Obama throws Bush under the bus......accuses him of torture

[Stephanie]

I can't stand that man and everyday he proves it to us

What kind of President does nothing but bring but chaos on us, is out to destroy any moral we have and is constantly putting us down in one way or another

I don't think we can take two more years

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

About time our country stopped covering for the abuses of Bush/Cheney

It's way past the time for conservatives and others on the partisan right to stop ignoring the abuses of Bush and Cheney, and to stop acting as apologists for that abuse.

 

[Peach]

Republicans are the party of torture after all

They actually celebrate it

Other than sociopaths (who exist in both parties) I don't think anyone "celebrates" it. But I can tell you quite honestly, that if someone kidnapped my little girl and I knew he knew where she was I would make him suffer till he told me where she was.

Anyone who says different in a similar situation is a flat out liar.

True, but our nation does not torture, unless you count Andersonville......

 

[kaz]

About time our country stopped covering for the abuses of Bush/Cheney

It's way past the time for conservatives and others on the partisan right to stop ignoring the abuses of Bush and Cheney, and to stop acting as apologists for that abuse.

You mean like you've done the decent thing and demanded Obama be held accountable for things like Fast and Furious, Benghazi, the IRS and exempting his friends from Obamacare and unilaterally changing it without legislation?

LOL, your hypocrisy reeks.

 

[Freewill]

About time our country stopped covering for the abuses of Bush/Cheney

It's way past the time for conservatives and others on the partisan right to stop ignoring the abuses of Bush and Cheney, and to stop acting as apologists for that abuse.

As I posted in elsewhere "torture" as defined by those who receive it, did not end with Obama's EO. Nor did his attack on sovereign ally nations with the drone program. Bush or Chaney never, as far as we know, targeted and killed American citizens. So you had better watch what you wish for.

Or are you of the mind it is better to kill a person then to use enhance interrogation methods? I don't like either.

 

[Clementine]

SO why isnt Obama prosecuting Bush era aides who advocated that policy? Torture is illegal, remember?

It has been bought up before by Hillary and Obama. They both want war crimes they believe were committed by Americans to be handled by the UN ICC. Of course, that would mean they aren't given the rights guaranteed to other Americans accused of crimes. Tribunals are fine for U.S. troops and Bush, but deemed unfair for terrorists. Funny that they insist that non-citizen terrorists who attack on foreign soil should be transported to America to ensure that they receive a fair trial with all rights upheld, yet they'd throw others to the wolves and not care whether their rights were respected.


American citizens are rarely given the same respect as hostiles and other illegals. This administration is giving preferential treatment to illegals while vets can die while waiting for the services they earned. And this administration has more respect for the laws and traditions of other countries while they trample ours.

 

[Camp]

Yes, they've repeatedly demonstrated flagrant double standards on how they view Obama and W doing the same things both domestically and internationally.

Did a light bulb just go off in your head? Presidents are liars and Congress covers for them. The more corrupt and dysfunctional Congress is the more Presidents can get away with. Wars are great for Presidents. That is why we have so many of them. Citizens pay less attention to details when there is a war going on and we always reelect Presidents during a war. Citizens allow crap to go on too. Kind of turn a blind eye to all the horrible stuff being committed in their name. National Security is the key scam term.
Blame the Congress. That is were the people have real power. We get a chance to kick the criminals out every two years, but we don't. We are stuck on thinking it is the President that is important and ignore the filth that is really in control.

Um...yeah dude. I just realized the things you said. Which is why I am a libertarian, I didn't realize that. LOL.

BTW, I wasn't talking about the hypocrisy of congress and the president, I was talking about the hypocrisy of you and the other liberal minions.

My comments have nothing to do with being a libertarian. Libertarians are just as corrupt and hypocritical as any politicians or individuals stuck on one party or the other. You appear to me as just a plane generic hater of people who oppose your beliefs. You are so obsessed with your hatred of the current President that having an academic discussion with you is impossible. I post a legal opinion and synopsis of a section of the Geneva Convention and a Federal District Court ruling regarding drone attacks on American citizens in Yemen and the discussion turns to nonsense, insults and the usual deflection away from anything academic or based on anything fact based. Rather we get stuck in opinions based on opinions that ignore any facts. Obama is a murderer and bad. Worst ever. All liberals are libtards. Anyone not a extreme rw fanatic is a liberal.

 

[Freewill]

Anything that complies with the Geneva Convention

The Geneva Convention applies to countries and people who wear military uniforms of those countries, signed by representatives of those countries.

Terrorists and partisans in all previous wars, when caught, were summarily executed after they were debriefed buy whatever means necessary.

Show me the signature of Al Qaida on the pages of the Geneva Convention, you righteous enemy loving, unpatriotic prick.

And that justifies torture to you?

Have you read our Constitution?

WTF? In another thread you were saying that just the allegations of taking up arms is stuffiest to kill Americans. Have you read the Constitution? (allegations because without a trial it is all allagations.)

 

[kaz]

My comments have nothing to do with being a libertarian. Libertarians are just as corrupt and hypocritical as any politicians or individuals stuck on one party or the other

LOL, no shit Dick Tracy. We don't want a "libertarian" government to force it's will on us, we want no government to do it. George Washington: Why trade one despot for another? Libertarians just want government to just provide those services that only government can do. Roads, civil and criminal courts, police, military, management of limited resources, recognition of property rights cover most of it. Imposing it's will on us and confiscating and redistributing our money is wrong. That is the difference. We don't want libertarian or liberal government forcing us to do it's will.

You appear to me as just a plane generic hater of people who oppose your beliefs.

I hate people who impose their beliefs on me. I have no problem with you practicing your beliefs. If I get my way, you are still free to act according to your beliefs. If you get your way, my right to practice my beliefs is removed.

You are so obsessed with your hatred of the current President that having an academic discussion with you is impossible. I post a legal opinion and synopsis of a section of the Geneva Convention and a Federal District Court ruling regarding drone attacks on American citizens in Yemen and the discussion turns to nonsense, insults and the usual deflection away from anything academic or based on anything fact based. Rather we get stuck in opinions based on opinions that ignore any facts. Obama is a murderer and bad. Worst ever. All liberals are libtards. Anyone not a extreme rw fanatic is a liberal.

I was pointing out your hypocrisy. You don't even know my view on it. Here's the trick, whatever I think that doesn't change your conflicting views. You are OK with Obama killing and maiming people with no due process, you are not OK with W waterboarding which doesn't kill or maim. That is hypocrisy. Nothing I think can change that what you are saying is a pure double standard.

 

[Erand7899]

Obama: U.S. 'crossed a line,' tortured after 9/11 - CNN.com

(CNN) -- President Barack Obama acknowledged Friday that the United States "crossed a line" and tortured al Qaeda detainees after the 9/11 terror attacks.
The comments at a White House news conference were the President's strongest on the controversial subject since he came into office denouncing what he described as the Bush years of torturing alleged terrorists, also known as "enhanced interrogation."
"When we engaged in some of these enhanced interrogation techniques, techniques that I believe and I think any fair-minded person would believe were torture, we crossed a line," Obama said. "And that needs to be ... understood and accepted. And we have to, as a country, take responsibility for that so that hopefully we don't do it again in the future."

About time our country stopped covering for the abuses of Bush/Cheney

Bush and Cheney are big boys, and I doubt they are, even slightly, disturbed by what you or the Fool in Chief thinks about their actions.

Torture has been a tool of the clandestine services of this nation since the war between the states. The OSS conducted an untold number of 'enhanced interrogations" during WWII, and I doubt that the CIA became nice guys during the cold war. And, don't forget those 'rubber hose' interrogations that were stardard operating practices in big city police forces across the country during the last century.

The only thing about enhanced interrogation that bothers you limp wristed patriots, is that they were conducted by the Bush administration.

 

[Camp]

My comments have nothing to do with being a libertarian. Libertarians are just as corrupt and hypocritical as any politicians or individuals stuck on one party or the other

LOL, no shit Dick Tracy. We don't want a "libertarian" government to force it's will on us, we want no government to do it. George Washington: Why trade one despot for another? Libertarians just want government to just provide those services that only government can do. Roads, civil and criminal courts, police, military, management of limited resources, recognition of property rights cover most of it. Imposing it's will on us and confiscating and redistributing our money is wrong. That is the difference. We don't want libertarian or liberal government forcing us to do it's will.

You appear to me as just a plane generic hater of people who oppose your beliefs.

I hate people who impose their beliefs on me. I have no problem with you practicing your beliefs. If I get my way, you are still free to act according to your beliefs. If you get your way, my right to practice my beliefs is removed.

You are so obsessed with your hatred of the current President that having an academic discussion with you is impossible. I post a legal opinion and synopsis of a section of the Geneva Convention and a Federal District Court ruling regarding drone attacks on American citizens in Yemen and the discussion turns to nonsense, insults and the usual deflection away from anything academic or based on anything fact based. Rather we get stuck in opinions based on opinions that ignore any facts. Obama is a murderer and bad. Worst ever. All liberals are libtards. Anyone not a extreme rw fanatic is a liberal.

I was pointing out your hypocrisy. You don't even know my view on it. Here's the trick, whatever I think that doesn't change your conflicting views. You are OK with Obama killing and maiming people with no due process, you are not OK with W waterboarding which doesn't kill or maim. That is hypocrisy. Nothing I think can change that what you are saying is a pure double standard.

Obama did't kill anyone without due process. That is the meaning of the Federal District Court dismissal. You might not like the interpretation of due process in regards to citizens judged to be a danger to the nation, but that doesn't mean due process was not followed. It means the courts give great room when it comes to the actions the military can take to defend the nation. The teenager son of a terrorist was a direct and imminent threat to national security due to his identification, status and location. His capture and real or unreal quasi status as a hostage would have been a game changer that would have given precedent setting advantages to al Qaeda.

 

[Ibentoken]

Blowing up a terrorist from a drone while he's eating his goat shit sandwich is fine. Put water up his nose to save American lives and it's "Torture". Obama and his supporters are sick.

 

[Freewill]

My comments have nothing to do with being a libertarian. Libertarians are just as corrupt and hypocritical as any politicians or individuals stuck on one party or the other

LOL, no shit Dick Tracy. We don't want a "libertarian" government to force it's will on us, we want no government to do it. George Washington: Why trade one despot for another? Libertarians just want government to just provide those services that only government can do. Roads, civil and criminal courts, police, military, management of limited resources, recognition of property rights cover most of it. Imposing it's will on us and confiscating and redistributing our money is wrong. That is the difference. We don't want libertarian or liberal government forcing us to do it's will.



I hate people who impose their beliefs on me. I have no problem with you practicing your beliefs. If I get my way, you are still free to act according to your beliefs. If you get your way, my right to practice my beliefs is removed.

You are so obsessed with your hatred of the current President that having an academic discussion with you is impossible. I post a legal opinion and synopsis of a section of the Geneva Convention and a Federal District Court ruling regarding drone attacks on American citizens in Yemen and the discussion turns to nonsense, insults and the usual deflection away from anything academic or based on anything fact based. Rather we get stuck in opinions based on opinions that ignore any facts. Obama is a murderer and bad. Worst ever. All liberals are libtards. Anyone not a extreme rw fanatic is a liberal.

I was pointing out your hypocrisy. You don't even know my view on it. Here's the trick, whatever I think that doesn't change your conflicting views. You are OK with Obama killing and maiming people with no due process, you are not OK with W waterboarding which doesn't kill or maim. That is hypocrisy. Nothing I think can change that what you are saying is a pure double standard.

Obama did't kill anyone without due process. That is the meaning of the Federal District Court dismissal. You might not like the interpretation of due process in regards to citizens judged to be a danger to the nation, but that doesn't mean due process was not followed. It means the courts give great room when it comes to the actions the military can take to defend the nation. The teenager son of a terrorist was a direct and imminent threat to national security due to his identification, status and location. His capture and real or unreal quasi status as a hostage would have been a game changer that would have given precedent setting advantages to al Qaeda.

Who Obama killed:

From the ACLU web site:

This case follows a lawsuit filed by the ACLU and CCR in 2010 challenging Anwar Al-Aulaqi’s placement on government kill lists, before his death. A federal district court dismissed the case, holding that the plaintiff, Al-Aulaqi’s father, lacked standing to bring suit, and that the request for before-the-fact judicial review raised “political questions” that the court could not decide.

https://www.aclu.org/national-security/al-aulaqi-v-panetta

Political questions? What in the hell does that even mean. That is BS.

 

[Mustang]

Obama: U.S. 'crossed a line,' tortured after 9/11 - CNN.com

(CNN) -- President Barack Obama acknowledged Friday that the United States "crossed a line" and tortured al Qaeda detainees after the 9/11 terror attacks.
The comments at a White House news conference were the President's strongest on the controversial subject since he came into office denouncing what he described as the Bush years of torturing alleged terrorists, also known as "enhanced interrogation."
"When we engaged in some of these enhanced interrogation techniques, techniques that I believe and I think any fair-minded person would believe were torture, we crossed a line," Obama said. "And that needs to be ... understood and accepted. And we have to, as a country, take responsibility for that so that hopefully we don't do it again in the future."

About time our country stopped covering for the abuses of Bush/Cheney

Conservatives talk about tyranny in the same sentence as Obama's name. I ask you this: What's more tyrannical than torturing detainees? But keep in mind that these people were detained without due process of law. THAT is tyranny. But conservatives LOVED Bush.

Here's the funny part. Conservatives don't love Bush anymore. And why is that? Because he's so damn unpopular after two terms of screwing up everything he touched. NOW, conservatives want to disavow Bush as not truly being one of their own after years of having embraced him as if he was the pride of the family.

 

[kaz]

My comments have nothing to do with being a libertarian. Libertarians are just as corrupt and hypocritical as any politicians or individuals stuck on one party or the other

LOL, no shit Dick Tracy. We don't want a "libertarian" government to force it's will on us, we want no government to do it. George Washington: Why trade one despot for another? Libertarians just want government to just provide those services that only government can do. Roads, civil and criminal courts, police, military, management of limited resources, recognition of property rights cover most of it. Imposing it's will on us and confiscating and redistributing our money is wrong. That is the difference. We don't want libertarian or liberal government forcing us to do it's will.



I hate people who impose their beliefs on me. I have no problem with you practicing your beliefs. If I get my way, you are still free to act according to your beliefs. If you get your way, my right to practice my beliefs is removed.

You are so obsessed with your hatred of the current President that having an academic discussion with you is impossible. I post a legal opinion and synopsis of a section of the Geneva Convention and a Federal District Court ruling regarding drone attacks on American citizens in Yemen and the discussion turns to nonsense, insults and the usual deflection away from anything academic or based on anything fact based. Rather we get stuck in opinions based on opinions that ignore any facts. Obama is a murderer and bad. Worst ever. All liberals are libtards. Anyone not a extreme rw fanatic is a liberal.

I was pointing out your hypocrisy. You don't even know my view on it. Here's the trick, whatever I think that doesn't change your conflicting views. You are OK with Obama killing and maiming people with no due process, you are not OK with W waterboarding which doesn't kill or maim. That is hypocrisy. Nothing I think can change that what you are saying is a pure double standard.

Obama did't kill anyone without due process. That is the meaning of the Federal District Court dismissal. You might not like the interpretation of due process in regards to citizens judged to be a danger to the nation, but that doesn't mean due process was not followed. It means the courts give great room when it comes to the actions the military can take to defend the nation. The teenager son of a terrorist was a direct and imminent threat to national security due to his identification, status and location. His capture and real or unreal quasi status as a hostage would have been a game changer that would have given precedent setting advantages to al Qaeda.

Why don't you google the word "hypocrisy" so you learn what it means. You are again not addressing my point.

 

[Sallow]

LOL, no shit Dick Tracy. We don't want a "libertarian" government to force it's will on us, we want no government to do it. George Washington: Why trade one despot for another? Libertarians just want government to just provide those services that only government can do. Roads, civil and criminal courts, police, military, management of limited resources, recognition of property rights cover most of it. Imposing it's will on us and confiscating and redistributing our money is wrong. That is the difference. We don't want libertarian or liberal government forcing us to do it's will.



I hate people who impose their beliefs on me. I have no problem with you practicing your beliefs. If I get my way, you are still free to act according to your beliefs. If you get your way, my right to practice my beliefs is removed.



I was pointing out your hypocrisy. You don't even know my view on it. Here's the trick, whatever I think that doesn't change your conflicting views. You are OK with Obama killing and maiming people with no due process, you are not OK with W waterboarding which doesn't kill or maim. That is hypocrisy. Nothing I think can change that what you are saying is a pure double standard.

Obama did't kill anyone without due process. That is the meaning of the Federal District Court dismissal. You might not like the interpretation of due process in regards to citizens judged to be a danger to the nation, but that doesn't mean due process was not followed. It means the courts give great room when it comes to the actions the military can take to defend the nation. The teenager son of a terrorist was a direct and imminent threat to national security due to his identification, status and location. His capture and real or unreal quasi status as a hostage would have been a game changer that would have given precedent setting advantages to al Qaeda.

Who Obama killed:

From the ACLU web site:

This case follows a lawsuit filed by the ACLU and CCR in 2010 challenging Anwar Al-Aulaqi’s placement on government kill lists, before his death. A federal district court dismissed the case, holding that the plaintiff, Al-Aulaqi’s father, lacked standing to bring suit, and that the request for before-the-fact judicial review raised “political questions” that the court could not decide.

https://www.aclu.org/national-security/al-aulaqi-v-panetta

Political questions? What in the hell does that even mean. That is BS.

What's Bullshit is that you act like you give a shit.

You don't.

Bush's various wars killed hundreds of thousands of kids just like this.

Your heart doesn't bleed for any one of them.

As your heart doesn't care about kids flocking to this country to escape death in hell holes of US making in Central/South America.

 

[Freewill]

Obama: U.S. 'crossed a line,' tortured after 9/11 - CNN.com

(CNN) -- President Barack Obama acknowledged Friday that the United States "crossed a line" and tortured al Qaeda detainees after the 9/11 terror attacks.
The comments at a White House news conference were the President's strongest on the controversial subject since he came into office denouncing what he described as the Bush years of torturing alleged terrorists, also known as "enhanced interrogation."
"When we engaged in some of these enhanced interrogation techniques, techniques that I believe and I think any fair-minded person would believe were torture, we crossed a line," Obama said. "And that needs to be ... understood and accepted. And we have to, as a country, take responsibility for that so that hopefully we don't do it again in the future."

About time our country stopped covering for the abuses of Bush/Cheney

Conservatives talk about tyranny in the same sentence as Obama's name. I ask you this: What's more tyrannical than torturing detainees? But keep in mind that these people were detained without due process of law. THAT is tyranny. But conservatives LOVED Bush.

Here's the funny part. Conservatives don't love Bush anymore. And why is that? Because he's so damn unpopular after two terms of screwing up everything he touched. NOW, conservatives want to disavow Bush as not truly being one of their own after years of having embraced him as if he was the pride of the family.

Ok, here is where the hypocritical part of left wing reactionaries come into play. They say that the targeting of Americans that take up arms against America without due process is OK because they are in a war zone. BUT the detention of what are nothing more then prisoners of war, whether called that or not they scream bloody murder. As far as I know no American citizen was targeted and killed during Bush nor were any Americans held at Gitmo. So on one hand, to defend Obama, the left will claim that pretty much anything he does is AOK because we are at war. But on the other side of their faces they will say Bush is wrong for taking those who have taken arms up against America and putting them in prison. Wow, just wow. Taking prisoners and detaining them without due process has happened in every war. Hell in FDR's world it was OK to round up Americans and put them into concentration camps without due process.

 

[kaz]

Conservatives talk about tyranny in the same sentence as Obama's name. I ask you this: What's more tyrannical than torturing detainees?

Killing them, their friends and family and anyone who happens to be near them from an automated weapon that fires at them from the air without being legally at war and with no accountability for the man making the decision to do it.

That was easy, you have another question?

 

[Freewill]

Obama did't kill anyone without due process. That is the meaning of the Federal District Court dismissal. You might not like the interpretation of due process in regards to citizens judged to be a danger to the nation, but that doesn't mean due process was not followed. It means the courts give great room when it comes to the actions the military can take to defend the nation. The teenager son of a terrorist was a direct and imminent threat to national security due to his identification, status and location. His capture and real or unreal quasi status as a hostage would have been a game changer that would have given precedent setting advantages to al Qaeda.

Who Obama killed:

From the ACLU web site:

This case follows a lawsuit filed by the ACLU and CCR in 2010 challenging Anwar Al-Aulaqi’s placement on government kill lists, before his death. A federal district court dismissed the case, holding that the plaintiff, Al-Aulaqi’s father, lacked standing to bring suit, and that the request for before-the-fact judicial review raised “political questions” that the court could not decide.

https://www.aclu.org/national-security/al-aulaqi-v-panetta

Political questions? What in the hell does that even mean. That is BS.

What's Bullshit is that you act like you give a shit.

You don't.

Bush's various wars killed hundreds of thousands of kids just like this.

Your heart doesn't bleed for any one of them.

As your heart doesn't care about kids flocking to this country to escape death in hell holes of US making in Central/South America.

So typical of a left wing reactionary to respond to logic with a vitriol attack.

I care about our troops I would not have sent them to Iraq either time. I would not have had the surge that resulted in so many deaths as did Obama. I would not target America citizens without at least some sort of due process. It could be done in secret and revealed after action was taken. I would be very wary of taking the CIAs word for anything.

What is obvious is that I am not sure if left wing reactionaries care about our young men and women or the COTUS. Protecting the King seems more important.

 

[Ibentoken]

The Looney left depends on ignorance. It's harder to lie and get by with it when dealing with informed citizens.