Oh the Irony!

[D-Roc]

I gotta say im slightly worried about Sayid.

I mean first he blames the others [who are probably Dharma] for the death of his beloved Shannon..ok, fair dues. Then he loses all of his morality and by beating Henry to near and certain death, clearly taking out his misplaced vengeance on the defenceless man. Sayid doesnt stop there however, he continues to lose his sense by making a non-existant distingtion between 'them and us'..forgetting that in the wild, "it's all relative" [as Mike has now proven].

And then..then despite all that apparent hatred for the Others and Dharma..and anyone who doesnt resemble a 'lostie'..he goes and drinks DHARMA Water!??



I mean is that hypocritical or what?

Either that or the producers thought they'd stick that in intentionally..

[E Pluribus Unum]

I'm not sure the losties would think 'the others' are from Dharma - from out looking in, it would seem to me that 'the others' are just another group on the island - like our losties..

You may argue that 'they' were seen in the medical hatch, but then - at the moment our losties are using the 'swan' and even eating there food.

Perhaps if Sayid had said "My goodness, I hate Dharma food" in a previous episode, then we see him doing a Sunday roast. Perhaps then you could call him a hypocrit. But drinking water, to stop himself dehydrating...? Hmmmm

And you're also making Henry out to be innocent, fair enought - perhaps Sayid went slightly over board [but considering Sayid is a 'torturer' it's hardly out of character] - but as Locke said "We're at war, and like it or not- what Sayid has to do in there is a part of it". I think it was required - and turned out to be the right call. I also think something that Sayid said applies here -

SAYID: "Jack asked me how I knew -- knew for sure that this man was lying. How I knew for sure that he was one of them -- one of the Others. I know because I feel no guilt for what I did to him. But there is no way I can ever explain that to Jack, or even Locke, because both of them have forgotten. "
CHARLIE: "Forgotten? What? "
SAYID: "That you were strung up by your neck and left for dead. That Claire was taken and kept for days during which god only know what happened to her. That these people -- these Others -- are merciless, and can take any one of us whenever they choose. So tell me, Charlie, have you forgotten?"

Well, have you KoR, HAVE YOU? :P

[D-Roc]

Originally Posted by E PLURIBUS UNUM,September 08, 2006 09:16 am

I'm not sure the losties would think 'the others' are from Dharma - from out looking in, it would seem to me that 'the others' are just another group on the island - like our losties..

You may argue that 'they' were seen in the medical hatch, but then - at the moment our losties are using the 'swan' and even eating there food.

Perhaps if Sayid had said "My goodness, I hate Dharma food" in a previous episode, then we see him doing a Sunday roast. Perhaps then you could call him a hypocrit. But drinking water, to stop himself dehydrating...? Hmmmm

And you're also making Henry out to be innocent, fair enought - perhaps Sayid went slightly over board [but considering Sayid is a 'torturer' it's hardly out of character] - but as Locke said "We're at war, and like it or not- what Sayid has to do in there is a part of it". I think it was required - and turned out to be the right call. I also think something that Sayid said applies here -

Well, have you KoR, HAVE YOU? :P

Haha..nice little end part there

The thing is though, they got by on rain water before so theyre hardly likely to dehydrate. And anyway it probably is rain water in a refilled Dharma bottle. But i would think Sayid would be so disgusted at even using their products..even a bottle.

If Sayid put 2+2 together surely he would at least consider that Henry was Dharma affiliated...i mean surely it would at least cross his mind? And considering the huge element of doubt that he ignored when claiming Henry was guilty and proceeding to smash the guys face in..surely he should also apply the same element of doubt in the possibility that that water might actually be from the others and that they may well be Dharma..? It just seems a little hypocritical to me. I wouldve thought Sayid would be completely avoiding any form of island products.

Also, im not making Henry out to be innocent..but at the time when Sayid nearly killed the man [pre-Lockdown] he had no proof that Henry was lying..and yet he still beat the man to a pulp. He lost all sense of morality and in the wild the only thing of 'home' that you have..is your morality. But Sayid clearly lost his. Beating a man to death without proof of his guilt is just wrong..especially when the man doing the beating so clearly believes that he is right and what he's doing is necessary . And even IF Henry was one of them [which we now know for sure] it still doesnt mean that Sayid shouldve been that hostile. Afterall, who's to say that HG was involved in Shannons death. You can't blame an entire people for one factions crime. For all her knew [at the time] Henry could be from a different faction of others.

[Kiowa Warrior]

As much as I don't like Sayid, I can't really blame the man for using a Dharma water bottle! Just because he's using a bit of equipment from them doesn't mean he's now Dharma's new best friend - it's a pretty tough life on the island, and you have to take advantage of everything you can find.

I fully understand that Sayid had his reasons for torturing Henry (grief, anger, a desire to help the other losties, his natural character etc...) and even though I don't like what he did (and I especially don't like Locke's involvement in that activity), I can see why it would be necessary and justifiable at that exact time and in those exact circumstances...like Locke said to Jack 'you did what you thought was right at the time you thought it' (or wtte).

But what I can't forgive Sayid for is nearly executing Henry at point blank range, when the man was tied up, no threat whatsoever and was just beginning to tell the truth for a change and reveal some information...it doesn't make sense from a logical point of view, let alone a humane one! I never thought I'd say this, but thank goddness for Ana-Lucia...

[E Pluribus Unum]

See, I think this is the pivot. I don't think he beat him because of Shannon. If you ask me - If Shannon hadn't died "would Sayid have tortured Henry" - I'd say yes, because that's who/what he is. Normally, torturing someone [especially with no proof] I'd say was wrong - but AT THAT TIME (remember) everyone thought [and actually still thinks] that Sun was attacked by 'them' - and so 'the line' had been crossed. Like the old saying goes "All is fair in love and war" - the rules change when war is on the agenda. Weather it be on a deserted island or the middle east. Torture happens, in civilisation and the wild - So do we blame Sawyer for Sayids actions, or Charlie? No - I would blame the situation, Sayid thought 'his people' were at war. You have to take the initiative during war - and who better than an ex Iraqi soldier?

Also I don't think Sayid ever doubted himself;

"Jack asked me how I knew -- knew for sure that this man was lying. How I knew for sure that he was one of them -- one of the Others. I know because I feel no guilt for what I did to him. But there is no way I can ever explain that to Jack, or even Locke, because both of them have forgotten. "

I don't understand how he knows - but he did. And he was right.

Also, this could be looked at in comparison to what happened with Sawyer [Shannon involved again] but Sayid DID feel guilt that time, not this time...

I know it can sound a weak argument. But like Sayid said 'They can take any of us at any time' - I think that is cause enough...

[D-Roc]

Originally Posted by Kiowa Warrior,September 08, 2006 10:14 am

As much as I don't like Sayid, I can't really blame the man for using a Dharma water bottle! Just because he's using a bit of equipment from them doesn't mean he's now Dharma's new best friend - it's a pretty tough life on the island, and you have to take advantage of everything you can find.

I fully understand that Sayid had his reasons for torturing Henry (grief, anger, a desire to help the other losties, his natural character etc...) and even though I don't like what he did (and I especially don't like Locke's involvement in that activity), I can see why it would be necessary and justifiable at that exact time and in those exact circumstances...like Locke said to Jack 'you did what you thought was right at the time you thought it' (or wtte).

But what I can't forgive Sayid for is nearly executing Henry at point blank range, when the man was tied up, no threat whatsoever and was just beginning to tell the truth for a change and reveal some information...it doesn't make sense from a logical point of view, let alone a humane one! I never thought I'd say this, but thank goddness for Ana-Lucia...

But i just think that him using the Dharma water bottle is like me saying i hate Tesco's and beating up their CEO and then the very next day shopping in Tescos and doing an advert for them, lol. I mean, if he hates the others so much then why drink from a bottle that is in all likelyhood produced by them...im sure theres a few Oceanic bottles lying around. Although theyre probably HansoF affiliated also, lol

I dont agree with how he tortured Henry..he did it pre-Lockdown and at a time when Henry was very convincing. In the real world Sayid wouldnt be allowed to get away with that..it's just wrong. How can he beat someone to a pulp when he has no evidence. Ki, you know the law better than I do, so if theres no firm evidence to convict someone then surely that doesnt mean you can apply mere suspicion in order to attribute blame? Imagine if Sayid did that in the real world..he'd be sent down for a very long time surely? Also we have to surely bear in mind that Sayid and his peopel were in no great danger from Henry..unlike the tailies in TO48D, the losties had plently of protection and man power.

Just because Sayid did what he thought right at the time doesnt make it any easier for me to deal with. In fact..did Sayid even think he was doing the right thing at the time? I would doubt this since he was clearly on a revenge mission..

I suppose like you i can 'understand' his anger [in the sense that i can see why he was angry] but i just cannot agree with his actions. And indeed..thanks God for Ana!

[Mantis Zero]

The only Dharma person the Losties have encountered was Desmond, and he didnt seem like the people snatching type so I'm sure the losties will not make any accosiation between Dharma and the Others. Sayid does not hate Dharma, responsible for making them push a button every 108 minutes, he hates the others and not even we actually know for sure if Dharma and The Others are one and the same.

Sayid drank some water, big deal. At least three of the losties had taken up permanent residence in their hatch (Locke, Jack, Ana) even after finding out Henry was an other so drinking a bottle of water with their logo on it is hardly something to be outraged about!

[E Pluribus Unum]

I'm glad he didn't kill Henry, that would have been wrong.

There was a part of the interrogation which was Sayid taking out frustration on Henry [when he was laying into his face] but he was also - before that - using none-physical interrogation - threatening to break his fingers [which he then didn't]....

The thing is with 'interrogation' - you can never be sure of anything - hence the need for interrogation, so then you're saying that you should trust everyone - and sadly that includes people that 'could be' your enemy. Morally, I agree, it’s not right. No one can argue torture is a good thing – especially when there is a possible ‘friendly’ involved. But it's a part of war, I'm affraid - and it happens. And yes, believe it or not during war in the real world people are tortured to death and actually don't know anything about anything....

[D-Roc]

Originally Posted by E PLURIBUS UNUM,September 08, 2006 10:17 am

See, I think this is the pivot. I don't think he beat him because of Shannon. If you ask me - If Shannon hadn't died "would Sayid have tortured Henry" - I'd say yes, because that's who/what he is. Normally, torturing someone [especially with no proof] I'd say was wrong - but AT THAT TIME (remember) everyone thought [and actually still thinks] that Sun was attacked by 'them' - and so 'the line' had been crossed. Like the old saying goes "All is fair in love and war" - the rules change when war is on the agenda. Weather it be on a deserted island or the middle east. Torture happens, in civilisation and the wild - So do we blame Sawyer for Sayids actions, or Charlie? No - I would blame the situation, Sayid thought 'his people' were at war. You have to take the initiative during war - and who better than an ex Iraqi soldier?

Also I don't think Sayid ever doubted himself;

"Jack asked me how I knew -- knew for sure that this man was lying. How I knew for sure that he was one of them -- one of the Others. I know because I feel no guilt for what I did to him. But there is no way I can ever explain that to Jack, or even Locke, because both of them have forgotten. "

I don't understand how he knows - but he did. And he was right.

Also, this could be looked at in comparison to what happened with Sawyer [Shannon involved again] but Sayid DID feel guilt that time, not this time...

I know it can sound a weak argument. But like Sayid said 'They can take any of us at any time' - I think that is cause enough...

I totally disagree on that - if Shan was still alive i really doubt he wouldve tortured Henry. After he tortured Sawyer he was very badly shook up..it wouldve taken something like a death of a loved one to make him revert back to his old ways again. imo.

Yes, Sun was attacked but the thing is -Sayid didnt beat him up because of Sun's attack, he had probably even forgotten about it. He was doing it for purely selfish reasons..it was because of Shannon..not once did Sayid mention Sun, Scott or anyone else.

I disagree with your stance on war in this context. Henry was a lone man..Sayid wasnt torturing him to extract information - Sayid was torturing him in order to make him say what he wanted to here. He didnt care whether HG was guilty or not..he just needed someone to blame..and he merely got lucky in his suspicion that he was an other. Tell me, what strategic or tactical advantage did Sayid 'the Soldier [apparently]' Jarrah, extract from HG? Nothing..absolutely nothing. It was Ana and her diplomatic technique that got some answers from him. This imo prooves that sadistically torturing a man gets you nowhere..especially when that torturer is emotionally unstable. :P

Sorry - i didnt mean that Sayid doubted that Henry was an other..what i meant was that if he hadnt had the blinkers on then it would have been obvious that there was a major element of doubt there. [Until LD] It was never certain that HG was an Other..there was never any major evidence that suggested he was one of them...only in Sayids mind. He ignored the uncertainly that existed in this situation and chose to take out his anger on the poor man. I wonder..if HG hadnt come along at that time what would Said have done? ..beat Locke into a pulp for pressing the button perhaps..or how about go back for 'part II' with Sawyer for calling people sweetcheeks all the time? I just think Sayid was loking for a fight regardless of HG's appearance.

See..Sayid didnt 'know'..her never 'knew' that HG was a fraud..he merely made himself believe. Maybe his instinct told him so but that still doesnt mean that he knew. He was driven by lose and heartache and this e helped him to 'know' [in his mind]. He was lucky because he could just as easily have been wrong. Some might argue that Ana was wrong with regards to Nathen, for example.

I also disagree with what you said about Sayid having good reason to do what he did merely because a threat existed. That just cannot work..just because someone might do something..doesnt mean they are going to! It's not like Sayid had just arrived on the island and had no manpower or resources [like Ana and the tailes when they got 'attacked']. Sayid had loads of resources and even had an interrogation room instead of a pit. Sayid had no reason to do what he did to Henry imo. And the fact that he ended up being right..doesnt mean he wasright to do what he did.

[Kiowa Warrior]

Originally Posted by KoRevo

I dont agree with how he tortured Henry..he did it pre-Lockdown and at a time when Henry was very convincing. In the real world Sayid wouldnt be allowed to get away with that..it's just wrong. How can he beat someone to a pulp when he has no evidence. Ki, you know the law better than I do, so if theres no firm evidence to convict someone then surely that doesnt mean you can apply mere suspicion in order to attribute blame? Imagine if Sayid did that in the real world..he'd be sent down for a very long time surely? Also we have to surely bear in mind that Sayid and his peopel were in no great danger from Henry..unlike the tailies in TO48D, the losties had plently of protection and man power.

Yes Henry was very convincing, which was why Sayid felt it necessary to test that conviction. I absolutely don't agree with what Sayid did, but I can understand why he did it, if that makes any sense? lol I'm trying to explain what I think is his reasons for doing so and am not defending him, but I'm probably not making a very good job of it!

And you're exactly right: in the real world no way would Sayid be allowed to get away with waht he did. But they aren't in the real world, and the rules, laws and socially and morally acceptable guidelines for behaviour are, imo, eroding away...or are at the very least not as strong as they would be outside of the island. And so, coupled with grief and rage and no visible structure of law, order or social condemnation to deter him, Sayid did what was in his nature and tortured someone.
And you're right about the law: for a criminal conviction the jury must believe that the defendant committed the crime 'beyond reasonable doubt.' And the jury usually only believes this based on hard evidence. If Sayid tortured someone in the real world then it's likely that he would face a charge of 'GBH with intent,' which is just as serious as a muder charge.

Originally Posted by KoRevo

Just because Sayid did what he thought right at the time doesnt make it any easier for me to deal with. In fact..did Sayid even think he was doing the right thing at the time? I would doubt this since he was clearly on a revenge mission..

No it doesn't make it any easier for me either, but I do believe that Sayid thought he was doing what was right and helping the group...only he also saw it as the perfect opportunity to use Henry as a release for his anger and grief, which is just not on

[E Pluribus Unum]

And you're exactly right: in the real world no way would Sayid be allowed to get away with waht he did. But they aren't in the real world, and the rules, laws and socially and morally acceptable guidelines for behaviour are, imo, eroding away...or are at the very least not as strong as they would be outside of the island. And so, coupled with grief and rage and no visible structure of law, order or social condemnation to deter him, Sayid did what was in his nature and tortured someone.

I agree, but also think it's all irrelevant. During war if you shoot someone and they die. Are you charged with murder (now I realise no-one [directly] died here) but aren't the same rules applied. Isn't interrogation part of war, sure legally - the US [for example] would say they never hurt enemies for information but surely we'd know they're lying? Right?

I'm also not condoning torture, it's wrong. However, within these circumstances, the rules are bent.

I absolutely don't agree with what Sayid did, but I can understand why he did it, if that makes any sense?

This is also my point of view - but I dunno if I'm doing well either lol