• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Conservative radio host gets waterboarded, and lasts six seconds before.....

My qualm is with people who are choosing to ignore and deny the reality of things and are flapping their gums about the "THREE PEOPLE THAT WERE TORTURED". It's an assine argument and I really don't see many credible links that prove that only three were tortured. But that doesn't keep a pack of numbnuts from running around and claiming such a thing. Does it?

I would rather have this discussion on the basis of 3 provable allegations of torture than 100 embroidered and embellished suspicions of torture.
 
My qualm is not with the Previous administration because it is clear as a bell that they are guilty as hell.

My qualm is with people who are choosing to ignore and deny the reality of things and are flapping their gums about the "THREE PEOPLE THAT WERE TORTURED". It's an assine argument and I really don't see many credible links that prove that only three were tortured. But that doesn't keep a pack of numbnuts from running around and claiming such a thing. Does it?




So you have an issu with Obama? Please tell us all about it. :2wave:
 
My qualm is not with the Previous administration because it is clear as a bell that they are guilty as hell.

My qualm is with people who are choosing to ignore and deny the reality of things and are flapping their gums about the "THREE PEOPLE THAT WERE TORTURED". It's an assine argument and I really don't see many credible links that prove that only three were tortured. But that doesn't keep a pack of numbnuts from running around and claiming such a thing. Does it?

But it still has little to do with the topic at hand. Unfortunately, a lot of people will still take any opportunity to attack the Bush Administration even if it is unwarranted and even though he's not the President anymore.
 
I think that there are two reasons to have this debate publicly. First, to make it explicitly clear that these acts are in violation of U.S. Law, our history as a nation, and our national ethics.

There were no laws broken however; the US attorney's who reviewed this and deliberated for a long time on this issue and they clearly indicate it was legal.

Is your legal background more credible than theirs?

Secondly, to ensure that we don't repeat this mistake.

This again is an OPINION and not shared by everyone. I think that it would be a serious mistake to NOT have this capability available in times of national emergency; which is the exact reason Obama has reserved that ability still. Why do you think that is?

I'm not opposed to trials, but it strikes me that there will be just as many dems prosecuted as Republicans.

Of course, I'm totally okay with Nancy Pelosi being incarcerated. I've never liked her.

If there is no legality issues, if no one is going to be prosecuted and you are not going to show how water boarding meets the UN definition of torture and you have a President who has expressly stated he will never authorize the use of such methods, what is the point?

Once more, there was NOTHING illegal about it and these techniques do not meet the United Nations criteria for the definition of torture which brings me to the logic of my argument; it is merely and attempt by a mainstream political party in power to impugn the previous political party for purely hyper partisan political purposes.

It doesn't make us safer, it doesn't make the troops risking their lives in these countries any safer and it serves NO purpose in the interest of National Security.

:2wave:
 
There were no laws broken however; the US attorney's who reviewed this and deliberated for a long time on this issue and they clearly indicate it was legal.

Is your legal background more credible than theirs?

2rotflol.gif
Probably
 
What is most interesting is all the focus on waterboarding. We have had detainees die from other forms of torture and abuse. Yet all we talk about is waterboarding.

This problem is well beyond just waterboarding. When the focus in on waterboarding it allows people like TD to jump up and down and say "but it was only THREE people....we don't torture because our government said waterboarding isn't torture."

This focus on a single technique is making us lose sight of the forest for the trees. Systematic punishment of detainees that lead to physical injury or death is wrong. You give it any label you want, it's still wrong. We shouldn't be doing it.

I still would like us to strive to be the actual good guys. When we do these things we are no better than those we are fighting.
 
There is a difference between prosecution, and doing nothing. I feel we should find out what happened, what was done, how well it worked as best we can tell, gather all the information available, and then look at setting a long term policy.

Two things here; do you not think that our Government can handle this without all the public scrutiny and hysterics if that is your argument? and; two, if we are trying to find out what happened, why only leak the secret memos on the justification and not the memos showing how these techniques actually resulted in actionable intelligence as well?

In addition, if getting all the information out is important, why then should the Obama Administration not release the memos requested by Dick Cheney and the pictures the ACLU successfully sued to get released?

You see the slippery slope one gets on when making these claims?


I might or might not agree with the policy, but I think that we owe it to the ones who will implement any such policy to have it be as clear as can be. Clear is obviously not how I would describe things the last few years in this regard.


And in the end, what I am seeing is that no one can sufficiently link these methods to anything illegal and cannot link these methods to the United Nations description of what constitutes torture.

Which supports my argument that this is a desperate highly emotional partisan issue brought up by a major political party in this country that had knowledge of these techniques when they were being used by said nothing but now want to use them to impugn their political opponents for purely partisan purposes.

:2wave:
 
I would rather have this discussion on the basis of 3 provable allegations of torture than 100 embroidered and embellished suspicions of torture.

And that is the problem. We are too hung up on waterboarding alone. There are many, many cases of detainees dying in custody as a result of abuse by our troops or interrogators. When we focus on waterboarding we tend to forget about those deaths.

Torture, waterboarding...there is too much emphasis being put on legal definitions and semantics and not enough emphasis on what the hell we are actually doing to detainees.
 
There were no laws broken however; the US attorney's who reviewed this and deliberated for a long time on this issue and they clearly indicate it was legal.

Is your legal background more credible than theirs?

I don't have a legal background, however, I do consider the opinions rendered by the FBI staff attorneys (who advised that FBI agents be pulled from joint CIA/FBI operations due to legal violations) and the ABA to be more credible than those of the Bush legal flunkies.

Since I can tell that you have a sincere desire to learn more about this subject, here's some light reading:

http://fl1.findlaw.com/news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/aba/abatskforce103rpt.pdf

Enjoy. :wink:
 
Two things here; do you not think that our Government can handle this without all the public scrutiny and hysterics if that is your argument? and; two, if we are trying to find out what happened, why only leak the secret memos on the justification and not the memos showing how these techniques actually resulted in actionable intelligence as well?

In addition, if getting all the information out is important, why then should the Obama Administration not release the memos requested by Dick Cheney and the pictures the ACLU successfully sued to get released?

You see the slippery slope one gets on when making these claims?

I think transparency is a key to good government. Unless national security is at stake, giving the people enough information to make an educated decision is a good thing. With that in mind, I have no problem with the release of the memos Vice President Cheney wants released and all other relevant memos.

And in the end, what I am seeing is that no one can sufficiently link these methods to anything illegal and cannot link these methods to the United Nations description of what constitutes torture.

Which supports my argument that this is a desperate highly emotional partisan issue brought up by a major political party in this country that had knowledge of these techniques when they were being used by said nothing but now want to use them to impugn their political opponents for purely partisan purposes.

:2wave:

If you reject every claim that might damage your position, of course you won't ever see what you do not want to.
 
Last edited:
And that is the problem. We are too hung up on waterboarding alone. There are many, many cases of detainees dying in custody as a result of abuse by our troops or interrogators. When we focus on waterboarding we tend to forget about those deaths.

Torture, waterboarding...there is too much emphasis being put on legal definitions and semantics and not enough emphasis on what the hell we are actually doing to detainees.

Truly, I find the actions of the CIA in the area of sleep deprivation far more unsettling even than those of waterboarding:

Memos shed light on CIA use of sleep deprivation - Los Angeles Times

A CIA inspector general's report issued in 2004 was more critical of the agency's use of sleep deprivation than it was of any other method besides waterboarding, according to officials familiar with the document, because of how the technique was applied.

The prisoners had their feet shackled to the floor and their hands cuffed close to their chins, according to the Justice Department memos.

Detainees were clad only in diapers and not allowed to feed themselves. A prisoner who started to drift off to sleep would tilt over and be caught by his chains.

The memos said that more than 25 of the CIA's prisoners were subjected to sleep deprivation. At one point, the agency was allowed to keep prisoners awake for as long as 11 days; the limit was later reduced to just over a week.

According to the memos, medical personnel were to make sure prisoners weren't injured. But a 2007 Red Cross report on the CIA program said that detainees' wrists and ankles bore scars from their shackles.


When detainees could no longer stand, they could be laid on the prison floor with their limbs "anchored to a far point on the floor in such a manner that the arms cannot be bent or used for balance or comfort," a May 10, 2005, memo said.

"The position is sufficiently uncomfortable to detainees to deprive them of unbroken sleep, while allowing their lower limbs to recover from the effects of standing," it said.

In the Red Cross report, prisoners said they were also subjected to loud music and repetitive noise.

"I was kept sitting on a chair, shackled by hands and feet for two to three weeks," said suspected Al Qaeda operative Abu Zubaydah, the first prisoner captured by the CIA, according to the Red Cross report. "If I started to fall asleep, a guard would come and spray water in my face."

To those defending the use of such tactics, DO THESE SOUND LIKE THE ACTIONS OF A DEMOCRATIC NATION?

I would expect a nation like Cuba or North Korea to treat prisoners in this fashion. I would NEVER expect it from us. Hence my horror.

NOTE TO GOLDEN DOG: This is what a credible news source looks like.
 
Last edited:
What is most interesting is all the focus on waterboarding. We have had detainees die from other forms of torture and abuse. Yet all we talk about is waterboarding.

Gee I thought that was the topic of the thread, water boarding. You mean Dan intended to talk about OTHER forms of torture and just forgot to mention it? :rofl

But those aside, let us touch on the red herring you are attempting to pull out of your hat; what other forms of torture and abuse where condoned and tolerated? I am curious about that one.

This problem is well beyond just waterboarding. When the focus in on waterboarding it allows people like TD to jump up and down and say "but it was only THREE people....we don't torture because our government said waterboarding isn't torture."

How trite, yet TD doesn't care how many individuals were subjected to these "enhanced" methods. It is equally fascinating that you think my argument is that our GOVERNMENT claimed it wasn't water boarding.

I clearly stated that the United Nations definition of torture. What parts of my comments were not OBVIOUS and CLEAR to you? Or is this just your typical attempt to fabricate arguments where none exist to support your Liberal point of view?

This focus on a single technique is making us lose sight of the forest for the trees. Systematic punishment of detainees that lead to physical injury or death is wrong. You give it any label you want, it's still wrong. We shouldn't be doing it.

Yet another asinine and farcical statement made in a vacuum of the FACTS and REALITY.

Why don't you share with the group what "systematic punishment" you are referring to where the people who allegedly conducted such acts were not prosecuted?

But beware; Dan and dclxvinoise are going to attack you for trying to suggest that this thread has NOTHING to do with a CONSERVATIVE talk show host who subjected himself to water boarding and NOTHING more. :rofl


I still would like us to strive to be the actual good guys. When we do these things we are no better than those we are fighting.

I am continually amazed when Liberals attempt to paint the United States as the "bad guy" or make the asinine analogy we are no better than people who blow up mosques, innocent civilians, schools and chlidren and cut the heads off their prisoners while they scream for mercy and videotaped.

Aside from the fact that it is an asinine and farcical remark, it begs the question of what defines a "bad guy" to a Liberal; perhaps the fact that they have an "R" behind their name?

:roll:
 
Gee I thought that was the topic of the thread, water boarding. You mean Dan intended to talk about OTHER forms of torture and just forgot to mention it? :rofl

But those aside, let us touch on the red herring you are attempting to pull out of your hat; what other forms of torture and abuse where condoned and tolerated? I am curious about that one.



How trite, yet TD doesn't care how many individuals were subjected to these "enhanced" methods. It is equally fascinating that you think my argument is that our GOVERNMENT claimed it wasn't water boarding.

I clearly stated that the United Nations definition of torture. What parts of my comments were not OBVIOUS and CLEAR to you? Or is this just your typical attempt to fabricate arguments where none exist to support your Liberal point of view?



Yet another asinine and farcical statement made in a vacuum of the FACTS and REALITY.

Why don't you share with the group what "systematic punishment" you are referring to where the people who allegedly conducted such acts were not prosecuted?

But beware; Dan and dclxvinoise are going to attack you for trying to suggest that this thread has NOTHING to do with a CONSERVATIVE talk show host who subjected himself to water boarding and NOTHING more. :rofl




I am continually amazed when Liberals attempt to paint the United States as the "bad guy" or make the asinine analogy we are no better than people who blow up mosques, innocent civilians, schools and chlidren and cut the heads off their prisoners while they scream for mercy and videotaped.

Aside from the fact that it is an asinine and farcical remark, it begs the question of what defines a "bad guy" to a Liberal; perhaps the fact that they have an "R" behind their name?

:roll:

Word salad anyone?
 
To those defending the use of such tactics, DO THESE SOUND LIKE THE ACTIONS OF A DEMOCRATIC NATION?

I would expect a nation like Cuba or North Korea to treat prisoners in this fashion. I would NEVER expect it from us. Hence my horror.

NOTE TO GOLDEN DOG: This is what a credible news source looks like.

That's exactly what I've been saying. How exactly claim the moral high ground when we engage in such activities? And I know a lot of people use 9/11 as an excuse and say that it was a game changer, but it's a slippery slope. When we get rid of a lot of the core values that make us great, before long there is little to separate us from our enemies.
 
There you go again Dan, when you are called on your patently asinine and offensive assertions comparing what the good men and women of our Government did to the Nazi's and Vietcong, you just ignore.

Bravo Dan. By the way, if what they did was OBVIOUSLY illegal according to your citations (which you probably pulled from a Left wing blog), why then is the Democrat led Congress and White House not prosecuting?

By Dan; I admit that I do enjoy shoving your whiney, trite and offensive little tirades back in your uninformed face.

But hey, you go on ignoring the REAL definition and keep citing codes you obviously are clueless about and compare the men and women fighting to keep you safe no better than Communists, Nazi’s and thugs.

Your dishonesty is well known. That left wing blog I got much of my information from is the National Review Online. Here is the article. It is by Conservative blogger Jim Minzi. The National Review Online is well noted for its past stars - Namely William Kristol and William F. Buckley. Now before you start calling Jim Minzi, William Kristol, and William F. Buckley Liberal bloggers, I suggest you read the article.

As for calling me a whiner, assinine, trite, and offensive, there is no room in this thread for that. Stop your god damn trolling. Your post has been reported.
 
Your dishonesty is well known. That left wing blog I got much of my information from is the National Review Online. Here is the article. It is by Conservative blogger Jim Minzi. The National Review Online is well noted for its past stars - Namely William Kristol and William F. Buckley. Now before you start calling Jim Minzi, William Kristol, and William F. Buckley Liberal bloggers, I suggest you read the article.

As for calling me a whiner, assinine, trite, and offensive, there is no room in this thread for that. Stop your god damn trolling. Your post has been reported.

That is quite the parade of far left wingers there. How can you even imagine using a source like that, highly suspect....




Note for the person who somehow misses it, and you know there will be one....that was intended as sarcasm.
 
That's exactly what I've been saying. How exactly claim the moral high ground when we engage in such activities? And I know a lot of people use 9/11 as an excuse and say that it was a game changer, but it's a slippery slope. When we get rid of a lot of the core values that make us great, before long there is little to separate us from our enemies.

As a mostly conservative person, the undermining of our national identity and core rights is what bothers me.
 
Truly, I find the actions of the CIA in the area of sleep deprivation far more unsettling even than those of waterboarding:

Memos shed light on CIA use of sleep deprivation - Los Angeles Times

That is your personal opinion which unfortunately require one to have a pre-911 mentality and are not shared by people like me who understand that if lives are in danger and these less than severe methods could be a way to save them, then it makes perfect sense to use them.

But I will refer you to someone who knows far more and knows better of what he is talking about than you or I from your article:

One came from former CIA Director Michael V. Hayden, who expressed disbelief that the administration was prepared to expose methods it might later decide it needed.

"Are you telling me that under all conditions of threat, you will never interfere with the sleep cycle of a detainee?" Hayden asked a top White House official, according to sources familiar with the exchange.

From the beginning, sleep deprivation had been one of the most important elements in the CIA's interrogation program, used to help break dozens of suspected terrorists, far more than the most violent approaches. And it is among the methods the agency fought hardest to keep.


To those defending the use of such tactics, DO THESE SOUND LIKE THE ACTIONS OF A DEMOCRATIC NATION?

They sound like the methods used by a Democratic Nation under assault from terrorists who desire to find methods to kill even higher numbers of our people than what occurred on 9-11.

They sound like the methods used by a Democratic Nation led by a president who understands that his most important duty as President is to defend it’s citizens from attack.

They sound like the methods used by a Democratic Nation led by a President who understands that the enemy is not one who wears a uniform and represents his nation; but rather one who hides amongst his victims dressed as one of them with the intent to kill as many as he can for fierce but purely false ideological reasons.

I would expect a nation like Cuba or North Korea to treat prisoners in this fashion. I would NEVER expect it from us. Hence my horror.

The notion that the methods we use are anything like those of Cuba or North Korea requires willful ignorance. Our enemies have NEVER been known to concern themselves with United Nations or Geneva Conventions even when they were parties to those agreements.

As I have stated countless times, our troops would welcome the notion that their enemies would take the care that we do to ensure that our prisoners are well cared for, fed and clothed, bathed and given access to medical personnel and care our troops have NEVER received in battle.

Your “horror” is expressed in a naïve idealistic vacuum of the historical facts and realities of the world we live in. It is quaint and okay because, thank God, you do not have to sit in the seat at the Whitehouse having the weight of these decisions on your conscience.
 
What kills me is that you never see the irony in your own posts sometimes. :lol:

Coming from you, this is more like the pot ATTEMPTING to CLAIM the kettle is black. The irony is all yours I assure you.

Here's a test, go back and re-read the thread from the start; all the way to where you decided to blather the thread with your personal selective outrage on me.

Carry on; it is hardly any wonder you don't see the irony and hypocrisy in your posts. :2wave:
 
Back
Top Bottom