Dick Cheney Blasts Obama

[HICKMAN]

Come blast this ******* with me!!!

YouTube - Response to Dick Cheney's Speech

Jackasses like this have no clue....

 

[HICKMAN]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLy06gR9kHo]YouTube - Democrats knew about Water-Boarding (Torture) and yet Remained Quiet - Glenn Beck Exposes[/ame]

 

[redneckmedic]

An I the only one who is being completely embarassed by this administration and the distractions they have?

 

[ATF Consumer]

Not that I'm against water-boarding, but if it is an effective method to gain valuable information to possibly prevent crimes or find out information about an existing crime...why doesn't the US use this tactic on criminals who refuse to comply with the courts to tell the truth?
Why not use it on the Natalie Holloway case? Why not use it to find out who the thug bought his drugs from?
If it's not torture, then our system should implement it to make us safer, no?
Now think about the power of our current government...and you have been detained because you have that Gadsden flag flying...

 

[Crystalship1]

An I the only one who is being completely embarassed by this administration and the distractions they have?

I'm pretty sure there's only a few that arent.

 

[Jeremiah]

I think the part of the problemn the last ten-15 years was terminology, yes we quit using facts. yes we have done lots of terrible things but we keep making new terms for things to make them sound more anemic and people won't look into them,

IED (improvised explosive device) - bomb? I always thought we called bombs, bombs regardless of who made tham or how?
'
Waterboarding? supposed to be a tourture but sounds just like a water sport.

I think if we got back to calling things what they are people would then start to ask fo the details, instead we use "happy" terms and most people let it go in one ear and out the other just like the rest of the "news" they watch every night, to stay informed.

 

[redneckmedic]

Waterboarding? supposed to be a tourture but sounds just like a water sport.

Water boarding, Practice by Springbreakers since 1979!!​

 

[citizenvain]

Not that I'm against water-boarding, but if it is an effective method to gain valuable information to possibly prevent crimes or find out information about an existing crime...why doesn't the US use this tactic on criminals who refuse to comply with the courts to tell the truth?
Why not use it on the Natalie Holloway case? Why not use it to find out who the thug bought his drugs from?
If it's not torture, then our system should implement it to make us safer, no?
Now think about the power of our current government...and you have been detained because you have that Gadsden flag flying...

I'll take a stab at this. I don't think waterboarding is horribly effective on some levels, as many would admit/confess anything even if they had no clue. I believe it is only effective in very specific instances, and I trust the CIA to know this better than me.

And another thing, I would be against waterboarding any US CITIZEN by our government and any soldier fighting for their COUNTRY, as that is Geneva conventions right? That is where I think Bush was coming from, these terrorists are not fighting for a country, do not represent a homeland, do not wear uniforms (geneva conventions again I believe). They do NOT follow any rules/laws of warefare and represent no country, so therefore they should not be afforded the same rights and respect we would give captured soldiers on a battlefield if were engaged against a COUNTRY.

Terrorists and pirates captured at sea, deserve no rights to our constitution in my opinion and should be at the mercy of our military and not afforded the same protections as an American citizen. EVER! These are people willing to blow themsevles up, their women and children to KILL us. Why the ACLU and other groups want to protect them is beyond me.

 

[redneckmedic]

I believe it is only effective in very specific instances, and I trust the CIA to know this better than me.

Remember Waterboarding is what the CIA admitted to ............ doesn't really matter what they did, its none of our business!

And another thing, I would be against waterboarding any US CITIZEN by our government and any soldier fighting for their COUNTRY

Hmmmm funny thing WE ACTUALLY USE WATERBOARDING IN OUR SERE TRAINING IN OUR TROOPS!!!!!!!!

Waterboarding: A SERE-ing Experience for Tens of Thousands of US Military Personnel - HUMAN EVENTS

 

[redneckmedic]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5_wUObzb4U]YouTube - Waterboarding in Popular Culture: "GI Jane" (1997)[/ame]

 

[citizenvain]

Hmmmm funny thing WE ACTUALLY USE WATERBOARDING IN OUR SERE TRAINING IN OUR TROOPS!!!!!!!!

I think that apples and oranges though. They are getting the needed training that could save their lives or others, and signed up for the military to endure such training. But if you're trying to say it can't be that bad to waterboard terrorists for information, then I'm with you. I would just hate to see it done against Americans here for the normal run of the mill criminial proceedings.

However (as an example), if someone knows when and where there is a dirty bomb is to get deployed and there is more than circumstantial proof that this person has this info, then by all means, waterboard them, beat them, do what ever it takes to save lives. And I mean WHATEVER it takes.

 

[rmcrob]

I'm offering a trade, but no offers so far.

Fair Trade The Upward Way Press

 

[redneckmedic]

However (as an example), if someone knows when and where there is a dirty bomb is to get deployed and there is more than circumstantial proof that this person has this info, then by all means, waterboard them, beat them, do what ever it takes to save lives. And I mean WHATEVER it takes.

Right, I think with different words we are in agreement. Although effective, not the worst treatment out there. Either way I will say again, none of the publics business. I believe that there are political movements everyday that would **** off the left as a part of a global homeostasis, and its none of our damn business!!!

 

[henktermaat]

Cheney still uses the constitution as a door mat, he used the words foolish and reckless? Wow, he sure was calling the kettle black.

How does he still use the "constitution as a door mat"?

 

[redneckmedic]

How does he still use the "constitution as a door mat"?

Some people just make up sh!t as they go, I believe there was a thread here earlier that talked about false logic, simular, but not the same. If it sounds good it must be true! Obama is a pro at this

I can make a firm pledge, under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.

I don't take a dime of their [lobbyist] money, and when I am president, they won't find a job in my White House.

I found this national debt, doubled, wrapped in a big bow waiting for me as I stepped into the Oval Office.

I think when you spread the wealth around it's good for everybody.

 

[ATF Consumer]

I don't think waterboarding is horribly effective on some levels, as many would admit/confess anything even if they had no clue. I believe it is only effective in very specific instances, and I trust the CIA to know this better than me.

And another thing, I would be against waterboarding any US CITIZEN by our government and any soldier fighting for their COUNTRY, as that is Geneva conventions right?

But if you're trying to say it can't be that bad to waterboard terrorists for information, then I'm with you. I would just hate to see it done against Americans here for the normal run of the mill criminial proceedings.

However (as an example), if someone knows when and where there is a dirty bomb is to get deployed and there is more than circumstantial proof that this person has this info, then by all means, water-board them, beat them, do what ever it takes to save lives. And I mean WHATEVER it takes.

First you say it isn't horribly effective and shouldn't be done to ANY US citizen, then you make exceptions later for specific reasons and want to totally violate their rights as a US citizen...have I got that right?

 

[citizenvain]

First you say it isn't horribly effective and shouldn't be done to ANY US citizen, then you make exceptions later for specific reasons and want to totally violate their rights as a US citizen...have I got that right?

I guess you are right. I think it has to be done on a case by case business and by telling the CIA they can not use certain tatics, etc. we limit their effectivness.

However, I would think waterboarding a murder suspect would be extreme, but waterboarding or anything else to someone who has knowledge of an act that is going to take several people is probably within reason. I just think a lot of people would confess to crimes they didn't commit just to end what ever they were subjected, however if you have someone who you know knows something like the example above, and you need that info, you have to have options.

I guess to me its not a black and white issue. And I know I'm not sounding very clear when I don't say I think it would be very effective in solving common crimes, but should be allowed to extract needed information from people who we know have such info.

 

[ATF Consumer]

Now think about the power of our current government...and you have been detained because you have that Gadsden flag flying...

I guess you are right. I think it has to be done on a case by case business and by telling the CIA they can not use certain tatics, etc. we limit their effectivness.

However, I would think waterboarding a murder suspect would be extreme, but waterboarding or anything else to someone who has knowledge of an act that is going to take several people is probably within reason. I just think a lot of people would confess to crimes they didn't commit just to end what ever they were subjected, however if you have someone who you know knows something like the example above, and you need that info, you have to have options.

I guess to me its not a black and white issue. And I know I'm not sounding very clear when I don't say I think it would be very effective in solving common crimes, but should be allowed to extract needed information from people who we know have such info.

My original post was to get you to realize that the government can claim anything they want as reasons to do whatever they want to people, whether they are citizens or not.

Think about how the recent labeling of right wingers, gun lovers, constitution followers, anti-abortionist, Gadsden flag flying Americans had somehow become part of the terrorist watch list...They have reason to believe these people are planning to overthrow the government...do you allow waterboarding??? It would be to protect the USA from terrorists, right?

 

[RogerB]

My original post was to get you to realize that the government can claim anything they want as reasons to do whatever they want to people, whether they are citizens or not.

Think about how the recent labeling of right wingers, gun lovers, constitution followers, anti-abortionist, Gadsden flag flying Americans had somehow become part of the terrorist watch list...They have reason to believe these people are planning to overthrow the government...do you allow waterboarding??? It would be to protect the USA from terrorists, right?

its a razor sharp double edged sword isn't it my friend....

 

[ATF Consumer]

its a razor sharp double edged sword isn't it my friend....

Yes indeed...

Here is a good read on the subject from LewRockwell.com

The Morality of Torture​

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]by [/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Laurence M. Vance[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]by Laurence M. Vance[/FONT]​

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Everyone follows some sort of a moral code, even atheists. Jews have the Old Testament or the Talmud. Christians have the New Testament or the Bible. Other religions have their particular holy books. Non-religious people subscribe to natural law, the Golden Rule, altruism, or some other ism.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Every moral code shares some basic similarities: it is wrong to lie, cheat, steal, rape, murder – and torture.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The current debate over the morality of the U.S. government engaging in torture has revealed many Americans who profess to adhere to a moral code to be hypocrites. Now we are being told that, because the end (saving American lives) justifies the means (torture), the use of torture is justified under certain circumstances.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Christians especially are being hypocritical since they have historically condemned situation ethics and the decline of moral absolutes. They are also cautioned in the New Testament not to do evil that good may come (Romans 3:8).[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]What some Americans are now advocating is the torture of suspected terrorists held in Guantánamoand other prisons. Real terrorists, like foreigners Ramzi Yousef and Zacarias Moussaoui and American José Padilla, have been charged for their crimes, convicted in federal court, and are currently incarcerated in U.S. prisons. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Let us assume for the sake of argument that terrorists are those that fight against a U.S. invasion of their country and not vice versa, that men held in places like Guantánamoare really suspected terrorists and are not there merely because they were wrongly picked up by bounty hunters paid by the U.S. government, and that torture does in fact result in valuable information being revealed that could prevent a terrorist attack and save American lives.[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]If it is morally permissible to torture a suspected terrorist in an attempt to gain information that may save American lives, then:[/FONT]

• [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Is it morally permissible to torture a suspected terrorist who is a child in an attempt to gain information that may save American lives? If not, then why not?[/FONT]
• [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Is it morally permissible to torture a suspected terrorist who is a woman in an attempt to gain information that may save American lives? If not, then why not?[/FONT]
• [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Is it morally permissible to torture by any means a suspected terrorist in an attempt to gain information that may save American lives? If not, then why not?[/FONT]
• [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Is it morally permissible to torture a suspected terrorist even if it results in his permanent disability in an attempt to gain information that may save American lives? If not, then why not?[/FONT]
• [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Is it morally permissible to torture a suspected terrorist even if it results in his death in an attempt to gain information that may save American lives? If not, then why not?[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Is it morally permissible to do any of the above if it may save just one American life? If not, then why not?[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]I am afraid that many American torture advocates would not have a problem with any of the above, even if it might only save just one American life.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]But if the goal is possibly saving American lives, then what about torturing American citizens who might know about American lives being in jeopardy? Is it morally permissible to torture a suspected terrorist who is an American in an attempt to gain information that may save American lives? If not, then why not? What about American woman and children? Are all means of torture acceptable or are there certain forms of torture that are only reserved for foreigners? What if the suspected American terrorist becomes disabled or dies as a result of the torture?[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Again, if the goal is possibly saving American lives, then what about torturing American citizens who are not suspected terrorists but might know about American lives being in jeopardy? Is it morally permissible to torture a suspect in police custody in an attempt to gain information that may save American lives? If not, then why not? But what if the suspect is a woman or a child? And may any form of torture be used or are there certain forms of torture that are off limits for suspects in police custody? What if the suspect in police custody becomes disabled or dies as a result of the torture?[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]But why stop with suspects in police custody. I mean, if the goal is possibly saving American lives, then what about torturing Americans in their homes who might know about American lives being in jeopardy? And what about travelling overseas to torture foreigners in their homes? Is it morally permissible to torture anyone anywhere in an attempt to gain information that may save American lives? If not, then why not?[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Just think about the potential benefits of torture for local law enforcement. Drug users could be tortured until they reveal the names of their dealers. Serial killers could be tortured until they reveal where they buried their dead bodies. Pedophiles could be tortured until they reveal the names of the children they have victimized. Burglars could be tortured until they reveal the addresses they have burglarized. Rapists could be tortured until they reveal the names of all the women they have violated. College students could be tortured until they reveal the names of those who illegally supplied them with booze. Reporters could be tortured until they reveal the names of their sources. Hey, if we torture enough people, we can get a confession for every unsolved crime in the world.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]The trump card of conservative torture advocates like Thomas Sowell is always an emotionally-charged reference to one’s family:[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]What if it was your mother or your child who was tied up somewhere beside a ticking time bomb and you had captured a terrorist who knew where that was? Face it: What you would do to that terrorist to make him talk would make water-boarding look like a picnic.[/FONT]
​

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]In such a highly emotional and personal situation, it’s difficult to know with certainty how someone would react. Face it: If someone thought that their loved ones were in imminent danger of death, and they thought that the only way to save them was by torturing someone, he might be willing to torture a terrorist, a terrorist’s mother, a terrorist’s child, or even you, your mother, or your child. But is this the right thing to do? And is this how U.S. foreign policy should be conducted?[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]I don’t think that many Americans who say that torture is justified under certain circumstances if it may save American lives really believe what they are saying. If you really want to get a terrorist to talk, there are ways to do it without laying a finger on him. Here is one: Take his wife and son and, in front of him, rape her, crush the boy’s testicles, and sodomize them both. That will get him talking more than anything you could ever do to him. If the end is gaining information that may save American lives, then why not? Now, except for some red-state conservative fascists and a few bloodthirsty Christian warmongers, I think that most Americans wouldn’t go this far. But if you believe in torture in an attempt to gain information that may save American lives, where do you draw the line? Once you establish a "ticking time bomb" exception, every situation ends up becoming a ticking time bomb scenario.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]And how credible is information obtained via torture? Face it: Just as someone might be willing to torture anyone and everyone if they thought the lives of their loved ones were in imminent danger, so anyone and everyone undergoing torture might be willing to admit to anything to get the torture to stop. If we took a chainsaw to Dick Cheney, he would confess to all sorts of crimes that the Bush administration didn’t even commit. Even the U.S. Army’s 2006 field manual on interrogation says about torture:[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Use of torture is not only illegal but also it is a poor technique that yields unreliable results, may damage subsequent collection efforts, and can induce the source to say what he thinks the HUMINT [Human Intelligence] collector wants to hear. Use of torture can also have many possible negative consequences at national and international levels.[/FONT]
​

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]But even if credible information could be obtained through torture, it is still immoral, barbaric, and un-American.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Seldom heard in the torture debate is why people became terrorists in the first place. A recent article by James Payne, "What Do the Terrorists Want," shows that, contrary to neoconservative warmongers like David Frum and Richard Perle, terrorists espouse neither an ideology of conquest like the Nazi Germany and Soviets Russia nor a desire to impose on the whole world its religion and law. The majority of Osama bin Laden’s venom is directed at the West for aggression, oppression, and exploitation of Muslim lands and peoples, not because he, like President Bush driveled, "hates our freedoms."[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Rather than saving American lives, the torture of Muslim prisoners serves as a recruiting tool for al-Qaeda and other Islamic terrorist organizations. Yes, the crimes of terrorists are many. But why give them reasons to commit more of them? "If we forfeit our values by signaling that they are negotiable in situations of grave or imminent danger, we drive those undecideds into the arms of the enemy," says former commandant of the Marine Corps Charles C. Krulak.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]It is proponents of torture that aren’t concerned about American lives. If they were then they wouldn’t support the senseless wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that have resulted in almost 5,000 American soldiers dying for a lie. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Who are the true patriots? Who are the real Americans? Those who defend foreign wars that send thousands of Americans to their deaths, create terrorists where there were none, and increase the hatred of foreigners toward the United States or those who want to end the U.S. foreign policy of intervening in the affairs of other countries, dismantle the Holy American Empire, and bring all U.S. troops home to stay?[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]May 22, 2009[/FONT]​

[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Laurence M. Vance [send him mail] writes from Pensacola, FL. He is the author of Christianity and War and Other Essays Against the Warfare State. His newest book is [ame="http://www.amazon.com/Revolution-that-Wasnt-Laurence-Vance/dp/0982369700/lewrockwell/"]The Revolution that Wasn't[/ame]. Visit [ame="http://www.vancepublications.com/"]his website[/ame].[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]Copyright © 2009 by LewRockwell.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.[/FONT]​