Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 241
  1. #41  
    Not in the same league. One is real news and the other one is just plain old trash. No interest at all in Roger Clemens.

    Quote Originally Posted by palandri View Post
  2. #42  
    And of course you forget that almost every nation said there was a connection, that Iraq had nasties, et cetera. Goodness gracious how we forget.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    If she lied, she should pay an appropriate price. Should **** Cheney also pay a price, for influencing the use of torture for political gain? Should he pay a price for lying about the connection between Al Quida and Iraq?

    If the issue is ethics, than I would think that lying about the rationale for the war, and ordering torture would be more serious than lying about whether you were briefed on torture as part of an Intelligence Committee? Shouldn't ethics be applied to both sides?
  3. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #43  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    If she lied, she should pay an appropriate price.
    Great. When's her last day?
    Should **** Cheney also pay a price, for influencing the use of torture for political gain?
    Lost me there. What did he gain?
    Should he pay a price for lying about the connection between Al Quida and Iraq?
    What day was it he lied, and what did he say exactly? Don't worry. We know you won't answer that directly.
    If the issue is ethics, than I would think that lying about the rationale for the war, and ordering torture would be more serious than lying about whether you were briefed on torture as part of an Intelligence Committee? Shouldn't ethics be applied to both sides?
    Yes, but the problem is "rationale" isn't a fact. It's an conclusion based on available information. And **** Cheney, and/or the Bush Administration were not the sole authors of this rationale. It was based on concensus between multiple governments, their respective intelligence agencies, and by both parties of the Congress... and INCLUDED the likes of Nancy Pelosi, past presidents like Clinton, his wife Hillary, John Kerry, etc. etc. They all agreed with that rationale.

    So we should impeach them all?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  4. #44  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Great. When's her last day?

    Lost me there. What did he gain?
    According to Former U.S. Army psychiatrist, Maj. Charles Burney, and Lawrence Wilkerson, chief of staff for then-Secretary of State Colin Powell, interrogators at Gitmo were under "pressure" to produce evidence of non-existent ties between al Qaida and Iraq. The gain was to prove a non-existent connection, after the war had already started based upon his claims that the connection existed.

    What day was it he lied, and what did he say exactly? Don't worry. We know you won't answer that directly.
    Actually I will answer, and I'll try to ignore the rude tone. As recently as April 5th, 2007, Cheney stated in an interview with Rush Limbaugh: "[Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi] went to Baghdad, he took up residence there before we ever launched into Iraq, organized the Al Qaeda operations inside Iraq before we even arrived on the scene," Cheney told Limbaugh. "This is Al Qaeda operating in Iraq. And as I say, they were present before we invaded Iraq." It wasn't simply a matter of a conclusion based upon available data - the American intelligence community and the Pentagon had already concluded that no such link existed. Some examples of video here:


    The Raw Story | Video: Cheney continues claims of Saddam-Qaeda connection

    So we should impeach them all?
    No, I'm personally happy if we just make the appropriate changes to our policies and drop the whole issue of Truth Commissions, Special Prosecutors, etc. It gains nothing but more divisiveness and will distract from the work that they all should be doing. I'm merely making the point that you can't simply single out one player that you don't like.
    Last edited by Bujin; 05/20/2009 at 10:56 AM.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  5. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #45  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    According to Former U.S. Army psychiatrist, Maj. Charles Burney, and Lawrence Wilkerson, chief of staff for then-Secretary of State Colin Powell, interrogators at Gitmo were under "pressure" to produce evidence of non-existent ties between al Qaida and Iraq. The gain was to prove a non-existent connection, after the war had already started based upon his claims that the connection existed.

    Actually I will answer, and I'll try to ignore the rude tone. As recently as April 5th, 2007, Cheney stated in an interview with Rush Limbaugh: "[Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi] went to Baghdad, he took up residence there before we ever launched into Iraq, organized the Al Qaeda operations inside Iraq before we even arrived on the scene," Cheney told Limbaugh. "This is Al Qaeda operating in Iraq. And as I say, they were present before we invaded Iraq." It wasn't simply a matter of a conclusion based upon available data - the American intelligence community and the Pentagon had already concluded that no such link existed. Some examples of video here:


    The Raw Story | Video: Cheney continues claims of Saddam-Qaeda connection

    No, I'm personally happy if we just make the appropriate changes to our policies and drop the whole issue of Truth Commissions, Special Prosecutors, etc. It gains nothing but more divisiveness and will distract from the work that they all should be doing. I'm merely making the point that you can't simply single out one player that you don't like.
    I don't know how you can pick up a rude tone, since you can't hear me. Thanks for the response. You're using a different argument to argue a second argument, e.g., a classic non sequitur argument.

    Cheney is saying that Al Qaeda was in Baghdad/Iraq before we invaded.

    Others are saying that there was "no link" between Al Qaeda and Iraq.

    Those are two different things that can both be true at the same time. We found no evidence that Saddam was in bed with, conversing with, or plotting with Al Qaeda, prior to 9/11. That does not necessariliy follow that Al Queda wasn't in Iraq (they were - Al-Zarqawi was indeed there.... that's from our intel agencies, not from Cheney).

    And of course the Bush administration turned up the heat on the agencies to look for the ties. I'd say that would be a pretty important thing to know about. Thats not the same thing as asking them to make false claims or lie about a link between Saddam and Al Queda. Do you have such evidence?
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  6. #46  
    Bottom line is, whoever performed or authorized the torturing should be held accountable.
    My Phone & My Wife's Phone Two Unlocked GSM Treo Pro's

  7. #47  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Those are two different things that can both be true at the same time. We found no evidence that Saddam was in bed with, conversing with, or plotting with Al Qaeda, prior to 9/11. That does not necessariliy follow that Al Queda wasn't in Iraq (they were - Al-Zarqawi was indeed there.... that's from our intel agencies, not from Cheney).
    But his argument wasn't that a single individual happened to be in Iraq, but that there was a direct link between the Iraqi government and Al Queda.

    You challenged me to find an instance where Cheney lied. In the first link above, he states that he never said it was "pretty much confirmed" that there was a meeting in Prague with a high ranking member of the intelligence service....and then the end of the video showed him saying just that.

    None of this is germane to the subject of this thread, however. I'm just making the point that you can't selectively decide who deserves punishment out of ideology.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  8. #48  
    So it is torture to blind fold someone, to yell at them, to put undies on their face, to rough them up a bit. Not in the eyes of most people and definitely not when it comes to protecting the land you live in. Scream all you want, but when it directly affects you (a family member?) and it is not done, you will be there demanding it to be done. Welcome to the real world. These terrorists hate you and me and eliminating us is their goal.

    Quote Originally Posted by palandri View Post
    Bottom line is, whoever performed or authorized the torturing should be held accountable.
  9. #49  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    So it is torture to blind fold someone, to yell at them, to put undies on their face, to rough them up a bit. Not in the eyes of most people and definitely not when it comes to protecting the land you live in. Scream all you want, but when it directly affects you (a family member?) and it is not done, you will be there demanding it to be done. Welcome to the real world. These terrorists hate you and me and eliminating us is their goal.
    You know we are talking about more than blindfolding someone, or putting their undies on their face.

    1. You're my age. When we turned 18 there was a draft and the Vietnam War.

    2. I can tell you were never in the Military, I was. If you were in the Military you wouldn't make statements about Survivalist/Resistance like, "...to think that bunches in our military are waterboarded as part of their training...." Anyone who goes through Survivalist/Resistance will tell you it's torture, nothing less. If it's not torture, why aren't police departments using these tactics?

    3. When I enlisted I took an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States. If I was ever given an order to mistreat a prisoner, I wouldn't have followed the order, because it is an unlawful order according to the UCMJ.

    4. These words are coming from a Veteran who is an American Patriot who has served this country.

    5. Welcome to the real world.
    Last edited by palandri; 05/20/2009 at 01:20 PM.
    My Phone & My Wife's Phone Two Unlocked GSM Treo Pro's

  10. #50  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    So it is torture to blind fold someone, to yell at them, to put undies on their face, to rough them up a bit. Not in the eyes of most people and definitely not when it comes to protecting the land you live in. Scream all you want, but when it directly affects you (a family member?) and it is not done, you will be there demanding it to be done. Welcome to the real world. These terrorists hate you and me and eliminating us is their goal.
    Is the situation described in post #21 torture?

    If the acts described in post #21 were done to a prisoner, would it be in violation of the Geneva Convention? John McCain seems to think so, and wouldn't he know?

    To me, it's a question of whether taking those actions will put our own people at further risk, either because others will be even less inclined to follow the same Conventions that we've signed, or because it incites further anti-American hatred.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  11. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #51  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bujin View Post
    But his argument wasn't that a single individual happened to be in Iraq, but that there was a direct link between the Iraqi government and Al Queda.
    Thanks again for the response, and for the opportunity to debate. I have to parse again, though, because you once again mislead, or are misled and repeating someone elses mistaken statement. I ask you to show me where Cheney says there was a direct link between Saddam's regime and Al Queda. He doesn't. He only says that Al Queda was in Iraq. He's right, he didn't lie. So now you're drawing distinctions on numbers. To me, one member of Al Queda operating out of Iraq *is* Al Queda in Iraq. That's all he said. He didn't not say that "Al Queda was in Iraq, therefore this is why we went into Iraq". Which is really what you're trying to imply; a false war, etc etc. We went into Iraq for a whole laundry list of reasons.
    You challenged me to find an instance where Cheney lied. In the first link above, he states that he never said it was "pretty much confirmed" that there was a meeting in Prague with a high ranking member of the intelligence service....and then the end of the video showed him saying just that.

    None of this is germane to the subject of this thread, however. I'm just making the point that you can't selectively decide who deserves punishment out of ideology.
    Ok, ok. I guess I get your point. I just took issue with that particular example of Cheney lying. That said, what do we do? Just give Pelosi a pass? I'm thinking this is a bit more than a simple flip flop. She's come out and basically said that the CIA is a bunch of liars. How productive do you think she can be, as third in line to the presidency, moving forward? She's lost all credibility with the CIA now.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  12. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #52  
    Quote Originally Posted by palandri View Post
    4. These words are coming from a Veteran who is an American Patriot who has served this country.

    5. Welcome to the real world.
    Thank you for your service, palandri. I too am a patriot, a veteran, and I've been through torture. I don't care what you call waterboarding. Bottom line is this.... does this technique provide actionable results. Cheney asked that Obama release the investigation findings based on the three or four times (hardly standard protocol) that we've used waterboarding, and he refused. Its effectiveness and usefullness has been attested to by other veterans and patriots.

    I have a 13 year old daughter (yeah, I got a late start. I'm old enough to be her grandfather). I can tell you that if her life was in danger because of a terrorist plot, and I had a prisoner that knew details about that plot, I'd whip out a board and a waterhose so fast your head would spin.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  13. #53  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Ok, ok. I guess I get your point. I just took issue with that particular example of Cheney lying. That said, what do we do? Just give Pelosi a pass? I'm thinking this is a bit more than a simple flip flop. She's come out and basically said that the CIA is a bunch of liars. How productive do you think she can be, as third in line to the presidency, moving forward? She's lost all credibility with the CIA now.
    If I knew the answer to that, I'd be making a lot more money that I currently am. If we looked for a pound of flesh from everyone in Washington who put their foot in their mouth, there'd be nobody left there.

    I personally agree with the president (and many other from both sides of the aisle) who think that we can't move forward and solve real problems if we are distracted by looking for blame.

    Bottom line is this.... does this technique provide actionable results.
    Honestly, here I disagree with you, for two reasons. First, even if you can make a case for actionable results -- and I'm not sure that anyone has shown a shred of evidence of that -- the reality is that America simply shouldn't torture. It goes against everything we stand for, and against international agreements we've signed. It makes for excellent propoganda against us, and is a recruiting tool for future anti-American extremists.

    (To me, that's sort of like saying that police officers beat a suspect, but at least he confessed. I guess you can make a case that it might be effective, but we don't do it anyway).

    Secondly, I disagree because we've seen no specifics that show that it is effective or useful. If it were, we wouldn't have had to waterboard anyone 83 times. There has been compelling testimony from an FBI interrogator that non-enhanced tactics were effective with Abu Zubaydah, then he shut down upon the start of CIA interrogation. He further testified that enhanced interrogation was "ineffective, slow and unreliable, and as a result harmful to our efforts to defeat al-Qaida."

    (The story about the effectiveness of torture is kind of like what Colbert calls 'truthiness': it feels like it should be true. Jack Bauer aside, that doesn't mean that it actually is true.)
    Last edited by Bujin; 05/20/2009 at 03:39 PM.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  14. #54  
    I am flabbergasted by people that try and justify torture and an effective means of obtaining information. What the hell is this world coming to.
    My Phone & My Wife's Phone Two Unlocked GSM Treo Pro's

  15. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #55  
    Quote Originally Posted by palandri View Post
    I am flabbergasted by people that try and justify torture and an effective means of obtaining information. What the hell is this world coming to.
    Yeah. Tell that to Nancy Pelosi. She was all for it back in 2004.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  16. fry8's Avatar
    Posts
    66 Posts
    Global Posts
    157 Global Posts
    #56  
    The US congress and federal government is controlled and run by domestic and offshore bankers. The people who print money are private corporations and they own congress. Even Senior Democrat **** Durbin Illinois Senator said the bankers practically own the place.
  17. fry8's Avatar
    Posts
    66 Posts
    Global Posts
    157 Global Posts
    #57  
    Thats percicesly the point for torture. O and by the way the department of homeland security is not just for arabs, it's for the American people. The 9/11 commission received much information via torture. I remember one man was waterboarded and had to sign a statement he couldn't read so he could be released, now that's the "American way." Waterboarding is torture by the way. One can die from it and cops don't do it to get information when they are doing interrigations, becuase cops are lower on the todem pole and lawsuits would be flooding courts.
  18. #58  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    Yeah. Tell that to Nancy Pelosi. She was all for it back in 2004.
    Just out of curiosity, do you have any evidence of that? The only allegations that I've heard is that she was briefed that waterboarding was a potential technique, and thus knew about it. The worst that can be said is that she was disingenuous for speaking out against it after the fact as if it were a surprise. That's a long way from saying she was "all for it" - I have heard absolutely nobody who has stated that she ever made a comment in favor of it.

    If you have any evidence to support that claim, I'd honestly be interested in seeing it.
    Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy

    Treo600 --> Treo650-->PPC6700-->Treo700P-->Treo755P-->Treo800W --> Touch Pro-->Palm Pre --> EVO 4G
  19. #59  
    You can die from taking too much aspirin. I have not found any reference anywhere to anyone dying in American hands during a water boarding. Also, the CIA and others have stated they did receive valuable information from water boarding - so to say thing is gained, well they just are all wet.

    Quote Originally Posted by fry8 View Post
    Thats percicesly the point for torture. O and by the way the department of homeland security is not just for arabs, it's for the American people. The 9/11 commission received much information via torture. I remember one man was waterboarded and had to sign a statement he couldn't read so he could be released, now that's the "American way." Waterboarding is torture by the way. One can die from it and cops don't do it to get information when they are doing interrigations, becuase cops are lower on the todem pole and lawsuits would be flooding courts.
  20. #60  
    You are just babbling the democrat talking point trash. Nothing you say below has any truth to it.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    It's so pathetic that everything we as Americans claim America is--freedom of speech, no torture, separation of church and state--goes right out the window when we suddenly feel threatened--even when the threat is made up. With Iraq, it was COMPLETELY made up. Completely--and mainly for money--to control oil in the Middle East, for large American corporations to reaps billions in profit from war mongering.

    When I see people on here justifying torture with idiotic reasoning--I realize that people can be convinced of anything. We even turn our backs on everything we hold sacred in America because we are made afraid.

    By the way, you don't get good information from torture--you get what you want to hear as shown by the 183 times we waterboarded a suspect. What did he confess? He was involved with absolutely everything. Looking at the list of crap he claimed to have been involved with is almost laughable. He said it to appease the torturers.

    Even if there is a direct threat, torture doesn't get you the real answers. It doesn't work. PERIOD
Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions