John Brennan Speaking Now...

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

Torture techniques were nothing but a form of organized terrorism by Bush and Cheney.

AQ had been defunded so badly by 2004 that there was no way they could launch another 9/11 style attack.

They were relegated to hiding bombs in boy's underwear then sticking them on planes to Detroit.

If this latest episode of arrogance from the U.S. doesn't make ISIS hijack a transatlantic flight and fly it into the new WTC, I don't know what will.

So, you are one of these goofs that thinks that if we just play nice with the Islamists, they'll be cool with us?

My God you screwballs are beyond ignorant.. or just cowards.

Who said anything about "playing nice"?
You don't know the difference between the rules of the Geneva Conventions concerning POWs (which the U.S. supposedly abides) and torture?
I thought you were at least a bit smarter than that.

Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, 75 U.N.T.S. 135, entered into force Oct. 21, 1950.
Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War 75 U.N.T.S. 135 entered into force Oct. 21 1950.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

Playing the emotion card.
What a hack.
Hang 'em all.
I bet they all claim to be Christians, too.

I just heard and noted that. Appeal to Emotion, the oldest trick in the logical fallacy book.

Another shitty Obama appointment reveals itself.

The ACLU objected to his appointment too. See, you're a closet liberal after all.

So why did Obama appoint him? WHy did Dems in the Senate confirm him?

Because Obama isn't the flaming liberal you think he is, or at least, as Fox NOISE suggests you believe.

 

[The Rabbi]

Torture techniques were nothing but a form of organized terrorism by Bush and Cheney.

AQ had been defunded so badly by 2004 that there was no way they could launch another 9/11 style attack.

They were relegated to hiding bombs in boy's underwear then sticking them on planes to Detroit.

If this latest episode of arrogance from the U.S. doesn't make ISIS hijack a transatlantic flight and fly it into the new WTC, I don't know what will.

So, you are one of these goofs that thinks that if we just play nice with the Islamists, they'll be cool with us?

My God you screwballs are beyond ignorant.. or just cowards.

Who said anything about "playing nice"?
You don't know the difference between the rules of the Geneva Conventions concerning POWs (which the U.S. supposedly abides) and torture?
I thought you were at least a bit smarter than that.

Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, 75 U.N.T.S. 135, entered into force Oct. 21, 1950.
Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War 75 U.N.T.S. 135 entered into force Oct. 21 1950.

Irrelevant as the terrorists taken were not covered by the Geneva Convention.

 

[Camp]

Torture techniques were nothing but a form of organized terrorism by Bush and Cheney.

AQ had been defunded so badly by 2004 that there was no way they could launch another 9/11 style attack.

They were relegated to hiding bombs in boy's underwear then sticking them on planes to Detroit.

If this latest episode of arrogance from the U.S. doesn't make ISIS hijack a transatlantic flight and fly it into the new WTC, I don't know what will.

So, you are one of these goofs that thinks that if we just play nice with the Islamists, they'll be cool with us?

My God you screwballs are beyond ignorant.. or just cowards.

Who said anything about "playing nice"?
You don't know the difference between the rules of the Geneva Conventions concerning POWs (which the U.S. supposedly abides) and torture?
I thought you were at least a bit smarter than that.

Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, 75 U.N.T.S. 135, entered into force Oct. 21, 1950.
Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War 75 U.N.T.S. 135 entered into force Oct. 21 1950.

Irrelevant as the terrorists taken were not covered by the Geneva Convention.

Yes they are. All civilians, no matter the category are covered under the Geneva Convention when captured or placed under military control in a war zone.

 

[koshergrl]

Apparently all the Democrats can do now, is wait till some conservative says something, and then they jump up and down, scream, and call him names.

Without even discussing what he actually said, of course.

This is what the once-great Democrat party has come to.

Well, they call for lynching, too. So they have returned to their true roots after all.

 

[depotoo]

So where is your disdain for all the terrorists lack of following the geneva convention?

Torture techniques were nothing but a form of organized terrorism by Bush and Cheney.

AQ had been defunded so badly by 2004 that there was no way they could launch another 9/11 style attack.

They were relegated to hiding bombs in boy's underwear then sticking them on planes to Detroit.

If this latest episode of arrogance from the U.S. doesn't make ISIS hijack a transatlantic flight and fly it into the new WTC, I don't know what will.

So, you are one of these goofs that thinks that if we just play nice with the Islamists, they'll be cool with us?

My God you screwballs are beyond ignorant.. or just cowards.

Who said anything about "playing nice"?
You don't know the difference between the rules of the Geneva Conventions concerning POWs (which the U.S. supposedly abides) and torture?
I thought you were at least a bit smarter than that.

Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, 75 U.N.T.S. 135, entered into force Oct. 21, 1950.
Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War 75 U.N.T.S. 135 entered into force Oct. 21 1950.

Irrelevant as the terrorists taken were not covered by the Geneva Convention.

Yes they are. All civilians, no matter the category are covered under the Geneva Convention when captured or placed under military control in a war zone.

 

[The Rabbi]

Torture techniques were nothing but a form of organized terrorism by Bush and Cheney.

AQ had been defunded so badly by 2004 that there was no way they could launch another 9/11 style attack.

They were relegated to hiding bombs in boy's underwear then sticking them on planes to Detroit.

If this latest episode of arrogance from the U.S. doesn't make ISIS hijack a transatlantic flight and fly it into the new WTC, I don't know what will.

So, you are one of these goofs that thinks that if we just play nice with the Islamists, they'll be cool with us?

My God you screwballs are beyond ignorant.. or just cowards.

Who said anything about "playing nice"?
You don't know the difference between the rules of the Geneva Conventions concerning POWs (which the U.S. supposedly abides) and torture?
I thought you were at least a bit smarter than that.

Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, 75 U.N.T.S. 135, entered into force Oct. 21, 1950.
Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War 75 U.N.T.S. 135 entered into force Oct. 21 1950.

Irrelevant as the terrorists taken were not covered by the Geneva Convention.

Yes they are. All civilians, no matter the category are covered under the Geneva Convention when captured or placed under military control in a war zone.

They were not civilians. They are enemy combatants. Learn the difference.

 

[depotoo]

I guess you didn't watch the news conference. ..

Those subjected to eit's did give actionable intelligence.

Prove it.

 

[Camp]

Torture techniques were nothing but a form of organized terrorism by Bush and Cheney.

AQ had been defunded so badly by 2004 that there was no way they could launch another 9/11 style attack.

They were relegated to hiding bombs in boy's underwear then sticking them on planes to Detroit.

If this latest episode of arrogance from the U.S. doesn't make ISIS hijack a transatlantic flight and fly it into the new WTC, I don't know what will.

So, you are one of these goofs that thinks that if we just play nice with the Islamists, they'll be cool with us?

My God you screwballs are beyond ignorant.. or just cowards.

Who said anything about "playing nice"?
You don't know the difference between the rules of the Geneva Conventions concerning POWs (which the U.S. supposedly abides) and torture?
I thought you were at least a bit smarter than that.

Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, 75 U.N.T.S. 135, entered into force Oct. 21, 1950.
Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War 75 U.N.T.S. 135 entered into force Oct. 21 1950.

Irrelevant as the terrorists taken were not covered by the Geneva Convention.

Yes they are. All civilians, no matter the category are covered under the Geneva Convention when captured or placed under military control in a war zone.

They were not civilians. They are enemy combatants. Learn the difference.

I know the difference. You either don't, or are being misleading. The proper word for the Geneva Convention was "unlawful combatant". The Bush administration invented the term "enemy combatant" to avoid giving rights to captives because the term enemy combatant was not referred to in the Convention. The captives were hence denied POW rights and unlawful combatant rights, but because all civilians must be accorded certain rights, the Bush administration ruse failed to a degree. Even civilian criminals must be afford some basic rights under the convention. They must be treated humanely and the must be afforded tribunals or court procedures. That is why Obama stopped the official use of the interrogation methods used by the Bush administration on his first day in office. He separated himself from the ongoing war crimes of the previous administration. The term enemy combatant has know legal or officially recognized status or meaning.

 

[The Rabbi]

So, you are one of these goofs that thinks that if we just play nice with the Islamists, they'll be cool with us?

My God you screwballs are beyond ignorant.. or just cowards.

Who said anything about "playing nice"?
You don't know the difference between the rules of the Geneva Conventions concerning POWs (which the U.S. supposedly abides) and torture?
I thought you were at least a bit smarter than that.

Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, 75 U.N.T.S. 135, entered into force Oct. 21, 1950.
Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War 75 U.N.T.S. 135 entered into force Oct. 21 1950.

Irrelevant as the terrorists taken were not covered by the Geneva Convention.

Yes they are. All civilians, no matter the category are covered under the Geneva Convention when captured or placed under military control in a war zone.

They were not civilians. They are enemy combatants. Learn the difference.

I know the difference. You either don't, or are being misleading. The proper word for the Geneva Convention was "unlawful combatant". The Bush administration invented the term "enemy combatant" to avoid giving rights to captives because the term enemy combatant was not referred to in the Convention. The captives were hence denied POW rights and unlawful combatant rights, but because all civilians must be accorded certain rights, the Bush administration ruse failed to a degree. Even civilian criminals must be afford some basic rights under the convention. They must be treated humanely and the must be afforded tribunals or court procedures. That is why Obama stopped the official use of the interrogation methods used by the Bush administration on his first day in office. He separated himself from the ongoing war crimes of the previous administration. The term enemy combatant has know legal or officially recognized status or meaning.

Thats wrong of course. Not to mention without proof.
The people captured were enemy combatants. They wore no uniform or other marks of soldiers so did not merit Geneva protections. They were organized to wage war on the US, so were not civilians. They were not entitled to US criminal protection, see ex parte Quirin. They could have been killed with impunity, as spies or something.
But the Bush Administration, facing a unique set of circumstances, endeavored to find guidelines to cover their questionoing and interrogation, which was necessitated by the threat of terrorism.

 

[blackhawk]

Appealing to emotion a hack play? Good to see the left finally admit that all of their appealing to emotion by claiming war on women, the poor, minority's, immigrants and any other groups you can name was a hack play by hacks.