CHENEY FTFMFW!!!!

[Alan®]

I've been disconnected from the world for awhile since I've been on vacation but I'm sitting up watching the speech he gave regarding the Enhanced Interrogation Techniques and I gotta fuckin say THANK YOU GOD SOMEONE IN POLITICS STILL HAS THEIR BALLS!

[tippatone]

I've been disconnected from the world for awhile since I've been on vacation but I'm sitting up watching the speech he gave regarding the Enhanced Interrogation Techniques and I gotta fuckin say THANK YOU GOD SOMEONE IN POLITICS STILL HAS THEIR BALLS!

Yeah right.....what the hell ever.....the country is better off without the Dick and Bush show.....bunches of flunkies....:2up:

[white24d]

Cheney is still an idiot

posted from yahoo News

http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20090521/pl_mcclatchy/3237981


By Jonathan S. Landay and Warren P. Strobel, McClatchy Newspapers Jonathan S. Landay And Warren P. Strobel, Mcclatchy Newspapers – Thu May 21, 7:10 pm ET
WASHINGTON — Former Vice President Dick Cheney's defense Thursday of the Bush administration's policies for interrogating suspected terrorists contained omissions, exaggerations and misstatements.

In his address to the American Enterprise Institute , a conservative policy organization in Washington , Cheney said that the techniques the Bush administration approved, including waterboarding — simulated drowning that's considered a form of torture — forced nakedness and sleep deprivation, were "legal" and produced information that "prevented the violent death of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of innocent people."

He quoted the Director of National Intelligence, Adm. Dennis Blair , as saying that the information gave U.S. officials a "deeper understanding of the al Qaida organization that was attacking this country."

In a statement April 21 , however, Blair said the information "was valuable in some instances" but that "there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means. The bottom line is that these techniques hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security."

A top-secret 2004 CIA inspector general's investigation found no conclusive proof that information gained from aggressive interrogations helped thwart any "specific imminent attacks," according to one of four top-secret Bush-era memos that the Justice Department released last month.

FBI Director Mueller Robert Muller told Vanity Fair magazine in December that he didn't think that the techniques disrupted any attacks.

— Cheney said that President Barack Obama's decision to release the four top-secret Bush administration memos on the interrogation techniques was "flatly contrary" to U.S. national security, and would help al Qaida train terrorists in how to resist U.S. interrogations.

However, Blair, who oversees all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies, said in his statement that he recommended the release of the memos, "strongly supported" Obama's decision to prohibit using the controversial methods and that "we do not need these techniques to keep America safe."

— Cheney said that the Bush administration "moved decisively against the terrorists in their hideouts and their sanctuaries, and committed to using every asset to take down their networks."

The former vice president didn't point out that Osama bin Laden and his chief lieutenant, Ayman al Zawahri , remain at large nearly eight years after 9-11 and that the Bush administration began diverting U.S. forces, intelligence assets, time and money to planning an invasion of Iraq before it finished the war in Afghanistan against al Qaida and the Taliban .

There are now 49,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan fighting to contain the bloodiest surge in Taliban violence since the 2001 U.S.-led intervention, and Islamic extremists also have launched their most concerted attack yet on neighboring, nuclear-armed Pakistan .

— Cheney denied that there was any connection between the Bush administration's interrogation policies and the abuse of detainee at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison, which he blamed on "a few sadistic guards . . . in violation of American law, military regulations and simple decency."

However, a bipartisan Senate Armed Services Committee report in December traced the abuses at Abu Ghraib to the approval of the techniques by senior Bush administration officials, including former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld .

"The abuse of detainees in U.S. custody cannot simply be attributed to the actions of 'a few bad apples' acting on their own," said the report issued by Sens. Carl Levin , D- Mich. , and John McCain , R- Ariz. "The fact is that senior officials in the United States government solicited information on how to use aggressive techniques, redefined the law to create the appearance of their legality and authorized their use against detainees."

— Cheney said that "only detainees of the highest intelligence value" were subjected to the harsh interrogation techniques, and he cited Khalid Sheikh Mohammad , the alleged mastermind of the 9-11 attacks.

He didn't mention Abu Zubaydah, the first senior al Qaida operative to be captured after 9-11. Former FBI special agent Ali Soufan told a Senate subcommittee last week that his interrogation of Zubaydah using traditional methods elicited crucial information, including Mohammed's alleged role in 9-11.

The decision to use the harsh interrogation methods "was one of the worst and most harmful decisions made in our efforts against al Qaida ," Soufan said. Former State Department official Philip Zelikow , who in 2005 was then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's point man in an internal fight to overhaul the Bush administration's detention policies, joined Soufan in his criticism.



— Cheney said that "the key to any strategy is accurate intelligence," but the Bush administration ignored warnings from experts in the CIA , the Defense Intelligence Agency , the State Department , the Department of Energy and other agencies, and used false or exaggerated intelligence supplied by Iraqi exile groups and others to help make its case for the 2003 invasion.

Cheney made no mention of al Qaida operative Ali Mohamed al Fakheri , who's known as Ibn Sheikh al Libi , whom the Bush administration secretly turned over to Egypt for interrogation in January 2002 . While allegedly being tortured by Egyptian authorities, Libi provided false information about Iraq's links with al Qaida , which the Bush administration used despite doubts expressed by the DIA.

A state-run Libyan newspaper said Libi committed suicide recently in a Libyan jail.

— Cheney accused Obama of "the selective release" of documents on Bush administration detainee policies, charging that Obama withheld records that Cheney claimed prove that information gained from the harsh interrogation methods prevented terrorist attacks.

"I've formally asked that (the information) be declassified so the American people can see the intelligence we obtained," Cheney said. "Last week, that request was formally rejected."

However, the decision to withhold the documents was announced by the CIA , which said that it was obliged to do so by a 2003 executive order issued by former President George W. Bush prohibiting the release of materials that are the subject of lawsuits.

— Cheney said that only "ruthless enemies of this country" were detained by U.S. operatives overseas and taken to secret U.S. prisons.

A 2008 McClatchy investigation, however, found that the vast majority of Guantanamo detainees captured in 2001 and 2002 in Afghanistan and Pakistan were innocent citizens or low-level fighters of little intelligence value who were turned over to American officials for money or because of personal or political rivalries.

In addition, German Chancellor Angela Merkel said on Oct. 5, 2005 , that the Bush administration had admitted to her that it had mistakenly abducted a German citizen, Khaled Masri , from Macedonia in January 2004 .

Masri reportedly was flown to a secret prison in Afghanistan , where he allegedly was abused while being interrogated. He was released in May 2004 and dumped on a remote road in Albania .

In January 2007 , the German government issued arrest warrants for 13 alleged CIA operatives on charges of kidnapping Masri.

— Cheney slammed Obama's decision to close the Guantanamo Bay prison camp and criticized his effort to persuade other countries to accept some of the detainees.

The effort to shut down the facility, however, began during Bush's second term, promoted by Rice and Defense Secretary Robert Gates .

"One of the things that would help a lot is, in the discussions that we have with the states of which they (detainees) are nationals, if we could get some of those countries to take them back," Rice said in a Dec. 12, 2007 , interview with the British Broadcasting Corp. "So we need help in closing Guantanamo ."

— Cheney said that, in assessing the security environment after 9-11, the Bush team had to take into account "dictators like Saddam Hussein with known ties to Mideast terrorists."

Cheney didn't explicitly repeat the contention he made repeatedly in office: that Saddam cooperated with al Qaida , a linkage that U.S. intelligence officials and numerous official inquiries have rebutted repeatedly.

The late Iraqi dictator's association with terrorists vacillated and was mostly aimed at quashing opponents and critics at home and abroad.

The last State Department report on international terrorism to be released before 9-11 said that Saddam's regime "has not attempted an anti-Western terrorist attack since its failed plot to assassinate former President ( George H.W.) Bush in 1993 in Kuwait ." A Pentagon study released last year, based on a review of 600,000 Iraqi documents captured after the U.S.-led invasion, concluded that while Saddam supported militant Palestinian groups — the late terrorist Abu Nidal found refuge in Baghdad , at least until Saddam had him killed — the Iraqi security services had no "direct operational link" with al Qaida .

[BanginJimmy]

I saw most of that speech and I have to agree. I am actually wondering how short of a leash Bush had Cheney on when it came to talking to the press. He came off as far more intelligent than he ever did when he was in office.


Oh and Biden is the idiot, not Cheney.

[Total_Blender]

Cheney is a shitheel. It doesn't take much balls to torture someone, even less to authorize the torture.

The studies show that there has been absolutely no info of any strategic use gained from "enhanced interrogations." Whats worse is that these techniques have undermined America's commitment to the Geneva convention and other human rights issues. The only thing the enhanced interrogation techniques did to Al Qaeda and the terrorists was give them a tool for propaganda against the US. It has helped them more than hurt them.

I hope that sick Cheney fuck rots in the deepest circle of hell with Cain, Antenor, Judas, and all the other traitors. Frozen up to his neck in ice. :2up:

[Vteckidd]

Yeah cause Yahoo news is totally reliable LOL

Funny how they are saying this stuff about Cheney but they reported almost NOTHING on Pelosi outright lying

[Vteckidd]

Cheney is a shitheel. It doesn't take much balls to torture someone, even less to authorize the torture.

The studies show that there has been absolutely no info of any strategic use gained from "enhanced interrogations." Whats worse is that these techniques have undermined America's commitment to the Geneva convention and other human rights issues. The only thing the enhanced interrogation techniques did to Al Qaeda and the terrorists was give them a tool for propaganda against the US. It has helped them more than hurt them.

I hope that sick Cheney fuck rots in the deepest circle of hell with Cain, Antenor, Judas, and all the other traitors. Frozen up to his neck in ice. :2up:
Conjecture without proof

Only people at the top will ever know if it worked or not. Im sorry, but im all for torture , especially of terrorists, if it saves lives.

These arent soldiers from another country. They have no allegiance to anyone. They are mercenaries

[white24d]

Conjecture without proof

Only people at the top will ever know if it worked or not. Im sorry, but im all for torture , especially of terrorists, if it saves lives.

These arent soldiers from another country. They have no allegiance to anyone. They are mercenaries


It's against the law. PERIOD
It wasnt supposed to be done. You would be singing a different tune if someone in your family or you were being tortured. It shouldnt be done. We are supposed to be the better guys and not stoop to the level of these "mercenaries"

[Vteckidd]

It's against the law. PERIOD
It wasnt supposed to be done. You would be singing a different tune if someone in your family or you were being tortured. It shouldnt be done. We are supposed to be the better guys and not stoop to the level of these "mercenaries"
Are you the same person that is saying thta we should have prevented 9/11 cause we had the intelligence to act on it before hand?

Look these guys dont play by the rules, this is not GENEVA Convention time. This is BY ALL MEANS NECESSARY times.

You know the reason why the "so called rest of the world" doesnt like us? cause for 7 years we said FUCK YOU we dont care about you we are protecting ourselves.

Thats why.

I love the argument that "ooooo by WATERBOARDING we gave the terrorists propaghanda to use to rally their cause"

Hey, dipshit, they were already going to blow us up, lol Like Achmed was sitting there going "hhmmmmmmmmi dont know man, this whole jihad thing im not really sold on............wait..............what.............t hey waterboarded achbar??? OH FUCK THAT< ITS ON NOW SAND ******!"

come on

So if WATERBOARDING, which DOESNT KILL the person , could be used on 1 Terrorist to save 10,000 lives, would you do it? or would you tell the 10000 peoples families, im sorry, it was against the law.

I dont see waterboarding as torture, i dont think these people fall under Geneva Convention as they have no COUNTRY they belong to.

[BanginJimmy]

It's against the law. PERIOD
It wasnt supposed to be done. You would be singing a different tune if someone in your family or you were being tortured. It shouldnt be done. We are supposed to be the better guys and not stoop to the level of these "mercenaries"


We have tried to be the bigger man before. All it does is put us on an unequal playing field with everyone else. Name a single conflict the US has been in since WWI that US troops have not been tortured. You cannot name a single one.

Terrorists are not covered by the Geneva Accords or any other international law except to say that US troops have the right to summarily execute them.

I would love to see all this proof that says we gained nothing from torture. That info cannot be an interview from a political appointee that owes their allegiance to the current administration either. They are obviously biased in their recollections.

Lastly, I am still waiting for someone to find a single piece of international law or law of war set by the Geneva Accords that defines water boarding as torture.

[white24d]

whatever,
the point is this- It is against the law. What about that makes this ok? In a time of distress, are we going to abandon our values? NO
Waterboarding was just the start of it, and there were over 100 deaths because of it.
The Us Troops were paying Iraq citizens money to turn in terrorist. They were turning in people that owed them money and many other reasons. Obama prob wont but, Cheney needs to be prosecuted because he did break the law and gave the order to torture. Bush created a monster that we will all have to deal with for many years to come. If we had a president that was as half as intelligent as Obama this last term, we would have not invaded Iraq for no Fucking reason. Then torture would not be the reason we are talking now.

[white24d]

.

Lastly, I am still waiting for someone to find a single piece of international law or law of war set by the Geneva Accords that defines water boarding as torture.




Article 3

In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:

1. Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.

To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:

(a) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;

(b) Taking of hostages;

(c) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;

(d) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.

2. The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for.

An impartial humanitarian body, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, may offer its services to the Parties to the conflict.

The Parties to the conflict should further endeavour to bring into force, by means of special agreements, all or part of the other provisions of the present Convention. The application of the preceding provisions shall not affect the legal status of the Parties to the conflict

[white24d]

water boarding is torture.


torture-The infliction of severe pain as a means of punishment or coercion.

[Vteckidd]

Waterboarding was just the start of it, and there were over 100 deaths because of it.

PROOF PLEASE

[Vteckidd]

water boarding is torture.


torture-The infliction of severe pain as a means of punishment or coercion.
ok what about sleep deprevation>?

Standing in a corner for days on end without sitting down?

Solitary Confinement?

go home hippie

[white24d]

PROOF PLEASE

Autopsy Reports
Death By Torture: US Media Ignores Hard Evidence

By PETER PHILLIPS

Military autopsy reports provide indisputable proof that detainees are being tortured to death while in US military custody. Yet the US corporate media are covering it with the seriousness of a garage sale for the local Baptist Church.

A recent American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) posting of one of forty-four US military autopsy reports reads as follows:


"Final Autopsy Report: DOD 003164, (Detainee) Died as a result of asphyxia (lack of oxygen to the brain) due to strangulation as evidenced by the recently fractured hyoid bone in the neck and soft tissue hemorrhage extending downward to the level of the right thyroid cartilage. Autopsy revealed bone fracture, rib fractures, contusions in mid abdomen, back and buttocks extending to the left flank, abrasions, lateral buttocks. Contusions, back of legs and knees; abrasions on knees, left fingers and encircling to left wrist. Lacerations and superficial cuts, right 4th and 5th fingers. Also, blunt force injuries, predominately recent contusions (bruises) on the torso and lower extremities. Abrasions on left wrist are consistent with use of restraints. No evidence of defense injuries or natural disease. Manner of death is homicide. Whitehorse Detainment Facility, Nasiriyah, Iraq."

The ACLU website further reveals how: "a 27-year-old Iraqi male died while being interrogated by Navy Seals on April 5, 2004, in Mosul, Iraq. During his confinement he was hooded, flex-cuffed, sleep deprived and subjected to hot and cold environmental conditions, including the use of cold water on his body and hood. The exact cause of death was "undetermined" although the autopsy stated that hypothermia may have contributed to his death

http://www.counterpunch.org/phillips12022005.html

[white24d]

ok what about sleep deprevation>?

Standing in a corner for days on end without sitting down?

Solitary Confinement?

go home hippie

Hippie huh.
Thanks.


:screwy:
I speak about something I believe is wrong.

[BanginJimmy]

Article 3

In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:

1. Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.

To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:

(a) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;

(b) Taking of hostages;

(c) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;

(d) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.

2. The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for.

An impartial humanitarian body, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, may offer its services to the Parties to the conflict.

The Parties to the conflict should further endeavour to bring into force, by means of special agreements, all or part of the other provisions of the present Convention. The application of the preceding provisions shall not affect the legal status of the Parties to the conflict

Re-read the bolded areas and tell me how terrorists are afforded the rights under the geneva accords. Put simply, they dont.

Also, show me where waterboarding is torture. It doesnt create pain, its not degrading, nor is it mutilation or murder.

[Vteckidd]

Autopsy Reports
Death By Torture: US Media Ignores Hard Evidence

By PETER PHILLIPS

Military autopsy reports provide indisputable proof that detainees are being tortured to death while in US military custody. Yet the US corporate media are covering it with the seriousness of a garage sale for the local Baptist Church.

A recent American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) posting of one of forty-four US military autopsy reports reads as follows:


"Final Autopsy Report: DOD 003164, (Detainee) Died as a result of asphyxia (lack of oxygen to the brain) due to strangulation as evidenced by the recently fractured hyoid bone in the neck and soft tissue hemorrhage extending downward to the level of the right thyroid cartilage. Autopsy revealed bone fracture, rib fractures, contusions in mid abdomen, back and buttocks extending to the left flank, abrasions, lateral buttocks. Contusions, back of legs and knees; abrasions on knees, left fingers and encircling to left wrist. Lacerations and superficial cuts, right 4th and 5th fingers. Also, blunt force injuries, predominately recent contusions (bruises) on the torso and lower extremities. Abrasions on left wrist are consistent with use of restraints. No evidence of defense injuries or natural disease. Manner of death is homicide. Whitehorse Detainment Facility, Nasiriyah, Iraq."

The ACLU website further reveals how: "a 27-year-old Iraqi male died while being interrogated by Navy Seals on April 5, 2004, in Mosul, Iraq. During his confinement he was hooded, flex-cuffed, sleep deprived and subjected to hot and cold environmental conditions, including the use of cold water on his body and hood. The exact cause of death was "undetermined" although the autopsy stated that hypothermia may have contributed to his death

http://www.counterpunch.org/phillips12022005.html


might as well use Wikipedia as a source, or Al Jazeehra

[white24d]

AHAHAHAAHAH.

Niether of you "hardasses" will realize that it's wrong. Im wasting my time.

Use your brains. Side stepping the law is still breaking the law. Right?

[white24d]

Also, show me where waterboarding is torture. It doesnt create pain, its not degrading, nor is it mutilation or murder.


Besides it makes you feel like you are dying, it's all good right. Scroll up to where I posted the definition. What does it say about coercion?


These "prisoners" were dying because of the non-torture that you two seem to defend.

[BanginJimmy]

http://www.counterpunch.org/swanson11282005.html

another great article that shows the motives of the site.

[white24d]

You two need to re-think things and jump the sinking ship that is the republican party.
I have been raised in the south and I would never again vote right. This issue here shows me some real issues with the right.
Isn't the right supposed to be the christian side of the room. What a joke

[white24d]

Jesus would want to water board.

Theres you a new bumper sticker

[BanginJimmy]

You two need to re-think things and jump the sinking ship that is the republican party.
I have been raised in the south and I would never again vote right. This issue here shows me some real issues with the right.
Isn't the right supposed to be the christian side of the room. What a joke


Socialism and a poverty striken society are defiantly a better way to go.

Show me where I ever said I was a republican. I am not now, and have not been one for many years. You ignorant liberals will say anything to talk down on Bush, yet ignore Obamas BS time and again. How about taking a look at reality and quit looking through your Obama lenses.

[BanginJimmy]

Jesus would want to water board.

Theres you a new bumper sticker

Jesus believed in torture, just look at hell. Maybe we should take his vies on it and start burning at the stake.

[BanginJimmy]

Besides it makes you feel like you are dying, it's all good right. Scroll up to where I posted the definition. What does it say about coercion?

I dont care what it makes you feel like. Terrorists are not being beaten, stabbed, burned or anything else that constitutes torture. It says nothing about coercion. What do you think interrogation is if it isnt coercion?



These "prisoners" were dying because of the non-torture that you two seem to defend.

And if you think the MSM wouldnt take a shot at Bush by reporting this you are even more ignorant than I thought you were. It's not being reported because it isnt true.

[white24d]

Show me where I ever said I was a republican. I am not now, and have not been one for many years. You ignorant liberals will say anything to talk down on Bush, yet ignore Obamas BS time and again. How about taking a look at reality and quit looking through your Obama lenses.



Look at your damn name you dip shit.
It says RIGHT WING EXTREMIST

Wow:screwy:

[BanginJimmy]

Look at your damn name you dip shit.
It says RIGHT WING EXTREMIST

Wow:screwy:


Yes, and that doesnt mean republican. It goes back to the DHS report which says that vets are right wing extremists. I am also a fiscal conservative and social liberal, which is also not the same as a republican.

[One_Bad_SHO]

whatever,
the point is this- It is against the law. What about that makes this ok? In a time of distress, are we going to abandon our values? NO
Waterboarding was just the start of it, and there were over 100 deaths because of it.
The Us Troops were paying Iraq citizens money to turn in terrorist. They were turning in people that owed them money and many other reasons. Obama prob wont but, Cheney needs to be prosecuted because he did break the law and gave the order to torture. Bush created a monster that we will all have to deal with for many years to come. If we had a president that was as half as intelligent as Obama this last term, we would have not invaded Iraq for no Fucking reason. Then torture would not be the reason we are talking now.

*edited because that's not my style*

And as for the bolded part above.... how is that wrong on OUR part? That just shows the character and morals of the people with whom we are fighting/trying to help. "Not all is fair in love and war." If they are turning in their neighbors who owe them money, imagine what the REAL terrorists are up to/thinking.

[Vteckidd]

We don't live in a utopia. They don't follow geneva why should we?

Poor terrorists , beheading innocent journalists for propaghanda but hey let's respect their rights

[BanginJimmy]

Maybe the US should develop a reciprocity doctrine. Whatever you do to us, we return in kind. Want to behead our reporters, we do they same to you. Dont want to allow our trade goods, lets have a talk about yours. Want to go on little rants to the UN, lets do some of our own.

Too bad none of that would even enter the messiah's mind. Someone might think he has America's interests before the worlds and that wouldnt set well with the Europeans he loves so much.

[tippatone]

We don't live in a utopia. They don't follow geneva why should we?

Poor terrorists , beheading innocent journalists for propaghanda but hey let's respect their rights

The main reason why we should follow the Geneva rules is because this is the country that is supposed to be the nation that leads the free world. So are you saying we should start resorting to terrorist tatics?? Oops I guess it's too late for that. I can say that the Bush comedy show led to this jacked up economy.

[Vteckidd]

The main reason why we should follow the Geneva rules is because this is the country that is supposed to be the nation that leads the free world. So are you saying we should start resorting to terrorist tatics?? Oops I guess it's too late for that. I can say that the Bush comedy show led to this jacked up economy.
REALLY


so Barney Frank and CHris Dodd had NOTHING to do with the housing crisis right? all Bushs fault?

I dont have time to go into this for the 213329048320493820359th time, but it was FRANK , DODD, PELOSI, REID that had control the last 2 years, and Frank was head chairman on the house banking/finance committee. He Is the one that said Fannie and Freddie were "SOUND SOLVENT FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS" 8 months before they went under.

No what im saying is the Geneva Convention was written long before these acts took place.

The Geneva COnvention is for soldiers of nations AT WAR. These guys have no flags, no colors , no country. they dont play by the rules, and thats how they kill so many people.

Not to be cliche, but remember the part in the Dark Knight when Alfred/Michael Caine says how they caught the bandit that was stealing the gem stones?

"Burn the entire village"

Thats how you have to fight these people, not under Geneva Convention rules that they dont follow or care about anyway. They know that is our weakness, so yeah, BY ALL MEANS NECESSARY.

If that means Waterboarding, do it. Ill be damned if someone in my family dies because we are quibling over how to keep these "terrorists" within their "legal" rights.

Fuck that.

[americanctm]

What I don't seem to understand, actually i do its because of the left wing media bias, but everyone seems to be up in arms about water boarding, portraying as if the United Sates water boarded thousands and thousands of prisoners, when in reality we only water boarded 3 people in total this entire time, and that was as a last resort because they refused to give up information about Al-Qaeda. 3 FUCKING PEOPLE, who had known links or were actually part of that terrorist organization...

Hell we water boarded more than that in our own armed forces, which is a "technique" to toughen them up. There are accounts from marines to air force personnel that were water boarded. Why are the Democrats making this huge outcry to stop water boarding terrorists, just 3 of them though, and there is no outrage that we do this to our own troops... talk about a double standard. Oh and by the way I have not heard anybody from the armed forces who was actually water boarded say that it is torture.

[BanginJimmy]

Hell we water boarded more than that in our own armed forces, which is a "technique" to toughen them up. There are accounts from marines to air force personnel that were water boarded. Why are the Democrats making this huge outcry to stop water boarding terrorists, just 3 of them though, and there is no outrage that we do this to our own troops... talk about a double standard. Oh and by the way I have not heard anybody from the armed forces who was actually water boarded say that it is torture.


Water Boarding is one of the techniques used in SERE school. That is where you see the video's of it online. It is simply a psychological thing that doesnt hurt you. It is said to be very effective though. I have also herd that people that are comfortable in the water are not effected by it.

[Alan®]

I saw most of that speech and I have to agree. I am actually wondering how short of a leash Bush had Cheney on when it came to talking to the press. He came off as far more intelligent than he ever did when he was in office.


Oh and Biden is the idiot, not Cheney.
As do I. I thought he said exactly what needed to be said.

[Alan®]

Cheney is a shitheel. It doesn't take much balls to torture someone, even less to authorize the torture.

The studies show that there has been absolutely no info of any strategic use gained from "enhanced interrogations." Whats worse is that these techniques have undermined America's commitment to the Geneva convention and other human rights issues. The only thing the enhanced interrogation techniques did to Al Qaeda and the terrorists was give them a tool for propaganda against the US. It has helped them more than hurt them.

I hope that sick Cheney fuck rots in the deepest circle of hell with Cain, Antenor, Judas, and all the other traitors. Frozen up to his neck in ice. :2up:
Hmm yet there are tons of classified documents that Obama won't release pertaining to the information acquired from using these.

Al Qaeda didn't need us to give them anything to use as a propaganda tool. What they did need is for us to release what we are doing to their operatives so they could train their guys to resist it and make our jobs harder and that's exactly what Obama has done now .

[Alan®]

It's against the law. PERIOD
It wasnt supposed to be done. You would be singing a different tune if someone in your family or you were being tortured. It shouldnt be done. We are supposed to be the better guys and not stoop to the level of these "mercenaries"
Wrong. You really think the best and brightest Lawyers would really call this legal if it wasn't.

You're right I would sing a different tune. But only if it came to light that they were in fact innocent. Otherwise I could care less. What is it with people thinking this war can be fought on a moral level when our people were being beheaded live on the internet for all the world to see. Atleast we do our shit behind closed doors.

[eraser4g63]

LOL at the right wing extremist meaning republican you sir are a tool and vote based on what your friends think. Water boarding IS NOT torture this whole thing is nothing but a political witch hunt by the left to draw attention away from the fact the a the bail outs are not working. Best way to describe this is a slight of hand.

[cjhutch]

Maybe the US should develop a reciprocity doctrine. Whatever you do to us, we return in kind. Want to behead our reporters, we do they same to you. Dont want to allow our trade goods, lets have a talk about yours. Want to go on little rants to the UN, lets do some of our own.

Too bad none of that would even enter the messiah's mind. Someone might think he has America's interests before the worlds and that wouldnt set well with the Europeans he loves so much.

That would never happen simply because we rely on the rest of the world too much. It really has nothing to do with Obama, but more to do with our economic structure and pacts we've developed throughout history. China damn near owns America and there is nothing we can do about it. We rely so much on the rest of the world because we are a country of consumption and that means we have to use resources outside of our country. On top of that we spend more time getting in our own way more than other countries do.

[BanginJimmy]

That would never happen simply because we rely on the rest of the world too much. It really has nothing to do with Obama, but more to do with our economic structure and pacts we've developed throughout history. China damn near owns America and there is nothing we can do about it. We rely so much on the rest of the world because we are a country of consumption and that means we have to use resources outside of our country. On top of that we spend more time getting in our own way more than other countries do.

We are a consumption based society because it is so much cheaper to produce overseas. We could very easily produce for ourselves though if need be.

Dont believe that propaganda that we need China. We dont need them at all and they rely on us to fund their economy and military, which is larger and spends more a year than we do when you compare them to the same pay structure. If the US quite buying from China today, their economy would crash and ours would most likely sky rocket after a short period of craziness. Prices on most trinkets would also go up, but that too would be short lived.

[redrumracer]

Conjecture without proof

Only people at the top will ever know if it worked or not. Im sorry, but im all for torture , especially of terrorists, if it saves lives.

These arent soldiers from another country. They have no allegiance to anyone. They are mercenaries
im for torture even if it doesnt save lives if they are terrorists

[.blank cd]

might as well use Wikipedia as a source, or Al Jazeehra:thinking: Wikipedia and yahoo news are both reliable sources of information. I suppose you dont trust information from ACLU or AP even. Probably dont read the AJC either, since those are the outlets that those sites have been pulling their information from. You must get all your information from watching Hannity&Colmbs huh? LOL
:cheers:

[patrick4588]

waterboarding isnt torture. they are terrorists, who gives a fuck anyway. im all for torturing terrorists. they are not innocent people, or even people who were caught doing something like stealing. They are out to kill americans. period. who cares about their rights? are you serious? torture a terrorist to save the country... hmmm. nah. let the country go down. at least ppl will say we were the bigger person.

[mrdrmchns]

on top of it being against the law, inhumane, and all that shit, think about it. if someone was going to be endlessly tortured, on only the thought they MAY have info on terrorism strongholds, plans, etc. dont you think they would eventually give in and say whatever the hell the torturer wants to hear? basically, although it is partially effective, the intel obtained from torture is invalid because the poor motherfucker probably just said whatever he thought would make the torturing end. i dont necessarily give a fuck whether terrorists are tortured and geneva, but it isnt effective enough to make the decisions to send american troops to war over.

[tony]

I don't have too much of an opinion on this for personal reasons but I will say this; the Geneva convention is in place for a reason, when we begin to abandon our core values as we have on this subject we stoop to the level of mercenaries as it was said earlier.

I challenge any of you for to look up al-Shaykh al-Libi, get a good understanding of the story and rationalize the information that comes from torture and the ramifications. Those who act pre-emptively on false intelligence should not be giving speeches on future diplomacy policy.

[Frög]

Those who act pre-emptively on false intelligence should not be giving speeches on future diplomacy policy.

Thank you! He failed miserably as a vice president, his hands are DIRTY and he was MIA while VP.. He is a corrupt, immoral politician and he now goes around criticizing? It's just ironic, I really wish someone else would chime in, not this fat dumb fuck..

Iraq is also not part of "Operation Enduring Freedom".

pffft waterboarding being torture.. I would love to see the kind of torture others would do to our soldiers..

It pisses me off how we try to balance morality and right, when we are in a FUCKING WAR.. God damn, are we gonna have to start using non-lethal projectiles next? What people don't realize is that war is immoral, and that one does not go without the other.. Morals cause wars to be lost..

How can one justify not "torturing" an enemy, because it isn't "right" while sending missiles and killing innocent women and children?

The irony in all these debates is what kills me..

[flak_monkey]

I thought it was completely asinine that he acted on false intelligence and had us invade Iraq and then has the audacity to criticize how this administration is running the show. YELLOW CAKE BITCHES! THEY GOT YELLOW CAKE!

[BanginJimmy]

on top of it being against the law, inhumane, and all that shit, think about it. if someone was going to be endlessly tortured, on only the thought they MAY have info on terrorism strongholds, plans, etc. dont you think they would eventually give in and say whatever the hell the torturer wants to hear? basically, although it is partially effective, the intel obtained from torture is invalid because the poor motherfucker probably just said whatever he thought would make the torturing end. i dont necessarily give a fuck whether terrorists are tortured and geneva, but it isnt effective enough to make the decisions to send american troops to war over.


Actually torture is effective if properly used. That is beside the point though as torture hasnt been used against them. You can also read John McCain's book and see that properly used torture does, in fact, work.

[BanginJimmy]

I don't have too much of an opinion on this for personal reasons but I will say this; the Geneva convention is in place for a reason, when we begin to abandon our core values as we have on this subject we stoop to the level of mercenaries as it was said earlier.

Sometimes war requires the use of mercenaries. The US has used them throughout history, but VERY extensively in WWII where the OSS used the Mob to get men and info in and out of Sicily. Then again in China with the use of Chaing ka Sheck's troops. Also you have the Eagle Squadron flying in England, and the Flying Tigers in China. All of them were Mercenaries and were paid $500 for every kill they got on top of the $600 a month they were paid. Great money back in those days when a 1Lt made less than $200 a month in basic pay.

[BanginJimmy]

Thank you! He failed miserably as a vice president, his hands are DIRTY and he was MIA while VP.. He is a corrupt, immoral politician and he now goes around criticizing?

Do you say the same things about the current President? He was actually criticizing the very programs that he used to get his house in Chicago. He got the sweetheart loan deal, then paid about 20 cents on the dollar for a piece of property owned by his neighborhood, who happened to be the CEO of Countrywide Mortgage. A company he ignored when talking about the greed of loan companies.

Iraq is also not part of "Operation Enduring Freedom".[/quote]

Name 1 place where anyone said it was. It is actually "Iraqi Freedom".

[punkr6]

to the OP, I will take Cheney over Biden any day of the week. Cheney isn't perfect but he has balls and a strong desire to keep this country safe at any price. What can you say about Biden ?

[Total_Blender]

I would love to see all this proof that says we gained nothing from torture. That info cannot be an interview from a political appointee that owes their allegiance to the current administration either. They are obviously biased in their recollections.

I am referring to studies of torture and the information gained from it, not the testimony of any "political appointee". But since you asked:

http://wizbangblue.com/2009/05/13/fbi-expert-refutes-gop-claims-on-torture-effectiveness-video.php



The use of "ticking time bomb" scenarios... its a fallacy. These situations assume the interrogators know a plot in imminent. If the interrogators know a plot is imminent and they know a particular individual is involved, what else can be gained from torture? Is it really effective to torture someone who may not provide any valuable info at all?

The detainee has a great opportunity to plant disinformation. Also, once a terrorist involved with a plot who has key information is captured, why would the terrorists stick with the same plot? Common sense would dictate that the plot would be either scrapped or altered if it were compromised.

And furthermore, if these techniques are allowed to continue, if the United States does in fact decide that it is OK to torture, who is to say that a precedent might be set for the use of torture on American citizens? If the official state policy is that "the ends justify the means," why not? Our constitution protects us from "cruel and unusual punishment," but interrogation, punishment, and their definitions could be reconfigured through some "neo-Cheney-ism". Its best to do away with torture completely.

If you think totrure is OK because "everything changed after 9/11" then you are no better than the terrorists themselves. You are letting FEAR restructure your morals. Times like this test our resolve, show who we really are. Can we remain moral and humane when we are tested? If not, the terrorists have won.

This guy's article is a good summation of the arguments against torture and the ramifications of the use of torture:

A Question of Identity: The Use of
Torture in Asymmetric War

JOE SANTUCCI
School of Advanced Air and Space Studies, Air University, Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama,
USA

Journal of Military Ethics,
Vol. 7, No. 1, 23
40, 2008

http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdf?vid=7&hid=105&sid=2961bfff-a5a1-4731-80ea-77d9357b6666%40SRCSM2#db=a9h&AN=31730309

[BanginJimmy]

I am referring to studies of torture and the information gained from it, not the testimony of any "political appointee". But since you asked:

http://wizbangblue.com/2009/05/13/fbi-expert-refutes-gop-claims-on-torture-effectiveness-video.php



The use of "ticking time bomb" scenarios... its a fallacy. These situations assume the interrogators know a plot in imminent. If the interrogators know a plot is imminent and they know a particular individual is involved, what else can be gained from torture? Is it really effective to torture someone who may not provide any valuable info at all?

And according to the CIA director who was not part of the legalization of enhanced interrogations, it does work.

http://www.scottallan.com/2009/01/enhanced-interrogation-techniques-work.html

Ignore everything but the portion quoted from ABC. I didnt even bother to read any of that because of the weakness of the source.


The detainee has a great opportunity to plant disinformation. Also, once a terrorist involved with a plot who has key information is captured, why would the terrorists stick with the same plot? Common sense would dictate that the plot would be either scrapped or altered if it were compromised.

You make it sound like terrorists have some sort of flexibility in their planning. They dont. They have a specific target and they will attack that target according to the plan. 9/11 was the exception, not the rule. Most terror attacks are carried out by people that have no knowledge of the reasoning or planning. Most would not even know who planned it to know if the operation is compromised. Dont believe 24, its only a TV show and the people actually committing terror attacks do not have that kind of organization.

I will agree that torture will not get you new info that cannot be otherwise confirmed, but it will get you info that can be confirmed, or to confirm info gained from other means. For example, you know a guy has access to money and you ask for the info for those bank accounts. He will not give it to you. You put some spiders in the room with him (a form of torture according to Obama) and he gives you some info. You go and check the info. If it pans out, you have info that can lead to a financier, or possibly even other cells. If not, you go back and give him a choice of giving up the correct info, or more severe interrogation methods.

And furthermore, if these techniques are allowed to continue, if the United States does in fact decide that it is OK to torture, who is to say that a precedent might be set for the use of torture on American citizens? [/quote]

Unless you were born yesterday, you would know that American prisoners have been tortured in every conflict since WWI. The Cuban rebels and those of several other small Bahamian countries during the Banana Wars between WWI and WWII, The Germans, the Japs, the Koreans, the Chinese, the Vietnamese, the Soviets, the Iraqis, Iranians. I could go on. Even if you want to call waterboarding torture, which it is not, it is still far lesser than the forms of torture used on Americans.




If the official state policy is that "the ends justify the means," why not? Our constitution protects us from "cruel and unusual punishment," but interrogation, punishment, and their definitions could be reconfigured through some "neo-Cheney-ism". Its best to do away with torture completely.

If some terrorists have to be a little uncomfortable to protect the US then oh well. I wont lose any sleep over it.

If you think totrure is OK because "everything changed after 9/11" then you are no better than the terrorists themselves. You are letting FEAR restructure your morals. Times like this test our resolve, show who we really are. Can we remain moral and humane when we are tested? If not, the terrorists have won.[/quote]

The only thing that changed after 9/11 is the fact that the US quit appeasing terrorists and letting them get away. We finally took the correct approach and quit treating them like terrorists and started to treat them like combatants. If we did that in '94, 9/11 would never have happened.

[Total_Blender]

. We finally took the correct approach and quit treating them like terrorists and started to treat them like combatants. If we did that in '94, 9/11 would never have happened.

"Treating them like combatants" would mean not torturing them, as torture is banned by the Geneva convention. So no, we are not treating them like combatants.

Torture does not imply death, but according to Cheney's memos "suffering "equivalent in intensity" to the pain of "organ failure ..... or even death." Waterboarding is meant to make the recipient think that they are drowning. The fact that the process isn't lethal is not important... the threat of death is there and thats what is important.

And since torture is "effective," I suppose all those false confessions John McCain signed in Vietnam are actually true.:screwy:

[BanginJimmy]

"Treating them like combatants" would mean not torturing them, as torture is banned by the Geneva convention. So no, we are not treating them like combatants.

Treating them like combatants means going after them militarily, not thourgh criminal law as we have done until 9/11. I guess I should have explianed myself better.

Torture does not imply death, but according to Cheney's memos "suffering "equivalent in intensity" to the pain of "organ failure ..... or even death." Waterboarding is meant to make the recipient think that they are drowning. The fact that the process isn't lethal is not important... the threat of death is there and thats what is important.[/quote]

There is no pain involved in water boarding. It is all mental. Would you be happier if we gave them everything they wanted and only asked them questions in a nice way? You obviously think that would be more effective.


And since torture is "effective," I suppose all those false confessions John McCain signed in Vietnam are actually true.:screwy:

As I said, it has to be verifiable info. The questions asked by the Russians, though the Vietnamese, were not independently verifiable. The signed confessions is a PR thing, not an information thing. Confessions under torture mean nothing. Individual, verifiable pieces of info are a very different story. My little scenario is a use for enhanced interrogations. Reaching for random pieces of info does not.

[One_Bad_SHO]

America...
America...
America, FUCK YEAH!
Coming again, to save the mother fucking day yeah,
America, FUCK YEAH!
Freedom is the only way yeah,
Terrorist your game is through cause now you have to answer too,
America, FUCK YEAH!
So lick my butt, and suck on my balls,
America, FUCK YEAH!
What you going to do when we come for you now,
it’s the dream that we all share; it’s the hope for tomorrow

FUCK YEAH!

McDonalds, FUCK YEAH!
Wal-Mart, FUCK YEAH!
Torture, FUCK YEAH!
Baseball, FUCK YEAH!
NFL, FUCK, YEAH!
Rock and roll, FUCK YEAH!
Waterboarding, FUCK YEAH!
Slavery, FUCK YEAH!

FUCK YEAH!



.....just saying

[eraser4g63]

:thinking: Wikipedia and yahoo news are both reliable sources of information. I suppose you dont trust information from ACLU or AP even. Probably dont read the AJC either, since those are the outlets that those sites have been pulling their information from. You must get all your information from watching Hannity&Colmbs huh? LOL
:cheers:

Wikipewdia has never been a reliable source for news or information considering people can go in and edit articals at will. I persoanlly perfer and AP because 9 times our of 10 they are not biased but more a median. As far as the the AJC time and time again they have proven to us that they can not report reliable facts and they streach the truth. I will provide links when I get home from work.

[.blank cd]

Wikipewdia has never been a reliable source for news or information considering people can go in and edit articals at will. I persoanlly perfer and AP because 9 times our of 10 they are not biased but more a median. As far as the the AJC time and time again they have proven to us that they can not report reliable facts and they streach the truth. I will provide links when I get home from work.9 times out of 10, information from wikipedia is also sourced and cited.

[eraser4g63]

DO you personaly check to see if those cites and quotes are correct before you use them? And 90% correct it pushing it, I cannot tell you how many times I have had to look up some information for work and it be completely off base or just plain wrong.