Torture battle escalating, Pelosi vs. Boehner

[Mr. President]

Both of you shut already. We were having a delightful conversation about torture and killing and now you all are ruining it. Can we stay on track please? Thank You

 

[NOBama]

Both of you shut already. We were having a delightful conversation about torture and killing and now you all are ruining it. Can we stay on track please? Thank You

I've said all I have to say about torture for today, here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/1186706-post269.html

But, I understand your desire to get back on topic. Have at it! I guess I should have just wrote whatshername a PM asking her to fuck-off with the "ignored" bullshit. My bad.

 

[DiveCon]

Ignored.

Psst... By replying to people you wish to ignore, you are not ignoring them.

I don't wish to ignore the person. Just the post. I suppose I could put "not responding" or something like that. "Ignored" is easier and works fine.

uh, no, if you dont wish to respond, NORMAL people just DONT REPLY
LOL

 

[DiveCon]

Both of you shut already. We were having a delightful conversation about torture and killing and now you all are ruining it. Can we stay on track please? Thank You

I've said all I have to say about torture for today, here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/1186706-post269.html

But, I understand your desire to get back on topic. Have at it! I guess I should have just wrote whatshername a PM asking her to fuck-off with the "ignored" bullshit. My bad.

it doesnt work to be direct with morons
LOL

 

[raceright]

Are you saying it doesn't make a difference if they are American or not?

But again, why are "terrorists" expendable, and not serial murderers, child molesters, gang members, herion dealers, and the like?

And once we clarify that, if only "terrorists" are expendable and therefore not entitled to human rights, how do you know if they are terrorists? Who decides that, Governments? If an American is capture in Iran, and Iran says hes a terrorist, its OK for Iran to torture him and we have no right to complain?

... asshole ...

Ignored.

Ok maybe Asshole is a term that Bothers you sorry about that.
(no really) But what about the rest would you not want to do what you have to to save your family (poles show 26% would let there family die scary) I for one would hurt anyone to protect my mother and wife and sister and daughter just the way I am.

 

[Shadow]

... asshole ...

Ignored.

Psst... By replying to people you wish to ignore, you are not ignoring them.

She just likes the faux "drama".

 

[WillowTree]

Ignored.

Psst... By replying to people you wish to ignore, you are not ignoring them.

She just likes the faux "drama".

she's the word nazi

 

[jeffrockit]

We kill 3 pirates to save the life of one captain but the left is against the US using waterboarding to save the lives of many. Explain that logic!

The golden rule -- do onto others as you would have them do onto you.

I wouldn't want our guys getting legitimately waterboarded.

Didn't see the pirates kill anyone so I guess we broke the rule there by killing them.

 

[Iriemon]

We kill 3 pirates to save the life of one captain but the left is against the US using waterboarding to save the lives of many. Explain that logic!

The golden rule -- do onto others as you would have them do onto you.

I wouldn't want our guys getting legitimately waterboarded.

Didn't see the pirates kill anyone so I guess we broke the rule there by killing them.

Not in my opinion.

 

[Yurt]

The golden rule -- do onto others as you would have them do onto you.

I wouldn't want our guys getting legitimately waterboarded.

Didn't see the pirates kill anyone so I guess we broke the rule there by killing them.

Not in my opinion.

then EXPLAIN your opinion

 

[Iriemon]

Didn't see the pirates kill anyone so I guess we broke the rule there by killing them.

Not in my opinion.

then EXPLAIN your opinion

Since you asked nicely -- heh heh -- in my opinion it is completely legitimate to shoot pirates who are holding hostages at gun point.

 

[jeffrockit]

Not in my opinion.

then EXPLAIN your opinion

Since you asked nicely -- heh heh -- in my opinion it is completely legitimate to shoot pirates who are holding hostages at gun point.

Liberal logic: It's OK to kill someone who may murder someone but it's not Ok to waterboard (which doesn't kill) someone who may be part of a mass murder. Got it.

 

[Old Rocks]

then EXPLAIN your opinion

Since you asked nicely -- heh heh -- in my opinion it is completely legitimate to shoot pirates who are holding hostages at gun point.

Liberal logic: It's OK to kill someone who may murder someone but it's not Ok to waterboard (which doesn't kill) someone who may be part of a mass murder. Got it.

That is not liberal logic, that is the Geneva Conventions. So you like to torture. How then are you any differant than the terrorists.

 

[DiveCon]

Since you asked nicely -- heh heh -- in my opinion it is completely legitimate to shoot pirates who are holding hostages at gun point.

Liberal logic: It's OK to kill someone who may murder someone but it's not Ok to waterboard (which doesn't kill) someone who may be part of a mass murder. Got it.

That is not liberal logic, that is the Geneva Conventions. So you like to torture. How then are you any differant than the terrorists.

wrong, the GC says these guiys can be shot on the battle field

 

[Meister]

Since you asked nicely -- heh heh -- in my opinion it is completely legitimate to shoot pirates who are holding hostages at gun point.

Liberal logic: It's OK to kill someone who may murder someone but it's not Ok to waterboard (which doesn't kill) someone who may be part of a mass murder. Got it.

That is not liberal logic, that is the Geneva Conventions. So you like to torture. How then are you any differant than the terrorists.

It's my understanding that terorists aren't even covered under the Geneva Convention.

 

[DiveCon]

Liberal logic: It's OK to kill someone who may murder someone but it's not Ok to waterboard (which doesn't kill) someone who may be part of a mass murder. Got it.

That is not liberal logic, that is the Geneva Conventions. So you like to torture. How then are you any differant than the terrorists.

It's my understanding that terorists aren't even covered under the Geneva Convention.

they are covered under the same thing as spies

 

[Care4all]

Water Torture/Boarding is against FEDERAL LAW...we have precedence with the case of the Sheriff...so, even if the Geneva Convention were not enough for some, our own federal law prohibits it and punishes it which has to be taken in to consideration in my opinion.

True this torture took place over seas, and maybe in retrospect, this is why the bush administration kept insisting that those on the grounds of Gitmo, were not covered by USA law....? I dunno??? This doesn't make total sense though, because that is like saying any representative of our government can be overseas and commit murder, and we could not prosecute them for such, because they were not on USA ground???? Again, I dunno?