Obama releasing torture memos. Change we can believe in.

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: maziwanka
i just started reading these memos now. i dont know what im going to think afterwards

It's sickening (or kinda like porn if you're a republican/a psychopath)

Strange. I get the impression that it's the lefties jerking off over this, tightly closing their eyes and fantasizing about Bush and Co. being frog-marched into a jail cell. After all, the left seems to have the biggest hard-on over this issue.

There are two options here. People either dislike Bush because they dislike his policies, or they dislike his policies because they dislike Bush.

Maybe in the case of the president of the US authorizing people being tortured, with the result that some people ended up being tortured to death, people don't like the policies.

Nowhere do the memos authorize anyone being tortured to death. In fact, a recurring theme throughout the memos is the insistence that there be no lasting physical or mental harm inflicted from the techniques used. Kinda blows all the rhetorical crap out of the water.

I never said the memos authorized people being tortured to death, but they very likely contributed to a situation in which people ended up being tortured to death.

I didn't say you made such a claim. I'm pointing out that the memos outlined how the techniques were to be applied without causing any permanent physical or mental harm. If someone went beyond the scope of the memos, resulting in a death, then it's those people who need to be prosecuted in a court of law.

Not everything is part of some nefarious scheme to dislike Bush. Some people just don't like our country being a party to torture.

Some people love to sling around the word "TORTURE" in a very rhetorical fashion, conflating valid interrogation techniques with TORTURE and pretending it's all equal. 'Let's just label it all as torture, be loud and obnoxious about it, and smear anyone who dares to claim otherwise.' Smearing is one of the left's favorite past-times. Look at Phokus, gleefully smearing his way through this thread. It's ridiculous. Like abortion, there can't be any rational discussion about this subject because of the fringe assholes.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

I didn't say you made such a claim. I'm pointing out that the memos outlined how the techniques were to be applied without causing any permanent physical or mental harm. If someone went beyond the scope of the memos, resulting in a death, then it's those people who need to be prosecuted in a court of law.

Not everything is part of some nefarious scheme to dislike Bush. Some people just don't like our country being a party to torture.

Some people love to sling around the word "TORTURE" in a very rhetorical fashion, conflating valid interrogation techniques with TORTURE and pretending it's all equal. 'Let's just label it all as torture, be loud and obnoxious about it, and smear anyone who dares to claim otherwise.' Smearing is one of the left's favorite past-times. Look at Phokus, gleefully smearing his way through this thread. It's ridiculous. Like abortion, there can't be any rational discussion about this subject because of the fringe assholes.

How is this slinging around torture in a rhetorical fashion? The memos themselves admit that the techniques they describe have been labeled by our government as torture, but that it shouldn't stop us from doing it. How is this not an admission that what we were doing was torture? I don't see how any reasonable person can say otherwise.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
How is this slinging around torture in a rhetorical fashion? The memos themselves admit that the techniques they describe have been labeled by our government as torture, but that it shouldn't stop us from doing it. How is this not an admission that what we were doing was torture? I don't see how any reasonable person can say otherwise.

Can you point out where the memos claim that? After reading through the memos all I've seen is them repeatedly saying that the enhanced interrogation techniques, subject to limitations and safegaurds, do not run afoul of US code and statutes.

I'd also like to point out that the memos talk about the use of waterboarding against high profile suspects and claims that the methods were successful in getting them to cooperate. That flies in the face of the claim from the left that the method doesn't work.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: eskimospy
How is this slinging around torture in a rhetorical fashion? The memos themselves admit that the techniques they describe have been labeled by our government as torture, but that it shouldn't stop us from doing it. How is this not an admission that what we were doing was torture? I don't see how any reasonable person can say otherwise.

Can you point out where the memos claim that? After reading through the memos all I've seen is them repeatedly saying that the enhanced interrogation techniques, subject to limitations and safegaurds, do not run afoul of US code and statutes.

I'd also like to point out that the memos talk about the use of waterboarding against high profile suspects and claims that the methods were successful in getting them to cooperate. That flies in the face of the claim from the left that the method doesn't work.

WoW!!! I guess your browser must have been hijacked.....are you sure you read the correct memo`s??

 

[lupi]

Excellent commentary in the OP, would read again +++

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: eskimospy
How is this slinging around torture in a rhetorical fashion? The memos themselves admit that the techniques they describe have been labeled by our government as torture, but that it shouldn't stop us from doing it. How is this not an admission that what we were doing was torture? I don't see how any reasonable person can say otherwise.

Can you point out where the memos claim that? After reading through the memos all I've seen is them repeatedly saying that the enhanced interrogation techniques, subject to limitations and safegaurds, do not run afoul of US code and statutes.

I'd also like to point out that the memos talk about the use of waterboarding against high profile suspects and claims that the methods were successful in getting them to cooperate. That flies in the face of the claim from the left that the method doesn't work.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/g.../04/16/aclu/index.html

We condemned these techniques when used by other countries and called it torture. But hey, when we do it for us, it's ok, which is another argument, but still doesn't turn torture into something else.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_MnYI.../s1600-h/bradbury2.png

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: eskimospy
How is this slinging around torture in a rhetorical fashion? The memos themselves admit that the techniques they describe have been labeled by our government as torture, but that it shouldn't stop us from doing it. How is this not an admission that what we were doing was torture? I don't see how any reasonable person can say otherwise.

Can you point out where the memos claim that? After reading through the memos all I've seen is them repeatedly saying that the enhanced interrogation techniques, subject to limitations and safegaurds, do not run afoul of US code and statutes.

I'd also like to point out that the memos talk about the use of waterboarding against high profile suspects and claims that the methods were successful in getting them to cooperate. That flies in the face of the claim from the left that the method doesn't work.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/g.../04/16/aclu/index.html

We condemned these techniques when used by other countries and called it torture. But hey, when we do it for us, it's ok, which is another argument, but still doesn't turn torture into something else.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_MnYI.../s1600-h/bradbury2.png

That was one of the most amazing parts of the memo. How can you criticize other countries for torture when you do the exact same things and not call it torture?

I honestly believe the world would be a better place if all republicans just dropped dead right now.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: eskimospy
How is this slinging around torture in a rhetorical fashion? The memos themselves admit that the techniques they describe have been labeled by our government as torture, but that it shouldn't stop us from doing it. How is this not an admission that what we were doing was torture? I don't see how any reasonable person can say otherwise.

Can you point out where the memos claim that? After reading through the memos all I've seen is them repeatedly saying that the enhanced interrogation techniques, subject to limitations and safegaurds, do not run afoul of US code and statutes.

I'd also like to point out that the memos talk about the use of waterboarding against high profile suspects and claims that the methods were successful in getting them to cooperate. That flies in the face of the claim from the left that the method doesn't work.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/g.../04/16/aclu/index.html

We condemned these techniques when used by other countries and called it torture. But hey, when we do it for us, it's ok, which is another argument, but still doesn't turn torture into something else.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_MnYI.../s1600-h/bradbury2.png

That was one of the most amazing parts of the memo. How can you criticize other countries for torture when you do the exact same things and not call it torture?

I honestly believe the world would be a better place if all republicans just dropped dead right now.

That would include many friends and family of mine so you really need to stop with your overinclusive condemnations and limit your vitriol to those that specifically deserved it, i.e. "those that authorized these actions..."

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: eskimospy
How is this slinging around torture in a rhetorical fashion? The memos themselves admit that the techniques they describe have been labeled by our government as torture, but that it shouldn't stop us from doing it. How is this not an admission that what we were doing was torture? I don't see how any reasonable person can say otherwise.

Can you point out where the memos claim that? After reading through the memos all I've seen is them repeatedly saying that the enhanced interrogation techniques, subject to limitations and safegaurds, do not run afoul of US code and statutes.

I'd also like to point out that the memos talk about the use of waterboarding against high profile suspects and claims that the methods were successful in getting them to cooperate. That flies in the face of the claim from the left that the method doesn't work.

WoW!!! I guess your browser must have been hijacked.....are you sure you read the correct memo`s??

I believe I did. I'm still waiting for someone to show me where in these memos reside the claim that CIA techniques are torture. The claims of "appear to bear some resemblence to" don't mean much. I used to be told that I bore a resemblence to Indiana Jones. I can assure you that I am not Indiana Jones.

 

[bbdub333]

Originally posted by: Phokus
I honestly believe the world would be a better place if all republicans just dropped dead right now.

If you are the example of the ever-tolerant and compassionate Democrat, then I guess we know why things never change in this country. I genuinely feel sorry for you.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: lupi
Excellent commentary in the OP, would read again +++

Yeah, I thought that type of "commentary" got locked. example

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: bbdub333

Originally posted by: Phokus
I honestly believe the world would be a better place if all republicans just dropped dead right now.

If you are the example of the ever-tolerant and compassionate Democrat, then I guess we know why things never change in this country. I genuinely feel sorry for you.

He's an example of the extremist that are a small minority of the Democratic party and a larger minority (those who follow Rush, Hannity and Faux news) of the Republican Party.

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: bbdub333

Originally posted by: Phokus
I honestly believe the world would be a better place if all republicans just dropped dead right now.

If you are the example of the ever-tolerant and compassionate Democrat, then I guess we know why things never change in this country. I genuinely feel sorry for you.

Hmmm yes, sorry for not being tolerant of people who want to bring down the USA to the level of Khmer Rogue, Soviet Union, or other authoritarian torture regimes.

PLEASE FORGIVE ME! :roll:

 

[OCGuy]

Phokus has filled Winnar's absense very well. We didnt even miss a beat!

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: OCguy
Phokus has filled Winnar's absense very well. We didnt even miss a beat!

So, just out of curiosity, when are you going to round up your rightwing teabagging buddies and demand bush/cheney/yoo be accountable for these actions?

*twiddles thumbs*

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: OCguy
Phokus has filled Winnar's absense very well. We didnt even miss a beat!

Nah he's filling in for McGowen, Fear No Evil is filling in for Winnar.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: eskimospy
How is this slinging around torture in a rhetorical fashion? The memos themselves admit that the techniques they describe have been labeled by our government as torture, but that it shouldn't stop us from doing it. How is this not an admission that what we were doing was torture? I don't see how any reasonable person can say otherwise.

Can you point out where the memos claim that? After reading through the memos all I've seen is them repeatedly saying that the enhanced interrogation techniques, subject to limitations and safegaurds, do not run afoul of US code and statutes.

I'd also like to point out that the memos talk about the use of waterboarding against high profile suspects and claims that the methods were successful in getting them to cooperate. That flies in the face of the claim from the left that the method doesn't work.

WoW!!! I guess your browser must have been hijacked.....are you sure you read the correct memo`s??

I believe I did. I'm still waiting for someone to show me where in these memos reside the claim that CIA techniques are torture. The claims of "appear to bear some resemblence to" don't mean much. I used to be told that I bore a resemblence to Indiana Jones. I can assure you that I am not Indiana Jones.

Are you serious? Really?

The state department condemned other countries' use of water dousing, hanging people from doorframes, sleep deprivation, and food deprivation as torture. Then the OLC says we can do these things. This is not rocket science.

You're being deliberately obtuse in order to once again attempt to shoehorn this subject into your "BAAWWWW the left wing just hates Bush!" topic.

 

[blackangst1]

Somehow I find it hard to believe these torturous activities were limited to Bush's administration. If Obama is going to release memos from Bush's admin, he needs to investigate and release memos from Reagan, Bush Sr, and Clinton. You know. In the name of transparancy.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: blackangst1
Somehow I find it hard to believe these torturous activities were limited to Bush's administration. If Obama is going to release memos from Bush's admin, he needs to investigate and release memos from Reagan, Bush Sr, and Clinton. You know. In the name of transparancy.

If OLC memos on the legality of torture existed from previous administrations, Bush's OLC would not have had to draft them in the first place.

I am not aware of any cases, nor am I even aware of any accusations of other former administrations taking part in this sort of conduct. If you are aware of any, please link them.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
I believe I did. I'm still waiting for someone to show me where in these memos reside the claim that CIA techniques are torture. The claims of "appear to bear some resemblence to" don't mean much.

Hold up, you're waiting for the memos written at the behest of the admin to justify the use of torture through evasive legal language to contain an admission that the techniques they discuss and justify as not torture...are actually torture?

Do you even understand why they had the memos written? Here's a hint: so they could later claim they had a legal basis that what they were doing wasn't torture.

Would kinda defeat the purpose to admit the techniques were torture in those same memos wouldn't it.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Phokus
Reading the right's reaction to the release of the memo's i can only conclude that the right is in fact the party of amoral psychopaths. How so many can claim to be Christians is beyond me.

Says the loser who gets his rocks off calling for the execution of half of the US population...

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: blackangst1
Somehow I find it hard to believe these torturous activities were limited to Bush's administration. If Obama is going to release memos from Bush's admin, he needs to investigate and release memos from Reagan, Bush Sr, and Clinton. You know. In the name of transparancy.

If OLC memos on the legality of torture existed from previous administrations, Bush's OLC would not have had to draft them in the first place.

I am not aware of any cases, nor am I even aware of any accusations of other former administrations taking part in this sort of conduct. If you are aware of any, please link them.

Well, prior to Bush, it wasnt in the public's interest. Just because it wasnt reported on doesnt mean it didnt happen. Dont get me wrong, Im not trying to absolve Bush et al. m just saying I highly doubt his admin was the first. Its very unlikely. As far as cases, I havent researched it so I dont know. Even if I *did* doesnt mean I couldnt find anything. As you know most of this stuff is private and classified. As it should be.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: blackangst1
Somehow I find it hard to believe these torturous activities were limited to Bush's administration. If Obama is going to release memos from Bush's admin, he needs to investigate and release memos from Reagan, Bush Sr, and Clinton. You know. In the name of transparancy.

If OLC memos on the legality of torture existed from previous administrations, Bush's OLC would not have had to draft them in the first place.

I am not aware of any cases, nor am I even aware of any accusations of other former administrations taking part in this sort of conduct. If you are aware of any, please link them.

Well, prior to Bush, it wasnt in the public's interest. Just because it wasnt reported on doesnt mean it didnt happen. Dont get me wrong, Im not trying to absolve Bush et al. m just saying I highly doubt his admin was the first. Its very unlikely. As far as cases, I havent researched it so I dont know. Even if I *did* doesnt mean I couldnt find anything. As you know most of this stuff is private and classified. As it should be.

That argument is mighty, mighty weak.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: blackangst1
Well, prior to Bush, it wasnt in the public's interest. Just because it wasnt reported on doesnt mean it didnt happen. Dont get me wrong, Im not trying to absolve Bush et al. m just saying I highly doubt his admin was the first. Its very unlikely. As far as cases, I havent researched it so I dont know. Even if I *did* doesnt mean I couldnt find anything. As you know most of this stuff is private and classified. As it should be.

LOL with Ollie and Rummy in the Reagan Admin you had to know that this shit was happening all the time.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: blackangst1
Well, prior to Bush, it wasnt in the public's interest. Just because it wasnt reported on doesnt mean it didnt happen. Dont get me wrong, Im not trying to absolve Bush et al. m just saying I highly doubt his admin was the first. Its very unlikely. As far as cases, I havent researched it so I dont know. Even if I *did* doesnt mean I couldnt find anything. As you know most of this stuff is private and classified. As it should be.

LOL with Ollie and Rummy in the Reagan Admin you had to know that this shit was happening all the time.

Thats what I was thinking. The face of Gitmo changed quite a bit after 9/11, but just a few minutes of searching there isnt much out there prior to that. Im open to the fact it was all run on the up-and-up prior to 9/11, but I think to think that Bush is the one who started all this is naive at best. If you read up on Camp X Ray, it was closed in 2002 under controversial circumstances. Per the wiki "Care of detainees at Camp X-Ray was handled by Joint Task Force 160 (JTF-160), while interrogations were conducted by Joint Task Force 170 (JTF-170).[1][2][3][4] JTF-160 was under the command of Marine Brigadier General Michael R. Lehnert until March 2002, when he was replaced by Brigadier General Rick Baccus" What happed prior to that? There isnt alot of info.