Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
At the very least, having the option to use harsh interrogation should be available.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:
Obama is threatening Bush Administration officials with prosecution - which will ruin them politically and financally, even if they're found innocent

---

WTF are you even talking about, Geezer? RUIN them? Oh please- that's what Swiss banks & the Cayman Islands are for, don't be so naive.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Chris,

So make it unofficial? Do it, but don't fess up to it? That's even worse, IMO.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Geezer:
Besides, with just the threat of prosecutions he'll be making the Democratic faithful - who want Bush & Co.waterboarded, regardless of "moral bearings" - very happy. Start actual trials and they'll be dancing in the streets with towels and waterbuckets.

---

Quote:

---

Any domestic bomber? Like William Ayers?

---

Quote:

---

It's unconscionable that a President would even think of prosecuting officials who sought legal counsel in matters dealing with those who did attack us, killed thousands, and vowed to do it again.

---

Quote:

---

Q: why is it ok to shoot 3 pirates in the head to save 1person, but wrong to waterboard terrorists to save thousands?

---

Quote:

---

Sig, As usual, you present a false dichotomy with your question. A ridiculous premise.

---

Quote:

---

The problems are twofold... ones that you can't seem to wrap your brain around... (1) WHO determines that these are indeed terrorists? Let's say that YOU get picked up. YOU'RE innocent, you KNOW you are! But... you're detained without benefit of a lawyer. No charges are ever filed. And someone is convinced that YOU, of all people, are part of a plot to blow up the University of Auburn. It's bad intel... but hell... BAD INTEL has happened before, right? We've invaded on bad intel in the past! So, what's one person's rights... YOURS, specifically... compared to the goal of saving thousands? (2) And then you're waterboarded to gain the information that you don't have. Not once or twice but DOZENS of times. Or you're sent to Poland or Egypt, where even worse occurs. What then? - Signy

Q: why is it ok to shoot 3 pirates in the head to save 1person, but wrong to waterboard terrorists to save thousands?- rappy

Because it's VERY CLEAR that these people are in the middle of an act of piracy! It's a little like shooting someone who's invading your home. But you don't go shooting your neighbor, or the bum down the street because you THINK he MIGHT invade your home. You need EVIDENCE. And that's what the COURTS are for: to determine if there is enough EVIDENCE to warrant an abrgation or YOUR rights. -Signy

Sig, As usual, you present a false dichotomy with your question. A ridiculous premise.-rappy

No rappy, it's you with the false dichotomy. You keep thinking it's safety OR civil rights. In reality, you DON'T have to give up one for the other. -Signy

---

Quote:

---

"In SERE training, U.S. troops are briefly exposed, in a highly controlled setting, to abusive interrogation techniques used by enemies that refuse to follow the Geneva Conventions," the report reads. "The techniques are based on tactics used by Chinese Communists against American soldiers during the Korean War for the purpose of eliciting false confessions for propaganda purposes.

---

Quote:

---

Chris,

So make it unofficial? Do it, but don't fess up to it? That's even worse, IMO.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Geezer:
Besides, with just the threat of prosecutions he'll be making the Democratic faithful - who want Bush & Co.waterboarded, regardless of "moral bearings" - very happy. Start actual trials and they'll be dancing in the streets with towels and waterbuckets.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I think this may be the ugliest thing you've ever said on this board, Geezer. You seem to think waterboarding is a joke, that calling waterboarding torture is a joke.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Declassified Report: Bush Admin Solicited Torture 'Wish List,' Ordered 'Communist' Tactics"

Quote:

---

"In SERE training, U.S. troops are briefly exposed, in a highly controlled setting, to abusive interrogation techniques used by enemies that refuse to follow the Geneva Conventions," the report reads. "The techniques are based on tactics used by Chinese Communists against American soldiers during the Korean War for the purpose of eliciting false confessions for propaganda purposes.

---

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
What did you call him? Occasional patriot?

Indeed!

---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by HKCavalier:
I think this may be the ugliest thing you've ever said on this board, Geezer. You seem to think waterboarding is a joke, that calling waterboarding torture is a joke.

Do you?

---

Quote:

---

I realize these folk were mostly engaging in hyperbole, but the wish was still there

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:

Quote:

---

I realize these folk were mostly engaging in hyperbole, but the wish was still there

---

That's a contradiction.

hyperbole: A figure of speech in which exaggeration is used for emphasis or effect, as in I could sleep for a year or This book weighs a ton.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Mikey, what's even stupider about SERE is that it doesn't work.

There's a certain method and manner to effectively resisting a forcible interrogation - hell, given all the other beans imma spillin, I might even post it.

You might find it... informative.

-F

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

You have less than no case.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
I have to leave but

It wasn't just a few bad apples, it was policy from the highest levels.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by chrisisall:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

You have less than no case.

---

YOU have less than no brains.

So where does that leave you?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
So, Rap
I don't remember - did you ever answer my question ? What if officials are found guilty of war crimes after a duly consituted trial ? Will you still be claiming there was no torture ?

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
"There needs to be a diversion!"

And if that diversion come 18 months from now ? Or two or more years ? What will you say then, when it is obviously not a diversion of the moment ?

*

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
You never explained how or why the sudden reversal of position from EVERYthing Obama's said , apparently for no damn reason.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:


There are FOUR lights!!!!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
There's never 'nothing' going on. If it's a slow news day, they'll invent something.

Look at how well Global Warming has caught on. That's totally bogus, and now everyone has bought into it.

Well, almost everyone.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
C'mon Clair, answer the question! It's just a simple question, why won't you answer ?

ANSWER THE QUESTION!

---

Quote:

---

Since you insist that waterboarding isn't torture unless it's done to someone in uniform, let me put a scenario to you:

Say the Iranians have tried and convicted a 30-year-old Iranian-American woman - an American citizen not serving in the military or the diplomatic corps - on charges of spying. Now, since she's clearly NOT a soldier, nor wearing the uniform of any recognized armed forces, then they are clearly within their rights to waterboard her, are they not? I mean, they can use whatever means necessary to "break" her, since she is, in essence, a "terrorist" - at least in their eyes, and according to their law.

So you're totally okay with them doing this, yes?

By the way, her name is Roxana Saberi. She was a former contestant in a Miss North Dakota beauty pageant, holds two masters degrees, and is a graduate of Northwestern, with a degree in journalism.

Iran has a golden opportunity here. They can use the exact same methods that the U.S. has used, and we can't say shit about it, OR they can gain international favor by NOT torturing this girl, and then they end up looking more civilized than we do. Either way, it doesn't work out too well for us...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Yes, and look at Iraq and the WMD, and how quickly that caught on, and how everyone bought into it.

Well, *almost* everyone



Mike

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
"You never explained how or why the sudden reversal of position ..."

I have no idea what you're talking about. Did you ask me a question ?

Or were you misunderstanding Obama ? When he said no prosecution for CIA AGENTS b/c they were acting in good faith on the advice given them, I thought it was pretty distinct from whether or not the AUTHORS OF THE POLICIES - ie those in charge - would be prosecuted.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Kwickie, I'll continue to ignore your silly question because it's completely irrelevant.

---

Quote:

---

Since you insist that waterboarding isn't torture unless it's done to someone in uniform, let me put a scenario to you:

Say the Iranians have tried and convicted a 30-year-old Iranian-American woman - an American citizen not serving in the military or the diplomatic corps - on charges of spying. Now, since she's clearly NOT a soldier, nor wearing the uniform of any recognized armed forces, then they are clearly within their rights to waterboard her, are they not? I mean, they can use whatever means necessary to "break" her, since she is, in essence, a "terrorist" - at least in their eyes, and according to their law.

So you're totally okay with them doing this, yes?

By the way, her name is Roxana Saberi. She was a former contestant in a Miss North Dakota beauty pageant, holds two masters degrees, and is a graduate of Northwestern, with a degree in journalism.

Iran has a golden opportunity here. They can use the exact same methods that the U.S. has used, and we can't say shit about it, OR they can gain international favor by NOT torturing this girl, and then they end up looking more civilized than we do. Either way, it doesn't work out too well for us...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Major combat operations WERE over. There was no army to engage any longer.

I love how the Left lies and distorts the facts so they can continue to bitch an moan. It's all you know how to do. And it shows.

---

Quote:

---

Since you insist that waterboarding isn't torture unless it's done to someone in uniform, let me put a scenario to you:

Say the Iranians have tried and convicted a 30-year-old Iranian-American woman - an American citizen not serving in the military or the diplomatic corps - on charges of spying. Now, since she's clearly NOT a soldier, nor wearing the uniform of any recognized armed forces, then they are clearly within their rights to waterboard her, are they not? I mean, they can use whatever means necessary to "break" her, since she is, in essence, a "terrorist" - at least in their eyes, and according to their law.

So you're totally okay with them doing this, yes?

By the way, her name is Roxana Saberi. She was a former contestant in a Miss North Dakota beauty pageant, holds two masters degrees, and is a graduate of Northwestern, with a degree in journalism.

Iran has a golden opportunity here. They can use the exact same methods that the U.S. has used, and we can't say shit about it, OR they can gain international favor by NOT torturing this girl, and then they end up looking more civilized than we do. Either way, it doesn't work out too well for us...

---