TankBuster 0 #76 April 12, 2008 Quote Like a good righty, Careful with the PA's. I'm an outstanding righty. Quote you bring up WJC as though he is somehow responsible for shrub's torture policies. No, READ the post several more times, young Jedi, until you can understand it. Quote Funny thing is that if you were old enough to be aware of the reality of the times, the rescums did everything they could to prevent and disrupt WJC from using military force to prevent terror attacks. Yep, now I remember, they sent Monica over to distract him. Quote They are a cancer on our system. A virulent metastasizing cancer that has infected the country. Naaah. Bacteria infect. Cancers don't infect. Quote In other words, the entire matter was handled within the scope and context of our legal system. Unlike...... Quote unlike when Willie commited perjury and obstruction of justice. Were you an adult during the eighties? Quote I've never really grown up. There were many planned attacks that were stopped by the Clinton administration. You wouldn't know much about it because there was little on no publicity, by design. Quote Deeeeeep bullshit. If the Clintons's can take credit for something, they do. Even if they can't, they do. I have family that was involved in some of the operations. What they hint at is pretty impressive. They can't talk about details. Quote Of course not...... But I bet we could get it out of them by waterboarding them for a few hours. The forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #77 April 12, 2008 Quote In Reply To -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- They are a cancer on our system. A virulent metastasizing cancer that has infected the country. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Naaah. Bacteria infect. Cancers don't infect. Rioght.. they eat away at the host from the inside until it can no longer maintain life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
funjumper101 15 #78 April 13, 2008 Quote Quote Like a good righty, Careful with the PA's. I'm an outstanding righty. Quote you bring up WJC as though he is somehow responsible for shrub's torture policies. No, READ the post several more times, young Jedi, until you can understand it. Quote Funny thing is that if you were old enough to be aware of the reality of the times, the rescums did everything they could to prevent and disrupt WJC from using military force to prevent terror attacks. Yep, now I remember, they sent Monica over to distract him. Quote They are a cancer on our system. A virulent metastasizing cancer that has infected the country. Naaah. Bacteria infect. Cancers don't infect. Quote In other words, the entire matter was handled within the scope and context of our legal system. Unlike...... Quote unlike when Willie commited perjury and obstruction of justice. Were you an adult during the eighties? Quote I've never really grown up. There were many planned attacks that were stopped by the Clinton administration. You wouldn't know much about it because there was little on no publicity, by design. Quote Deeeeeep bullshit. If the Clintons's can take credit for something, they do. Even if they can't, they do. I have family that was involved in some of the operations. What they hint at is pretty impressive. They can't talk about details. Quote Of course not...... But I bet we could get it out of them by waterboarding them for a few hours. Can't argue the facts, so you resort to smart-ass bullshit. You are absolutely correct. You are an outstanding righty. You could care less about the rule of law and the Constitution. Your version of critical thinking is "Don't confuse me with the facts, my mind is made up." Maybe someday you'll start taking a little bit longer view of politics and history. In the meantime, your own statement "I've never really grown up." appears to be 100% accurate. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TankBuster 0 #79 April 13, 2008 OK, let's try this one more time. My point was - GW didn't write the CIA interrogation manual. Neither did Billy Boy, but that point was lost on you. The actual intent of my post was to get you to go off on some non-sensical rant about Clinton. Success! I couldn't find many "facts" in your post to argue. Tell you what, confuse me by giving us an example of one of these "thwarted attacks" that we never heard about. And by the way, the expression is "couldn't care less about the rule of law and the Constitution...."The forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,026 #80 April 13, 2008 Why does it matter who wrote the CIA manual? The important issue right now is that Bush opposed the removal of torture from the manual, and McCain, to his discredit, supported him.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TankBuster 0 #81 April 13, 2008 Quote Why does it matter who wrote the CIA manual? The important issue right now is that Bush opposed the removal of torture from the manual, and McCain, to his discredit, supported him. and de facto so did Clinton, Bush41, Reagan, Carter, .....The forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
funjumper101 15 #82 April 14, 2008 Quote I couldn't find many "facts" in your post to argue. Tell you what, confuse me by giving us an example of one of these "thwarted attacks" that we never heard about. Quote In terms of successful attempts to thwart terrorist activities, round one in Somalia was an unqualified success. Due to the rescum Congress failing to back up the promises made, along with their lack of support for "nation building", round two ended up a disaster. The righties revisionist history makes some people believe that the failure was due to ineptness by the Clinton administration. A careful reading of the events and politics of the time makes clear what really took place. I followed the story very closely as a third cousin was involved in both actions, along with other stuff before that. Spec Ops guys don't talk about their missions with civilians. At the next family reunion I hope that he is willing to talk more, now that he has been out of the service for several years. In terms of the covert actions that took place, I don't have direct knowlege of the details. When the documents are de-classified, we all will know more. I'll likely be dead by the time that happens. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites TankBuster 0 #83 April 14, 2008 QuoteIn terms of the covert actions that took place, I don't have direct knowlege of the details. Why was I expecting that answer?The forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites funjumper101 15 #84 April 14, 2008 QuoteQuoteIn terms of the covert actions that took place, I don't have direct knowlege of the details. Why was I expecting that answer? Why would you expect anything else? If I did have first hand details of succesful covert operations, I certainly wouldn't post them in a public forum. I have heard a small bit of first hand info, discussed between relatives with similar backgrounds. Their individual activites took place about 30 years apart. When they figured out there were people listening, they shut up PDQ. I would have liked to have heard more. Funny how you didn't contest the rest of the content of the post. Maybe you know more about recent history than it seems. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites TankBuster 0 #85 April 14, 2008 QuoteWhy would you expect anything else? I didn't.The forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites idrankwhat 0 #86 April 15, 2008 Quote Why does it matter who wrote the CIA manual? The important issue right now is that Bush opposed the removal of torture from the manual, and McCain, to his discredit, supported him. Actually, I think that Terry Jones should have written it. He's much better at explaining things"When Torture Isn't Torture" Terry Jones, The Guardian LONDON, 17 June 2004 - Donald Rumsfeld holds that torture isn't torture if causing pain isn't the objective. For some time now, I've been trying to find out where my son goes after choir practice. He simply refuses to tell me. He says it's no business of mine where he goes after choir practice and it's a free country. Now it may be a free country, but if people start going just anywhere they like after choir practice, goodness knows whether we'll have a country left to be free. I mean, he might be going to anarchist meetings or terrorist study groups. How do I know? The thing is, if people don't say where they're going after choir practice, this country is at risk. So I have been applying a certain amount of pressure on my son to tell me where he's going. To begin with I simply put a bag over his head and chained him to a radiator. But did that persuade him? Does the Pope eat kosher? My wife had the gall to suggest that I might be going a bit too far. So I put a bag over her head and chained her to the radiator. But I still couldn't persuade my son to tell me where he goes after choir practice. I tried starving him, serving him only cold meals and shaving his facial hair off, keeping him in stress positions, not turning his light off, playing loud music outside his cell door - all the usual stuff that any concerned parent will do to find out where their child is going after choir practice. But it was all to no avail. I hesitated to gravitate to harsher interrogation methods because, after all, he is my son. Then Donald Rumsfeld came to my rescue. I read in the New York Times last week that a memo had been prepared for the defense secretary on March 6, 2003. It laid down the strictest guidelines as to what is and what is not torture. Because, let's face it, none of us want to actually torture our children, in case the police get to hear about it. The March 6 memo, prepared for Rumsfeld explained that what may look like torture is not really torture at all. It states that: If someone "knows that severe pain will result from his actions, if causing such harm is not his objective, he lacks the requisite specific intent even though the defendant did not act in good faith". What this means in understandable English is that if a parent, in his anxiety to know where his son goes after choir practice, does something that will cause severe pain to his son, it is only "torture" if the causing of that severe pain is his objective. If his objective is something else - such as finding out where his son goes after choir practice - then it is not torture. Rumsfeld's memo goes on: "A defendant" (by which he means a concerned parent) "is guilty of torture only if he acts with the express purpose of inflicting severe pain or suffering on a person within his control". Couldn't be clearer. If your intention is to extract information, you cannot be accused of torture. In fact, the report went further. It said, if a parent "has a good-faith belief (that) his actions will not result in prolonged mental harm, he lacks the mental state necessary for his actions to constitute torture". So all you've got to do to avoid accusations of child abuse is to say that you didn't think it would cause any lasting harm to the child. Easy peasy! I currently have a lot of my son's friends locked up in the garage, and I'm applying electrical charges to their genitals and sexually humiliating them in order to get them to tell me where my son goes after choir practice. Dick Cheney's counsel, David S Addington, says that's just fine. William J Haynes, the US Defense Department's general counsel, agrees it's just fine. And so does the US Air Force General Counsel Mary Walker. In fact, practically everybody in the US administration seems to think it's just fine, except for the State Department lawyer, William H. Taft IV, who perversely claims that I might be opening the door to people applying electrical charges to my genitals and sexually humiliating me. So I'm going to round up all the children in the neighborhood, chain them and set dogs on them. I might accidentally kill one or two - but I won't have intended to - and perhaps I'll take some photos of my wife standing on the dead bodies, and then I'll show the photos to the other kids, and finally, perhaps, I might get to find out where my son goes after choir practice. After all, I'll only be doing what the US administration has been condoning since 9/11. - Terry Jones is a writer, film director, actor and Python (www.terry-jones.net) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,026 #87 April 15, 2008 Quote Quote Why does it matter who wrote the CIA manual? The important issue right now is that Bush opposed the removal of torture from the manual, and McCain, to his discredit, supported him. Actually, I think that Terry Jones should have written it. He's much better at explaining things"When Torture Isn't Torture" Terry Jones, The Guardian ... Well, Terry J. went to Oxford and I went to Cambridge, which must explain the difference.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Iceburner 0 #88 April 17, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Yet McCain says the solution to the housing crisis is for people facing foreclosure to get a "second job" and skip their vacations.6 And I would vote for him just for that. Lemme see . . . spoiled brat son of an admiral hooks up with millionaire daughter of Budweiser baron while still married to crippled wifey #1. You go Johnnie-boy! Let `em eat turds. Arrogant prick. brat son...who let others leave the prison camps before him, even though offered the chance to leave earlier.......yea, what an asshole for looking out for his fellow sailors, soldiers, or Marines. Fuck him right? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 4 of 4 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
TankBuster 0 #83 April 14, 2008 QuoteIn terms of the covert actions that took place, I don't have direct knowlege of the details. Why was I expecting that answer?The forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
funjumper101 15 #84 April 14, 2008 QuoteQuoteIn terms of the covert actions that took place, I don't have direct knowlege of the details. Why was I expecting that answer? Why would you expect anything else? If I did have first hand details of succesful covert operations, I certainly wouldn't post them in a public forum. I have heard a small bit of first hand info, discussed between relatives with similar backgrounds. Their individual activites took place about 30 years apart. When they figured out there were people listening, they shut up PDQ. I would have liked to have heard more. Funny how you didn't contest the rest of the content of the post. Maybe you know more about recent history than it seems. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TankBuster 0 #85 April 14, 2008 QuoteWhy would you expect anything else? I didn't.The forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #86 April 15, 2008 Quote Why does it matter who wrote the CIA manual? The important issue right now is that Bush opposed the removal of torture from the manual, and McCain, to his discredit, supported him. Actually, I think that Terry Jones should have written it. He's much better at explaining things"When Torture Isn't Torture" Terry Jones, The Guardian LONDON, 17 June 2004 - Donald Rumsfeld holds that torture isn't torture if causing pain isn't the objective. For some time now, I've been trying to find out where my son goes after choir practice. He simply refuses to tell me. He says it's no business of mine where he goes after choir practice and it's a free country. Now it may be a free country, but if people start going just anywhere they like after choir practice, goodness knows whether we'll have a country left to be free. I mean, he might be going to anarchist meetings or terrorist study groups. How do I know? The thing is, if people don't say where they're going after choir practice, this country is at risk. So I have been applying a certain amount of pressure on my son to tell me where he's going. To begin with I simply put a bag over his head and chained him to a radiator. But did that persuade him? Does the Pope eat kosher? My wife had the gall to suggest that I might be going a bit too far. So I put a bag over her head and chained her to the radiator. But I still couldn't persuade my son to tell me where he goes after choir practice. I tried starving him, serving him only cold meals and shaving his facial hair off, keeping him in stress positions, not turning his light off, playing loud music outside his cell door - all the usual stuff that any concerned parent will do to find out where their child is going after choir practice. But it was all to no avail. I hesitated to gravitate to harsher interrogation methods because, after all, he is my son. Then Donald Rumsfeld came to my rescue. I read in the New York Times last week that a memo had been prepared for the defense secretary on March 6, 2003. It laid down the strictest guidelines as to what is and what is not torture. Because, let's face it, none of us want to actually torture our children, in case the police get to hear about it. The March 6 memo, prepared for Rumsfeld explained that what may look like torture is not really torture at all. It states that: If someone "knows that severe pain will result from his actions, if causing such harm is not his objective, he lacks the requisite specific intent even though the defendant did not act in good faith". What this means in understandable English is that if a parent, in his anxiety to know where his son goes after choir practice, does something that will cause severe pain to his son, it is only "torture" if the causing of that severe pain is his objective. If his objective is something else - such as finding out where his son goes after choir practice - then it is not torture. Rumsfeld's memo goes on: "A defendant" (by which he means a concerned parent) "is guilty of torture only if he acts with the express purpose of inflicting severe pain or suffering on a person within his control". Couldn't be clearer. If your intention is to extract information, you cannot be accused of torture. In fact, the report went further. It said, if a parent "has a good-faith belief (that) his actions will not result in prolonged mental harm, he lacks the mental state necessary for his actions to constitute torture". So all you've got to do to avoid accusations of child abuse is to say that you didn't think it would cause any lasting harm to the child. Easy peasy! I currently have a lot of my son's friends locked up in the garage, and I'm applying electrical charges to their genitals and sexually humiliating them in order to get them to tell me where my son goes after choir practice. Dick Cheney's counsel, David S Addington, says that's just fine. William J Haynes, the US Defense Department's general counsel, agrees it's just fine. And so does the US Air Force General Counsel Mary Walker. In fact, practically everybody in the US administration seems to think it's just fine, except for the State Department lawyer, William H. Taft IV, who perversely claims that I might be opening the door to people applying electrical charges to my genitals and sexually humiliating me. So I'm going to round up all the children in the neighborhood, chain them and set dogs on them. I might accidentally kill one or two - but I won't have intended to - and perhaps I'll take some photos of my wife standing on the dead bodies, and then I'll show the photos to the other kids, and finally, perhaps, I might get to find out where my son goes after choir practice. After all, I'll only be doing what the US administration has been condoning since 9/11. - Terry Jones is a writer, film director, actor and Python (www.terry-jones.net) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,026 #87 April 15, 2008 Quote Quote Why does it matter who wrote the CIA manual? The important issue right now is that Bush opposed the removal of torture from the manual, and McCain, to his discredit, supported him. Actually, I think that Terry Jones should have written it. He's much better at explaining things"When Torture Isn't Torture" Terry Jones, The Guardian ... Well, Terry J. went to Oxford and I went to Cambridge, which must explain the difference.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Iceburner 0 #88 April 17, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Yet McCain says the solution to the housing crisis is for people facing foreclosure to get a "second job" and skip their vacations.6 And I would vote for him just for that. Lemme see . . . spoiled brat son of an admiral hooks up with millionaire daughter of Budweiser baron while still married to crippled wifey #1. You go Johnnie-boy! Let `em eat turds. Arrogant prick. brat son...who let others leave the prison camps before him, even though offered the chance to leave earlier.......yea, what an asshole for looking out for his fellow sailors, soldiers, or Marines. Fuck him right? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
