Retired JAGs On Waterboarding: ‘It Is Inhumane, It Is Torture, And It Is Illegal’
Retired JAGs On Waterboarding: ‘It Is Inhumane, It Is Torture, And It Is Illegal’
Attorney General nominee Michael Mukasey has repeatedly refused to state whether or not waterboarding is illegal. In a legal dodge, Mukasey called the torture technique “hypothetical” and said that he would need the “actual facts and circumstances” to strike a “legal opinion.”
But in a letter to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT), four retired Judge Advocates General (JAGs) — the judicial arm of the U.S. military — sharply criticize Judge Mukasey’s legal hedging. They unequivocally state that waterboarding is torture. From their letter:
In the course of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s consideration of President Bush’s nominee for the post of Attorney General, there has been much discussion, but little clarity, about the legality of “waterboarding” under United States and international law. We write because this issue above all demands clarity: Waterboarding is inhumane, it is torture, and it is illegal. [...]
This is a critically important issue - but it is not, and never has been, a complex issue, and even to suggest otherwise does a terrible disservice to this nation. [...]
In this instance, the relevant rule - the law - has long been clear: Waterboarding detainees amounts to illegal torture in all circumstances. To suggest otherwise - or even to give credence to such a suggestion - represents both an affront to the law and to the core values of our nation.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), a member of the JAG Corp. in the U.S. Air Force, also once condemned waterboarding as “illegal.” “I don’t think you have to have a lot of knowledge about the law to understand this technique violates” the Geneva Convention and other statutes, said Graham.
Yet Graham has now sold out his principles in return for campaign assistance from President Bush. The South Carolina senator, who recently announced his support for Mukasey, was rewarded with an appearance by the President at a “high-roller fundraiser” kicking off his ‘08 re-election campaign. Bush yesterday said that he has “no better ally than Lindsey Graham” in pushing forward his nominees through the Senate.
View the JAGs’ full letter HERE.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
104 Responses to “Retired JAGs On Waterboarding: ‘It Is Inhumane, It Is Torture, And It Is Illegal’”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
"...Lindsey Grahamno better ally than Lindsey Graham"
Should be
November 3rd, 2007 at 6:13 pm"...Lindsey Graham"
Don't tell us! Tell Schumer and Feinstein!
November 3rd, 2007 at 6:15 pmThose unpatriotic b*st*rds!!!!
Coddling the enemy like that... just disgusting!
November 3rd, 2007 at 6:15 pmdigby has a post that jeanne moos at cnn did a comedy segment on waterboarding.
cnn -- staying classy.
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2007/11/too-much-fun-by-digby-i-just-saw-jeanne.html
November 3rd, 2007 at 6:16 pmWaterboarding is not sport. It is most inhumane and illegal. To think otherwise is torturous. People who vote otherwise are unamerican.
November 3rd, 2007 at 6:29 pmWhat these senators have done- Graham, McCain, Specter, Schumer, Feinstein- is reminiscent of the classic film The Hustler, when Fast Eddie tells Bert near the end of the film that there is nothing there because he is empty inside. The same thing applies to these senators because they too are empty because they have given up their humanity and bargained it away for political expediency. What one of the senators should do [perhaps Whitehouse?] is to show the clip from Countdown where the volunteer is shown being waterboarded and ask Mukasey point blank:
1) does he believe what he is seeing is torture?
2) would he volunteer to have it done on him so he could determine if waterboarding qualifies as being torture?
Any reasonable, intelligent person would say that trying to simulate drowning on another person is an act of torture but yet members of Congress are actually willing to give Mukasey the benefit of the doubt. Or perhaps they actually believe Bush when he proclaimed that Mukasey is a "good man." It is no wonder that countries around the world look upon the United States, that alleged bastion of democracy, with such loathing and contempt.
November 3rd, 2007 at 6:29 pmThose that do not see water boarding as torture maybe should try it out... especially those two in the picture above.
November 3rd, 2007 at 6:32 pm... reminds me of this:
"but if the president does it, it's not illegal"...
.
i kinda feel sorry for the guy... damned if he does, damned if he doesn't...
he will have to pursue criminal charges if he states the truth...
probably doesn't have near enough life insurance...
November 3rd, 2007 at 6:44 pm...
For that matter ANYONE with a mind set that water boarding is OK should try it... you too Feinstein.
November 3rd, 2007 at 6:46 pmhttp://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=apMMOJofS6Q8&refer=us
[...]
"This is the kind of leader America needs to head the Department of Justice at this important moment in our history,'' Bush said today in his weekly radio address. ``Yet some senators are working against his nomination because they want him to take a position on the legality of specific techniques allegedly used to question captured terrorists.''
[...]
Bush defended Mukasey's response to the waterboarding issue, saying he "does not know whether certain methods of questioning are in fact used, because the program is classified, he's not been given access to that information, and therefore he is in no position to provide an informed opinion.''
The president also expressed concern that a Mukasey opinion on torture may give U.S. interrogators the impression that they might be vulnerable to penalties.
`Legal Jeopardy'
"He does not want our professional interrogators in the field to take an uninformed opinion he has given in the course of a confirmation hearing as meaning that any conduct of theirs has put them in legal jeopardy,'' Bush said.
Bush said an opinion on waterboarding also might help terrorists train for U.S. interrogation. [ah hahaha!]
"Congressional leaders should not make Judge Mukasey's confirmation dependent on his willingness to make a public judgment about a classified program he has not been briefed on,'' Bush said.
boyoboy... does he wear waders when he says this crap?
November 3rd, 2007 at 6:53 pmit's pretty deep... doubt those fance boots are enough...
.
So the only question is whether those retired JAGs will get the stress positions before or after they are waterboarded.
November 3rd, 2007 at 7:05 pmIsrael taught US soldiers how to dominate and humiliate Arab prisoners.
They literally TAUGHT US THIS.
This is no accident. Israel's entire strategy from the outset has been to cast the United States in the role that they have historically "occupied."
Who is the occupier of Arab lands and the famous torturer of Arab peoples now? Israeli leaders of the Likud party are taking this opportunity in history to use the lessons taught to them by Hitler against another race of people.
You think this is a coincidence?
AIPAC is literally demanding it - blackmailing every elected official to do their bidding.
Israel is 100% in charge of American Foreign Policy.
THAT is the elephant in the room.
November 3rd, 2007 at 7:15 pmBush yesterday said that he has “no better ally than Lindsey Graham†in pushing forward his nominees through the Senate. - - Make that, no better allies than Schumer and Feinstein.
November 3rd, 2007 at 7:16 pmWaterboarding IS torture no matter how you dice it and Mukasey's Bush's "fall guy" hedging his a$$ off in order to cover Dumbya's own a$$. Bush knows that once the AG decides unequivocally that waterboarding IS torture, it will send Bush to prison for a very long time.
Waterboarding is waterboarding is waterboarding. How different can one technique which simulates drowning be from another? It's all heinous and in violation of the Geneva Conventions.
That International War Crimes Tribunal is licking it's chops as it prepares for the Bush/Cheney/Rummy/Rice trial. They'll all be in jail when this is finished.
November 3rd, 2007 at 7:21 pmLindsey Graham favors the beating of investigating journalists:
POLICE LOOK ON AS HOMELAND SECURITY OFFICERS VIOLATE REPORTER’S CIVIL RIGHTS:
Arrest Of AFP Journalist Christopher Bollyn
Kurt Nimmo
August 16, 2006
“I was harassed, beaten, and shocked with a Tazer-like gun in my front yard before my wife and children, and then abused for 6 hours by the ADL-trained local police,†explains American Free Press journalist and Republic Broadcast Network talk show host Christopher Bollyn on the RBN website. “I have every reason to believe it is because of my journalistic investigation into 9/11. I have been threatened before in my career as a journalist, but this is the first time I have been intentionally beaten and abused—by the cops…. I intend to seek asylum in Norway or Switzerland. I can read the writing on the wall.â€
Indeed, the writing is on the wall. In the neocon “you’re either with us or with the terrorists†political climate in America today, those who tell the truth are increasingly coming under the gun—or as in Bollyn’s case, under a Tazer. It is a short step from accusations of treason and appeasement of terrorists, who work for the government—or are simply retarded patsies set-up to take a fall—and the sort of violence practiced by the Nazis and their goons after Hitler pulled off his Gesetz zur Behebung der Not von Volk und Reich, or the Law to Remedy the Distress of the People and the Reich. Bush has come a long way in realizing his Ermächtigungsgesetz, or Enabling Act, and it won’t be long now before minor complaints are dealt with in severe fashion, as they always are under fascist dictatorships.
“And the administration has not only the right, but the duty, in my opinion, to pursue fifth column movements,†Senator Lindsey Graham told AG Gonzales earlier this year. “And let me tell folks who are watching what a fifth column movement is. It is a movement known to every war where American citizens will sympathize with the enemy and collaborate with the enemy. And it’s happened in every war…. and I don’t think you need a warrant to do that.â€
According to the Manichean dictum of the neocons—you’re with us in the forever war against the Muslims, or you’re with the terrorists—revealing certain facts, as Bollyn has done over the years, may result in, for now, arrest and abuse. However, next month or next year, certainly after the next staged terror attack, it will result in far harsher, even fatal retaliation, as it invariably does in fascist countries.
http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m25819&l=i&size=1&hd=0
Chertoff's goons attacked this reporter for telling the truth, and Lindsey Graham condones it.
November 3rd, 2007 at 7:21 pmLet's assume for a second--a really bad, immoral, illogical, and scary second--that waterboarding is not torture. When Bush and Cheney are out of the White House in January of 2009, would it then be logical to waterboard the pair of them to get all the information out of them that they have refused to allow Americans to have during the 8 years of WH terror? If it can be used against terrorists, wouldn't it be consistent to use it on the two biggest American terrorists?
November 3rd, 2007 at 7:22 pmSENATOR GRAHAM CALLS FOR ACTION AGAINST AMERICANS WHO DISAGREE WITH BUSH
Sen. Lindsey Graham suggested to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales a new target for the administration's domestic operations -- Fifth Columnists, supposedly disloyal Americans who sympathize and collaborate with the enemy.
"The administration has not only the right, but the duty, in my opinion, to pursue Fifth Column movements," Graham, R-S.C., told Gonzales during Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on Feb. 6.
"I stand by this President's ability, inherent to being Commander in Chief, to find out about Fifth Column movements, and I don't think you need a warrant to do that," Graham added, volunteering to work with the administration to draft guidelines for how best to neutralize this alleged threat. "Senator," a smiling Gonzales responded, "the President already said we'd be happy to listen to your ideas."
http://uncapitalist.com/blog/?itemid=1329
CHERTOFF SETTING THE STAGE FOR ARRESTING BLOGGERS:
http://www.rawstory.com/showarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.yahoo.com%2Fs%2Fnm%2F20061017%2Fwr_nm%2Fsecurity_chertoff_dc%3B_ylt%3DAq31AQx4TKjh9chd4l0E4ZQjtBAF%3B_ylu%3DX3oDMTA0cDJlYmhvBHNlYwM-
.
"PROBABLE CAUSE"
These are the two words that represent the threshold required to obtain a warrant under FISA.
"REASONABLE SUSPICION"
These are the two words that separate Bush's existing program from falling within the law of the land.
Bush and Gonzales have attempted to reinterpret the Constitution, claiming that spying on US Persons is justified when there exists a "REASONABLE SUSPICION" of wrong doing.
The threshold is "PROBABLE CAUSE" - a HIGHER THRESHOLD than Reasonable Suspicion.
They will avoid using these two words at all cost.
Regardless, a warrant under the supervision of FISA is ALWAYS a requirement for spying on US persons...period.
The ONLY reason not to seek a warrant under FISA is if the target of the spying is a US person for whom there is no "PROBABLE CAUSE" of a direct connection to terrorism.
Logic dictates that those who have been the subject of NSA surveillance without benefit of FISA have been US Persons not likely to be involved with terrorists.
Spying on US Persons for political purposes (or revenge) is the stuff impeachments are made of.
IMPEACH
November 3rd, 2007 at 7:24 pmhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_Inmate_Labor_Program
Wikipedia:
Civilian Inmate Labor Program -
The Civilian Inmate Labor Program is a program of the United States Army provided by Army Regulation 210-35[1]. The regulation, first drafted in 1997 and went under a "rapid act revision" in January 2005, provides policy for the creation of labor programs and prison camps on Army installations. The labor would be provided by persons under the supervision of the Federal Bureau of Prisons.
Prison camps
The regulation also sets forth policy for the creation of prison camps on Army installations. These would be used to keep inmates of the labor programs resident on the installations.
In January 2006, Kellogg, Brown and Root reported that they had received a contract from the Department of Homeland Security to expand ICE DRO facilities "in the event of an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs."[3] A February news article comments that the "new programs" mentioned could include the Civilian Inmate Labour Program.[4] ICE has "joint federal facilities" with the Federal Bureau of Prisons.[5]
External links
1. ^ AR 210-35 Civilian Inmate Labor Program (PDF) (2004). Retrieved on 2006-03-09.
http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/47/17936
Bush's Mysterious 'New Programs'
By Nat Parry
Consortium News
Tuesday 21 February 2006
Not that George W. Bush needs much encouragement, but Sen. Lindsey Graham suggested to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales a new target for the administration's domestic operations - Fifth Columnists, supposedly disloyal Americans who sympathize and collaborate with the enemy.
"The administration has not only the right, but the duty, in my opinion, to pursue Fifth Column movements," Graham, R-S.C., told Gonzales during Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on Feb. 6.
"I stand by this President's ability, inherent to being Commander in Chief, to find out about Fifth Column movements, and I don't think you need a warrant to do that," Graham added, volunteering to work with the administration to draft guidelines for how best to neutralize this alleged threat.
"Senator," a smiling Gonzales responded, "the President already said we'd be happy to listen to your ideas."
In less paranoid times, Graham's comments might be viewed by many Americans as a Republican trying to have it both ways - ingratiating himself to an administration of his own party while seeking some credit from Washington centrists for suggesting Congress should have at least a tiny say in how Bush runs the War on Terror.
But recent developments suggest that the Bush administration may already be contemplating what to do with Americans who are deemed insufficiently loyal or who disseminate information that may be considered helpful to the enemy.
Top US officials have cited the need to challenge news that undercuts Bush's actions as a key front in defeating the terrorists, who are aided by "news informers" in the words of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.
Detention Centers
Plus, there was that curious development in January when the Army Corps of Engineers awarded Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg Brown & Root a $385 million contract to construct detention centers somewhere in the United States, to deal with "an emergency influx of immigrants into the US, or to support the rapid development of new programs," KBR said. [Market Watch, Jan. 26, 2006]
Google: "swift luck greens"
November 3rd, 2007 at 7:27 pmIsrael taught US soldiers how to dominate and humiliate Arab prisoners.
They literally TAUGHT US THIS.
Comment by plunger — November 3, 2007 @ 7:15 pm
Er… okay.
And the US tought and still teaches any regime in Sth America how to torture their own citizens.
Much like conducting an invasion, occupation and approving torture techniques on detainees though, whether these get used wasn’t something Israel decided.
Unless you want to suggest those pesky Jews are practicing mind control you need to accept the fact that the US decided to make these things US policy, not Israel.
ps. Whodathunk it’d be the Jews who ended up being proposed as a scapegoat? What a surprise.
Comment by Kilo — November 3, 2007 @ 7:25 pm
Kilo:
Why do you find it so convenient to use the term "the Jews" in your response?
Hot rhetorical language, isn't it?
Designed to provoke a particular preconditioned response, isn't it?
I never mentioned "the Jews."
I discussed a foreign country that has clearly infiltrated the political system of our own.
The only one here discussing "the Jews" is you - and it is done purposefully to bring for the "anti-Semite" canard and silence honest dialogue about our most serious problem.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7545.htm
http://antiwar.com/israeli-files.php
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/fiveisraelis.html
On the day of the 9-11 attacks, former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was asked what the attack would mean for US-Israeli relations. His quick reply was: "It's very good…….Well, it's not good, but it will generate immediate sympathy (for Israel)"
Climb aboard the Way-Back Machine, to the days just prior to September 11, 2001:
http://www.alternet.org/story/11427
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/goldstein.html
November 3rd, 2007 at 7:32 pmThese bastards voted to approve the use of rendition flights and torture in order to extract information vital to the safety and security of our country during a time of crisis/war.
FINE.
Put these bastards on a CIA G5 along with Rove, Libby, Feith, Rumsfeld, Fleisher, Cheney, Rice, Bush 41, Chertoff, Zakheim (the $7 TRILLION thief/Mossad Operative) and the rest of the traitors pulling the strings - send it out over the Atlantic using the same SYSPLAN remote control Flight Termination System (FTS) that Zakheim attached to the jets on 9/11 - and let's get to the truth of the matter.
Open up the microphones in the main cabin and put one of the 9/11 widows in control of the joystick flying the plane.
Information Extraction...9/11 Widow Style!
Let's see how loudly these bastards can sing!
I got yer waterboarding, right here!
November 3rd, 2007 at 7:41 pmA slightly dated but relevant rant:
Put down the 9/11 Kool-Aide and step back for a broader view.
Clearly, and without any doubt, foreknowledge of the events of 9/11 existed among agents of the Mossad and among hundreds of individuals who had positioned themselves to profit from the market movements in the aftermath of the attacks.
Bush and his team continue to remind us that the attacks of 9/11 are directly responsible for all that has followed. I couldn't agree more. The big question is, how much of what has followed was already in the Business Plan prior to the attacks, and who helped write (or had access to) the plan?
A conspiracy to pull off a False Flag operation of this enormity requires massive strategic planning, taking all contingencies into account. The fact is, it required so much strategic planning, there was simply no way to keep the entire operation secret and ensure that every one of the players behave themselves. Evidence of insider trading points directly to greed (and stupidity) combined with foreknowledge. The absence of a detailed SEC report of who profited directly from the events of 9/11, and a complete absence of any arrests and convictions of those who attempted to profit, is EVIDENCE of a cover-up.
If you are really interested in learning everything you can to come to some level of understanding what is actually occurring, and why, you need to allow yourselves some time to do some research and read how each of these seemingly unrelated events are in fact related.
http://www.venusproject.com/ecs/nuclear_false_flag.html
With the entire conspiracy unraveling, and the truth slowly being revealed, the plan must provide for a fallback position. The pending war with Iran is by design, and may come any day now. The pretext for the invasion of Iraq was 9/11. The pretext for the invasion of Iran will be based on the next "event" - which is already planned and about to be carried out.
Martial Law is part of that plan. The collapse of the markets and the housing bubble is part of that plan. Think about what the impact of yet another attack on the US would be right now. Think about what this dictator's response would be. These are cornered wild animals. Do you really think they're going to go down without a fight? What options do they have? Think like a criminal.
Watch and listen. What is Joe Lieberman actually up to? What about the role of Michael Chertoff? Why did Bush go so far out of his way to take all of the blame for Chertoff's failures in the Katrina debacle? Had you EVER hear Mr. Bush accept responsibility for ANYTHING prior to that? Coincidence?
Fox News: Israeli Spy ring
Fox News, alone of all the media, actually ran the story as a four part broadcast, and put the story up on its web site. Then, without explanation, Fox News erased the story from their web site and have never mentioned it again.
http://100777.com/node/180
Now a local FOX affiliate has again provided air time to expose the truth about 9/11:
http://www.wicz.com/fox40/video.asp?video=%2F12%2D02+Terror%2DConspiracy%2Ewmv
The Israeli Political Influence in the United States
It should be noted here that the professional Israeli lobby in America is huge in size and is considered even by our American colleagues to be a very powerful and entirely dominant factor in American politics.
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee is the largest foreign lobby in Washington and fourth most powerful lobby in the country. Other Israeli groups also include the Anti-Defamation League (from whose national offices, along with the Israel Trade Mission and the many Israeli Consulates, many Mossad agents were working,) the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs and the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America.
These groups, in conjunction with Jewish dominated media giants like the New York Times, the Washington Post, Newsweek Magazine, the Los Angeles Times, Time- Warner-AOL and their CNN news network, basically control the dissemination of news in the United States. It is therefore almost impossible for any news that would be considered in opposition to Israeli interests to appear before the American public, although such stories are readily available in most European media.
The ONLY reason that the Times ran the Domestic Espionage/Wiretap story has got to be that Fitzgerald forced them to. They held this story for a year enabling Bush to be elected, and his investigation of Judith Miller's shenanigans clearly revealed this story had been spiked. Holding this story back amounts to a pattern of conspiracy and collusion with the Bush Administration, and if it had been held back until after the vote on the Patriot Act, it would have resulted in one more count of Obstruction of Justice against the ownership of the New York Times. The FBI and Fitzgerald left Times management with no choice but to run the story, and even direct threats by the President himself couldn't stop it. It's Fitzgerald Vs. Bush - for all the marbles.
The greatest failure in Mossad history has to be the story of the Dancing Israelis...the story that just won't go away. Caught red handed on 9/11, and subsequently having failed 7 lie detector tests, these Mossad Agents were quietly deported by Michael Chertoff. Why is this ABC 20/20 story only available for viewing on a conspiracy web site?
http://www.antichristconspiracy.com/HTML%20Pages/ABCNEWS_com_Were_Israelis_Detained_Sept_11_Spies.htm
Why was Michael Chertoff tasked with Operation Greenquest to track the 9/11 money, only to have the investigation killed?
Are you a Coincidence Theorist?
Stop worrying about the minutia...look at the big picture. The spying which Bush has authorized on US citizens is spying on political enemies, and those who would work to expose the truth of this great scheme. Remember when Bush said "you're either with us or against us?" Did you make the assumption that he was talking about the best interests of America in that statement? The "us" that he was referring to was his group of co-conspirators - and to be perfectly clear...I'm AGAINST them - not against the best interests of the United States or its Constitution, which he took an oath to uphold.
How did Bush KNOW that the NY Times was about to run the explosive story about domestic wiretaps on US Citizens? The names of the vast majority of those US citizens can NEVER be revealed, as they have nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism. He is spying on EVERY news organization and EVERY seeker of the truth. His surrogates are right here monitoring this conversation, and his agents are inside your computer anytime they choose. This is not America.
Time is running out for him - and for all of his co-conspirators both below and above his pay grade. Assume that all of them are completely freaking out right now. What will they do?
If you expose the truth of 9/11, the entire plan comes into sharp focus. Rove was in on the plan from the very beginning, and was key to its implementation.
Was the US military sent into a quagmire with no defensible borders and a lack of sufficient force to succeed by design? Was failure and quagmire part of the plan? Why no exit strategy? Why is our National Guard over there? What's really going on that makes us so vulnerable here at home? Why has our national treasury been looted? Why did Greenspan resign last January? What comes after that?
Rove, Bush, Bush Senior, Rice, Bolton, Chertoff, Cheney and Rumsfeld...under oath on the subject of 9/11 and Able Danger?
Imagine that.
If anyone is to be tortured to obtain the truth about terrorism, let it be them.
November 3rd, 2007 at 7:44 pmOk, as waterboarding is *NOT* torture, then I can grab people off the street, make videos of them being waterboarded, post the videos to the net and sell them
All completely legal. Right ?
November 3rd, 2007 at 7:44 pm#15-Kilo
You made an assumption which is totally erroneous. I was simply trying to get Mukasey to stop equivocating and to get him on the record as to whether he believes waterboarding is torture. Since he is
November 3rd, 2007 at 7:51 pmhedging on this issue of wateboarding, I am then blaming the members of this congressional committee for allowing Mukasey to give ambiguous answers and for then voting Mukasey as the next attorney general. As you correctly point out, the military field manual calls waterboarding torture as well as the Geneva Conventions. This committee has the power to say no to Mukasey but is instead going along with his confirmation. The point is, both Bush's lackey and members of congress are wrong in the actions that they are taking.
There remains no god damn question that 9/11 was ALLOWED TO HAPPEN ON PURPOSE in order to fulfill the globalist's PNAC/Zionist wet dream.
The Conspiracy Theorists have had it right.
http://plungerspeaks.blogspot.com
It's the Coincidence Theorists that are just getting the picture.
Time to apologize for getting it wrong - and impeach these bastards.
Put them ALL UNDER OATH - or waterboard them at Gitmo.
The entire Congress knows the truth.
After all, they're the ones who decided that torture is a legitimate means of extracting information where urgent matters of our national security are concerned.
As Brian Williams informed you by asking the question...two US cities are targeted for nuclear attack. Cheney has told you that when it comes, he will order an immediate nuclear strike against Iran, regardless of who was actually responsible.
Is your hair on fire yet?
What's it going to take, America?
November 3rd, 2007 at 7:54 pmRove loves the fact that you're focused on "Waterboarding"
What an elegant distraction...
To those inclined to parrot what they’ve been told about 9/11:
You actually don’t KNOW that there were ANY hijackers, let alone their country of origin (7 are still alive - therefore the identity and status of the others is in doubt). There were NO Arab names on ANY flight manifests on the 9/11 flights. The planes were ALL controlled remotely by SYSPLAN technology thanks to then DOD Comptroller, Dov Zakheim.
You claim that Pakistan is providing safe harbor for Osama Bin Laden. I’m telling you here and now that the man does not exist, and you have virtually no proof to the contrary. The FBI refuses to authenticate the purported Bin Laden 9/11 confession video, and he is not wanted in connection with 9/11 according to the FBI.
Stop doing the propagandists job for them. Question everything you hear and most of what you see.
Talk about this subject all day, every day, and don’t let the trolls shout you down. We’re all obligated to learn the truth.
The A-3 Skywarrior that hit the Pentagon was owned by Raytheon.
It was guided by Sysplan’s (FTS) technology.
It intercepted AA 77 and shadowed it so closely so as to appear to be a single aircraft on radar.
AA 77 crashed in a field in Virginia and was dealt with quietly.
The A-3 continued the mission, as evidenced by Mr. Mineta when he arrived at Cheney’s Command Bunker in time to hear him barking orders to his subordinate about the approaching “plane.†“The orders still stand!â€
The silver A-3 was painted with the American Airlines logo - a piece of which is part of the debris that was photographed outside the Pentagon on the lawn.
The outer half of the wings sheered off on impact, because these wings were designed with hinges to fold up for storage on the deck of an aircraft carrier.
Pieces of the wings were visible outside the Pentagon, and were quickly hidden from view.
This was a building full of defense specialist who instantly recognized the aroma of explosives on the scene in the aftermath.
No cell phone calls were made from any flights on 9/11. That was and remains a physical impossibility.
The explosion you see in the video is NOT fuel from the aircraft.
This A-3 was converted into a missile itself.
The “plane†is a “missle.â€
Against all protocol (and the law), the lawn of the Pentagon became a hive of activity as Government employees scurried to taint a crime scene (and the site of what would typically result in an FAA investigation), removing all essential evidence.
9/11 was an operation of the US Government in concert with Israel and The Crown - with the complicity of those at the highest levels of NORAD, NSA, CIA, FBI and other agencies.
For a list of the criminals, follow the money, the “Indictments,†the “Retirements,†the “Promotions,†and the Medal Of Freedom Award Winners.
Hundreds were in on it…thousands know the truth.
Now you do.
CNN Correspondent Jamie McIntyre claimed on live TV last week that he photographed some of the debris, including the “cockpit†found outside of the building in the immediate aftermath. He said this in as part of the Government/Media Orchestrated PsyOps event which accompanied the release of the “smoking missile†video - all in a carefully-scripted effort to tell the viewer that they were seeing a 757 on the video that WAS NOT THERE.
Let’s see those crime scene photos on CNN, Jamie. Let’s see that A-3 cockpit photo you took.
November 3rd, 2007 at 7:57 pmThis is from Scott Horton over at Harper's quoting Jack Balkin, pretty much sums it all up perfectly: Quote" So why has torture emerged as a Bush Administration litmus test? My friend Jack Balkin nails this:
The real reason why Judge Mukasey cannot say that waterboarding is illegal is that Administration officials have repeatedly insisted that they do not torture, and that they have acted both legally and honorably. If Judge Mukasey said that waterboarding is illegal, it would require the Bush Administration to admit that it repeatedly lied to the American people and brought shame and dishonor on the United States of America. If Judge Mukasey were to say waterboarding is illegal and not just “a dunk in the water†in Vice President Cheney’s terminology, he would have announced that, as incoming Attorney General, he is entering an Administration of liars and torturers.
And Jack summarizes the dilemma very accurately:
Which places any Attorney General nominee in a difficult bind: The Bush Admininstration will not nominate anyone to be Attorney General who will state publicly that what the Administration did was illegal or dishonorable. That means that the only persons who can be nominated are those who are willing to be complicit in its illegality and dishonor. For if the nominee admitted that the Administration had repeatedly misled the American people about the legality of its actions, he would not be welcome in the Bush Administration." End
Here's the links:
http://balkin.blogspot.com/2007/11/judge-mukasey-and-groucho-marx.html
http://harpers.org/archive/2007/11/hbc-90001567
November 3rd, 2007 at 7:58 pmhttp://wakeupfromyourslumber.blogspot.com/2006/10/911-dont-believe-it-youre-not-alone.html
9/11 - don’t believe it? You’re not alone
One by one, hundreds of prominent Americans - in this case, Robert D. Steele - are no longer able to deny what has been so painfully obvious to so many millions of us, for so long.
It is with great sadness that I conclude that this book is the strongest of the 770+ books I have reviewed here at Amazon, almost all non-fiction. I am forced to conclude that 9/11 was at a minimum allowed to happen as a pretext for war (see my review of Jim Bamford’s “Pretext for Warâ€), and I am forced to conclude that there is sufficient evidence to indict (not necessarily convict) Dick Cheney, Karl Rove and others of a neo-conservative neo-Nazi coup d’etat and kick-off of the clash of civilizations (see my review of “Crossing the Rubicon†as well as “State of Denialâ€). Most fascinatingly, the author links Samuel Huntington, author of “Clash of Civilizations†with Leo Strauss, the connecting rod between Nazi fascists and the neo-cons.
This is, without question, the most important modern reference on state-sponsored terrorism, and also the reference that most pointedly suggests that select rogue elements within the US Government, most likely led by Dick Cheney with the assistance of George Tenet, Buzzy Kronguard, and others close to the Wall Street gangs, are the most guilty of state-sponsored terrorism.
The author draws on historical examples of US fabrication of threats (e.g. the bombing of the USS Maine in Havana Harbor) and many others (Jim Bamford publicized Operation Northwoods). It is an undeniable fact that the U.S. Government has been willing to kill its own citizens and fabricate attacks as part of moving the public…………..â€
The author is compelling in his review of the conflicts of interest for each of the 9/11 Commissioners and key staff; he is conclusive in his damnation of their performance and their refusal to be tough with NORAD, FAA, and many other Executive organizations that refused to cooperate; and he is conclusive on his suggestion that all actual evidence points to the Pentagon being hit by a missile rather than an airplane. [?]
The author is especially compelling in condemning Rudy Guilliani as part of the conspiracy, and as the “bud†of the extreme right charged with cleaning up the crime scene. Instead of making the area off-limits, Gulliani moved aggressively to “scoop and dump†to the point that firefighters rioted.
I sit here, a 54-year old, liberally educated, two graduate degrees, war college, a life overseas, 150 IQ or so, the number #1 Amazon reviewer for non-fiction, a former MarineCorps infantry officer, a former CIA clandestine case officer, founder of the Marine Corps Intelligence Center, and I have to tell anyone who cares to read this: I believe it.
I believe it enough to want a full investigation that passes the smell test of the 9/11 families as well as objective outside observers.
I believe it sufficient to indict Dick Cheney and other neo-cons.
Sadly, the Executive is now in the service of corporations that benefit from high crimes and misdemeanors, rather than in the service of the American people who suffer great ill from these terrible mis-deeds.
My bottom line: justice has NOT been done, and this book, together with Crossing the Rubicon, is a major reason why I believe that eventually, Dick Cheney and others will be brought to justice. The people now have a digital memory and collective intelligence.
November 3rd, 2007 at 7:59 pmROVE RELIES ON YOUR DENIAL:
Most Americans do not have the “Willingness To Believe.â€
Rove counts on the fact that Americans don’t have the “Willingness To Believe†that their own government would attack its citizens.
This despite the EVIDENCE of precisely the same strategies being employed in countries all over the world (Google “False Flagâ€), including this very one right here (Google “Operation Northwoodsâ€).
The absence of the “Willingness to Believe†is what led to the rise of Hitler.
Ask any “Good German.†Ask ANY German how they feel today about the way they were manipulated. They are embarrassed about the absence of their “Willingness To Believe.â€
Creeping Fascism - The voices of the past, on Recognizing the Unrecognizable:
http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/511928.html
OUR GOVERNMENT ATTACKED US ON 9/11 – AND AGAIN A COUPLE WEEKS LATER WITH THE ANTHRAX ATTACKS – TIMED TO ENSURE PASSAGE OF THE “PATRIOT ACT.â€
AND YOU DON’T WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT?
Believe the UNBELIEVABLE – or live with the fact that your own lack of “Willingness†was precisely what enabled their success.
November 3rd, 2007 at 8:02 pmJeb had his emergency request written BEFORE 9/11.
Chertoff had his Patriot Act written BEFORE 9/11.
Bush had pursued AT&T about warrantless wiretaps BEFORE 9/11.
Various government officials were warned not to fly commercially BEFORE 9/11.
Bush demanded that the FBI back off their investigation of Al Qaeda BEFORE 9/11.
Israeli firm Zimm Shipping broke their long-term lease and moved out of the WTC BEFORE 9/11.
Mohammad Atta was seen on a Sun Cruise Casino Ship owned by Abramoff BEFORE 9/11.
The largest foreign spy ring ever uncovered within the United States (Google: Israeli Art Students) was exposed BEFORE 9/11.
Israeli pager company, Odigo, warned Israeli Nationals to stay away from the Twin Towers ON 9/11.
November 3rd, 2007 at 8:05 pmIt is not a secret who did this, PNAC spells it out and shows it off.
911 is undeniably tied to the war in Iraq. It is obvious to any thinking person how the 911 tragedy was used to justify by deception the war in Iraq. We know that the WMDs claims were lies not just mistaken intelligence. Now the question arises, who lied? Who set up and makes up the OFFICE OF SPECIAL PLANS?
All roads lead to Israel.
Here is a map of where Iraq’s oil is going. (SCROLL DOWN TO MAP)
http://www.rys2sense.com/anti-neocons/viewtopic.php?t=1388&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=
Here’s the best guest so far of what happened on 9/11/2001…
Osama bin Laden is a high level agent operated by the Israeli Mossad in cooperation with the CIA. OBL and his inner circle recruited the hijackers for 911, with the naive recruitees having little idea of what they were really getting into or about whom was pulling their strings (this was the false flag component of the operation).
Now the government is engaged in a massive propaganda campaign to suppress any reasonable questions about 911. If the cover-up starts to fall apart, it is likely that more and worse terrorist incidents will be engineered, martial law will be declared, and any skeptics and dissidents will be imprisoned or murdered.
Now, if none of this true, why is the government doing its level best to make it appear to be true by its bungling and provocative behavior? Doesn’t this entire operation — both 911 and post-911 — have a keystone cops quality about it that is highly redolent of Iran-Contra?
Anyone who thinks Israel is incapable of this kind of behavior should thoroughly research the Lavon Affair. Start by doing a simple Google search on “lavon affairâ€.
http://www.rense.com/general21/was911mossad.htm
Corporations have obviously profiteered from the wars, that has been made quite clear. But did they write, implement, and use deception, to start this war or was that the Zionists? Who got caught spying on the US Halliburton or Israel? Israel that is who. The profiteering is a by product of the war as in any war. They are all in bed together because of overlapping interests between the military related corporations and the Zionists.
The Neocons Made it happen with the assistance of a foreign government, the same government where PNAC was first written, and who we have caught spies from who have been stealing secrets from us about Iran, and who made up the shadow government of the OSP which is who cherry picked and fabricated the lies told about Iraq in order to start the war. The Wars in the middle east were for separate reasons, Afghanistan was about a few pipelines as noted but more so about controlling large quantities of un-tapped uranium (a reason for both the Russian and US invasions) and secondly for controlling opium as the CIA funds it’s off the books black operation such as the now known massive secret prison systems, (torture camps) and coupled with other color coded revolutions to circle China and Russia with US bases, (add to that the lesser known negotiations with Japan to allow nuclear subs into the Japanese Sea [pointed at China] in exchange for moving troops from Okinawa to Guam). The main goal however which PNAC states is to keep the eye on the pie, Iran (which Afghanistan and Iraq both boarder.) The invasion of Iraq was to solve Israel’s oil crisis and stop the threat of a secular Middle East which would become a true economic player and was a threat to the aggressive state of Israel.
Now you ready to get pulled out of the rabbit hole some more? I will come back to just who forged these documents. (Ahmad Chalabi , Francis Brookes, Dewey Clarridge, and Michael Ledeen. ) First let’s see how they got into the presidents hands. Bush said, these known false claims, as if they were true in his State of the Union Address. It has now been called is infamous 16 words, which he could be impeached for if we had an actual opposition party.
The disinformation was stove piped straight to Cheney/Bush by a little known shadow government called the OSP the Office of Special Plans, headed under Cheney and Rumsfeld and a pack of Zionists underling, yes the same ones who co-authored PNAC and the Clean Break for Israel.
Andreas von Bulow the former German Defense Minister said on April 21, 2006 on the Alex Jones show that this false flag operation had to be carried out by a very small group of people Alex asked him 100? 40? he said less than that. Right after the second break (which on the QuickTime bar would be right in line with Andreas vo Bulow’s right ear) Alex talks about the picture getting more clear as the truth about the wars come out. He then talks about the 25 Neocons who wrote PNAC were in high positions in the DOD and white house and Andreas von Bulow says “sure and part of them wrote the government program for Benjamin Netanyahu… “(Former Prime Minister of Israel). Alex goes on to say who could have done this? Bulow says it was not the CIA and Alex jumps in saying your talking about black ops. Than Alex says we know only a MAJOR STATE could have carried this out? Andreas says it must have been done from high up and it had to be done by a few people. Alex says would you say 100-200, AVB says less, Alex askes 50 people and AVB says less. Alex can not say it was the zionists on the air.
http://www.rys2sense.com/anti-neocons/viewtopic.php?t=1388&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=
100% official proof: Body Doubles at work on 911
Atta was a Mossad agent that’s why he was seen on the Abramoff casino ships and why the Mossad lived next door to his house, why they found his stolen pass port at ground Zero (the mossad planted it for the FBI) and why Atta could not speak German to his flight instructor.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/August2006/180806Doubles.htm
THE OFFICE OF SPECIAL PLANS EXPOSED:
http://www.rys2sense.com/anti-neocons/viewtopic.php?t=550
This case with Rove, Miller, Libby, and so on, is linked to another scandal in the DOD. The Larry Franklin/AIPAC scandal. Where Israel was using DOD officials to hand over classified information to their Israeli lobby group who then passed it to the Israeli government. Now just how does it all fit together?
November 3rd, 2007 at 8:05 pmYou know, I’m starting to think Plungers that guy they threw off the Bill Maher set last week.
Comment by BARTLEBEE — November 3, 2007 @ 8:04 pm
I know you're reading it. Are you learning anything?
November 3rd, 2007 at 8:06 pmI used it because it was an accurate assessment of you.
You complained about this, then went on to post 5 links, 2 of which were from whatreallyhappened.com.
A website that suggests OBL is dead and an actor is portraying him in movies directed by the CIA and mossad.
So what, you would have preferred to be assessed as a “lunatic†than an anti-Semite?
Comment by Kilo — November 3, 2007 @ 8:10 pm
You failed to answer my question entirely.
How does my linking to whatreallyhappened.com in any way explain your use of the term "the Jews"?
To be clear, whatreally happened.com is 100% accurate when they proclaim that there is no "Osama Bin Laden" and that these phony tapes purporting to feature him, do not.
You have no proof whatsoever of the existence of Bin Laden. None.
The FBI is unwilling to confirm that the purported "Bin Laden Confession Video" that we were all treated to on TV just days after 9/11 was in fact Bin Laden. It clearly was not.
Have you actually LOOKED at the person in the fake Bin Laden video?
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/osamatape.html
The FBI declines to confirm its authenticity.
For those of you who actually believe that Bin Laden was involved in the 9/11 attacks, the FBI Most Wanted web site disagrees with you, and so does Wikipedia:
"The FBI does not yet have 'hard evidence' linking him to the 9/11 attacks and so as of 2006 he has only been indicted on the embassy murders; he is officially still only a suspect in 'other terrorist attacks throughout the world'."
http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.htm
To each of you - go ahead, tell me again about the one where Osama Bin Laden attacked America on 9/11.
Anybody?
Anybody?
http://www.physics911.net/kevinbarrett.htm
Top Bin Laden Expert: The Tapes are Fakes
Kevin Barrett
As a PhD in Islamic and Arabic Studies, I hate to say this, but I’ll say it anyway. The events of 9/11 had nothing to do with Islam. The war on terror itself is as phony as the latest “Bin Laden tape.â€
Compare the nose of the actor in the video tape with that of Bin Laden:
http://www.911blimp.net/vid_fakeOsamaVideo.shtml
This is NOT BIN LADEN.
Repeat this information often.
LOOK AT THE VIDEO - IT'S FAKE.
Now...back to my earlier question...
Why are you the only person in this thread referring to "the Jews?"
November 3rd, 2007 at 8:17 pmWell here is something that has some consistencies with what Plunger is stating: http://www.fas.org/sgp/jud/aipac/memop110207.pdf
Here is Steven aftergood's summation:
** COURT AUTHORIZES SUBPOENAS OF SENIOR OFFICIALS IN AIPAC CASE
** NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN US POLICY, AND MORE FROM CRS
COURT AUTHORIZES SUBPOENAS OF SENIOR OFFICIALS IN AIPAC CASE
A federal court authorized issuance of subpoenas to more than a dozen
current and former government officials to testify in the case of two
former officials of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee who
are accused of unauthorized receipt, transmission and disclosure of
classified information.
According to the defense, the testimony of the subpoenaed officials
will show that the defendants did "nothing more than the
well-established official Washington practice of engaging in 'back
channel' communication with various non-governmental entities and
persons for the purpose of advancing U.S. foreign policy goals."
The government disputes that claim and says such testimony is
irrelevant to whether the defendants engaged in a conspiracy to obtain
and disclose classified information.
The court, however, ruled that circumstantial evidence of the official
use of "back channel" communications could be probative of the
defendants' state of mind and could show a lack of criminal intent.
Judge T.S. Ellis III therefore authorized issuance of subpoenas to the
following officials:
Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of State (then-National Security Advisor)
Richard Armitage, former Deputy Secretary of State
William Burns, U.S. Ambassador to Russia
Marc Grossman, former Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs
Lawrence Silverman, Deputy Chief of Mission of the U.S. Embassy to the
Slovak Republic
Matthew Bryza, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State
Marc Sievers, Political Officer, U.S. Embassy to Israel
David Satterfield, Senior Advisor to the Secretary of State and
Coordinator for Iraq (then-Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, Bureau
of Near Eastern Affairs)
Stephen Hadley, National Security Advisory (then-Deputy National
Security Advisory)
Elliot Abrams, Deputy Assistant to the President and Deputy National
Security Advisory for Global Democracy Strategy Affairs
Kenneth Pollack, former Director for Persian Gulf Affairs for the
National Security Council
Paul Wolfowitz, former Deputy Secretary of Defense
Douglas Feith, former Undersecretary of Defense
Michael Makovsky, former employee of the Office of the Secretary of
Defense, Office of Near East and South Asia
Lawrence Franklin, former Department of Defense employee
A copy of the November 2, 2007 Memorandum Opinion in the case of United
November 3rd, 2007 at 8:20 pmStates of America v. Steven J. Rosen and Keith Weissman is available
here:
I’ve read the 911 conspiracy theories and I have some views on them, however this thread is not the place for it as wasn’t the audience on Real Time last week.
Comment by BARTLEBEE — November 3, 2007 @ 8:13 pm
And when will it be the appropriate time for civil disobedience along the path toward a full blown police state in your estimation?
When and how do you propose that the truth will reach the American people?
November 3rd, 2007 at 8:21 pmKilo fails once again to answer a direct question.
November 3rd, 2007 at 8:25 pmAs the 1983 American Heritage Dictionary noted, fascism is: "A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism." (The US dictionary definition has gotten somewhat squishier since then, as all the larger dictionary companies have been bought up by multinational corporations.)
Mussolini was quite straightforward about all this. In a 1923 pamphlet titled "The Doctrine of Fascism" he wrote, "If classical liberalism spells individualism, Fascism spells government." But not a government of, by, and for We The People - instead, it would be a government of, by, and for the most powerful corporate interests in the nation.
It seems that facism more resembles bush policy that islamic theocracy...
Here is the 14-point Britt definition as posted some months ago...
Dr. Lawrence Britt has examined the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia) and several Latin American regimes. Britt found 14 defining characteristics common to each:
1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism - Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.
2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights - Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.
3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause - The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.
4. Supremacy of the Military - Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.
5. Rampant Sexism - The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Divorce, abortion and homosexuality are suppressed and the state is represented as the ultimate guardian of the family institution.
6. Controlled Mass Media - Sometimes, media is directly controlled by the government. But in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.
7. Obsession with National Security - Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.
8. Religion and Government are Intertwined - Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.
9. Corporate Power is Protected - The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.
10. Labor Power is Suppressed - Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.
11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts - Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts and letters is openly attacked.
12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment - Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.
13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption - Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.
14. Fraudulent Elections - Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.
November 3rd, 2007 at 8:27 pm"As people do better, they start voting like Republicans - unless they have too much education and vote Democratic, which proves there can be too much of a good thing."
Karl Rove.
"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, THE TRUTH IS THE GREATEST ENEMY OF THE STATE."
-- Joseph Goebbels, German Minister of Propaganda, 1933-1945
"See in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda."
GEORGE w. BUSH
Here's a great comparison of Goebbels to Bush:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/may2005/260505newbushism.htm
November 3rd, 2007 at 8:30 pmThe Fly Man is right. If Mukasey admits that waterboarding is torture, and torture is illegal, then the Bush Administration is Guilty of a War Crime. If the justice Dept. is independent, and beholding to the law and not the president....then Mukasey will have to go after the water boarders and those who sanctioned it.
Mukasey may surprise everyone and actually go after Bush, but he is smart enough to know that admitting as much is a non starter.
If Mukasey is not approved by the Senate, which is not likely, then Bush won't appoint anybody, and an acting attorney General with even less accountability, will run the justice Dept.
November 3rd, 2007 at 8:34 pm.
Our Senate is pleat with "Sissy" Graham's.
Is torture EVER an American Principle?
Schumer and Feinstein seem to think so too...
.
November 3rd, 2007 at 8:37 pmTwo years ago, Cheney appeared on Larry King. He stepped in it big time, but few people caught it. I alerted Rude Pundit and he wrote about it.
an excerpt:
Then Cheney made this statement: "In a sense, when you're at war, you keep prisoners of war until the war is over with." So, like, if, in a sense, the Gitmo campers are "prisoners of war," then, in a sense, don't they get Geneva Conventions protections?
Cheney and Gonzales have been playing a semantics game to justify torture, since "war" was never formally declared. It's pretty obvious why they chose to embark upon the path of war without ever formally declaring it - so they could not be held accountable for the War Crimes they knew they'd be committing.
Bush tells us every day that we're at war. Cheney and Gonzales tell us that we're not REALLY at war.
Problem is, Cheney is on tape stating not only that we are at war, but that we are holding "prisoners of war."
The Geneva Conventions DO APPLY, and Cheney is guilty of war Crimes.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0505/30/lkl.01.html
KING: They specifically said, though, it was Guantanamo. They compared it to a gulag.
D. CHENEY: Not true. Guantanamo's been operated, I think, in a very sane and sound fashion by the U.S. military. Remember who's down there. These are people that were picked up off the battlefield in Afghanistan and other places in the global war on terror. These are individuals who have been actively involved as the enemy, if you will, trying to kill Americans. That we need to have a place where we can keep them. In a sense, when you're at war, you keep prisoners of war until the war is over with."
So this is the war without end, and these prisoners will be held forever?
YES IT IS A WAR - AND YES THE GENEVA CONVENTIONS APPLY, AND YES TORTURE IS A WAR CRIME.
PERIOD.
November 3rd, 2007 at 8:38 pmhttp://www.warcrimeswatch.org
Published on Friday, November 3, 2006 by The Nation
War Criminals, Beware
by Jeremy Brecher and Brendan Smith
On November 14 a group of lawyers and other experts will come before the German federal prosecutor and ask him to open a criminal investigation targeting Donald Rumsfeld, Alberto Gonzales and other key Bush Administration figures for war crimes. The recent passage of the Military Commissions Act provides a central argument for the legal action, under the doctrine of universal jurisdiction: It demonstrates the intent of the Bush Administration to immunize itself legally from prosecution in the United States, even for the most serious crimes.
The Military Commissions Act of 2006, which the President promoted and recently signed into law, provides retroactive immunity for civilians who violated the War Crimes Act, including officials of the Bush Administration. Such an attempt to provide immunity for their crimes, it will be argued, is in itself evidence of an effort to block prosecution of those crimes. Indeed, according to Scott Horton, chair of the International Law Committee of the New York City Bar Association, when Yugoslavia sought to immunize senior government officials, the United States declared the act itself to be evidence of such a conspiracy.
“The United States declared the act itself to be evidence of such a conspiracy.â€
“The United States declared the act itself to be evidence of such a conspiracy.â€
“The United States declared the act itself to be evidence of such a conspiracy.â€
November 3rd, 2007 at 8:41 pmOne more time Plunger, in between your printing of the Britannica Encylopeida, just know that you’re not some great heralder of some obscure and unknown truth that we are all oblivious to.
You’re just a guy spamming a blog and burying everyones comments with articles you came across on the internet that you found interesting.
Comment by BARTLEBEE — November 3, 2007 @ 8:50 pm
Bartlebee and I have had our tiffs, our differences, our arguments, but on this particular subject we stand united! Arggh!!!
P!ss off, Plunger!
November 3rd, 2007 at 8:56 pmWaterboarding is deceptive because it doesn't outwardly look like what most people picture torture looking like. After all, how could stuffing a rag in your mouth then constantly pouring a slow stream of water cause pain.
Somebody should wake up and describe the medical aspects of this procedure. Waterboarding triggers the gag reflex. What does repeated gaging do to the body and mind? I don't think that very many people are buying off on waterboarding as torture because there is no outward appearance of pain being inflicted. No minds are being changed. The debate is being lost. Bush knows that.
Lets get some medical people involved and have them graphically describe what is happening to the person as waterboarding is being administered. Otherwise the debate is lost. In fact, people may have already made up their minds. I can't believe how poorly this has been handled to date.
November 3rd, 2007 at 9:01 pmThanks to ThinkProgress and to these very brave JAGS for protesting this Crime Against Humanity.
Cageprisoners.com and WitnessToTorture.org to stop this nazi horror by the never-elected bush regime.
November 3rd, 2007 at 9:02 pmIf Mukasey is not approved by the Senate, which is not likely, then Bush won’t appoint anybody, and an acting attorney General with even less accountability, will run the justice Dept.
Comment by Badger — November 3, 2007 @ 8:34 pm
i've heard, and taken some solace in the message, that the US can
survive without an AG, but NOT without the Constitution...
not sure how that fugures with an ACTing AG... would i be naive to think that all the sunshine of late will keep the dept of justice clean?
yes, i suppose...
November 3rd, 2007 at 9:07 pm...
Plunger's post is not particularly long and we need to remember that these monsters can and will be charged for their war crimes.
link to protest to NPR for their inhumanity at the link.
http://nprcheck.blogspot.com/
So, the Anne Garrels' story involving torture seems to have gotten a lot of attention at NPR; today they devoted their entire letters section to it. For those who did not hear it, let me synopsize:
Steve Inskeep "elicited" this chilling statement from Garrels:
"The three Detainees had clearly been tortured, Er, There was blood all over their clothes, they were in such bad shape they couldn't walk, they had to be dragged on to the chairs, and one of them was
just sobbing"
Then Inskeep quotes an astute listener:
"Let me get this straight, Anne Garrels is reporting information obtained from a torture victim, speaking in the presence of his torturers, as if it is credible; has NPR sunk that low?"
But before Garrels can respond to that pithy question, Inskeep throws out the red herring that "a lot of listeners" had a "A more specific Question...were you there for the torture?" Garrels, of course, responded in the negative. In an aside, Inskeep says "...this is how reporting has to be done in this most dangerous situation."come on.
November 3rd, 2007 at 9:07 pmInhumane, illegal, torture?
November 3rd, 2007 at 9:11 pmWHO CARES? Definitely not this administration! They care about nothing. I take it back, they only care about the gain that their little mafiosi gang can earn. That's all.
Kilo:
The FBI fails to confirm what you seem to take as gospel.
If the FBI and I are in agreement - that the man in the video does not appear to be bin laden, where does that leave you?
Where is the CREDIBLE proof that bin laden exists?
You have no proof, and neither does the FBI.
One difference...they admit it.
November 3rd, 2007 at 9:25 pmYou’re just a guy spamming a blog and burying everyones comments with articles you came across on the internet that you found interesting.
Comment by BARTLEBEE — November 3, 2007 @ 8:50 pm
Bottom line, no one will read reams & reams of text. Post a link & a very brief synopsis. Or better yet, discuss the topic at hand. Every time I see an entire screen of text I know plunger has posted and I skip past it. It could be the most important thing in the world but the way he presents it doesn't lend itself to serious thinking, so I don't. So you're doing yourself a disservice plunger. If you want people to read this stuff come up with a better way... this way is old & doesn't work. If you won't listen to your supposed audience then why bother at all?
November 3rd, 2007 at 9:50 pm"I'LL STOP THIS CAR RIGHT NOW!"
November 3rd, 2007 at 10:01 pmIf Lindsey Graham can lie about his homosexuality, he can lie about anything.
November 3rd, 2007 at 10:19 pmI agree with Bigfoot. Waterboarding is designed to make people talk. Waterboarding is not, however, torture. Waterboarding does not cause any physical damage so it can not be torture. Unless torture is defined as anything thing, physical or mental designed to get information, but then almost any form of interrogation is tortue. Waterboarding is no different than an interrogation room. It is a psychological means of getting information. If waterboarding is torture, then so is any form of interrogation. As for legality, I do not know, but logically it is not torture.
November 3rd, 2007 at 10:48 pmWaterboarding is not torture, and waterboarding is an effective means of gathering information from a stubborn enemy. When the situation demands it, waterboarding should be utilized.
Comment by O. Bigfoot
Only if you say so...
November 3rd, 2007 at 10:51 pmKilo, you are arguing moralltiy. In that situation, it was not moral, in this situation, it is. We're talking about using waterboarding to extract information about terrorist activity. We are trying to save lives when in your scenario it was to end them. We are talking about whether or not waterboarding is torture, so please stick to the topic of the thread.
November 3rd, 2007 at 10:56 pmWhat I have always wondered is why some repugs seem to think its cute to sit on their fat asses and cheer on torturing folks.
Comment by BARTLEBEE
Because it surely works. That's why there has not a terrorist attack in the US, nor a Martian Invasion...because waterboarding produces results.
In fact, if you grind the genitals of kids in front of their parents, you will get greater results in your struggle against whatever your military corporate economy talks you into.
November 3rd, 2007 at 10:56 pm... it sure took long enough for the troolls to get here...
talking points don't come along as fast and furious as in the recent past...
and to come along with "it's not torture" is simply astounding...
November 3rd, 2007 at 10:58 pmwell, maybe not... nothing surprises me anymore...
...
katy, why is arguing that it is not torture astounding?
November 3rd, 2007 at 10:59 pmBigfoot, I agree. It is not torture if it does not cause physical harm. The argument is not about whether or not torture is illegal, it is about whether or not waterboarding is torture. Since it doesn't cause physical harm, then it is not torture. It is therefore not illegal.
November 3rd, 2007 at 11:10 pmHowever, the United States does not torture.
Comment by O. Bigfoot
Is there a Bud light ad in all that Propaganda crap?
November 3rd, 2007 at 11:11 pmRemoveBush, if it is simulated drowning then it is simulated drowning. Maybe we do mischaracterize it by calling it waterboarding. It is obviously simulated drrowning according to you. Someone must have just mislabeled it somewhere.
November 3rd, 2007 at 11:12 pmSince it doesn’t cause physical harm, then it is not torture. It is therefore not illegal.
Comment by Patriot
If you get bombed by an IED, and just die without feeling any pain, it is not illegal.
People on the WTC planes didnt suffer pain, just a flashlight at the temperature range, therefore that act wasn't illegal.
Got it.
November 3rd, 2007 at 11:13 pmWhy are Republicans such IDIOTS?????
Comment by RemoveBush
Is that a trick question?
November 3rd, 2007 at 11:13 pmRemoveBush, I can't believe you just brought up the Geneva Convention. The people waterboarding is being used on are not covered in the Geneva Convention. They are not part of any uniform army, they are insurgents and terrorists. Also, simulated drowning isn't torture, so the Geneva Convention doesn't apply here.
November 3rd, 2007 at 11:14 pmAgreed, Patriot. We cannot use kid gloves in dealing with people who want us dead.
Comment by O. Bigfoot
Oh, another Christian.
November 3rd, 2007 at 11:16 pmJuan C at 99, I think I would consider death as physical harm. Your argument is irrelevant and pointless.
November 3rd, 2007 at 11:16 pmAlso, simulated drowning isn’t torture, so the Geneva Convention doesn’t apply here.
Comment by Patriot
Welcome to Circular logic time.
November 3rd, 2007 at 11:17 pmYour argument is irrelevant and pointless.
Comment by Patriot
Then again, I just used your argument. mmmm...
November 3rd, 2007 at 11:18 pmRemoveBush at 103, we've already said that if it doesn't cause physical harm then it isn't torture. When classifying something as torture or not, it doesn't matter what is thought, it only matters what is done .
November 3rd, 2007 at 11:19 pmRemoveBush at 103, we’ve already said that if it doesn’t cause physical harm then it isn’t torture.
Comment by Patriot
Oh, and I was wasting my time thinking they were at least coherent trolls...
Buh Bye.
November 3rd, 2007 at 11:21 pm#91 - That is exactly the descriptiveness I was talking about that is necessary to win this debate. The pictures of waterboarding do not support the appearance of torture. It is necessary to get graphic about how the body and mind responds when waterboarding techniques are administered. Say it often and say it loudly.
November 3rd, 2007 at 11:25 pmRemoveBush at 111, Yes, it would be illegal to detain your neighbor, unless of course you had a warrant. We aren't waterboarding our neighbors, we are waterboarding terrorists and insurgents. This takes place outside of the U.S. so U.S. Constitutional rights do not apply, and as stated before, they are not part of a uniformed army, so the Geneva Convention does not apply.
November 3rd, 2007 at 11:25 pmRemoveBush at 113, as Bigfoot and I have tried to tell you, waterboarding is not illegal and is not torture. Plus, U.S. laws don't apply outside of the U.S. Your argument is irrelevant.
November 3rd, 2007 at 11:29 pmso, out of curiosity, i have to ask;
bigfool, parrot - did you come here thinking that you would convince anyone that torture is OK? ... is that your mission?...
and, TPers, do you think there is any chance of redeeming the lost souls
of the troolls who show up espousing UNamerican, UNcivil behavior?
just curious...
November 3rd, 2007 at 11:29 pm.
RemoveBush at 117, when will you get it? The Geneva Convention does not apply, the U.S. Constitution does not apply. Stop bringing these up. You're sounding like a broken record. Waterboarding is not torture because it does not cause physical harm. Waterboarding is not illegal because it is not torture and it is done outside of the U.S. The Geneva Convention does not apply because the people waterboarding is being used on are not part of a uniformed army.
November 3rd, 2007 at 11:33 pmRemoveBush at 128, the Geneva Convention does not apply to people who are not in a uniformed army. You have not named any other international laws that declare warterboarding illegal. Plus, since waterboarding is not torture no anti-torture laws apply to it.
November 3rd, 2007 at 11:38 pmKilo at 131, I know we are out there to stop the terrorists. The difference is, in Cambodia it was a government that wanted to opress its people. We are trying to stop fanatics that want us all dead. The people we are trying to find are the ones that want to opress people. Waterboarding is not torture if it is done properly. If the best example of waterboarding being torture is that a communist dictatorship used it, then you have already lost. Communist dictatorships have used plenty of other things I'm sure you don't think are bad.
November 3rd, 2007 at 11:44 pmRemoveBush at 132, you keep coming up with insane arguments. In your example, you are right, it was not physical harm, it wasn't torture. You abducted someone and held them against their will, but you did not physically harm them. People can not be blamed for phsychological effects, only physical. You did not torture but you did violate constitutional rights which is why you would be punished. As stated before, constitutional rights don't apply to this waterboarding argument. It is not torture if there is no physical harm. That is what I have stated. Waterboarding does not cause physical harm. Waterboarding is not torture, plain and simple.
November 3rd, 2007 at 11:49 pmDumb Question: As our waterboarding is classified and the identies of those under extraordinary rendition are hidden, how do we know that waterboarding and other forms of torture have NOT killed any of them ?
November 3rd, 2007 at 11:53 pmRemoveBush at 134, have you read what you posted? It says in article 1:
To be commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
To have a fixed distinctive emblem recognizable at a distance;
To carry arms openly; and
To conduct their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war
They do not have a distinctive emblem, they do not carry arms openly, and they do not conduct their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war. They do not meet Article 1, therefore Article 3 does not apply.
November 3rd, 2007 at 11:53 pmMapleStreet at 136, we do not know, but that is not the question. If waterboarding is done correctly, it won't cause physical harm and is therefore not torture. If it is done incorrectly, then it is not waterboarding and should not be classified as such. In this dicussion, I am assuming that desert island is taken out of the argument.
November 3rd, 2007 at 11:56 pmI'll bet there isn't one American, Republican or Democrat, who would have believed 7 years ago that they'd be arguing over whether or not the U.S. should waterboard captured enemies. Your country is sinking to a new low every month thanks to GWB. The value of your $ is a good indication of the world's opinion of your govt & your foreign policy.
November 3rd, 2007 at 11:56 pmDave C at 139, 7 years ago, I never thought I would have to argue about stopping terrorists.7 years ago, I thought the terrorists had to be stooped using any means necesary in order to protect the world from the extreme religous control the terrorists seek. I still believe that they must be stopped using any means necesary.
November 4th, 2007 at 12:00 amDave C at 139, 7 years ago, I never thought I would have to argue about stopping terrorists.7 years ago, I thought the terrorists had to be stooped using any means necesary in order to protect the world from the extreme religous control the terrorists seek. I still believe that they must be stopped using any means necesary.
Comment by Patriot — November 4, 2007 @ 12:00 am
Seven years ago I doubt you would have believed that the U.S. would attack a country that had not attacked it on the basis of flawed intelligence. And then stayed in that country fighting for another 4+ years. The terrorists you're fighting are not those that attacked the U.S. You're creating terrorists. Look at how many people have been released from Abu. Are they terrorists? Are you actually believing that you are releasing terrorists to fight again? No, they're people that you have determined are innocent... after possibly years of isolation, waterboarding, standing on boxes with electrodes on their dicks... this is what you defend. At the point your country waterboards someone they don't know that they are a terrorist. They're trying to find that out. So they torture the person to find out if they have information. And you defend that. It's amazing that you feel it's ok to decide who is a terrorist, torture that person to find out if you're right and then release them years later once you realize you've made an error.
Tell me this, if waterboarding supposed terrorists is ok to find info then it should also be ok for suspected criminals in the U.S. Why not? It's not torture, it doesn't inflict any harm... you're not wearing any emblems. So your police should be able to waterboard you to find out if maybe you're the next unabomber. Enjoy your freedom.
November 4th, 2007 at 12:05 amKilo at 140, first off, how is wikipedia reliable? For all I know, you wrote that yourself. Also, if physical or mental interrogation is banned, then is it not illegal for the police to use those dark interreogation rooms? Any form of interrogation is mental. Including waterboarding, but not all interogation is torture. Waterboarding is not torture because it does not cause physical harm. If the Un Convention defines waterboarding as torture, then almost all means of interogation are tortue,so we might as well let the terrorists live their everyday lives until they decide to give up and talk.
November 4th, 2007 at 12:05 amPatriot, you do realize that when these captured folks are being waterboarded they aren't known terrorists right? They're often just people in the wrong place at the wrong time. They have no legal rights, there's no trial, no one determines that they are actually terrorists. It's no different then picking you up off the street because your neighbor says you're trouble... next thing you find yourself gulping for air while the police waterboard you to find out if you're a real criminal. Welcome to Iraq under U.S. occupation. Be proud!!! At least you can sleep better knowing that the potentially innocent folks aren't being tortured. Sure, you invaded their country on the basis of fake intel (Read that as OIL Lust) but you're not torturing them.
November 4th, 2007 at 12:14 amRemoveBush at 142, how was it illegal to invade Iraq? I don't recall anything about it being illegal to go towar with a hostile nation. And about bombing innocent civilians, there are casulties to war. If the enemies would just come out and meet us in the field, there wouldn't be a problem. But they don't. The enemy hides in the towns and in order to take out the enemy we have to attack. Sometimes citizens get in the way. It's a fact of war. By the way, nice job dropping your conventions argument. You do like to drop arguments once you realize you can't win, which seems to be quite often.
Dave C at 143, once again, I will say this is a discussion about whether or not waterboarding is legal. This is not a morality debate. It is a simple agrument abour whether or not something is illegal. If innocents are interrogated, then it is a problem with the detainment end, not the interrogation end. Innocent people go to jail all the time, but we don't shut down jails. That is because prisons are both legal and necesary.
November 4th, 2007 at 12:14 amRemoveBush at 145, what are you talking about? Give me links to this evidence, if it exists.
November 4th, 2007 at 12:19 amRemoveBush at 147, you are entirely right. This is the fight of our lives and the entire nation should be behind it. We currently have an all volunteer army, however, and public opinions is against the war, so not enough people are joining. Now, if you'd like to institute a draft, go ahead.
If innocents are interrogated, then it is a problem with the detainment end, not the interrogation end. Innocent people go to jail all the time, but we don’t shut down jails. That is because prisons are both legal and necesary.
Comment by Patriot — November 4, 2007 @ 12:14 am
It wouldn't be a problem to interrogate innocents if you followed the Geneva Convention. Innocent people go to jail in the U.S..... after a trial. You don't shut down your jails because those people have a right to defend themselves, their guilt is determined before the punishment is administered.
btw, International law states that it is illegal to attack another country without being attacked. Iraq did nothing to provoke an attack. They were complying with UN inspectors when GWB pulled the inspectors out and attacked. He kept saying that all Saddam had to do was give up the WMDs. It turns out there were none to give up. Go figure.
November 4th, 2007 at 12:20 amRemoveBush 152, a friendly chat and interogation are completely different. Judging by how you behave, I'd assumed you knew that, meaning that you've been to jail more than once. What I said first about wikipedia still applies. So they give the sources. What is the source used is a whackjob with a degree? Would they turn it down or still count it?
BARTLEBEE at 153, I am not a coward because I want to protect freedom. Are you calling anyone who does not want to live under a oppresive, fanaticallay religious government a coward? That's what the terrorists want. They want their beliefs to be law and they want to kill all who oppose them. And yes, I would use any means necesary to stop them.
November 4th, 2007 at 12:26 amAs much fun as it has been argueing with a wall, I have to go. It's pretty late now. Have fun with your little game here on TP. This argument can't stay on topic, so I've got to say I'm done with it. I cna have more meaningful political discussion elsewhere.
November 4th, 2007 at 12:34 amRetired JAGs On Waterboarding: ‘It Is Inhumane, It Is Torture, And It Is Illegal’
According to Bush and Mukasey that's classified!
November 4th, 2007 at 10:57 amHow can those two traitors be allowed to remain in office? CodePink, where are you when we need you, your sensible and dignified presensce is needed in these desperate times.
Comment by Fletcher Morgantown — November 4, 2007 @ 11:12 am
And you're enlisting when, you brainless coward?
November 4th, 2007 at 11:23 amIt's time to stop the madness. Kucinich is moving to impeach. You can add your support now by sending an email to Congress: http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Kucinich_says_he_will_force_House_1102.html
November 4th, 2007 at 11:27 amyour sensible and dignified presensce is needed in these desperate times.
Comment by Fletcher Morgantown — November 4, 2007 @ 11:12 am
Your clown Bush took care of that problem several years ago. Never has he said or done a sensible or dignified thing, never. Code Pink is the model of decorum, compared to the retard in the White House. Come back when the Deserter-In-Chief puts a coherent Engish sentence together, or when he shows the least understanding of the Law and Constitution. So far, he's struck out completely.
November 4th, 2007 at 11:31 amwell, imagine that... i NEVER get a reply from the bigfool...
even when i address it by the name bigfoot...
still, i'd like to know:
bigfool, parrot - did you come here thinking that you would convince anyone that torture is OK? … is that your mission?…
Comment by katy — November 3, 2007 @ 11:29 pm
...
i'm not counting on an answer...
November 4th, 2007 at 11:41 am...
Yet Graham has now sold out his principles in return for campaign assistance from President Bush.
What...??? A Republican selling out his principles?
What a surprise. NOT. Republicans would sell their children as sex slaves if they thought it would bring them more power.
November 4th, 2007 at 11:47 amBottom line: ‘It Is Inhumane, It Is Torture, And It Is Illegal’
Waterboarding undermines the safety of our troops, it undermines the USA as a benevolent superpower.
We cannot be a moral leader when we act immorally.
When other countries spit on us, don't be insulted, what's a little water
November 4th, 2007 at 12:27 pmI was so pleased to see the four retired JAG's saying what would be OBVIOUS to everyone but blind followers of the current, corrupt, criminal president and his nominee to replace the lying, criminal Gonzo.
So, I started reading the thread to get some ideas of what can be done to be SURE the opinions of the JAG's gets wide notice and is impressed on the Senators, Democratic and Republican, so that Mukasey's nomination is rejected, as it should be.
And what did I find? TONS of troll dung! Examples:
A troll who ignores pleas from progressives to shorten posts so that they do not dominate the thread, many times with OFF TOPIC material. The troll's response to the pleas? Observe:
plunger — November 3, 2007 @ 7:15 pm
plunger — November 3, 2007 @ 7:21 pm
plunger — November 3, 2007 @ 7:27 pm
plunger — November 3, 2007 @ 7:32 pm
plunger — November 3, 2007 @ 7:41 pm
plunger — November 3, 2007 @ 7:44 pm - second longest post on thread
plunger — November 3, 2007 @ 7:54 pm
plunger — November 3, 2007 @ 7:57 pm - third longest post on thread
plunger — November 3, 2007 @ 7:59 pm
plunger — November 3, 2007 @ 8:02 pm
plunger — November 3, 2007 @ 8:05 pm
plunger — November 3, 2007 @ 8:05 pm - longest post on thread
plunger — November 3, 2007 @ 8:06 pm
plunger — November 3, 2007 @ 8:17 pm
plunger — November 3, 2007 @ 8:25 pm
plunger — November 3, 2007 @ 8:27 pm
plunger — November 3, 2007 @ 8:30 pm
plunger — November 3, 2007 @ 8:38 pm
plunger — November 3, 2007 @ 8:41 pm
plunger — November 3, 2007 @ 9:25 pm
This sums up plunger's contribution:
You’re just a guy spamming a blog and burying everyones comments with articles you came across on the internet that you found interesting.
Comment by BARTLEBEE — November 3, 2007 @ 8:38 pm
Two trolls who come into this thread, and TOO MANY other threads, and simply regurgitate the current corrupt, criminal president's talking points:
O. Bigfoot — November 3, 2007 @ 10:40 pm
O. Bigfoot — November 3, 2007 @ 10:48 pm
O. Bigfoot — November 3, 2007 @ 10:57 pm
O. Bigfoot — November 3, 2007 @ 11:03 pm
O. Bigfoot — November 3, 2007 @ 11:06 pm ...the United States does not torture.
O. Bigfoot — November 3, 2007 @ 11:09 pm ...There is no law against waterboarding.
O. Bigfoot — November 3, 2007 @ 11:14 pm ...We cannot use kid gloves in dealing with people who want us dead.
O. Bigfoot — November 3, 2007 @ 11:19 pm
O. Bigfoot — November 3, 2007 @ 11:23 pm
O. Bigfoot — November 3, 2007 @ 11:25 pm
O. Bigfoot — November 3, 2007 @ 11:28 pm
O. Bigfoot — November 3, 2007 @ 11:33 pm
O. Bigfoot — November 4, 2007 @ 12:52 am
Patriot — November 3, 2007 @ 10:48 pm
Patriot — November 3, 2007 @ 10:56 pm
Patriot — November 3, 2007 @ 10:59 pm
Patriot — November 3, 2007 @ 11:10 pm ...Since it doesn’t cause physical harm, then it is not torture.
Patriot — November 3, 2007 @ 11:12 pm
Patriot — November 3, 2007 @ 11:14 pm
Patriot — November 3, 2007 @ 11:19 pm
Patriot — November 3, 2007 @ 11:29 pm
Patriot — November 3, 2007 @ 11:33 pm
Patriot — November 3, 2007 @ 11:44 pm
Patriot — November 3, 2007 @ 11:49 pm
Patriot — November 3, 2007 @ 11:53 pm
Patriot — November 3, 2007 @ 11:56 pm
Patriot — November 4, 2007 @ 12:00 am
Patriot — November 4, 2007 @ 12:05 am
Patriot — November 4, 2007 @ 12:14 am
Patriot — November 4, 2007 @ 12:19 am
Patriot — November 4, 2007 @ 12:26 am
Patriot — November 4, 2007 @ 12:34 am
And sadly, I found progressives FEEDING the trolls, to the end that we get MORE troll dung.
Please stop feeding the trolls and report them for abuse!
Thank you!
NOTE: I now realize that in listing the troll posts so they can be reported for abuse, I now may have taken the "longest post" title from plunger. SORRY!
November 4th, 2007 at 12:47 pmIf Mukasey is having trouble to figure out what the Geneva convention and International law stipulates on Torture/Waterboarding, he should go through a 5 hours waterboarding/interrogation USA style, against his will. Than, after the 'waterboarding, the congress should ask him again if he thinks Waterboarding is Torture!
November 4th, 2007 at 9:01 pmi'm not surprised he has difficulty trying to get his head around what is torture and what isn't - he probably is in the first stages of alzheimer's....i mean,how old is this guy????.....cant they pick someone younger and more forward thinking?
November 4th, 2007 at 9:21 pmThanks to these four courageous military officers for stating so clearly that water boarding is torture. Who ever would believe that in 2007, in a supposedly advanced nation, Water Boarding would be the subject of discussion or debate?
We should all hang our heads in shame.
November 4th, 2007 at 10:20 pmThis makes me proud to be a former JAG (1986-1992). Honestly, during these days of "creeping fascism," I sleep better at night knowing that JAG has a long history of standing up TO the civilian leadership and FOR the Constitution.
November 5th, 2007 at 12:42 amIs waterboarding ok?
Questions to right wingers: Are there any waterboarding techniques that you would disapprove being used on our soldiers? If so, what are they?
November 5th, 2007 at 6:44 pmIf not, that's understandable. You have no objections about the enemy taking such actions against our troops.
And who are the two so-called Democratic PROGRESSIVES who broke ranks with their fellow Democrats and VOTED for Mukasey?
November 7th, 2007 at 6:59 amSen. Charles Shumer and Sen. Diane Feinstein.
In this instance they sure do look like Joe Lieberman types...
Odd how the most vocal proponents of war and or torture seem to be of a particular ethnic group.