Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => General Topics => Topic started by: 240 is Back on September 19, 2006, 07:55:34 AM
-
Canadian Report Faults Mounties, U.S. for Deportation
By ROB GILLIES, AP
TORONTO (Sept. 19) - The United States "very likely" sent a Canadian software engineer to Syria, where he was tortured, based on the false accusation by Canadian authorities that he was suspected of links to al-Qaida, according to a new government report.
Syrian-born Maher Arar was exonerated of all suspicion of terrorist activity by the 2 1/2-year commission of inquiry into his case, which urged the Canadian government to offer him financial compensation. Arar is perhaps the world's best-known case of extraordinary rendition -- the U.S. transfer of foreign terror suspects to third countries without court approval.
"I am able to say categorically that there is no evidence to indicate that Mr. Arar has committed any offense or that his activities constitute a threat to the security of Canada," Justice Dennis O'Connor said Monday in a three-volume report on the findings of the inquiry, part of which was made public.
Arar was traveling on a Canadian passport when he was detained at New York's Kennedy Airport on Sept. 26, 2002, on his way home from vacation in Tunisia.
Arar said U.S. authorities sent him to Syria for interrogation as a suspected member of al-Qaida, a link he denied.
He spent nearly a year in prison in Syria and made detailed allegations after his release in 2003 about extensive interrogation, beatings and whippings with electrical cables.
O'Connor criticized the U.S. and recommended that Ottawa file formal protests with both Washington and the Syrian government over Arar's treatment.
"The American authorities who handled Mr. Arar's case treated Mr. Arar in a most regrettable fashion," O'Connor wrote. "They removed him to Syria against his wishes and in the face of his statements that he would be tortured if sent there. Moreover, they dealt with Canadian officials involved with Mr. Arar's case in a less than forthcoming manner."
The U.S. is already under intense criticism from human rights groups over the practice of sending suspects to countries where they could be tortured.
U.S. and Syrian officials refused to cooperate with the Canadian inquiry.
-
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=95287.msg1374424#msg1374424 (http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=95287.msg1374424#msg1374424)
-
So what does everyone think?
Does this bug you, that a guy was whisked away from his family and his boring job as a programmer to spend a year being beaten and tortured by the US, in Syria?
The US just grabbed this Canadian guy, destroyed a year of his life, then let him go. No accountbaility, no punishment, no nothing.
Why doesn't this really upset people? Is this a race thing? If they had tortured a blond haired blue eyes woman for a year, would you feel differently? I cannot tell if this is a race thing, a national thing, or a constitutional thing for yall.
-
You wont find any people named BeachBum or Mr. Intestone posting in this topic. To them destroying peoples' lives and taking them to prison without trail is all for the good of the American people and the United States Constitution, which they don't mind violating cuz they are "protecting" it and the American people.
:-\
-
You wont find any people named BeachBum or Mr. Intestone posting in this topic. To them destroying peoples' lives and taking them to prison without trail is all for the good of the American people and the United States Constitution, which they don't mind violating cuz they are "protecting" it and the American people.
:-\
I am completely cool with protecting out nation. However, this guy coudl have been interrogated in the US, without a year of torture, and the same result would have been reached.
Shit, imagine what this guy is going to go through, for the rest of his life. imagine being grabbed off an airplane for no reason, then spedning the next year being beaten, fake drowned, starved, exposed to extreme temps, FOR NO REASON.
Then he just gets sent home. If this doesn't bother you, please explain why. If 10,000 people were whisked off to Syria tomorrow, would you feel the same? 100,000? 1 million US citizens shipped to Syria for torture?
Where do you draw the line?
-
I am completely cool with protecting out nation. However, this guy coudl have been interrogated in the US, without a year of torture, and the same result would have been reached.
Shit, imagine what this guy is going to go through, for the rest of his life. imagine being grabbed off an airplane for no reason, then spedning the next year being beaten, fake drowned, starved, exposed to extreme temps, FOR NO REASON.
Then he just gets sent home. If this doesn't bother you, please explain why. If 10,000 people were whisked off to Syria tomorrow, would you feel the same? 100,000? 1 million US citizens shipped to Syria for torture?
Where do you draw the line?
Well, looks like this stuff just wont go through some people because to them they are protecting America. To them, they're making sacrafices but not on their own expense. ::)
Seriously, they violate the rights of some Canadian citzen, then even American citzens who're muslim, then they'll be able to justify doing it any other American. Allowing shit like this to happen opens the flood gates, and closes the door on true liberty and freedom which is what the United States supposedly stands for, according to the same assholes who are for wiretapping and imprisonment without trail.
-
So what does everyone think?
Does this bug you, that a guy was whisked away from his family and his boring job as a programmer to spend a year being beaten and tortured by the US, in Syria?
The US just grabbed this Canadian guy, destroyed a year of his life, then let him go. No accountbaility, no punishment, no nothing.
Why doesn't this really upset people? Is this a race thing? If they had tortured a blond haired blue eyes woman for a year, would you feel differently? I cannot tell if this is a race thing, a national thing, or a constitutional thing for yall.
I think it's outrageous the Canadian government falsely accused this guy of being a terrorist.
-
I think it's outrageous the Canadian government falsely accused this guy of being a terrorist.
WTF?
Do you think it's outrageous it was the US govt torturing him?
Shit, man. Can you seriously look at this guy with his kids and just dismiss what happened? This man was fucking tortured for a year. He was denied a lawyer, denied his family, denied his right, for no reason.
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=95452.0;attach=103292;image)
-
WTF?
Do you think it's outrageous it was the US govt torturing him?
Shit, man. Can you seriously look at this guy with his kids and just dismiss what happened? This man was fucking tortured for a year. He was denied a lawyer, denied his family, denied his right, for no reason.
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=95452.0;attach=103292;image)
"false accusation by Canadian authorities that he was suspected of links to al-Qaida"
Absolutely outrageous.
-
So you would rather Canada just ignore it next time they think they know of a terrorist???
"This guy could have a nuclear weapon, but no! don't tell the Americans, look what happend last time"
-
So you would rather Canada just ignore it next time they think they know of a terrorist???
"This guy could have a nuclear weapon, but no! don't tell the Americans, look what happend last time"
I would rather Canada or the US do their interrogation here in the US, perhaps employing a technique like a polygraph. I would give the man a lawyer, and while he may pose such a threat to nat'l security that no bail or 5th amendment may apply, surely a polygraph and a little truth serum (you inject it and people cannot lie) would get to the bottom of it quickly. Then you would file it with the courts, so it is on record.
No one gets beaten. No one loses a year of their life to a Syrian torture chamber. There ARE ways to find out the truth without damn near killing people.
-
I would rather Canada or the US do their interrogation here in the US, perhaps employing a technique like a polygraph. I would give the man a lawyer, and while he may pose such a threat to nat'l security that no bail or 5th amendment may apply, surely a polygraph and a little truth serum (you inject it and people cannot lie) would get to the bottom of it quickly. Then you would file it with the courts, so it is on record.
No one gets beaten. No one loses a year of their life to a Syrian torture chamber. There ARE ways to find out the truth without damn near killing people.
Nooo I wasnt talking to you, I was talking to Beach Bum. He acts like Canada made the mistake by telling us.
-
Nooo I wasnt talking to you, I was talking to Beach Bum. He acts like Canada made the mistake by telling us.
LOL gotcha@!
For real, I don't see why they don't give the guys some heroin and just start asking questions. There are a variety of chemicals which make guys just spill their guts. Then, ask them sober using a polygraph.
I don't see why we have to hook up car batteries to genitals.
-
I listened to another man who was sent to Morocco and he told of each month how they would slice and dice on his privates, let them heal up and begin again... Said it became like routine. The camera had to stop filming because he couldn't bring himself to continue and broke down crying. All the time I just kept thinking about Bush saying he has never and would never order torture and how it wasn't American do to so. ::)
-
I listened to another man who was sent to Morocco and he told of each month how they would slice and dice on his privates, let them heal up and begin again... Said it became like routine. The camera had to stop filming because he couldn't bring himself to continue and broke down crying. All the time I just kept thinking about Bush saying he has never and would never order torture and how it wasn't American do to so. ::)
And there will be 4 guys who will chime in with "if that's what it takes for us to be safe, so be it".
problem is, there are ways to get info that don't involve *sawing their f**king cock off*.
Can you imagine sitting through that? For what? Because some other prick being tortured picked your name out of a phone book and pointed the finger at you?
The real purpose of torture, IMO, is to incite the muslim population to continue acting crazy, and crazier. Do republicans benefit from insane muslims blowing shit up? You'd better believe they do? If iran, iraq, and afghan were all settled tomorrow, you know a dem would scoot right into office.
I don't care where you stand politically - torture is unamerican. We have the technology to do so many things, but we can't find a way to extract info without putting a fucking blase to a man's genitals? I am disgusted.
-
And there will be 4 guys who will chime in with "if that's what it takes for us to be safe, so be it".
problem is, there are ways to get info that don't involve *sawing their f**king cock off*.
Can you imagine sitting through that? For what? Because some other prick being tortured picked your name out of a phone book and pointed the finger at you?
The real purpose of torture, IMO, is to incite the muslim population to continue acting crazy, and crazier. Do republicans benefit from insane muslims blowing shit up? You'd better believe they do? If iran, iraq, and afghan were all settled tomorrow, you know a dem would scoot right into office.
I don't care where you stand politically - torture is unamerican. We have the technology to do so many things, but we can't find a way to extract info without putting a fucking blase to a man's genitals? I am disgusted.
You just hit the nail on the head.... Good post! What people wouldn't react this way too... If the tables were turned and our people were being subjected to these things under these conditions with occupations of our land, what patriot wouldn't get extreme in the defense of Americans... Red Dawn... They know exactly what they're doing and it's not for the purpose of getting Intel to save us... Everything we seem to be doing seems geared toward creating the extremism we're suppose to be squelching, all while listening to doublespeak with sugar on top from our leadership... :-\ I'm not for being soft on extremists--I'm even more not for breeding it.
-
Canadian Report Faults Mounties, U.S. for Deportation
By ROB GILLIES, AP
TORONTO (Sept. 19) - The United States "very likely" sent a Canadian software engineer to Syria, where he was tortured, based on the false accusation by Canadian authorities that he was suspected of links to al-Qaida, according to a new government report.
Dumbasses . . . Canadian authorities=root of all evil. ;D
-
Nooo I wasnt talking to you, I was talking to Beach Bum. He acts like Canada made the mistake by telling us.
Canada obviously made a mistake by falsely accusing the guy of being a terrorist.
-
Canada obviously made a mistake by falsely accusing the guy of being a terrorist.
And so did the United States by violating his basic human rights, admit it.
-
And so did the United States by violating his basic human rights, admit it.
I admit Canada really screwed up by giving the U.S. false information that the U.S. relied on in trying to protect my family and me from a potential terrorist.
-
Beach Bum & Al Gebra, you may make light of this, ...but it holds grave ramifications for co-operation in the future. The Canadian government was wrong in their assumptions, ...however, it was NOT the Canadian government doing the torturing. If governments around the world suspect that this is how their citizens will be treated, how much co-operation & intel do you think they'll be willng to share in the future? How long do you think it will be before citizens of these countries demand their governments cut-off the information flow to the US, ...and where does that leave the American people if governments refuse to share intel with the US gov? It's certainly something to think about.
-
I think it's outrageous the Canadian government falsely accused this guy of being a terrorist.
They didn't say he was a terrorist, they falsely stated he was suspected of being a terrorist.
-
So what does everyone think?
Does this bug you, that a guy was whisked away from his family and his boring job as a programmer to spend a year being beaten and tortured by the US, in Syria?
The US just grabbed this Canadian guy, destroyed a year of his life, then let him go. No accountbaility, no punishment, no nothing.
Why doesn't this really upset people? Is this a race thing? If they had tortured a blond haired blue eyes woman for a year, would you feel differently? I cannot tell if this is a race thing, a national thing, or a constitutional thing for yall.
Rob,
The element of race is so prevalent within this entire so called 'War on Terror' that anyone who denies it is either blind or a liar.
I leave you with this editorial piece that truly speaks to the heart of it.
Globalization And Terror
by Toni Solo
Thursday, 31 August 2006
Opinion: Toni Solo (http://www.tonisolo.net)
The bomb attacks in Madrid in 2004 and London in 2005 raised the issue of racism especially starkly for politicians in Europe as well as for their North American and Pacific allies. No matter how they spin it, the fundamental question they face is whether they value people's lives on racist criteria or not. The record of their responses to terror attacks by the US government and its allies weakens their condemnations of such attacks against civilians in the US and Europe.
Those politicians have never been able to explain away their implementation of life-taking sanctions and bombardment through the 1990s against the civilian population of Iraq. Nor have they explained adequately their failure to act against decades of murderous attacks on civilians by Israel in the Occupied Territories and Lebanon. It is impossible justify their own life-taking sanctions against the Palestinians. Nor can they legitimately excuse murderous attacks on civilians by their own and allied forces in Haiti, Iraq and Afghanistan.
Cuba, Nicaragua, Angola, Mozambique
Official responses to terror attacks and alleged bomb plots as well as the echoes of those responses in the corporate media are as interesting for what they omit as for what they say. Cuba has suffered attacks from US protected terrorists for decades. When the United States government was condemned by the International Court of Justice in 1986 for promoting terror attacks against Nicaragua, the silence on the part of European and other US allied governments was shameful. The clear impression one got at the time was that terror attacks paid for and facilitated by the United States government were acceptable to US allied governments because they happened in a tiny, far away, country unreasonably resisting US power.
A similar attitude characterised responses to the terror wars waged by South Africa's apartheid regime against Mozambique and Angola. In all these countries attacks on public transport, on clinics, on schools, on farm cooperatives by terrorists supported by the United States and its allies were routine. In Nicaragua, typical incidents included a couple of attacks - among hundreds of others - on buses in the rural areas of San Juan de Limay and San Jose de Bocay, killing over thirty civilians in each case and wounding dozens more. The US government paid for the explosives and trained the perpetrators. Margaret Thatcher and her colleagues cheered them on.
Unequal even in death
Since such attacks have begun to occur recently in Europe the responses of governments have been both repressive and obtuse. In evading the question of racism, recent pronouncements by British government officials actually put it more sharply than ever. Do these officials think the lives of the victims of their government's policies are worth less than the lives of their own citizens?
Is a Palestinian or Lebanese child murdered by Israeli settlers or troops worth less than a child who dies in London in a bomb attack? Is an Iraqi or Afghan woman murdered by a US bomber worth less than a woman blown up on the London Underground? Perhaps the question appears absurd. In a sane world it would be. But if those lives are of equal worth, why does British government policy - and by extension the policies of all US allied governments - not reflect that?
This very issue prompted a letter by three British Muslim MPs to Tony Blair that has provoked a strong counterattack from the British government. British government ministers and their officials do not, in fact, seem to think those lives are of equal worth. This really is clear from the long-standing and still current policies of the Blair government and those of its allies. Faced with those policies, their opponents in Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine and Lebanon are entitled to dismiss US-UK axis appeals to long established moral and political norms as hypocritical and worthless.
By their very nature, those norms apply to everyone or, if not, then to no one. Given the general tendency of the Bush and Blair governments to trash fundamental humanitarian and human rights standards, the way Blair's officials try to spin responses to bomb attacks and alleged bombing plots is instructive. The tangled propaganda web they weave seems more and more to be an integral move in the great corporate globalization scam.
"Billy Liar" - Whitehall set text
Lately, the main front on which Blair government officials have attacked has been against accusations making the self-evident link between government foreign policy and terror bombings. A report in the London Observer of August 13th quoted Foreign Office Minister Kim Howells - "The accusations were 'facile' and 'dangerous', he said. 'I have no doubt that there are many issues which incite people to loathe government policies - but not to strap explosives to themselves and go out and murder innocent people.' "
But what if those government policies themselves mean training, supplying and paying military personnel to "go out and murder innocent people" in Iraq and Afghanistan or if they give support to governments like that of Israel who "go out and murder innocent people"? It is implausible to think such policies might not invite reprisals of one kind or another, including vicious bomb attacks. Still, Blair's spokespersons mechanically blurt out the unchanging script. Whether from Howells or from maligant hoods like Home Secretary John Reid or from unconvincing, time-serving consiglieri like Margaret Beckett, the line seldom varies.
Critics of government are "foolish". To suggest a link between government policies and terrorist reprisals is "dangerous". A key part of the propaganda offensive is to try and shift the focus back beyond the invasion of Iraq even though no bombings in Europe involving massive loss of life like those in London and Madrid had happened for many years before the watershed event of the second Iraq war. The same Observer report quoted Beckett urging on the BBC, "Let's put the blame where it belongs: with people who wantonly want to take innocent lives.'
Few will disagree with that. Step forward George W. Bush, Tony Blair and the clutch of war criminals in their respective Cabinets responsible for wanton illegal aggression against the people of Iraq. One might leave it there, since things seem bad enough already given the criminal irresponsibility and recklessness towards human life of the governments concerned.
Does globalization require terror?
But things are probably much worse even than they appear at first glance. If one stops to ask why things should be as they are, one has to consider why these leaders and their governments are pursuing policies against the interests of their own peoples. The inherently racist double standard, the determination to instill fear, the refusal to engage criticism rationally, all indicate a deeply entrenched, radically anti-democratic narcissism.
A partial answer to the puzzle may be that the bogus "war on terror" is looking ever more like globalization's strategic twin. What is billed as the "war on terror", sired by the "war on drugs" out of "the communist menace", looks far more plausible when interpreted as a fight to enforce injustice - a "war on the poor" to keep them in their place. Corporate globalization does entail wholesale injustice, as all the auxiliary machinery of bilateral trade and aid trickery, debt extortion and "democratic elections" (optional in many cases) backed up by terrifying military power, makes so very clear.
The empire and its agents get to plunder resource-rich countries through political chicanery and terror, supported by palliative measures to patch up the bewildered victims. Equitable global economic policies would end the current privileged position of North America, Europe and their Pacific allies. If the World Trade Organization is now moribund, it is because those countries refuse to negotiate a fair deal with the rest of the world. But long before the most recent WTO debacle, they had already begun to pick off their victims one by one and so get their way piecemeal instead of at one go.
The Israeli microcosm
In this they are following Israel faithfully. International tolerance of Israeli crimes against the Palestinians seems to be based on both envy and fear. The US government and its allies appear to envy Israel's colonialist settler State because it embodies what they want to do to the rest of the world. A racist entity grabs resources from a vulnerable population using unrestrained military force and bogus legality. At the same time it projects itself as "the region's only democracy", basing its political and economic practice on systematic injustice and discrimination against the people it has dispossessed. All of this is globalization in a nutshell.
But at the same time, the imperialist political networks fear the Israeli example because ultimately, like their own, Israeli power and privilege is based on the threat of nuclear weapons. What is that threat if it is not a terrorist threat - "do what we want - or else"? This is the relationship that subsists between Israel and the imperialist drive towards corporate globalization. Israel's defeat in Lebanon has brought that relationship into much sharper focus.
The infamous imperialist double standard becomes progressively more glaring as it becomes harder to apply. The equation of a-nod's-as-good-as-a-wink law for the US and its allies, versus vicious sanctions plus shock-and-awe firestorms and depleted uranium munitions for everyone else, is breaking down. That probably means the agreed international settlement based on the 1948 UN Declaration of Human Rights is finished, since it can no longer be distorted to serve the purposes of empire. If it is done for, the fundamental reason will have been the refusal of the United States government and its European and Pacific allies to implement it in good faith.
Beyond terror - justice
In any case, time is against those traditional world powers. Latin America provides a good example of wider international trends confounding their imperialist project. For the moment, Latin America's drive towards integration as a powerful regional bloc has been stalled by Alan Garcia's dodgy electoral victory in Peru and Alvaro Uribe's narco-terror enforced electoral win in Colombia. Throughout the region the US government and its allies are fomenting crisis to try and stem their steady loss of influence and power.
The current crisis in Mexico is a clear example of this. Whereas the US and its allies vigorously condemned the rigged election in the Ukraine, in Mexico they are tacitly supporting their Mexican clients' electoral putsch to deny opposition leader Lopez Obrador his legitimate victory. Why? Because Lopez Obrador rejects the corporate globalizing agenda promoted by the US government and its European and Pacific allies.
But the disenfranchised majority in Mexico are unlikely to accept quietly an illegitimate government imposed by the local imperial clients. The Mexican ruling class may well have to resort to wholesale repression with an uncertain outcome if they want to suppress popular rejection of their coup d'etat. Whatever happens in Mexico, results in upcoming elections in Brazil, Ecuador, Nicaragua and Venezuela are very likely to deepen the developing crisis of the imperialist corporate globalization project in Latin America.
George W. Bush, Tony Blair and their allies represent an ancient regime desperately trying to preserve its privileges and power. To do so they are ignoring long standing international agreements and norms based on generations of accumulated experience and wisdom. To get what they want, they apply their customary sadism to hurt recalcitrant but vulnerable populations. Confronted with setbacks as in Lebanon, they deploy their usual hypocrisy to explain it all away.
Incapable of acknowledging the possible rightness of another rationality - a rationality based, not like theirs on terror, but on justice - they are determined to drag humanity through one catastrophe after another. So maybe the war on terror is a real one, after all. Its main fronts are resistance to corporate globalization, defence of the legitimate rights of peoples, and re-affirmation of international humanitarian and human rights standards against the renegade war-mongers in Washington and London and their allies.
*************
-
It was unfortunate. The guy should be compensated in some way at the least.
-
For some reason it always comes back to the US government. For people that are so into lying governments, do you honestly think stuff like this doesn't go on other places? Canada made false accusations and he happened to be getting on an American plane during a time where those things aren't taken lightly. It's not like Americans are the only ones who do this, though, I promised someone is getting tortured somewhere right now. I'm not saying its right, but that's how things work sometimes. Or we could "inject him with heroin", yeah good idea 240, that's pretty ethical as well.
-
For some reason it always comes back to the US government. For people that are so into lying governments, do you honestly think stuff like this doesn't go on other places? Canada made false accusations and he happened to be getting on an American plane during a time where those things aren't taken lightly. It's not like Americans are the only ones who do this, though, I promised someone is getting tortured somewhere right now. I'm not saying its right, but that's how things work sometimes. Or we could "inject him with heroin", yeah good idea 240, that's pretty ethical as well.
Just because "I'm sure someone else is torturing someone right now too!" doesn't make it right. I'm sure someone is having sex with a sheep right now. Does that make you want to drive to the nearest petting zoo?
Come on, man. Torture is wrong. You could argue that when generals were captured in WWII and Vietnam, those men had FAR MORE useful info than terrorists do now. Those men had knowledge of TONS of bombs being dropped upon targets. With terrorists, it's one guy, maybe a small cell, and one attack. Obviously it's serious, but can you tell me why we didn't torture a nazi general or a viet cong general, but some 18-year old with suicide bomb and a map needs beat for 5 years?
Injecting someone with heroin is FAR MORE ethical than cutting small slits into their penis for 4 straight years, letting them heal, then doing it again.
Canada was incorrect in their intelligence. A legal interrogation, a polygraph and perhaps truth serum, would have proven that in about a week. Why this guy spends a year getting beaten is just beyond me.
Tell me - you're cool that it happened to one guy. if it happened to 10,000 people this month, would that bother you? Or 100,000?
-
Al-Gebra is a fucking hypocrite and piece of shit.
He's the type of homo that has one of those "THESE COLORS DON'T RUN!" stickers on his car, yet he approves of torture of an innocent man.
-
Beach Bum & Al Gebra, you may make light of this, ...but it holds grave ramifications for co-operation in the future. The Canadian government was wrong in their assumptions, ...however, it was NOT the Canadian government doing the torturing. If governments around the world suspect that this is how their citizens will be treated, how much co-operation & intel do you think they'll be willng to share in the future? How long do you think it will be before citizens of these countries demand their governments cut-off the information flow to the US, ...and where does that leave the American people if governments refuse to share intel with the US gov? It's certainly something to think about.
Who's making light of this? I think what the Canadian government did is dispicable. They should give this guy a seven-figure settlement. Oh, and free health care for life.
-
They didn't say he was a terrorist, they falsely stated he was suspected of being a terrorist.
Now there's a distinction without a difference if I ever heard one.
-
Al-Gebra is a fucking hypocrite and piece of shit.
He's the type of homo that has one of those "THESE COLORS DON'T RUN!" stickers on his car, yet he approves of torture of an innocent man.
;D . . . looks like I got under someone's skin.
Don't worry, they're not going to take you in anytime soon . . . I think most people who have any clue about the great nation of Bangladesh know that Bengali Muslims are among the most inept people on earth . . . except when it comes to begging from the Indian govt.
-
;D . . . looks like I got under someone's skin.
Don't worry, they're not going to take you in anytime soon . . . I think most people who have any clue about the great nation of Bangladesh know that Bengali Muslims are among the most inept people on earth . . . except when it comes to begging from the Indian govt.
I had no idea that you would stoop so low, to the point where you attack my background when you clearly don't know anything about me.
I don't have any idea why you'd attack the people of Bangladesh, some of the poorest and most underpriviledged people in the world. But I guess I'm not that surprised, people like you think anyone who doesn't agree with you is of lesser intelligence and pretty much inferior.
-
I had no idea that you would stoop so low, to the point where you attack my background when you clearly don't know anything about me.
I don't have any idea why you'd attack the people of Bangladesh, some of the poorest and most underpriviledged people in the world. But I guess I'm not that surprised, people like you think anyone who doesn't agree with you is of lesser intelligence and pretty much inferior.
didn't we meet when you saw the "these colors don't run" sticker on my car?
come on, two can play at that game.
I don't think Bangladeshis are inferior, or that they are naturally less intelligent . . . I merely think that the culture that you still owe allegiance to is pretty fucked up, that's all. it's fucked Bangladesh up, and it's fucked up a lot of other places in the world . . . but you're too blind to see it. people make a big song and dance about New Orleans, when the victims get relocated at govt. expense . . . they should go to Bangladesh in monsoon season and see what a real national tragedy looks like.
-
your just sour because you didnt get a free vacation also.
-
Now there's a distinction without a difference if I ever heard one.
There's a BIG difference and if you can't see it, ...you are in for a very RUDE awakening.
-
I'm kinda annoyed tonight.
A reporter is on O Reilly. He says he has inside info from CIA sources that 14 top Al Q guys gave up good intel. He can't name sources. He is telling us about which terrorists cried. He is telling us that they promised to torture Khalid Sheik's children if he didn't "give it up".
I wonder what the innocent Canadian went through. I wonder if the intel he gave them - the color of his blood, piss, shit, and vomit, and tears - really helped stopped terrorist.
-
There's a BIG difference and if you can't see it, ...you are in for a very RUDE awakening.
LOL. Okay Jag. Let the Canadian government issue a statement that you are an "accused" terrorist and see how that impacts your life. Geeze Louise. ::) Of course the government can and should move quickly when another country tells them a resident is a "suspected" terrorist.
-
LMAO
Bill O Reilly - I love this guy's show... but tonight, he define waterboarding as:
"Putting a little water on their face"
Wiki:
The modern practice of waterboarding, characterized in 2005 by former CIA director Porter J. Goss as a "professional interrogation technique"[1], involves tying the victim to a board with the head lower than the feet so that he or she is unable to move. A piece of cloth is held tightly over the face, and water is poured onto the cloth. Breathing is extremely difficult and the victim will be in fear of imminent death by asphyxiation. However, it is relatively difficult to aspirate a large amount of water since the lungs are higher than the mouth, and the victim is unlikely to actually die if this is done by skilled practitioners. Waterboarding may be used by captors who wish to impose anguish without leaving marks on their victims as evidence. [citation needed] Journalists Brian Ross and Richard Esposito described the CIA's waterboarding technique as follows:
The prisoner is bound to an inclined board, feet raised and head slightly below the feet. Cellophane is wrapped over the prisoner's face and water is poured over him. Unavoidably, the gag reflex kicks in and a terrifying fear of drowning leads to almost instant pleas to bring the treatment to a halt. According to the sources, CIA officers who subjected themselves to the water boarding technique lasted an average of 14 seconds before caving in. They said al Qaeda's toughest prisoner, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, won the admiration of interrogators when he was able to last over two minutes before begging to confess. "The person believes they are being killed, and as such, it really amounts to a mock execution, which is illegal under international law," said John Sifton of Human Rights Watch.[2]
-
Of course the government can and should move quickly when another country tells them a resident is a "suspected" terrorist.
What if Canada sends us a list tomorrow of 75,000 people who are suspected terrorists?
-
What if Canada sends us a list tomorrow of 75,000 people who are suspected terrorists?
What if you stopped posing incomprehensible, unrealistic hypotheticals? You would cut your daily post count in half. :)
-
What if you stopped posing incomprehensible, unrealistic hypotheticals? You would cut your daily post count in half. :)
but then he might actually have time to do some real work.
-
What if you stopped posing incomprehensible, unrealistic hypotheticals? You would cut your daily post count in half. :)
You, without a doubt, support the transport of one man to Syria for a year of torture because Canada suspected him of being a terrorist.
Would you feel the same if it was 75,000 people?
Monster dodge, by the way. You know where i"m going with this and you're scared to commit ;)
-
You, without a doubt, support the transport of one man to Syria for a year of torture because Canada suspected him of being a terrorist.
Would you feel the same if it was 75,000 people?
Monster dodge, by the way. You know where i"m going with this and you're scared to commit ;)
Why only 75,000? Why not 750,000? How about 7.5 million? ::)
-
Why only 75,000? Why not 750,000? How about 7.5 million? ::)
You're dodging.
You support the torture of one man. I am asking at what number you draw the line.
Once it becomes acceptable and legal in a country to torture one man, it becomes acceptable and legal to torture any number of men.
This is why short sighted people do not see the danger in this.
-
You're dodging.
You support the torture of one man. I am asking at what number you draw the line.
Once it becomes acceptable and legal in a country to torture one man, it becomes acceptable and legal to torture any number of men.
This is why short sighted people do not see the danger in this.
Where I did I say I "support the torture of one man"? Feel free to quote me.
-
Of course the government can and should move quickly when another country tells them a resident is a "suspected" terrorist.
Where I did I say I "support the torture of one man"? Feel free to quote me.
-
O'Reilly:
"Greta, coming up on the Factor, we have PROOF POSITIVE that torture does work."
Turns out, the proof was a reporter who said so. He said his sources were CIA and he couldn't reveal them. He was dropping all sorts of numbers and details. Zero verification or proof. Just "my sources tell me..."
I don't know if one guy's newspaper article can really be hailed as "PROOF POSITIVE"
Is this some new journalistic standard, that one guy's anonymous source is 'proof'? Or was OReilly being irresponsible? I watch his show every night... I know he commonly parrots the WH... but I must admit, hearing our proof positive is nothing but a reporter's word and a bunch of unverified CIA agents (who coincidentally make their living misleading people), feels a bit thin. If a CIA agent told me something, I'd heed some serious warning that the info might have an agenda.
-
Well when one of the these bastards makes one of our cities' glow..say Seattle, so the Canadians feel the pain as well, then i think we'll all get over the torture of some piece of shit rag terrorist. Yeah mistakes are made and yeah torture is not always necceasry but the Al Queda guy are pretty tough to crack and the info we get outa thm tends to be pretty good. Besides we don't act solely on interrogation information..we use it to paint a picture before we act...Sometimes the final piece of information or corroborative info comes from the interrogation. At this point the stakes are pretty high and we need to get past the politically correct stupidity and finish this thing.
-
HH6, How can you even equate or compare the interrogation of a terrorist captured on the battlefield with the rendition & torture of an innocent civilian on his way home from vacation? :-\
-
Dude, I really try and take you seriously, but you make it very difficult.
-
BB, I don't get it. I might be labelable as a skeptic, CT, etc, but I am very direct in my statements and beliefs.
You rant about how correct it is to torture one man, but you will not say that torturing 75,000 men under similar circumstances. Either it is, or it isn't. You condone one. But you don't condone bigger numbers?
You're either scared to say you support large scale torture, or you just realized that you've painted yourself into an indefensible position. I'll ask again:
Would you support the torture of 75,000 men?
-
BB, I don't get it. I might be labelable as a skeptic, CT, etc, but I am very direct in my statements and beliefs.
You rant about how correct it is to torture one man, but you will not say that torturing 75,000 men under similar circumstances. Either it is, or it isn't. You condone one. But you don't condone bigger numbers?
You're either scared to say you support large scale torture, or you just realized that you've painted yourself into an indefensible position. I'll ask again:
Would you support the torture of 75,000 men?
240, the good thing about these message boards is you can try and make stuff up, but you can't change my posts. I never ranted or said "how correct it is to torture one man." You can repeat that nonsense till the cows come home, but it just makes you sound like more of a lunatic. Sometimes I'll engage you (for fun), but dude you too often sound a few fries short of a Happy Meal, with some lucid intervals of sanity.
I don't support the torture of an innocent man. Never said that. So your question is rather silly.
Do you support consensual sex between humans and aliens?
-
I don't support the torture of an innocent man. Never said that. So your question is rather silly.
Do you support the torture of "suspected" terrorists?
-
Do you support the torture of "suspected" terrorists?
Look, if the guy was tortured and he's not a terrorist, I think that is awful. Like I said about ten times already, the Canadian government should compensate the poor guy.
Now if you want to ask whether I support the torture of a known terrorist, the is answer is "probably," if those on the ground believe it will help save American lives.
-
Look, if the guy was tortured and he's not a terrorist, I think that is awful. Like I said about ten times already, the Canadian government should compensate the poor guy.
Now if you want to ask whether I support the torture of a known terrorist, the is answer is "probably," if those on the ground believe it will help save American lives.
I didn't ask about that. This guy was a programmer and family man. Cases like his are in the 10s when our terrorist tortures are in the hundreds.
Problem is, once Bush gets his torture bill, we'll be torturing more people. instead of having 10 mistakes per 100, we'll now have 100 mistakes for 1000.
Then, we'll be torturing 10,000 men and hey, maybe 1,000 of them are completely innocent. maybe less, maybe more. But a thousand men just spent a year getting waterboarded, having car batteries attached to their genitals, or perhaps having small slits made in their genitals every monday for 52 weeks.
Stats don't lie. A percentage will always be wrongly accused. The more men you allow to be tortured, the more men will be wrongly tortured. This is why you cannot allow one.
besides, truth serum and polygraphs work. morphine makes people tell the truth. Ask any terrorist if he'd prefer an hour in a freezer, or a shot of morphine ;)
-
I didn't ask about that. This guy was a programmer and family man. Cases like his are in the 10s when our terrorist tortures are in the hundreds.
Problem is, once Bush gets his torture bill, we'll be torturing more people. instead of having 10 mistakes per 100, we'll now have 100 mistakes for 1000.
Then, we'll be torturing 10,000 men and hey, maybe 1,000 of them are completely innocent. maybe less, maybe more. But a thousand men just spent a year getting waterboarded, having car batteries attached to their genitals, or perhaps having small slits made in their genitals every monday for 52 weeks.
Stats don't lie. A percentage will always be wrongly accused. The more men you allow to be tortured, the more men will be wrongly tortured. This is why you cannot allow one.
besides, truth serum and polygraphs work. morphine makes people tell the truth. Ask any terrorist if he'd prefer an hour in a freezer, or a shot of morphine ;)
Did the U.S. torture the guy, or did I miss something?
-
Did the U.S. torture the guy, or did I miss something?
yes. We took him to Syria and tortured him for a year.
-
HH6, How can you even equate or compare the interrogation of a terrorist captured on the battlefield with the rendition & torture of an innocent civilian on his way home from vacation? :-\
I'm not...my comment was torture in general..If this guy is innocent then he should get paid.
-
yes. We took him to Syria and tortured him for a year.
lol. Here is an excerpt that you put in bold print in the first post in this thread: "He spent nearly a year in prison in Syria and made detailed allegations after his release in 2003 about extensive interrogation, beatings and whippings with electrical cables."
So now the U.S. tortured him in a Syrian prison? ::) Dang dude. This is like shooting fish in a barrel. ;D O.K. I'm going to be or I won't get up on time in the morning. Buenos noches gents.
-
lol. Here is an excerpt that you put in bold print in the first post in this thread: "He spent nearly a year in prison in Syria and made detailed allegations after his release in 2003 about extensive interrogation, beatings and whippings with electrical cables."
So now the U.S. tortured him in a Syrian prison? ::) Dang dude. This is like shooting fish in a barrel.
Yes. This is exactly true. Our CIA takes people to countries where torture is permitted. Syria is one of them. Intelligence agencies always work together no matter how much public posturing their leaders make. This story is straight from the AP.
He spent nearly a year in prison in Syria and made detailed allegations after his release in 2003 about extensive interrogation, beatings and whippings with electrical cables.
-
lol. Here is an excerpt that you put in bold print in the first post in this thread: "He spent nearly a year in prison in Syria and made detailed allegations after his release in 2003 about extensive interrogation, beatings and whippings with electrical cables."
So now the U.S. tortured him in a Syrian prison? ::) Dang dude. This is like shooting fish in a barrel. ;D O.K. I'm going to be or I won't get up on time in the morning. Buenos noches gents.
:-[ I get embarrassed for you sometimes, ...but this is just far too painful to watch.
The level of your ignorance is appalling. Scarier still, ...you not only have the audacity to open your mouth and speak, ...you probably vote too.
-
These are the words of the kindly faced, retired General who admitted to torturing suspected Algerian terrorists in the 1950's. He stated elsewhere that waterboarding was an extemely efficient and cost-effective way of extracting information. Waterboarding has been around since the stone tablets days. It's naive to think that even civilized countries don't engage in, or condone torture. It's just that we are now better informed and actually hear about it.
"I would do it [the torture and killings] again today if it were against Osama bin Laden," he said. "These were not reprisals... It was a case of stopping actions which were being prepared for deeds that would cause the deaths of French citizens in Algeria."
In his book, Special Services: Algeria 1955-57, Gen Aussaresses said that the government of the day was fully aware of those practices, and that he had only followed orders to eradicate terrorism.
"The best way to make a terrorist talk when he refused to say what he knew was to torture him," he wrote in one of the 19 passages singled out by the prosecution.
Of the hundreds of Algerian independence fighters summarily executed on his orders, he said in another passage: "I was indifferent. They had to be killed, that's all there is to it."
http://www.globalpolicy.org/intljustice/general/2001/1127ga.htm
-
:-[ I get embarrassed for you sometimes, ...but this is just far too painful to watch.
The level of your ignorance is appalling. Scarier still, ...you not only have the audacity to open your mouth and speak, ...you probably vote too.
If I had an ounce of respect for your intellect I MIGHT be a little offended. Instead, you helped me start off my day with a smile. Gracias. ;D
And I don't ever get embarrassed for you, because I'm not convinced you actually know how ridiculous many of your comments are.
Yes, I vote. Every election. It's a family affair.
-
Yes. This is exactly true. Our CIA takes people to countries where torture is permitted. Syria is one of them. Intelligence agencies always work together no matter how much public posturing their leaders make. This story is straight from the AP.
He spent nearly a year in prison in Syria and made detailed allegations after his release in 2003 about extensive interrogation, beatings and whippings with electrical cables.
So where does the AP say the CIA tortured this guy in a Syrian prison?
-
So where does the AP say the CIA tortured this guy in a Syrian prison?
God, I'm growing bored. You are uneducated in this arena. I don't know if you don't watch the news, or just don't keep track of politics. Bush went on tv last week and said that while our troop do not use torture, our intelligence agency does.
I'm not going to spoonfeed you this shit. It was all over the news. Go google bush's speech. You cry for free links, then crap on them, and it seems like you have no clue what is even going on in the world. Bush said last week that the CIA has successfully used the techniques on terrorists. Look it up yourself.
-
God, I'm growing bored. You are uneducated in this arena. I don't know if you don't watch the news, or just don't keep track of politics. Bush went on tv last week and said that while our troop do not use torture, our intelligence agency does.
I'm not going to spoonfeed you this shit. It was all over the news. Go google bush's speech. You cry for free links, then crap on them, and it seems like you have no clue what is even going on in the world. Bush said last week that the CIA has successfully used the techniques on terrorists. Look it up yourself.
Here is what you said when I asked whether the U.S. tortured this guy: "yes. We took him to Syria and tortured him for a year."
Prove it.
-
Here is what you said when I asked whether the U.S. tortured this guy: "yes. We took him to Syria and tortured him for a year."
Prove it.
Oh geez, you want me to spend my day proving that the US, Can, and the Ap are telling the truth.
Please turn on the news, do some reading, and catch up with the rest of us. This was all over the news last week. If I have to prove news claims now for you to believe anything, well, good luck with that. Bush admitted last week that we routinely torture terrorists in nations which allow it. wake up.
-
Oh geez, you want me to spend my day proving that the US, Can, and the Ap are telling the truth.
Please turn on the news, do some reading, and catch up with the rest of us. This was all over the news last week. If I have to prove news claims now for you to believe anything, well, good luck with that. Bush admitted last week that we routinely torture terrorists in nations which allow it. wake up.
Translation, "although I made the unsubstantiated allegation that the U.S. tortured a man in a Syrian prison, I have no evidence to support this allegation, and I expect you to find it for me."
You make a dumb comment, you find the facts to support it. You don't pay me enough to do your research.
:)
-
Injecting someone with heroin is FAR MORE ethical than cutting small slits into their penis for 4 straight years, letting them heal, then doing it again.
For one thing it said he was interrogated, beaten, and whipped with electrical cables. I didn't see where this guy's penis was cut. So lets use some basic logic to understand this: getting beating hurts, getting shot up with heroin can kill someone. Which one has a better chance of making someone's heart stop?
-
240, Let it go. Beachbum is either incredibly obtuse, ...or purposely trying to frustrate you.
Either way, ...it's not worth the effort. :-\
-
you didn't mention the free 3 meals and a haircut