Tom Ridge Says Waterboarding is Torture

[The Senator]

From MSNBC:


WASHINGTON - The first secretary of the Homeland Security Department says waterboarding is torture.

"There's just no doubt in my mind — under any set of rules — waterboarding is torture," Tom Ridge said Friday in an interview. Ridge had offered the same opinion earlier in the day to members of the American Bar Association at a homeland security conference.

"One of America's greatest strengths is the soft power of our value system and how we treat prisoners of war, and we don't torture," Ridge said in the interview. Ridge was secretary of the Homeland Security Department between 2003 and 2005. "And I believe, unlike others in the administration, that waterboarding was, is — and will always be — torture. That's a simple statement."

Waterboarding is a harsh interrogation tactic that was used by CIA officers in 2002 and 2003 on three alleged al-Qaida terrorists. The tactic gives the subject the sensation of drowning.

The CIA has not used the technique since 2003, and CIA Director Michael Hayden prohibited it in 2006, according to U.S. officials. The debate was recently revived when the CIA revealed it had destroyed videotapes showing the interrogations of two alleged terrorists, both of whom were waterboarded.

Fuzzy message on waterboarding

Ridge's comments come a week after a report that Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell said he would consider waterboarding torture if it were used against him.

In a separate interview Thursday, the current Homeland Security secretary, Michael Chertoff, refused to say what he thinks of the interrogation technique. Chertoff, a former federal prosecutor and judge — who was also assistant attorney general for the Justice Department's Criminal Division in 2002 — said the question should be asked in the context of a specific set of facts and a specific statute and should not be posed abstractly.

"This is too important a discussion to have based on throwing one question at somebody," Chertoff said.

Attorney General Michael Mukasey has declined so far to rule on whether waterboarding constitutes torture. An affirmative finding by Mukasey could put at risk the CIA interrogators who were authorized by the White House in 2002 to waterboard three prisoners deemed resistant to conventional techniques.

‘No idea’ how CIA got intelligence

Ridge, homeland security adviser and then secretary from 2001 to 2005, said he was not involved in the discussions about CIA interrogation techniques. Rather, his department was a consumer of any intelligence gleaned from them.

"I have no idea how any of the intelligence community extrapolated any information from anybody — where they got it, how they got it, and from whom they got it. But waterboarding is torture."

Ridge, a lawyer, wades into the waterboarding debate with both a military and civilian background. He is also a former Pennsylvania governor and congressman. He has since started his own homeland security consulting firm.

"As a former soldier, I will tell you that we go to great pains, and a lot of men and women, who serve in the military at risk of their own lives, do everything they can to minimize civilian casualties and certainly do everything they can to respect the Geneva Convention."

The House and Senate intelligence committees want to prohibit the CIA from using any interrogation techniques not allowed by the military. That list includes waterboarding. If their intelligence bill containing the restriction is approved by Congress, it almost certainly will face a veto from President Bush.

[rdh007]

Tom Ridge is correct.

[Memphis Slim]

Here we go again. :whatever:

So you take Ridges' opinion over the other expert who says it's not. Why is that?

Bamboo shoved into your finger nails......electric clamps on your genitals, beaten with lashes.......

That's torture.i

[The Senator]

And simulated drowning isn't torture? Because when I almost drowned as a kid, I remember it being a very dreadful experience. I could only imagine what it must feel like, over and over again, for hours at a time.

[Addendum]

I guess the other expert forgot that the United States charged and convicted a Japanese Officer of War Crimes for waterboarding an American civilian in 1947. During the Vietnam War, an American soldier was court-martialled when a picture was published in The Washington Post of him supervising the waterboarding of a POW. He was convicted and later thrown out of the Army.

Daniel Levin, who was Assistant Attorney General in 2004, subjected himself to waterboarding. He was forced to resign when he published this memo (http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/18usc23402340a2.htm) where he said that waterboarding is torture.

Yet again, celldog is in error with regard to the truth. But then, I remember that he blindly follows the president because the voices on the radio tell him to, and and according to the voices, the president is telling the truth, because he found the loopholes to change it.

[teseract]

Here we go again. :whatever:

So you take Ridges' opinion over the other expert who says it's not. Why is that?

Bamboo shoved into your fingernals......electric clamps on your genitals, beaten with lashes.......

That's torture.i

From Merriam-Webster:

Main Entry:1tor·ture http://www.m-w.com/images/audio.gif (javascript:popWin('/cgi-bin/audio.pl?tortur01.wav=torture'))Pronunciation: \ˈtȯr-chər\ Function:noun Etymology:Middle French, from Old French, from Late Latin tortura, from Latin tortus, past participle of torquēre to twist; probably akin to Old High German drāhsil turner, Greek atraktos spindleDate:1540 1 a: anguish of body or mind : agony (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/agony) b: something that causes agony or pain2: the infliction of intense pain (as from burning, crushing, or wounding) to punish, coerce, or afford sadistic pleasure3: distortion or overrefinement of a meaning or an argument : straining (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/straining)

Waterbording:

Agony, check

Pain, check

Anguish of mind and body, check

sounds like torture to me.

[Mr Sparkle]

hahahaha! water boarding ISN'T torture?
then what is it?

[Addendum]

hahahaha! water boarding ISN'T torture?
then what is it?

Cups and cakes
Cups and cakes
Oh what good things mother makes
You've got to take tea won't you take it with me
What a gay time it will be
Cups and cakes
Cups and cakes
Please make sure that nothing breaks
The china's so dear and the treacle so clear
And I'm glad that you are here
Milk and sugar
Bread and Jam
Yes please, sir, and thank you ma'am
Here I am
Cups and cakes
Cups and cakes
I'm so full my tummy aches
How sad it must end
But I'm glad I've a friend
Sharing cups and cakes with me
And cakes with me...

[Memphis Slim]

And simulated drowning isn't torture? Because when I almost drowned as a kid, I remember it being a very dreadful experience. I could only imagine what it must feel like, over and over again, for hours at a time.


Poor, poor terrorist......... boo hoo. Find somebody who cares. Because I don't.

NEWS FLASH!!! Interrogation is not suppose to be a "PLEASANT EXPERIENCE"! It's suppose to be dreadful. These are bad guys!!! Reeeeally bad. Also.... these cats are not going to drown! They will only feel like they are. You, on the other hand, were "really" drowning!! big difference. :whatever:

[Addendum]

Poor, poor terrorist......... boo hoo. Find somebody who cares. Because I don't.

NEWS FLASH!!! Interrogation is not suppose to be a "PLEASANT EXPERIENCE"! It's suppose to be dreadful. These are bad guys!!! Reeeeally bad. Also.... these cats are not going to drown! They will only feel like they are. You, on the other hand, were "really" drowning!! big difference. :whatever:

You have no damn clue what you're talking about.

"The practice involves strapping the person being interrogated on to a board as pints of water are forced into his lungs through a cloth covering his face while the victim's mouth is forced open. Its effect, according to Mr Nance, is a process of slow-motion suffocation.

"Typically, a victim goes into hysterics on the board as water fills his lungs. "How much the victim is to drown," Mr Nance wrote in an article for the Small Wars Journal, "depends on the desired result and the obstinacy of the subject."

"A team doctor watches the quantity of water that is ingested and for the physiological signs which show when the drowning effect goes from painful psychological experience to horrific, suffocating punishment, to the final death spiral. For the uninitiated, it is horrifying to watch."

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article3115549.ece

[teseract]

Poor, poor terrorist......... boo hoo. Find somebody who cares. Because I don't.

NEWS FLASH!!! Interrogation is not suppose to be a "PLEASANT EXPERIENCE"! It's suppose to be dreadful. These are bad guys!!! Reeeeally bad. Also.... these cats are not going to drown! They will only feel like they are. You, on the other hand, were "really" drowning!! big difference. :whatever:
A human being is a human being and remains a human being no matter how evil he is and, as the human rights carta says, that is not up for negotiation.

NEWSFLASH!!! Interrogation is not supposed to create Anguish, Agony and Pain!" It's supposed to get information. These people are bad guys, but that doesn't make it right for the "good guys" to act like bad guys themselves. The laws of protection of the bodie's integrity must protect all or they protect none, NO MIDDLE GROUND OR PICK AND CHOOSE, PERIOD.

[Memphis Slim]

Addendum: You have no damn clue what you're talking about.


And it's very obvious you don't either.

[Addendum]

Even though I provided facts to back up my view that waterboarding is torture.

All you have provided is rhetoric and talking points from the right, and nothing of actual substance.

[Superman]

The term "Simulated Drowning" is a misnomer. There is no simulation to it, You ARE drowning when they do this. They just try to stop before you die from it.

And one more thing. None of these so called "terrorist" have been tried or convicted of any crimes. We've held and tortured these people for over 5+ years without any proof that they have done anything.

We have become the very thing we are supposed to be fighting.

We are better than this. Or we should be.

[Memphis Slim]

A human being is a human being and remains a human being no matter how evil he is and, as the human rights carta says, that is not up for negotiation.


Dude.....where do I even start with you? "No matter how evil he is???" Are you kidding me? How old are you? Because this is so unreal, you have got to be a 10th grader or something. Let me school you in some reality. At some point, when a human being decides to murder innocent civilians or has murdered other human beings, he forfeits his rights. His rights do not supercede the right of the baby in the troller with it's mother.....or the school children in the playground....or the man going off to worker his 8 hours to support his family. All, who by the the way, said terrorist was willing to exterminate, if given the chance.

What is wrong with us? Our values are so twisted, we don't even know when to defend ourselves anymore. http://bibleforums.org/forum/images/aux-s/17no.gif



NEWSFLASH!!! Interrogation is not supposed to create Anguish, Agony and Pain!" It's supposed to get information. These people are bad guys, but that doesn't make it right for the "good guys" to act like bad guys themselves.

Yes....it is suppose to be painful....uncomfortable.....mentally and physically.
At what point do you fight back? What price are you willing to pay? How do know that you haven't been spared because of info these techniques uncovered?
And "good guys" use "force" to match the aggression of the bad guy.

The laws of protection of the bodie's integrity must protect all or they protect none, NO MIDDLE GROUND OR PICK AND CHOOSE, PERIOD.

In what parallel universe?

[Memphis Slim]

The term "Simulated Drowning" is a misnomer. There is no simulation to it, You ARE drowning when they do this. They just try to stop before you die from it.

And one more thing. None of these so called "terrorist" have been tried or convicted of any crimes. We've held and tortured these people for over 5+ years without any proof that they have done anything.

We have become the very thing we are supposed to be fighting.

We are better than this. Or we should be.


You are not drowning. And they were captured on a battlefield.

[The Senator]

You are not drowning.

Nope, you're not drowning. It's simulated drowning. It's made to mock drowning. They wrap a cloth "mask" over your face, then dunk your head in water. When you come out of the water, the cloth is soaked, and effects your breathing. If you've ever put a wet washcloth over your mouth and breathed in, you'd know what I was talking about. It is incredibly difficult to breathe.

And the second part to all of this... it doesn't always work. If you waterboard a suspect, there's no guarantee that the suspect will give accurate information. They could tell you a nuke was about to explode in LA, when in fact it's in Chicago. They could tell you that insurgents are going to strike in Baghdad, when in fact they're planning a strike in Al Anbar. It's just as unreliable as it is inhumane, and shouldn't be used.

[teseract]

You are not drowning. And they were captured on a battlefield.
Of course you're drowning. Drowning is the process before one ends up dead. Not the end result.

[Memphis Slim]

http://blogs.trb.com/news/politics/blog/swamp_header.gif (http://weblogs.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/blog/)

Court throws out Islam-based Gitmo claims

by James Oliphant
A federal appeals court today tossed a lawsuit brought against former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and other officials by four released British prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay, who alleged that they were tortured and denied the right to practice Islam.
The British detainees–Shafiq Rasul, Asif Iqbal, Rhuhel Ahmed and Jamal Al-Harith–spent more than two years in Guantánamo and were repatriated to the U.K. in 2004.
They brought claims under the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a law passed in the 1990s to prevent government interference with religious practices, arguing that officials at Guantanamo actively prevented worship of Islam by, among other things, tossing a copy of the Quran into a toilet.
They also say they were tortured, beaten and humiliated. They had sought $10 million in damages. A federal trial judge dismissed most of the claims saying U.S. officials couldn't be sued for actions taken in wartime, but the religious act claim and some other claims survived. (A story here (http://herehttp://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2007/09/exgitmo_detainees_base_lawsuit.html) in the Tribune took a closer look at the case.)
But in an opinion (http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200801/06-5209a.pdf) released Friday Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson of U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington wrote that the religious freedom act does not apply to the Guantanamo detainees because they are not "persons" for the purposes of U.S law.
The three-judge panel also held that the U.S. officials were immune from the torture claims because, as held by the trial court: “torture is a foreseeable consequence of the military’s detention of suspected enemy combatants.” In other words, the court held that the officials that allegedly engaged in torture did so as part of their assigned duties to interrogate.
And the panel found that, even if torture and religious abuse were illegal, defendants were immune under the Constitution because they could not have reasonably known that detainees at Guantánamo had any constitutional rights.

The detainees were supported in their litigation by a wide range of church groups across the religious spectrum, which were concerned about the government using faith-based humiliation as an interrogation tool.
Interestingly, Judge Janice Rogers Brown, an evangelical, while concurring in the court's opinion, wrote a separate opinion, criticizing the majority for using a definition of person “at odds with its plain meaning.” She wrote, “There is little mystery that a ‘person’ is an individual human being…as distinguished from an animal or thing.” Brown said the opinion “leaves us with the unfortunate and quite dubious distinction of being the only court to declare those held at Guantánamo are not ‘person[s].’ This is a most regrettable holding in a case where plaintiffs have alleged high-level U.S. government officials treated them as less than human."
Eric Lewis, the Washington lawyer who argued the case for the detainees, said in a statement Friday, "It is an awful day for the rule of law and common decency when a court finds that torture is all in a days’ work for the secretary of defense and senior generals."
Lewis said he would appeal the case to the Supreme Court.
Supporting Henderson and Brown in the decision was Judge A. Raymond Randolph, who has consistently sided with the Bush administration in terrorism cases.



Since the DNC Swamp won't ever talk to our soldiers....
Here's a letter from an American servicewoman who served as a Gitmo guard.
"My daughter was in Gitmo for a year as a Master-at- Arms, E4. (10/04-10/05) She was injured several times by the inmates assaulting her physically. In addition, she knew that when she was doing her job by enforcing the rules, she was threatened by the prisoners if she had to touch them. They would get her. They mixed a cocktail of urine, feces, and semen, and let it fester for days until the right moment. They warned her that she was a target and then they got her, she was assaulted several times by loads of crap thrown at her.
She had to undergo shots to prevent what diseases that she was exposed to. I don’t know why we have women guarding men, especially these animals, but that is the policy. My daughter is a tough cookie and can handle herself. In her year there she did not dishonor herself or our country. When she returned home she had a DVD of Gitmo. They made fresh bread every day!! Part of it showed how the chef’s prepared special meals for the prisoners. If a prisoner refused food the guards were happy to sample the Chicken, rice pilaf, yogurt and fresh baked pita bread, while our guys had crap food from the mess or had to buy it from Burger King.
As part of her duties, in the last month she was there, she was assigned to the hospital ward. She had to force feed those a..holes who offed themselves the other day. They were the meanest of the bunch and had to be tied down to get their food. My daughter and other personnel voluntarily submitted themselves to the force feeding procedure also so that they could do it with the least pain for the captives. It was very unpleasant for her but it helped her and others to understand how to participate in it with the least stress for the recipients. The goal was to keep them alive. She feels that the suicides would not have happened on her watch, but it was going to happen eventually. These guys are warriors. By their death they have achieved a military success in the political world. The media marches on."
Another Inconvenient Truth.

[teseract]

In what parallel universe?
YES! No matter how evil he is. I don't give a flying **** if you want to cry about all the victims, and shake your fist in revenge, Human rights are NOT up for negotiation, peroid! They either count for all everytime or they count for none. It says in the UNIVERSAL (as in they count anywhere, at any given time, no exceptions) declaration of Human rights:

Article 3. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person. (that includes EVERYONE, even the vilest of criminals and most evil men on the planet)



Article 5.

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishme (that includes Terrorists)
Article 6.

Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law. (that measn everyone has to be recognized as a human being to which human rights apply,)

Article 7.

All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination. (that also means criminals, murders and Terrorists)

[Memphis Slim]

Nope, you're not drowning. It's simulated drowning. It's made to mock drowning. They wrap a cloth "mask" over your face, then dunk your head in water. When you come out of the water, the cloth is soaked, and effects your breathing. If you've ever put a wet washcloth over your mouth and breathed in, you'd know what I was talking about. It is incredibly difficult to breathe.

And the second part to all of this... it doesn't always work. If you waterboard a suspect, there's no guarantee that the suspect will give accurate information. They could tell you a nuke was about to explode in LA, when in fact it's in Chicago. They could tell you that insurgents are going to strike in Baghdad, when in fact they're planning a strike in Al Anbar. It's just as unreliable as it is inhumane, and shouldn't be used.


And asking them nicely, "Where's the next attack?" Never works. Nothing is fool proof. But, Water boarding does at least work some times. And if it saves "some" innocent lives, isn't that worth it?
http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:Q4-_7sn_HAkohM:http://pictopia.com/perl/get_image%3Fprovider_id%3D498%26size%3D550x550_mb% 26ptp_photo_id%3D1560447 (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://pictopia.com/perl/get_image%3Fprovider_id%3D498%26size%3D550x550_mb% 26ptp_photo_id%3D1560447&imgrefurl=http://pictopia.com/perl/ptp/observwash/%3Fptp_photo_id%3D1560447&h=285&w=550&sz=113&hl=en&start=22&um=1&tbnid=Q4-_7sn_HAkohM:&tbnh=69&tbnw=133&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dchildren%2Bat%2Bplay%2B%2Bground%2B%2 B%26start%3D20%26ndsp%3D20%26svnum%3D10%26um%3D1%2 6hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4RNWN_enUS210US211%26sa%3DN)htt p://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:bhtGyD8PEBIG3M:http://images.jupiterimages.com/common/detail/18/84/23128418.jpg (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://images.jupiterimages.com/common/detail/18/84/23128418.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.jupiterimages.com/itemDetail.aspx%3FitemID%3D23128418&h=250&w=243&sz=26&hl=en&start=23&um=1&tbnid=bhtGyD8PEBIG3M:&tbnh=111&tbnw=108&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dchildren%2Bat%2Bplay%2B%2Bground%2B%2 B%26start%3D20%26ndsp%3D20%26svnum%3D10%26um%3D1%2 6hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4RNWN_enUS210US211%26sa%3DN)htt p://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:_0-dycjd6v9BpM:http://www.jimwegryn.com/Photos/Mother%2520and%2520child.jpg (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.jimwegryn.com/Photos/Mother%2520and%2520child.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.jimwegryn.com/Photos/Photos.htm&h=817&w=1000&sz=145&hl=en&start=6&um=1&tbnid=_0-dycjd6v9BpM:&tbnh=122&tbnw=149&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dmother%2Band%2Bchild%26svnum%3D10%26u m%3D1%26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4RNWN_enUS210US211%26sa% 3DG)
http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:H0GH0srYvBzvVM:http://www.douglaschapel.org/black_family.bmp (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.douglaschapel.org/black_family.bmp&imgrefurl=http://www.douglaschapel.org/read_bible.htm&h=333&w=500&sz=326&hl=en&start=4&um=1&tbnid=H0GH0srYvBzvVM:&tbnh=87&tbnw=130&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dblack%2Bfamily%26svnum%3D10%26um%3D1% 26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4RNWN_enUS210US211%26sa%3DG)
This is what we are trying to prevent...These are the people they are trying to murder, if they had the chance.
http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:Zk_UD8LxorzTDM:http://www.atomicarchive.com/Effects/Images/WE12.jpg (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.atomicarchive.com/Effects/Images/WE12.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.atomicarchive.com/Effects/effects9.shtml&h=410&w=360&sz=24&hl=en&start=6&um=1&tbnid=Zk_UD8LxorzTDM:&tbnh=125&tbnw=110&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dmushroom%2Bcloud%26svnum%3D10%26um%3D 1%26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4RNWN_enUS210US211%26sa%3DG)
Does that make any sense to you at all??

[teseract]

http://blogs.trb.com/news/politics/blog/swamp_header.gif (http://weblogs.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/blog/)

Court throws out Islam-based Gitmo claims

by James Oliphant
A federal appeals court today tossed a lawsuit brought against former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and other officials by four released British prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay, who alleged that they were tortured and denied the right to practice Islam.
The British detainees–Shafiq Rasul, Asif Iqbal, Rhuhel Ahmed and Jamal Al-Harith–spent more than two years in Guantánamo and were repatriated to the U.K. in 2004.
They brought claims under the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a law passed in the 1990s to prevent government interference with religious practices, arguing that officials at Guantanamo actively prevented worship of Islam by, among other things, tossing a copy of the Quran into a toilet.
They also say they were tortured, beaten and humiliated. They had sought $10 million in damages. A federal trial judge dismissed most of the claims saying U.S. officials couldn't be sued for actions taken in wartime, but the religious act claim and some other claims survived. (A story here (http://herehttp://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2007/09/exgitmo_detainees_base_lawsuit.html) in the Tribune took a closer look at the case.)
But in an opinion (http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200801/06-5209a.pdf) released Friday Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson of U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington wrote that the religious freedom act does not apply to the Guantanamo detainees because they are not "persons" for the purposes of U.S law.
The three-judge panel also held that the U.S. officials were immune from the torture claims because, as held by the trial court: “torture is a foreseeable consequence of the military’s detention of suspected enemy combatants.” In other words, the court held that the officials that allegedly engaged in torture did so as part of their assigned duties to interrogate.
And the panel found that, even if torture and religious abuse were illegal, defendants were immune under the Constitution because they could not have reasonably known that detainees at Guantánamo had any constitutional rights.

The detainees were supported in their litigation by a wide range of church groups across the religious spectrum, which were concerned about the government using faith-based humiliation as an interrogation tool.
Interestingly, Judge Janice Rogers Brown, an evangelical, while concurring in the court's opinion, wrote a separate opinion, criticizing the majority for using a definition of person “at odds with its plain meaning.” She wrote, “There is little mystery that a ‘person’ is an individual human being…as distinguished from an animal or thing.” Brown said the opinion “leaves us with the unfortunate and quite dubious distinction of being the only court to declare those held at Guantánamo are not ‘person[s].’ This is a most regrettable holding in a case where plaintiffs have alleged high-level U.S. government officials treated them as less than human."
Eric Lewis, the Washington lawyer who argued the case for the detainees, said in a statement Friday, "It is an awful day for the rule of law and common decency when a court finds that torture is all in a days’ work for the secretary of defense and senior generals."
Lewis said he would appeal the case to the Supreme Court.
Supporting Henderson and Brown in the decision was Judge A. Raymond Randolph, who has consistently sided with the Bush administration in terrorism cases.



Since the DNC Swamp won't ever talk to our soldiers....
Here's a letter from an American servicewoman who served as a Gitmo guard.
"My daughter was in Gitmo for a year as a Master-at- Arms, E4. (10/04-10/05) She was injured several times by the inmates assaulting her physically. In addition, she knew that when she was doing her job by enforcing the rules, she was threatened by the prisoners if she had to touch them. They would get her. They mixed a cocktail of urine, feces, and semen, and let it fester for days until the right moment. They warned her that she was a target and then they got her, she was assaulted several times by loads of crap thrown at her.
She had to undergo shots to prevent what diseases that she was exposed to. I don’t know why we have women guarding men, especially these animals, but that is the policy. My daughter is a tough cookie and can handle herself. In her year there she did not dishonor herself or our country. When she returned home she had a DVD of Gitmo. They made fresh bread every day!! Part of it showed how the chef’s prepared special meals for the prisoners. If a prisoner refused food the guards were happy to sample the Chicken, rice pilaf, yogurt and fresh baked pita bread, while our guys had crap food from the mess or had to buy it from Burger King.
As part of her duties, in the last month she was there, she was assigned to the hospital ward. She had to force feed those a..holes who offed themselves the other day. They were the meanest of the bunch and had to be tied down to get their food. My daughter and other personnel voluntarily submitted themselves to the force feeding procedure also so that they could do it with the least pain for the captives. It was very unpleasant for her but it helped her and others to understand how to participate in it with the least stress for the recipients. The goal was to keep them alive. She feels that the suicides would not have happened on her watch, but it was going to happen eventually. These guys are warriors. By their death they have achieved a military success in the political world. The media marches on."
Another Inconvenient Truth.





Let me make one thing clear, I don't give a Rats ass about that Judgement or what the bad bad men did to the woman. All that counts to me is what is written in the Declaration of Humans right and it states clearly there

Article 5.

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.


The Judges ruled against the DoHR and that is plainly said, disgusting and umbecoming of a civilzed society that calls itself advanced and elightened, period.

[Memphis Slim]

YES! No matter how evil he is. I don't give a flying **** if you want to cry about all the victims, and shake your fist in revenge, Human rights are NOT up for negotiation, peroid! They either count for all everytime or they count for none. It says in the UNIVERSAL (as in they count anywhere, at any given time, no exceptions) declaration of Human rights



Until it hits you at home. Until you or your family is one of them.

[teseract]

And asking them nicely, "Where's the next attack?" Never works. Nothing is fool proof. But, Water boarding does at least work some times. And if it saves "some" innocent lives, isn't that worth it?
http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:Q4-_7sn_HAkohM:http://pictopia.com/perl/get_image%3Fprovider_id%3D498%26size%3D550x550_mb% 26ptp_photo_id%3D1560447 (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://pictopia.com/perl/get_image%3Fprovider_id%3D498%26size%3D550x550_mb% 26ptp_photo_id%3D1560447&imgrefurl=http://pictopia.com/perl/ptp/observwash/%3Fptp_photo_id%3D1560447&h=285&w=550&sz=113&hl=en&start=22&um=1&tbnid=Q4-_7sn_HAkohM:&tbnh=69&tbnw=133&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dchildren%2Bat%2Bplay%2B%2Bground%2B%2 B%26start%3D20%26ndsp%3D20%26svnum%3D10%26um%3D1%2 6hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4RNWN_enUS210US211%26sa%3DN)htt p://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:bhtGyD8PEBIG3M:http://images.jupiterimages.com/common/detail/18/84/23128418.jpg (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://images.jupiterimages.com/common/detail/18/84/23128418.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.jupiterimages.com/itemDetail.aspx%3FitemID%3D23128418&h=250&w=243&sz=26&hl=en&start=23&um=1&tbnid=bhtGyD8PEBIG3M:&tbnh=111&tbnw=108&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dchildren%2Bat%2Bplay%2B%2Bground%2B%2 B%26start%3D20%26ndsp%3D20%26svnum%3D10%26um%3D1%2 6hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4RNWN_enUS210US211%26sa%3DN)htt p://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:_0-dycjd6v9BpM:http://www.jimwegryn.com/Photos/Mother%2520and%2520child.jpg (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.jimwegryn.com/Photos/Mother%2520and%2520child.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.jimwegryn.com/Photos/Photos.htm&h=817&w=1000&sz=145&hl=en&start=6&um=1&tbnid=_0-dycjd6v9BpM:&tbnh=122&tbnw=149&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dmother%2Band%2Bchild%26svnum%3D10%26u m%3D1%26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4RNWN_enUS210US211%26sa% 3DG)
http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:H0GH0srYvBzvVM:http://www.douglaschapel.org/black_family.bmp (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.douglaschapel.org/black_family.bmp&imgrefurl=http://www.douglaschapel.org/read_bible.htm&h=333&w=500&sz=326&hl=en&start=4&um=1&tbnid=H0GH0srYvBzvVM:&tbnh=87&tbnw=130&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dblack%2Bfamily%26svnum%3D10%26um%3D1% 26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4RNWN_enUS210US211%26sa%3DG)
This is what we are trying to prevent...These are the people they are trying to murder, if they had the chance.
http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:Zk_UD8LxorzTDM:http://www.atomicarchive.com/Effects/Images/WE12.jpg (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.atomicarchive.com/Effects/Images/WE12.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.atomicarchive.com/Effects/effects9.shtml&h=410&w=360&sz=24&hl=en&start=6&um=1&tbnid=Zk_UD8LxorzTDM:&tbnh=125&tbnw=110&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dmushroom%2Bcloud%26svnum%3D10%26um%3D 1%26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4RNWN_enUS210US211%26sa%3DG)
Does that make any sense to you at all??

Nope, because I'd rather be dead than become the same scum that these Terrorists are! You asked me what I was willing to sacrifice. I don't know what I'm willing to sacrifice but I know what I'm not willing. I'm not willing to throw out 100 years of social progress just to get "even" with a bunch of lunatics. If you're willing to sacrifice your soul and as clichee as it may sound "purity" then do that. I'd rather not become the monster we try to fight out of revenge and misunderstood honor.

[teseract]

Until it hits you at home. Until you or your family is one of them.

Nope not even then, Revenge is stupid and doesn't solve anything. I'm above such pityful emotions. besides if it is me, I wouldn't care about it a lot because I'm dead. As for my family, if I would behave like you, it would be shamefull to their memory. My family and friends have always held law and Human rights in high regard. I'd honor them much more by upholding the principle even in the most darkest hours, than giving in to animalistic blood lust and "get even" mentality.

[Memphis Slim]

Nope, because I'd rather be dead than become the same scum that these Terrorists are! You asked me what I was willing to sacrifice. I don't know what I'm willing to sacrifice but I know what I'm not willing. I'm not willing to throw out 100 years of social progress just to get "even" with a bunch of lunatics. If you're willing to sacrifice your soul and as clichee as it may sound "purity" then do that. I'd rather not become the monster we try to fight out of revenge and misunderstood honor.


Well....this discussion is over. There is no reasoning with a someone as far gone as you, my friend. Peace

[teseract]

Well....this discussion is over. There is no reasoning with a someone as far gone as you, my friend. Peace

There is nothing to discuss, the only one far gone is you, you're willing to become a monster to fight monsters. Well, sorry but we others would like to remain human and not lower ourselves down to such a disgusting level.

[The Senator]

Well....this discussion is over. There is no reasoning with a someone as far gone as you, my friend. Peace

Ha! The pot's calling the kettle black, I see :cwink:

But... I understand what you're saying. I do. I don't approve of the method, because I consider it torture, hands down.

Preventing a nuclear war is something which I completely support. That's why I'm planning to go into defense contracting/ lobbying/ advising. I think that wiretapping, internal surveillance and other similar methods are the best way to prevent a full-scale terrorist attack.

We don't see eye to eye, obviously, on a lot of things. But, I do understand what you are saying.

[teseract]

Ha! The pot's calling the kettle black, I see

But... I understand what you're saying. I do. I don't approve of the method, because I consider it torture, hands down.

Preventing a nuclear war is something which I completely support. That's why I'm planning to go into defense contracting/ lobbying/ advising. I think that wiretapping, internal surveillance and other similar methods are the best way to prevent a full-scale terrorist attack.

We don't see eye to eye, obviously, on a lot of things. But, I do understand what you are saying.
Especially, when one considers how much of a Jesus freak he is. "Love thy enemy" is obviously lost to him. What a shame that an Atheist (me) is more willing to act like Jesus recommended than a self professing christian (him).

Wire Tapping, Surveillance? Dangerous territory which also can infridge on human rights as the UDoHR states:

Article 12.

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

[The Senator]

Especially, when one considers how much of a Jesus freak he is. "Love thy enemy" is obviously lost to him. What a shame that an Atheist (me) is more willing to act like Jesus recommended than a self professing christian (him).

I hope we aren't opening a **** storm on religion...

[Matt]

Poor, poor terrorist......... boo hoo. Find somebody who cares. Because I don't.

NEWS FLASH!!! Interrogation is not suppose to be a "PLEASANT EXPERIENCE"! It's suppose to be dreadful. These are bad guys!!! Reeeeally bad. Also.... these cats are not going to drown! They will only feel like they are. You, on the other hand, were "really" drowning!! big difference. :whatever:

Why is it when they cut off our citizen's heads they are barbarians but when we torture them we are just fine? If we use the enemy's tactics...we become the enemy.

[Matt]

Especially, when one considers how much of a Jesus freak he is. "Love thy enemy" is obviously lost to him. What a shame that an Atheist (me) is more willing to act like Jesus recommended than a self professing christian (him).


http://steve-parker.org/urandom/2006/dec/gop-vs-jesus.jpg

[Memphis Slim]

http://steve-parker.org/urandom/2006/dec/gop-vs-jesus.jpg


Moderator using an religiously offensive posting?? What is up with you? Why didn't you use Mohammed?

[Matt]

Moderator using an religiously offensive posting?? What is up with you? Why didn't you use Mohammed?

How is it religiously offensive? :huh: And the joke wouldn't work with Mohammed.

[teseract]

Moderator using an religiously offensive posting?? What is up with you? Why didn't you use Mohammed?

Oh my Darwin, Celldogslim converted to Islam !!! :wow:

[The Senator]

Oh my Darwin, Celldogslim converted to Islam !!! :wow:

No, he's just going to create one of those manips, but with Muhammad instead. And instead of it being funny or trying to prove a point, it'll just be racist.

[rdh007]

No, he's just going to create one of those manips, but with Muhammad instead. And instead of it being funny or trying to prove a point, it'll just be racist.
Ha!

Oh, and though I've seen it before, I love that Bush ad. Perhaps Oliver Stone will put it in his movie?

[Matt]

Ha!

Oh, and though I've seen it before, I love that Bush ad. Perhaps Oliver Stone will put it in his movie?

Its an oldie, but definitely still one of the funniest pictures around. I don't get why Slim would want to use Mohammed? That joke just wouldn't make any sense :csad:

[bell110]

You must really hate America.

Here we go again. :whatever:

So you take Ridges' opinion over the other expert who says it's not. Why is that?

Bamboo shoved into your finger nails......electric clamps on your genitals, beaten with lashes.......

That's torture.i

Would you approve of those techniques in a "ticking time-bomb" situation.

You are not drowning. And they were captured on a battlefield.

Captured on the battlefield DEFENDING themselves.

[/URL]

Court throws out Islam-based Gitmo claims

by James Oliphant
A federal appeals court today tossed a lawsuit brought against former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and other officials by four released British prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay, who alleged that they were tortured and denied the right to practice Islam.
The British detainees–Shafiq Rasul, Asif Iqbal, Rhuhel Ahmed and Jamal Al-Harith–spent more than two years in Guantánamo and were repatriated to the U.K. in 2004.
They brought claims under the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a law passed in the 1990s to prevent government interference with religious practices, arguing that officials at Guantanamo actively prevented worship of Islam by, among other things, tossing a copy of the Quran into a toilet.
They also say they were tortured, beaten and humiliated. They had sought $10 million in damages. A federal trial judge dismissed most of the claims saying U.S. officials couldn't be sued for actions taken in wartime, but the religious act claim and some other claims survived. (A story [URL="http://herehttp://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2007/09/exgitmo_detainees_base_lawsuit.html"]here (http://weblogs.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/blog/) in the Tribune took a closer look at the case.)
But in an opinion (http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200801/06-5209a.pdf) released Friday Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson of U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington wrote that the religious freedom act does not apply to the Guantanamo detainees because they are not "persons" for the purposes of U.S law.
The three-judge panel also held that the U.S. officials were immune from the torture claims because, as held by the trial court: “torture is a foreseeable consequence of the military’s detention of suspected enemy combatants.” In other words, the court held that the officials that allegedly engaged in torture did so as part of their assigned duties to interrogate.
And the panel found that, even if torture and religious abuse were illegal, defendants were immune under the Constitution because they could not have reasonably known that detainees at Guantánamo had any constitutional rights.

The detainees were supported in their litigation by a wide range of church groups across the religious spectrum, which were concerned about the government using faith-based humiliation as an interrogation tool.
Interestingly, Judge Janice Rogers Brown, an evangelical, while concurring in the court's opinion, wrote a separate opinion, criticizing the majority for using a definition of person “at odds with its plain meaning.” She wrote, “There is little mystery that a ‘person’ is an individual human being…as distinguished from an animal or thing.” Brown said the opinion “leaves us with the unfortunate and quite dubious distinction of being the only court to declare those held at Guantánamo are not ‘person[s].’ This is a most regrettable holding in a case where plaintiffs have alleged high-level U.S. government officials treated them as less than human."
Eric Lewis, the Washington lawyer who argued the case for the detainees, said in a statement Friday, "It is an awful day for the rule of law and common decency when a court finds that torture is all in a days’ work for the secretary of defense and senior generals."
Lewis said he would appeal the case to the Supreme Court.
Supporting Henderson and Brown in the decision was Judge A. Raymond Randolph, who has consistently sided with the Bush administration in terrorism cases.


As with the Nazis, "just following orders" in no excuse.


Since the DNC Swamp won't ever talk to our soldiers....
Here's a letter from an American servicewoman who served as a Gitmo guard.
"My daughter was in Gitmo for a year as a Master-at- Arms, E4. (10/04-10/05) She was injured several times by the inmates assaulting her physically. In addition, she knew that when she was doing her job by enforcing the rules, she was threatened by the prisoners if she had to touch them. They would get her. They mixed a cocktail of urine, feces, and semen, and let it fester for days until the right moment. They warned her that she was a target and then they got her, she was assaulted several times by loads of crap thrown at her.
She had to undergo shots to prevent what diseases that she was exposed to. I don’t know why we have women guarding men, especially these animals, but that is the policy. My daughter is a tough cookie and can handle herself. In her year there she did not dishonor herself or our country. When she returned home she had a DVD of Gitmo. They made fresh bread every day!! Part of it showed how the chef’s prepared special meals for the prisoners. If a prisoner refused food the guards were happy to sample the Chicken, rice pilaf, yogurt and fresh baked pita bread, while our guys had crap food from the mess or had to buy it from Burger King.
As part of her duties, in the last month she was there, she was assigned to the hospital ward. She had to force feed those a..holes who offed themselves the other day. They were the meanest of the bunch and had to be tied down to get their food. My daughter and other personnel voluntarily submitted themselves to the force feeding procedure also so that they could do it with the least pain for the captives. It was very unpleasant for her but it helped her and others to understand how to participate in it with the least stress for the recipients. The goal was to keep them alive. She feels that the suicides would not have happened on her watch, but it was going to happen eventually. These guys are warriors. By their death they have achieved a military success in the political world. The media marches on."
Another Inconvenient Truth.





Oh, that poor service woman :csad: . If I was being held unlawfully for years, I'd throw **** at my captures too. I'm sure you would too, Slim.

And asking them nicely, "Where's the next attack?" Never works. Nothing is fool proof. But, Water boarding does at least work some times. And if it saves "some" innocent lives, isn't that worth it?
http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:Q4-_7sn_HAkohM:http://pictopia.com/perl/get_image%3Fprovider_id%3D498%26size%3D550x550_mb% 26ptp_photo_id%3D1560447 (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://pictopia.com/perl/get_image%3Fprovider_id%3D498%26size%3D550x550_mb% 26ptp_photo_id%3D1560447&imgrefurl=http://pictopia.com/perl/ptp/observwash/%3Fptp_photo_id%3D1560447&h=285&w=550&sz=113&hl=en&start=22&um=1&tbnid=Q4-_7sn_HAkohM:&tbnh=69&tbnw=133&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dchildren%2Bat%2Bplay%2B%2Bground%2B%2 B%26start%3D20%26ndsp%3D20%26svnum%3D10%26um%3D1%2 6hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4RNWN_enUS210US211%26sa%3DN)htt p://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:bhtGyD8PEBIG3M:http://images.jupiterimages.com/common/detail/18/84/23128418.jpg (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://images.jupiterimages.com/common/detail/18/84/23128418.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.jupiterimages.com/itemDetail.aspx%3FitemID%3D23128418&h=250&w=243&sz=26&hl=en&start=23&um=1&tbnid=bhtGyD8PEBIG3M:&tbnh=111&tbnw=108&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dchildren%2Bat%2Bplay%2B%2Bground%2B%2 B%26start%3D20%26ndsp%3D20%26svnum%3D10%26um%3D1%2 6hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4RNWN_enUS210US211%26sa%3DN)htt p://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:_0-dycjd6v9BpM:http://www.jimwegryn.com/Photos/Mother%2520and%2520child.jpg (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.jimwegryn.com/Photos/Mother%2520and%2520child.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.jimwegryn.com/Photos/Photos.htm&h=817&w=1000&sz=145&hl=en&start=6&um=1&tbnid=_0-dycjd6v9BpM:&tbnh=122&tbnw=149&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dmother%2Band%2Bchild%26svnum%3D10%26u m%3D1%26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4RNWN_enUS210US211%26sa% 3DG)
http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:H0GH0srYvBzvVM:http://www.douglaschapel.org/black_family.bmp (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.douglaschapel.org/black_family.bmp&imgrefurl=http://www.douglaschapel.org/read_bible.htm&h=333&w=500&sz=326&hl=en&start=4&um=1&tbnid=H0GH0srYvBzvVM:&tbnh=87&tbnw=130&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dblack%2Bfamily%26svnum%3D10%26um%3D1% 26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4RNWN_enUS210US211%26sa%3DG)
This is what we are trying to prevent...These are the people they are trying to murder, if they had the chance.
http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:Zk_UD8LxorzTDM:http://www.atomicarchive.com/Effects/Images/WE12.jpg (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.atomicarchive.com/Effects/Images/WE12.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.atomicarchive.com/Effects/effects9.shtml&h=410&w=360&sz=24&hl=en&start=6&um=1&tbnid=Zk_UD8LxorzTDM:&tbnh=125&tbnw=110&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dmushroom%2Bcloud%26svnum%3D10%26um%3D 1%26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4RNWN_enUS210US211%26sa%3DG)
Does that make any sense to you at all??

Fear tactics don't work on me. If you really think a couple of criminals are going to defeat America, you really don't think to highly of us. Which is apparent, because you justify torture.

[cookiva]

And asking them nicely, "Where's the next attack?" Never works. Nothing is fool proof. But, Water boarding does at least work some times. And if it saves "some" innocent lives, isn't that worth it?
http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:Q4-_7sn_HAkohM:http://pictopia.com/perl/get_image%3Fprovider_id%3D498%26size%3D550x550_mb% 26ptp_photo_id%3D1560447 (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://pictopia.com/perl/get_image%3Fprovider_id%3D498%26size%3D550x550_mb% 26ptp_photo_id%3D1560447&imgrefurl=http://pictopia.com/perl/ptp/observwash/%3Fptp_photo_id%3D1560447&h=285&w=550&sz=113&hl=en&start=22&um=1&tbnid=Q4-_7sn_HAkohM:&tbnh=69&tbnw=133&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dchildren%2Bat%2Bplay%2B%2Bground%2B%2 B%26start%3D20%26ndsp%3D20%26svnum%3D10%26um%3D1%2 6hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4RNWN_enUS210US211%26sa%3DN)htt p://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:bhtGyD8PEBIG3M:http://images.jupiterimages.com/common/detail/18/84/23128418.jpg (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://images.jupiterimages.com/common/detail/18/84/23128418.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.jupiterimages.com/itemDetail.aspx%3FitemID%3D23128418&h=250&w=243&sz=26&hl=en&start=23&um=1&tbnid=bhtGyD8PEBIG3M:&tbnh=111&tbnw=108&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dchildren%2Bat%2Bplay%2B%2Bground%2B%2 B%26start%3D20%26ndsp%3D20%26svnum%3D10%26um%3D1%2 6hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4RNWN_enUS210US211%26sa%3DN)htt p://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:_0-dycjd6v9BpM:http://www.jimwegryn.com/Photos/Mother%2520and%2520child.jpg (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.jimwegryn.com/Photos/Mother%2520and%2520child.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.jimwegryn.com/Photos/Photos.htm&h=817&w=1000&sz=145&hl=en&start=6&um=1&tbnid=_0-dycjd6v9BpM:&tbnh=122&tbnw=149&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dmother%2Band%2Bchild%26svnum%3D10%26u m%3D1%26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4RNWN_enUS210US211%26sa% 3DG)
http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:H0GH0srYvBzvVM:http://www.douglaschapel.org/black_family.bmp (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.douglaschapel.org/black_family.bmp&imgrefurl=http://www.douglaschapel.org/read_bible.htm&h=333&w=500&sz=326&hl=en&start=4&um=1&tbnid=H0GH0srYvBzvVM:&tbnh=87&tbnw=130&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dblack%2Bfamily%26svnum%3D10%26um%3D1% 26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4RNWN_enUS210US211%26sa%3DG)
This is what we are trying to prevent...These are the people they are trying to murder, if they had the chance.
http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:Zk_UD8LxorzTDM:http://www.atomicarchive.com/Effects/Images/WE12.jpg (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.atomicarchive.com/Effects/Images/WE12.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.atomicarchive.com/Effects/effects9.shtml&h=410&w=360&sz=24&hl=en&start=6&um=1&tbnid=Zk_UD8LxorzTDM:&tbnh=125&tbnw=110&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dmushroom%2Bcloud%26svnum%3D10%26um%3D 1%26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4RNWN_enUS210US211%26sa%3DG)
Does that make any sense to you at all??

Wow. I knew you we sad, but this post is pathetic. Like everyone else has said, fear tactics dont work. Terrorists dont hate us just for the fun of it. We have invaded their country, and push our beliefs one EVERYONE. Would you do the same thing if people invaded your neighborhood, kill your friends, and torture your family??? Yes, you would.

[LuiECuomo]

Ummm...what about BEFORE Iraq? What about 9/11?

And it's pretty disgusting that you're accusing US of torture since you must have no idea the kind of stuff those monsters do to other human beings like you and I.

[cookiva]

Oh yeah, you mean when we had troops in Iraq still from the Gulf War? Is that what you mean?

[LuiECuomo]

We also had legitimate authority during the Gulf War. And please answer my question about 9/11.

[cookiva]

We also had legitimate authority during the Gulf War. And please answer my question about 9/11.

......

Just because we have the right to do it doesn't mean we should. Just because a 21 year old goes out to drink, doesn't mean he should. It can lead to some problems.

Ummm...what about BEFORE Iraq? What about 9/11?

And it's pretty disgusting that you're accusing US of torture since you must have no idea the kind of stuff those monsters do to other human beings like you and I.

1. What do you mean "What about 9/11? You sound like Giuliani. Oh, 9/11 9/11. What do you mean?

2. Did I ever say that its ok for anyone to torture??? No, I said we shouldnt. We should be the "bigger man" and not torture. Just because they piss on a tree doesn't mean we should.

[LuiECuomo]

Your comparisons hold no weight. I agree Rudy has played up his role in post-9/11 recovery FAR too much, but you really are a delirious fool if you have forgotten about the effects of 9/11. Can you honestly say that those attacks were legitimate and warranted?

[cookiva]

Your comparisons hold no weight. I agree Rudy has played up his role in post-9/11 recovery FAR too much, but you really are a delirious fool if you have forgotten about the effects of 9/11. Can you honestly say that those attacks were legitimate and warranted?


Why would we go to Iraq? There is no link between 9/11 and Iraq. Your comparisons hold no weight if you think that there is a link between the two.

Oh, and answer my question. If you want to act that way, I will do the same.

[LuiECuomo]

I didn't make a connection between Iraq and 9/11.

By your logic, after 9/11, or after the London subway bombings, the U.S. and U.K. would have started committing terrorists attacks against the nations responsible. Right?

And I guess you never said it was okay to torture someone, but in this case, most of everything terrorists are willing to do to us is FAR worse than anything we do to them.

[The Senator]

Your comparisons hold no weight. I agree Rudy has played up his role in post-9/11 recovery FAR too much, but you really are a delirious fool if you have forgotten about the effects of 9/11. Can you honestly say that those attacks were legitimate and warranted?

Yes, we can agree that 9/11 was a horrible tragedy.

We can agree that Al Qaeda deserved to be wiped out because of what they did to our people.

We can agree that 9/11 was the WORST tragedy to ever happen on American soil.

But I cannot agree that we hold no responsibility in the attacks.

We built bases throughout the Middle East. That pissed off many of the "Islamic extremists." But the best part about all this is... we had a chance to prevent it. After the invasion of Afghanistan in the late 1980s, instead of staying there and rebuilding their country, which we single-handedly helped destroy... we let the Taliban rise to power. Instead of giving the Afghanis the money we had promised them to rebuild their government from the ground up, we let a group of fundamentalists take over their country. These fundamentalists gained control of the Afghanistan government, and they funded Al Qaeda.

It took an attack on our soil which killed roughly 3,000 people to make us wake up and realize that we didn't finish the job. It took over a decade for us to do what we had set out to do in the first place, and the only reason it happened was because we were attacked.

And then-- this is the best part-- we didn't even FINISH that job. No, we half-assed it like we did in the 1980s, and then-- get this-- we went into a country which had no connections to the September 11th attacks and scapegoated the entire war efforts on Saddam Hussein. And why did we go after Saddam Hussein? Because as fate has it, we half-assed the Gulf War, too.

So now, not only have we screwed over Afghanistan two times over, but we've done the exact same thing in Iraq.

I have no problem with going after our enemies. But when we repeatedly have the opportunity fix these countries and we repeatedly fail to fix the problems we set out to fix in the first place, it becomes a moot point.

We've had the responsibility to not just be greeted as "liberators," but actually act like liberators and bring true reform to the Middle East. We've failed, time and time again. And we will keep failing until we realize that we can't win, we can't fix these things, and we never will.

For the world's policemen, we sure are doing a sucky job.

[LuiECuomo]

That's all well and good; a lot of it makes sense. But what about the fact that the 9/11 highjackers made a point of targeting INNOCENT CIVILIANS? You may try to argue that we are killing civilians in Iraq, but the difference is, we are not TARGETING them. I think the "fear tactics" figure above is supposed to illustrate the fact that terrorists are happy to blow innocent people away who have done them no ill will or could even defend themselves in the first place.

[cookiva]

I didn't make a connection between Iraq and 9/11.

By your logic, after 9/11, or after the London subway bombings, the U.S. and U.K. would have started committing terrorists attacks against the nations responsible. Right?

And I guess you never said it was okay to torture someone, but in this case, most of everything terrorists are willing to do to us is FAR worse than anything we do to them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definition_of_terrorism

Read that. The definition of terrorist is not what you probably think it is.

The U.S. has committed acts of terrorism before, but we dont consider them terroristic acts, because the US is the best country and could never stoop down to that level. What we are doing in Iraq is basically a terroristic attack. We went in to overthrow a dictator. Thats called a coup d'etat, guerrilla warfare/terrorism 101.

Finally, I still dont think you understand torture. Just because they do it means its ok for EVERYONE to do it??

[cookiva]

That's all well and good; a lot of it makes sense. But what about the fact that the 9/11 highjackers made a point of targeting INNOCENT CIVILIANS? You may try to argue that we are killing civilians in Iraq, but the difference is, we are not TARGETING them. I think the "fear tactics" figure above is supposed to illustrate the fact that terrorists are happy to blow innocent people away who have done them no ill will or could even defend themselves in the first place.

How do you know? Torture makes a man say anything you want them to, so who is to say that innocent men and women are admitting to these acts we want them to admit to.

[LuiECuomo]

QUOTE FROM WIKIPEDIA: It has also been argued that the political use of violent force and weapons that deliberately target or involve civilians.

My point.

[cookiva]

Oh yeah, it has also been argued.

That sure is definite proof. How about you post other statements that show other points of view...

As terrorism is generally understood, it involves the use or threat of violence with the aim of creating fear not only to the victims but among a wide audience.

Do you think that this isn't one of the goals of the US right now?

How about you answer those questions that you love asking I answer....

[LuiECuomo]

Hasn't that been the mindset of about every WAR waged in modern history?

[cookiva]

To install fear in ones enemies? Yes! IM GLAD YOU REALIZE THAT!!! War is terroristic in its own nature. The word terrorism is used to describe everyones enemies. Its used to make one sound better. Have you ever wondered why we call them terrorists, yet they call us the same thing??

[teseract]

No, he's just going to create one of those manips, but with Muhammad instead. And instead of it being funny or trying to prove a point, it'll just be racist.
you killed my joke :(

[teseract]

I didn't make a connection between Iraq and 9/11.

By your logic, after 9/11, or after the London subway bombings, the U.S. and U.K. would have started committing terrorists attacks against the nations responsible. Right?

And I guess you never said it was okay to torture someone, but in this case, most of everything terrorists are willing to do to us is FAR worse than anything we do to them.

Yes, and that makes them the BAD guys, noe we should be the GOOD guys, not the bad ones.

[Matt]

QUOTE FROM WIKIPEDIA: It has also been argued that the political use of violent force and weapons that deliberately target or involve civilians.

My point.

Did you just use Wikipedia as a source in a debate? :lmao:

[LuiECuomo]

To install fear in ones enemies? Yes! IM GLAD YOU REALIZE THAT!!! War is terroristic in its own nature. The word terrorism is used to describe everyones enemies. Its used to make one sound better. Have you ever wondered why we call them terrorists, yet they call us the same thing??

I understand this. It still doesn't help the fact that they are the ones SPECIFICALLY TARGETING innocent civilians. 100% of every person I know, liberal and conservative, would include "civilian targets" somewhere in his or her definition of terrorism.

[LuiECuomo]

Did you just use Wikipedia as a source in a debate? :lmao:

Did you notice that cookiva did, as well?

[The Senator]

Did you just use Wikipedia as a source in a debate? :lmao:

Drat, you beat me to it.

Then again, cookiva used it, too...

[The Senator]

No one should be using Wikipedia, unless you want to find information about a city or a person. And even then, you ought to find another source to make sure the morons editing those Wikipedia pages didn't insert something false or completely exaggerated.

But my best advice is... just don't use it.

End of story.

[LuiECuomo]

Exactly what I said. I'm sure you liberals wouldn't want to be "unfair". :D

[bell110]

That's all well and good; a lot of it makes sense. But what about the fact that the 9/11 highjackers made a point of targeting INNOCENT CIVILIANS? You may try to argue that we are killing civilians in Iraq, but the difference is, we are not TARGETING them. I think the "fear tactics" figure above is supposed to illustrate the fact that terrorists are happy to blow innocent people away who have done them no ill will or could even defend themselves in the first place.

We do a better job at killing their innocent civilians.

Plus, 9/11 was a criminal act, not an act of war.

[The Senator]

We do a better job at killing their innocent civilians.

Plus, 9/11 was a criminal act, not an act of war.

I think we've killed over half a million civilians since we invaded Iraq.

That doesn't count Afghanistan.

So I think that begs an interesting question: Are American lives worth more than the lives of those in the Middle East?

[LuiECuomo]

No, it was an act of "war". But then again, a lot of the rhetoric in this thread is that words are just words, quite relative and very interchangeable.

[The Senator]

You can argue that 9/11 was an act of war, too. So then, are our citizens' lives just as irrelevant as those who have been killed abroad?

What if the insurgency infiltrated the United States and led an army against our citizens? Would it be okay for them to do that?

Because I don't see why its okay for us to go over there, invade their countries, overthrow their governments and kill their people, but it's a travesty if they walk into an American shopping mall and detonate an IED.

[LuiECuomo]

Militarily, they initiated it with 9/11. I'm not trying to bring Iraq into this argument.

[The Senator]

Militarily, they initiated it with 9/11. I'm not trying to bring Iraq into this argument.

But I am.

So I want to know if it's okay for us to invade a country, topple their governments, and kill their people, but if it's wrong for our "enemies" to do the exact same to us.

I want to know where we draw the line, and where that line begins to blur.

Because us going into Iraq has arguably had more ramifications than when Al Qaeda destroyed the Twin Towers and a section of the Pentagon. We rebuilt that section of the Pentagon, and we're rebuilding the World Trade Center.

We haven't rebuilt the Iraqi government, we haven't rebuilt the infrastructure, we haven't been greeted as liberators, and we haven't finished what was supposed to take us only a few months.

So I want to know, if the Iraqis invaded the United States, would they be justified in killing our civilians, just as we have done to them? Because the civilian casualties in Iraq have far exceeded the number of Americans killed in all terrorist attacks combined.

[LuiECuomo]

Don't get me wrong, jman, I'm not agreeing with the way we went about invading Iraq. We need a President who WILL help rebuild Iraq's government and infrastructure.

And look harder, for you will find that many Iraqis HAVE greeted the U.S. as liberators.

[bell110]

No, it was an act of "war". But then again, a lot of the rhetoric in this thread is that words are just words, quite relative and very interchangeable.

Quite the contrary, it's the republicans who mix their words. Torture isn't torture if americans do it. 9/11 was an act of WAR, then we went to WAR with a soverign country, but since congress can only declair WAR, we are not technically at WAR, it was a Military Operation, and those people we capture on the battlefield aren't Prisoners of War, they are Unlawful Enemy Combatants, so aren't protected under the Geveva Convention.

Militarily, they initiated it with 9/11. I'm not trying to bring Iraq into this argument.

9/11 was a criminal act. There was no government backing what they did.

[The Senator]

In my opinion, many is greater than 50%.

Last I read, only 30% or so felt the U.S. presence in Iraq was beneficial.

The other 70% had no water, no electricity, no employment... I'd be a bit opposed to this little war and the Americans just a wee bit if that's what happened to me and my family.

[cookiva]

No, it was an act of "war". But then again, a lot of the rhetoric in this thread is that words are just words, quite relative and very interchangeable.


How was 9/11 an act of war? Proof plzthankyou?

And also, what is this???

Ummm...what about BEFORE Iraq? What about 9/11?

And it's pretty disgusting that you're accusing US of torture since you must have no idea the kind of stuff those monsters do to other human beings like you and I.


Isn't that you talking about both 9/11 and Iraq? So why did you say this??

Militarily, they initiated it with 9/11. I'm not trying to bring Iraq into this argument.

[LuiECuomo]

People who making statements about the Mid-East. Last I checked, both Afghanistan and Iraq were part of the Mid-East.

[cookiva]

No one should be using Wikipedia, unless you want to find information about a city or a person. And even then, you ought to find another source to make sure the morons editing those Wikipedia pages didn't insert something false or completely exaggerated.

But my best advice is... just don't use it.

End of story.


Are you saying that the statements that I posted from the article are not true of "terrorism"? So what, wiki? I know that other articles are changed every five minutes, but terrorism doesnt seem to be one that would be altered too often, and everyone here should agree with that.

[cookiva]

People who making statements about the Mid-East. Last I checked, both Afghanistan and Iraq were part of the Mid-East.

???????

:huh:

[The Senator]

Are you saying that the statements that I posted from the article are not true of "terrorism"? So what, wiki? I know that other articles are changed every five minutes, but terrorism doesnt seem to be one that would be altered too often, and everyone here should agree with that.

I don't think it should be used, and I've only used it once to direct a user to Sherrod Brown's profile. My point is, it's academically unreliable.

Other sites debate the definition of terrorism more thoroughly, and are fact checked.

Here's what I would have used:

http://www.terrorism-research.com/

Not criticizing you. I personally think that while Wikipedia has tons of information... only 70% of it can be considered fact.

[cookiva]

And like I said, I know that. I figured that a term as concrete as terror/ism, it could be used as a good basis for a basic definition.

Sherrod Brown ftw, btw...

[Mr Sparkle]

Poor, poor terrorist......... boo hoo. Find somebody who cares. Because I don't.

NEWS FLASH!!! Interrogation is not suppose to be a "PLEASANT EXPERIENCE"! It's suppose to be dreadful. These are bad guys!!! Reeeeally bad. Also.... these cats are not going to drown! They will only feel like they are. You, on the other hand, were "really" drowning!! big difference. :whatever:


neither is being a POW, so I guess you and the VC back in NAM would've gotten along splendidly, ha, I love how someone can be outraged about a group's "inhumanity" and then do their darnedest to act exactly the same.
also, there's no way of knowing all the people captured are terrorists is there? that's the nature of asymmetric warfare.

[Mr Sparkle]

maybe Tom Ridge thinks THIS is waterboarding.

http://image.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Travel/Pix/pictures/2007/04/20/wakeboarding_ChrisColeGetty460.jpg

:huh::huh::huh: