Supreme Court Overrules Bush on Guantanamo

[OCA]

Did you know that when you said tht torture was not used at Abu Ghraib you were lying?
Again, President Bush, the entire army, Donald Rumsfield, and both houses of Congress all disagree with you, "there was no torture at Abu Ghraib," bit.

So the validity of an argument is determined by the number of posts a person has? That's adorable.

And did you know that other methods that stand in sharp contrast to what Amercia stands for were also used?

I would rather effectively interrogate a terrorist and extract information that could be used to save American and innocent Iraqi lives. That's just me though.

No lying involved, you are using a liberal definition of torture. Bush, Rumsfeld and the others agree with you publicly to save their own asses from the pc crowd but i'd bet a dollar to a doughnut that privately they say the torture farce is all bullshit.

No the validity of an argument is not determined by post count but your credibility sure is and mine is above reproach.

No method used at Ghraib was across any imaginary limits that libs have set up, they were all methods of extreme humiliation and very effective indeed. Why do you think that anti-war libs wanted the joint shut down so quickly?

Do you have any proof or links that verify that not 1 live was saved because of the interrogations that took place at Ghraib?

 

[Mr.Conley]

No lying involved, you are using a liberal definition of torture. Bush, Rumsfeld and the others agree with you publicly to save their own asses from the pc crowd but i'd bet a dollar to a doughnut that privately they say the torture farce is all bullshit.

Exactly, you'd bet a dollar. I could bet that the moon is made out of cheese, but that doesn't mean it's true.

No the validity of an argument is not determined by post count but your credibility sure is and mine is above reproach.

Really? That's adorable.

No method used at Ghraib was across any imaginary limits that libs have set up, they were all methods of extreme humiliation and very effective indeed. Why do you think that anti-war libs wanted the joint shut down so quickly?

That's a very wild imagination you've got there. Too bad the army and the Senate investigators (you know, the people who actually saw what happened) disagree with you.

Do you have any proof or links that verify that not 1 live was saved because of the interrogations that took place at Ghraib?

(Begin Retarded Voice) DDUUAAA... IT"S CLASSIFIED (End Retarded Voice) Can you provide a link that
a. Anyone was saved (you have to prove it occured, you are the one trying to change the status quo)
b. That torture is the most effective means of gathering information.
c. Find some credible person who supports your position.

 

[OCA]

Mr. Conley check my status on this board, it is not adorable but rather admirable.

No, my view is the status quo, Ghraib is happening to the dogs at U.S. run prisons all over the world as we speak......and I love it!

Please continue to follow the spineless pc route, looks like you've had lots of practice.

Anyway looks like we agree to disagree but one question: if shutting down Ghraib would help us win the war why 2-3 years later and its a stalemate?