Reply
Thu 15 Dec, 2005 09:32 pm
The WH has decided to support the McCain anti-torture bill.
I hear there is an asterik at the bottom of the bill that reads:
* The above does not apply if we fly them to Romania.
I thought it was Bulgaria...
Poland and Romania. Of course, nobody knows anything...
When in doubt, go with the majority.............especially when an election is coming up! :wink:
In re: to renditions and the alleged secret CIA prisons, I heard someone ask an obvious question I hadnt, surprisingly, heard anyone else ask:
"If the US is not flying its terror suspects around the world, to various allied states of dubious credentials and possible CIA-run camps abroad, for them to be tortured - why is it flying them around?
nimh
I have heard an apologist address that, sort of.
Interrogations might be more effective if the prisoner is held in a location where his family might be brought in or if certain cultural bonds and influences might be persuasive.
Total bullshit of course.
You have absolutely no basis for saying that the WH flip flopped. Maybe they merely negotiated with the McCain people until a mutually satisfactory compromise was reached. If I am wrong, then please cite some evidence that it was a matter of flip-floppping, rather than compromise.
nimh wrote:In re: to renditions and the alleged secret CIA prisons, I heard someone ask an obvious question I hadnt, surprisingly, heard anyone else ask:
"If the US is not flying its terror suspects around the world, to various allied states of dubious credentials and possible CIA-run camps abroad, for them to be tortured - why is it flying them around?
Airline food. Pure torture.
nimh wrote:In re: to renditions and the alleged secret CIA prisons, I heard someone ask an obvious question I hadnt, surprisingly, heard anyone else ask:
"If the US is not flying its terror suspects around the world, to various allied states of dubious credentials and possible CIA-run camps abroad, for them to be tortured - why is it flying them around?
To secure them from their friends and the continuous leaks of intelligence from the CIA and other org's.
Because one can trust the, say, Egyptian secret service so much better than the CIA when it comes to preventing intelligence leaks to Islamists?
Ignoring the rhetorical aspect of my own question here and taking your assertion at face value, McG, that sounds like a lot of money is misspent on what's probably the largest secret service of the world. I mean, if, as probably the best-funded intelligence service around, they have to hand over their detainees to any developing country's intelligence agency for safe-keeping... is the world's greatest nation really that incompetent?
I've always thought Idaho would be a good place to stockpile Terrorists, but what do I know?
Some day I'm gonna get a lot of credit for ignoring straight lines like that....
Romania? Bulgaria? Idaho? I could have sworn it was Texas.
maybe the CIA needed to rack up more airmiles for free flights or upgrades , or are they trying to help the airlines from filing for chapter 11 by giving them extra business ? hbg
JustWonders wrote:nimh wrote:In re: to renditions and the alleged secret CIA prisons, I heard someone ask an obvious question I hadnt, surprisingly, heard anyone else ask:
"If the US is not flying its terror suspects around the world, to various allied states of dubious credentials and possible CIA-run camps abroad, for them to be tortured - why is it flying them around?
Airline food. Pure torture.
Between the food and those skimpy pillows. Torture in the sky
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace