quade 3 #1 March 8, 2008 This man brings dishonor to all Americans. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/08/bush.torture.ap/index.htmlquade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,672 #2 March 8, 2008 QuoteThis man brings dishonor to all Americans. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/08/bush.torture.ap/index.html So what's new?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #3 March 8, 2008 Frankly, I'm surprised that such TTPs governing the CIA are so transparent.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
likearock 1 #4 March 8, 2008 Interesting sidelight: McCain's role in the waterboarding debate. Apparently, he voted with Bush on this one in spite of his past opposition to torture. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
akarunway 1 #5 March 8, 2008 QuoteThis man brings dishonor to all Americans. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/08/bush.torture.ap/index.htmlYeah. And if McCain gets in there it's gonna be "same ole shit, different day"I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,271 #6 March 8, 2008 Quote "This is no time for Congress to abandon practices that have a proven track record of keeping America safe," the president said. Would be good if he could back up that statement. Oh wait, I'm sure releasing that information would be "endangering national security".Must be nice to be the king.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,672 #7 March 8, 2008 QuoteQuoteThis man brings dishonor to all Americans. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/08/bush.torture.ap/index.htmlYeah. And if McCain gets in there it's gonna be "same ole shit, different day" Well it could be: "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss".... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KelliJ 0 #8 March 8, 2008 QuoteThis man brings dishonor to all Americans. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/08/bush.torture.ap/index.html Yep, he should have signed it. I'll agree with you on that. But I do take issue with your statement that he brings dishonor to all Americans...unless, of course, you have been given some special power that lets you speak for all Americans. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jimmytavino 16 #9 March 8, 2008 According to the article, GW Bush calls waterboarding a useful tool... WHAT!!!????? the real....."Tool", in the 'war on terror'...? ... the President himself...and his VP who is so deep into financial holdings which benefit from WAR,, that it is a Sin..... i wonder if G W B ever heard of the phrase... "walk a mile in his shoes"...? If he is willing to condone such "interrogation tactics'... then he should face that technique himself,,,, .. If slots were auctioned off, to see who could be the one to administer the waterboarding procedure to Bush and all like him who find this acceptable,,,,, you could raise enough money to eliminate the federal deficit...Given the fact that many who are " in custody" as "terrorists",, know Nothing about such things... and may have been 'captured' in an unfair, and even illegal way,,,how in the world can we justify torturing them, in order to extract "information"...? these victims, would likely say ANYthing,, truthful or not, accurate or not, useful or not... just to end the 'session'... Then our "intelligence community' ( there's an oxymoron for you,, ) can chase down all those dead ends, and fringe statements, and maybe even useless "leads". like some collective barn yard full of headless chickens, running around... What has the U S A come to.??? This guy is going out, leaving as big a mess as possible.. for some other poor bastard, to deal with....... And not just regarding this issue tool.... indeed jmy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #10 March 8, 2008 QuoteQuoteThis man brings dishonor to all Americans. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/08/bush.torture.ap/index.html Yep, he should have signed it. I'll agree with you on that. But I do take issue with your statement that he brings dishonor to all Americans...unless, of course, you have been given some special power that lets you speak for all Americans. That's what elected leaders of countries are.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Botellines 0 #11 March 8, 2008 QuoteQuoteThis man brings dishonor to all Americans. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/08/bush.torture.ap/index.html Yep, he should have signed it. I'll agree with you on that. But I do take issue with your statement that he brings dishonor to all Americans...unless, of course, you have been given some special power that lets you speak for all Americans. Actually it only brings dishonor to the americans that voted him. Which democratically, usually they are the majority. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,271 #12 March 8, 2008 QuoteQuoteThis man brings dishonor to all Americans. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/08/bush.torture.ap/index.html Yep, he should have signed it. I'll agree with you on that. But I do take issue with your statement that he brings dishonor to all Americans...unless, of course, you have been given some special power that lets you speak for all Americans. The President speaks for America. If, in his capacity as leader of the country, he does something dishonorable then it reflects on the entire country. You seem to agree that supporting torture fits that bill, so...Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KelliJ 0 #13 March 8, 2008 You seem to confuse the President speaking for his country, the President vetoing legislation, and somebody assuming every citizen of the U.S. is dishonored by the Presidents actions. You are right, the President does represent his country. I never said he didn't. The President vetoed a bill he didn't agree with. I feel he should have signed it. Am I dishonored because of that? No, quite the contrary. I feel honored to live in a country where we can publicly disagree with our leader's actions. Can anyone...anyone at all...profess to know whether all Americans are dishonored? Not any more than any one person can profess to know that every American likes their eggs over easy. Now, before you have a tantrum and go off on a tangent, I will reinforce to you that I do not agree with Bush on this one. I am not dishonored by it and I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in that respect. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
loumeinhart 0 #14 March 8, 2008 Quote"Torture is a black mark against the United States," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California. "We will not stop until [the ban] becomes law." "President Bush's veto will be one of the most shameful acts of his presidency," Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Massachusetts, said in a statement Friday.Quote OK great, what's the solution then? Should we not interrogate at all? Not detain for that matter? Not even investigate or monitor? What if we need to get information from a person who we suspect has it? If it's a humanitarian thing, then why doesn't Dianne and Ed yell at China or maybe Great Brittain? or Iran, or the dozens of other small powers that make us look like sissies because we don't cut off limbs.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jakee 1,271 #15 March 8, 2008 QuoteOK great, what's the solution then? Should we not interrogate at all? No, don't be so silly. QuoteNot detain for that matter? No, don't be so silly. QuoteNot even investigate or monitor? No, don't be so silly. QuoteWhat if we need to get information from a person who we suspect has it? We interrogate them, but we don't use torture to do so. If you think that passing the bill would have been a massive blow to national security, could you point to any studies that show torture to be an effective means of obtaining information? QuoteIf it's a humanitarian thing, then why doesn't Dianne and Ed yell at China or maybe Great Britain? or Iran, or the dozens of other small powers that make us look like sissies because we don't cut off limbs.. ?? Lots of people do yell at China and Iran. If you've missed that you must really not be paying attention! Still, we cannot directly control what methods they use. We can directly control the methods that we use, and saying "But they're worse!" is not a justification for using torture.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jakee 1,271 #16 March 8, 2008 Quote You seem to confuse the President speaking for his country, the President vetoing legislation, and somebody assuming every citizen of the U.S. is dishonored by the Presidents actions. You confuse your own personal feelings about being dishonored with the fact that what the President decides to do does reflect on you as a citizen of his country. Quote Now, before you have a tantrum and go off on a tangent, I will reinforce to you that I do not agree with Bush on this one. Spare me the petty bullshit. I specifically noted in my previous post that I know you disagree with him. What's the point of saying it again except to get that little dig in?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites KelliJ 0 #17 March 8, 2008 Quote Quote You seem to confuse the President speaking for his country, the President vetoing legislation, and somebody assuming every citizen of the U.S. is dishonored by the Presidents actions. You confuse your own personal feelings about being dishonored with the fact that what the President decides to do does reflect on you as a citizen of his country. Quote Now, before you have a tantrum and go off on a tangent, I will reinforce to you that I do not agree with Bush on this one. Spare me the petty bullshit. I specifically noted in my previous post that I know you disagree with him. What's the point of saying it again except to get that little dig in? See...I KNEW you'd get all pissy! I recognize the fact that what Bush does reflects upon me as a citizen. What YOU fail to acknowledge is that just because you or anyone else may look down upon us because of what he says or does, does not mean everyone or anyone is dishonored. That, my dear boy, is a matter of personal opinion. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jakee 1,271 #18 March 8, 2008 QuoteSee...I KNEW you'd get all pissy! I noted that you through in a completely pointless personal dig. I have absolutely no problem at all with the part of your post that was on topic. Here's how it is - if you can stay on topic, so can I. if you persist in throwing in non-sequitur PAs then I'm going to point out your childishness. Happy? QuoteI recognize the fact that what Bush does reflects upon me as a citizen. What YOU fail to acknowledge is that just because you or anyone else may look down upon us because of what he says or does, does not mean everyone or anyone is dishonored. That, my dear boy, is a matter of personal opinion. Whether you are dishonored or not isn't always a matter of your own personal opinion. You don't have to feel dishonored to be dishonored.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites KelliJ 0 #19 March 8, 2008 Quotehether you are dishonored or not isn't always a matter of your own personal opinion. You don't have to feel dishonored to be dishonored. That point can be debated to no end. Are you dishonored living in a country that holds people in a position of royalty for no other reason than their family name? I would if I were you. Does that mean you are dishonored? That is for you to decide and nobody else, least of all me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites KidWicked 0 #20 March 8, 2008 Quote OK great, what's the solution then? Should we not interrogate at all? Not detain for that matter? Not even investigate or monitor? What if we need to get information from a person who we suspect has it? All strawman arguments. Your skills are weak.Coreece: "You sound like some skinheads I know, but your prejudice is with Christians, not niggers..." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #21 March 8, 2008 OK great, what's the solution then? Should we not interrogate at all? - no. That's silly. Not detain for that matter? - There is a legitimate argument that we should not. Not even investigate or monitor? - investigate? Yes. Monitor? With a warrant, yes. What if we need to get information from a person who we suspect has it? - I happen to have met a couple of guys through my job who, within ten minutes, I'm sure can get you, me, or anybody to confess to being the mastermind behind the IED attacks in Iraq. I'll bet they could get you to name all kinds of persons who are directly responsible, too. The reason why torture is bad is not just the morals and ethics, but also the notorious lack of reliability of the information provided. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites KelliJ 0 #22 March 8, 2008 Quote OK great, what's the solution then? Should we not interrogate at all? - no. That's silly. Not detain for that matter? - There is a legitimate argument that we should not. Not even investigate or monitor? - investigate? Yes. Monitor? With a warrant, yes. What if we need to get information from a person who we suspect has it? - I happen to have met a couple of guys through my job who, within ten minutes, I'm sure can get you, me, or anybody to confess to being the mastermind behind the IED attacks in Iraq. I'll bet they could get you to name all kinds of persons who are directly responsible, too. The reason why torture is bad is not just the morals and ethics, but also the notorious lack of reliability of the information provided. As evidenced by the small number of those tortured into confessing they were witches who actually were witches. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PLFXpert 0 #23 March 8, 2008 What would you suggest instead?Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #24 March 8, 2008 QuoteMr. President, to fight terrorism we need intelligence. That much is obvious. What should also be obvious is that the intelligence we collect must be reliable and acquired humanely, under clear standards understood by all our fighting men and women. To do differently not only offends our values as -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 2 2 Americans, but undermines our war effort, because abuse of prisoners harms – not helps – us in the war on terror. First, subjecting prisoners to abuse leads to bad intelligence, because under torture a detainee will tell his interrogator anything to make the pain stop. Second, mistreatment of our prisoners endangers U.S. troops who might be captured by the enemy – if not in this war, then in the next. And third, prisoner abuses exact on us a terrible toll in the war of ideas, because inevitably these abuses become public. When they do, the cruel actions of a few darken the reputation of our country in the eyes of millions. American values should win against all others in any war of ideas, and we can’t let prisoner abuse tarnish our image John McCain, November 4, 2005. You know, the guy put longstanding US doctrine into a couple of sentences. Edited to add: Is there any greater motivation to fight than the known inhumanity of your enemy? My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites KelliJ 0 #25 March 8, 2008 QuoteWhat would you suggest instead? Well, witches burn. So does wood. Wood floats. So does a duck. If the suspected witch weighs the same as a duck then she/he is a witch. (To prevent possible damage to the scale the balance beam must be locked in a neutral position throughout the test.) The result is just as reliable as the information gained from someone who will say anything to make the pain stop. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 1 of 4 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
jakee 1,271 #15 March 8, 2008 QuoteOK great, what's the solution then? Should we not interrogate at all? No, don't be so silly. QuoteNot detain for that matter? No, don't be so silly. QuoteNot even investigate or monitor? No, don't be so silly. QuoteWhat if we need to get information from a person who we suspect has it? We interrogate them, but we don't use torture to do so. If you think that passing the bill would have been a massive blow to national security, could you point to any studies that show torture to be an effective means of obtaining information? QuoteIf it's a humanitarian thing, then why doesn't Dianne and Ed yell at China or maybe Great Britain? or Iran, or the dozens of other small powers that make us look like sissies because we don't cut off limbs.. ?? Lots of people do yell at China and Iran. If you've missed that you must really not be paying attention! Still, we cannot directly control what methods they use. We can directly control the methods that we use, and saying "But they're worse!" is not a justification for using torture.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,271 #16 March 8, 2008 Quote You seem to confuse the President speaking for his country, the President vetoing legislation, and somebody assuming every citizen of the U.S. is dishonored by the Presidents actions. You confuse your own personal feelings about being dishonored with the fact that what the President decides to do does reflect on you as a citizen of his country. Quote Now, before you have a tantrum and go off on a tangent, I will reinforce to you that I do not agree with Bush on this one. Spare me the petty bullshit. I specifically noted in my previous post that I know you disagree with him. What's the point of saying it again except to get that little dig in?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KelliJ 0 #17 March 8, 2008 Quote Quote You seem to confuse the President speaking for his country, the President vetoing legislation, and somebody assuming every citizen of the U.S. is dishonored by the Presidents actions. You confuse your own personal feelings about being dishonored with the fact that what the President decides to do does reflect on you as a citizen of his country. Quote Now, before you have a tantrum and go off on a tangent, I will reinforce to you that I do not agree with Bush on this one. Spare me the petty bullshit. I specifically noted in my previous post that I know you disagree with him. What's the point of saying it again except to get that little dig in? See...I KNEW you'd get all pissy! I recognize the fact that what Bush does reflects upon me as a citizen. What YOU fail to acknowledge is that just because you or anyone else may look down upon us because of what he says or does, does not mean everyone or anyone is dishonored. That, my dear boy, is a matter of personal opinion. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,271 #18 March 8, 2008 QuoteSee...I KNEW you'd get all pissy! I noted that you through in a completely pointless personal dig. I have absolutely no problem at all with the part of your post that was on topic. Here's how it is - if you can stay on topic, so can I. if you persist in throwing in non-sequitur PAs then I'm going to point out your childishness. Happy? QuoteI recognize the fact that what Bush does reflects upon me as a citizen. What YOU fail to acknowledge is that just because you or anyone else may look down upon us because of what he says or does, does not mean everyone or anyone is dishonored. That, my dear boy, is a matter of personal opinion. Whether you are dishonored or not isn't always a matter of your own personal opinion. You don't have to feel dishonored to be dishonored.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KelliJ 0 #19 March 8, 2008 Quotehether you are dishonored or not isn't always a matter of your own personal opinion. You don't have to feel dishonored to be dishonored. That point can be debated to no end. Are you dishonored living in a country that holds people in a position of royalty for no other reason than their family name? I would if I were you. Does that mean you are dishonored? That is for you to decide and nobody else, least of all me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KidWicked 0 #20 March 8, 2008 Quote OK great, what's the solution then? Should we not interrogate at all? Not detain for that matter? Not even investigate or monitor? What if we need to get information from a person who we suspect has it? All strawman arguments. Your skills are weak.Coreece: "You sound like some skinheads I know, but your prejudice is with Christians, not niggers..." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #21 March 8, 2008 OK great, what's the solution then? Should we not interrogate at all? - no. That's silly. Not detain for that matter? - There is a legitimate argument that we should not. Not even investigate or monitor? - investigate? Yes. Monitor? With a warrant, yes. What if we need to get information from a person who we suspect has it? - I happen to have met a couple of guys through my job who, within ten minutes, I'm sure can get you, me, or anybody to confess to being the mastermind behind the IED attacks in Iraq. I'll bet they could get you to name all kinds of persons who are directly responsible, too. The reason why torture is bad is not just the morals and ethics, but also the notorious lack of reliability of the information provided. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KelliJ 0 #22 March 8, 2008 Quote OK great, what's the solution then? Should we not interrogate at all? - no. That's silly. Not detain for that matter? - There is a legitimate argument that we should not. Not even investigate or monitor? - investigate? Yes. Monitor? With a warrant, yes. What if we need to get information from a person who we suspect has it? - I happen to have met a couple of guys through my job who, within ten minutes, I'm sure can get you, me, or anybody to confess to being the mastermind behind the IED attacks in Iraq. I'll bet they could get you to name all kinds of persons who are directly responsible, too. The reason why torture is bad is not just the morals and ethics, but also the notorious lack of reliability of the information provided. As evidenced by the small number of those tortured into confessing they were witches who actually were witches. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PLFXpert 0 #23 March 8, 2008 What would you suggest instead?Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #24 March 8, 2008 QuoteMr. President, to fight terrorism we need intelligence. That much is obvious. What should also be obvious is that the intelligence we collect must be reliable and acquired humanely, under clear standards understood by all our fighting men and women. To do differently not only offends our values as -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page 2 2 Americans, but undermines our war effort, because abuse of prisoners harms – not helps – us in the war on terror. First, subjecting prisoners to abuse leads to bad intelligence, because under torture a detainee will tell his interrogator anything to make the pain stop. Second, mistreatment of our prisoners endangers U.S. troops who might be captured by the enemy – if not in this war, then in the next. And third, prisoner abuses exact on us a terrible toll in the war of ideas, because inevitably these abuses become public. When they do, the cruel actions of a few darken the reputation of our country in the eyes of millions. American values should win against all others in any war of ideas, and we can’t let prisoner abuse tarnish our image John McCain, November 4, 2005. You know, the guy put longstanding US doctrine into a couple of sentences. Edited to add: Is there any greater motivation to fight than the known inhumanity of your enemy? My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KelliJ 0 #25 March 8, 2008 QuoteWhat would you suggest instead? Well, witches burn. So does wood. Wood floats. So does a duck. If the suspected witch weighs the same as a duck then she/he is a witch. (To prevent possible damage to the scale the balance beam must be locked in a neutral position throughout the test.) The result is just as reliable as the information gained from someone who will say anything to make the pain stop. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
