Page 13 of 19 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 184

Thread: Banned Techniques Yielded ‘High Value Information,’ Memo Says

  1. #121
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Banned Techniques Yielded ‘High Value Information,’ Memo Says

    Quote Originally Posted by dclxvinoise View Post
    There has to be a line that we shouldn't cross and the fact that the line is now getting blurred in the name of nationalism should frighten everyone.
    The US government should everything in its power to protect the rights of the people of the United States. If the only way the government can keep US cities from evaporating into a radiactive cloud is to torture someone, then by anny and all means, they should tortue them.

    If you do not agree, then I do not want you in the US government.

  2. #122
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ventura California
    Last Seen
    11-15-11 @ 11:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,706

    Re: Banned Techniques Yielded ‘High Value Information,’ Memo Says

    Quote Originally Posted by dclxvinoise View Post
    It's sad that people still use a tragedy like 9/11 to justify their blind nationalism and extremist views on torture.
    It is even more sad and pathetic that people still ignore the tragedy of 9-11 to promote their hate America agenda for purely partisan political gain.

    Quote Originally Posted by dclxvinoise View Post
    I'm sure torture does yield results just as I'm sure killing a prisoner's entire family in front of them would yield results. Does that mean that we should do it?
    Once again I am hardly surprised to see people who support terrorism asking the wrong question over and over again. The correct question is; "I wonder how many lives have been saved as a result of the efforts of our Government?"

    We certainly should do it in the humane and thoughtful way the previous Administration went about it if it means we can save lives from these despicable cretins who show no compunction killing a small child or innocents in any brutal fashion they can devise; these thugs who claim that their goal is to kill even MORE in single attacks than done on 9-11; these despots who while sawing off the heads of their screaming victims video tape their egregious acts to show what despicable animals they are.

    Yes whatever we do, lets NOT do what is necessary to ensure these thugs, despots, terrorists and murderers don't kill even more innocents.

    Quote Originally Posted by dclxvinoise View Post
    There has to be a line that we shouldn't cross and the fact that the line is now getting blurred in the name of nationalism should frighten everyone.
    There is nothing rational in your comments here; this isn't in the name of "nationalism," which is your weak attempt to suggest "Nazi like."

    What we have here is a bunch of moronic Liberal politicians using this issue to further divide the nation and impugn America for purely partisan political purposes in the inane assumption that this will help them gain more power.

    You should be MUCH more afraid of the current march of Government control over vast aspects of your lives and expand Governments role than what we did to despicable terrorists after careful thoughtful inflection on the legal ramifications of what methods would be humane yet achieve results.

    Again, it begs the question; for what purpose are we attempting to impugn the previous administration for trying to protect us?

    I can assure of this; our enemies, the people who hate us and the terrorists who want to kill even larger numbers of our citizens are outright laughing at us and gleeful that their efforts will now become easier rather than more difficult. No wonder they were so happy to see Obama win eh?


  3. #123
    Androgyne
    Dr_Patrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Montana
    Last Seen
    12-16-15 @ 11:50 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,349
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: Banned Techniques Yielded ‘High Value Information,’ Memo Says

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    The US government should everything in its power to protect the rights of the people of the United States. If the only way the government can keep US cities from evaporating into a radiactive cloud is to torture someone, then by anny and all means, they should tortue them.

    If you do not agree, then I do not want you in the US government.
    I really could care less what you want. I'm merely expressing my opinion. I think that there are lines that we shouldn't cross and it concerns me that there are so many people that are so willing to cross those lines in the name of "safety". This is exactly the type of blind nationalism that I'm talking about.

  4. #124
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Banned Techniques Yielded ‘High Value Information,’ Memo Says

    Quote Originally Posted by dclxvinoise View Post
    I really could care less what you want. I'm merely expressing my opinion.
    Yes. And I am expressing mine.

  5. #125
    Androgyne
    Dr_Patrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Montana
    Last Seen
    12-16-15 @ 11:50 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,349
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: Banned Techniques Yielded ‘High Value Information,’ Memo Says

    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    It is even more sad and pathetic that people still ignore the tragedy of 9-11 to promote their hate America agenda for purely partisan political gain.
    What hate America agenda? Could you be more specific?

    Once again I am hardly surprised to see people who support terrorism asking the wrong question over and over again. The correct question is; "I wonder how many lives have been saved as a result of the efforts of our Government?"
    Who is supporting terrorism here? Are you seriously asserting that being against torture means that you are for terrorism?

    We certainly should do it in the humane and thoughtful way the previous Administration went about it if it means we can save lives from these despicable cretins who show no compunction killing a small child or innocents in any brutal fashion they can devise; these thugs who claim that their goal is to kill even MORE in single attacks than done on 9-11; these despots who while sawing off the heads of their screaming victims video tape their egregious acts to show what despicable animals they are.
    Fear can be used as a motivational tool to justify all sorts of things. Once we start crossing lines that we shouldn't be crossing it starts to concern me.
    Yes whatever we do, lets NOT do what is necessary to ensure these thugs, despots, terrorists and murderers don't kill even more innocents.
    So torture is the only way to ensure that these things don't happen?

    There is nothing rational in your comments here; this isn't in the name of "nationalism," which is your weak attempt to suggest "Nazi like."
    I didn't say Nazi-like. I said Nationalism. When someone is so blindly devoted to their country that they are willing to torture others I consider that Nationalism.

    What we have here is a bunch of moronic Liberal politicians using this issue to further divide the nation and impugn America for purely partisan political purposes in the inane assumption that this will help them gain more power.
    That may be, as I don't know what their own personal motivations are. While it may divide our country a bit, I don't think we should allow these things to continue. They shouldn't have happened int he first place.

    You should be MUCH more afraid of the current march of Government control over vast aspects of your lives and expand Governments role than what we did to despicable terrorists after careful thoughtful inflection on the legal ramifications of what methods would be humane yet achieve results.
    I'm concerned about that too.

    Again, it begs the question; for what purpose are we attempting to impugn the previous administration for trying to protect us?
    I think that people should be held accountable for their actions. I don't think that someone should be exempt from this just because of their previous position in the government or whatever.

    I can assure of this; our enemies, the people who hate us and the terrorists who want to kill even larger numbers of our citizens are outright laughing at us and gleeful that their efforts will now become easier rather than more difficult. No wonder they were so happy to see Obama win eh?

    I really could care less how the terrorists view us.

  6. #126
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ventura California
    Last Seen
    11-15-11 @ 11:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8,706

    Re: Banned Techniques Yielded ‘High Value Information,’ Memo Says

    Quote Originally Posted by Singularity View Post
    I personally don't understand - nor will I ever understand - an American citizen endorsing torture on another human being for purposes of information, security, or both. Far too many people rally behind the belief that we are engaging in torture to protect our country, but what about the basic human values we believe in? If torture and cruelty become policy, then so much for our belief in individual rights. The Constitution recognizes that man has an inherent right, not bestowed by the state or laws, to liberty of person and personal dignity - including the right to be free of cruelty. The spirit and ideals in the Constitution applies to all human beings, not just those in America. It even applies to those designated as 'unlawful enemy combatants.' The Constitution embodies every ideal and value we believe in as a nation, and that better men than myself gave their lives to secure. I don't think we should throw all this away just to get information which could be gathered in a more humane way. Honestly...the fact that so many people embrace torture as potential policy is somewhat disturbing to me.

    I'm not sure if McCain ever flip-flopped on the torture issue, but he had a damn good quote on the subject.

    "Our enemies didn't adhere to the Geneva Convention. Many of my comrades were subjected to very cruel, very inhumane and degrading treatment, a few of them even unto death. But every one of us -- every single one of us -- knew and took great strength from the belief that we were different from our enemies, that we were better than them, that we, if the roles were reversed, would not disgrace ourselves by committing or countenancing such mistreatment of them." - John McCain
    How quaint to post this quote when the end result of that war was allowing the North Vietnamese to not only get away with their war crimes and illegal torture and abuse of their prisoners, but allow them to break their treaty with us and our ally and re-invade an ally we promised to aid in that event and instead abandoned; which resulted in the subsequent deaths of untold millions.

    How trite for Liberals to argue about morality but who think NOTHING about the sanctity of life for an unborn child or a family pleading to keep their daughter alive through artificial means, and not blink an eye at the efforts and crimes committed by those the previous Administration tried to protect us from using humane forms to extract critical information.

    This issue is almost as hypocritical and offensive as their idiotic rants about the tiny deficits during the same administration they claim are war criminals yet now think NOTHING of $1.8 trillion deficits without any debate about how to pay for them.

    It is as specious as suggesting that the 3,000 plus men and women of our military died not because of the actions of despicable terrorists who want to kill even greater numbers of our citizens, but rather would blame the previous administration; you cannot fabricate the level of ignorance it takes to make such asinine arguments.

    The only thing MORE amazing than these patently partisan political asinine attempts is that MORE Americans haven't been saying enough is enough!

    We ought to impeach the entire Democrat House and Senate leaders and this President for rabid ignorance, naiveté and stupidity.

  7. #127
    Educating the Ignorant
    zimmer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:51 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    14,503
    Blog Entries
    12

    Re: Banned Techniques Yielded ‘High Value Information,’ Memo Says

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    The US government should everything in its power to protect the rights of the people of the United States. If the only way the government can keep US cities from evaporating into a radiactive cloud is to torture someone, then by anny and all means, they should tortue them.

    If you do not agree, then I do not want you in the US government.
    Not to do everything possible is the definition of immorality.

    Which means...

    .
    The Clintons are what happens...
    when you have NO MORAL COMPASS.

  8. #128
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Banned Techniques Yielded ‘High Value Information,’ Memo Says

    Quote Originally Posted by zimmer View Post
    Not to do everything possible is the definition of immorality.
    Which means...
    Imagine, the press conference:
    "I decided to not subject this individual to torture, knowing full well that this decision would certainly and definitely result in a nuclear weapon detonating somewhere in Los Angeles."
    -B. Obama

  9. #129
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: Banned Techniques Yielded ‘High Value Information,’ Memo Says

    Quote Originally Posted by Indy View Post
    You show me where in the constitution where it says that welfare is illegal and I'll start to take you seriously.
    The problem there Indy, is that the Constitution is exceptionally vague about what 'general welfare' means. While the anti-side likes to clamor that it is unconstitutional, they have no actual legitimate grounds to do so. Likewise, those clamoring for more programs don't have anything other than shaky foundations for such programs' legitimacy within the Constitution. Furthermore, the argument that we should view such programs through the eyes of the founders is pretty insane given just how radically the world has changed.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  10. #130
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: Banned Techniques Yielded ‘High Value Information,’ Memo Says

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    You highlighted the wrong part.
    The capacity to read alludes many here.

    This clause creates the power to tax; it doesn't create the power to create the welfare state. Taxes may be used to pay for various things, including the common defense and the general welfare, but this clause doesn't convey the power to do anything other than to tax.
    Indeed, the Constitution does not explicitly lay out the right to create programs to create a welfare state (nor does it say we can make nuclear weapons). However, what Indy cited clearly does allow Congress to levy taxes to pay for general welfare. The question is what is general welfare? Furthermore, Indy did not suggest anywhere in his posts that he supports a cradle to grave welfare system. Earned income tax credit is welfare. It is hardly a cradle to grave welfare program as it requires people to work to get anything. You are again showing why you are considered the #1 dishonest poster here. Instead of addressing what he wrote, you instead choose to fabricate an argument and then dishonestly attack Indy as if he said it.

    So, my statement stands -- no power to create = unconstitutional.
    Except that you have failed to define what general welfare is.

    But you are clearly displaying double standards.

    The Constitution strictly prohibits funding in excess of two years for a standing army. We have done this so many times that no one can keep track. Therefore, much of the current military was and is funded by Unconstitutional measures. Where your argument on general welfare is largely semantics, here is an actual strictly prohibits clause which parties of both sides have flagrantly violated time after time.

    And you ignored this:

    "To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers,"

    As the power to provide for general welfare is explicitly stated, Congress by the Constitution has the power to make laws necessary to carry out such powers.

    So the question comes back to again, which neither you nor Indy have defined, What is General Welfare?

    Show me where the constitution it says the government shalll have the power to create the welfare state, and I'll start to take you seriously.
    Maybe he'll start taking you serious when you stop using such obvious dishonest fabrications?
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

Page 13 of 19 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •