Posting Towards Gomorrah - Page 130

Spanky · 09-21-2006, 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by taxwonk
Sometimes, I wonder about you, Spanky.

Its good to know I am in your thoughts.

Shape Shifter · 09-21-2006, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spanky
Its good to know I am in your thoughts.

I thought one of your arguments for going into Iraq is that SH tortured people.

eta:

Secret_Agent_Man · 09-21-2006, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
ummm, you realize we meant "accountable" and "responsible" to the American people, right?

Preecisely, Hank.

S_A_M

(The fact that we can agree so often shows the indefiniteness of the English language.)

:butt:

Secret_Agent_Man · 09-21-2006, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spanky
I just don't understand why liberals insist that morality has to be based on overarching general platitutdes without exceptions.

Have you ever even been inside a church?

S_A_M

Hank Chinaski · 09-21-2006, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
I thought one of your arguments for going into Iraq is that SH tortured people.

eta:

You don't think right. Have you ever held a position of responsibility in a company- how's that company doing?

Secret_Agent_Man · 09-21-2006, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
You don't think right. Have you ever held a position of responsibility in a company- how's that company doing?

By that standard, he could be our next President . . .

S_A_M

Sidd Finch · 09-21-2006, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
helpful to get information- agree?

Absolutely.

It's especially good if you're not picky about the information being true. See, e.g., the false confession our Syrian brethren extracted for us from a Canadian citizen.

Ah, working with Syria to torture prisoners. The sunlight of democracy shines through the Middle East.

Spanky · 09-21-2006, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
You skipped a couple of steps. Typical.

The Canadians fucked up and gave us bad information.

Then we grabbed an innocent man (probably without any independent investigation) and -- without any sort of process or meaningful review -- "rendered"his ass off to Syria.

Why did we ship him off to Syria? Perhaps so he could enjoy the local couscous during his interrogation? Or, was it because we expected the Syrians to peel him like a grape?

How can you say that this is not blame-worthy? It is a prime example of why I oppose the practice of extraordinary rendition.

What happened to this guy was tragic, and was a royal screw up, and if I were a Canadian I would not be happy. They really need to figure out why they gave him to post 9-11 American authorities saying he was a terrorist. But as a Canadian citizen he is their responsiblity. They washed their hands of him and said he was terrorist.

If they did this to an American citizen then we would have to figure out how the hell this happened. But if the Canadians tell us one of their citizens is a terrorist and deal with it, why would we assume that they have screwed up. Why would we double check their conclusion on one of their citizens.

And if we were going to start second guessing the validity of legal processes of other countrys, I would think Canada would be last on our list. If Russia says he is a terrorist, we double check, but the Canadians? Who would of thought?

Quote:

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
If the Bush Adminstration had its way, neither would this fellow. Or you, if they snatched you up at an airport.

S_A_M

This is simply not true.

Shape Shifter · 09-21-2006, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
You don't think right. Have you ever held a position of responsibility in a company- how's that company doing?

Um, no criminal charges were ever filed. Why do you ask?

Sidd Finch · 09-21-2006, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spanky
Brian Ross the ABC News Chief Investigative Correspondent was on Fox. He said that he has conclusively substantiated facts that torture or strong interrogative techniques have thwarted terrorist plots. He had absolutely no doubt that such techniques had obtained information that had saved lives. Specifically, Colleed Sheik Mohammed gave up at least fourteen plots because of coercive interrogation techniques (Water boarding) used against him. The most important was a plot against a tower in Los Angeles that would have cost thousands of lives was thwarted because of information he gave up under coercive techniques.

The Secret Police in Pakistan used torture to get the information that when passed on to British officials enabled them to stop the recent London plane plots.

Brian Ross also confirmed that many Generals deny torture works to protect the image of the Army. But he has information that the army has used coercive techniques and that such techniques have produced important information.

I vote that they use water boarding whenever they think it is necessary. I would also argue that it would have been immoral not to use coercive techniques against Sheik Mohammed to get that information.

Next time you feel the urge to criticize Ty for relying on sources that he has not personally interviewed, finger-printed, and given a proctology exam to, please remember this post.

Though I guess if he said he "conclusively substantiated" something, and he said it on Fox, then you don't need to know who his sources were.

SlaveNoMore · 09-21-2006, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Spanky
What happened to this guy was tragic, and was a royal screw up, and if I were a Canadian I would not be happy. They really need to figure out why they gave him to post 9-11 American authorities saying he was a terrorist. But as a Canadian citizen he is their responsiblity. They washed their hands of him and said he was terrorist.

If they did this to an American citizen then we would have to figure out how the hell this happened. But if the Canadians tell us one of their citizens is a terrorist and deal with it, why would we assume that they have screwed up. Why would we double check their conclusion on one of their citizens.

And if we were going to start second guessing the validity of legal processes of other countrys, I would think Canada would be last on our list. If Russia says he is a terrorist, we double check, but the Canadians? Who would of thought?

:td:

Spanky · 09-21-2006, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
I thought one of your arguments for going into Iraq is that SH tortured people.

eta:

He tortured innocent people. I really doubt that Saddam Hussein tortured anyone so that he could get information to save innocent lives. If he did that would have been fine. However, he tortured political prisoners. People who should have rights, and did nothing to justify having their rights taken away.

If we critisize Saddam Hussein for jailing innocent people, does that mean in order for us not to be hypocritical, we have to empty all our prisons? Following yours and Taxwonks logic, we would have to.

Penske_Account · 09-21-2006, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sidd Finch

Though I guess if he said he "conclusively substantiated" something, and he said it on Fox, then you don't need to know who his sources were.

Sure, as long as Fox doesn't hire famed NYTimes reporter Jayson Blair or WaPo's Pulitzer prise winning Janette Cooke.

taxwonk · 09-21-2006, 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spanky
He tortured innocent people. I really doubt that Saddam Hussein tortured anyone so that he could get information to save innocent lives. If he did that would have been fine. However, he tortured political prisoners. People who should have rights, and did nothing to justify having their rights taken away.

If we critisize Saddam Hussein for jailing innocent people, does that mean in order for us not to be hypocritical, we have to empty all our prisons? Following yours and Taxwonks logic, we would have to.

Innocent people like that Syrian dude we sent off to be tortured by proxy? You know, the one who did nothing to justify having his rights taken away? Like that?

And that second paragraph, where the fuck does that come from? Do you really think anybody's not going to see clearly that you're just talking out your ass?

Hank Chinaski · 09-21-2006, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Absolutely.

It's especially good if you're not picky about the information being true. See, e.g., the false confession our Syrian brethren extracted for us from a Canadian citizen.

Ah, working with Syria to torture prisoners. The sunlight of democracy shines through the Middle East.

STP. i had quit the board. Now you draw me back in?