Administration’s Secret Prison System Violates Law
Administration’s Secret Prison System Violates Law
Earler this year, White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan said the United States was adhering to both U.S. law and treaty obligations outlawing torture:
And as we carry out the war on terrorism, and seek to prevent attacks from happening, we must adhere to those laws, and we must adhere to those treaty obligations and we must adhere to — we must adhere to our values. [White House, 3/17/05]
But the Washington Post reports today that the U.S. is keeping prisoners in a system of secret, “black-site†prisons around the world, where they can be treated to punishment which the U.N. Convention on torture and U.S. military law does not allow:
Host countries have signed the U.N. Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, as has the United States. Yet CIA interrogators in the overseas sites are permitted to use the CIA’s approved “Enhanced Interrogation Techniques,” some of which are prohibited by the U.N. convention and by U.S. military law. They include tactics such as “waterboarding,” in which a prisoner is made to believe he or she is drowning. [Washington Post, 11/2/05]
The prisons were approved “by a small circle of White House and Justice Department lawyers and officials, according to several former and current U.S. government and intelligence officials.†It helps explain why the White House wants to exempt the CIA from legislation banning the inhumane treatment of detainees.
UPDATE: Those responsible for justifying these policies are getting promotions. David S. Addington, Vice President Cheney’s choice to replace Scooter Libby as his Chief of Staff, was a “principal author of the White House memo justifying torture of terrorism suspects.†The memo said, “Congress may no more regulate the president’s ability to detain and interrogate enemy combatants than it may regulate his ability to direct troop movements on the battlefield.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
isn’t this the kind of stuff Saddam did, and was part of the evolving justification for our invasion of Iraq? HYPOCRISY!!!
November 2nd, 2005 at 9:44 amI’ll remind you. This is the BUSH/GOSS CIA.
November 2nd, 2005 at 9:45 amword to #1 – this is the kind of garbage we thought only OTHER countries did. the bush administraion continues to take the US backward in increasingly appalling and embarassing ways. 2008 can’t come fast enough.
November 2nd, 2005 at 9:49 amOn NPR this morning: (Paraphrase from UN): “We’re not going to lower our standard for prison facility inspection because it’s the USA, anymore than we would lower our standard for China or North Korea.”
That’s right. We’re used in the same breath as Red China and North Korea. Terrific.
November 2nd, 2005 at 9:52 am“Alito is against race based preferences like affirmative action – like most of America is. That is a good thing.â€
“Bush can appoint Condi to VP and try to “heal†the country. The first female and black VP – major achievementâ€
“[BUSH]he will pack the Court with judges that think like me!”
-Northeast Dilemma
November 2nd, 2005 at 9:54 amThe CIA is fuc*ing this administration at every turn. Serves them right for lying us to war, circumventing their intelligence on Iraqi threat, screwing with Valerie Plame, hiring a hack, crony in Goss, etc. etc.
November 2nd, 2005 at 10:28 amDick Cheney = War Criminal
Trust me, I know.
November 2nd, 2005 at 10:30 amIsn’t waterboarding what John Kerry likes to do?
Come to think of it, watching his campaign was kind of like torture.
November 2nd, 2005 at 10:30 amAre they saying that dumbya is the one who regulates troop movements in the field?
Maybe that’s why the Iraqi’s hate us. Of course, it’s par for the course. GWB wouldn’t go near Vietnam, now he can still have other guys die for him from just as far away. The sniveling coward.
& to stay on thread topic… So bushco is willing to sacrifice our boys when they get caught by the other side so they can use torture? Once again, they don’t care about their own guys in the field enough. Typical.
November 2nd, 2005 at 10:32 am#8 – Nice, make a joke out of torture. Just a typical conservative response.
November 2nd, 2005 at 10:36 amOK, I’ll stay on topic. The CIA has secret prisons for terrorists? Good. Maybe they’ll do a better job at getting info out of them than the military.
Next subject?
November 2nd, 2005 at 10:39 amNo wonder Cheney’s in so much sh*t. With useless f*ckwit lawyers like Addington that justify executive power by comparing the treatment of prisoners (covered by treaty obligations) to troop movements (not covered), expect Leakin’ Dick to join Augusto Pinochet in living out the rest of his life in legal jeopardy.
November 2nd, 2005 at 10:45 amcynicon – After 4 years in those secret prisons, I wonder if they even remember their own names.
November 2nd, 2005 at 10:48 amHow many of you losers wouldn’t cut the flesh from a kidnapper who refused to tell you where he’s hidden your little boy? Same thing. War is hell and if you’re going to win you’ve got to bring it to the enemy. If you don’t like it, move to Kanaduh.
November 2nd, 2005 at 10:49 amOn NPR this morning: (Paraphrase from UN): “We’re not going to lower our standard for prison facility inspection because it’s the USA, anymore than we would lower our standard for China or North Korea.â€
That’s right. We’re used in the same breath as Red China and North Korea. Terrific.
Comment by Average TV Viewer
Just like the UN who really cares what the treasonous scum at NPR think or say. Fuck them, fuck you. Bush=Hitler,indeed.
November 2nd, 2005 at 10:52 amIf torture is nothing to be ashamed of, per I-RIGHT-I’s insistance, why do we always try to keep it secret?
November 2nd, 2005 at 10:53 am#15 — because people like you run home crying to mommy when it comes to light — and we find that highly annoying.
November 2nd, 2005 at 10:57 amRIGHT -
1: Even kidnappers eventually get to see a lawyer.
2: War is hell, especially when it’s mismanaged by people like Bush and Cheney.
November 2nd, 2005 at 10:58 am#
How many of you losers wouldn’t cut the flesh from a kidnapper who refused to tell you where he’s hidden your little boy? Same thing. War is hell and if you’re going to win you’ve got to bring it to the enemy. If you don’t like it, move to Kanaduh.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — November 2, 2005 @ 10:49 am
Explain that to John McCain. Unlike you, he actually fought for his country and he endured torture for years at the hands of the Vietnamese.
Explain that to George Patton. “Prisoner of War guard companies, or an equivalent organization, should be as far forward as possible in action to take over prisoners of war, because troops heated with battle are not safe custodians. Any attempt to rob or loot prisoners of war by escorts must be dealt strictly with.” Patton
“You cannot be disciplined in great things and indiscipline in small things. Brave undisciplined men have no chance against the discipline and valour of other men. Have you ever seen a few policemen handle a crowd?â€
Patton
You’re such a Coward, IRI, and you have no idea what you’re talking about because you’re too much of a Chickenhawk to ever put yourself in any danger..jusst squalking on the internet like a tough guy.
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:00 amIf policies of torture have such wide GOP support, why were there only 9 Senators that were willing to vote against the anti-torture amendment proposed by John McCain?
By the way, in case anyone is interested in which Senators approve of torture, they are:
Allard (R-CO)
Bond (R-MO)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Roberts (R-KS)
Sessions (R-AL)
Stevens (R-AK)
All disgraceful Republicans.
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:05 amIf we take on the same inhumane practices as nations whom we oppose on moral grounds (China, South Korea, Saddam’s Iraq, etc), we become just as morally bankrupt as them.
How can we say we’re “spreading freedom” when we are committing the same atrocities as other “freedom hating” countries out there? During past armed conflicts, the fact that we treated our P.O.W.s well, for the most part, kept our captured soldiers safe.
This torture business is a slippery slope. In America, we should hold ourselves to a higher moral standard than our enemies and opponents. We *are* different from them… but that difference is getting narrower every time we rob someone of their God-given rights.
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:06 am“How many of you losers wouldn’t cut the flesh from a kidnapper who refused to tell you where he’s hidden your little boy?”
Only problem is that all these prisoners have not been given fair process in the legal system. Pretty much, they are guilty on location. So, we can use your logic when it comes to the Bush administration….but then you guys would flip flop and say that no one has been convicted, no one has lied, everyone is innocent…blah blah blah.
You guys are truley hypocrites.
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:06 am“Only problem is that all these prisoners have not been given fair process in the legal system.”
Well, considering that we never ever in all our history have given captured-on-a-foreign-battlefield combatants access to the American courts, why should we start now?
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:11 amThe CIA has secret prisons for terrorists? Good.
Alleged terrorists, you idiot.
Do you think we should take the government’s word for who is and isn’t a terrorist? Because that’s the issue here.
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:11 amGo get ‘em, tomaig! You had your ass handed to you over at NewsHounds. We’ll see how long you last here.
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:15 am#22 — good point!
#23 — I’ll take the government’s word. Who do you think would know more? Some pantywaist writer for the NY Times?
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:16 amtomaig said:
“Well, considering that we never ever in all our history have given captured-on-a-foreign-battlefield combatants access to the American courts, why should we start now?”
Considering that in American history, we’ve never, ever, tortured prisoners of war….why start now?
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:18 amYou’re such a Coward, IRI, blah, blah, sniffle…
Comments by Puss Parker
You didn’t answer the question. What would you do to the man that had your kid? Loser.
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:18 amConsidering that in American history, we’ve never, ever, tortured prisoners of war….why start now?
Comment by Jay
Bullshit
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:19 amI’ll take the government’s word.
Of course you will, you good little brownshirt you.
Who do you think would know more?
It’s not primarily a question of whether they know, chuckles. The important question is whether we can trust them to be honest about it. Given the number of apparent pathological liars in the current administration, it’s not a safe bet.
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:21 amYou’re so macho I-Right-I!!!!!!
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:22 amYou’re so HOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!
#25 the goverment’s word? You believe this government? Even after all the evidence that continues to pile in of the lies they have told??? You live in a fantasy world! You give the government that much power and then when your sitting in an internment camp with no civil rights maybe you’ll wake up.
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:24 amDid we or did we not sign on to the Geneva Conventions? Do we or do we not honor our international obligations to abide by international laws?
Why the hell am I arguing with extreme rightwing fanatics about whether or not torture is wrong? The fact that we’ve been torturing prisoners since the Bush administration launched this phony global war on terror is among a long list of clear war crimes. Eventually, Rumsfeld, Cheney and Bush will pay.
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:24 amDo you trolls really believe good information is obtained by torture? All Americans should be ashamed this is happening.
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:25 amyou think torturing the guy is gonna get you anywhere? TORTURE DOES NOT YIELD ACTIONABLE INTELLIGENCE. You guys are morons.
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:26 am#27, et al.
What’s that have to do with prisoners being tortured? Are they holding your children? Of course any person who’s child was kidnapped would do everything they could to get their child back. Still, in breaking the law they should have to pay the legal consequences of their choices and actions. That’s how a civilized society works. Institutionalizing torture is not how civilized societies works.
Now to ask you a question, what would you do if your child was arrested for a crime they didn’t commit and tortured into submitting a false confession?
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:27 amWe became America years ago to throw off the chains of tyranny and we produced excellent documents to keep our newly assembled government from doing the very things to it’s citizens that our previous governors did.
We’ve had this discussion before so I’m just going to say this once.
Those of you who support torture are standing the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights on it’s head. You want to do what Saddam did, what Stalin did, what Hitler did and you have the gall to say that those who don’t want to do this are the unpatriotic Americans.
Bunch of cowards, that’s what you are. We’re supposed to represent the high road to the world. Doing things right is harder and more difficult than taking shortcuts. That is what is supposed to give us moral clarity and nobility. You’d undercut that so that you could have vengance. it isn’t even about information. The information gleaned from torture victims is worthless, they’ll say anything to get you to stop.
You can run your sorry asses down the totalitarian rat hole but I’m gonna defend what America stands for. Me & John McCain and anyone who wants to stand with us. Snivelling cowards.
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:28 amI would personally want to be tortured by IRI just to get a glimpse of his HOTNESS! OOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:29 amI think torture is a tough call. I can only say that if I had someone who had harmed my child they’d die a very slow painful death somewhere out in the woods where they wouldn’t been found for weeks or months. But, that’s more like revenge and state-sponsored torture is a different deal.
I think the biggest question is: does the actions of the CIA result in information that prevents further attacks? It might be a lowering of our own moral standards, but Al Queda is not signed up with the same rule book we abide by. We give an unfair advantage to them when we limit the tachticts availble for the intelligence/military community to use. That said, I think these have to be extraordinary circumstances (like the top few people), before the suspension of human rights and due process should be considered. If the process is resulting in good intelligence that can not be obtained another way, then should we look the other-way? If its not, then a program such as this should not be allowed to continue. Sufficient oversight must be given – to Congress – for the correct decision to be made, and therein lies the problem with the ultra-secrecy requirements of such a program. I think the fact that it’s showing up in an article in the Washington Post should be some indication of its effectiveness.
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:30 am/sigh
Torture is wrong because participating in it places our troops in danger of it. Yes, I know some sick assholes would still do it, but you can’t get the international community behind you, nor can you condemn the practice when you export innocent-until-proven-guilty suspects like [url=http://www.counterpunch.org/arar11062003.html]Maher Arar[/url] to countries that practice torture to extract “vital” information. The threat of dropping bombs/nukes don’t deter shit in this scenario when it’s your citizen apprehended overseas and illegally detained for God knows what.
Oh, but how dare I speak of the troops. I’m forgetting my place. Conservatives naturally care more about their wellbeing and I’m just being a whiney liberal.
Bush on scoot-scooting “Scooter” Libby:
[blockquote]In our system each individual is presumed innocent and entitled to a fair trial. [/blockquote]
Bush on Jose Padilla:
[blockquote]This guy, Padilla, is a bad guy. And he is where he needs to be detained.[/blockquote]
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:32 amConsidering that in American history, we’ve never, ever, tortured prisoners of war….why start now?
Torture was quite widespread during the Philippine Insurrection.
America *hearts* torture
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:36 am#14 –
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:38 amIf my child were kidnapped, my emotional response would be to tear apart the kidnapper; my logical mind would tell me however, that doing that would get me no where.
We don’t even know these prisoners are guilty of anything except being who they are and where they are.
War is hell, as you state the obvious, and all the more reason why starting war on false pretenses is unjust and immoral.
The way the USA treats its prisoners is more about how we can demand that our soldiers be treated when captured — with the warmongers in charge, all of our servicepeople are in greater jeopardy. They have given away our morality.
The wimpy, leftist weasels who give a sh&t about those poor, misunderstood “people” wanting to kill us (and the rest of the West) might want to wake-up to the vicious reality that “it ain’t your father’s war” anymore.
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:39 amIRI’s pig mother,
Has got the right idea! Ride the wave, homey!
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:41 amIRI would faint if he saw a real torture session! Then blame his own whore mother for not making him tough enough!
“Well, considering that we never ever in all our history have given captured-on-a-foreign-battlefield combatants access to the American courts, why should we start now?”
My argument was in response to I-wrong-I comparing these prisoners to a kidnapper who is holding a child. We obviously know this person is guilty, but we can’t say all P.O.W.s are guilty, they have not been through any courts to determine that. Therefore, there is no excuse for the use of torture.
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:42 amWouldn’t you consider “wimpy” and “weasel” as appropriate adjectives for people that are unwilling to fight in a war themsleves yet they support its cause? How about leaders that didn’t fight in the war of their generation but see nothing wrong with sending our boys off to die for a lie of their making?
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:44 am“Did we or did we not sign on to the Geneva Conventions?”
yes, we did, and the GC’s require certain characteristics of POW’s, such as identifiable uniforms, a command structure, and commanding officers responsible for their troops. If they don’t meet these criteria, they are not considered POWs.
Yet instead of abiding by the GC’s, you’d rather grant these folks even MORE rights than any previous POWs.
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:45 amWhy?
mighty aphrodite,
You’re a dumb whore. You ass clowns don’t even know who you are torturing. You spread the “They want to destroy our way of life” arguement which is a lie. They want the same thing you want. Their own theocracy on their own land.
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:46 amQuit spreading lies you whore before you get smashed like a wet turd.
Oh, and as for the “what if your kid scenario…” I would kill the guy if it didn’t increase the danger for my child more than necessary. Quit thinking with your conservative elephantitis-sized balls for a moment. You have enough gray matter to make a post.
As for Osama, I see nothing wrong with putting a bullet in his head. However, I would never lower myself to torturing him for some orgiastic retribution over 911. Not for me, not for my family, not for anyone.
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:47 amI think the biggest question is: does the actions of the CIA result in information that prevents further attacks? It might be a lowering of our own moral standards, but Al Queda is not signed up with the same rule book we abide by. We give an unfair advantage to them when we limit the tachticts availble for the intelligence/military community to use.
That’s assuming we can trust the “intelligence/military community” to use those tactics in our interest, and not against us. Said community’s resources are far greater than those of Al Q. What makes you think we can trust them to do the right thing?
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:47 amtomaig,
Looks as though we better be more careful about invading countries with no armies, uniforms or command structures in the future. That doesn’t sound like an imminent threat or a clear and present danger to me. Does it to you?
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:48 amWhoever removed IRI’s Pig Mother post — thanks. I know we disagree here but there’s no need for that kind of stuff.
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:48 am#11 – What if the people they’re trying to “extract information” from really don’t know anything?
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:51 am“The wimpy, leftist weasels who give a sh&t about those poor, misunderstood “people†wanting to kill us (and the rest of the West) might want to wake-up to the vicious reality that “it ain’t your father’s war†anymore.”
And yet you can defend the Iraq war how? You know its creating more terrorists. So, what do you support, the Iraq war or less terrorists? We know the nature of these people, we know the results of our activity in the middle east and we know the results of terrorism as a response to our activity in the middle east.
By sending foreign troops on their soil, you are supporting terrorism. It’s as simple as that.
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:53 amPost #51:
Whoever removed IRI’s Pig Mother post — thanks. I know we disagree here but there’s no need for that kind of stuff.
I’ve no objection to removing the post, but please leave a placeholder when this happens. A lot of people reference previous posts by number and having posts just vanish is going to goof up the numbering.
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:53 amJeremy,
I agree and i would add that our military presence goes beyond supporting terrorism: we are expanding, intensifying and asking for terrorism. Not smart.
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:55 amToo bad the IRI’s pig mother was removed. It was all true. If you guys can do that sort of thing, and support that kind of thing ,then I can at least say it in a free country.
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:56 am#52 — they’ll stop trying to extract it? Is this a trick question?
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:56 am#35 M Duchamp: excellent point. Everyone should go back and reread it.
To I-R-I, tomaig, dai, cynicon implant: I am absolutely horrified at your comments. THIS is the morality you speak of? Have you no compassion? No regard for another human being? Do you realize the hatred that must be festering within you to write such horrible things?
November 2nd, 2005 at 11:56 amOK, so not all the bad guys play fair. That really is terrible. But to adopt the “Everyone else is doing it” attitude is obscene. Besides, didn’t your mother ever impart her wisdom in reply to such a plea with, “Well, if everyone else was jumping off a bridge, does that mean you do, too?”
Listen to mom.
#53,
If sending foreign troops on their soil creates terrorists, you have no f*cking clue. Tell me again, how did Al Qaeda grow so large during the Clinton years? These radicals want to kill the infidels. They want to kill you. They want to kill me. Get it? Liberals are wimps and losers.
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:00 pmMorality truley doesn’t exist in the neo-conservative camp. And the torture question is proof of this.
Hypocrites.
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:01 pm#
The wimpy, leftist weasels who give a sh&t about those poor, misunderstood “people†wanting to kill us (and the rest of the West) might want to wake-up to the vicious reality that “it ain’t your father’s war†anymore.
Comment by mighty aphrodite — November 2, 2005 @ 11:39 am
Fine- you feel so strongly that it’s “your war”, then get off the internet, step up & enlist to fight it. Chickenhawk.
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:02 pm#58 — My mom was fond of saying “wake up and smell the coffee”.
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:03 pm#59,
William Odom, Eric Shinseki, Brent Scowcroft,and Larry Wilkerson are NOT liberals.
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:06 pmKaren Kwiatkowski, Richard Clarke, Paul O’Neill and Larry Johnsom are NOT liberals.
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:07 pmI’m getting the feeling that most of the folks here prefer being “morally right” to being alive. Why else would they argue consistently against policies that increase our chances for survival.
Maybe that’s the difference between liberals and conservatives. Conservatives just want to live, liberals only want to live if they can feel morally superior to others.
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:07 pm#
You’re such a Coward, IRI, blah, blah, sniffle…
Comments by Puss Parker
You didn’t answer the question. What would you do to the man that had your kid? Loser.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — November 2, 2005 @ 11:18 am
Ahhh- I see, avoid the real issue involving 200 years of military institutional honor and try to correlate it to an anecdotal, hypothetical situation involving the extremes of visceral human emotion. Because somehow that’ll prove that the correlative in “equal”.
Boy, you really got me there. Oh, and those “Puss” and “Loser” comment really stung- I’ve never been taunted by a Internet Toughguy before. I had better hide my real name and sling threats back at you. You’re very scary and obviously a real warrior, even though you’re just a little afraid of joining up to fight in Iraq yourself.
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:11 pmIf you’re smart and honest, you can be morally right and survive. Your problem is that you can only see things one way and unfortunately for our country, it’s the wrong way.
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:11 pmThis administration has no humanity. There are not members of the human race. May they burn in hell!
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:11 pm#60 Maybe because we already HAD foreign troops all over their soil.
Adding a shitload more hasn’t really helped, has it?
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:12 pm“Supreme power over life and death” is the meaning behind “Skull and Bones”. The SS wore the symbol and our President and others are members of the frat.. Torture? just a logical act for these inhuman animals.
To pay eternally for ones momentary weakness in this life is as bad a gamble as one can make. Pay you will
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:13 pmTerror was invented by Israelis. Mastered by Muslims.
To support Israel is to support PNAC and eternal war end an endless supply of suicide bombers! YIPPEE!!!!!
Direct attacks on US started after US decided to hang out in Saudi Arabia.
Ed, your lack of history will make your children stupid pieces of meat to feed to the torture machine! Have fun!
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:14 pmI’m getting the feeling that most of the folks here prefer being “morally right†to being alive. Why else would they argue consistently against policies that increase our chances for survival.
The policies you’re talking about are anything but conducive to survival. Becoming the biggest bully on the block works until somebody bigger comes along, or until enough people gang up against you. Live by the sword, and you’ll die by the sword — which in your case is no great loss but I’d hate to see you take the rest of us with you.
Self-destructive behavior, of course, is nothing new to wingnuts, who are perfectly happy to let big-money interests rape the environment in order to make a buck (to take just one example).
Maybe that’s the difference between liberals and conservatives. Conservatives just want to live, liberals only want to live if they can feel morally superior to others.
Wingnuts only want to live if they can be economically superior to others. And they don’t care who they have to kill to achieve this.
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:14 pmhey want to kill you. They want to kill me. Get it? Liberals are wimps and losers.
Comment by Ed — November 2, 2005 @ 12:00 pm
Tough talker- now go enlist. Or, are you possibly a wimp yourself? Tough typist does not make a tought guy.
You guys would be comical if it wasn’t for the fact that someone else was doing the fighting and dying for you.
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:15 pmstupid hitler youth. ci you are a putz.
Just because you insist on being an asshole doesn’t mean your slandering those against torture is gonn hurt our side.
If you hadn’t noticed, the citizens of this great country are catching on to the lies spread by you and the rest of the bushco cabal.
Maybe if you pulled your head out of your ass you could see what the rest of us see.
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:17 pm#65. It’s not a feeling of morale superiority, its being a role model to the rest of the world so that other countries can strive for a better standard in how we treat other human beings.
The conservative agenda is a feeling of morale superiority. You guys are always the ones who brag about your values. Yet you are always the ones who contradict yourselves by supporting policies that advocate torture on those not even proven guilty, or advocate the death sentence on those who may be mentally challenged, or even support a ongoing war which is contributing to the thousands of deaths based on false intelligence, or even supporting a President who is loosening enviromental regulations which protect it’s citizens against becoming sick or dying, or privatized healthcare which contributes to the thousands of deaths of our citizens who are not treated, or even supporting policies which drive the wedge deeper between the rich and the poor.
This is not morale, it’s barbaric and criminal.
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:17 pmGary (#49) – I agree that how can you trust any particular community to exercise their power the way you think it ought to be done. But that’s a long standing problem. I didn’t elect this Administration, and I don’t trust them to make good decisions for myself on most issues. The question goes back to who’s the appropriate body to make these decisions. We have seen a failing of this administration because of the concentration of power within the White House. Government is supposed be based on the system of checks and balances, but I don’t think that’s the case. You’ve got people in all branches of the government who have this view of foreign policy where dissenting opinions are quashed. So you’re seeing actions by the government that are not representative of the will of the people. I think that the responsibility lies with Congress as our representative decisions making body. If we don’t like the decisions they make, don’t re-elect them. But Congress must be given the information necessary to ensure appropriate oversight, and I think that is where the great failing in this discussion has occurred.
Secondly, I think that the analogies of the kidnapped child is just the wrong comparison. I don’t oppose torture if it provides results. But I think that’s a big “if”, and I’m probably not well informed enough to say what works and what doesn’t. I think that since your seeing something that’s supposed to be ultra-secret showing up in the press, that it means it’s probably not effective. But, the CIA should be reporting this to Congress, and Congress should decide what to do with these people and this program.
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:18 pm#59 I believe OBL’s motivation was that US troops were still on Saudi soil after the end of Gulf War One. Which was fought by G.H.W.Bush not Clinton.
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:22 pmcynicon implant: “I would would cut off both feet and eat them if it meant my survival”.
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:23 pmSo far, the only excuses I have read here that “justifies” torture is the assumption of guilt, its “not your father’s war”, and “they want to kill us”. IRI, Mighty Aphrodite, etc… how do you know these prisoners are actually guilty of anything? Odds are that some are in fact guilty/have info we need, but ALL of them?
Mighty Aphrodite, do you recall our previous conversation where you told me the thing that makes this country great is FREEDOM (different topic)? Well, torture is about as far removed from FREEDOM as you can get and your encouraging such behavior from our gov’t. Its disturbing to say the least.
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:23 pm#78.
These neo-con trolls are the defnition of a hypocrite.
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:27 pmJust another dark malignant blotch in the Bushies 1,000 points of blight.
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:30 pmI.R.I, and other right winged individuals. I understand loss,fear,and despiration because I have been in the situations that you so easily through you convictions at. But the truth is that when your in war fighting for your life and/or for those you love you must do so honorably. This nation is suppossed to stand for honor,liberty,freedom.We as a nation with bush as our leader are not doing this.Sytematically Bush is taking rights of freedom away from those of this nation,and anyone who stands in his way he destroys. Elsewhere bush takes peoples liberties even more forcably, through open and covert military methods. The lies that have been perpetrated against us are so many that even an extream right wing individual with some independant thought left should by now be disguted with our governments behavior. A just war I will fight to my death for.A just war should entail at least some Threat from the party you are going to fight. There is and has been no threat from Iraq.If you are a warrior of any sort fight who is a threat,and thats Bush +cheney.Cheney is receiving all contracts from Iraq hundreds of billions of dollars,this is the biggest theft of american funds ever.To all concervitives i understand your disgust at the way the morals have declined in this world,but preemptive murder,lying,stealing,and taking away all the things that this country stands for in the name of security is NOT THE WAY. Standing strong is the way. Saying “though we are scared we shall not bend,our country was born on the princibles of freedom,and though you hurt us we not hurt ourselves”.
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:35 pmFor those of you who oppose torture under any terms – what’s the alternative? What do you do if you have a single source of information, who won’t talk, and you belive the information to be time-sensitive and critical. Is there a distinction between types of torture? Is for example, sleep depravation OK, but a technique that inflicts pain not? Do conventional forms of interogation work on a person who is fundementaly commited to their cause? Will torture work on these people either?
Doesn’t torture still exist as a form of interrogation by some, because there is no alternative to getting answers to questions (even its the wrong one). What are we supposed do when you have evedince that someones’s going to blow up a building – ask them “please answer the question”, and when they won’t say “OK, thank you”. A trial or life in prison, is no deterent to these types of people, and I am sure it can be argued that torture is not as well.
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:39 pmbeen there,
Well spoken, like a TRUE PATRIOT and citizen of this country that understands that the people should be keeping our gov’t HONEST, not blindly following like sheep.
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:43 pmHistory has proven that torture does not produce actionable intelligence. Read up on the inquisitions and witch hunts, and read some transcripts of what these people confessed to under torture. It is the stuff of the highest fiction. Martyrs were so praised because even in the light if incredible torture they held to their beliefs. But the torturer assumes guilt from the beginning, and torture continues until the victim confesses – even if such a confession is untrue. And the wrongnutz simply believe that indefinete incommunicado detention and torture is the way to go, because:
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:44 pm1) they assume that all prisoners are just guilty (and note, MOST of these were NOT captured on a battlefield – most were kidnapped from home or off the street)
or
2) They have a racial and/or theological hatred that makes them wish torture and death upon others
This administration has argued and fought from the beginning for the use of torture because they are morally bankrupt, and they do not want America to be an example for other nations to look up to. They just want their personal secret agenda completed (see PNAC for a start on what that agenda entails).
The battle is over when you become what you fight.
-GSD
November 2nd, 2005 at 12:54 pmI-RIGHT-I,
#27, “You didn’t answer the question. What would you do to the man that had your kid?”
Though you didn’t ask me, I’ll asnwer your question anyway:
I’d give him whatever he is asking for in return.
November 2nd, 2005 at 1:08 pmBush Administration uses secret prisons to dodge torture, military laws
Remind me again; aren’t we supposed to be the good guys?
November 2nd, 2005 at 1:11 pmThey have been watching a lot of movies, you know. In the movies, the good guy can torture the bad guy and get good information because… well, it’s a movie. And in the movies, when the bad guy is tortured, it always turns out to be that he WAS a bad guy, and that his information was useful. Reality is a little different, but these folks seem to have trouble with reality (who was it that said something like “We create ‘reality’” ? – I actually cannot remember that quote (not the “I AM the government” one, though)).
November 2nd, 2005 at 1:17 pm“Word made flesh”, a common theme in myth means we create physical and mental reality.
November 2nd, 2005 at 1:25 pmReality v. Creating It
I am the government.
November 2nd, 2005 at 1:32 pm- DeLay, after someone asked him to put his cigar or cigarrette out according to government rules
For those of you who oppose torture under any terms – what’s the alternative? What do you do if you have a single source of information, who won’t talk, and you belive the information to be time-sensitive and critical.
You act on the information you do have. That’s all you can do anyway. As many other posters have pointed out, people under torture tend to say anything they think the interrogator wants to hear, so information gained via torture isn’t likely to be accurate.
Is there a distinction between types of torture?
Not really, no.
What are we supposed do when you have evedince that someones’s going to blow up a building
Evacuate the building.
A trial or life in prison, is no deterent to these types of people, and I am sure it can be argued that torture is not as well.
Then what on Earth is the point of doing it?
Now you answer something for us: If we give the US government the power to torture, what makes you think they’ll use it responsibly? And if they won’t, aren’t they a far greater danger than Al Q?
November 2nd, 2005 at 1:39 pmGary (#92). You have good solid answers to the questions that I raised. But I think this thread shows why the Right is so effective against the Left. We say “don’t torture because its wrong”, but we don’t offer a unified alternative. The Right says “torture the hell out of em’ because we’re protecting American lives”. That’s why their in power and we’re not. We need to say torture is wrong and its not effective, and here’s the alternative. Instead we get mired down in discussion of morality, which while important, doesn’t produce something that our government can act on. We have to elect component leadership that will exercise the power we give them without deceit and corruption. We’re stuck with the Administration we have, because the Left can not develop an effective and clear message that is appealing to the rest of American. We need to say, will protect the American people, and we will do it at any cost. Torture just isn’t effective. It has produced results now, and has not done so in the past, and its certainly not going to work with people who have such fundamental beliefs.
I think for those that look at history as a guide, you have to be careful about how you pick and choose your arguments. Torture may not have been effective, but we’ve lost wars in the past by underestimating our adversaries conviction. We won the War in the Pacific by exercising a ruthlessness not seen by humankind before. We killed hundreds of thousands of innocent Japanese, in two days, but preserved American lives in the process. Was that the right decision? Is torture the right answer? I think the arguments we need to effective against the Right are ones that tell the American people that we know how to protect Americans and we will do so at any cost. Let’s just come up with an answer that’s better than “torture isn’t moral”, because its not going to fly with the rest of the country.
November 2nd, 2005 at 2:02 pmThe Right says “torture the hell out of em’ because we’re protecting American livesâ€. That’s why their in power and we’re not.
No, they’re in power because of rigged voting machines and vast amounts of other cheating.
That said, I’ve no problem with focusing on the effectiveness of torture. It is not only ineffective but in many ways counterproductive.
But there is still the issue of why we should trust our government with this power, and I’d still like to hear your take on this.
November 2nd, 2005 at 2:14 pmLesly – Thanks for the quote. :)
November 2nd, 2005 at 2:36 pm“No, they’re in power because of rigged voting machines and vast amounts of other cheating.”
Really? So the ONLY reason GWB won 2 elections is because of cheating? Do you really believe that?
Yet there’s not one shred of evidence that what you so deeply believe is true…is true.
Do you really want to compare Dems to Republicans for voting fraud arrests / prosecutions / convictions?
Do some research on your own and see who has been committing more election fraud, Dems or Republicans.
If you are truly honest, you would have to conclude that Democrats are involved in election fraud FAR more than Republicans.
November 2nd, 2005 at 2:37 pmtomaig,
That’s a lie.
Only propaganda websites spread these sorts of lies, and the fact that you’re stupid enough to believe them explains why you’re a republican in the face of all of their criminality. You’re a fool and a moron.
November 2nd, 2005 at 2:41 pmThe difference between republicans and democrats is that republicans justify voting fraud because they claim ‘the other side does it’, whereas democrats argue voting fraud is wrong PERIOD. And the way people argue always tells you who actually is the crook. That would be you tomaig. You’re a crook and a liar!
November 2nd, 2005 at 2:48 pmReally? So the ONLY reason GWB won 2 elections is because of cheating? Do you really believe that?
Yup.
Do you really want to compare Dems to Republicans for voting fraud arrests / prosecutions / convictions?
It’s a start. Unfortunately, the biggest violations, like the illegal Supreme Court ruling in ‘00, the massive fraud by companies like Diebold, or the equially massive disenfranchisement of minority voters in Florida and elsewhere, aren’t being prosecuted.
The argument you’re trying to make is a bit like saying that Republicans are more moral because Martha Stewart went to jail and Ken Lay didn’t. The flaw there is in pretending that selective enforcement isn’t going on.
November 2nd, 2005 at 2:49 pm#95,
“Really? So the ONLY reason GWB won 2 elections is because of cheating? Do you really believe that?”
If you look at the available evidence, and there’s lots of it, they stole Ohio and Florida and there were large-scale irregularities in a number of other states. It’s well-documented and scientific, unlike the arguments from the right about conspiracy theories. Stealing votes isn’t the only reason they won though. They also control the mainstream media, lied through their teeth about how scared and terrorized we should be since 9/11, and many Americans are irresponsible and don’t know what’s going on beyond the headline news. That’s why they “won”.
This is how the game works. The Republicans repeatedly commit brazen crimes and the media sweeps it under the carpet or gives us a line on page 37D and poof, it’s gone in a day. A Democrat commits a similar crime one time and it’s frint-page in your face news for three months, there are websites dedicated to it and it becomes an instant talking point. So the Reopublicans are certainly more organized at the swindle/con-game, but they are much bigger liars and crooks.
November 2nd, 2005 at 2:51 pmIt is not a matter of protecting Americans “at any cost”. That is the “The ends justifies the means” argument. That argument cannot be sustained. Torture IS a moral matter. If a person has no moral integrity, then they have no issue with torture. What about “justice”? Is not justice more important? Is THAT not what one would call an American ideal: “Justice and liberty for all”? So, if we imprison someone, is it not hypocritical to hold them to a different set of values of “justice” than we would, say, a serial killer? How about “innocent until proven guilty”? These are not just party rhetoric, these are principles integrated into our government and legal system. These are things that (at least in the past) DEFINED America. These are the things that made people want to come to America. You know, freedom, fairness, justice, and all that other ’stuff’. One does not need to display an alternative to torture to condemn it. Every hypothetical scenerio presented here and elsewhere in defence of torture all are based around the scenerio of “If a terrorist knew a building was going to be bombed….”. Every hypothetical in favor of torture ASSUMES in its fundamental premise that the prisoner is 1) a terrorist 2) knows of an immenent attack (after 4 years any data is a bit dated – hell, after a few months there will be no “immenent danger” information) and 3) that the TORTURERS KNOW OF THE ATTACK AS WELL. Every hypothetical assumes that there is knowledge of the interrogators of the attack (i.e. they know the information is being retained by the prisoner, and it is timely), and if they know, then they already know AT LEAST enough to take preventative measures (like clearing the building or closing the bridge). The majority of information that we have been privy to that has been given under torture has been of the “Well, Achmed heard from Mohammr that Sadrij was once seen near an Al Qida training ground”, and thus operatives immediately seek out Sadrij, to begin the “process” on him. They have claimed that actionable intelligence has been brought to light, but we have not heard of it (if they got info that thwarted a major attack, then the attack is over, and there is no reason to keep it from us – in fact releasing it would help their argument, and help protect us. No such info has been gathered). We have no justice if we have separate rules concerning the incarceration of people based on race or theology.
November 2nd, 2005 at 2:53 pmGary – Why trust the government with any power? Why trust them to wage war, to conduct national security and foreign policy, to implement social programs or fiscal discipline. I consider any of these issues to be as important on how to treat POWs. If the Republicans came to power by cheating, then why didn’t we think of that!? If the terrorists win because they don’t play fair, then why don’t we play by the same rules? The importance of the war on terror, or any war is not to be right, but to win. Its the same way in American politics. The Democrats aren’t winning because they are playing by a different set of rules.
November 2nd, 2005 at 3:07 pmNEWS FLASH: WE ARE NOT AT WAR. On what date did America declare “war”? That is, when did Congress, the only authority in our government capable of declaring WAR, actually declare WAR. Or do you accept one man’s declaration of “war” (Bush) as sufficient to make America BE at war? This is Bush’s “war”, but it is no more a “war” than the “war on poverty”. And before you loonies go off the deep end, I am not saying there are no terrorists. I am saying, AMERICA DID NOT DECLARE WAR.
November 2nd, 2005 at 3:20 pmOff topic. Sorry. I’m REALLY tired of that spin that EVERYONE has bought into. By calling this military action a “war” it offers it a level of importance that it does not possess. We are not at war, Bush is NOT a wartime president.
Gary – Why trust the government with any power? Why trust them to wage war, to conduct national security and foreign policy, to implement social programs or fiscal discipline.
Because these things, unlike torture, are necessary to the continuing existence and prospetity of the country. Most of them are benign activities, or at least not directly destructive to people the way that torture is.
The exception to this, of course, is warfare, which is why there are strong checks and balances on the government’s ability to go to war. (At least in principle there are. In practice, unfortunately, the executive pretty much does what he likes, but that’s another matter.)
If the terrorists win because they don’t play fair, then why don’t we play by the same rules? The importance of the war on terror, or any war is not to be right, but to win. Its the same way in American politics. The Democrats aren’t winning because they are playing by a different set of rules.
In a game, what strategy is best to use is determined by what your goal is. Yours might be different from other players’, which means that tactics that work for them won’t necessarily be good for you.
The goal of Al Q, one presumes, is to disrupt and destabilize Western society, or something like that. The Bushies’ goal is to make more money for themselves and their cronies. My goal, and I assume yours, is a safe and equitable world.
November 2nd, 2005 at 3:25 pmmysticagent #100,
That was an excellent post and the key point in my opinion is:
“One does not need to display an alternative to torture to condemn it”
Moderate Lefty,
When you start to judge yourself by the standards of those that you hold in contempt, you have lost your integrity. We are a party to the Geneva Conventions and the International Criminal Court (at least we were) because it’s RIGHT to have standards and the so-called “worlds only remaining superpower” should be leading the way in that regard, not dragging everyone else into the gutter. Stop rationalizing what’s wrong and get behind what’s RIGHT!
November 2nd, 2005 at 3:26 pmJust a thought…maybe the CIA wouldn’t need foreign based torture chambers if the enemy couldn’t count on being treated like a victim instead of murderous scum by the traitors in the American Left.
Just a thought….what if “outed” CIA “agent” Valerie was one of the interrogators at the “secret” CIA prisons?
Just a thought….how come nobody on the Left cares about the CIA agents put in harms way by the leaking of this story and why isn’t anyone on the Left demanding that the source of the leak be identified and put in prison for life?
Just a thought….what are you commieratbastard mofo’s going to do when we finally have enough and start coming after you?
November 2nd, 2005 at 3:39 pm#101 You just hit the nail on the head, bro! Conservatives look at politics like war, where winning is what matters. I look at politics like a balancing act. I personally think it would be TERRIBLE for the country if we were run by one party. The Republicans seem to have no trouble with that idea, and sadly, many Democrats wish they had all the power too. Well, it’s a bad idea. Neither party has a monopoly on good ideas, nor on BAD ideas for that matter.
My 2 cents.
November 2nd, 2005 at 3:40 pm#105 I can’t threaten you, so I won’t (without being booted, so what would be the point). The answer is if you really think liberals are wimps, go ahead a pick a fight with one. I dare you.
November 2nd, 2005 at 3:44 pmAnd give Moderate Lefty a break… he’s asking some genuine questions. Questions are GOOD things, remember?
November 2nd, 2005 at 3:46 pm#105
November 2nd, 2005 at 3:52 pmWell, this leak did not blow the cover of CIA agents. This leak did not blow the cover of a CIA front operation that was used my an UNKNOWN number of CIA agents. This leak revealed further proof of activities being undertaken in the name of our country that even the Administration admits might not be accepted by most Americans. Go join your terrorist bretheren who also love to kill, kill, kill, and leave America to the true patriots. You and your mindless kind are simply mirrors of the enemies that your people created (WHO funded and trained Al Qeda? I’ll give you a hint, it was NOT Hussein). You are no better than the suicide bombers, though at least (and it is not apology for their evil ways) they are willing to sacrafice their lives for what they believe in. Your conviction ends well before that – you are happy to have armed conflict as long as it does not directly involve you. I fought for this country twice. You sit on your a@@ and bandy about the necessity of death to preserve our way of life, yet have stated clearly and without exception that you would not go fight in this (or any) conflict because some of the people you would be fighting for/with would be “liberals”. You shamelessly justilfy torture, but that is not surprising as you have repeatedly stated that you just assume that every Islamic is a terrorist or a terrorist sympathizer. As was asked earlier (#35):
“Now to ask you a question, what would you do if your child was arrested for a crime they didn’t commit and tortured into submitting a false confession? “
Just a thought….what are you commieratbastard mofo’s going to do when we finally have enough and start coming after you?
If you ever decide to start coming after me, what I’m going to do is laugh hysterically. Everyone knows that right-wingers are chickenhawks. You never fight your own battles.
November 2nd, 2005 at 3:58 pmYou’re welcome on the quotes, mysticagent. You wrote: That is, when did Congress, the only authority in our government capable of declaring WAR, actually declare WAR.
Congress “declared war” by proxy when the lot of those fools abrogated their responsibility to the Constitution and surrendered war powers to the president.
November 2nd, 2005 at 4:16 pmDominos Pizza for teh sux~
November 2nd, 2005 at 4:40 pmGuantanamo: ‘Honor Bound To Defend Freedom’
NOW PLAYING at The Studio Theatre in Washington, DC
For more info: http://www.studiotheatre.org
November 2nd, 2005 at 4:43 pmEveryone knows that right-wingers are chickenhawks. You never fight your own battles.
Comment by Gary Kleppe
Tell that to the majority of Marines in Iraq that voted for Bush and snubbed Hillary and Kerry and look forward to the day when they can shoot a few of you next time you riot. Dipshit
November 2nd, 2005 at 4:49 pm#111
November 2nd, 2005 at 4:49 pmI understand that :). My point is that Congress did not declare war. Congress cannot (and did not) give Bush the power to declare war, they simply said they would back him (though the terms were specific, and the admin is already trying to broaded the scope of that authorization illegally). My point is that America has not “declared war”. If one man has the power to declare war, then it is a dictatorship, which is EXACTLY why that power was put into the hands of Congress and not the president. The “emergency powers act” is unconstitutional and undermines our government. It is NOT how a democracy operates.
But I very much agree that that moment was the biggest mistake this Congress has made.
Well, this leak did not blow the cover of CIA agents. This leak did not blow the cover of a CIA front operation that was used my an UNKNOWN number of CIA agents.
Comment by MysticalMajical
How do you know? Oh yeah, the same way you knew Vallerie was an “undercover agent”.
November 2nd, 2005 at 4:51 pmunderstand that :). My point is that Congress did not declare war.
Comment by MysticalMajical
Call it what you want to. They all stood up and said, “lets go kick Saddams ass”, did they not? Yes they did.
November 2nd, 2005 at 4:52 pmThe “emergency powers act†is unconstitutional and undermines our government. It is NOT how a democracy operates.
Comment by MysticalMajical
Pssssst……this isn’t a democracy, never was.
November 2nd, 2005 at 4:53 pmCall your Senator and tell him or her that unless he or she votes against Samuel Alito, you will boycott Dominos pizza and they will lose alot of money and that you’re boycotting them because they give money to the Republican Party and the CEO David Brandon supports the antiabortion movement with money.
In the 2004 election cycle, Domino’s gave $23,500 to Republicans.
The National Association of Realtors (just to take one example) gave $2,095,444 to them during the same cycle.
It seems a bit silly (and “a bit silly” is a polite euphemism for “incredibly stupid”) to expect that Domino’s would be able to dictate Supreme Court appointments.
November 2nd, 2005 at 4:54 pmCall your Senator and tell him or her that unless he or she votes against Samuel Alito, you will boycott Dominos pizza
Comment by john dope
Hey dope. I’m calling and telling them to fund a mission to give every soldier a Domino’s pizza and a government loan for there to be 100 Domino franchises sold and built in Iraq. How you like them pepperoni’s? Dipshit.
November 2nd, 2005 at 4:57 pmIt seems a bit silly (and “a bit silly†is a polite euphemism for “incredibly stupidâ€) to expect that Domino’s would be able to dictate Supreme Court appointments.
Comment by Gary Kleppe
You’re right it is stupid but hey, they are your idiots so whadaya going to do?
November 2nd, 2005 at 4:59 pm#117
November 2nd, 2005 at 4:59 pmHow do you know that it DID (as you seem to claim)? Al Qeda is more aware of THIS aspect of the military action than any of us are. If you are going to comment, comment on all of my post, not just one tiny and irrelevant part. Go read my post #109 again if you want to discuss. Then again, don’t bother. I tire of having discussions with traitorous terrorist sympathizers like yourself who have stated refusal to fight this military action that you claim is necessary to save us and our way of life, and who will blindly defend an obviously corrupt administration, and categorically claim that an entire race or theological viewpoint is evil and must be wiped from the face of the planet. Take your sad a## out of America, since you hate it so much that you refuse to do your patriotic duty to serve this country in (what YOU call) a time of “war”.
#118
November 2nd, 2005 at 5:00 pmNo, they said “Let’s go get Osama”.
Tell that to the majority of Marines in Iraq that voted for Bush and snubbed Hillary and Kerry and look forward to the day when they can shoot a few of you next time you riot.
Sorry, but I don’t converse with figments of your imagination.
November 2nd, 2005 at 5:01 pm#119
November 2nd, 2005 at 5:05 pmPssst…. this is a democratic republic. Our system depends on democracy to function – it is part of the balance. Weren’t you bantering about bringing democracy to Iraq (and others). Is is so great that we bring it to others but don’t use it ourself? What country do you live in?
You and your mindless kind are simply mirrors of the enemies that your people created (WHO funded and trained Al Qeda? I’ll give you a hint, it was NOT Hussein)
Comment by MysticalMajical
You’re right sweetie, it was Jimmah “Peanut” Carter who began the funding. Look it up.
November 2nd, 2005 at 5:05 pmPssst…. this is a democratic republic. Our system depends on democracy to function – it is part of the balance. Weren’t you bantering about bringing democracy to Iraq (and others). Is is so great that we bring it to others but don’t use it ourself? What country do you live in?
Comment by mysticagent
In a republic you don’t get to vote about every little detail, that’s what elected officials are for. You know, like the ones that voted to bomb the shit out of Iraq.
If it were my republic you wouldn’t get to vote at all unless you were male and had a vested interest in the country. That means if you actually produced something besides treasonous rhetoric.
November 2nd, 2005 at 5:09 pmI-R-I,
Were you continuously and severely beaten as a child?
I can FEEL the hatred spewing out of my PC everytime you post.
I would suggest a good therapist, and medication.
November 2nd, 2005 at 5:09 pmI don’t mean it to be flip. I can just tell you are deeply troubled. Good Luck.
I-Idiot-I
November 2nd, 2005 at 5:13 pmJoin Mightanalpylop – get your meds checked. They are due. You are a waste of human flesh. You merely argue in circles (even regularly contradicting yourself), you selectivly respond to posts, ignoring salient points or statements, and you never ever stay on point.
“Now to ask you a question, what would you do if your child was arrested for a crime they didn’t commit and tortured into submitting a false confession? “
#100
November 2nd, 2005 at 5:22 pmOle!
I-R-I,
Were you continuously and severely beaten as a child?
I can FEEL the hatred spewing out of my PC everytime you post.
Copout by True Blue
Oh good. I’m glad I’m getting through to you.
November 2nd, 2005 at 5:23 pmHeh heh… only Males should be able to vote I-RIGHT-I? Why do you feel women should not vote?
November 2nd, 2005 at 5:27 pm#131
November 2nd, 2005 at 5:32 pmHating and reasoning are contrary actions.
Why is the administration torturing and at the same time saying we don’t torture?
Why are they blocking a law banning torture?
Why don’t they just call these seceret facilities what they are:
concentration camps.
Why is the senate enabling the wh crimes?
November 2nd, 2005 at 5:38 pmHeh heh… only Males should be able to vote I-RIGHT-I? Why do you feel women should not vote?
Comment by Catalyst for Change
Because they f e e l , they don’t think. There are exceptions to the rule and they all agree with me.
November 2nd, 2005 at 5:39 pmI agree, I am an idiot.
I will no longer support the Nazi party or the creeps in the whitehouse
November 2nd, 2005 at 5:39 pmI am so sorry guys, I didn’t mean to be evil.
November 2nd, 2005 at 5:40 pmI will no longer support the Nazi party nor their selected officials in the white house.
November 2nd, 2005 at 5:41 pmI too have been an idiot.
I rebuke the Nazi party and their WH cronies.
November 2nd, 2005 at 5:42 pmIf you can impeach for a BJ, then
We can damn well impeach for war crimes and treason.
November 2nd, 2005 at 5:44 pmSounds to me like you really don’t give a @#$% about anything other than how much aggravation you can generate.
Women THINK AND FEEL… just like MEN do. You have proven in that post that you have NOTHING to offer in terms of INTELLIGENT discussion or debate.
November 2nd, 2005 at 5:48 pmThat last post was aimed at I-RIGHT-I.
November 2nd, 2005 at 5:49 pmTurning Up The Heat
Oh, yes. We ARE turning up the heat.
November 2nd, 2005 at 9:32 pmOh, Wingnuts… having a good life? What with so many worms crammed into your so-very-tiny, frightened, hate-filled Nazi brains…
You massively-retarded chickenhawks: you all love the Mafia cabal that rules you, don’t you? You love the fascist boot in the face, the torture, the killing, the thievery, and you don’t have to think for yourself as if you ever actually grew up… you stunted, psychopathic freaks.
November 3rd, 2005 at 1:10 amSounds to me like you really don’t give a @#$% about anything other than how much aggravation you can generate.
Comment by Catalyst for Change
So, basically what you’re saying is that if I want to change hearts and minds it’s probably not a good idea to call women in general thoughtless bags of sloppy sentimentality and liberal women in particular brain dead life support systems for a vagina? Ok…I’ll keep that in mind.
Women THINK AND FEEL… just like MEN do.
Comment by Catalyst for Change
No they don’t. Not even close.
You have proven in that post that you have NOTHING to offer in terms of INTELLIGENT discussion or debate.
Comment by Catalyst for Change
Sticks and stones, etc., etc…..
That last post was aimed at I-RIGHT-I.
Comment by Catalyst for Change
No kidding?
November 3rd, 2005 at 9:18 amLiars and Warmongers One and All?
“Without question we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator leading an impressive regime. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he’s miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction.” John Kerry, January 23rd, 2003
If Saddam rejects peace, and we have to use force, our purpose is clear: We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.” — Bill Clinton, February 17th, 1998
“We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and the security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction.” — Madeleine Albright, February 1st, 1998
“He will use those weapons of mass destruction again as he has ten times since 1983.” — Sandy Berger, Clinton national security advisor, February 18th, 1998
“We urge you, after consulting with Congress and consistent with the US Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions, including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.” That from a letter to President Clinton signed by Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, October 9th, 1998
“We begin with a common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations, is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them.” — Senator Carl Levin (D-MI), September 19th, 2002
“We know that he has stored nuclear supplies, secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.” — Al Gore, September 23rd, 2002
“Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter, and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.” — Al Gore, September 23rd, 2002
“We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has and has had for a number of years a developing
capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction.” — Senator Bob Graham, Democrat, Florida, December 2002
“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock. His missile delivery capability, his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists including Al-Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.” — Senator Hillary Clinton, October 10th of 2002
“There was unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. We also should remember that we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.” — Senator Jay Rockefeller, October 10th, 2002
“I will be voting to give the president of the US the authority to use force if necessary to disarm Saddam because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.” — Senator John Kerry, October 9th, 2002
“We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.” — Ted Kennedy, September 27th, 2002.
“The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of ‘98. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons.” — Robert Byrd (D-WV) October 3rd, 2002.
“Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology, which is a threat to countries in the region, and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.” — Nancy Pelosi, December 16th, 1998″Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies.”Madeleine Albright, Clinton’s secretary of state, November 10th, 1999
November 3rd, 2005 at 9:21 am–
I-RIGHT-I,
I just re-read my post, and your right, its not completely accurate the way it is written.
Womem and Men BOTH think and feel, but not exactly the same way. However, your post about women is still completely off-base, especially after you expanded further on it. Talk about disturbing…
November 3rd, 2005 at 11:48 amI-RIGHT-I,
Each one of your paragraphs posted in #149 speaks of WMD. We know now that he did not have them. Whatever intelligence the people who made these statements were reading, if any, was false.
The reports coming from Iraq itself, as well as the inspectors the U.N. had in there, were accurate. No WMD.
There are very few, if any, honest politicians at such a level. Most of them are simply playing a part as directed. If Clinton, Carter, Kennedy or Lincoln were president, and did what Bush is doing, I for one would dissent in exactly the same manner.
It’s not so much about the person (though in this case, he does raise the eyebrows of the concerned a bit more simply by being who he is) as it is the actions.
“States are not moral agents.” -Chomsky
Read that above statement. Then go back and read what Frist and others had to say about the events of the last few days. They speak of “our values.” As if we all share the same set, and as if the government has any as a unit.
The fact is, we don’t share the same values. There is no such thing as “American Values.” We are not bound by blood; we are not brothers and sisters. Therefore the government does not and could never possibly represent “our values.â€
November 3rd, 2005 at 1:36 pmHowever, your post about women is still completely off-base, especially after you expanded further on it. Talk about disturbing…
Comment by Catalyst for Change
I know. Look up the word misogynist (coined in the 80’s by a woman that couldn’t get a man) and you’ll see my picture.
November 3rd, 2005 at 1:44 pmEach one of your paragraphs posted in #149 speaks of WMD. We know now that he did not have them. Whatever intelligence the people who made these statements were reading, if any, was false.
Comment by Elvis
The very first one by Kerry indicates that whether he has them or not, he’s trying to get them and that is threat enough from a man like him to warrant action. What changed? In addition, we know damn well he had them because he used them on his own people. What rational mind would suppose he didn’t possess something he’d already used?
Here’s the bottom line though. It really didn’t matter if it was Iraq or Iran or (fill in the blank of your favorite middle east thuggocracy)a response to 911 required that we put massive force in the area and begin to dismantle the Islamofascist regimes. You may not agree that it was necessary but it really doesn’t matter, American and British strategic planners cognizant of the threat fundamentalist Islam funded by trillions of petro dollars represent to the West decided it was.
There are only two reasons an American could not approve of Bush’s plan to invade. 1 He doesn’t understand the threat or care to understand the threat or 2, He is willing to put our 200 million people at risk to further a political agenda. There’s no other answer. Well there is but it dove tails with number 2. He is an enemy of America and seeks to destroy us from within and without.
November 3rd, 2005 at 2:00 pm1 He doesn’t understand the threat or care to understand the threat or 2, He is willing to put our 200 million people at risk to further a political agenda. There’s no other answer. Well there is but it dove tails with number 2. He is an enemy of America and seeks to destroy us from within and without.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — November 3, 2005 @ 2:00 pm
Frankly, that describes the current Bush Administration and their policies as well as many of the politicians in power right now.
And beyond that, if what you say is true, why didn’t we send in a MASSIVE FORCE as well as have a plan in place to actually rally the Iraqi people behind us (keep law and order, rebuild all the infrastructure we wiped out with “shock and awe”)? We sent half the number of troops originally recommended which allowed Iraq to be destablized and influenced more easily by other countries around it. The strategy so far has proven quite ineffective and weakened our standing in the world.
November 3rd, 2005 at 6:05 pmThe fact is, we don’t share the same values. There is no such thing as “American Values.†We are not bound by blood; we are not brothers and sisters. Therefore the government does not and could never possibly represent “our values.â€
Comment by Elvis
You are wrong. We are bound by the blood of those that went before us, who died fighting our battles and live to carry on the American traditions. If you are of the opinion that we are a multicultural society and by that you mean we all go our separate ways and do our own thing then you are one of the people who are killing our country. Take a look at Paris tonight and tell me how you think their little multicultural experiment is working out.
There is a “Greater American” ethos and with it experience that is bound up in our fundamental understanding of freedom and the foundational traditions of this country. We are the greatest people who have ever walked this earth and that’s why we are hated.
You are either with us or against us. The Filthy Left is against us and they are who I hate and who I will fight if I can ever get a clear shot. If you are not going to get on board I suggest you get out of the way.
November 3rd, 2005 at 6:28 pm“There is a “Greater American†ethos and with it experience that is bound up in our fundamental understanding of freedom and the foundational traditions of this country. We are the greatest people who have ever walked this earth and that’s why we are hated.”
Who qualifies as the “greatest people”? So far you have knocked women off the list since they don’t “think”. Does skin color disqualify you as well? Do you have to be of a specific religion? If your supposed to be an example of the “greatest people”, our country is in DEEP trouble.
“You are either with us or against us. The Filthy Left is against us and they are who I hate and who I will fight if I can ever get a clear shot. If you are not going to get on board I suggest you get out of the way.”
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — November 3, 2005 @ 6:28 pm
Its clear that you are justifying your desire to hurt others by making them “the enemy” and to allow yourself to think/feel your superior. And the irony here is that you are just like the terrorists we are fighting… mindless in your desire to WIN and “JUSTIFIED” in using any means to accomplish your selfish, irrational goal.
November 3rd, 2005 at 7:01 pmCFC,
It isn’t just irrational, it’s ‘psychotic’, in the literal and clinical sense. This is a common issue with reichwing fascists on the far right of the political spectrum. Whether the be osama or MizzWrong, they’re psychotic individuals suffering from a host of symptoms and issues. They need a straight jacket, not a keyboard.
November 3rd, 2005 at 10:12 pmRyan,
That became very clear early on, but I decided to keep the conversation going. I chose my name because that is my goal… to try and help create change and open the eyes of people who may not understand what is happening in this country. Funny thing is… I-RIGHT-I has managed to do my job for me. :) So he has my thanks for that, even if it wasn’t his intent. I have made sure to send this link to everyone I know so they understand such right-wing extremists exist, the way they think and how important it is that they participate in the political process to avoid such crazy people getting into power. That is the reason we are in this mess… the majority of people in this country don’t pay attention to the things that matter. I wish I would have realized that myself a long time ago. :(
November 4th, 2005 at 1:36 amI-R-I
November 4th, 2005 at 7:57 amYou ARE including Israel in you list of mid-east thuggocracies, right? (Or is that the source of I-R-I:
I s R ael I ? Are you a terrorist loyal to some country other than America? Are you even an American?)
#155 is a laugh riot. An outcry that we owe our greatness to those who died in battle for our country (which is true), coming from a girly-man who posted that he refused to sign up to go fight in ANY conflict The best rationale for not signing up: she’s not going to fight with or for “liberals”. Well, maybe you should LEAVE this country, then, because the group that you identify as “liberal” is the majority of people in this country, girl. Now, go back up and actually respond to the questions posted directly to you pertaining to the topic at hand instead of rambling off topic and refusing to engage in discussion. You are a wuss, coward, and imbecile incapable of sustaining an argument on a single topic. I tire of your stupidity, and of your hatred of American ideals and morals, of your racism, sexism, hypocracy, and general bigotry. You are an example of the worst kind of white supremecist (but I thought they hated jewish people… you ARE one confused, sick puppy… and that is not a complement, though I know you might think it was). But still, I AM amused. You are like a psychotic clown… vaguely amusing, but not to be left alone with the children (or the elderly).
Its clear that you are justifying your desire to hurt others by making them “the enemy†and to allow yourself to think/feel your superior. And the irony here is that you are just like the terrorists we are fighting… mindless in your desire to WIN and “JUSTIFIED†in using any means to accomplish your selfish, irrational goal.
Comment by Catalyst for Change
I didn’t make anyone “the enemy”. I recognize the Filthy Left for what it is; the enemy of free nations.
November 4th, 2005 at 8:55 amThe strategy so far has proven quite ineffective and weakened our standing in the world.
Comment by Catalyst for Change
It’s not perfect but you’re absolutely wrong about it being ineffective, you’re wrong about it not having broad Iraqi support and you’re wrong about it weakening our standing in the world unless you think that having the enemies of America love us is strength.
November 4th, 2005 at 8:58 amIRI
November 4th, 2005 at 11:33 amTo quote you: “You didn’t answer the question”:
What would you do if your child was arrested for a crime they didn’t commit and tortured into submitting a false confession?
It’s a good question, a fair question, and more appropriate than the hypothetical that you offered about someone holding your child.
I didn’t make anyone “the enemyâ€. I recognize the Filthy Left for what it is; the enemy of free nations.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — November 4, 2005 @ 8:55 am
You don’t even respect or understand what a free nation/people is based on your own admitted bigotry. The “Filthy Left” is a creation of your own imagining because it certainly does not represent the PEOPLE of this country. Where do you even get your information? I am curious how you came to your conclusions… do you listen to some radio nut spouting this kind of hatred? I think mysticagent has you pegged as a white supremacist and so far it fits with your posts… don’t you see how much your like the extremists of the Nazi movement in WW2? They believed they were the “greatest people” as well, and used that as an excuse to slaughter millions of innocent people… the “Filthy Jews”. Its no different than the crap you are spouting now.
November 4th, 2005 at 12:36 pmWhat would you do if your child was arrested for a crime they didn’t commit and tortured into submitting a false confession?
Comment by MajicalMyscical
We don’t do that dipshit. Further more…my kid ain’t no raghead Muslim scumbag looking for a place to plant a roadside bomb. But let’s say he was….I shoot the little bastard myself.
November 4th, 2005 at 12:45 pmIt’s not perfect but you’re absolutely wrong about it being ineffective, you’re wrong about it not having broad Iraqi support and you’re wrong about it weakening our standing in the world unless you think that having the enemies of America love us is strength.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — November 4, 2005 @ 8:58 am
The “its not perfect” is the closest you have come to recognizing the reality of this war and its consequences for our nation. And where is your evidence of our standing in the world improving… everywhere you look there is growing anger at our nation and the confusion of why the beacon of freedom has become another empire out to conquer/dominate the world. World peace requires cooperation between nations, not this unilateral stupidity the Bush Administration has dragged us into.
November 4th, 2005 at 12:51 pmCatayst
November 4th, 2005 at 1:04 pmI think that your post #158 has a lot of truth. Imyself was not interested in politics until the flurry of questionable activity right after 9/11. I think that is when a lot of progressives woke up that we allowed these criminals in by not participating. The supporters of this regime are going looney because it is becoming quite evident that their base is NOT the majority opinion in the country, and that the majority are standing up and demanding their voting priveledges, and demanding accountability. That is my take on it, at least. My estimation in watching the last 4 years of polls is that the extreme right base is somewhere around 10% – 20% of the population. When (yes, I said WHEN – IRI, don’t bother chiming in unless you are going to respond to my several prior posts pertaining to torture, and the direct question posed to you… though I am prepared to answer it FOR you, as we both know what your answer is, and you know the implications of giving that answer). Bush’s overall approval drops below 15% or so, he will have begun to lose the hardcore base. Speculation, of course. He will reach that number once it actually sinks in that he has been lying, and that his morals are NOT remotely Christian morals. And that day is approaching, though slowly. Still speculation, but not without basis in reality.
I, too, wish I had been more attentive of the political process prior to this administration. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance, from without and from WITHIN. The greatest threat to a free society will always come from within – those who wish to “change the rules” to make it all go their way, instead of “playing by the rules”. The ‘lawyers’ (that’d be ALL of the admin) in this admin see every law, every item of the Constitution as a barrier to be overcome (generally by deception, or by trying to find legal loopholes), and not as being the rules to abide by. I think IRI and his ilk agree with that. They will scream about freedom and democracy and moral duty and how great this country is, and then they will in the same breath bemoan the constitution and those pesky laws that don’t let them do as they please – you know, civil rights laws and all that “bunk”. These people argue that this country is the greatest thing around, but they want to change every aspect of the Constitution and every aspect of our government (so that all things are just their way). That is not patriotism, that is traitorous.
We don’t do that dipshit. Further more…my kid ain’t no raghead Muslim scumbag looking for a place to plant a roadside bomb. But let’s say he was….I shoot the little bastard myself.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — November 4, 2005 @ 12:45 pm
Nice disconnect from reality… it sure must make life easier for you. Why are you for helping Iraqi “raghead muslims” again? You obviously have no respect for them as a people, but you sure are gung ho for murdering them. And we do have such shit going on in this country… WAKE UP and do some research… not that it would matter… you would just adjust your reality to fit them in the “Filthy Left” category where you place anyone you don’t understand, respect, or care for.
November 4th, 2005 at 1:07 pmOh, and my estimation of IRI is based solely on his posts. I do formally apologize for the comment about the link (past item, other post), however, as I did take Ryan’s word and did not go there myself. But I am not so sure that Ryan is inclined to lie. But since I did not verify it, I apologize to IRI for using that piece of unsubstansiated evidence. I, however, maintain all other comments and observations as being true in my estimation (to include the supremecist accusation).
November 4th, 2005 at 1:10 pmIRI
“We don’t do that dipshit. Further more…my kid ain’t no raghead Muslim scumbag looking for a place to plant a roadside bomb. But let’s say he was….I shoot the little bastard myself.”
O.k., kidnapping people without evidence and torturing them, with no legal recourse, no trial, and not even visitation from human rights organizations IS doing that. ANYONE who tortures someone for information ASSUMES THE VICTIM IS GUILTY, whether there is evidence or not. How many people have been released because they were innocent (admitted in the release of them)? Any clue as to how many of them are claiming abuse and torture? If you torture for information as a policy, you WILL torture innocents.
And you still did not answer the question. The question doesn’t say that your kid is a terrorist. It says what if your child (innocent of any wrongdoing at all) was tortured into giving a false confession (happens all the time under torture):
“What would you do if your child was arrested for a crime they didn’t commit and tortured into submitting a false confession?”
November 4th, 2005 at 1:17 pmmysticagent,
Everyday, I pray for Americans to open the eyes to what is being done in their name and the hypocrisy that exists in our leadership. Bush was smart to hide behind the Christian vale since that makes it easy for Christians to rally behind him, it is NOT easy to open the eyes of people that have their church propping him up like he is some kind of godly man. It took a year of constant discussion and facts to open the eyes of two of my best friends who are very devout Christians. And I took no pleasure in that, because it is very demoralizing to see the truth that their leader is just another “false prophet”. I think it has taken longer as well due to the failure of our media thanks to corporate influence and the removal of the Fairness Doctrine (thanks President Reagan). But like you said, it takes eternal vigilance to keep our country free from these criminals and I will do my best to help make this country better. You have my respect and thanks for your part. :)
November 4th, 2005 at 1:25 pmCatalyst
November 4th, 2005 at 1:58 pmIt is difficult to believe that Christians (and ESPESCIALLY fundamentalist Christians, who, by nature, should be the pinnacle of adhering to the Christian Bible) believe the words and can completely ignore the actions. Their opinions seem to be based entirely on the WH speeches with zero regard for looking at what is going on. I think that is because the rhetoric rings solidly with them: the words outline someone who will lead in a manner that is moral and “Christian”, and they desperately want that. Apparently so badly that they allow themselves to be self deluded. Any failure of the admin to accomplish the Fundamentalist golas (e.g. abortion) is construed as being the fault of “those rotten lefties who hate religion”. That attitude alone seems also to drive the Christian base strongly: they believe that if you are not 100% behind the (modern) GOP then you are a hater of all things religious. I am quite religious (though not a Christian nor any other major world religion – though I respect everyone to have their views as long as they do not involve hurting others), and I also know a number of Christians who ARE good Christians (as ‘good’ as the average layman) and who opposed Bush from day one. Most of America is Christian, which means that most of the “Filthy left” are Christians, and not haters of religion. But the followers of Bush believe the words – those who oppose must hate religion. I know I ramble, but this post seems to be a bit dead, so I feel a little more free to go off topic.
Final (?) off-topic matter (and non-sequitor): pledge of allegience. I think that a preferable, and more accurate line would be, “…one nation, under our Gods,….” It is a subtle change, but it encompasses all but athiests. The Right claim that it is not about attesting to any religion, so that will allow it to respect the beliefs of the Hindu, or any panthiest. Any objection to that will have to be on the groounds that they actually DO think it is about affirming THEIR God, and not affirming that the people have religion. I’m sure I’ll bring this up again some point later. It highlights the lie about their intention.
Oh yeah, don’t expect IRI to answer that question… that scenario can’t exist in his current reality… otherwise it would start to make him question what he currently believes and that would be unacceptable.
November 4th, 2005 at 2:04 pmI don’t expect him to answer it (and the excellent question was not mine, it was M. Duchamp). If he answered it truthfully he would be arguing against himself. It is an introspective question with farther reaching implications – like a partial explanation for the swelling of the terrorist ranks. If you want to resist oppressors, the best way is to join an organized resistance. If the only organized resistance is the terrorists, a desperate person will go there. The policy of kidnapping and torture serves only to increase the ranks of the terrorists – not with zealots, mind you, but with those who see no other recourse to battle their oppressors.
November 4th, 2005 at 2:16 pmOh, and my estimation of IRI is based solely on his posts. I do formally apologize for the comment about the link (past item, other post), however, as I did take Ryan’s word and did not go there myself. But I am not so sure that Ryan is inclined to lie. But since I did not verify it, I apologize to IRI for using that piece of unsubstansiated evidence. I, however, maintain all other comments and observations as being true in my estimation (to include the supremecist accusation).
Comment by mysticagent
I guess this means a blowjob is totally out of the question?
November 4th, 2005 at 4:30 pmMost of America is Christian, which means that most of the “Filthy left†are Christians, and not haters of religion.
Comment by one of the dumbass twins
I hate to break it to you girls but people who think like you are a very tiny minority of people in this country. Don’t let the fact that you’ve got your whacko’s in office and destroyed the Democratic Party lead you to think you’re anywhere near 50% let alone “most” of anything including Christians. You can’t be a Left Wing Walking Dead Loser and a Christian. It’s just not possible.
November 4th, 2005 at 4:45 pmKeep ignoring reality IRI… it must be getting frightening for you to see your delusional world coming apart at the seems. The fact that you represent all that is wrong with this country and those you follow are so corrupt is becoming clearer everyday. I can’t find anyone who agrees or even wants to be associated with you so far, including many conservatives and Christians should be alarming to you. Like I said before, I am using you as an example and sending this to everyone I have known and worked with (the majority have been Conservative/Christian). You truly disrespect Christians and Conservatives with your views, not to mention Americans in general. I feel sorry for you, but you are doing me a great service in sharing your ideas to display to everyone I can. Keep up the good work! :)
November 4th, 2005 at 5:49 pmI feel sorry for you, but you are doing me a great service in sharing your ideas to display to everyone I can. Keep up the good work! :)
Comment by Catalyst for Change — November 4, 2005 @ 5:49 pm
Don’t feel sorry for me, feel sorry for the Leftist pencle neck that ratted out these Rangers. I hope they find out who did it and cut his heart out.
Please pass this along to your “Christian friends” and “conservative” associates and tell them this is the proper Christian response to those that hide behind women and children to do their murders and those like you who support them.
Army Rangers Accused of Abusing Detainees
The Associated Press
Monday, November 7, 2005; 3:12 PM
BAGHDAD, Iraq — Five U.S. members of an elite Army unit have been charged with kicking and punching detainees in Iraq, the military said Monday.
The charges were issued Saturday against five soldiers from the 75th Ranger Regiment in connection with a Sept. 7 incident “in which three detainees were allegedly punched and kicked while awaiting movement to a detention facility,” the U.S. military said in a statement.
The military said officials had immediately launched an investigation after discovering the abuse allegations, leading to the charges. Names and ranks of the five soldiers were not released and the statement gave no further details.
Allegations of prisoner abuse at the Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad gained international notoriety in 2004 after a number of U.S. military personnel were charged with humiliating and assaulting detainees at the facility. Nine Army reservists were convicted in the scandal.
The announcement came as President Bush vigorously defended U.S. interrogation practices in the war on terror and lobbied against a congressional drive to outlaw torture during a visit to Panama.
November 7th, 2005 at 3:30 pmMilitary rules are pretty clear that MI or Psyops (Strategic, NOT tactical) are the only people to have contact with prisoners (regardless of who the prisoners are or what they did). Soldiers are required, it is their DUTY, to protect and ensure the safety of all prisoners while they are in their custody. Those Rangers stepped outside of their duty AND added yet another tarnish on the reputation of ALL Americans by their illegal,immoral, and dihonorable actions (is there honor in striking a bound prisoner? Not for an honorable warrior). Hiding behind women and children is dishonorable (though do you have proof that that is what those prisoners had done?…. didn’t think so… you are simply a racist and thuggocrat… nice word, thanks for offering it up :) …), guess what – striking unarmed and bound prisoners is no more honorable, and is arguably even worse. The person who identified the illegal activity was doing his duty. Something that a coward who will not serve certainly cannot understand: duty and honor.
November 8th, 2005 at 8:57 amGreat post mystic!
November 8th, 2005 at 4:53 pmThe person who identified the illegal activity was doing his duty. Something that a coward who will not serve certainly cannot understand: duty and honor.
Comment by mysticagent
The words duty and honor must stick in the throat of an enemy of our country and the men who defend her. You have no proof the soldiers actually did what is claimed yet you are the first in line to claim they have dishonored themselves and us. I say “to the sharks with you”.
November 9th, 2005 at 4:14 pmhttp://myblogma.com/handbags/ handbags handbags
December 8th, 2006 at 3:43 am