Minority whip swan dives into the deep end of the hyperbole pool

[RightIsWrong]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
No American 'Gulag'

Even this guy understands that the over the top rhetoric used by the ultraleftists does their case no good. Although he does defend AI and claim it uses a "balanced approach to the defense of human rights" which is laughable but his point about the extreme rhetoric stands true. I wonder why the Durbin apologists don't understand that...oh wait...yes I do understand why...

CsG

How can you be so freaking ballsy as to claim that this guy is right when he states something that you agree with and completely "laughable" when it is something you don't?

Your hypocracy knows no bounds!

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
I never understood the logic in arguing,

"Hey, we're not AS bad as Nazi's!"

LOL, instead of saying that there are some valid comparisons to be made, they want to argue about his statments being "over the top". Nothing but spin control. So much for bipartisianship.

 

[cwjerome]

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
I never understood the logic in arguing,

"Hey, we're not AS bad as Nazi's!"

Of course you don't, because you're the type of dimwit (like so many around here) who can easily toss around the "Nazi" label in serious political discussion. So when somebody properly takes you to task on such stupidity, you're utterly confused as to what the big deal is. The fact that people like you cannot comprehend what's wrong with such allusions shows an extremely distressing lack of moral foundation, an incapability for higher level contextual thinking, and a worrisome penchant for grievous exaggerations and hype.

What you partisan hacks can't fathom is that my argument doesn't excuse ANY possible abuses at Gitmo. Actually, by sticking to reasonable truth, it serves a more contructive purpose than your panicked wailings of hyperbole and embellishment. That's why I can't help but think your fallacious cries have nothing to do with problem solving or contructive change, no matter how much you pretend to be offended and feign indignation. Rather it's all about clamoring for the pure sake of political opportunism and advancement. Of course that seems to be the Left's new way, although it certainly hasn't got them very far recently :roll:

The quote in your sig should say, "I'd rather lose with overexcited rants than win with rational discussion."

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: cwjerome

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
I never understood the logic in arguing,

"Hey, we're not AS bad as Nazi's!"

Of course you don't, because you're the type of dimwit (like so many around here) who can easily toss around the "Nazi" label in serious political discussion. So when somebody properly takes you to task on such stupidity, you're utterly confused as to what the big deal is. The fact that people like you cannot comprehend what's wrong with such allusions shows an extremely distressing lack of moral foundation, an incapability for higher level contextual thinking, and a worrisome penchant for grievous exaggerations and hype.

What you partisan hacks can't fathom is that my argument doesn't excuse ANY possible abuses at Gitmo. Actually, by sticking to reasonable truth, it serves a more contructive purpose than your panicked wailings of hyperbole and embellishment. That's why I can't help but think your fallacious cries have nothing to do with problem solving or contructive change, no matter how much you pretend to be offended and feign indignation. Rather it's all about clamoring for the pure sake of political opportunism and advancement. Of course that seems to be the Left's new way, although it certainly hasn't got them very far recently :roll:

The quote in your sig should say, "I'd rather lose with overexcited rants than win with rational discussion."

Hmm... seems I hit a nerve.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: cwjerome

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
I never understood the logic in arguing,

"Hey, we're not AS bad as Nazi's!"

Of course you don't, because you're the type of dimwit (like so many around here) who can easily toss around the "Nazi" label in serious political discussion. So when somebody properly takes you to task on such stupidity, you're utterly confused as to what the big deal is. The fact that people like you cannot comprehend what's wrong with such allusions shows an extremely distressing lack of moral foundation, an incapability for higher level contextual thinking, and a worrisome penchant for grievous exaggerations and hype.

What you partisan hacks can't fathom is that my argument doesn't excuse ANY possible abuses at Gitmo. Actually, by sticking to reasonable truth, it serves a more contructive purpose than your panicked wailings of hyperbole and embellishment. That's why I can't help but think your fallacious cries have nothing to do with problem solving or contructive change, no matter how much you pretend to be offended and feign indignation. Rather it's all about clamoring for the pure sake of political opportunism and advancement. Of course that seems to be the Left's new way, although it certainly hasn't got them very far recently :roll:

The quote in your sig should say, "I'd rather lose with overexcited rants than win with rational discussion."

SO, pray tell us when these people will get tried? Are they afraid of what they might say when they get their day in court? Is Bush planning on holding them until the time is right to release them all without trials?

What is the grand Repug plan here? They are the party who critizes people without plans, right. I guess their plan is to just keep diverting from the issue by claiming the left is "over the top".

Even McCain says this is hurting us and putting us at risk of having our POW's treated inhumanly in future conflicts. So, let our leader tell us his plans. If he doesn't, then it is his fault for opening the door to partisianship and smear tactics.

 

[Warpirate]

Just a reminder to both sides....

These aren't prisoners. They are enemy combatants, and under the guidelines set forth by the Geneva Convention, they have NO rights of any kind.

There is no proof that the "prisoners" are being treated poorly at all in fact quite the opposite. So when your squeeling about how badly they are allegedly being treated ask Paul Johnson's family how they think the "prisoners" should be treated.

And think about the repercussions your immature whinings, that you nor Turbin Durbin have no clue about, are effecting how our American soldiers that are prisoners are being treated.

Do you believe that American POW's were being treated fairly and humanely before any of this? I don't think so. So imagine how they are going to be treated when this childish uncorroborated bitching is spewed into the hands of Al-Jazeera. I would imagine that the Dishonorable Sen. Turbin Durbins comments may have killed a few US Soldiers do you want that blood on your own hands???

This is the internet so that Al-Queda informant you sold your video card to last week is reading this and reporting it to all of the Al-Queda prison camps.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Warpirate
Just a reminder to both sides....

These aren't prisoners. They are enemy combatants, and under the guidelines set forth by the Geneva Convention, they have NO rights of any kind.

There is no proof that the "prisoners" are being treated poorly at all in fact quite the opposite. So when your squeeling about how badly they are allegedly being treated ask Paul Johnson's family how they think the "prisoners" should be treated.

And think about the repercussions your immature whinings, that you nor Turbin Durbin have no clue about, are effecting how our American soldiers that are prisoners are being treated.

Do you believe that American POW's were being treated fairly and humanely before any of this? I don't think so. So imagine how they are going to be treated when this childish uncorroborated bitching is spewed into the hands of Al-Jazeera. I would imagine that the Dishonorable Sen. Turbin Durbins comments may have killed a few US Soldiers do you want that blood on your own hands???

This is the internet so that Al-Queda informant you sold your video card to last week is reading this and reporting it to all of the Al-Queda prison camps.

So you think abusing our prisoners will help anything?

That's not what Sen, John McCain thinks. As a matter of fact, he thinks just the opposite and I'd take his opinion over yours any day.

 

[Warpirate]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Warpirate
Just a reminder to both sides....

These aren't prisoners. They are enemy combatants, and under the guidelines set forth by the Geneva Convention, they have NO rights of any kind.

There is no proof that the "prisoners" are being treated poorly at all in fact quite the opposite. So when your squeeling about how badly they are allegedly being treated ask Paul Johnson's family how they think the "prisoners" should be treated.

And think about the repercussions your immature whinings, that you nor Turbin Durbin have no clue about, are effecting how our American soldiers that are prisoners are being treated.

Do you believe that American POW's were being treated fairly and humanely before any of this? I don't think so. So imagine how they are going to be treated when this childish uncorroborated bitching is spewed into the hands of Al-Jazeera. I would imagine that the Dishonorable Sen. Turbin Durbins comments may have killed a few US Soldiers do you want that blood on your own hands???

This is the internet so that Al-Queda informant you sold your video card to last week is reading this and reporting it to all of the Al-Queda prison camps.

So you think abusing our prisoners will help anything?

That's not what Sen, John McCain thinks. As a matter of fact, he thinks just the opposite and I'd take his opinion over yours any day.

Are you high?

They aren't being abused!!!!!

There are over 16,000 pages of transcripts and documents from congressional investigations about this and not a single sentence in any of those 16,000 pages even suggests that "abuse" might be happening.

 

[Warpirate]

These aren't prisoners. They are enemy combatants, and under the guidelines set forth by the Geneva Convention, they have NO rights of any kind.

As for that I was just stating the law. These "prisoners" have no right to a trial or any other special treatment that normal POW's would have under the Geneva Convention.

 

[Warpirate]

SENATOR DURBIN - Just Apologized for his comments.

 

[1EZduzit]

His comments were a little over the top, so good for him. I'd like to point out again that even John McCain remarked that even Eichman got a trial.

I guess your definition of abuse is different then mine, or maybe you haven't seen the pictures.

So, what do you think we should do with them?

 

[BigLar]

Anybody out there proud of Gitmo?

 

[ntdz]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050621/ap_on_go_co/guantanamo_durbin_3

Durbin apologized for his comments...finally.

 

[EatSpam]

What a chickensh!t. I had sent him an email earlier telling him to stick to his guns.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
His comments were a little over the top, so good for him. I'd like to point out again that even John McCain remarked that even Eichman got a trial.

Eichman was an official representative of an internationally recognized govenrment. al Qaeda members are not. That's why Saddam is getting a trial and the guys in Gitmo are not.

I guess your definition of abuse is different then mine, or maybe you haven't seen the pictures.

You're confusing Abu Ghraib and Gitmo.

So, what do you think we should do with them?

Personally I think we should put them all into a building and then fly a remotely controlled jetliner into it. I bet a lot of Americans would agree with me too on that point too. Unfortunately, the Bush admin is a lot more kind to them in that respect. And far kinder than the al Qaeda types who slice people's heads off.

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
His comments were a little over the top, so good for him. I'd like to point out again that even John McCain remarked that even Eichman got a trial.

Eichman was an official representative of an internationally recognized govenrment. al Qaeda members are not. That's why Saddam is getting a trial and the guys in Gitmo are not.

I guess your definition of abuse is different then mine, or maybe you haven't seen the pictures.

You're confusing Abu Ghraib and Gitmo.

So, what do you think we should do with them?

Personally I think we should put them all into a building and then fly a remotely controlled jetliner into it. I bet a lot of Americans would agree with me too on that point too. Unfortunately, the Bush admin is a lot more kind to them in that respect. And far kinder than the al Qaeda types who slice people's heads off.

I say we put them all in a jetliner and crash the jetliner into a burning pile of Qurans! LOL

 

[EatSpam]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

So, what do you think we should do with them?

Personally I think we should put them all into a building and then fly a remotely controlled jetliner into it. I bet a lot of Americans would agree with me too on that point too. Unfortunately, the Bush admin is a lot more kind to them in that respect. And far kinder than the al Qaeda types who slice people's heads off.

So are the people in Gitmo accused of anything, really? If not, you'd be running the risk of killing lots of innocents. But an eye for an eye, that's the Christian way, right?

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: EatSpam

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

So, what do you think we should do with them?

Personally I think we should put them all into a building and then fly a remotely controlled jetliner into it. I bet a lot of Americans would agree with me too on that point too. Unfortunately, the Bush admin is a lot more kind to them in that respect. And far kinder than the al Qaeda types who slice people's heads off.

So are the people in Gitmo accused of anything, really? If not, you'd be running the risk of killing lots of innocents. But an eye for an eye, that's the Christian way, right?

Now that you mention it, some of the detainess in Gitmo are known to have been involved in plotting 9/11. Other were captured on the battlefield with gun in hand, ready to kill the infidels.

Of course, if you're so compassionate towards them you can always have them stay at your place. You can keep an eye on them and be responsible for them. Feel like volunteering?

 

[EatSpam]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: EatSpam

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

So, what do you think we should do with them?

Personally I think we should put them all into a building and then fly a remotely controlled jetliner into it. I bet a lot of Americans would agree with me too on that point too. Unfortunately, the Bush admin is a lot more kind to them in that respect. And far kinder than the al Qaeda types who slice people's heads off.

So are the people in Gitmo accused of anything, really? If not, you'd be running the risk of killing lots of innocents. But an eye for an eye, that's the Christian way, right?

Now that you mention it, some of the detainess in Gitmo are known to have been involved in plotting 9/11. Other were captured on the battlefield with gun in hand, ready to kill the infidels.

Fair enough. So where's their trial? If there is enough evidence, they should be tried and convicted. Then they can be placed in a convienient PMITA prison and I won't care. However, what's going on here isn't right...holding indefinately without a trial is unAmerican. Let's set a higher standard for America than that of our enemies.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: EatSpam

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: EatSpam

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

So, what do you think we should do with them?

Personally I think we should put them all into a building and then fly a remotely controlled jetliner into it. I bet a lot of Americans would agree with me too on that point too. Unfortunately, the Bush admin is a lot more kind to them in that respect. And far kinder than the al Qaeda types who slice people's heads off.

So are the people in Gitmo accused of anything, really? If not, you'd be running the risk of killing lots of innocents. But an eye for an eye, that's the Christian way, right?

Now that you mention it, some of the detainess in Gitmo are known to have been involved in plotting 9/11. Other were captured on the battlefield with gun in hand, ready to kill the infidels.

Fair enough. So where's their trial? If there is enough evidence, they should be tried and convicted. Then they can be placed in a convienient PMITA prison and I won't care. However, what's going on here isn't right...holding indefinately without a trial is unAmerican. Let's set a higher standard for America than that of our enemies.

We already have set a higher standard. We are detaining them instead of beheading them.

"We" can't try them and convict them, as they are foreign nationals. There is nothing in international or US law that allows the US to do that. You do want to do it legally, right? But if we release them to their home country, there's nothing to guarantee they won't be right back out on a battlefield trying to kill infidels; as recent past history has shown for some of those already released who were subsequently killed on the battlefield fighting the US. So the best solution is simply to hold them. They don't die and neither do we. It actually seems to be the most compassionate route.

And I guess it's an emphatic "NO" concerning your volunteerism?

 

[nageov3t]

gotta wonder how America would react if the situation was reversed.

say, France picks up a group of US civilians, claims that there were plotting to blow up the louvre, and sticks them in a prison indefinitely.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: loki8481
gotta wonder how America would react if the situation was reversed.

say, France picks up some off-duty army guys, claims that there were plotting to blow up the louvre, and sticks them in a prison indefinitely.

Erm...US Army guys are representatives of an internationally recognized government. There are rules that govern their behaviour.

Can you make the same claim of al Qaeda?

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: loki8481
gotta wonder how America would react if the situation was reversed.

say, France picks up some off-duty army guys, claims that there were plotting to blow up the louvre, and sticks them in a prison indefinitely.

Erm...US Army guys are representatives of an internationally recognized government. There are rules that govern their behaviour.

Can you make the same claim of al Qaeda?

good point. fixed post.

 

[imported_Tango]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: loki8481
gotta wonder how America would react if the situation was reversed.

say, France picks up some off-duty army guys, claims that there were plotting to blow up the louvre, and sticks them in a prison indefinitely.

Erm...US Army guys are representatives of an internationally recognized government. There are rules that govern their behaviour.

Can you make the same claim of al Qaeda?

Funny how much the media develop the lexicon and the conseguent mental schemes... for example... shouldn't we all stop calling every Afghan "Al-Qaeda"? You do know 99.9% of those detained in guantanamo have no idea of what Al-Qaeda is, don't you? Or you think international terroristic groups enroll people by the hundreds? Taliban and Al-Qaeda IS NOT the same thing. And beeing a soldier of the former Afghanistan regime IS NOT terrorism. Of course some of those inmates could have some kind of contact with the Al-Qaeda network, but it's the exception, not the rule. Most of those people come from the regular army...

It has really become the magic word... when you wanna say "bad, bad guy" you just say "Al-Queda". The TV started all this, and now the people in the street follow. But words are important, cause they identify the frames.

Those captured who really had contacts with Al-Qaeda are not detained with the other inmates in Guantanamo, due to obvious security reasons. Those in Guantanamo are a tutti-frutti mix of what you could find in Afghanistan during the conflict: local level Taliban officiers, some Mujaheidins, some young kids, some people who were in the wrong spot at the wrong time. Some of those already released were Journalists (!!!) from all over the world...

If you give them a trial, the percentage of those charged with something will be no more than 15%.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Tango

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: loki8481
gotta wonder how America would react if the situation was reversed.

say, France picks up some off-duty army guys, claims that there were plotting to blow up the louvre, and sticks them in a prison indefinitely.

Erm...US Army guys are representatives of an internationally recognized government. There are rules that govern their behaviour.

Can you make the same claim of al Qaeda?

Funny how much the media develop the lexicon and the conseguent mental schemes... for example... shouldn't we all stop calling every Afghan "Al-Qaeda"? You do know 99.9% of those detained in guantanamo have no idea of what Al-Qaeda is, don't you?

Proof?

Or you think international terroristic groups enroll people by the hundreds?

According to the meme of the left, there are tens of thousands and more recruited to the cause every day. Are you claiming this is BS?

It has really become the magic word... when you wanna say "bad, bad guy" you just say "Al-Queda". The TV started all this, and now the people in the street follow. But words are important, cause they identify the frames.

Those captured who really had contacts with Al-Qaeda are not detained with the other inmates in Guantanamo, due to obvious security reasons. Those in Guantanamo are a tutti-frutti mix of what you could find in Afghanistan during the conflict: local level Taliban officiers, some Mujaheidins, some young kids, some people who were in the wrong spot at the wrong time. Some of those already released were Journalists (!!!) from all over the world...

If you give them a trial, the percentage of those charged with something will be no more than 15%.

The youngest detainee in Gitmo is 18 years old. There are no "kids."

Then again, imo, one of the failings of the Bush admin is to not specifiy exactly what every detainee in Gitmo is there for. I seriously doubt they are keeping people there with no valuable information just for the hell of it, so I expect there's some valid reasons. I do wish they'd provide an explanation at the very least though.