rushmc 18 #101 April 21, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuote Desperate? No, interested? Yes. There are conflicting statements being made by many people. Real results can answer many questions. Ihave to believe there is a real reason Cheney is asking for more to be released Yes, he's desperate to defend his policies and his choices. (Not you.) Rather than taking responsibility. Again I look forward to the release of more information - transparency. I strongly suspect that the release of more information will further show what we've seen thus far, i.e., torture is counter-productive and, as Sen McCain has also said the use of torture and “enhanced interrogation” has been the “greatest recruiting tool” for al Qa’eda, al Qa’eda in Iraq, and other insurgents targeting US soldiers, airmen, sailors, Marines, deployed civilians, and US nationals abroad. “So you can't underestimate the damage that our treatment of prisoners, both at Abu Ghraib and other [facilities, has] ... harmed our national security interests.” “What I am interested in and committed to is making sure we don't do it again. We're in this long twilight struggle here, and so America's prestige and image, as we all know, was damaged by these stories of mistreatment. And we've got to make sure the world knows that that's not the United States of America that they knew and appreciated for centuries.” /Marg I understand your point, but I will have to respectfully disagree"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #102 April 21, 2009 Quote Or getting desperate? Maybe he booked his overseas vacation before he consulted this map Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #103 April 21, 2009 QuoteI understand your point, but I will have to respectfully disagree Very seriously: what kind of information or evidence would it take for you to not consider torture, including water-boarding, to be a policy of the US Government? /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #104 April 21, 2009 QuoteQuoteI understand your point, but I will have to respectfully disagree Very seriously: what kind of information or evidence would it take for you to not consider torture, including water-boarding, to be a policy of the US Government? /Marg To me it is very situational and, I do not see waterboarding as tortue"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #106 April 21, 2009 QuoteTo me it is very situational and, I do not see waterboarding as tortue Do you think that would change if you were on the receiving end? (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #107 April 21, 2009 QuoteOk Jack. My name is Marc, just in case you are trying to be an ass."America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #108 April 21, 2009 QuoteQuote Very seriously: what kind of information or evidence would it take for you to not consider torture, including water-boarding, to be a policy of the US Government? /Marg To me it is very situational and, I do not see waterboarding as tortue This is the attitude that makes people want to drive airplanes into buildings. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #109 April 21, 2009 Quote Quote Quote Very seriously: what kind of information or evidence would it take for you to not consider torture, including water-boarding, to be a policy of the US Government? /Marg To me it is very situational and, I do not see waterboarding as tortue This is the attitude that makes people want to drive airplanes into buildings. and its a lame claims like this that will allow them to get it done"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #110 April 21, 2009 Quote and its a lame claims like this that will allow them to get it done That statement makes absolutely no sense at all. Tell me, no. Tell us all. How is torture "situational"? I think most people would read that statement as "it depends on who's doing it." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyD 0 #111 April 21, 2009 QuoteQuoteI understand your point, but I will have to respectfully disagree Very seriously: what kind of information or evidence would it take for you to not consider torture, including water-boarding, to be a policy of the US Government? /Marg For some people, there is absolutely no amount of evidence that will convince them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sundevil777 94 #112 April 22, 2009 Quotewho do you hold accountable? Those who set the policy certainly should be How about the members of Congress (D's and R's) that were informed of the details? That would include some liberal darlings.People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #113 April 22, 2009 http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/22/us/politics/22blair.html?_r=1&hp"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #114 April 22, 2009 And the whole topic is so none political. From the link QuoteAdmiral Blair’s assessment that the interrogation methods did produce important information was deleted from a condensed version of his memo released to the media last Thursday. Also deleted was a line in which he empathized with his predecessors who originally approved some of the harsh tactics after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001."America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #115 April 22, 2009 Quotehttp://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/22/us/politics/22blair.html?_r=1&hp From your article.... Several news accounts, including one in the New York Times last week, have quoted former intelligence officials saying the harsh interrogation of Abu Zubaydah, a Qaeda operative who was waterboarded 83 times, did not produce information that foiled terror plots. The Bush administration has long argued that harsh questioning of Qaeda operatives like Zubaydah helped prevent a planned attack on Los Angeles and cited passages in the memos released last week to bolster that conclusion. You FAIL yet again. Jack Baur is appalled at your understanding of this issue.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #116 April 22, 2009 It looks like President Obama is not going to interfere with investigations and possible prosecutions of those who authorized torture of prisoners. From the Reuters article: President Barack Obama opened the door on Tuesday to possible prosecutions of U.S. officials who laid the legal groundwork for harsh interrogation of terrorism suspects during the Bush administration. Obama also said he would not necessarily oppose an effort to pursue a "further accounting" or investigation into the Bush-era interrogation program that included waterboarding, sleep deprivation, forced nudity, shoving people into walls and other methods.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 25 #117 April 22, 2009 Yeah! It's the ultimate in partisan bitterness. Now, if you lose an election, not only are you out of power, but you're subject to prosecution! The bitterness and bickering continue to escalate in the American political system. I can't wait to see what the next Republican administration comes up with. Maybe in a few years we can rotate politicians in and out of jails when they get elected. Does anyone besides me wonder if this is the new Administrations way of telling Dick Cheney that his dissent from their policies is not acceptable? "Don't agree with what I'm doing? Well, we'll see if a stint in prison will make you more amenable..."-- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #118 April 22, 2009 Quote Does anyone besides me wonder if this is the new Administrations way of telling Dick Cheney that his dissent from their policies is not acceptable? "Don't agree with what I'm doing? Well, we'll see if a stint in prison will make you more amenable..." No. People have been screaming for years that Cheney and his followers of the strong unitary executive theory were acting illegally. When the Republicans held the responsibility of being the check to the executive branch they failed miserably. When the Democrats took over in 2006 they decided that they would put on the kid gloves while dealing with the issue while they dealt with the larger issue of removing the neo-cons from power. Now that they have achieved the high ground they're doing their job. IMO Cheney (the guy who lived in the Constitutional netherworld that had "executive privilege" but was not part of the executive branch) honestly seems to believe that he was justified in his behavior and is clawing back in desperation. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 25 #119 April 22, 2009 Don't get me wrong. The "Cheney branch" (more accurately, the New American Century branch) of the Republican party is exactly what I think is wrong with it. But I still don't think that prosecuting people who lose elections is very good for the nation. It engenders too much resentment and bitterness. Combine it with wide swings in policy and you've got a recipe for disaster. The rift in this country's politics seems, to me, to have been widening steadily for some time. I was hoping that the election of president Obama would change that, as he's typically been a consensus builder. Unfortunately, I don't see that happening, and it appears that his administration is further alienating citizens in "red" parts of the country. What's needed now is not further partisanship and swings further away from the center (in either direction--and I say that despite my own views being way out on one end of the spectrum). We need some national reconciliation, and that's not really possible at the same time as pushing an agenda that's not significantly centrist.-- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lindsey 0 #120 April 22, 2009 But I still don't think that prosecuting people who lose elections is very good for the nation. I don't think that prosecuting people who lose elections is very good for the nation either, unless what they've done is very horrible and criminal. Then it'd be wrong not to.-- A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #121 April 22, 2009 QuoteYeah! It's the ultimate in partisan bitterness. Now, if you lose an election, not only are you out of power, but you're subject to prosecution! Have you considered the possibility that it might actually have something to do with torture violating international law. Or, are you implying that you believe politicians should be above the law and not held accountable for their actions?Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #122 April 22, 2009 QuoteBut I still don't think that prosecuting people who lose elections is very good for the nation. I suspect Senator McCain will not be prosecuted, so your concern seems to be unjustified in this case.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jerryzflies 0 #123 April 22, 2009 QuoteAnd the whole topic is so none political. From the link QuoteAdmiral Blair’s assessment that the interrogation methods did produce important information was deleted from a condensed version of his memo released to the media last Thursday. Also deleted was a line in which he empathized with his predecessors who originally approved some of the harsh tactics after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. And YOU omitted this part of Admiral Blair's statement on 4/21: "The information gained from these techniques was valuable in some instances, but there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means. The bottom line is these techniques have hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security. "We do not need these techniques to keep America safe."If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #124 April 22, 2009 QuoteDon't get me wrong. The "Cheney branch" (more accurately, the New American Century branch) of the Republican party is exactly what I think is wrong with it. Then you and I are on the same page. As a heads up, keep your eye open for the reborn (lower profile) version of the PNAC, FPI. Quote But I still don't think that prosecuting people who lose elections is very good for the nation. It engenders too much resentment and bitterness. Combine it with wide swings in policy and you've got a recipe for disaster. I understand your point, and I agree to a certain extent. But it's not simply prosecuting people who lost an election. It's holding people accountable for illegal actions which have done serious harm to our security and our image as a nation. I think that these guys are criminals and I would love to see them thrown in jail. However I'm willing to accept that that may not be best for our country in the long run. I'm struggling with my demand for accountability and the smartest way to get this sad period in our history behind us. So far, I think that Obama is doing a pretty good job of beginning to repair the wounds cause to our international relations and seems to be heading in the right direction with regard to seeking peace with our enemies. He's got quite the tightrope to walk and I wish him well. Quote The rift in this country's politics seems, to me, to have been widening steadily for some time. I was hoping that the election of president Obama would change that, as he's typically been a consensus builder. Unfortunately, I don't see that happening, and it appears that his administration is further alienating citizens in "red" parts of the country. I agree with the presence of the rift but I don't put the onus on Obama. I put it in the same place I always put it, with the ignorance peddlers in the media and their followers. The most recent example that I've seen of the cultivation of this divisive movement was their hijacking of the "tea party" movement. I agree with many of the points that the original party members were espousing. They lost me when they allowed FOX and the Hannitites to take ownership of the movement and turn it into an anti-Obama hate-a-thon. Quote What's needed now is not further partisanship and swings further away from the center (in either direction--and I say that despite my own views being way out on one end of the spectrum). We need some national reconciliation, and that's not really possible at the same time as pushing an agenda that's not significantly centrist. Obama's been pissing off both right and left extremes. I'd say he's playing the center pretty well so far. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #125 April 22, 2009 QuoteQuoteAnd the whole topic is so none political. From the link QuoteAdmiral Blair’s assessment that the interrogation methods did produce important information was deleted from a condensed version of his memo released to the media last Thursday. Also deleted was a line in which he empathized with his predecessors who originally approved some of the harsh tactics after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. And YOU omitted this part of Admiral Blair's statement on 4/21: "The information gained from these techniques was valuable in some instances, but there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means. The bottom line is these techniques have hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security. "We do not need these techniques to keep America safe." I did not omit anything as I posted the link to the article entotal. I am not the one claiming over and over the tech. do not or did not work. Part you posted is the same old tired opinion of the limp spined. The "ommisons" were those not provided to the media so the frenzy could over power the facts. Now that you are set straight........next?"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
