''I’ve made it very clear, I’ve made it very clear in my statements and in my support of the Detainee Treatment Act, the Geneva Conventions, etc., that there may be some additional techniques to be used, but none of those would violate the Geneva Conventions, the Detainee Treatment Act…And we cannot ever, in my view, torture any American, that includes waterboarding."
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/04/14/...ing-americans/
So McCain also say waterboarding is torture, while the WH says it's not torture.
Is this guy really this dumb as ?
Why do the Repugs keep nominating total dumb s like dubya and McCain?
Wow.
It's pretty frightening that a presidential candidate feels that he has to explicitly state that he doesn't support the torture of American citizens. I mean, if he says that at the convention are the people supposed to cheer? Maybe he'll run a campaign ad that says, "Vote McCain - he'll only torture foreigners!"
Last edited by BradLohaus; 04-15-2008 at 01:04 AM.
That gets my vote.
Amen!! Well there are some Americans that I wouldnt mind getting tortured, we're tortured everyday with some of their posts on here.
If the mere technicality of U.S. citizenship is the only thing the grants us the "privilege" not be tortured, denied representation, habeus corpus, etc...then no one's "unalienable rights" are truly safe.
Last edited by PixelPusher; 04-15-2008 at 07:19 PM.
Unless you're an American.
damn, just missed my edit to include the FDR's executive order to inter American citizens.
So if citizenship isn't enough to guarantee your rights won't be violated, what will? Ethnicity? Political connections?
This isn't WWII and the current administration isn't FDR's. Your point?
Your right, WWII had an end. The "War on Terror" doesn't.
Do you have some crystal ball which tells you future administrations won't retain the precedents of past administrations, and continue to push the envelope? History is not on your side if you think so.
That American citizenship by itself is not a guarantee that your rights won't be violated. "...a nation of laws, not of men..." and all of that you know.
Dang straight. Better them than us. I'd do whatever it takes to stop Islamic radicals from trying to kill Americans and destroy western civilization.
(That said, if you come across one instance of the gummint torturing an American, or any random (non-terrorist) Moslem, do let me know.)
Quick response to that.
(1) Radical Islam is more than capable of doing serious damage to Western civ. Have you seen what is going on in Europe? It's not out-and-out war there, but there has been enough terror there (e.g., bombings in Spain & Germany) to scare the govts into compliance. And, not to be a scare-monger, but it is only a matter of time before Islam becomes dominant in the UK, France, Belgium, or the Netherlands. When that happens, we'll see sharia. Count on it.
Will this be the end of Western civ? No. Are they capable of ending it? I dunno. But they ARE (or were) capable of monstrous acts (WTC bombing, USS Cole, 9-11) against humanity. And the fact that they're trying to destroy us ought to be enough for us to do whatever it takes to stop them.
Soo ... wake me up when there's an American at Gitmo.
(2) So tell me. What freedoms has the gummint taken from you? What freedoms do you think you might lose?
and (3) I am not a coward.
Last edited by Don Quixote; 04-15-2008 at 08:20 PM. Reason: and another thing
you forgot selling out and living in a foreign country
Need to move on and get some more work done. A final word though ...
(1) Obviously you're not taking me seriously about the threat the radical Islam poses, or wants to pose, on Western civilization. Like I said previously, we're not seeing "people killing each other in the streets." But there has clearly been enough pressure exerted by the Islamic community (particularly in the Netherlands) to scare the people and gummint into compliance. (i.e., the Mohammed cartoons, the murder of Theo van Gogh). Put that with Europe's decline in birth rates and the family unit in general, and Islam's tendency to dominate when in the majority, and I conclude that it's only a matter of time before we see the Islamic Republic of Belgium, or something.
Now ... I am optimistic that the US will not see sharia, except PERHAPS in isolated communities (i.e., Dearborn, Michigan). But we know this: (a) they have designs to kill for Allah and ins ute sharia, and (b) they are capable of great harm. Therefore, it would be foolish and negligent on Pres. Whoever's part not to aggressively pursue them, kill them, and torture them if necessary.
Like I said, wake me up when a dissident American is at Gitmo. (by this, I don't mean an American who's declared jihad. I mean a loyal American who's against the war, or Bush.)
(2) Are you in danger of losing any of your cons utional rights? Like freedom of worship? Freedom from a state religion? Freedom of the press? 5th Amendment? Unreasonable search & seizure? A speedy trial? Do tell me if you've been thrown in prison for criticizing the gummint.
and (3) Fine. We can stop using the word "terrorist," and go with "murderers," "savages," "barbarians," or "destroyers." Your call.
Well, please notify me when you see any of these!
Put down the crack pipe and turn off the wing-nut radio....Put that with Europe's decline in birth rates and the family unit in general, and Islam's tendency to dominate when in the majority, and I conclude that it's only a matter of time before we see the Islamic Republic of Belgium, or something.
'Family Jewels' reveal CIA altered mind of four-year-old girl
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sto...76-663,00.html
EASILY lost, on page 425, in the mass of the CIA's notorious "Family Jewels" files is a short paragraph outlining "potentially embarrassing Agency activities".
"Experiments in influencing human behaviour through the administration of mind- or personality-altering drugs to unwitting subjects."
Of all the heinous acts committed by the CIA in the name of national security, these experiments, done on the agency's behalf by prominent psychiatrists on innocent victims - including children as young as four - may be the darkest.
"We have no answer to the moral issue," former director Richard Helms infamously said when asked about the nature of the projects.
The release of the Family Jewels do ents revealed the CIA handsomely funded these real-life Dr Strangeloves and engaged pharmaceutical companies to help its experiments...
The nature of the experiments, gathered from government do ents and testimony in numerous lawsuits brought against the CIA, is shocking, from testing LSD on children to implanting electrodes in victims' brains to deliberately poisoning people with uranium.
"The CIA bought my services from my grandfather in 1952 starting at the tender age of four," wrote Carol Rutz of her experiences.
"Over the next 12 years, I was tested, trained, and used in various ways.
"Electroshock, drugs, hypnosis, sensory deprivation, and other types of trauma were used to make me complain and split my personality (to create multiple personalities for specific tasks).
"Each alter or personality was created to respond to a post-hypnotic trigger, then perform an act and (I would) not remember it later.
"This Manchurian Candidate program was just one of the operational uses of the mind-control scenario by the CIA.
"Your hard-earned tax dollars supported this."
The US began these experiments after World War II when it made a grab for hundreds of Nazi scientists and doctors who had been researching mind control in concentration camps, fearing they would fall into Soviet hands.
US military intelligence leaders were paranoid that they were falling behind the communist bloc in the brain-washing race.
The programs, though carefully hidden, continued into the 1970s - when Helms ordered much of the do entation to be destroyed.
But the CIA would never do anything terrible, like assassinate a U.S. president for example, or God knows what else.
(Okay ... how to respond?)
Normally, I would let stuff like this, especially from you, go. But Islamic studies happens to be in my wheelhouse and I can't pass it up.
First of all, my judgments regarding Islam and the future of the West are not based upon "right-wing radio" (when you say that, you mean Rush). To my recollection, Rush has not talked much about it. I don't recall Hannity (don't listen to him much) or Beck either saying much about it. And we don't get Bennett in New Orleans, and I don't have time to listen to talk radio all day anyway. Or watch TV news, for that matter.
My judgments on the matter come primarily from my education in comparative religions, theology, and missions, and from being educated by people who have lived in Europe and the Middle East, a few for many years, who have considerable experience and education on the matter. Would you like to be put in touch with Dr. Michael Edens at NOBTS? He is the Dean of Graduate Studies and a retired missionary who spent 30 years in the Middle East, 23 in Cairo, 7 in Baghdad. He can tell you everything about Islam and how Egypt has changed since about 1980.
I could also get you in touch with "abu Daoud" (name withheld), who is currently in Israel. He is an Anglican missionary who was kicked out of Jordan for no reason in particular. He, too, is a wonderful man who can tell you all about the Islamic mentality and their designs on changing the world.
Lastly, and I know this is anathema to you, but I would look at "The Corner" blog on National Review online. Filter out the conservative stuff and focus on the stories regarding sharia and Europe.
Pax
Well, it wasn't during WWII and that little girl wasn't of Japanese descent, so this story couldn't possible be true...
Because Europe is EXACTLY like the Middle East...
Fine. I am more than willing to admit that the gummint was and is capable of bad things to Americans. This happened in the 1950s, not that long ago, but still, a long time ago. If that made any sense.
But IN THIS CONTEXT (i.e., GWOT), please let me know when the gummint has rounded up dissidents (merely for demonstrating), silenced free speech, kept Moslems in prison for no reason in particular, etc. Because if this country really was losing its freedoms the way that Nazi Germany or Stalinist Russia did, then we'd be seeing guys like Michael Moore or Markos Mouslitas locked up right now. Or whole Islamic families thrown in prison or deported. Or people being fined for listening to certain radio programs. Etc.
But I'm not finding that, despite what Al Gore tells people overseas. If Americans are really losing their freedoms at the hands of the Bush administration, I'm not seeing it. (Now have we been losing our freedoms over the decades at the hands of the gummint? That's a different story!)
Let me give you a caveat, however. Most conservatives have been, since 2001, in the position of generally defending the govt. Not 100% signing off on everything, but in general, we have defended the administration against some real crass and base criticism. That said, I would advise conservatives not to get into the habit of always defending the govt, or the Presidency. Indeed, we are, ideally, the party of smaller govt. And, second, it's only a matter of time before we see a Pres. Clinton or Obama. And so I'm not defending the admin out of some naive trust in govt. It's more out of a real skepticism of your conclusions based on the evidence.
Never said it was. Bernard Lewis is probably the best writer on the differences between Islam and Europe historically. He'd be a good one for your summer reading.
But the Islamic immigrants (legal!) have been taking advantage of European freedom, wrought by modernism and indirectly by Christianity, and have naturally used it to their advantage. As they have increased in political and economic power, they have been able to get European people and govts to bend or change their customs/laws in order to accomodate Islam. This would be okay if Islam would return the favor, which of course, it won't and can't.
My point was, some Western European nations are in serious trouble of having an Islamic majority in the next 50 years. If this happens, Islamic rule is inevitable because Islam is also a political system. When this happens, we can kiss freedom goodbye in that part of the world.
There are way too many possible variables between now and 2058 to link your point A (Europe as a modern, liberal democracy) to a point B (Europe as a medieval Islamic theocracy). Are you basing your certainty on some lame conservative stereotype of "the cheese-eating surrender monkey" European?
Yes. And the possibilities are (a) Europe stands up to defeat Islam. Doubtful. I don't think Europeans have the political will to stand up to them. And they can't do it militarily.
(b) Islam conquers Europe. If today's trends continue, then I think that will happen. It's a matter of when. This is the majority opinion in evangelical and conservative circles.
(c) Islam adopts some aspects of European democracy, a bit like Turkey. Some conservatives think this will happen. I don't see it because it doesn't take into account how Islam works. Islam has NEVER not dominated politically where it has conquered (by warfare or otherwise).
But no, I like to think I am a fair-minded scholar. And not all Europeans are "surrender monkeys," although I am sure a few are. So no insults or "lame cons. stereotypes" here.
Good point. We'll probably invade Europe as a preemptive measure, because if we don't it'll turn into a base for Al Qaeda. Then the U.S and "the terrorists" can mutually agree that Europe is the new central battlefield in the war on terror. At least the weather will be more temperate for future generations of Blackwater mercenaries, and whatever military soldiers can be spared from occupation duty in the Middle East.
And ... would you at least admit that some liberal opinions are partially informed by "lame" stereotypes of conservatives as: backward, southern, uneducated, racist, bigot, sexist, phobe?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
