Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Neurotoxin on June 18, 2008, 03:33:44 AM
-
Report: Exams reveal abuse, torture of
detainees POW's
June 18 2008
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Former terrorist suspects detained by the United States were tortured, according to medical examinations detailed in a report released Wednesday by a human rights group.
A human rights group has concluded that terrorist suspects held by the U.S. were tortured in captivity.
The Massachusetts-based group Physicians for Human Rights reached that conclusion after clinical evaluations of former detainees, who had been held at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and in Afghanistan.
The detainees POW's were never charged with crimes.
"We found clear physical and psychological evidence of torture and abuse often causing lasting suffering," said Dr. Allen Keller, a medical evaluator for the study.
The doctors' group said in a 121-page report that it uncovered medical evidence of torture, including beatings, electric shock, sleep deprivation, sexual humiliation, sodomy and scores of other abuses.
The report is prefaced by retired U.S. Major Gen. Antonio Taguba, who led the Army's investigation into the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal in 2003.
"There is no longer any doubt that the current administration committed war crimes," Taguba states. "The only question is whether those who ordered torture will be held to account."
-
nice try. You clearly dug this shit out of some WWII nazi files and changed it to look like we did it ::)
-
Documents confirm U.S. hid detainees POW's from Red Cross
HH6 said we only waterboarded 3 people.
Of course, we beat and sodomized hundreds more.
I guess we can't claim that moral high ground anymore in this war or any.
-
They were taken from their own nations, never charged with a crime, held againest their will and abused
And sodomy is great. Just great. Lovely. And of course I've never seen photos, or heard any type of sexual humilation done before by US troops. No chance they would do anything like put naked guys in a pile or anything. Not possible.
Anyone who complains is doing so as they "hate the US for their freedoms" >:(
No way would it be in horror that we now have another nation committing vile and despicable acts.
Sodomy is something to be so proud of :-\
-
yes. We inserted objects into the anuses of men in restraints.
We stuck broom handles up their asses.
Because we're the civilized ones. We have the higher moral ground.
As they lay screaming and naked tied to a table with a plunger handle lodged in their bleeding colons, they hate us because we're free!
-
Yes, very civilised.
And of course, when some of my fellow defenders of sodomy/abuses come into the thread and help me defend it, I am quite sure they will not pick only a few nations to compare to, but look at all 220 nations. Government sanctioned sodomy seems not to be too widespread in the world. Damn the Swiss, New Zealanders and so many more for not sodomising others!
The world condemns the USA for Gitmo and it's abuses obviously out of......jealousy and/or "hating them as they are free".
Not because it is sickening to think of a government paying grown men to sodomise men.
-
I actually did wonder why waterboarding was a big deal because after I saw pictures of some of the shit that went down in Iraq, I could only imagine that the waterboarding would be much better. Verses some of the shit I read about that happened in the name of the war on terror, waterboarding is cheesecake. Some fuckers in russia got their asses boiled alive. No kidding.
-
If I remember rightly, it was in Uzbekistan where they boil people alive.
-
HH6 said we only waterboarded 3 people.
Of course, we beat and sodomized hundreds more.
I guess we can't claim that moral high ground anymore in this war or any.
How can you even utter the words "moral high ground", where are YOUR morals? ;D ;D ;D
Here it comes:
-
I actually did wonder why waterboarding was a big deal because after I saw pictures of some of the shit that went down in Iraq, I could only imagine that the waterboarding would be much better. Verses some of the shit I read about that happened in the name of the war on terror, waterboarding is cheesecake. Some fuckers in russia got their asses boiled alive. No kidding.
I know.
The sodomy thing needs to be discussed more in the media. A step by step video of how it is performed for TV airing might be ideal. Maybe Lou Dobbs could volunteer to be sodomised for the video clip. Or Anderson Cooper could sodomise Hannity for a cross network special. Not sure why discussing the sodomy of people is not done more, but waterboarding was discussed at length. Can't be because waterboarding is a more vague term that people are unfamilar with, or is actually less offensive to people </end sarcasm>
Not directed at anyone here, but I seriously wonder about this thing some do of choosing to always compare themself with the worst. Like a murderer saying well I only killed 3 people, others kill more. USA gov can abuse ppl as China, Russia etc do. When we in the world start using the lowest form of behaviour as our standard bearer...you know it will be bad.
-
How can you even utter the words "moral high ground", where are YOUR morals? ;D ;D ;D
Here it comes:
That steely eyed dealer of death looks like he could sodomise a dozen unlawful combatants without so much as breaking a sweat.
-
I know.
The sodomy thing needs to be discussed more in the media. A step by step video of how it is performed for TV airing might be ideal. Maybe Lou Dobbs could volunteer to be sodomised for the video clip. Or Anderson Cooper could sodomise Hannity for a cross network special. Not sure why discussing the sodomy of people is not done more, but waterboarding was discussed at length. Can't be because waterboarding is a more vague term that people are unfamilar with, or is actually less offensive to people </end sarcasm>
Not directed at anyone here, but I seriously wonder about this thing some do of choosing to always compare themself with the worst. Like a murderer saying well I only killed 3 people, others kill more. USA gov can abuse ppl as China, Russia etc do. When we in the world start using the lowest form of behaviour as our standard bearer...you know it will be bad.
lol
-
If I remember rightly, it was in Uzbekistan where they boil people alive.
yea, some shit like that, I posted the story a long time ago but don't remember the details. Anyway, it was in the name of obtaining intelligence for the war on terror after 9/11. So some dudes got boiled for Bush. :-X
-
Am I the only person who gets the irony of the USA having a section 100% dedicated to violating international law, abusing people, holding people with no charge, torturing people, sodomising people..........
On Cuban soil.....then complaining all the time about Cuba having poor human rights ???
-
How can you even utter the words "moral high ground", where are YOUR morals? ;D ;D ;D
brutal attack the messenger, not the message.
That quote was made in response to threats from getbiggers. If come to do me harm, you bet your ass I will not hesitate. What the debate here is about, is foreign invaders taking the moral high ground.
So you go ahead and tease me... but in this argument, you just got your ass handed to you by refusing to debate the points ;)
-
First off who cares, second where is this report from...please provide a link.
-
brutal attack the messenger, not the message.
That quote was made in response to threats from getbiggers. If come to do me harm, you bet your ass I will not hesitate. What the debate here is about, is foreign invaders taking the moral high ground.
So you go ahead and tease me... but in this argument, you just got your ass handed to you by refusing to debate the points ;)
Wow, I feel so owned! ::)
Watch your mouth 240, hesitation in this blood doesn't come easily, (y'all)! ;D
-
Having served with Gen. Taguba, I find that statement hard to believe....plus i have yet to see this report in any crediable news source. Please provide a link.
-
Wow, I feel so owned! ::)
Watch your mouth 240, hesitation in this blood doesn't come easily, (y'all)! ;D
seriously dude, when i said that, i had people here saying they were coming to my door. Like most men, if you come to my door, you're going to have a bad day. I'm sure you'd feel the same way if you didnt' live in an anti-gun utopia.
-
If I was there and an insurgent was captured by my team I would bust his face in, in order to find out where the enemy and weapons are. One dead Iraqi is better than 1 dead American.
-
HH6 said we only waterboarded 3 people.
Of course, we beat and sodomized hundreds more.
I guess we can't claim that moral high ground anymore in this war or any.
Only 3?
I guess the other hundred or so died falling in the shower.
Torture blamed for detainee deaths
From correspondents in Washington
02/23/06 "The Australian" -- -- AT least eight detainees of the roughly 100 who have died in US military custody in Iraq and Afghanistan were tortured to death, human rights lawyers said in a report released today.
http://informationclearinghouse.info/article12038.htm
-
Am I the only person who gets the irony of the USA having a section 100% dedicated to violating international law, abusing people, holding people with no charge, torturing people, sodomising people..........
On Cuban soil.....then complaining all the time about Cuba having poor human rights ???
no, you're not that special, sorry. I think quite a few people have a grasp on it :) I usually get a laugh when Rice or Bush get's all verbal with China.
-
From correspondents in Washington
02/23/06 "The Australian" -- -- AT least eight detainees of the roughly 100 who have died in US military custody in Iraq and Afghanistan were tortured to death, human rights lawyers said in a report released today.
"These are detainees who were beaten, suffocated or otherwise died in circumstances that meet the definition of torture that is in the federal law that bans the practice," said Hina Shamsi, a lawyer for New York-based Human Rights First and author of the report.
Analysing military documents and press accounts, Human Rights First examined 98 detainee deaths, and concluded that torture by US military personnel caused eight deaths and may have been responsible for four others.
All of the deaths have been disclosed previously.
The Pentagon said at least 108 detainees have died in US custody in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2002, not counting those killed in insurgent mortar attacks on jail facilities.
"Critically, only half of the cases of detainees tortured to death have resulted in punishment; the steepest sentence for anyone implicated in a torture-related death has been five months in jail," the report said.
The military has said it has a policy against torture, but has acknowledged using interrogation techniques that include placing detainees in stress positions.
US soldiers at Abu Ghraib jail in Iraq were also pictured sexually humiliating prisoners and menacing them with dogs.
The report said that of the 98 deaths it examined, only 12 led to punishment of any kind for US personnel.
"People are dying in US custody and no one's being held to account," said Deborah Pearlstein, who heads the Human Rights First US law and security program.
© The Australian
-
First off who cares, second where is this report from...please provide a link.
I bet you have a final solution worked out for these muzzie bastards don't you ;) I mean you wouldn't care would you? But no fucking way you have anything in common with... ::)
-
If I was there and an insurgent was captured by my team I would bust his face in, in order to find out where the enemy and weapons are. One dead Iraqi is better than 1 dead American.
ah hell..., get yourself up to Israeli standards if you're going full out neocon on us
-
U realize this says nothing..there is no first hand information in this release. I could not allow this to be released if it were up to me. There are no facts investigated first hand by these people. They looked at documents and then drew their own conclusions. Thats why its on some obscure site. This shit is kinda funny, compared to what the enemy actually does. U guys all live in fuzzy bunny land.
Hugo..they're the enemy....they don't count. I'm not going to kill them if they surrender, they could be a good source of intel. I fully realize, where the roles switched, I'd be dead regardless of how the US treats their pows. This is a different war. U guys are so so insulated from this. Get a grip dude...the West is in trouble.
-
U realize this says nothing..there is no first hand information in this release. I could not allow this to be released if it were up to me. There are no facts investigated first hand by these people. They looked at documents and then drew their own conclusions. Thats why its on some obscure site. This shit is kinda funny, compared to what the enemy actually does. U guys all live in fuzzy bunny land.
Hugo..they're the enemy....they don't count. I'm not going to kill them if they surrender, they could be a good source of intel. I fully realize, where the roles switched, I'd be dead regardless of how the US treats their pows. This is a different war. U guys are so so insulated from this. Get a grip dude...the West is in trouble.
If your fellow GI's were engaged in the act of raping a 12 year old Okinawan girl, would you intervene and stop it?
-
From correspondents in Washington
02/23/06 "The Australian" -- -- AT least eight detainees of the roughly 100 who have died in US military custody in Iraq and Afghanistan were tortured to death, human rights lawyers said in a report released today.
"These are detainees who were beaten, suffocated or otherwise died in circumstances that meet the definition of torture that is in the federal law that bans the practice," said Hina Shamsi, a lawyer for New York-based Human Rights First and author of the report.
Analysing military documents and press accounts, Human Rights First examined 98 detainee deaths, and concluded that torture by US military personnel caused eight deaths and may have been responsible for four others.
All of the deaths have been disclosed previously.
The Pentagon said at least 108 detainees have died in US custody in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2002, not counting those killed in insurgent mortar attacks on jail facilities.
"Critically, only half of the cases of detainees tortured to death have resulted in punishment; the steepest sentence for anyone implicated in a torture-related death has been five months in jail," the report said.
The military has said it has a policy against torture, but has acknowledged using interrogation techniques that include placing detainees in stress positions.
US soldiers at Abu Ghraib jail in Iraq were also pictured sexually humiliating prisoners and menacing them with dogs.
The report said that of the 98 deaths it examined, only 12 led to punishment of any kind for US personnel.
"People are dying in US custody and no one's being held to account," said Deborah Pearlstein, who heads the Human Rights First US law and security program.
© The Australian
Like I said those 100 or so other deaths were domestic accidents...slipping in the shower, choking on a Cheerio or the like.
-
Yes dumbass I would.....ur an idiot. I would do more then stop it. I'd make sure they went to the Brig in pieces. There is no call for any of that shit. Big difference between an innocent 12 year old Japanese girl or Iraqi girl for that matter, then some terrorist shitbag.
-
Not my call to invade..but I'm doing my part to make sure we win and come home.
-
I'm defending the troops and they wa the war is currently done....no I don't I. I wish u guys would get past bashing this country..ok maybe not u but the cluster of libs on here. Ur just a disgruntled Repub without a horse in this race. I can't say I blame u.
-
Why do people care about terrorists more than Americans on this forum? ???
-
Why do people care about terrorists more than Americans on this forum? ???
Do you still beat your wife?
That's a loaded question, much like yours.
No one's defending terrorism or terrorists. People are defending untried detainees stripped of the right of habeas corpus.
It is elementary to our society that people accused by the state have a right to say, "you got the wrong guy" or "I didn't do it" otherwise we have a system based on railroading people...that's Russia, not us.
-
Do you still beat your wife?
LMAO
-
Do you still beat your wife?
That's a loaded question, much like yours.
No one's defending terrorism or terrorists. People are defending untried detainees stripped of the right of habeas corpus.
It is elementary to our society that people accused by the state have a right to say, "you got the wrong guy" or "I didn't do it" otherwise we have a system based on railroading people...that's Russia, not us.
Did enemy combatants in any other war in anybody's history have these rights....NO. They dont either. This is as wrong as it gets. Did the nazi's or the Japs..hell no.
-
Do you still beat your wife?
That's a loaded question, much like yours.
No one's defending terrorism or terrorists. People are defending untried detainees stripped of the right of habeas corpus.
It is elementary to our society that people accused by the state have a right to say, "you got the wrong guy" or "I didn't do it" otherwise we have a system based on railroading people...that's Russia, not us.
Wife? Shit, I'm not getting married until I'm at least 30 and actually advanced whatever career I choose to a point that I'm comfortable. I've got 99 problems, but some gold diggin bitch ain't one.
Terrorists should not get habeas corpus. Why should we grant them the rights of American citizens? Stupid, stupid argument.
-
Did enemy combatants in any other war in anybody's history have these rights....NO. They dont either. This is as wrong as it gets. Did the nazi's or the Japs..hell no.
Well then, I guess the Supreme Court got it wrong and HeadHuntersix got it right.
So you are for kangaroo courts and railroading all detainees regardless of guilt or innocence?
That's unamerican.
Even the POWs of WWII had their day in court.
-
Yeah after the war....we're still at war. Does Bin laden get the same rights. Is he innocent until proven guilty if captured...especially seeing as how he has a price on his head.
-
Wife? Shit, I'm not getting married until I'm at least 30 and actually advanced whatever career I choose to a point that I'm comfortable. I've got 99 problems, but some gold diggin bitch ain't one.
Terrorists should not get habeas corpus. Why should we grant them the rights of American citizens? Stupid, stupid argument.
B/c, we don't know if the detainees are terrorists or not.
We have a good military but not a perfect military...they make mistakes. They grab the wrong people.
-
B/c, we don't know if the detainees are terrorists or not.
We have a good military but not a perfect military...they make mistakes. They grab the wrong people.
They've released 400+ people. 270 are left. No reason to believe that after 5+ years that anyone still in there is innocent when you take into account that actual terrorists have already been released. I would rather err on the side of caution and assume they're guilty. No skin off my back.
-
Yeah after the war....we're still at war. Does Bin laden get the same rights. Is he innocent until proven guilty if captured...especially seeing as how he has a price on his head.
By Bush's definition of wartime, we will always be at war.
OBL would stand trial sure.
What's your problem with the wheels of justice? OBL is guilty he'll go away with due process of law.
-
They've released 400+ people. 270 are left. No reason to believe that after 5+ years that anyone still in there is innocent when you take into account that actual terrorists have already been released. I would rather err on the side of caution and assume they're guilty. No skin off my back.
I can't support that. I see your point. But I think it's wrong.
The US used the same rationale for German and Japanese internment camps in WWII.
It was wrong then and it's wrong today.
If a person is innocent, he/she shouldn't have to be imprisoned and possibly tortured.
-
I can't support that. I see your point. But I think it's wrong.
The US used the same rationale for German and Japanese internment camps in WWII.
It was wrong then and it's wrong today.
If a person is innocent, he/she shouldn't have to be imprisoned and possibly tortured.
The military should be ashamed of itself. it is without honor here.
-
B/c, we don't know if the detainees are terrorists or not.
We have a good military but not a perfect military...they make mistakes. They grab the wrong people.
I agree...but they do not get the rights that we get. Especially Bin Laden. And I'm torn as to whether he gets double tapped or stands trial. The ramifications of both courses of action are very important to think through. I don't belive he would ever be taken alive.
-
actually if you look at what these guys do to our guys when they get captured than HELL YA, we are standing on the moral high ground. WHO THE FUCK CARES, if doing that saves one american soldier than shit ram that broom handle up his ass!!!!, where do you ppl get off bashing the troops and letting the multiple, numerous, atrocities committed by the terrorist go unreported maybe we should post every single atrocity done by each side one by one...I wonder which group would have more to post??? GO OFF yourselves or at least be thankful you live in a place that allows, YES ALLOWS you to speak your mind w/o being publicly executed, after a "trial" that is if your lucky.
-
actually if you look at what these guys do to our guys when they get captured than HELL YA, we are standing on the moral high ground. WHO THE FUCK CARES, if doing that saves one american soldier than shit ram that broom handle up his ass!!!!, where do you ppl get off bashing the troops and letting the multiple, numerous, atrocities committed by the terrorist go unreported maybe we should post every single atrocity done by each side one by one...I wonder which group would have more to post??? GO OFF yourselves or at least be thankful you live in a place that allows, YES ALLOWS you to speak your mind w/o being publicly executed, after a "trial" that is if your lucky.
Great post. Shame you'll be castrated on here for it. Terrorist rights > American lives.
-
It's not about prisoner rights. Or terrorist rights or whatever.
It's about common decency. Not that any of you, who feel justified when a uncharged prisoner is sexually abused and tortured and imprisoned would see that.
You are no different than a common terrorist.
-
It's not about prisoner rights. Or terrorist rights or whatever.
It's about common decency. Not that any of you, who feel justified when a uncharged prisoner is sexually abused and tortured and imprisoned would see that.
You are no different than a common terrorist.
LOL a more ironic of a term couldnt have been used in this situation for it to be common means that they would have to extend the same, do they? oh thats right they dont, they decapitate reporters, religious clergy, and innocent civilians...maybe you should try going over there and preaching to them and see what happens...LOL MWHHSAUHAH common decency lol thats a good one
-
LOL a more ironic of a term couldnt have been used in this situation for it to be common means that they would have to extend the same, do they? oh thats right they dont, they decapitate reporters, religious clergy, and innocent civilians...maybe you should try going over there and preaching to them and see what happens...LOL MWHHSAUHAH common decency lol thats a good one
Who says I'm trying to preach to them?
You miss the point completely.
Not surprised.
-
Who says I'm trying to preach to them?
You miss the point completely.
Not surprised.
what is your point then? clarify it for me if you would.
-
what is your point then? clarify it for me if you would.
It's about practicing what you preach.
-
It's about practicing what you preach.
Didnt bush sign in a "torture bill" or veto an anti torture bill so we are practicing what we preach arent we? I may be misinformed but i believe that he ok'd it.
practicing what you preach I can appreciate that is if its the case but when it comes down to the safety of our soldiers than i dont believe it should apply. Why is it up to the US to be politically correct when we are fighting ppl who dont pay us the same respect? b/c we are a civilized nation? This is the reason why this war is so hard to fight b/c we cant fight like them this war would have been long over if not for the politically correct way that we must fight.
Again I say who gives a fuck about them if it saves american soldiers lives? Would you rather we practice what we preach and american soldiers die as a result? Its a rock and a hard place but at the end of the day its between practicing what we preach or saving american lives, and you wanna go with practicing what you preach? are you sure about that?
-
Didnt bush sign in a "torture bill" or veto an anti torture bill so we are practicing what we preach arent we? I may be misinformed but i believe that he ok'd it.
practicing what you preach I can appreciate that if its the case but when it comes down to the safety of our soldiers than i dont believe it should apply. Why is it up to the US to be politically correct when we are fighting ppl who dont pay us the same respect? b/c we are a civilized nation? This is the reason why this war is so hard to fight b/c we cant fight like them this war would have been long over if not for the politically correct way that we must fight.
Again I say who gives a fuck about them if it saves american soldiers lives? Would you rather we practice what we preach and american soldiers die as a result? Its a rock and a hard place but at the end of the day its between practicing what we preach or saving american lives, and you wanna go with practicing what you preach? are you sure about that?
How does sexually abusing or torturing, imprisoning and not charging a person and then releasing them protect American Soldiers?
If they were a danger then they wouldn't release them.
If they were guilty then they 'd charge them.
So what's the point of sexually abusing them and torturing them unless you are as evil a scum like them.
I get we need to be hard core. I'm no lamby pamby liberal. But i'm not a hypocrite either.
We preach decency and living in a civilized society. Yet, we torture sexually abuse and imprison people with out charges. That's what i mean be practicing what we preach.
-
How does sexually abusing or torturing, imprisoning and not charging a person and then releasing them protect American Soldiers?
If they were a danger then they wouldn't release them.
If they were guilty then they 'd charge them.
So what's the point of sexually abusing them and torturing them unless you are as evil a scum like them.
I get we need to be hard core. I'm no lamby pamby liberal. But i'm not a hypocrite either.
We preach decency and living in a civilized society. Yet, we torture sexually abuse and imprison people with out charges. That's what i mean be practicing what we preach.
we also preach using torture, so we are practicing what we preach and not being hypocritical the president himself ok'd it, the american public for the most part is the entity preaching decency, the american public that isnt there and has all but forgotten about the soldiers sent there to do a job which is all to obvious by the outcry do to US attrocities and silence when regarding terrorist attrocities.
you think they these guys just nab random ppl and torture them for fukin kicks? NO they have reason to believe that they know something. I understand your logic of them not being dangerous if they got released but that logic could also give validity to the idea that they wouldnt have been detained if they didnt have reason to think they were dangerous.
IRAQ isnt america if it was then yes by all means charge them or let them go however our american civil liberties dont apply there and shouldnt as long as the terrorist continue to fight the way they do.
WE ARE AT WAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and ppl are DYING if getting info from one person no matter how it is obtained will save american lives i want it done.
-
It's about practicing what you preach.
LOL that is what Rev Wright said
-
we also preach using torture, so we are practicing what we preach and not being hypocritical the president himself ok'd it, the american public for the most part is the entity preaching decency, the american public that isnt there and has all but forgotten about the soldiers sent there to do a job which is all to obvious by the outcry do to US attrocities and silence when regarding terrorist attrocities.
Show me in the US constitution where we preach torture? That piece of sh1t in the oval office is not the AMerican people and last i checked we are a country whose moral base is rooted in christianity. I don't see Jesus sexually abusing prisoners. And i don;t see the Christianity supporting torture.
Your argument falls apart enough there but let's go on:
you think they these guys just nab random ppl and torture them for fukin kicks? NO they have reason to believe that they know something. I understand your logic of them not being dangerous if they got released but that logic could also give validity to the idea that they wouldnt have been detained if they didnt have reason to think they were dangerous.
If they had reason to think they were dangerous then they would have had charged them with something. They just held them and didn't give a reason. Which means they HAD NONE. Then they torture them, sexually abused them, kept them in prison for years and then released them.
What is looks like is they were fishing and never caught any fish.
Imagine Being tortured for something you might know. Sounds, very HIMMLER.
More flawed logic on your part.
IRAQ isnt america if it was then yes by all means charge them or let them go however our american civil liberties dont apply there and shouldnt as long as the terrorist continue to fight the way they do.
I'm not talking habeus corpus. I'm talking about imprison someone and charging them. Telling them and their families or who ever why they are being imprisoned. We did it with the Germans, Japs, Koreans etc... And we didn't sell our soul when they were our POW's.
WE ARE AT WAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and ppl are DYING if getting info from one person no matter how it is obtained will save american lives i want it done.
You advocate NAZI tactics as justification for a means to an end. You are also an uninformed peorson who thinks BUSH is the voice of America which makes you a candidate for nipple whore-dom.
And if you do really want that done, sexually abusing and torturing prisoners without charging them and holding them for indefinate amounts of time then you are no different than a run of the mill radical islamic. The only difference is the side of the fence you live on.
In case you have the courage:
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=219296.0 (http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=219296.0)
Last i checked the supreme court decided.
Besides that you need to go back and re-read from the beginning. We aren't talking about water-boarding here. which were condiered war crimes in ww2. ::)
-
LOL that is what Rev Wright said
Yeah, i think GOD ON EARTH said something about that too.
nice try. Sorry, stupid try.
-
You know youandme, Your arguments are really, well....... on the level of a 10 year old.
Don't worry, however, in about a month, I'm going to switch gears and start crucifying Obama with real issues. Not this namby pamby childish crap the basic ignorant nipple whore spouts. Not that you are a nipple whore or anything ;D ;)
-
Show me in the US constitution where we preach torture? That piece of sh1t in the oval office is not the AMerican people and last i checked we are a country whose moral base is rooted in christianity. I don't see Jesus sexually abusing prisoners. And i don;t see the Christianity supporting torture.
IRAQ is not the United States and therefore the constitution should have no bearing. I never said the president was the american ppls voice but he was voted in by the american ppl. LOL im not even going to go into the religion thing
If they had reason to think they were dangerous then they would have had charged them with something. They just held them and didn't give a reason. Which means they HAD NONE. Then they torture them, sexually abused them, kept them in prison for years and then released them.
What is looks like is they were fishing and never caught any fish.
Imagine Being tortured for something you might know. Sounds, very HIMMLER.
So what? I know that sounds cruel and it is. These guys had reason to think that certain ppl might have information some probably dont and some probably do, more than likely the ones who dont are the minority. You dont know how many lives have been saved b/c of info gained from this do you? so how can you say they never caught a fish.
I'm not talking habeus corpus. I'm talking about imprison someone and charging them. Telling them and their families or who ever why they are being imprisoned. We did it with the Germans, Japs, Koreans etc... And we didn't sell our soul when they were our POW's.
AGAIN you are thinking about this from the pov of a US civilian...THIS IS WAR, dirty shit happens, whoever told you war is dignified state of affiars lied to you. The germans and japanese didnt resort to terrorist tatics either, this is an unconventional war and must be fought in an unconventional way.
You advocate NAZI tactics as justification for a means to an end. You are also an uninformed peorson who thinks BUSH is the voice of America which makes you a candidate for nipple whore-dom.
And if you do really want that done, sexually abusing and torturing prisoners without charging them and holding them for indefinate amounts of time then you are no different than a run of the mill radical islamic. The only difference is the side of the fence you live on.
AGAIN I never said that Bush is the voice of america but again he was voted in so say what you want. If you go back to my previous post youll see.
Im ok with that I never said I was better than them, you know what OZMO if your trying to kill me and at the end of the day if its me or you, im sorry bud but its not gonna be me and ill do whatevers necessary to make sure of that as im sure you would as well.
There is a difference however between me and the terrorist we are fighting, I will live and let live always been my motto...they however feel the need to attack US establishments and its constituents...they brought on this fight.
It may suprise you to know that i believe that they should have a course of action to appeal a release as well as the methods of torture being wrong, but its necessary IMO...
I think this is more difference of view points than ideals...I do feel torture is wrong and that being held without charge is wrong but I also think anything and everything should be done to protect our soldiers more so than the first.
-
I think this might get at the heart of our disagreement
let me ask you a question OZMO if your in a fight and getting your ass kicked and theres a bat nearby do you pick up the bat?
-
I think this might get at the heart of our disagreement
let me ask you a question OZMO if your in a fight and getting your ass kicked and theres a bat nearby do you pick up the bat?
If it looks like I'm going to get seriously hurt or robbed, yes. But I'm not going to ram the bat up the guy's ass.
IRAQ is not the United States and therefore the constitution should have no bearing. I never said the president was the american ppls voice but he was voted in by the american ppl. LOL im not even going to go into the religion thing
I don't care what Iraq is. I'm talking about common decency as a human being, not acting like the very thing I'm fighting. I guess you are. I guess you and the Terrorist are one in the same.
So what? I know that sounds cruel and it is. These guys had reason to think that certain ppl might have information some probably dont and some probably do, more than likely the ones who dont are the minority. You dont know how many lives have been saved b/c of info gained from this do you? so how can you say they never caught a fish.
Because they never changed them. They released them. And you don't even know the circumstances that made them candidates for sexual abuse and torture. If there was justifiable cause they would have been charged. And instead they weren't charged and sexually abused and tortured. And you are so blind to the blatant immorality and barbarism of those acts by your lack of sensibility and your flawed, paradigm of right and wrong.
AGAIN you are thinking about this from the pov of a US civilian...THIS IS WAR, dirty shit happens, whoever told you war is dignified state of affiars lied to you. The germans and japanese didnt resort to terrorist tatics either, this is an unconventional war and must be fought in an unconventional way.
If this is war then they are POW's and should granted rights of POW's under the geneva convention. It is not WAR if those you are fighting are neither members of another country or recognized as enemy soldiers.
Aside from all of that. It's not about being a civilian like you'd like to think i'm trying to say. It's about right and wrong, common decency and doing the right thing, being civilized, being noble, taking the high road, not being barbaric, not being medieval etc...
But it's seems more like trying to explain humane treatment to Hitler.
AGAIN I never said that Bush is the voice of america but again he was voted in so say what you want. If you go back to my previous post youll see.
Im ok with that I never said I was better than them, you know what OZMO if your trying to kill me and at the end of the day if its me or you, im sorry bud but its not gonna be me and ill do whatevers necessary to make sure of that as im sure you would as well.
Sexually abusing, imprisoning with out charge and torturing is not necessary. Especially someone you don't charge. It's overkill and the expense of our integrity.
There is a difference however between me and the terrorist we are fighting, I will live and let live always been my motto...they however feel the need to attack US establishments and its constituents...they brought on this fight.
No, you are one in the same because both of you justify the means to an end even if it means doing something barbaric and immoral.
That's the difference between us and them.
It may suprise you to know that i believe that they should have a course of action to appeal a release as well as the methods of torture being wrong, but its necessary IMO...
What's needed? Having a course of action to appeal or legally performing torture or immoral acts?
Which is more terrorist like?
I think this is more difference of view points than ideals...I do feel torture is wrong and that being held without charge is wrong but I also think anything and everything should be done to protect our soldiers more so than the first.
You should do a study on torture then. You may find that's it's widely ineffective.
-
LOL i guess im a islamic terrorist version of hitler then ::) :o ;D
why should we pay them courtesies that they dont pay us?
Again maybe you should read my posts I said torture is wrong so is holding somebody with out charging them but to me to me its not about being moral and taking the high road its about saving lives by any means necessary.
war or fighting is not a moral act in itself and definitely not taking the high road.
First off who said we were better than them? we are no better than anybody else on this planet.
I never claimed to be better than them and dont really care if i am or not what i do care about is the safety of our soldiers.
I understand your viewpoints but it leads to us fighting with our hands tied and thats not a smart way to fight.
I dont advocate blantent misuse of torture but i do believe it does have a useful component if for nothing more than a scare tatic.
im tired of argueing this point with you, i see your points, but i feel that you refuse to acknowledge mine which is why i hate argueing over the internet.
-
LOL i guess im a islamic terrorist version of hitler then ::) :o ;D
why should we pay them courtesies that they dont pay us?
Again maybe you should read my posts I said torture is wrong so is holding somebody with out charging them but to me to me its not about being moral and taking the high road its about saving lives by any means necessary.
war or fighting is not a moral act in itself and definitely not taking the high road.
First off who said we were better than them? we are no better than anybody else on this planet.
I never claimed to be better than them and dont really care if i am or not what i do care about is the safety of our soldiers.
I understand your viewpoints but it leads to us fighting with our hands tied and thats not a smart way to fight.
I dont advocate blantent misuse of torture but i do believe it does have a useful component if for nothing more than a scare tatic.
im tired of argueing this point with you, i see your points, but i feel that you refuse to acknowledge mine which is why i hate argueing over the internet.
The good guys don't torture. The commies, nazis and japs tortured. We don't
I think a lot of this confusion comes from the notion that we are at war the way we were in WWII.
We are not.
Terrorism is a police problem.
Bush and company used the military (wrongly) to address the issue.
Why? Look at how all those private corporations are making a veritable killing off the Iraq disaster. It's a novel way to plunder the US tax coffers, rob another country blind while cowing all political opponents here in america.
You have to hand it to the Bush administration, they've muddied the waters. Mission Accomplished!
-
Decker...we're not the "good" guys were just guys trying to ensure our way of life.
-
Decker...we're not the "good" guys were just guys trying to ensure our way of life.
It brings tears to my eyes when we agree HH6.
-
Decker...we're not the "good" guys were just guys trying to ensure our way of life.
I'm not a moral relativist HH.
I don't see how torturing people ensures our way of life any more than attacking Iraq defends our country from terrorists.
To believe those things are true requires a massive amount of cognitive dissonance by the believer.
-
I'm not a moral relativist HH.
I don't see how torturing people ensures our way of life any more than attacking Iraq defends our country from terrorists.
To believe those things are true requires a massive amount of cognitive dissonance by the believer.
your man John Edwards thought that it did, as he voted for the war !
-
your man John Edwards thought that it did, as he voted for the war !
Eldon/Ozark, Don't you have some race or immigration issues to obsess over?
-
LOL i guess im a islamic terrorist version of hitler then ::) :o ;D
why should we pay them courtesies that they dont pay us?
Again maybe you should read my posts I said torture is wrong so is holding somebody with out charging them but to me to me its not about being moral and taking the high road its about saving lives by any means necessary.
war or fighting is not a moral act in itself and definitely not taking the high road.
First off who said we were better than them? we are no better than anybody else on this planet.
I never claimed to be better than them and dont really care if i am or not what i do care about is the safety of our soldiers.
I understand your viewpoints but it leads to us fighting with our hands tied and thats not a smart way to fight.
I dont advocate blantent misuse of torture but i do believe it does have a useful component if for nothing more than a scare tatic.
im tired of argueing this point with you, i see your points, but i feel that you refuse to acknowledge mine which is why i hate argueing over the internet.
I for one, say we are more civilized then they are. If that equates us being better then what ever, BUT, they have the same rights as human beings as we do IMO and should be treated as such.
Why should treat them as we wish to be treated? Aren't you at least a bit religious TT? I think i've seen you on the religion board.
I heard what you said. You think those things are wrong, but you justify them as a means to an end. I don't. I believe we should walk the walk AND talk the talk.
Water boarding for me is a difficult issue that i've gone back and forth with, however, straight torture and sexual abuse, imprisonment without charges is well beyond the line.
-
I for one, say we are more civilized then they are. If that equates us being better then what ever, BUT, they have the same rights as human beings as we do IMO and should be treated as such.
Why should treat them as we wish to be treated? Aren't you at least a bit religious TT? I think i've seen you on the religion board.
I heard what you said. You think those things are wrong, but you justify them as a means to an end. I don't. I believe we should walk the walk AND talk the talk.
Water boarding for me is a difficult issue that i've gone back and forth with, however, straight torture and sexual abuse, imprisonment without charges is well beyond the line.
I consider myself religious, would you or others i dont know.
I agree we should treat ppl the way we want to be treated, but I also believe that when somebody starts playing dirty pool all bets are off. I justify it by the lives saved from the information gained, if you want to see that as a means to an end then go right ahead. Ive never talked your talk, is my point, ive talked my talk and doing whatever necessary is walking my walk. You can sit back and believe your better than them or more civilized and thats all good but like i said at the end of the day you and me arent any better than anybody else on this planet. That type of thinking is detrimental to our freedoms and safety.
-
Eldon/Ozark, Don't you have some race or immigration issues to obsess over?
Decker , don't you have some John Edwards rally or a ' We Hate the Troops" rally to go to ?
But before you go, why don't you tell us all how you were backing John Edwards, even though he voted for the War, and yet he did not even take the time to read the intelligence report .
-
Decker , don't you have some John Edwards rally or a ' We Hate the Troops" rally to go to ?
But before you go, why don't you tell us all how you were backing John Edwards, even though he voted for the War, and yet he did not even take the time to read the intelligence report .
So what if he didn't read it.
How does Congress's negligence on the matter excuse the Bush administration's littany of lies and distortions about Iraq's threat in taking this country to war?
Who would believe the president of the United States of America would lie to the American People and Congress about something as important as going to war?
Your "We hate the troops rally" is as entertaining as your multiple personalities.
Am I talking to Eldon or Ozark now? Or is there another?
-
Not my call to invade..but I'm doing my part to make sure we win and come home.
What the fuck are you going to win?
-
Wife? Shit, I'm not getting married until I'm at least 30 and actually advanced whatever career I choose to a point that I'm comfortable. I've got 99 problems, but some gold diggin bitch ain't one.
Terrorists should not get habeas corpus. Why should we grant them the rights of American citizens? Stupid, stupid argument.
It's about you not them... think on it for a while ;)
-
It's about you not them... think on it for a while ;)
I don't need to. I'd rather every terrorist was executed after interrogation or shipped off on prison ships where we wouldn't have to hear about them. I've got better things to do than worry about whether or not Mohammed from Saudi Arabia deserves a trial after killing 5 American soldiers.
It cracks me up. Americans are so desensitized to other American plights. They'd rather rally for the rights of terrorists than spend their time doing things to make the country better. Go lead a rally or donate some money to help get innocent Americans out of jail for crimes they didn't commit.
How would you feel if one of these terrorists got off through a legal loophole and turned around and killed a couple hundred Americans in a bombing? I know it probably wouldn't bother you in bumfucksville Wyoming but I'm sure you'd be rallying about it on the internet, blaming everyone and everything. ::)
So what if he didn't read it.
How does Congress's negligence on the matter excuse the Bush administration's littany of lies and distortions about Iraq's threat in taking this country to war?
Who would believe the president of the United States of America would lie to the American People and Congress about something as important as going to war?
Your "We hate the troops rally" is as entertaining as your multiple personalities.
Am I talking to Eldon or Ozark now? Or is there another?
So what if he didn't read it? Stop being a fucking hypocrite. You would castrate anyone else for not doing that.
-
.....
So what if he didn't read it? Stop being a fucking hypocrite. You would castrate anyone else for not doing that.
You or I do not know the reports that Edwards read or did not read. So stop acting like you know something on the matter b/c you don't. Was it the reports that were doctored by the Bush administration or the ones from the intelligence agencies? I don't know. And neither do you.
On the whole, Congress's behavior was negligent and appalling. And Edwards deserves his criticism.
But that does not excuse the President's wholesale lies and manufacturing of cooked evidence to support his push for war.
Do you see that?
-
So what if he didn't read it.
How does Congress's negligence on the matter excuse the Bush administration's littany of lies and distortions about Iraq's threat in taking this country to war?
Who would believe the president of the United States of America would lie to the American People and Congress about something as important as going to war?
Your "We hate the troops rally" is as entertaining as your multiple personalities.
Am I talking to Eldon or Ozark now? Or is there another?
Yes, a hypocrite is exactly what Decker is.
The one person that Decker thought was the most and best deserving of all the candidates to be our next President (John Edwards) , was a person who voted for the War in Iraq, and yet did not even take the time to read the Intelligence reports, meaning either Edwards is lazy, or did not think it was not important, or both.
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/few-senators-read-iraq-nie-report-2007-06-19.html
Of the 22 senators who reported reading the full NIE, eight are Republicans and 14 are Democrats. All but one Democrat on the 17-person Intelligence Committee in 2002 recalled reading the NIE: Former Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.) told a campaign-trail audience earlier this month that he had, but later recanted. Edwards voted to authorize war.[/u]
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2007/6/1/111340.shtml?s=us
John Edwards Admits He Never Read Iraq Intel Report :
Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards misspoke when he said he read a National Intelligence Report before authorizing the war in Iraq, his campaign said.
"Edwards did not read the classified report that contained doubts about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, his spokesman said, even though it was available to him at the time when he was a North Carolina senator serving on the Intelligence Committee."
Decker is a Hypocrite :o :o :o :o :o
-
Yes, a hypocrite is exactly what Decker is.
The one person that Decker thought was the most and best deserving of all the candidates to be our next President (John Edwards) , was a person who voted for the War in Iraq, and yet did not even take the time to read the Intelligence reports, meaning either Edwards is lazy, or did not think it was not important, or both.
Decker is a Hypocrite :o :o :o :o :o
Eldon, Ozark and whomever else resides in your splintered mind, are you saying that Edwards is a fool for trusting the word of the president of the United States of America?
That's what I thought.
-
Eldon, Ozark and whomever else resides in your splintered mind, are you saying that Edwards is a fool for trusting the word of the president of the United States of America?
That's what I thought.
What I am saying is that you are a hypocrite :o :o :o
John Edwards Admits He Never Read Iraq Intel Report :
"Edwards did not read the classified report that contained doubts about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, his spokesman said, even though it was available to him at the time when he was a North Carolina senator serving on the Intelligence Committee."
-
I am saying that you are a hypocrite !
How am I a hypocrite? Do explain.
I chose to support a candidate with the best health plan and a firm promise that he'd end the Iraq fiasco. The man admitted his mistake about voting for the war.
I accepted his apology and appreciated his candor.
Bush still thinks that Iraq is the central front on terror...as does McCain. I imagine you agree with that nonsense.
-
How am I a hypocrite? Do explain.
I chose to support a candidate with the best health plan and a firm promise that he'd end the Iraq fiasco. The man admitted his mistake about voting for the war.
I accepted his apology and appreciated his candor.
Bush still thinks that Iraq is the central front on terror...as does McCain. I imagine you agree with that nonsense.
""Edwards did not read the classified report that contained doubts about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, his spokesman said, even though it was available to him at the time when he was a North Carolina senator serving on the Intelligence Committee."
"that contained doubts about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq"
"that contained doubts about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq"
"that contained doubts about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq"
So you come on GetBig constantly with your anti-War links. Yet You think a man that cant find the time or the importance in reading the intelligence reports, before voting to send men and woman off to war, is the most qualified to be our President !
You can Spin all you want Decker, but that is as weak as it gets.
You are a Hypocrite :o :o :o :o
-
Hypocrite (Decker) read the following :
""Edwards did not read the classified report that contained doubts about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, his spokesman said, even though it was available to him at the time when he was a North Carolina senator serving on the Intelligence Committee."
So you come on here with your anti war rhetoric, preaching how wrong the war was, and etc..
Yet the one guy who you think is the most qualified to be our President, did even take the time to read the intelligence reports.
You can Spin all you want Decker, but that is as weak as it gets. You think a man that cant find the time or the importance in reading the intelligence reports, before voting to send men and woman off to war, is the most qualified to be our President, and on top of that you come on GetBig constantly with your anti War links.
You are a Hypocrite :o :o :o :o
You know what that means to me? You're out of your fucking mind.
He said he fucked up and I believe him.
Let's make some sense. I know details run counter to your shallow-minded reactionary political analysis but bear with me.
The president and his drones bleat on about Iraq's imminent threat to the US backed up by US intelligence.
They lied.
Edwards believed them and voted to give the president authority, IF NEEDED, to deal with the supposed threat.
Edwards fucked up twice: he didn't do his homework and he trusted the president who turned out to be a lying sack of shit.
Edwards apologized for his poor judgment. And I supported him as the best candidate.
And I'm a hypocrite how?
-
You know what that means to me? You're out of your fucking mind.
He said he fucked up and I believe him.
Let's make some sense. I know details run counter to your shallow-minded reactionary political analysis but bear with me.
The president and his drones bleat on about Iraq's imminent threat to the US backed up by US intelligence.
They lied.
Edwards believed them and voted to give the president authority, IF NEEDED, to deal with the supposed threat.
Edwards fucked up twice: he didn't do his homework and he trusted the president who turned out to be a lying sack of shit.
Edwards apologized for his poor judgment. And I supported him as the best candidate.
And I'm a hypocrite how?
So he admits to a "fuck up", that sent men and woman off to War, 1000's have died, yet He could not even take the time out from combing his hair to read the intelligence reports : "that contained doubts about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq"
If you are as Anti-War as Decker is, then in no way is this just a little "fuck up",
and Yet this is the most qualified man in the eyes, of Mr. "Anti-War" Decker.......
You are a Hypocrite :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o
-
So he admits to a "fuck up", that sent men and woman off to War, 1000's have died, yet He could not even take the time out from combing his hair to read the intelligence reports : "that contained doubts about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq"
If you are as Anti-War as Decker is, then in no way is this just a little "fuck up",
and Yet this is the most qualified man in the eyes, of Mr. "Anti-War" Decker.......
You are a Hypocrite :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o
I have similar discussions with my 5 year old nephew but unlike you, he learns. You paraphrase my statements to fit your own warped views. It was only GW Bush that ordered the invasion of Iraq. No one else has the constitutional authority to do that. Only a very sick man or woman such as yourself would cast Edwards in the same light as that intentional murderer George Bush.
What should I expect from you though?
You have created alternate account identities to buttress your points. Eldon AND Ozark have spoken. Have you told your therapist about your 'friend'?
-
"Oh, and the reason we haven't found any weapons of mass destruction is that they're all in a warehouse in Topeka waiting for the next right-wing militia asshat to work his hatred of the federal government to a sufficient boiling point due to the fact that the local TV station has once again cancelled Dukes of Hazzard."
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=220648.0
Why does this quote remind me of Eldon/Ozark?
-
I have similar discussions with my 5 year old nephew but unlike you, he learns. You paraphrase my statements to fit your own warped views. It was only GW Bush that ordered the invasion of Iraq. No one else has the constitutional authority to do that. Only a very sick man or woman such as yourself would cast Edwards in the same light as that intentional murderer George Bush.
What should I expect from you though?
You have created alternate account identities to buttress your points. Eldon AND Ozark have spoken. Have you told your therapist about your 'friend'?
You can call me sick, childish, warped and all the other name you can think of if you prefer, but the truth is you are a hypocrite !
2 Choices :
A.) Either War is something that deserves a Senator reading every intelligence report he or she can, before casting a vote that could
contribute to the death of 1000's
or
B.) War does not deserve taking away time from combing your hair, to read intelligence reports : "that contained doubts
about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq"
Edwards choose "B" :o
And Decker choose Edwards :o :o
Decker is a Hypocrite :o :o :o
-
You are a hypocite Decker.
You can cal me sick, childish, warped and all the other name you can think of if you prefer, but the truth is you are a hypocrite !
2 Choices.
A.) Either War is something that deserves a Senator reading every intelligence report he or she can, before casting a vote that could contribute to the death of 1000's
or
B.) War does not deserve taking away time from combing your hair, to read intelligence report: "that contained doubts about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq"
Edwards choose "B" :o
And Decker choose Edwards :o
Decker is a Hypocrite !
Ozark, When you lay it out with such logical precision...how could I doubt you. I am a hypocrite. Why? Because I supported John Edwards who gave President Bush the authority to use force to defend our country and Bush misused that authority.
Why it's as clear as day? And here I wasted all my time spinning this untenable position that an apologetic Edwards was worth a look as command in chief when all along he was the equivalent of the murderous George Bush.
It's so damn easy.
Thank you Ozark. Next time I'll check with you when my thinking becomes so muddled.
And thanks Eldon, for helping me see my blatant hypocrisy.
-
Ozark, When you lay it out with such logical precision...how could I doubt you. I am a hypocrite. Why? Because I supported John Edwards who gave President Bush the authority to use force to defend our country and Bush misused that authority.
Why it's as clear as day? And here I wasted all my time spinning this untenable position that an apologetic Edwards was worth a look as command in chief when all along he was the equivalent of the murderous George Bush.
It's so damn easy.
Thank you Ozark. Next time I'll check with you when my thinking becomes so muddled.
And thanks Eldon, helping me see my blatant hypocrisy.
Nice try with the sarcasm approach. :o
But you are still a Hypocrite :o :o :o
You are welcome .
-
Nice try with the sarcasm approach. :o
But you are still a Hypocrite :o :o :o
Look Ozark, I still don't see the hypocrisy.
If I supported McCain, I would be a hypocrite.
Do you understand what the word 'hypocrite' means?
-
Hypocite = Decker
John Edwards own words " I voted for the War " http://www.johnedwards.com/issues/iraq/20071003-radio-address/
John Edwards Admits He Never Read Iraq Intel Report :
"Edwards did not read the classified report that contained doubts about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, his spokesman said, even though it was available to him at the time when he was a North Carolina senator serving on the Intelligence Committee."
"that contained doubts about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq"
Edwards was on the Intelligence Committee, it was his job to read the reports !
Mr. anti-War Decker thought that John Edwards was the best man to become our next President.
Decker is a hypocrite :o :o :o
-
Hypocite = Decker
John Edwards own words " I voted for the War " http://www.johnedwards.com/issues/iraq/20071003-radio-address/
John Edwards Admits He Never Read Iraq Intel Report :
"Edwards did not read the classified report that contained doubts about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, his spokesman said, even though it was available to him at the time when he was a North Carolina senator serving on the Intelligence Committee."
"that contained doubts about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq"
Edwards was serving on the Intelligence Committee, it was job to read the reports !
Mr. anti-War Decker thought that John Edwards was the best man to become our next President.
Decker is a hypocrite :o :o :o
Typical.
The cornered Ozark falls back on his assertions as revealed truth while plugging his ears with his fingers.
"I was wrong," Edwards wrote in a guest column published Sunday in The Washington Post. "It was a mistake to vote for this war in 2002. I take responsibility for that mistake."
Now Edwards says he made a mistake in 2002 when he voted to authorize the war, saying his vote was based on bad intelligence about weapons of mass destruction that Iraq was said to be harboring.
http://www.newsobserver.com/110/story/367328.html
I guess Edwards was looking at the white paper whitewash rewrite that the Bush administration did of CIA reports re the imminency of the Iraq "threat".
Cue Eldon to repost the word hypocrite.
Do you hear me Ozark?
-
John Edwards own words " I voted for the War " http://www.johnedwards.com/issues/iraq/20071003-radio-address/
John Edwards Admits He Never Read Iraq Intel Report :
"Edwards did not read the classified report that contained doubts about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, his spokesman said, even though it was available to him at the time when he was a North Carolina senator serving on the Intelligence Committee."
"that contained doubts about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq"
Edwards was on the Intelligence Committee, it was job to read the reports !
Mr. anti-War Decker thought that John Edwards was the best man to become our next President.
Decker is a hypocrite :o :o :o
-
Am I the only person who gets the irony of the USA having a section 100% dedicated to violating international law, abusing people, holding people with no charge, torturing people, sodomising people..........
On Cuban soil.....then complaining all the time about Cuba having poor human rights ???
Yes, you are the only one.
HTH.
-
U realize this says nothing..there is no first hand information in this release. I could not allow this to be released if it were up to me. There are no facts investigated first hand by these people. They looked at documents and then drew their own conclusions. Thats why its on some obscure site. This shit is kinda funny, compared to what the enemy actually does. U guys all live in fuzzy bunny land.
Hugo..they're the enemy....they don't count. I'm not going to kill them if they surrender, they could be a good source of intel. I fully realize, where the roles switched, I'd be dead regardless of how the US treats their pows. This is a different war. U guys are so so insulated from this. Get a grip dude...the West is in trouble.
You are right.
Since you are or have been in the "suck", your words are the only ones here that ring true.
Insulated...how true.
-
I'm defending the troops and they wa the war is currently done....no I don't I. I wish u guys would get past bashing this country..ok maybe not u but the cluster of libs on here. Ur just a disgruntled Repub without a horse in this race. I can't say I blame u.
Most of us here are with you and the troops.
-
Yes, you are the only one.
HTH.
You've admitted you're a jingoist, Moosejay.
By definition you wear no moral glasses. Your only gauge for right/wrong is how it serves US agenda for gaining power. You've admitted this much.
Your agenda excludes your opinion. Sorry. Can't take any kind of moral high ground and cite "the troops" as they are but pawns in the global power grab agenda you already declared allegience too. You can't have it both ways. Your position is a valid and necessary one - but citing troop welfare is in poor taste.
-
You've admitted you're a jingoist, Moosejay.
By definition you wear no moral glasses. Your only gauge for right/wrong is how it serves US agenda for gaining power. You've admitted this much.
Your agenda excludes your opinion. Sorry. Can't take any kind of moral high ground and cite "the troops" as they are but pawns in the global power grab agenda you already declared allegience too. You can't have it both ways. Your position is a valid and necessary one - but citing troop welfare is in poor taste.
Disagree
-
You've admitted you're a jingoist, Moosejay.
By definition you wear no moral glasses. Your only gauge for right/wrong is how it serves US agenda for gaining power. You've admitted this much.
Your agenda excludes your opinion. Sorry. Can't take any kind of moral high ground and cite "the troops" as they are but pawns in the global power grab agenda you already declared allegience too. You can't have it both ways. Your position is a valid and necessary one - but citing troop welfare is in poor taste.
Lots of jingoists on the board; Moosejay, HH6, Berserkfury, Beach Buffoon...maybe even you 240...which makes me very sad... :'(
I personally think you are too good to be such.
-
Disagree
I see your point.
-
Disagree
Writing 'disagree' is not a counterargument.
-
Lots of jingoists on the board; Moosejay, HH6, Berserkfury, Beach Buffoon...maybe even you 240...which makes me very sad... :'(
I personally think you are too good to be such.
I'm willing to admit I'm a POS hypocrite for being okay with US imperialism if it means we are able to maintain our way of life. I am very much against pilferage and abuses of public trust, as well as domestic constitutional abuses. Most of the jingos here are in denial of the bad shit Bush does, and are very dishonest about the war. HH6 is honest - it's about oil. BBum and others can't admit it - they are coward's jingoists, because it conflicts with their moral code.