Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I'm sure KSM's interrogators could tell you how well it works and how much info they got from the dirtbag. Far from useless info.
My logic says that if waterboarding will get the info to prevent another 9-11, save American lives and kill the dirtbags then I'm all for it.
Your logic still seems to equate Terrorism with criminal activity. You have apparantly gone back to the pre-9-11 mindset. Thats where we differ big time.
If you want to call waterboarding torture, then feel free. Opinions are like assholes. Everybody's got one. Mine just differs from yours.
If Terrorism is NOT criminal activity, then it is military activity. Do you want those we have captured treated as POWs with NO trial at all?
And the law as shown by Maineman pretty clearly defines waterboarding as torture. We tried and convicted Japanese officers for doing that very thing after WWII.
They aren't even POW's. They are terrorist. They are enemy combatants. They do not recognize or follow the Geneva Convention. Why then should we?
If caught they should be waterboarded. We get all the info we can from them and then shoot them. Definetly works for me. This is a language they would understand. After all they are all so eager to sacrifice themselves for Allah. We should do the humanitarian thing and speed them all on their way.
Can't say as I give a shit about the Japanese in WWII. That was 60 years ago. We are living in the here and now with dirtbags who have no problem killing every living thing that they can. Women, kids, doesn't make any difference to these dirtbags.
If it makes you feel better to call waterboarding torture, feel fee. I call it a usefull took to gather info and save lives. Opinons. We all have em.
Bumping this question for Walt.
__________________________________
"I can torture who ever I please" - alleged Military Veteran Wicked Jester 2/23/10
I have a much better question.
Suppose a terrorist has critical intelligence to stop a terrorist attack of a plane into a Los Angeles building and your entire family will be in that building at that time?
All other measures to get the information have failed. In fact, the terrorist when asked about terrorist attacks simply responded "soon you will know". The terrorist is taunting you.
Do you give the okay to waterboard that terrorist to get that information, or do you take the route of I don't want to add any discomfort to the terrorist even though my entire family will now be murdered as a result?
Are you seriously stating that that is why some of us want to take the Constitutional, the Moral route when it comes to torture? Because we don't want to discomfort suspects?
How can I take you or your argument seriously when you say stuff like that?
________________
"I can torture who ever I please" - alleged Military Veteran Wicked Jester 2/23/10
Mcveigh was caught and had information is what I wrote. I should have also added you knew he had the information. Not "erroneously" thinking "maybe" he had information. Someone you knew had information that could save lives. I am not talking about dragging somebody off the street. During last years campaign. Obama said if he had "actionable intelligence", he would go into Pakistan, with or without their permission. All that were there cheered. He would have done this to kill terrorists even though it violated the law. To me that is one of the good things he said.
I would like to see you guys in action. if their was a bomb in your loved ones work place or school and such a person who you knew had information on how to stop it was placed in front of you. If you would do noting. I feel sorry for you.
How do you know that every single person that has been waterboarded by our government was NOT "dragged in off the street"?
How do you know that every single time we waterboard someone, we've got the right suspects?
How do you know that every single time we waterboard someone, we get valid info?
How do you know that the waterboarders aren't known liars and misrepresenters like Wicked Jester?
________________
"I can torture who ever I please" - alleged Military Veteran Wicked Jester 2/23/10
Well let's see.
If the CIA asks them about terrorist attacks, and they respond by saying "soon you will know" that could be an indication that they aren't innocent victims
That's what actually happened.
Heard of Glenn Becks book "Arguing with Idiots"?I have a much better question.
Suppose a terrorist has critical intelligence to stop a terrorist attack of a plane into a Los Angeles building and your entire family will be in that building at that time?
All other measures to get the information have failed. In fact, the terrorist when asked about terrorist attacks simply responded "soon you will know". The terrorist is taunting you.
Do you give the okay to waterboard that terrorist to get that information, or do you take the route of I don't want to add any discomfort to the terrorist even though my entire family will now be murdered as a result?
Are you seriously stating that that is why some of us want to take the Constitutional, the Moral route when it comes to torture? Because we don't want to discomfort suspects?
How can I take you or your argument seriously when you say stuff like that?
________________
"I can torture who ever I please" - alleged Military Veteran Wicked Jester 2/23/10
For you some odd reason you think your position is moral? It's not. It's reprehensible.
What did the waterboarding of the 3 terrorists lead too?:
1) The thwarting of a plane to crash a plane into a LA bulding
and
2) Stopping the building and exploding a "dirty bomb" in Washington D.C.
Let's say your way prevailed.
How many people will have suffered torture in the first thwarted terrorist attack?
All the people in the plane would be hijacked? They then would be murdered.
Then there are the people in the Los Angeles building dying slowly from fire. One of the most heinous and most painful ways to go. Of course, there could be the people who jump off the buildings rather than be consumed by fire.
Yup, it's really moral for our leaders to let that happen.
Now let's take the "dirty bomb" explosion attempted attack.
How many people who have suffered the anguish of radiation posioning?
How many people would have a terrible agonizing death because the CIA was unwilling to do what needed to be done to stop this from happening?
No sir. Your position of letting these attacks occur is not moral. It's heinous and revolting.
She acts as though KSM was just some guy we pulled off the street.How do you know that every single person that has been waterboarded by our government was NOT "dragged in off the street"?
How do you know that every single time we waterboard someone, we've got the right suspects?
How do you know that every single time we waterboard someone, we get valid info?
How do you know that the waterboarders aren't known liars and misrepresenters like Wicked Jester?
________________
"I can torture who ever I please" - alleged Military Veteran Wicked Jester 2/23/10
Well let's see.
If the CIA asks them about terrorist attacks, and they respond by saying "soon you will know" that could be an indication that they aren't innocent victims
That's what actually happened.
She is obviously clueless as to what was already known of him.
Like I said, buddy, arguing with an idiot!
Heard of Glenn Becks book "Arguing with Idiots"?Are you seriously stating that that is why some of us want to take the Constitutional, the Moral route when it comes to torture? Because we don't want to discomfort suspects?
How can I take you or your argument seriously when you say stuff like that?
________________
"I can torture who ever I please" - alleged Military Veteran Wicked Jester 2/23/10
For you some odd reason you think your position is moral? It's not. It's reprehensible.
What did the waterboarding of the 3 terrorists lead too?:
1) The thwarting of a plane to crash a plane into a LA bulding
and
2) Stopping the building and exploding a "dirty bomb" in Washington D.C.
Let's say your way prevailed.
How many people will have suffered torture in the first thwarted terrorist attack?
All the people in the plane would be hijacked? They then would be murdered.
Then there are the people in the Los Angeles building dying slowly from fire. One of the most heinous and most painful ways to go. Of course, there could be the people who jump off the buildings rather than be consumed by fire.
Yup, it's really moral for our leaders to let that happen.
Now let's take the "dirty bomb" explosion attempted attack.
How many people who have suffered the anguish of radiation posioning?
How many people would have a terrible agonizing death because the CIA was unwilling to do what needed to be done to stop this from happening?
No sir. Your position of letting these attacks occur is not moral. It's heinous and revolting.
You're arguing with one of the biggest.
I'm sure KSM's interrogators could tell you how well it works and how much info they got from the dirtbag. Far from useless info.
My logic says that if waterboarding will get the info to prevent another 9-11, save American lives and kill the dirtbags then I'm all for it.
Your logic still seems to equate Terrorism with criminal activity. You have apparantly gone back to the pre-9-11 mindset. Thats where we differ big time.
If you want to call waterboarding torture, then feel free. Opinions are like assholes. Everybody's got one. Mine just differs from yours.
If Terrorism is NOT criminal activity, then it is military activity. Do you want those we have captured treated as POWs with NO trial at all?
And the law as shown by Maineman pretty clearly defines waterboarding as torture. We tried and convicted Japanese officers for doing that very thing after WWII.
They aren't even POW's. They are terrorist. They are enemy combatants. They do not recognize or follow the Geneva Convention. Why then should we?
If caught they should be waterboarded. We get all the info we can from them and then shoot them. Definetly works for me. This is a language they would understand. After all they are all so eager to sacrifice themselves for Allah. We should do the humanitarian thing and speed them all on their way.
Can't say as I give a shit about the Japanese in WWII. That was 60 years ago. We are living in the here and now with dirtbags who have no problem killing every living thing that they can. Women, kids, doesn't make any difference to these dirtbags.
If it makes you feel better to call waterboarding torture, feel fee. I call it a usefull took to gather info and save lives. Opinons. We all have em.
Heard of Glenn Becks book "Arguing with Idiots"?Are you seriously stating that that is why some of us want to take the Constitutional, the Moral route when it comes to torture? Because we don't want to discomfort suspects?
How can I take you or your argument seriously when you say stuff like that?
________________
"I can torture who ever I please" - alleged Military Veteran Wicked Jester 2/23/10
For you some odd reason you think your position is moral? It's not. It's reprehensible.
What did the waterboarding of the 3 terrorists lead too?:
1) The thwarting of a plane to crash a plane into a LA bulding
and
2) Stopping the building and exploding a "dirty bomb" in Washington D.C.
Let's say your way prevailed.
How many people will have suffered torture in the first thwarted terrorist attack?
All the people in the plane would be hijacked? They then would be murdered.
Then there are the people in the Los Angeles building dying slowly from fire. One of the most heinous and most painful ways to go. Of course, there could be the people who jump off the buildings rather than be consumed by fire.
Yup, it's really moral for our leaders to let that happen.
Now let's take the "dirty bomb" explosion attempted attack.
How many people who have suffered the anguish of radiation posioning?
How many people would have a terrible agonizing death because the CIA was unwilling to do what needed to be done to stop this from happening?
No sir. Your position of letting these attacks occur is not moral. It's heinous and revolting.
You're arguing with one of the biggest.
Well, according to the supreme court, no laws were broken so, once again our resident idiot is talking out her fat ass again.Anyone else here shocked as I am to see so-called military veterans voting to ignore our laws, our Constitution?
Last time that happened, we ended up with this, I believe:
___________________
"I can torture who ever I please" - alleged Military Veteran Wicked Jester 2/23/10
Well, according to the supreme court, no laws were broken so, once again our resident idiot is talking out her fat ass again.Anyone else here shocked as I am to see so-called military veterans voting to ignore our laws, our Constitution?
Last time that happened, we ended up with this, I believe:
___________________
"I can torture who ever I please" - alleged Military Veteran Wicked Jester 2/23/10
How's those Bush war crime trials treatin' ya'?
Fuckin' dumbass!
Heard of Glenn Becks book "Arguing with Idiots"?Are you seriously stating that that is why some of us want to take the Constitutional, the Moral route when it comes to torture? Because we don't want to discomfort suspects?
How can I take you or your argument seriously when you say stuff like that?
________________
"I can torture who ever I please" - alleged Military Veteran Wicked Jester 2/23/10
For you some odd reason you think your position is moral? It's not. It's reprehensible.
What did the waterboarding of the 3 terrorists lead too?:
1) The thwarting of a plane to crash a plane into a LA bulding
and
2) Stopping the building and exploding a "dirty bomb" in Washington D.C.
Let's say your way prevailed.
How many people will have suffered torture in the first thwarted terrorist attack?
All the people in the plane would be hijacked? They then would be murdered.
Then there are the people in the Los Angeles building dying slowly from fire. One of the most heinous and most painful ways to go. Of course, there could be the people who jump off the buildings rather than be consumed by fire.
Yup, it's really moral for our leaders to let that happen.
Now let's take the "dirty bomb" explosion attempted attack.
How many people who have suffered the anguish of radiation posioning?
How many people would have a terrible agonizing death because the CIA was unwilling to do what needed to be done to stop this from happening?
No sir. Your position of letting these attacks occur is not moral. It's heinous and revolting.
You're arguing with one of the biggest.
Heard of Glenn Becks book "Arguing with Idiots"?For you some odd reason you think your position is moral? It's not. It's reprehensible.
What did the waterboarding of the 3 terrorists lead too?:
1) The thwarting of a plane to crash a plane into a LA bulding
and
2) Stopping the building and exploding a "dirty bomb" in Washington D.C.
Let's say your way prevailed.
How many people will have suffered torture in the first thwarted terrorist attack?
All the people in the plane would be hijacked? They then would be murdered.
Then there are the people in the Los Angeles building dying slowly from fire. One of the most heinous and most painful ways to go. Of course, there could be the people who jump off the buildings rather than be consumed by fire.
Yup, it's really moral for our leaders to let that happen.
Now let's take the "dirty bomb" explosion attempted attack.
How many people who have suffered the anguish of radiation posioning?
How many people would have a terrible agonizing death because the CIA was unwilling to do what needed to be done to stop this from happening?
No sir. Your position of letting these attacks occur is not moral. It's heinous and revolting.
You're arguing with one of the biggest.
Actually my wife bought me the book, I didn't read it yet.
I got a great book for you "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand.
She acts as though KSM was just some guy we pulled off the street.Well let's see.
If the CIA asks them about terrorist attacks, and they respond by saying "soon you will know" that could be an indication that they aren't innocent victims
That's what actually happened.
She is obviously clueless as to what was already known of him.
Like I said, buddy, arguing with an idiot!
I agree. Like the CIA randomly picks arabs to waterboard
I'll check it out.Heard of Glenn Becks book "Arguing with Idiots"?For you some odd reason you think your position is moral? It's not. It's reprehensible.
What did the waterboarding of the 3 terrorists lead too?:
1) The thwarting of a plane to crash a plane into a LA bulding
and
2) Stopping the building and exploding a "dirty bomb" in Washington D.C.
Let's say your way prevailed.
How many people will have suffered torture in the first thwarted terrorist attack?
All the people in the plane would be hijacked? They then would be murdered.
Then there are the people in the Los Angeles building dying slowly from fire. One of the most heinous and most painful ways to go. Of course, there could be the people who jump off the buildings rather than be consumed by fire.
Yup, it's really moral for our leaders to let that happen.
Now let's take the "dirty bomb" explosion attempted attack.
How many people who have suffered the anguish of radiation posioning?
How many people would have a terrible agonizing death because the CIA was unwilling to do what needed to be done to stop this from happening?
No sir. Your position of letting these attacks occur is not moral. It's heinous and revolting.
You're arguing with one of the biggest.
Actually my wife bought me the book, I didn't read it yet.
I got a great book for you "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand.
Why would you think that they are one dimensional?
Um, because they are. Even in HS I could pick up on that.
Read the book and you will notice it too.
