Top Dems Well Aware Of CIA Interrogations

hapaboy · Apr 24, 2009

Landis & TDog, it is my understanding that neither of you would waterboard a captured terrorist, even a high-ranking captured terrorist, in order to try and gather information that may save the lives of your fellow countrymen.

Is this true - yes or no?

Landis82 · Apr 24, 2009

Quote from CaptainObvious:

BUT, as you keep conveniently ignoring, congress could have overridden the veto and chose not to.

I guess you are unaware of how many votes are needed in the House in order to over-ride ONE MAN'S VETO.

By the way, how many shares did you trade today Captain?

Landis82 · Apr 24, 2009

Quote from hapaboy:

Landis & TDog, it is my understanding that neither of you would waterboard a captured terrorist, even a high-ranking captured terrorist, in order to try and gather information that may save the lives of your fellow countrymen.

Is this true - yes or no?

I agree with Republican's Ron Paul and John McCain when it comes to the opposition of waterboarding.

There are CLEARLY other interrogation methods that can be used in an effective manner in obtaining critical information that can save the lives of Americans.

You act as if waterboarding is the ONLY interrogation method available.

You couldn't be more wrong.
It clearly is not the only option.

By the way, could you please post a "screenshot" of your trading today so that we can see how many shares you traded?

Thanks!

Lucrum · Apr 24, 2009

Quote from hapaboy:

Landis & TDog, it is my understanding that neither of you would waterboard a captured terrorist, even a high-ranking captured terrorist, in order to try and gather information that may save the lives of your fellow countrymen.

No, but they would both be more than happy to "make love" to his anus.

hapaboy · Apr 24, 2009

Quote from Landis82:

I agree with Republican's Ron Paul and John McCain when it comes to the opposition of waterboarding.

There are CLEARLY other interrogation methods that can be used in an effective manner in obtaining critical information that can save the lives of Americans.

You act as if waterboarding is the ONLY interrogation method available.

You couldn't be more wrong.
It clearly is not the only option.

Cutting through all your diversionary bullshit, it appears that the answer is NO, you would NOT waterboard a captured terrorist, even a high-ranking terrorist such as KSM who planned and executed 9/11, in order to gather information that might save other Americans from a fate similar to 9/11.

That's just great.....SO, what are these "other interrogation methods" that you would be willing to do to someone like KSM? Tickle his feet? Make him read your posts? What?

By the way, could you please post a "screenshot" of your trading today so that we can see how many shares you traded?

Thanks!

What is a "screenshot"? What is a "trade"? What is a "share"?

drjekyllus · Apr 24, 2009

Quote from Landis82:

It appears that Congress wished to change the laws regarding military oversight and interrogation techniques with HR 2082 - - - seeking to uphold the Army Field Manual, but it was VETOED by ONE MAN.

Just like Bush vetoed a bi-partisan effort in Congress towards Children's Health Insurance.

One man, one veto.
One law.

GWB.

Well how dare Bush use his Constitutional authority.

Thunderdog · Apr 24, 2009

Quote from hapaboy:

Landis & TDog, it is my understanding that neither of you would waterboard a captured terrorist, even a high-ranking captured terrorist, in order to try and gather information that may save the lives of your fellow countrymen.

Is this true - yes or no?

The issue at hand is that we have fairly established that waterboarding is indeed torture, and has been demonstrably regarded as such by the US in the past. Former President George W. Bush proclaimed to America and the world in no uncertain terms that America does not torture. This was a bald faced lie by former President Bush. That is the point. What I or anyone else would do is quite beside the point.

Thunderdog · Apr 24, 2009

Quote from Lucrum:

No, but they would both be more than happy to "make love" to his anus.

You articulate your visuals with remarkable clarity. One can only imagine the amount of time you must spend on them.

trefoil · Apr 24, 2009

Quote from hapaboy:

What relevance is the effectiveness? Are you kidding? Saving American lives has no relevance? Your argument is ridiculous.

Bullshit. The difference between what happened to those two soldiers and waterboarding is night and day.

Again, moral equivalency.

Do you really think those animals who tortured - REALLY tortured - our soldiers give a rats ass if one of their own was waterboarded or not? Do you think that factored into their decision when they castrated our troops and stuffed their penises in their mouths and gouged their eyes out?

Let's compare:

Waterboarding, three meals a day, allowed Koran, prayer time, etc. Purpose of waterboarding: to gain information that may save lives.

V.S.

castration, eyes gouged out, ears and tongues cut off, dragged behind a vehicle, eventually decapitated, disfigured beyond recognition. Purpose: to inflict as much pain as possible prior to murdering them.

Yep, one and the same....

Give me a fucking break.

The moral equivalency argument dishonors their memory.

No, that would be you.

trefoil · Apr 24, 2009

Quote from CaptainObvious:

Yes, it's a crime for those covered by international law and the Geneva convention. Terrorists are not under those rules of law, or any other law. No law can be broken where there is no law. What is it about that simple concept that escapes you?

Article from the NY Post nails it.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt....ad/1d1c0941659b5bd5/90940852ba73dd27?lnk=raot

Rupert's Post knows jackshit.
It's torture. It's a war crime. It can't be done to anyone, terrorists included.