okie wrote:One of the biggest problems we have is a re-definition of what constitutes torture, by those that have an agenda against the administration.
I thought it was interesting that Huckabee gave one reason for wanting to move the prisoners from Gitmo to Leavenworth or somewhere here in the states is so the prisoners won't be treated so well. Of course, Huckabee says many surprising things, but he may have a point on that one. After all, he visited Gitmo, and he was also familiar with his own state prisons in Arkansas, and that was legitimate first hand observation from which he made that statement.
The US gov't defined waterboarding as torture long ago, when we prosecuted the Japanese and Germans for it.
It's a major moral failing that you can't admit this.
Cycloptichorn
There are various forms of waterboarding, aren't there? And some are not the same as the original form that was classified as torture from WWII?
You mean there's different levels of experiencing drowning?
cicerone imposter wrote:You mean there's different levels of experiencing drowning?
Seems to be the argument: if you experience drowning because water actually gets into your respiratory tract, it constitutes torture. But if you experience drowning while in reality no or only a very small amount of water gets into your upper respiratory system, it's a perfectly valid interrogation method.
And who's going to police the waterboarding to make sure it does't go over the "line?" Bush and Cheney?
Ha.
Well, I believe it's torture in any case. If somebody gets waterboarded, he experiences drowning. He experiences the terror of imminent death. No matter whether a wet towel or a plastic wrap is used.
Harold Bloom....expands on the consequences of the war and, ultimately, of Bush at power: a growing national debt and a weakened dollar in tandem with a spiraling war budget, as well as America's lost credibility on the international stage due to the Iraq war and the situation in Afghanistan. Not to mention Guantanamo Bay, the use of torture and humiliation at Abu Ghraib and the CIA's rendition program.
"We have caused a monstrous mess. We don't even count killed Iraqis. God knows how many Iraqi women, children and men have been killed by our accidental shootings, which we are such experts at, or by other Iraqis. No, ?'Benito Bush' (Bloom's pet name for President George Bush) deserves, if we had a functioning civil law in the world, to be condemned for crimes against humanity. Bush is ultimately responsible for this war," Bloom says ..
from WIP
McTag wrote:Harold Bloom....expands on the consequences of the war and, ultimately, of Bush at power:
Is there any reason to care what Harold Bloom thinks about this? His expertise is literature, and he probably ought not try to extend himself much outside that sphere of knowledge.
One thing is certain, he is an annoying, pompous ass.
Ticomaya wrote:McTag wrote:Harold Bloom....expands on the consequences of the war and, ultimately, of Bush at power:
Is there any reason to care what Harold Bloom thinks about this? His expertise is literature, and he probably ought not try to extend himself much outside that sphere of knowledge.
One thing is certain, he is an annoying, pompous ass.
Funny, Ticomaya; this is a democracy where one's specialty doesn't limit our opinions. FYI, most Americans today think the congress are doing a very poor job, and Americans come from all walks of life; so what's your beef? Where do you live?
and speaking of pompous ass...
Ticomaya wrote:McTag wrote:Harold Bloom....expands on the consequences of the war and, ultimately, of Bush at power:
Is there any reason to care what Harold Bloom thinks about this? His expertise is literature, and he probably ought not try to extend himself much outside that sphere of knowledge.
One thing is certain, he is an annoying, pompous ass.
This from the king of annoying, pompous, ignorant, immoral, obtuse, ... . Your expertise seems to be limited to being a shill for other immoral, ignorant, pompous degenerates.
cicerone imposter wrote:Funny, Ticomaya; this is a democracy where one's specialty doesn't limit our opinions.
Right ... he's not an expert. Why should anyone care about his opinion on the matter? Might as well post Emeril Lagasse's opinion.
Simply because most of us posting on these threads are not "experts."
cicerone imposter wrote:Simply because most of us posting on these threads are not "experts."
That didn't really answer the question, did it?
Yes, it does. You just can't "see" it. Not all experts are always right, nor all non-experts always wrong. Most of us on these forums are non-experts, but we learn some new things by participating on these threads. I'm not so sure you do.
cicerone imposter wrote:Yes, it does. You just can't "see" it. Not all experts are always right, nor all non-experts always wrong. Most of us on these forums are non-experts, but we learn some new things by participating on these threads. I'm not so sure you do.
What do you learn from constantly insulting people you disagree with, c.i.?
Point being, I could care less about what a literary professor thinks about the state of politics in this country, and I learn nothing by reading his opinion.
cicerone imposter wrote:JTT has you pegged.
JTT is a troll whose posts are not worth reading, and so I don't.
Ticomaya wrote:McTag wrote:Harold Bloom....expands on the consequences of the war and, ultimately, of Bush at power:
Is there any reason to care what Harold Bloom thinks about this? His expertise is literature, and he probably ought not try to extend himself much outside that sphere of knowledge.
One thing is certain, he is an annoying, pompous ass.
Well Tico if Bloom is a pompus ass and you have no respect for his opinions, whose opinions do you have respect for?
Jonah Goldberg?
Bill Kristol?
Bob Novak?
David Broder?
This was a post contributed by nimh on
another thread
Quote:The more [Fred] talks, the more likable and presidential he appears. ... It's unlikely his ratings will drop anytime soon." -- Jonah Goldberg, June 1
"Fred Thompson knows what he is doing and he will be formidable." -- Bill Kristol, June 3
"Fred Thompson at the dinner table confirmed the widespread perception inside the party of his potential to be an extraordinary candidate." -- Bob Novak, June 10
"When Fred Thompson makes his long-delayed entrance into the Republican presidential race, he will not tiptoe quietly." -- David Broder, August 16
Ticomaya wrote:cicerone imposter wrote:JTT has you pegged.
JTT is a troll whose posts are not worth reading, and so I don't.
Look who's calling somebody else a troll. LOL
