0
   

Who do you believe?

Forums: Politics
Email this Topic • Print this Page
 
 
DrewDad
 
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2005 02:14 pm
Bush says, "We do not torture."

vs.

http://www.borkowski.co.uk/archives/mark/1212196.jpg


Is Bush deliberately trying to destroy any credibility that he may still have?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 1,908 • Replies: 36
No top replies

 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2005 02:31 pm
All the while begging the question, why oppose the Senate bill forbidding it if you don't do it? Why try to get an exemption for the CIA?
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2005 02:35 pm
Well, just for the record, I am against toture and side with McCain over this issue.

On the prupose of this thread, the picture adds nothing. Standing on a box, hooded, wires leading nowhere is not torture. Being covered in boiling oil, watching your family murdered in front of you, eyes poked out, fed to a shredder, these are implements of torture. These are things the butcher of Baghdad did and will never do again. The word torture has no meaning anymore.
0 Replies
 
Bella Dea
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2005 02:40 pm
Torture doesn't have to be physical. The human imagination can conjure up some pretty awful things. All it takes is someone blindfolding you and telling you that those wires are hooked to enough electricity to fry you feet to the floor. Wouldn't that scare you?
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2005 02:42 pm
McGentrix wrote:
The word torture has no meaning anymore.


This is partly due to the efforts of torturers to continually redefine the word in order to exclude their own actions.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2005 02:49 pm
More likely the inclusion of everything from getting a hangnail up has been defined as torture by those that oppose America and it's allies in the middle east.

Fear does not equal torture. Stress positions, humiliation,sleep deprivation and general discomfort does not equal torture.

I hope every terrorist in the world fears what may happen to them if they are captured.

Bit we need to stop all forms of actual torture like beatings and such.
0 Replies
 
twinpeaksnikki2
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Nov, 2005 10:03 pm
Ha ha ha ha ha, yeah only use torture techniques that give enough wiggle room to claim it's not really torture. You denialistas amaze me.

Thank God that this particular conflict in Iraq doesn't lend itself to insurgents taking our guys as POWs but the quails will come home to roost some day.
0 Replies
 
Wolf ODonnell
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2005 05:32 am
Well, it doesn't matter. Torture is the infliction of severe physical or psychological pain or grief as an expression of cruelty, a means of intimidation, deterrent, revenge or punishment, or as a tool for the extraction of information or confessions.

That standing on the box, attached to wires is psychological grief. So therefore it is torture.
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2005 07:53 am
Wolf_ODonnell wrote:
Well, it doesn't matter. Torture is the infliction of severe physical or psychological pain or grief as an expression of cruelty, a means of intimidation, deterrent, revenge or punishment, or as a tool for the extraction of information or confessions.

That standing on the box, attached to wires is psychological grief. So therefore it is torture.


Then define SEVERE.

How is standing on a box severe?

Being put in a locked cell 24/7 could be percieved as SEVERE PSYCHOLOGICAL PAIN by the one locked in it.

Lame attempt by the Bushwackers to re-define the English language.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2005 08:59 am
Shall I do a Google image search on Abu Ghraib and post the rest of the pictures? This is a family site, after all.




For the record, however, are you (McG and woiyo) asserting that Bush spoke the truth?
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2005 09:08 am
woiyo wrote:
Being put in a locked cell 24/7 could be percieved as SEVERE PSYCHOLOGICAL PAIN by the one locked in it.

Lame attempt by the Bushwackers to re-define the English language.



torture
n 1: extreme mental distress [syn: anguish, torment]
2: unbearable physical pain [syn: torment]
3: intense feelings of suffering; acute mental or physical
pain; "an agony of doubt"; "the torments of the damned"
[syn: agony, torment]
4: the act of distorting something so it seems to mean
something it was not intended to mean [syn: distortion,
overrefinement, straining, twisting]
5: the act of torturing someone; "it required unnatural
torturing to extract a confession" [syn: torturing]
v 1: torment emotionally or mentally [syn: torment, excruciate,
rack]
2: subject to torture [syn: excruciate, torment]

Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913)


So, woiyo, if you state that something could be perceived as severe psychological pain, and Webster's Dictionary lists "acute mental pain" as torture, then, I think, it's not re-defining the English language to state that this amounts to being torture.
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2005 09:20 am
DrewDad wrote:
Shall I do a Google image search on Abu Ghraib and post the rest of the pictures? This is a family site, after all.




For the record, however, are you (McG and woiyo) asserting that Bush spoke the truth?


Spoke the truth about what? Be specific.
0 Replies
 
twinpeaksnikki2
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2005 09:22 am
woiyo wrote:
DrewDad wrote:
Shall I do a Google image search on Abu Ghraib and post the rest of the pictures? This is a family site, after all.




For the record, however, are you (McG and woiyo) asserting that Bush spoke the truth?


Spoke the truth about what? Be specific.


ha ha ha ha ha ha so Bush lies so much you need DD to be more specific?
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2005 09:25 am
woiyo wrote:
DrewDad wrote:
Shall I do a Google image search on Abu Ghraib and post the rest of the pictures? This is a family site, after all.




For the record, however, are you (McG and woiyo) asserting that Bush spoke the truth?


Spoke the truth about what? Be specific.

Let's start witht the quote at the beginning of the thread and move on from there.
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2005 09:27 am
DrewDad wrote:
woiyo wrote:
DrewDad wrote:
Shall I do a Google image search on Abu Ghraib and post the rest of the pictures? This is a family site, after all.




For the record, however, are you (McG and woiyo) asserting that Bush spoke the truth?


Spoke the truth about what? Be specific.

Let's start witht the quote at the beginning of the thread and move on from there.


That is our policy and so far, I see very little that deviates from this policy. Those who have used torture, have been identified and action has been taken.
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2005 09:27 am
DrewDad wrote:
woiyo wrote:
DrewDad wrote:
Shall I do a Google image search on Abu Ghraib and post the rest of the pictures? This is a family site, after all.




For the record, however, are you (McG and woiyo) asserting that Bush spoke the truth?


Spoke the truth about what? Be specific.

Let's start witht the quote at the beginning of the thread and move on from there.


That is our policy and so far, I see very little that deviates from this policy. Those few, who have used torture, have been identified and action has been taken.
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2005 09:28 am
DrewDad wrote:
woiyo wrote:
DrewDad wrote:
Shall I do a Google image search on Abu Ghraib and post the rest of the pictures? This is a family site, after all.




For the record, however, are you (McG and woiyo) asserting that Bush spoke the truth?


Spoke the truth about what? Be specific.

Let's start witht the quote at the beginning of the thread and move on from there.


That is our policy and so far, I see very little that deviates from this policy. Those few, who have used torture, have been identified and action has been taken.
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2005 09:30 am
twin_peaks_nikki wrote:
woiyo wrote:
DrewDad wrote:
Shall I do a Google image search on Abu Ghraib and post the rest of the pictures? This is a family site, after all.




For the record, however, are you (McG and woiyo) asserting that Bush spoke the truth?


Spoke the truth about what? Be specific.


ha ha ha ha ha ha so Bush lies so much you need DD to be more specific?


Another brainless post. Thanks for the contribution.
0 Replies
 
Synonymph
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2005 09:30 am
The president's approval rating seems to be slipping in the forums too. A decline in rabid defending, although several going-down-with-the-ship blind loyalists remain.

"Someone give him a blow job so we can impeach him."
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Nov, 2005 09:34 am
old europe wrote:
woiyo wrote:
Being put in a locked cell 24/7 could be percieved as SEVERE PSYCHOLOGICAL PAIN by the one locked in it.

Lame attempt by the Bushwackers to re-define the English language.



torture
n 1: extreme mental distress [syn: anguish, torment]
2: unbearable physical pain [syn: torment]
3: intense feelings of suffering; acute mental or physical
pain; "an agony of doubt"; "the torments of the damned"
[syn: agony, torment]
4: the act of distorting something so it seems to mean
something it was not intended to mean [syn: distortion,
overrefinement, straining, twisting]
5: the act of torturing someone; "it required unnatural
torturing to extract a confession" [syn: torturing]
v 1: torment emotionally or mentally [syn: torment, excruciate,
rack]
2: subject to torture [syn: excruciate, torment]

Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913)


So, woiyo, if you state that something could be perceived as severe psychological pain, and Webster's Dictionary lists "acute mental pain" as torture, then, I think, it's not re-defining the English language to state that this amounts to being torture.


Sure it is since you have not defined what "severe" or even "acute" is. These are relative terms that mean different things to different people or situations.

Reading some of your posts could be defined severe torture.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND - Discussion by Foxfyre
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Fellow Bostonians: How many of us wished we had an assault weapon last night? - Question by maxdancona
What should be first on the agenda of the winner in November? - Discussion by Frank Apisa
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Who do you believe?
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 11/15/2024 at 11:45:30
▲ ▼