The bigots win again

[andy]

Really - what happened there then?

[TANEYTOWN]

Not as cool as you folks are. Over here we can talk things out, over there it gets out of control fast.

[andy]

Given your past behaviour - can I ask, was it all everyone elses there fault?
They really don't like us here do they - will you have to change identities to remain safe now you have defected (like a sort of Alt Country witness protection scheme!)?

[andy]

Did you say goodbye to them there?

[Dangerbird]

The USA is the greatest country on gods green earth.

I was reading a newspaper just yesterday
got the headlines reading god bless the USA, and I thought, God bless everyone
God bless the people in New York when they got attacked,
God bless the children being bombed yeah in Iraq,
God bless the god damn junky with the monkey on his back,
God bless everybody under the sun

i'm still waiting for your opinion on Rudd's view of gay marriage, Taney.

[TANEYTOWN]

Who the fuck is Rudd? And why should I give a fuck what he thinks? I'm for it as I'm for treating humans as a human.

[noteethleroy]

I'm for it as I'm for treating humans as a human.

Then let them give each other a quick kiss in a commercial.

[TANEYTOWN]

You know what cool have at it. Yes, the bigots won another huge victory in the war against gays.
For that it is a bad day. People are people & should be treated as such .

[Dangerbird]

Who the fuck is Rudd?

my point exactly.

your America-centric view of the world is disturbingly narrow.

why should i care what Obama thinks, when you don't even know who the PM of Australia is, let alone his views on the issue at hand?

[TANEYTOWN]

Because I see a large picture of Obama on the front of this site. I just find it funny how Obama is pretty much lock step in line with McCain on Iraq yet he gets a free pass around here.

[andy]

Christ on a bike this is so boring Tanny - endlessly repeating your half witted diatribes does nothing but encourage us not to take any notice of you at all.
I really fail to fathom what you are trying to do, except see your own posts on the web.
Please can we have an original, thought out & well expressed opinion from you?
Don't you realise that the standard of debate is much higher here than the bear pit of ACT?

[TANEYTOWN]

And you're point is so original Andy? Seems like the same simply minded, clueless crap the
far left spits out without any rime or reason or context ...........

Does waterboarding work? Without a doubt, yes. Abu Zubayda broke after 35 seconds of being waterboarded and, according to the man who did it, the information he gave let us stop “…a number of attacks, maybe dozens of attacks”.

Is waterboarding torture? Well, this CIA agent believes it is, as do a number of other very well-intentioned and reasonable people. I am not so sure that it is. The word “torture” carries a certain number of very weighty connotations that I’m not sure apply to waterboarding. Should it be a regular part of our interrogations? Of course not, and I’m very glad that it isn’t. Let us remember here that for all the sturm und drang over waterboarding, it has been used only three times since 9/11, it hasn’t been used since 2003, and a bipartisan group of our duly-elected officials had oversight over the program and registered no meaningful objections to it when it was in use. What we do know now, and many of us strongly suspected for some time, is that waterboarding was at the extreme point of a very carefully-followed and strictly-approved continuum of interrogation techniques. It was not used recklessly, as you might have gathered from the shrill MSM coverage and the frantic accusations from the left. But it has to be on the table. It has to be part of the continuum. Because of all the extreme things we could do, this one is by far the least damaging and it works.

I'll never understand fascist people that only want to hear what they've always been told & so fearful to ever hear or read something that goes against the grain of they're mind process.

I for am happy to hear it all. I'm a stats guy & breaking a top guy like Abu Zubayda in 35sec tells me not only does this tactic work, it should always be on the table . But should only be
used in extreme situations .......

[Dangerbird]

Is waterboarding torture? Well, this CIA agent believes it is, as do a number of other very well-intentioned and reasonable people. I am not so sure that it is. The word “torture” carries a certain number of very weighty connotations that I’m not sure apply to waterboarding. Should it be a regular part of our interrogations? Of course not, and I’m very glad that it isn’t. Let us remember here that for all the sturm und drang over waterboarding, it has been used only three times since 9/11, it hasn’t been used since 2003, and a bipartisan group of our duly-elected officials had oversight over the program and registered no meaningful objections to it when it was in use. What we do know now, and many of us strongly suspected for some time, is that waterboarding was at the extreme point of a very carefully-followed and strictly-approved continuum of interrogation techniques. It was not used recklessly, as you might have gathered from the shrill MSM coverage and the frantic accusations from the left. But it has to be on the table. It has to be part of the continuum. Because of all the extreme things we could do, this one is by far the least damaging and it works.

This is by far the most coherent and correctly spelled para you've managed to string together since your return. So much so, one has to question it's authorship.

Nevertheless.... this assertion that "it's only been used three times since 9/11" is much like a child sex abuser saying "but I only did it three times". The law is the fucking law, and the law is very clear on torture tactics. Waterboarding is torture and no amount of excuses and claims that it's for the greater good is going to change that.

All nations that are signatory to the United Nations Convention Against Torture have agreed they are subject to the explicit prohibition on torture under any condition. This was affirmed by Saadi v. Italy in which the European Court of Human Rights, on February 28, 2008, upheld the absolute nature of the torture ban by ruling that international law permits no exceptions to it.[105] The treaty states "No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture."[106] Additionally, signatories of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are bound to Article 5, which states, "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment."[107] Many signatories of the convention have made specific declarations and reservations regarding the interpretation of the term "torture" and restricted the jurisdiction of its enforcement.[108] However, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Louise Arbour, stated on the subject: "I would have no problems with describing this practice as falling under the prohibition of torture," and Violators of the UN Convention against Torture should be prosecuted under the principle of universal jurisdiction

Just b/c Bush and his bully-boys don't believe it's torture doesn't mean it isn't. America is not absolved from it's obligations under international law simply b/c it rewrites the definitions.

[andy]

Better tanny technique I guess, but the thing is I requested original not cut & paste from another website:
http://www.sundriesshack.com/?p=3741

[andy]

Also so am I as I no longer post on ACTtab.ca.

I see you are back posting on the ACT forum and claiming that you aren't the person posting here.