Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Decker on March 14, 2008, 08:16:08 AM
-
"George W. Bush made history on March 8, when he became the first American President to use the veto power to preserve the right to torture."
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080331/cole
"The bill would take away one of the most valuable tools on the war on terror, the CIA program to detain and question key terrorist leaders and operatives," deputy White House press secretary Tony Fratto said Friday.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/07/national/main3919118.shtml
Thank you, El Presidente, for championing torture of untried suspects, detainees and prisoners. Torture is inhuman. Torture without trial is right out of the Fascist/dictatorial playbook.
Let's call a spade a spade. Bush is a dictorial fascist.
You know, I do not believe that torture is something that issues from our national traditions or our history.
Does everybody see what kind of human a being Bush is?
Is that apparent, or are there any apologists left? Besides John McCain?
http://www.wtopnews.com/?nid=213&sid=1311077
-
What do mean Deck?
He's doing what no pacifist liberal is willing to do to get the job done. We should be thankful for great, God appointed, leaders like George Bush becuase would have been overrun by AQ without him and our freedoms would be a distant memory.
And what do we care anyway? If we are law abiding citizens no matter how many rights are taken away or how the soul of the United States of America has changed from noble virtues to ruthless warriors of right, what do we have to worry about?
8) >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
-
What do mean Deck?
He's doing what no pacifist liberal is willing to do to get the job done. We should be thankful for great, God appointed, leaders like George Bush becuase would have been overrun by AQ without him and our freedoms would be a distant memory.
And what do we care anyway? If we are law abiding citizens no matter how many rights are taken away or how the soul of the United States of America has changed from noble virtues to ruthless warriors of right, what do we have to worry about?
8) >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
That's beautifully stated. hahaha
I guess I better just shut up and stop picking at the president....he'll never heal otherwise.
-
On the bright side, you only have about ten months to continue the extreme Bush hatred. Then you can pick on President McCain. :)
-
On the bright side, you only have about ten months to continue the extreme Bush hatred. Then you can pick on President McCain. :)
You mean you don't hate Bush for making our country one that practices torture?
-
You mean you don't hate Bush for making our country one that practices torture?
No I don't hate Bush for being such a strong leader, particularly since 911. I listened to him giving a speech this morning. He'll obviously never be confused with MLK (speaking wise), but he is still a man of conviction. Speaks his mind. Does what he believes is right. And . . . he agrees with Coach that his highest priority is protecting the American people (he said it again this morning).
And on that "torture" stuff, if this wasn't a partisan issue, Congress would simply override his veto.
-
No I don't hate Bush for being such a strong leader, particularly since 911.
I didn't ask you about his allegedly strong leadership. Hitler was a strong leader. I listened to him giving a speech this morning. He'll obviously never be confused with MLK (speaking wise), but he is still a man of conviction. Speaks his mind. Does what he believes is right. And . . . he agrees with Coach that his highest priority is protecting the American people (he said it again this morning).
Hitler was a strong man of conviction as well--he was convinced his way was right.
And on that "torture" stuff, if this wasn't a partisan issue, Congress would simply override his veto.
Everyone else in the free world considers waterboarding torture. You don't? So by your moral system, if Congress doesn't override a veto, the issue must be A-ok. Do you know how many votes are required to override a presidential veto? 2/3 majority.
The Dems don't have the votes and the rubberstamp republicans are just as morally bankrupt as the President.
-
I didn't ask you about his allegedly strong leadership. Hitler was a strong leader. Hitler was a strong man of conviction as well--he was convinced his way was right.
Everyone else in the free world considers waterboarding torture. You don't? So by your moral system, if Congress doesn't override a veto, the issue must be A-ok. Do you know how many votes are required to override a presidential veto? 2/3 majority.
The Dems don't have the votes and the rubberstamp republicans are just as morally bankrupt as the President.
You asked me a loaded question and I gave you my answer.
Mentioning Hitler in the same sentence with the president of the United States is beyond absurd. Won't even address that one.
Apparently, everyone in the free world does not consider waterboarding torture, because a significant number of our legislators and, more importantly, people involved in the defense of this country, don't consider it torture.
This is just one of many issues where Democrats have gotten nowhere with their partisan agenda.
-
You asked me a loaded question and I gave you my answer.
You accused me, in your backhanded way, of hating the president. I hate him today b/c he is trying to make the USA into a country that practices torture.
Do you agree with the president, that the USA should torture untried detainees in the war on terror?
Do take your time.
Mentioning Hitler in the same sentence with the president of the United States is beyond absurd. Won't even address that one.
Where did I mention Bush and Hitler in the same sentence? I was merely pointing out that your criteria of support for the president can easily be applied to Hitler's supporters as well.
Why do I do that? B/c you avoid answering the question regarding your stance on torture.
Apparently, everyone in the free world does not consider waterboarding torture, because a significant number of our legislators and, more importantly, people involved in the defense of this country, don't consider it torture.
Oh boy, I forgot about them. If you agree with them on torture, then you also agree with the mafia, the Nazis, the Communists, South American death squads and George W. Bush.
That's some select company you keep my friend.
This is just one of many issues where Democrats have gotten nowhere with their partisan agenda.
Wow. Keeping the US from using Torture is just a partisan agenda.
I believe every issue is partisan.
But this is humanitarian and goes to our core national character.
Whom would Jesus Christ torture?
-
You accused me, in your backhanded way, of hating the president. I hate him today b/c he is trying to make the USA into a country that practices torture.
Do you agree with the president, that the USA should torture untried detainees in the war on terror?
Do take your time.
Where did I mention Bush and Hitler in the same sentence? I was merely pointing out that your criteria of support for the president can easily be applied to Hitler's supporters as well.
Why do I do that? B/c you avoid answering the question regarding your stance on torture.
Oh boy, I forgot about them. If you agree with them on torture, then you also agree with the mafia, the Nazis, the Communists, South American death squads and George W. Bush.
That's some select company you keep my friend.
Wow. Keeping the US from using Torture is just a partisan agenda.
I believe every issue is partisan.
But this is humanitarian and goes to our core national character.
Whom would Jesus Christ torture?
lol . . . So I made a backhanded accusation that you hate the president and in the same sentence you say "I hate him today . . . ." Okaaaay.
I believe in the Geneva Convention and I believe in our Rules of Engagement. "Torture" isn't permitted under either one. And terrorists don’t appear to fall under the Geneva Convention. Regarding terrorists, I leave the appropriate methods in the hands of people with more information than me. If our military and defense folks believe certain practices are torture and should be banned, then the legislature should take action. Bipartisan action. If the folks on the ground believe it is a legitimate, helpful tool that will help save American lives, then I have no problem with it.
What I will not do is lose any sleep over whether we pour water over the face of someone trying to kill Americans. I'm not convinced waterboarding is torture. It apparently doesn't cause any physical injury and/or permanent damage. If I cared enough, I'd go do some homework. But this is nothing more than an issue being used by Democrats to try and score cheap political points.
And Jesus would tell you to hate the sin and love the sinner. In other words, stop hating on the president. :)
-
lol . . . So I made a backhanded accusation that you hate the president and in the same sentence you say "I hate him today . . . ." Okaaaay.
You were attempting to avoid the question by rephrasing it. You do that sometimes. I answered your question to show you that the object of my hatred for Bush stems from his inhumane advocacy of torture.
I believe in the Geneva Convention and I believe in our Rules of Engagement. "Torture" isn't permitted under either one. And terrorists don’t appear to fall under the Geneva Convention. Regarding terrorists, I leave the appropriate methods in the hands of people with more information than me. If our military and defense folks believe certain practices are torture and should be banned, then the legislature should take action. Bipartisan action. If the folks on the ground believe it is a legitimate, helpful tool that will help save American lives, then I have no problem with it.
Terrorists do fall under the Geneva Convention. Bush's Military Act of 2006 changed that.
This vetoed legislation isn't about our military. Our military cannot torture, period. This is about the CIA's ability to use torture.
What I will not do is lose any sleep over whether we pour water over the face of someone trying to kill Americans. I'm not convinced waterboarding is torture. It apparently doesn't cause any physical injury and/or permanent damage. If I cared enough, I'd go do some homework. But this is nothing more than an issue being used by Democrats to try and score cheap political points.
So now you are an expert on torture?
How do you know the detainees are trying to kill americans?
They haven't been tried in a court yet. They are just detainees.
Our CIA is good. But it's not perfect. They may have the wrong man.
Aside from your deplorable acceptance of torture as a valid interrogation technique, don't you think that torturing innocent people is a little bit counter to the values of America?
Just a little bit?
-
You were attempting to avoid the question by rephrasing it. You do that sometimes. I answered your question to show you that the object of my hatred for Bush stems from his inhumane advocacy of torture.
Terrorists do fall under the Geneva Convention. Bush's Military Act of 2006 changed that.
This vetoed legislation isn't about our military. Our military cannot torture, period. This is about the CIA's ability to use torture.
So now you are an expert on torture?
How do you know the detainees are trying to kill americans?
They haven't been tried in a court yet. They are just detainees.
Our CIA is good. But it's not perfect. They may have the wrong man.
Aside from your deplorable acceptance of torture as a valid interrogation technique, don't you think that torturing innocent people is a little bit counter to the values of America?
Just a little bit?
You asked me a question based on a false premise. You do that sometimes.
What specific provision of the Geneva Convention covers terrorists?
Never claimed to be an expert on torture (an example of a question with a false premise).
I guess it's possible suspected terrorists are simply interested in selling girl scout cookies, but I doubt that's the case. I don't know for certain if any suspected terrorist is trying to kill Americans, but that doesn't mean we don't arrest and interrogate them.
I don't support torture. For the most part. I'm not convinced waterboarding is torture.
If you ask me whether we have a suspected terrorist in custody and whether "torturing" him could save American lives, I'm not sure how I'd answer that one. This is a different era. We're dealing with people willing to commit suicide when killing Americans. I'm willing to defer to folks with more knowledge than me about what interrogation techniques are most effective and appropriate. I’m far more concerned about the safety of our citizens than some nut trying to blow himself and other innocents to bits.
-
You asked me a question based on a false premise. You do that sometimes.
You are good at that. You make an 'innocent' statement, much in the style of our president, that I have "extreme Bush hatred". Implicit in that loaded sentence are two things: 1. that extreme hatred is irrational hatred of Bush with no object and 2. Me, the hater, is hating ONLY b/c I have an axe to grind for other reasons, i.e., he's a republican.
You do that all the time and I don't mind. But I do mind when it comes to something as debasing and, let's face it, monstrous, as torture.
What specific provision of the Geneva Convention covers terrorists?
The same specific part of the Geneva convention pre-empted by the Military Commissions Act of 2006.
Never claimed to be an expert on torture (an example of a question with a false premise) "Torture" isn't permitted under either one."
That's pretty impressive tap dancing. I mean you still haven't given me an answer as to whether you stand in league with the Nazis, the Mafia, death squads, the republican party and Pres. Bush over the US's use of torture. Do you or don't you?
You say that you defer to the judgment of those in the field, but that's a cop out. Then in the quote above you put the word torture in quotes as if you know what torture is and what it is not. That's why I was concerned that you might think of yourself as possessing some sort of knowledge about torture.
I guess it's possible suspected terrorists are simply interested in selling girl scout cookies, but I doubt that's the case. I don't know for certain if any suspected terrorist is trying to kill Americans, but that doesn't mean we don't arrest and interrogate them.
Maybe they are selling cookies. We don't know. We haven't tried them in a court of law. The US makes sweeps into foreign neighborhoods and people are picked up on hearsay accusations.
I don't support torture. For the most part. I'm not convinced waterboarding is torture.
"In 1947, the United States prosecuted a Japanese military officer, Yukio Asano, for carrying out a form of waterboarding on a U.S. civilian during World War II. Yukio Asano received a sentence of 15 years of hard labor."
"the U.S. Department of State formally recognized "submersion of the head in water" as torture in its examination of Tunisia's poor human rights record,"
"both under the War Crimes Act and international law, violators of the laws of war are criminally liable under the command responsibility, and they could still be prosecuted for war crimes"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterboarding#United_States
Are you absolutely sure, Beach Bum, that water boarding is not torture?
If you ask me whether we have a suspected terrorist in custody and whether "torturing" him could save American lives, I'm not sure how I'd answer that one. This is a different era. We're dealing with people willing to commit suicide when killing Americans. I'm willing to defer to folks with more knowledge than me about what interrogation techniques are most effective and appropriate. I’m far more concerned about the safety of our citizens than some nut trying to blow himself and other innocents to bits.
Sorry, we are not in a different era regarding American humanity. The japanese used suicide bombers against us. You've never heard of terrorist tactics used before 9/11/2001?
Stop deferring to other people for answers to this question of torture. Please use your own judgment. You do not have to be an expert on torture to know that torture is wrong. When you substitute President Bush's conclusions on what is torture, you are doing yourself a horrible disservice.
Humanity means nothing to this man. He's wrongfully killed tens of thousands of people and advocates torture.
And you want to substitute your judgment with that monster's views?
-
You are good at that. You make an 'innocent' statement, much in the style of our president, that I have "extreme Bush hatred". Implicit in that loaded sentence are two things: 1. that extreme hatred is irrational hatred of Bush with no object and 2. Me, the hater, is hating ONLY b/c I have an axe to grind for other reasons, i.e., he's a republican.
You do that all the time and I don't mind. But I do mind when it comes to something as debasing and, let's face it, monstrous, as torture.
The same specific part of the Geneva convention pre-empted by the Military Commissions Act of 2006.
That's pretty impressive tap dancing. I mean you still haven't given me an answer as to whether you stand in league with the Nazis, the Mafia, death squads, the republican party and Pres. Bush over the US's use of torture. Do you or don't you?
You say that you defer to the judgment of those in the field, but that's a cop out. Then in the quote above you put the word torture in quotes as if you know what torture is and what it is not. That's why I was concerned that you might think of yourself as possessing some sort of knowledge about torture.
Maybe they are selling cookies. We don't know. We haven't tried them in a court of law. The US makes sweeps into foreign neighborhoods and people are picked up on hearsay accusations.
"In 1947, the United States prosecuted a Japanese military officer, Yukio Asano, for carrying out a form of waterboarding on a U.S. civilian during World War II. Yukio Asano received a sentence of 15 years of hard labor."
"the U.S. Department of State formally recognized "submersion of the head in water" as torture in its examination of Tunisia's poor human rights record,"
"both under the War Crimes Act and international law, violators of the laws of war are criminally liable under the command responsibility, and they could still be prosecuted for war crimes"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterboarding#United_States
Are you absolutely sure, Beach Bum, that water boarding is not torture?
Sorry, we are not in a different era regarding American humanity. The japanese used suicide bombers against us. You've never heard of terrorist tactics used before 9/11/2001?
Stop deferring to other people for answers to this question of torture. Please use your own judgment. You do not have to be an expert on torture to know that torture is wrong. When you substitute President Bush's conclusions on what is torture, you are doing yourself a horrible disservice.
Humanity means nothing to this man. He's wrongfully killed tens of thousands of people and advocates torture.
And you want to substitute your judgment with that monster's views?
Dude. I made a "backhanded" comment about you hating the president and you admit you hate the president. I didn't say anything about whether your hatred is irrational. If you want to know if I'm trying to imply something, just ask.
Regarding the Geneva Convention, you said "Terrorists do fall under the Geneva Convention." Prove it. What specific provision?
If you don't want me rephrasing questions, then don't ask loaded questions, like "do you stand in league with the Nazis, the Mafia, death squads, the republican party and Pres. Bush over the US's use of torture." lol. . . . C'mon dude. Just another question based on a false premise. Bush and the Republican Party are not Nazis, the Mafia, death squads, etc. So your question is trying to force me to agree with you that Bush/Republicans = Nazis, the Mafia, etc. That's absurd. I like exchanges with you, but what I prefer not to do is start parsing stuff like this. That's why I didn't even address your first Hitler comparison.
I have previously admitted that my view on waterboarding is sort of all over the place. The best answer I can give you is it doesn't sound like torture to me. Sorry if you that isn't good enough.
This isn't some black and white issue. It's nothing like decapitations, burnings, maiming, etc. (you know, real torture). And some people believe it works. I ain't getting worked up over this. I do not view it in the same light as the other items I mentioned, so I don't view the practice, if it is used against suspected terrorists, as some barbarian act.
As I said, I'm more concerned about the safety of our people than some suspected terrorist.
-
Dude. I made a "backhanded" comment about you hating the president and you admit you hate the president. I didn't say anything about whether your hatred is irrational. If you want to know if I'm trying to imply something, just ask.
Forgive me but language is loaded and precision sought for.
Regarding the Geneva Convention, you said "Terrorists do fall under the Geneva Convention." Prove it. What specific provision?
You don't remember the Supreme Court ruling? "All US military detainees, including those at Guantanamo Bay, are to be treated in line with the minimum standards of the Geneva Conventions. The White House announced the shift in policy almost two weeks after the US Supreme Court ruled that the conventions applied to detainees." http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5169600.stm
The Military Commissions Act created military commissions to circumvent that 'problem'.
If you don't want me rephrasing questions, then don't ask loaded questions, like "do you stand in league with the Nazis, the Mafia, death squads, the republican party and Pres. Bush over the US's use of torture." lol. . . . C'mon dude. Just another question based on a false premise. Bush and the Republican Party are not Nazis, the Mafia, death squads, etc. So your question is trying to force me to agree with you that Bush/Republicans = Nazis, the Mafia, etc. That's absurd. I like exchanges with you, but what I prefer not to do is start parsing stuff like this. That's why I didn't even address your first Hitler comparison.
What I do is different than what you do. I point out a fact that torture is accepted amongst the most evil of nations and men. I also ask if you are standing with these evil factions on torture. We are what we do, right?
All you do with your statement about my supposed 'extreme hatred' of Bush is use innuendo to give the appearance that my criticisms are unhinged or not substantive at the least.
I have previously admitted that my view on waterboarding is sort of all over the place. The best answer I can give you is it doesn't sound like torture to me. Sorry if you that isn't good enough.
The anti-torture bill does not concern only waterboarding as the only form of torture permitted.
This isn't some black and white issue. It's nothing like decapitations, burnings, maiming, etc. (you know, real torture). And some people believe it works. I ain't getting worked up over this. I do not view it in the same light as the other items I mentioned, so I don't view the practice, if it is used against suspected terrorists, as some barbarian act.
This is absolutely a black and white issue hence the Nazi, death squad references.
Torture is torture. Either we become the worst mankind has to offer or we do not.
Either you are with me or you are against me.
-
You mean you don't hate Bush for making our country one that practices torture?
Oh pleaaaaaze ::)
-
Forgive me but language is loaded and precision sought for.
You don't remember the Supreme Court ruling? "All US military detainees, including those at Guantanamo Bay, are to be treated in line with the minimum standards of the Geneva Conventions. The White House announced the shift in policy almost two weeks after the US Supreme Court ruled that the conventions applied to detainees." http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5169600.stm
The Military Commissions Act created military commissions to circumvent that 'problem'.
What I do is different than what you do. I point out a fact that torture is accepted amongst the most evil of nations and men. I also ask if you are standing with these evil factions on torture. We are what we do, right?
All you do with your statement about my supposed 'extreme hatred' of Bush is use innuendo to give the appearance that my criticisms are unhinged or not substantive at the least.
The anti-torture bill does not concern only waterboarding as the only form of torture permitted.
This is absolutely a black and white issue hence the Nazi, death squad references.
Torture is torture. Either we become the worst mankind has to offer or we do not.
Either you are with me or you are against me.
Thanks for the link. So the executive branch believed the Geneva Convention didn't apply to suspected terrorists (which I agree with), the supremes voted 5-3 that it does apply, and the legislature exempted suspected terrorists under the Military Commissions Act. So, as of today, it doesn't apply. The system works again. :)
You believe waterboarding is torture. I don't really think it is. Because I don't equate waterboarding with torture, the Nazi et al. comparisons don't work. If we were running around cutting off limbs and murdering people I could see a parallel, but that's not what we do. We put suspected terrorists in a taxpayer-funded prison, feed them 4000 calorie a day diets, and let them use our taxpayer funded legal system. Torture American style.
And yes, torture is torture, but if we don't agree on whether a certain practice is torture then it is indeed a gray area (at least for me).
-
not as much as i despise him for blowing up the US economy. >:(
can you say 5.00 gasoline ?
brace yourself..........it's coming.
NT
(http://www.jaguarenterprises.net/images/em/dollar_eyes.gif)
Ya, ...isn't it great!
I'm not only bracing myself, ...I'm strategically positioning myself for the inevitable!
When the winds start blowing, you better make sure you've got your sails set correctly.
Somethings are unavoidable. Sometimes you just have to learn how to "dance in the rain". 8)
-
Thanks for the link. So the executive branch believed the Geneva Convention didn't apply to suspected terrorists (which I agree with), the supremes voted 5-3 that it does apply, and the legislature exempted suspected terrorists under the Military Commissions Act. So, as of today, it doesn't apply. The system works again. :)
You believe waterboarding is torture. I don't really think it is. Because I don't equate waterboarding with torture, the Nazi et al. comparisons don't work. If we were running around cutting off limbs and murdering people I could see a parallel, but that's not what we do. We put suspected terrorists in a taxpayer-funded prison, feed them 4000 calorie a day diets, and let them use our taxpayer funded legal system. Torture American style.
And yes, torture is torture, but if we don't agree on whether a certain practice is torture then it is indeed a gray area (at least for me).
You can't possibly believe this.
-
Without torture we wouldn't have Easter
-
You can't possibly believe this.
High-Calorie Diet Fattens Gitmo Inmates
By MICHAEL MELIA
The Associated Press
Tuesday, October 3, 2006; 11:08 PM
SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico -- A high-calorie diet combined with life in the cell block _ almost around the clock in some cases _ is making detainees at Guantanamo Bay fat.
Meals totaling a whopping 4,200 calories per day are brought to their cells, well above the 2,000 to 3,000 calories recommended for weight maintenance by U.S. government dietary guidelines. And some inmates are eating everything on the menu.
. . . .
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/03/AR2006100300665.html
-
High-Calorie Diet Fattens Gitmo Inmates
By MICHAEL MELIA
The Associated Press
Tuesday, October 3, 2006; 11:08 PM
SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico -- A high-calorie diet combined with life in the cell block _ almost around the clock in some cases _ is making detainees at Guantanamo Bay fat.
Meals totaling a whopping 4,200 calories per day are brought to their cells, well above the 2,000 to 3,000 calories recommended for weight maintenance by U.S. government dietary guidelines. And some inmates are eating everything on the menu.
. . . .
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/03/AR2006100300665.html
they should start feeding them McDonalds everyday. If they don't die in a month they'll at least think like westerners.
-
they should start feeding them McDonalds everyday. If they don't die in a month they'll at least think like westerners.
They're doing a lot better than McDonalds. From the article:
The meals include meats prepared according to Islamic guidelines, along with fresh bread, vegetables and yogurt. With nearly all detainees fasting in the daytime during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, authorities have arranged for a post-sunset meal and a midnight meal. Traditional desserts and honey also are served during the Ramadan observances.
-
They're doing a lot better than McDonalds. From the article:
The meals include meats prepared according to Islamic guidelines, along with fresh bread, vegetables and yogurt. With nearly all detainees fasting in the daytime during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, authorities have arranged for a post-sunset meal and a midnight meal. Traditional desserts and honey also are served during the Ramadan observances.
lol, The point i was implying was that McDonalds was torturous and if they survived it would rehabilitate them.
-
lol, The point i was implying was that McDonalds was torturous and if they survived it would rehabilitate them.
Ah so. :)
-
High-Calorie Diet Fattens Gitmo Inmates
By MICHAEL MELIA
The Associated Press
Tuesday, October 3, 2006; 11:08 PM
SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico -- A high-calorie diet combined with life in the cell block _ almost around the clock in some cases _ is making detainees at Guantanamo Bay fat.
Meals totaling a whopping 4,200 calories per day are brought to their cells, well above the 2,000 to 3,000 calories recommended for weight maintenance by U.S. government dietary guidelines. And some inmates are eating everything on the menu.
. . . .
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/03/AR2006100300665.html
So do they feed them this great diet before or after they put them in stress postions for hours at a time? Or maybe they feed them this diet while they are getting waterboarded to help the food go down.
-
Thanks for the link. So the executive branch believed the Geneva Convention didn't apply to suspected terrorists (which I agree with), the supremes voted 5-3 that it does apply, and the legislature exempted suspected terrorists under the Military Commissions Act. So, as of today, it doesn't apply. The system works again. :)
You believe waterboarding is torture. I don't really think it is. Because I don't equate waterboarding with torture, the Nazi et al. comparisons don't work. If we were running around cutting off limbs and murdering people I could see a parallel, but that's not what we do. We put suspected terrorists in a taxpayer-funded prison, feed them 4000 calorie a day diets, and let them use our taxpayer funded legal system. Torture American style.
And yes, torture is torture, but if we don't agree on whether a certain practice is torture then it is indeed a gray area (at least for me).
After WWII, the United States prosecuted Japanese military men for torture for the waterboarding of american prisoners.
Do you think that the torture technique of waterboarding has improved with age?
Do you think that the Japanese war criminals were wrongly punished by the US b/c waterboard was mistakenly seen as torture back then?
The mere fact that we provide 4000 calorie meals to people we've deprived of their freedom without a trial is pointless. I bet that 4000 calorie meal does not sit well when the untried detainee is struggling for his/her last breath during a waterboarding session...or when he/she is being told that the screams from the next room is your child being raped b/c you are not cooperating.
Marty Lederman noted that the CIA can currently use “stress positions, hypothermia, threats to the detainee and his family, severe sleep deprivation, and severe sensory deprivation.”
Funny, McCain called waterboarding a “terrible and odious practice” that “should never be condoned in the U.S.”
-
If i was in a Jap prison and all they did was water board me I'd be giddy. In that culture, once u surrender ur nothing. When we got the odd jap to surrender, they sang like canaries because they didn't matter to their own people anymore.
Marty Lederman noted that the CIA can currently use “stress positions, hypothermia, threats to the detainee and his family, severe sleep deprivation, and severe sensory deprivation.”
The KGB found some of this much more effective then shit beating somebody. With Sense Dep u get a drug like reaction without drugs. Mccain got the dog snot kicked out of him so i don't blame him. This came up in the recent work I did in New York.
"Official DOD policy prohibits waterboarding and does not condone that behavior. The US military treats all prisoners with the dignity and respect that they deserve as well as upholds the letter and spirit of both the Hague and Geneva conventions".
The CG liked it. ;)
-
After WWII, the United States prosecuted Japanese military men for torture for the waterboarding of american prisoners.
Do you think that the torture technique of waterboarding has improved with age?
Do you think that the Japanese war criminals were wrongly punished by the US b/c waterboard was mistakenly seen as torture back then?
The mere fact that we provide 4000 calorie meals to people we've deprived of their freedom without a trial is pointless. I bet that 4000 calorie meal does not sit well when the untried detainee is struggling for his/her last breath during a waterboarding session...or when he/she is being told that the screams from the next room is your child being raped b/c you are not cooperating.
Marty Lederman noted that the CIA can currently use “stress positions, hypothermia, threats to the detainee and his family, severe sleep deprivation, and severe sensory deprivation.”
Funny, McCain called waterboarding a “terrible and odious practice” that “should never be condoned in the U.S.”
Oh my heart is bleeding over the fatties sitting in Guantanamo who eat better than many Americans. Boo freakin hoo.
I don't know the details of the prosecution of the Japanese and waterboarding, so I don't have an opinion. Maybe our policies changed. Not unusual. We used to execute people by hangings and firing squads. Also, American soldiers are clearly covered by the Geneva Convention, while terrorists are not. If I had the time (and desire) to read up on it, I'm sure I could find out--to quote Paul Harvey--"the rest of the story."
-
If America did prosecute and punish Japanese for water boarding then we are no different than spitzer. And the old adage does work when you say terrorist are not covered by the Geneva Convention, becuase would it be if we condone water boarding on ordinary criminals?
-
Oh my heart is bleeding over the fatties sitting in Guantanamo who eat better than many Americans. Boo freakin hoo.
Sorry for my tone, but goddam it Beach Bum we are the good guys. We don't waterboard, we don't tell untried detainees that we are sexually torturing their children until they spill the beans. That's about as unamerican as it gets and you're just fine with it?
I don't know the details of the prosecution of the Japanese and waterboarding, so I don't have an opinion. Maybe our policies changed. Not unusual. ....
We still do execute people by hanging and firing squads.
Our policies are informed by our sense of morality.
Apparently our morality has changed. That's not unusual considering the caliber of men occupying the White House.
-
Sorry for my tone, but goddam it Beach Bum we are the good guys. We don't waterboard, we don't tell untried detainees that we are sexually torturing their children until they spill the beans. That's about as unamerican as it gets and you're just fine with it?
We still do execute people by hanging and firing squads.
Our policies are informed by our sense of morality.
Apparently our morality has changed. That's not unusual considering the caliber of men occupying the White House.
I don't have a problem with your tone so need to apologize (but thanks).
Decker I think we agree that torture is abhorrent. We don't agree on whether waterboarding is torture.
I also agree that we are the good guys. If we are engaging in real torture (not turning up the AC and taking away a blanket), then I share your outrage. I'm not convinced that this is our policy or that it is currently happening.
When was the last time we executed people by firing squad and/or hanging? We're on the verge of deeming execution by lethal injection "cruel and unusual punishment." :-\
-
I don't have a problem with your tone so need to apologize (but thanks).
Decker I think we agree that torture is abhorrent. We don't agree on whether waterboarding is torture.
I also agree that we are the good guys. If we are engaging in real torture (not turning up the AC and taking away a blanket), then I share your outrage. I'm not convinced that this is our policy or that it is currently happening.
When was the last time we executed people by firing squad and/or hanging? We're on the verge of deeming execution by lethal injection "cruel and unusual punishment." :-\
Here's what happened at Abu Grhaib and this is what Bush is preserving for our CIA:
Urinating on detainees
Jumping on detainee's leg (a limb already wounded by gunfire) with such force that it could not thereafter heal properly
Continuing by pounding detainee's wounded leg with collapsible metal baton
Pouring phosphoric acid on detainees
Sodomization of detainees with a baton
Tying ropes to the detainees' legs or penises and dragging them across the floor.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_prisoner_abuse#Hersh_New_Yorker_article
And let's not forget the psychology of making a detainee think that US soldiers are going family style on his little girl in the next room.
I know Oklahoma still has firing squads. I think Idaho or Iowa does too.
-
If America did prosecute and punish Japanese for water boarding then we are no different than spitzer. And the old adage does work when you say terrorist are not covered by the Geneva Convention, becuase would it be if we condone water boarding on ordinary criminals?
I don't think we should compare terrorists and American citizens. They don't (and shouldn't) have all of the rights we give to our own people.
-
Here's what happened at Abu Grhaib and this is what Bush is preserving for our CIA:
Urinating on detainees
Jumping on detainee's leg (a limb already wounded by gunfire) with such force that it could not thereafter heal properly
Continuing by pounding detainee's wounded leg with collapsible metal baton
Pouring phosphoric acid on detainees
Sodomization of detainees with a baton
Tying ropes to the detainees' legs or penises and dragging them across the floor.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_prisoner_abuse#Hersh_New_Yorker_article
And let's not forget the psychology of making a detainee think that US soldiers are going family style on his little girl in the next room.
I know Oklahoma still has firing squads. I think Idaho or Iowa does too.
Decker I'm surprised at you. The acts described in that link are not the policy of our military or our government. They are criminal acts. To say we are supporting that stuff is really misleading.
-
I don't think we should compare terrorists and American citizens. They don't (and shouldn't) have all of the rights we give to our own people.
Yes, but we should afford the same basic rights as human beings. They may not get the benefits of being a US Citizen, but they do have certain unalienable rights as people, not to be punished with out due process.
-
Yes, but we should afford the same basic rights as human beings. They may not get the benefits of being a US Citizen, but they do have certain unalienable rights as people, not to be punished with out due process.
I completely agree.
Suspected terrorists are getting due process through military commissions.
-
Decker I'm surprised at you. The acts described in that link are not the policy of our military or our government. They are criminal acts. To say we are supporting that stuff is really misleading.
Those are criminal acts for our military...not the CIA.
-
So I wasn't misleading anyone. You were misstating what entity the current legislation covers.
-
Those are criminal acts for our military...not the CIA.
No they aren't. They are allegations of acts committed by individuals. Show me the policy of our government that authorizes and/or condones the stuff in the wiki link you provided. Also, try and reconcile your contention that is an official government policy with the express denunciations in the same link you provided, including this from Rumsfeld:
These events occurred on my watch. As secretary of defense, I am accountable for them. I take full responsibility. It is my obligation to evaluate what happened, to make sure those who have committed wrongdoing are brought to justice, and to make changes as needed to see that it doesn't happen again. I feel terrible about what happened to these Iraqi detainees. They are human beings. They were in U.S. custody. Our country had an obligation to treat them right. We didn't do that. That was wrong. To those Iraqis who were mistreated by members of U.S. armed forces, I offer my deepest apology. It was un-American. And it was inconsistent with the values of our nation.
-
You said "Here's what happened at Abu Grhaib and this is what Bush is preserving for our CIA." That's absolutely misleading, because Bush condemned the stuff from your link.
-
No they aren't. They are allegations of acts committed by individuals. Show me the policy of our government that authorizes and/or condones the stuff in the wiki link you provided. Also, try and reconcile your contention that is an official government policy with the express denunciations in the same link you provided, including this from Rumsfeld:
These events occurred on my watch. As secretary of defense, I am accountable for them. I take full responsibility. It is my obligation to evaluate what happened, to make sure those who have committed wrongdoing are brought to justice, and to make changes as needed to see that it doesn't happen again. I feel terrible about what happened to these Iraqi detainees. They are human beings. They were in U.S. custody. Our country had an obligation to treat them right. We didn't do that. That was wrong. To those Iraqis who were mistreated by members of U.S. armed forces, I offer my deepest apology. It was un-American. And it was inconsistent with the values of our nation.
Again, is the CIA the US military?
-
You said "Here's what happened at Abu Grhaib and this is what Bush is preserving for our CIA." That's absolutely misleading, because Bush condemned the stuff from your link.
Well, if Bush said it, then I'm sold.
Again, the CIA is not the US Military.
http://abcnews.go.com/story?id=4128320
Showdown Over Destroyed CIA Tapes This Week
Will Congress Offer Immunity to Find Out What Really Happened to Alleged Torture Tapes?
-
Again, Beach Bum you defend the indefensible.
The Mafia handles torture like the CIA...destroy any evidence and have your boys on the inside side with you.
1. The Agency has encouraged its clients in the Third World to use torture.
2. It has provided the host country the names of the people who wound up as torture victims.
3. It has supplied torture equipment.
4. It has conducted classes in torture.
5. It has written torture manuals -- how-to books.
6. It has been present when torture has taken place, to observe and evaluate how well its students were doing.
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/CIATorture_WBlum.html
Extraordinary Rendition---the CIA has done that.
-
Again, is the CIA the US military?
What difference does that make? You're contending the U.S. government, or at a minimum the Bush Administration, supported/condoned the criminal acts in the link you provided: "Here's what happened at Abu Grhaib and this is what Bush is preserving for our CIA."
You stand by that statement? If so, it's grossly misleading, because you're saying Bush and the CIA were involved in and condoned the items in the link.
-
Again, Beach Bum you defend the indefensible.
The Mafia handles torture like the CIA...destroy any evidence and have your boys on the inside side with you.
1. The Agency has encouraged its clients in the Third World to use torture.
2. It has provided the host country the names of the people who wound up as torture victims.
3. It has supplied torture equipment.
4. It has conducted classes in torture.
5. It has written torture manuals -- how-to books.
6. It has been present when torture has taken place, to observe and evaluate how well its students were doing.
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/CIATorture_WBlum.html
Extraordinary Rendition---the CIA has done that.
I'm defending the position of those who know more about this than me that something like waterboarding shouldn't be taken off the table when dealing with suspected terrorists. What you're doing is trying to tie that to the Mafia, Nazis, real torture, etc. Sorry. Doesn't work.
Are you a Blum disciple?
Blum describes himself as a socialist and has supported Ralph Nader's presidential campaigns.
In early 2006 (see 19 January 2006 Osama bin Laden tape), Blum briefly became the subject of widespread media attention when Osama bin Laden issued a public statement in which he quoted Blum and recommended that all Americans read Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower.[1] In a May 22, 2006 article entitled, Come Out of the White House With Your Hands Up, Blum wrote, "Since the bin Laden recommendation, January 19, I have not been offered a single speaking engagement on any campus . . .This despite January-May normally being the most active period for me and other campus speakers."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Blum
-
Wow an entire thread where to guys disagree but don't hurl insults..must bea getbig first. I think the idiots at Abu Grahrib got out of hand...they were told to do or allowed to do some things but got carried away. Bush did not know what was going on...he does now but generally they don't let the head guys know exactly whats going on. It does not bother me because these are some truly horrible people. These aren't Germans or even Russians. I don't think physical torture is the best way to go anyway.
-
What difference does that make? You're contending the U.S. government, or at a minimum the Bush Administration, supported/condoned the criminal acts in the link you provided: "Here's what happened at Abu Grhaib and this is what Bush is preserving for our CIA."
You stand by that statement? If so, it's grossly misleading, because you're saying Bush and the CIA were involved in and condoned the items in the link.
The Military must adhere to restrictions against torture in the Military Field Manuals. The CIA is not bound in such a manner.
What about this?:
Why the Bush Administration Says the CIA Torture Tapes Were Deleted: According to CIA Director Michael Hayden, the tapes were deleted primarily to protect the identity of interrogators. Hayden denies that the tapes have any relevance to torture investigations, but it is worth noting that the Bush administration's official position is that waterboarding--the form of water torture Kiriakou stated was used during the interrogation--is not described as a form of torture by Bush administration officials.
Potential Legal Consequences of the CIA Torture Tapes: Because the tapes were deleted in violation of a federal court order, and may have shown criminally actionable acts, those involved in deleting them could be charged with obstruction of justice. The interrogators shown on the tapes could also be charged with violations of U.S. torture law, though this is less likely.
http://civilliberty.about.com/od/tortureandrendition/p/torture_tapes.htm
I can read Blum without feeling threatened by self-imposed thought police that he's a...gasp....socialist.
Have you ever read Marx? Are you a communist b/c of it?
Waterboarding as an interrogation technique has its roots in some of history's worst totalitarian nations, from Nazi Germany and the Spanish Inquisition to North Korea and Iraq. In the United States, the technique was first used five decades ago as a training tool to give U.S. troops a realistic sense of what they could expect if captured by the Soviet Union or the armies of Southeast Asia. The U.S. military has officially regarded the tactic as torture since the Spanish-American War.
In general, the technique involves strapping a prisoner to a board or other flat surface, and then raising his feet above the level of his head. A cloth is then placed over the subject's mouth and nose, and water is poured over his face to make the prisoner believe he is drowning.
U.S. officials knowledgeable about the CIA's use of the technique say it was used on three individuals -- Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks; Zayn Abidin Muhammed Hussein Abu Zubaida, a senior al-Qaeda member and Osama bin Laden associate captured in Pakistan in March 2002; and a third detainee who has not been publicly identified.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/08/AR2007120801664_pf.html
Again, I point out the obvious--You stand with the Nazis and the Commies in your view of the utility of Waterboarding.
-
Wow an entire thread where to guys disagree but don't hurl insults..must bea getbig first. I think the idiots at Abu Grahrib got out of hand...they were told to do or allowed to do some things but got carried away. Bush did not know what was going on...he does now but generally they don't let the head guys know exactly whats going on. It does not bother me because these are some truly horrible people. These aren't Germans or even Russians. I don't think physical torture is the best way to go anyway.
You're all douchebags.
Of course you tasked me to type that.
-
Have a good evening guys. I gotta go home and be sick for a while.
-
I completely agree.
Suspected terrorists are getting due process through military commissions.
Is our military also a sanctioned police force?
Getting due process through military commission makes them combatants and should have rights under the Geneva convention. If they aren't considered eligible then they should be prosecuted as criminals by local courts.
It's a sham and a way to legally torture them and do what you want with them.
That's why we've had problems with it from the media and have somewhat lost our souls as a just country in the process.
Or maybe a terrorist is something that deserves only minimal rights. He is neither a criminal or a soldier.
-
The Military must adhere to restrictions against torture in the Military Field Manuals. The CIA is not bound in such a manner.
What about this?:
Why the Bush Administration Says the CIA Torture Tapes Were Deleted: According to CIA Director Michael Hayden, the tapes were deleted primarily to protect the identity of interrogators. Hayden denies that the tapes have any relevance to torture investigations, but it is worth noting that the Bush administration's official position is that waterboarding--the form of water torture Kiriakou stated was used during the interrogation--is not described as a form of torture by Bush administration officials.
Potential Legal Consequences of the CIA Torture Tapes: Because the tapes were deleted in violation of a federal court order, and may have shown criminally actionable acts, those involved in deleting them could be charged with obstruction of justice. The interrogators shown on the tapes could also be charged with violations of U.S. torture law, though this is less likely.
http://civilliberty.about.com/od/tortureandrendition/p/torture_tapes.htm
I can read Blum without feeling threatened by self-imposed thought police that he's a...gasp....socialist.
Have you ever read Marx? Are you a communist b/c of it?
Waterboarding as an interrogation technique has its roots in some of history's worst totalitarian nations, from Nazi Germany and the Spanish Inquisition to North Korea and Iraq. In the United States, the technique was first used five decades ago as a training tool to give U.S. troops a realistic sense of what they could expect if captured by the Soviet Union or the armies of Southeast Asia. The U.S. military has officially regarded the tactic as torture since the Spanish-American War.
In general, the technique involves strapping a prisoner to a board or other flat surface, and then raising his feet above the level of his head. A cloth is then placed over the subject's mouth and nose, and water is poured over his face to make the prisoner believe he is drowning.
U.S. officials knowledgeable about the CIA's use of the technique say it was used on three individuals -- Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks; Zayn Abidin Muhammed Hussein Abu Zubaida, a senior al-Qaeda member and Osama bin Laden associate captured in Pakistan in March 2002; and a third detainee who has not been publicly identified.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/08/AR2007120801664_pf.html
Again, I point out the obvious--You stand with the Nazis and the Commies in your view of the utility of Waterboarding.
I thought the issue was waterboarding? Where do these alleged "torture tapes" fit in?
I'm not threatened by a socialist or someone who Bin Laden thinks highly enough to quote. I just wouldn't use that person as an unreferenced source as part of a discussion (at least not without qualification).
We're kinda going around in circles. Saying anyone "stands with" Nazis because the Nazis used waterboarding is ridiculous. No different than saying someone who supports capital punishment "stands with" Nazis because Nazis also used capital punishment.
This is barely a blip on the radar. Nothing more than a partisan non-issue.
-
Wow an entire thread where to guys disagree but don't hurl insults..must bea getbig first.
I think the idiots at Abu Grahrib got out of hand...
they were told to do or allowed to do some things but got carried away.
Bush did not know what was going on...he does now but generally they don't let the head guys know exactly whats going on. It does not bother me because these are some truly horrible people. These aren't Germans or even Russians.
I don't think physical torture is the best way to go anyway.
For the most part HH6, this is why i think you are a true conservative. You don't condone stupid shit in the name of your party, even though you stereotype liberals occasionally.
-
Is our military also a sanctioned police force?
Getting due process through military commission makes them combatants and should have rights under the Geneva convention. If they aren't considered eligible then they should be prosecuted as criminals by local courts.
It's a sham and a way to legally torture them and do what you want with them.
That's why we've had problems with it from the media and have somewhat lost our souls as a just country in the process.
Or maybe a terrorist is something that deserves only minimal rights. He is neither a criminal or a soldier.
Why does our military need to be a sanctioned police force?
Suspected terrorists don't fall under the Geneva Convention.
Military commissions are not a sham. They have a long history. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_tribunal
That's really all a suspected terrorist should get IMO. I would not give them carte blanche access to our court system at taxpayer expense. They still get their day in court.
-
Why does our military need to be a sanctioned police force?
Suspected terrorists don't fall under the Geneva Convention.
Military commissions are not a sham. They have a long history. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_tribunal
That's really all a suspected terrorist should get IMO. I would not give them carte blanche access to our court system at taxpayer expense. They still get their day in court.
I'm not saying they need to be. I'm saying they are either fighting a war or acting as a police force or both. either way when we take prisoners, if they don;t have rights under the GC and they don't have rights as citizens of another nations, we are effectively saying they are less than human. which with some is arguable, and with others is not. And then we torture them to boot.
BTW, I'm not suggesting they get tried in our civilian courts with our money, becuase they are getting tried in military courts with our money anyway.
And as far as finding the truth i wouldn't trust any military court as far as i could through it.
-
I'm not saying they need to be. I'm saying they are either fighting a war or acting as a police force or both. either way when we take prisoners, if they don;t have rights under the GC and they don't have rights as citizens of another nations, we are effectively saying they are less than human. which with some is arguable, and with others is not. And then we torture them to boot.
BTW, I'm not suggesting they get tried in our civilian courts with our money, becuase they are getting tried in military courts with our money anyway.
And as far as finding the truth i wouldn't trust any military court as far as i could through it.
I agree we shouldn't treat anyone as less than human.
The military justice system is actually pretty efficient. Much more efficient than the civilian side. They don't play around.
-
It would really be a shining American moment if the next President, from whichever party, would take office and completely outlaw waterboarding on Jan 20, 2009.
I don't care how you feel about it (some say it might technically not be torture, even though our admin considered it torture until 2001)...
If the Pres came in and told the world "We're not going to be playing in that gray area anymore"... it would be a great thing.
-
it would be a real shame if we poured water over one of these guys faces. even though they would receive no physical damage, it would be too mean and unfair.
http://www.conservativenewswarriors.com/nick-berg-video-photos-beheaded.html
-
it would be a real shame if we poured water over one of these guys faces. even though they would receive no physical damage, it would be too mean and unfair.
http://www.conservativenewswarriors.com/nick-berg-video-photos-beheaded.html
Really, why don't we just beat some of them to death? That's what they were trying to do to us right? It's only fair.
-
Really, why don't we just beat some of them to death? That's what they were trying to do to us right? It's only fair.
we arnt. were pouring water over their faces.
would you like them to say. ''hey mr terrorist, tell us were those pow's are or you wont get your cupcake after dinner''
-
we arnt. were pouring water over their faces.
would you like them to say. ''hey mr terrorist, tell us were those pow's are or you wont get your cupcake after dinner''
::)
-
we arnt. were pouring water over their faces.
would you like them to say. ''hey mr terrorist, tell us were those pow's are or you wont get your cupcake after dinner''
Fair enough.
Can you share some examples of cases where torture has saved our POWs?
Or is this just a made-up hypothetical (with real torture and imaginary results!)?
-
Fair enough.
Can you share some examples of cases where torture has saved our POWs?
Or is this just a made-up hypothetical (with real torture and imaginary results!)?
And don't think I'm defending bad guys... that analysis is very poor. I'm all for executing the bastards if they have it coming. I just don't want OUR troops getting tortured in return. Remember those 2 poor kidnapped troops who were tortured and cut up - in direct response to abu ghirab? They are two examples of how torturing enemies put our troops in more danger.
-
we arnt. were pouring water over their faces.
would you like them to say. ''hey mr terrorist, tell us were those pow's are or you wont get your cupcake after dinner''
No, what I'd like them to do is stick a read hot poker up their asses until they tell us what we want to know. But that's not what we are about, at least not the America i grew up learning about. I grew up learning that we were the "good guys" and wouldn't attack anyone unless we were attacked, and that the only people that tortured people were the bad guys.
Like i said. We are losing our soul as a country, and in that instance, the Terrorists are winning. In that way they are turning us into the monsters they are. Americans trhat support torture. The same torture that allegedly was use to punish Japanese for war crimes.
Are we really water boarding people to find POW's or are we doing as a matter of practice in a standard interrogation.......i guarantee. If it's legal it will be standard.
-
No, what I'd like them to do is stick a read hot poker up their asses until they tell us what we want to know. But that's not what we are about, at least not the America i grew up learning about. I grew up learning that we were the "good guys" and wouldn't attack anyone unless we were attacked, and that the only people that tortured people were the bad guys.
Like i said. We are losing our soul as a country, and in that instance, the Terrorists are winning. In that way they are turning us into the monsters they are. Americans trhat support torture. The same torture that allegedly was use to punish Japanese for war crimes.
Are we really water boarding people to find POW's or are we doing as a matter of practice in a standard interrogation.......i guarantee. If it's legal it will be standard.
:D Haha, how old are you 40, 50? When you were growing up our CIA was assassinating people, torturing people, installing puppet dictators in other countries and contributing to human rights violations across the world.
We are not losing our 'soul', we are just more open about the stuff that we used to do covertly.
-
:D Haha, how old are you 40, 50? When you were growing up our CIA was assassinating people, torturing people, installing puppet dictators in other countries and contributing to human rights violations across the world.
We are not losing our 'soul', we are just more open about the stuff that we used to do covertly.
No kidding. But we are openly doing it. And people are supporting it. What does that say about the state of our soul?
-
No kidding. But we are openly doing it. And people are supporting it. What does that say about the state of our soul?
Nothing. Americans have always been greedy, selfish materialists (I don't mean materialist in the philosophical sense). As long as they can drive their big cars and live in big houses, they don't care much.
-
Nothing. Americans have always been greedy, selfish materialists (I don't mean materialist in the philosophical sense). As long as they can drive their big cars and live in big houses, they don't care much.
True it would seem like that. But many do care and speak out. There are people in other countries that are apathetic also.
-
True it would seem like that. But many do care and speak out. There are people in other countries that are apathetic also.
Absolutely. Koreans are some of the worst.
-
I thought the issue was waterboarding? Where do these alleged "torture tapes" fit in?
CIA admits waterboarding inmates
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7229169.stm
CIA head Michael Hayden testified before Congress that the CIA waterboards detainees.
Then the CIA destroyed tapes documenting its interrogation "techniques".
Now you may trust admitted torturers that those tapes showed simple question and answer techniques of investigation. But me, I'm a little more cynical.
I'm not threatened by a socialist or someone who Bin Laden thinks highly enough to quote. I just wouldn't use that person as an unreferenced source as part of a discussion (at least not without qualification).
Maybe you missed the link that I provided where I cited my source. Here it is again so you do not miss it twice:
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/CIATorture_WBlum.html
Frankly, I don't care if the source is Satan himself. If the statements are facts then they are facts.
You engage in a classic Bush maneuver of changing the subject to attacking the speaker instead of the message.
We're kinda going around in circles. Saying anyone "stands with" Nazis because the Nazis used waterboarding is ridiculous. No different than saying someone who supports capital punishment "stands with" Nazis because Nazis also used capital punishment.
It's called contrarianism. I state a fact that the Nazis and the Commies used waterboarding and that you support "pouring water on someone's face" (i.e., waterboarding) so it must follow that you stand with the Nazis and Commies in your joint appreciation of waterboarding as a viable interrogation technique.
You answer the contrary--no I don't or we are 'kinda going in circles'...
I assure you, you are adding the curve to this discussion.
And then you engage in that well-worn Bush tactic of diversion: someone who supports capital punishment "stands with" "Nazis because Nazis also used capital punishment.
How transparent. Is torture capital punishment? Not even close.
Why even opt for that stretch Beach Bum? Why not just point out that b/c the Nazis ingested food, anyone eating stands with the Nazis?
That's weak.
This is barely a blip on the radar. Nothing more than a partisan non-issue.
It could end up just a blip on the radar but not because it's just a 'partisan issue'.
It's because people like you condone torture.
It's the simple difference between right and wrong, between being the good guy and being a shady dark torturer.
-
CIA admits waterboarding inmates
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7229169.stm
CIA head Michael Hayden testified before Congress that the CIA waterboards detainees.
Then the CIA destroyed tapes documenting its interrogation "techniques".
Now you may trust admitted torturers that those tapes showed simple question and answer techniques of investigation. But me, I'm a little more cynical.
Maybe you missed the link that I provided where I cited my source. Here it is again so you do not miss it twice:
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/CIATorture_WBlum.html
Frankly, I don't care if the source is Satan himself. If the statements are facts then they are facts.
You engage in a classic Bush maneuver of changing the subject to attacking the speaker instead of the message.
It's called contrarianism. I state a fact that the Nazis and the Commies used waterboarding and that you support "pouring water on someone's face" (i.e., waterboarding) so it must follow that you stand with the Nazis and Commies in your joint appreciation of waterboarding as a viable interrogation technique.
You answer the contrary--no I don't or we are 'kinda going in circles'...
I assure you, you are adding the curve to this discussion.
And then you engage in that well-worn Bush tactic of diversion: someone who supports capital punishment "stands with" "Nazis because Nazis also used capital punishment.
How transparent. Is torture capital punishment? Not even close.
Why even opt for that stretch Beach Bum? Why not just point out that b/c the Nazis ingested food, anyone eating stands with the Nazis?
That's weak.
It could end up just a blip on the radar but not because it's just a 'partisan issue'.
It's because people like you condone torture.
It's the simple difference between right and wrong, between being the good guy and being a shady dark torturer.
lol . . . After reading this I might as well change my name to Dr. Evil.
(http://zerotosixty.files.wordpress.com/2007/09/medium_dr_evil_1.jpg)
The CIA admitted to waterboarding suspected terrorists and then destroyed tapes of those interrogations? So what.
I thought I might have missed something, so clicked on your link again and as I said it is unsourced. It contains blanket statements with no reference support whatsoever. Did you miss that part? The fact that this guy makes unsourced statements, is a socialist, and is quoted by Bin Laden makes me just a tad suspicious. If you can't trust the messenger, the message is automatically suspect.
Your attempt to link me, Bush, etc. to Nazis is preposterous. And yes, why "not just point out that b/c the Nazis ingested food, anyone eating stands with the Nazis?" It's as ridiculous as your waterboarding comparison.
This non-issue is a blip because Democrats have attempted to exploit it for political gain.
-
Yeah waterboarding is nothing.... ;D
-
lol . . . After reading this I might as well change my name to Dr. Evil.
I knew it!
The CIA admitted to waterboarding suspected terrorists and then destroyed tapes of those interrogations? So what.
B/c it is likely there's more on the tapes than admitted. Or do you believe the word of anyone destroying evidence of his wrongdoing? That's such a bush league mafia tactic.
Admitted law-breakers are trustworthy aren't they?
I thought I might have missed something, so clicked on your link again and as I said it is unsourced. It contains blanket statements with no reference support whatsoever. Did you miss that part? The fact that this guy makes unsourced statements, is a socialist, and is quoted by Bin Laden makes me just a tad suspicious.
Fine. You win. I'm not even going to indulge your misdirection on this one.
This is just a distraction from your dancing around the fact that you support torture. Your support gives the USA a blackeye.
But in the interest of pulling the rug out from under your diversion:
CIA Rendition http://www.wtopnews.com/?nid=116&sid=1349214 http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/11/cia-rendition-t.html
CIA Torture Instruction http://www.kimsoft.com/2000/kubark.htm (The actual Manual)
If you can't trust the messenger, the message is automatically suspect.
Trust? Trust me, you are tap dancing like Sammy Davis on fire.
Back to the topic at hand. You support torture--the same torture practiced by the Nazis and the Communists.
Your attempt to link me, Bush, etc. to Nazis is preposterous. And yes, why "not just point out that b/c the Nazis ingested food, anyone eating stands with the Nazis?" It's as ridiculous as your waterboarding comparison.
Nazis waterboarded. Communists Waterboarded. WWII Japs waterboarded. GW Bush & Beach Bum support waterboarding.
Who on the planet misses the obvious nefarious link amongst you?
I don't see FDR, Jesus Christ or even Richard Nixon on that list.
But I do see you.
This non-issue is a blip because Democrats have attempted to exploit it for political gain.
I hope your reptition of this mantra assuages your misguided conscience.
-
I knew it!
B/c it is likely there's more on the tapes than admitted. Or do you believe the word of anyone destroying evidence of his wrongdoing? That's such a bush league mafia tactic.
Admitted law-breakers are trustworthy aren't they?
Fine. You win. I'm not even going to indulge your misdirection on this one.
This is just a distraction from your dancing around the fact that you support torture. Your support gives the USA a blackeye.
But in the interest of pulling the rug out from under your diversion:
CIA Rendition http://www.wtopnews.com/?nid=116&sid=1349214 http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/11/cia-rendition-t.html
CIA Torture Instruction http://www.kimsoft.com/2000/kubark.htm (The actual Manual)
Trust? Trust me, you are tap dancing like Sammy Davis on fire.
Back to the topic at hand. You support torture--the same torture practiced by the Nazis and the Communists.
Nazis waterboarded. Communists Waterboarded. WWII Japs waterboarded. GW Bush & Beach Bum support waterboarding.
Who on the planet misses the obvious nefarious link amongst you?
I don't see FDR, Jesus Christ or even Richard Nixon on that list.
But I do see you.
I hope your reptition of this mantra assuages your misguided conscience.
Did the CIA have some kind of duty to preserve tapes? And if they violated the law when they destroyed the tapes, then why haven't they been charged with a crime?
Did you think I wasn't going to read the link? You posted so-called facts and provided this link to support the so-called facts: http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/CIATorture_WBlum.html That link simply repeats the "facts" you listed, with no support whatsoever. It's as reliable as a Dr. Seuss book, particularly given the author (Blum).
The Nazis used capital punishment. Communists used capital punishment. More than 30 states and the federal government use capital punishment. I support capital punishment. [gasp] Beach Bum is a Nazi!
Yes, I defer to people in the know about waterboarding. Dr. Evil in the flesh.
-
Did the CIA have some kind of duty to preserve tapes? And if they violated the law when they destroyed the tapes, then why haven't they been charged with a crime?
It's your type of vigilant oversight over governmental operations that makes the Bush Administration a success.
Are you kidding me? I mean, really Beach Bum, are you kidding me?
Videos of interrogation of suspected terrorists right after the 9/11 attacks...and you see no merit in hanging on to those tapes?
How about the 9/11 commissions request for all relevant information to their investigations? Where were the tapes then?
Congress will have to look into this.
I can't wait for it to unfold
Did you think I wasn't going to read the link? You posted so-called facts and provided this link to support the so-called facts: http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/CIATorture_WBlum.html That link simply repeats the "facts" you listed, with no support whatsoever. It's as reliable as a Dr. Seuss book, particularly given the author (Blum).
I link things with the direct intent that the links be followed and read. I posted the Blum list b/c it was a handy list of proven CIA torture endeavors.
You did see these links, b/c you asked for them, right?
CIA Rendition http://www.wtopnews.com/?nid=116&sid=1349214 http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/11/cia-rendition-t.html
CIA Torture Instruction http://www.kimsoft.com/2000/kubark.htm (The actual Manual)
The Nazis used capital punishment. Communists used capital punishment. More than 30 states and the federal government use capital punishment. I support capital punishment. [gasp] Beach Bum is a Nazi!
You're doing what you did a few posts ago.
I already debunked your fallacious logic.
Is capital punishment torture?
No.
So why are you creating another diversion?
How unfortunate.
Nazis and Communists use waterboarding. The USA didn't waterboard until Bush got into office. Beach Bum and Bush support waterboarding.
I'm sorry Beach Bum, but that connection above is unamerican. Waterboarding is not part of our history and it doesn't issue from our national traditions.
You know whose history and traditions it does issue from?
Nazis and Communists...and now the Bush administration and Beach Bum are trying to create a new and immoral tradition.
Yes, I defer to people in the know about waterboarding.....
You mean like Nazis & Communists that performed waterboarding?
-
[gasp] Beach Bum is a Nazi!
WTF?
-
WTF?
It's a trick 240.
He will then argue about the semantics and logical structure of any reference between nazis, waterboarding and Beach Bum.
That is a diversion from dealing with the fact that waterboarding's history begins with evil people. It's an evil tactic, if you will. And Beach Bum is willingly supporting that type of evil by supporting Bush in his endeavor to keep waterboarding part of the CIA's bag of tricks.
-
It's your type of vigilant oversight over governmental operations that makes the Bush Administration a success.
Are you kidding me? I mean, really Beach Bum, are you kidding me?
Videos of interrogation of suspected terrorists right after the 9/11 attacks...and you see no merit in hanging on to those tapes?
How about the 9/11 commissions request for all relevant information to their investigations? Where were the tapes then?
Congress will have to look into this.
I can't wait for it to unfold
I link things with the direct intent that the links be followed and read. I posted the Blum list b/c it was a handy list of proven CIA torture endeavors.
You did see these links, b/c you asked for them, right?
CIA Rendition http://www.wtopnews.com/?nid=116&sid=1349214 http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/11/cia-rendition-t.html
CIA Torture Instruction http://www.kimsoft.com/2000/kubark.htm (The actual Manual)
You're doing what you did a few posts ago.
I already debunked your fallacious logic.
Is capital punishment torture?
No.
So why are you creating another diversion?
How unfortunate.
Nazis and Communists use waterboarding. The USA didn't waterboard until Bush got into office. Beach Bum and Bush support waterboarding.
I'm sorry Beach Bum, but that connection above is unamerican. Waterboarding is not part of our history and it doesn't issue from our national traditions.
You know whose history and traditions it does issue from?
Nazis and Communists...and now the Bush administration and Beach Bum are trying to create a new and immoral tradition.
You mean like Nazis & Communists that performed waterboarding?
So I guess this answer is "no," the CIA did not have any duty to preserve interrogation tapes and "no," there was no violation of the law involved in destroying interrogation tapes. On the other hand, I could see why some people like the ACLU would want them. They would probably try and use them to file lawsuits on behalf of suspected terrorists.
You didn't debunk anything. You used an absurd hypothetical and I used an absurd hypothetical.
But this horse is about dead. You can have the last word. :)
-
It's a trick 240.
He will then argue about the semantics and logical structure of any reference between nazis, waterboarding and Beach Bum.
That is a diversion from dealing with the fact that waterboarding's history begins with evil people. It's an evil tactic, if you will. And Beach Bum is willingly supporting that type of evil by supporting Bush in his endeavor to keep waterboarding part of the CIA's bag of tricks.
That's "Dr." Evil to you. :)
-
So I guess this answer is "no," the CIA did not have any duty to preserve interrogation tapes and "no," there was no violation of the law involved in destroying interrogation tapes. On the other hand, I could see why some people like the ACLU would want them. They would probably try and use them to file lawsuits on behalf of suspected terrorists.
You didn't debunk anything. You used an absurd hypothetical and I used an absurd hypothetical.
But this horse is about dead. You can have the last word. :)
Oh I'm not worried about a duty to not destroy the tapes. I'm more concerned with the CIA's obvious disregard of the 9/11 Commission's right to see those tapes.
Why were they withheld from the 9/11 Commission?
Who ordered it?
Who knew of it?
Well gee, Beach Bum, if a detainee is tortured and he is innocent, don't you think he might have a legitimate grievance?
Any topic but torture and I'd have been gone a long time ago.
Nazi and Communist use of waterboarding is not hypothetical. That is what is called, "history".
Your support of waterboarding is not hypothetical. In your own words you've stated your support for Bush and his waterboarding stance.
The only hypotheticals flying around are your diversionary tales.
-
In a related development, one of America’s leading constitutional scholars said White House involvement in the CIA’s decision to destroy videotapes documenting severe interrogation techniques of suspected terrorists could constitute as many as six crimes.
http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/article_4277.shtml
-
No, what I'd like them to do is stick a read hot poker up their asses until they tell us what we want to know. But that's not what we are about, at least not the America i grew up learning about.
hate to break it to ya, but this country was built upon blood and torture.
-
hate to break it to ya, but this country was built upon blood and torture.
Is that what you think America is all about?
-
Is that what you think America is all about?
no but its a reality. america shouldnt be about any type of hurt or torture. but theres a fine line between pain and being a complete pussy
-
no but its a reality. america shouldnt be about any type of hurt or torture. but theres a fine line between pain and being a complete pussy
No wonder your a cop. Have fun tazing someone today......
-
No wonder your a cop. Have fun tazing someone today......
he's a cop? Good grief.
-
no but its a reality. america shouldnt be about any type of hurt or torture. but theres a fine line between pain and being a complete pussy
I agree,
and there's a fine line between doing the right thing vs. torture and evil.
-
I don't think we should compare terrorists and American citizens. They don't (and shouldn't) have all of the rights we give to our own people.
When you understand the circumstances of how many in Abu Ghraib or even Guantanamo got there, you'd realize that "terrorists" is the wrong adjective to be using. I don't doubt that some of them may be terrorists, but the sweeps were so wide, innocents were scooped up as well. By all accounts I've read, the vast majority were innocents scooped up for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, not making it home by curfew... having the dumb luck of having id that the soldier was unable to read. If they're look for Abdullah, and some 22 yr old kid unable to read Iraqi has to examine Mohammed's id, ...guess what, mohammed's ass is in Abu ghraib. I won't even start on the guys kidnapped and turned over in Afghanistan for money.
Even if one is ok with the idea of torture, ...at least ascertain that these guys are indeed terrorists first before you start the torture, otherwise you're no better than the terrorists you seek to destroy. They don't have a problem with killing innocents, ...and apparently neither do those who advocate the torture of detainees. It's all the same justification. Good Grief! ::)
-
By all accounts I've read, the vast majority were innocents scooped up for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, not making it home by curfew... having the dumb luck of having id that the soldier was unable to read.
I am continually amazed by the number of getbig.com exclusives.
-
I am continually amazed by the number of getbig.com exclusives.
Yeah, we should check with you before we post. ::)
-
Club Gitmo...... ;D
Club Gitmo
What it's really like behind the wire.
by Jacob Laksin
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/014/893ibjxl.asp
...Case in point is the notorious Camp X-Ray. In 2002, the camp became a stand-in for the alleged horrors of Guantanamo Bay when pictures of detainees in orange jump suits, kneeling and handcuffed, became public. Up close, the camp is indeed intimidating. A sprawling expanse of decaying sheds and weed-choked confinement cells, X-Ray would make an easy target for anyone seeking proof of American neglect and abuse. Inconveniently for this caricature, the camp was shut down a mere months after it was opened in 2002; it has stood abandoned ever since. Today, the camp's sole residents are butterflies, lizards and an improbably menacing creature called a banana rat.....
-
Yeah, we should check with you before we post. ::)
I'd be happy to screen any crackpot conspiracy theories you might have.
-
I'd be happy to screen any crackpot conspiracy theories you might have.
lol
-
...
Even if one is ok with the idea of torture, ...at least ascertain that these guys are indeed terrorists first before you start the torture, otherwise you're no better than the terrorists you seek to destroy. They don't have a problem with killing innocents, ...and apparently neither do those who advocate the torture of detainees. It's all the same justification. Good Grief! ::)
When did the US suddenly view torture as necessary? On a moral front, it's sickening. Psychologists still claim that it is counterproductive.
Yet we have no problem digging up torturers and supporters of such acts. Makes you think twice about your neighbor.