Did Waterboarding lead to the death of Osama?

@DrewDad,

In Ohio and Kentucky all hunting accidents involving firearms are thoroughly investigated by authorities involving natural resources (game wardens), the police, and the courts. In most cases charges are filed.

Usually, as a minimum, the shooter receives a lifetime suspension of hunting privileges and may lose their right to own firearms.

Ohio and Kentucky aren't all that unique.

0 Replies

@DrewDad,

Unfortunately, your brilliantly crafted gag was a bit like concorde. It went right over his head. Well I'm not telling him what teabagging is. Ugh!

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

izzythepush wrote:

gag

Heh.

0 Replies

@Renaldo Dubois,

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

I was watching O'Reilly and Rep. Peter King, NY, stated that info obtained from waterboarding led to the killing of Bin Laden. Now what if this is true? How do you on the left react to this if it is true? Would that make our President a war criminal by acting on info obtained through torture?

Let me say first that anyone that knows anything about physics and chemistry knows bin laden and the plane crashes had nothing to do with the towers collapse. People can say what they want but its just physically impossible one many levels.

now for the matter at hand. to me It is insane how many people miss the obvious. Yes we are criminals and had no right to kill anyone without a trial. I wonder how many people got killed by navy seals raids before they found bin laden. Does it not seem like all we had the right to do was surround the house and ask him to come out? What if it was not bin laden. what if it was just some guy with a bunch of armed guards. Would we have the right to shoot people doing their jobs protecting whoever s house it was. I mean when people start busting in the place you paid to defend are you supposed to make sure they are not navy seals looking for bin laden before opening fire? seriously it seems like even with 100% certainty he was in there we had no right to go in guns blazing. surrounding the place would have done the job. hell tear gas maybe? but no we dont want him to have a chance to talk and thats all there is too it. So i guess i definably think we had no right to do what we did. I dont know but i assume armed guards for protection is common is the Stans and they should have done things in a respectable fashion. For instance say bin laden was there but he never left the house and someone else was in charge of hiring and paying the houses guards. Now if people unaware they where working for bin laden where killed that is outright murder and no talk of bin laden can change that. My country makes me sick. So many dipshits proud of something that was wrong in every sense.

2 Replies

@Renaldo Dubois,

It wasn't until 9/11--and then only according to CIA/NSS 'spooks'. Even the FBI and the military didn't condone 'waterboarding'.

Fortunately when the 'waterboarding' practices by 'spooks' became public in 2003 it no longer was defensible and was suspended.

0 Replies

@Renaldo Dubois,

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

Waterboarding is also an "unfortunate act of war". Duh!!!

This turns out not to be the case. Treatment of prisoners falls under some pretty specific guidelines. Bush & Co. had to define entire new classes of detainees in order to avoid those.

Personally, I prefer it when folks don't take the law and turn in into little origami shapes.

1 Reply

@Doubt doubt,

Doubt doubt wrote:

Let me say first that anyone that knows anything about physics and chemistry knows bin laden and the plane crashes had nothing to do with the towers collapse. People can say what they want but its just physically impossible one many levels.

I guess the folks behind Popular Mechanics must not know physics and chemistry, then.

Popular Mechanics - Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report

2 Replies

@Renaldo Dubois,

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

I'm saying when you edit my post to make your reply you are not going to get a reply from me to the rest of your post. This is supposed to be a debate. During a debate you don't interrupt the speaker whenever you want to make a point. You make your points when they are through speaking.

That is obviously too difficult for a few posters on this forum.

How did I interrupt you post?

I can't see what you post until you post it here. My response in no way interrupts your posting.

What is difficult is for us to understand how you can possibly think I am interrupting your post when I respond point by point to it.

1 Reply

@DrewDad,

You're confusing "the law" with "war". That's why your morals are appearing so twisted lately. War changes everything that makes sense. You don't get that and until you get it, you're gonna keep sounding confused.

1 Reply

@parados,

You are interjecting your reply before I am finished. Try that in a public debate and tell me how that works out for ya. That's why you lefties use it. You need every edge you can get.

2 Replies

@Renaldo Dubois,

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

Nope. I am saying it's a tactic used among weak debaters to give them an edge.

Ah, you are saying you are both.

I can't interrupt you when you are posting. This isn't a case of my talking over the top of you so you can't speak or be heard.

1 Reply

@parados,

In a debate, each speaker speaks until he is finished with his reply (post). When you interject your thoughts in the middle of my post then you are interrupting me, which is rude, which is why you and your pals do it. You are weak. You're looking weaker with every post. How many people are lurking and watching you appear weaker with every post?

1 Reply

@Renaldo Dubois,

Why does O'Reilly do it then. Is he a leftist?

1 Reply

@raprap,

So Bill O'Reilly is your role model? Gee, who woulda thunk.

1 Reply

@DrewDad,

DrewDad wrote:

Doubt doubt wrote:
Let me say first that anyone that knows anything about physics and chemistry knows bin laden and the plane crashes had nothing to do with the towers collapse. People can say what they want but its just physically impossible one many levels.

I guess the folks behind Popular Mechanics must not know physics and chemistry, then.

Popular Mechanics - Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report

The steel is all you need to look into. The Debunking people are telling lies. you may believe it but look into it and you will see it is lies. I know chemistry and these guys are talking utter nonsense. Weakened steel is a joke.

1 Reply

@Renaldo Dubois,

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

You are interjecting your reply before I am finished. Try that in a public debate and tell me how that works out for ya. That's why you lefties use it. You need every edge you can get.

You don't seem to understand the difference between the written and spoken word. Once you complete the writing of your post, I can no longer interrupt your work.

Once you complete the writing of your post you are FINISHED with it. I can't prevent you from finishing it. Your post is there for all to see. If you feel I am taking parts of it out of context then you are free to point out how I am doing so. Since you can't do that, I can only assume you are forced to attack me personally since you can't respond to what I am writing.

1 Reply

@Renaldo Dubois,

Renaldo Dubois wrote:

In a debate, each speaker speaks until he is finished with his reply (post). When you interject your thoughts in the middle of my post then you are interrupting me, which is rude, which is why you and your pals do it. You are weak. You're looking weaker with every post. How many people are lurking and watching you appear weaker with every post?

You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.

1 Reply

@Doubt doubt,

Doubt doubt wrote:

The steel is all you need to look into. The Debunking people are telling lies. you may believe it but look into it and you will see it is lies. I know chemistry and these guys are talking utter nonsense. Weakened steel is a joke.

What is a joke about weakened steel? Steel as with almost all materials loses its ability to support weight as it is heated.

1 Reply

@parados,

I am not attacking you personally. I am saying that interjecting your thoughts into my post is weak. If you want to appear stronger and more intelligent then you can quote me completely and post your reply at the end of my post. You can take that as a personal attack if you want to, but again, calling that a "personal attack", makes you appear weak again. Maybe you should report it as a hate crime. Yeah, I think that would be fitting.

1 Reply

@parados,

You're weak and everyone can see it.

1 Reply

Did Waterboarding lead to the death of Osama?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know