
Well cr*p! Why the *#&$ did he have to go and do a *&%$ thing like that? Is *&$%*&% Smith trying to give the *&%^#^% left something to *&^% about? *&%%!
Torture is against the principles America is founded upon. We call it war crimes and go after the perpetrators when it happens to our soldiers, so how in the world are we justified in doing it to anyone else?
We train our soldiers to tell their captors anything that they want to hear if it will stop the torture. Why should we expect that us doing the same thing will not yield the same results?
Anyone who supports the use of waterboarding and other forms of torture is a horrible person.
Brad, you’re wrong. It doesn’t make them bad people necessarily, just ignorant. You can change minds, but only if you haven’t written them off. This is first and foremost a battle for the soul of our country, and this battle is being waged on the battlefield of the hearts and minds of its citizens. Every time you write someone off, you give the other side a victory. People do change their minds. Even people you think are bad.
Im a horrible person. Make a note of it.
Waterboarding is not illegal. The senate was fully aware of our waterboarding techniques and refused on many occasions to make the interrogation technique illegal.
@Doug
If it is not illegal, then why did we execute the japanese for doing it to our soldiers in WWII?
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/29/politics/main3554687.shtml
(old article, please note date)
Just wondering.
We didn’t execute the Japanese for waterboarding our troops. We executed them for filling them up with water and then jumping on their stomachs until their stomachs exploded.
So, there is moral outrage over torturing evil people who want to kill innocent people in order to get them to tell us who/what their next victim is so that we can hopefully prevent more loss of life.
But, we condone the practice of sucking a baby out of its mothers womb with a vaccum hose and if the poor little thing is still alive the medical staff can kill it anyway just for being unlucky enough to be born to a mother who doesn’t want it….but that is a choice not a moral outrage?
this country is sick and getting sicker.
Not torturing is what makes us different from ‘evil people’. If you believe that it is permissible to torture someone because you label them as evil, means you are just as bad. It is a violation of freedom and liberty, what America stands for. As benjamin Franklin said “Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither”.
In respect to your abortion argument that is referring to a late term abortion, which is not done because the mother “…doesn’t want it…”, it is performed because the child threatens the mother’s life. You may still think this is wrong but let me present a line of reasoning.
The United States constitution guarantees “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”. To demand that a women give birth when doing so would guarantee death is a clear violation of the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness. Even Thomas Hobbes believed the only right you can never give up is the right to live. No piece of legislation can be valid if it requires that a mother die; it is every woman’s right to live.
If you believe that carrying your child to term is more important than you own life then you can choose to die, but you can’t force this decision upon anyone else.
@ Jacii
Japanese water-boarding and American water-boarding are two completely different animals.
And we didn’t execute them just for water-boarding. They did plenty of other evil things, like cutting the flesh from living victims and eating it in front of them.
HAHAHAHAHA! And this clown is still on TV? HAHAHAHAHA
Brad, Jacii: please define “torture.” If we can agree on what the word means it’ll be much easier to know what’s legal and what’s not. Our CongressTools need all the help they can get.
And while you’re at it, perhaps you can help the UN define “terrorism,” since the bureaucrats still can’t seem to agree on a definition since 2001.
Maybe you could also help me understand “cruel and unusual” as it pertains to punishing mass murderers. Is lethal injection “cruel and unusual”?
Just wondering.
the problem in these disputes is that people want to ignore psychological damage.
they say – if there was no physical damage – there was no torture.
the thing is – torture has almost nothing to do with physical damage. it’s all mental. it’s about putting the subject into mental/emotional pain.
when old POWs kill themselves, it’s not because their leg still hurts. it’s because of the psychological damage. the post traumatic stress disorders, etc.
does waterboarding cause mental/emotional pain/damage?
it seems to, yes. it seems to break people’s minds right in two.
Jacil: To compare anything Americans have done in the War on Terror to the things the Japanese did during World War II is absurd. It shows your complete ignorance of history. Please read this and learn something:
http://hubpages.com/hub/Japanese-Atrocities-during-World-War-II-in-Philippines
The Japanese were guilty of mass rape of innocent women, forced enslavement and prostitution of women, beheadings, forced labor by captured soldiers, the Bataan Death March, starvation, torture until death, and, of course, the infamous burning bamboo shoot under the fingernails, and on and on.
How about John McCain’s experience in North Vietnam? He was beaten on his previously broken limbs until he passed out. He was denied even the most basic medical treatment until they found out his father was an admiral. Then he was treated in a filthy room filled with rats and mosquitos. He was beaten day after day. His arm was re-broken. One of his cellmates was hung by his arms until they were torn out of their sockets. His arms were intentionally re-broken. McCain describes other POWs who had their thumbnails ripped off and were burned with cigarettes.
In comparison, Gitmo detainees lived a life of luxury compared to what they had before they were captured. They got three square meals a day for the first time in their lives and many of them became overweight as a result. They got to play volleyball and soccer. They got regular medical attention.
We “tortured” them by putting panties on their heads at Abu Ghraib, by putting one of them in an enclosed space with a harmless caterpillar, by slapping them, and yes, by waterboarding.
If you think this rises to the level of torture performed by those who are guilty of real torture, you are living in a land of delusion.
Pat — late term abortions are not just performed when the mother’s life is in danger.only a tiny fraction of all abortions are performed because the mother’s life is in danger.
as to the other argument — if you can’t make a distinction between good and evil then there is no basis for the values you purport to uphold. The waterboarding prevented planned terrorist attacts, saved lives and therefore it was totally justified. I wish we had done it before 9/11 a lot grief to the victims of terrorists would have been avoided and the US would not have gone to war in IRaq or Afghanistan. If waterboarding would have prevented that I’d say go for it.
Emanuel Kant said “Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.”.
This means that if you wouldn’t want to be waterboarded by your local police force in an attempt to gain information on a crime (for fun, imagine you’re innocent!) then you should oppose it’s use by our government on foreign nationals.
We have prosecuted other people from other nations who have done the SAME type of torture and so now its ok since it sopposed to give us results. Even though theres not been any clear cut results to begin with. Keeping us safe for 8 years is a n excuse and not something to even go on. Keep in mind that other US military men and women as well as even a case in Texas over waterboarding had been prosecuted and these people have gone to jail for it. Oh and the case about the cop was going on when Bush governor. Just a little peice of irony to chew on there.
Oh and in 9/11 thats a low excuse too since at that time there was no tight security or any real threat seen at that point or rather lack of action from both the Bush and Clinton administrations. 9/11 is a poor excuse to justify this type of torture and even an insult to what the military men must go through in their training. Also I’m sure that nothing came out of it, becuase if these wacko terrorist were willing to die on 9/11 what makes some of you think that torture would even get anithyng out of them. Notice we have not even caught Bin Laden.
Kant was an agnostic whose theories have a lot to do with Europe’s current move to secularism. so the idea of good and evil are relative to your point of view.
hogwash.
I wouldn’t want to have some terrorist fly a plane through my office or my loved ones office. I don’t want babies murdered in the womb. I don’t think morality is relative to my point of view. both things are evil, regardless of your political views, perception of America or attitude about the convenience of being pregnant. Preventing a terrorist attack or preventing pregnancy is not evil — you may even argue that it is wise.
hhv94:
There are no “clear cut results” because Obama has redacted all of the results from the OLC memos. He’s only released the tactics used. Very politically convenient for your argument. That’s why Cheney has now called for the release of the actual intelligence gained, so that you can make a more informed, intelligent judgement.
Although Bin Laden hasn’t been caught (probably dead), you may not have noticed that we DID catch the actual planner of 9/11, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, thanks to enhanced interrogation techniques, specifically waterboarding. Still sure that “nothing came of it”? Then ask your President to release the rest of the OLC memos. Not just the politically convenient parts.
for those of you who’ve forgotten/missed highschool – the ends do not, ever, ever justify the means.
> We “tortured” them by putting panties on their heads at Abu Ghraib, by putting one of them in an enclosed space with a harmless caterpillar, by slapping them, and yes, by waterboarding.
and the book 1984 ended with the character in a cage with a mouse. clearly that’s not torture either – Orwell was an idiot.
(PS. no, Orwell wasn’t an idiot. you are.)
qarl, here’s some more Orwell for you:
“Those who ‘abjure’ violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf.”
“War is evil, but it is often the lesser evil.”
P.S. Orwell wasn’t an idiot. you are.
JohnGalt4Prez – i don’t see how that refutes anything i said.
or are you just name-calling?
qarl, you seem to imply that Orwell condemns violence or “torture” when it comes to preventing the mass slaughter of innocents. Is that your point? If not, what is your point? What would you do to extract information (not “confessions” or submission, as in 1984) from someone who had already committed mass murder and may know of more such attacks?
And you’re the one who started in with the ad hominem. Just playing back your own doublespeak.
ok, let me explain it to you.
the editor was implying that torture does not include things like “put into an enclosed space with a harmless caterpillar”, and etc.
i was merely pointing out his ignorance.
i don’t mind ad hominem if you’ve got a point to make. but if all you want to do is call names, you’d be better off talking to yourself.
I see. So rather than torture a self-proclaimed terrorist (like a KSM) with a caterpillar to prevent future attacks, you’d rather allow others to be tortured by being blown up in pizza parlors and nightclubs or with planes flying into buildings. Because, as you learned in high school, the “ends never justify the means”. That’s a very nuanced view. Thanks for defining torture and clearing that up.
i can see you didn’t do very well in debate class.
let’s try again, shall we?
do you think putting someone with a caterpillar can be torture?
yes or no will do, thanks.
I can see you’re only interested in scoring “points” rather than actually addressing the real-world ramifications of academic theories or answering others’ questions.
Here’s one for you, if you care enough to deal with real-world situations: Do you think having one’s limbs blown off by a suicide bomber can be torture? And do you think it’s worth inflicting anxiety on a known murderer to prevent further acts of murder and mayhem?
The “harmless caterpillar” admin comment that you consider ignorant was also followed by a qualifier: “If you think this rises to the level of torture performed by those who are guilty of real torture, you are living in a land of delusion.”
I understand you’d like to “win” debate points, but the issue is not as black and white as you and Shep would like to make it.
So regardless of whether you answer my questions (it doesn’t really matter to me), I’ll answer yours: It comes down to a matter of degrees. The word torture has been cheapened to include acts of abuse and humiliation. Although no one seems willing to define it, in most cases torture means inflicting severe pain. However, it can also include great mental suffering or anxiety. So as to the caterpillar, in most cases that would be a no. But if you want to equate maiming with panic, then yes, you could be right. Feel safer now?
You’re welcome.
> then yes, you could be right.
good, i’m glad you agree with me.
I agree you’d make a great professor.
This f*cking idiot is always doing this kind of stuff on the air. Remember the famous “Blow Job” Lopez line? This guy is a dumbass, yet it’s pretty damn entertaining and that’s why he’s still working there.
Saw a funny clip of Joy Behr & Ann Coulter discussing this very subject. Joy of course was against waterboarding, Ann’s very witty reply was something along the lines of “Why don’t you submit yourself to an abortion.” Funny how libs are ok with abortion, but not waterboarding. I thought it was brilliant!
When does waterboarding become an effective tool to gain vital information? Never?
Here is a mental exercise. Suppose a gang of thugs kidnapped your family. They threaten to kill them all if you don’t meet their demands and are given a deadline. You have been given strict instructions not to involve the authorities or they will kill your family instantly. Being clever, you capture one of the thugs but every effort to locate the others or your family is futile. You find you cannot meet their demands and the deadline is drawing closer. Do you
1) Sing “Kumbaya” while holding hands with the thug?
2) Plead tearfully for him to tell you where the others took your family?
3) Write your family off as lost?
4) Waterboard the sob?
I can just hear ‘ole Shep clearing his throat while tuning the guitar.