John McCain being against it doesn't make it torture. As I wrote, it's arguable, which I have no issue with. We can debate the issue and define it conclusively after some intelligent discourse. What the radical left wants to do is have their opinion become law without any debate, and worse than that, they then want to apply that law retroactively. That's insane!
Top Dems Well Aware Of CIA Interrogations
- Thread starter AAAintheBeltway
- Start date
John McCain being against it doesn't make it torture. As I wrote, it's arguable, which I have no issue with. We can debate the issue and define it conclusively after some intelligent discourse. What the radical left wants to do is have their opinion become law without any debate, and worse than that, they then want to apply that law retroactively. That's insane!
Really now?
Given his real world experience, I would tend to place more credibility in him than I would you.
But leave it to you to claim that John McCain doesn't know what he's talking about when it comes to "enhanced" interrogation techniques such as waterboarding.
Unreal.
A high school debate team would crush the manner in which you construct an argument in about 90 seconds flat.
It's one mans opinion. Do you really want the law of the land, any law, based on the opinion of one guy?
Quote from Landis82:
Really now?
Given his real world experience, I would tend to place more credibility in him than I would you.
But leave it to you to claim that John McCain doesn't know what he's talking about when it comes to "enhanced" interrogation techniques such as waterboarding.
Unreal.
A high school debate team would crush the manner in which you construct an argument in about 90 seconds flat.
And you seem to be debating with all the worldly experience of a high school kid. I would expect a teenager to argue from such a simplistic point of view. You can do better!
Law based on one man's opinion?
How ironic . . . Please tell me that you aren't this ignorant.
Your claim is amazingly ironic given the fact that the "enhanced" interrogation techniques that we are discussing were based off of a legal memorandum Jay Bybee authorized while serving in the Office of Legal Counsel of the DoJ.
One man.
One legal opinion.
How is it that you have absolutely ZERO clue about what you are talking about and you immediately wind-up putting your foot in your mouth?
They should change your name to Captain Oblivious
Waggie ...just to let you know CO is tight. He's a good man.
Sorry to interrupt.
Sorry to interrupt.
Quote from Landis82:
Law based on one man's opinion?
How ironic . . . Please tell me that you aren't this ignorant.
Your claim is amazingly ironic given the fact that the "enhanced" interrogation techniques that we are discussing were based off of a legal memorandum Jay Bybee authorized while serving in the Office of Legal Counsel of the DoJ.
One man.
One legal opinion.
How is it that you have absolutely ZERO clue about what you are talking about and you immediately wind-up putting your foot in your mouth?
Congratulations.
Epic fail.
How typically leftist of you to claim victory out of defeat.
The law as it stands does not consider water boarding to be torture. You want to change that law, fine.
Regardless of whether it's torture or not is not relevant to my original post on this topic. Terrorists have no rights, therefore no law can be broken while interrogating them.
That's because George Bush VETOED legislation (HR 2062, the Intelligence Authorization Act of 2008) that was previously passed by the United States Congress that banned water boarding!
How hypocritical of you to claim that you don't want ONE MAN'S OPINION becoming the law of the land, and yet you have no problem at all with George Bush's VETO.
I repeat:
You really should change your name to Captain Oblivious
You have absolutely NO command of the FACTS in evidence on this subject, and as a result you continue to put your foot in your mouth.
Errr! It's possible for congress to override a veto, is it not? One mans opinion does not make law. I know in your leftist universe you'd like it to be so, but that ain't the game, least not yet.
News Flash to Mr. Oblivious:
It is only possible for Congress to over-ride a Presidential veto with 2/3rds of the vote.
Thus, logic dictates that it is very possible for ONE MAN'S opinion to make law by vetoing legislation that challenges his opinion. Bush did not wish to ban torture. That's a fact. Bush accomplished this with his veto of HR 2062. That's also a fact. One man gets to over-ride 271 representatives of the United States.
Leftist universe???
That's funny!
For what its worth, I was a registered Republican for 28 years before changing to a different political party last year. I got tired of the GOP spending our tax dollars like a drunken sailor on shore leave, not too mention all of the totally incompetent appointees that Bush made to his Administration . . . from Rumsfeld, to Hank Paulson, to Christoper Cox at the SEC, to Michael Chertoff at Homeland Security, Pat Wood III at FERC, Gale Norton at the Department of Interior, etc.
What a disaster.
By the way, can anyone care to name a Bush appointee that was actually competent and worth a grain of salt?