Obama proud of torturing american civilians.

[CMike]

Obama says waterboarding was torture

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama said Wednesday night that waterboarding authorized by former President George W. Bush was torture and that the information it gained from terror suspects could have been obtained by other means. "In some cases, it may be harder," he conceded at a White House news conference capping a whirlwind first 100 days in office.

The waterboarding of 3 arch terrorists saved thousands of american lives from torture.

If the terrorist attacks occurred, thousands of US civilians would have died from fire, and radiation. Of course, hundreds would have just been murdered by the plane crashing into a LA building

By protecting the 3 terrorists from being waterboarded, had Obama been president, the terrorist attacks would have occurred and americans would have been tortured.

http://luxmedia.vo.llnwd.net/o10/clients/aclu/olc_05302005_bradbury.pdf

First off, what two plots?

And secondly, you have no way to know that they would happen. Arab terrorists are world-renowned for their incompetence.

the ones bush "leaked" a vague idea about (like that la was going to be bombed or whatever), but then when asked for proof said he couldn't for security reasons. you also then had neocon characters running to fox and opeds saying how bush put the nation at risk by even mentioning that the incidents may have occurred if we didn't stop the plot. was pretty funny actually.

You are an idiot.

Thank you for your attention on this matter.

Try the ones from a Obama declassified department of justice memo.

Morons.

 

[CMike]

Wow. This guy has Bush kool-aid on an IV drip to his brain.

Bush put in safeguards? Really? Seriously? BAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA *spits out coffee*

What the fuck is wrong with people who promote torture?

For them the ends justify the means. I had this debate with some other right-wing chick on these boards. They keep thinking that this "only gets done to terrorists" - which is totally untrue. Innocent people get hurt. And besides that, the founding fathers explained that these rights are for ALL men.

They just want to vent their frustration on their perceived enemy and think they can skewer anyone and be justified. It's utter bullshit of course.

Why do you promote torture by allowing if your way prevailed two massive terrorist attacks to occur in the US?

How many thousands of americans would have met a horrible death if Obama was in charge at that time?

Why do you put the rights of terrorists before the lives of americans?

 

[Vanquish]

CMike... people answer you and defeat your logic...but you don't accept it. Talking to you is like running on a hamster wheel. Nobody gets anywhere.

I've already told you why your ends justifies the means policy doesn't work.

Nice try twisting non-torture of terror suspects/terror prisoners as ACTUAL torture of American citizens. I get what you're doing. Keep chuckling to yourself on that one - it's not clever or funny or valid in any way.

Dude. Get this through your head. Torture is wrong. Torture of people who are going to kill Americans is wrong. Two wrongs dont make a right. Saving lives by hurting people IS BAD.

There's no clearer way to put it. You wont accept that. And I'm sure as hell not going to accept your twisted, whackadoo logic. This thread should be over.

 

[rightwinger]

CMike... people answer you and defeat your logic...but you don't accept it. Talking to you is like running on a hamster wheel. Nobody gets anywhere.

I've already told you why your ends justifies the means policy doesn't work.

Nice try twisting non-torture of terror suspects/terror prisoners as ACTUAL torture of American citizens. I get what you're doing. Keep chuckling to yourself on that one - it's not clever or funny or valid in any way.

Dude. Get this through your head. Torture is wrong. Torture of people who are going to kill Americans is wrong. Two wrongs dont make a right. Saving lives by hurting people IS BAD.

There's no clearer way to put it. You wont accept that. And I'm sure as hell not going to accept your twisted, whackadoo logic. This thread should be over.

CMike just enjoys the idea of torture. If American soldiers get tortured, CMike is OK with it as long as the soldiers give up useful information

End justifies the means to CMike

 

[beowolfe]

First off, what two plots?

And secondly, you have no way to know that they would happen. Arab terrorists are world-renowned for their incompetence.

the ones bush "leaked" a vague idea about (like that la was going to be bombed or whatever), but then when asked for proof said he couldn't for security reasons. you also then had neocon characters running to fox and opeds saying how bush put the nation at risk by even mentioning that the incidents may have occurred if we didn't stop the plot. was pretty funny actually.

You are an idiot.

Thank you for your attention on this matter.

Try the ones from a Obama declassified department of justice memo.

Morons.

Acutally, you're the idiot. But I know you already know that.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Seedy Mike is probably the dumbest motherfucker on these boards right now.

Hey......Seedy Mike.........how is it that the attacks prevented occurred BEFORE KSM was captured in 2003?

 

[CMike]

How is it that you are an idiot and you have no clue what you are talking about?

Check your premise.

 

[CMike]

CMike... people answer you and defeat your logic...but you don't accept it. Talking to you is like running on a hamster wheel. Nobody gets anywhere.

I've already told you why your ends justifies the means policy doesn't work.

Nice try twisting non-torture of terror suspects/terror prisoners as ACTUAL torture of American citizens. I get what you're doing. Keep chuckling to yourself on that one - it's not clever or funny or valid in any way.

Dude. Get this through your head. Torture is wrong. Torture of people who are going to kill Americans is wrong. Two wrongs dont make a right. Saving lives by hurting people IS BAD.

There's no clearer way to put it. You wont accept that. And I'm sure as hell not going to accept your twisted, whackadoo logic. This thread should be over.

CMike just enjoys the idea of torture. If American soldiers get tortured, CMike is OK with it as long as the soldiers give up useful information

End justifies the means to CMike

As I said it depends on what end and what means.

 

[CMike]

Seedy Mike is probably the dumbest motherfucker on these boards right now.

Hey......Seedy Mike.........how is it that the attacks prevented occurred BEFORE KSM was captured in 2003?

Here is the declassified DOJ/CIA memo?

http://luxmedia.vo.llnwd.net/o10/clients/aclu/olc_05302005_bradbury.pdf

Where does it say that douche bag?

 

[amrchaos]

The US would engage in torture, by allowing Al Qaida to torture thousands of americans civilians.

Are you aware that torture is against the Geneva Convention?

Yeah......as a retired military man I am.

Did you also know that waterboarding is torture? And.....because Cheney and Bush Jr. authorized it, they went against the Geneva Conventions.

I'd like to see them both in Spandau.

Obama is guilty of allowing torture, because he would allow thousands of americans to be tortured in order to protect his Al Qaida terrorist buddies from discomfort.

Obama is going against the Geneva Convention. That should be a war crime.

Hold it

Name an American that Obama allowed to be tortured?

Now do you see the problem with your reasoning?

 

[CMike]

Yeah......as a retired military man I am.

Did you also know that waterboarding is torture? And.....because Cheney and Bush Jr. authorized it, they went against the Geneva Conventions.

I'd like to see them both in Spandau.

Obama is guilty of allowing torture, because he would allow thousands of americans to be tortured in order to protect his Al Qaida terrorist buddies from discomfort.

Obama is going against the Geneva Convention. That should be a war crime.

Hold it

Name an American that Obama allowed to be tortured?

Now do you see the problem with your reasoning?

My point is that had Obama been president and waterboarding not allowed at that time, the terrorist attacks would have been taken place, and thousands of americans would have been tortured and murdered.

The libs are using the word "torture" very loosely, so I am using it very "loosely" too.

When in Rome...

 

[ABikerSailor]

No, you dumb motherfucker, you're using "torture" when you should use the word "killed".

Not our fault that you're too blind to see that. I posted the fucking definitions for you so that you could square yourself.

Seedy Mike, you should have been a blowjob, and your parent should have swallowed.

 

[rightwinger]

CMike... people answer you and defeat your logic...but you don't accept it. Talking to you is like running on a hamster wheel. Nobody gets anywhere.

I've already told you why your ends justifies the means policy doesn't work.

Nice try twisting non-torture of terror suspects/terror prisoners as ACTUAL torture of American citizens. I get what you're doing. Keep chuckling to yourself on that one - it's not clever or funny or valid in any way.

Dude. Get this through your head. Torture is wrong. Torture of people who are going to kill Americans is wrong. Two wrongs dont make a right. Saving lives by hurting people IS BAD.

There's no clearer way to put it. You wont accept that. And I'm sure as hell not going to accept your twisted, whackadoo logic. This thread should be over.

CMike just enjoys the idea of torture. If American soldiers get tortured, CMike is OK with it as long as the soldiers give up useful information

End justifies the means to CMike

As I said it depends on what end and what means.

The person performing the torture always gets to define both the end and the means.

The person being subjected to torture is never asked his opinion

 

[CMike]

Douche bag you still don't even acknowledge the basic facts.

You just live in your left wing delusional world, taking the lies that your let wing leaders as fact.

This is where you and the rest of the left wing delusional loonies live.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzlG28B-R8Y]YouTube - Twilight Zone intro.[/ame]

 

[beowolfe]

Obama is guilty of allowing torture, because he would allow thousands of americans to be tortured in order to protect his Al Qaida terrorist buddies from discomfort.

Obama is going against the Geneva Convention. That should be a war crime.

Hold it

Name an American that Obama allowed to be tortured?

Now do you see the problem with your reasoning?

My point is that had Obama been president and waterboarding not allowed at that time, the terrorist attacks would have been taken place, and thousands of americans would have been tortured and murdered.

The libs are using the word "torture" very loosely, so I am using it very "loosely" too.

When in Rome...

Your point is stupid. Totally stupid. And here's why? Imagine that someone broke into your neighbors house and actually tortured them. And you didn't call 911. Are you guilty of torture? Heck no. You may be guilty of a lot of things, but you didn't torture your neighbor. So you see, what you're arguing is totally stupid, but hey, you have the right of free speech. So, just continue showing everyone that you're a moron.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Way to go Seedy Mike.......spoken like a true lobotomized FAUX viewer.

 

[CMike]

CMike just enjoys the idea of torture. If American soldiers get tortured, CMike is OK with it as long as the soldiers give up useful information

End justifies the means to CMike

As I said it depends on what end and what means.

The person performing the torture always gets to define both the end and the means.

The person being subjected to torture is never asked his opinion

How many in the hijacked plane that would have crashed into the LA building would have been asked their opinion?

How many of the americans suffereing from radiation poisioning would have been asked their opinion?

How many of the americans in the burning building would have been asked their opinion?

How many americans would have been without their loved ones if their view point prevailed at the time?

 

[ABikerSailor]

Two things I want to know.......exactly when were these attacks supposed to take place Seedy Mike?

You're the one with all the "good" info, so give.

 

[CMike]

Read it. I have no idea exactly when the attacks were to take place, and no one else does either.

I go by the evidence I don't make it up.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Right. Those attacks were on the LAX airport and someplace else. Set to take place a year before KSM was captured.

Like I said, wanna explain the time paradox, or do you want to continue believing the FAUX rhetoric machine?