This blog,originally founded by Blogger, who is listed in Marquis Who's Who and is a recipient of the Albert Nelson Marquis Lifetime Achievement Award. He holds a theological degree and a doctorate in Counseling Psychology. Taught Psychology for 32 years and is now Professor Emeritus. Is a board-certified psychologist and was awarded the Lifetime Achievement Award in his profession. Ministered as a chaplain, and pastored Baptist and Episcopal churches. Publications cover the integration of psychology and theology. Served in the Army, the Merchant Marines and the Peace Corps.

Friday, February 19, 2010

Much Ado Over Nothing

Bush officials have been cleared of professional misconduct for the "torture memos" after seven years. I could have saved them a lot of time if they had asked.

72 comments:

oatz said...

I just read that story buried on page 5 in the briefs section. Funny how it was front page when the story broke. I wonder why that was? Also liked how the story says Obama "claimed" water boarding was torture, but since his own department found nothing to charge this settles it once and for all, right Liberal POV? Or is that Left Liberal?

Johnny Rico said...

And who was tortured? Enhanced interrogation is not torture. Wonder why the lefties who claim to hate torture so much never complain when Al Queda does it to our own citizens. Daniel Pearl had his head cut off of Al Jazirra TV with a dull knife. Why do we never get to see that? We sure had Abu Grab on TV every night for months.

Johnny Rico

bridle said...

As a matter of fact, the actual report did find Yoo and Bybee guilty of professional misconduct. The report was over-ridden by David Margolis, at the Dept of Justice. I wonder who was pulling the strings to get those creeps off the hook and why.

Honest Debate said...

"I wonder who was pulling the strings to get those creeps off the hook and why." -Bridle

Someone in the Obama administration.

bridle said...

Why? I suspect that those creeps have some dirt on someone way up high in govt. If it came out, President Obama would be forced by public and world opinion to prosecute this person (Cheney? Bush?). My guess is that President Obama, beset with two wars, national security concerns,and an economy on the verge,on top of a political opposition determined to destroy him at all costs, doesn't feel the country can afford a trial that would divide us even more.

Honest Debate said...

"Why?"

Because it was Obama's DOJ that cleared them. BTW the "J" stands for justice.

guy faulkes said...

Why? - Bridle

Because there was no torture and to have come to the decision that there was would have been another nail in the coffins of the liberal politicians. Bridle is correct that Obama was forced to rein in his sit down and shut up political inclinations.

bridle said...

Go back and read the report. The actual report did find misconduct.

Sarkazein said...

Bridle- Let's say hind-sight had picked up some "mis-conduct". So what? The US is fighting a new kind of enemy in a new kind of war. Not on the battlefields you seem to think exist, but in pizza parlours, passenger airlines, un-armed military bases, and at Embassies. Mis-conduct going in the way of stopping and killing or capturing this new kind of enemy is good, is necessary. The mis-conduct is compared to previous conduct in an entirely different environment.
Once we are frozen by the fear of "mis-conduct" we have lost.

Johnny Rico strikes said...

unbridled idiot (notice lower case spelling),

Are you still yapping about torture? Let your fallicies go man. The US has unfortunately not tortured anyone in Iraq or Afghanistan.

What about Al Queda torturing American civilians and soldiers. Does this even register on the collective memory of idiot liberal socialists such as yourself. For you not to remember marks you forever and always a traitor of the highest order. If you don't like it here in the country that has given you such an easy life then get your sorry ass the hell out of here. Pack your possessions, do us all a favor, and go to, ummm, France and see how you like conversing with the frogs.

Folks like you are what has killed over 4 thousand of our soldiers. do you feel guilty about it in the least?

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

Grady

PS I'll give you a gold star if you can answer to any of this you dolt of an idiot.

Honest Debate said...

Bridle,

Please climb off your high horse. Were they cleared or not? Was it Obama's DOJ or not? Obama had to have signed off on it. They dumped it on Friday night, the black hole of news.

I sincerely apologize if I am wrong but I don't believe you read the 289 page report or the 69 page Margolis memorandum. You look down your nose and say "read the report" as if you have. BS! Likely you read some left-wing hit job somewhere that linked to the report. You swallow their perspective and pass the links (and the vitriol) on to us.

Don't you get bored with parroting the latest Democrat smear meme?

Honest Debate said...

Bridle,

I've got you pegged. You know in your heart I'm right.

Liberal POV said...

Chicken Hawks and Torture Supporters

#1 This story proves the human right abuse, torture and break down of military discipline leading to harsh treatment of Iraq's Civilian population started in the Bush White house.
# 2 A number low ranking men and women went to prison for caring out these torture policies.

# Bridle is correct this was a political decision made at some level to get this legal inditement of former Bush officials off the table. The Obama Admin. has two wars started by the Bush Admin to bring to an end as well as near economic collapse to manage also caused by the Republicans.
These two Bush admin. attorneys were found guilty of professional misconduct by the committee charged with investigating their actions. One person simply over ruled the committee. That's a political white wash not an exoneration.

Why would so called Christians and so call patroitic Americans support such inhuman, un American actions?

Honest Debate said...

You guys go ahead and stew in your conspiracy theories. This new dynamic of criminalizing the advice a President receives is stupid and dangerous. Any President. Now that the shoe is on the other foot Obama knows he can't get candid answers to tough questions from his advisers if those answers can be used against them in court. It's no more complicated than that.

Honest Debate said...

"The Obama Admin. has two wars started by the Bush Admin to bring to an end..." -LiberalPOV

Didn't you mean to say "win"?

Liberal POV said...

HD


No, I mean bring to an end, I have no idea how to stop religious conflicts rooted over one thousand years ago reawaked by both Al Qaeda and The Iraq War.
The Russians were in Afganistan for over a decade using Johnny and Guy's tactics and stradegy without success.

You nor any of your conservative friends know how to define a victory so don't play that game.

guy faulkes said...

POV, glad to see you have run to another thread. However, my questions are going to follow you.

What about Brown, Bayh, and Moore? What about the treatment of Daniel Pearl? What the fact that even some of the people you used to quote admit the Earth has been cooling for several years and that it was warmer in the middle ages than it is now? What about the Democrats baiting the Republicans to hold a conference on health care while they secretly held meetings to ram through their own version be reconciliation? What about the Congressional approval of water boarding?

All of these were questions for which you have no answers. Why should we waste or time by answering your questions over and over?

Liberal POV said...

Guy

" What about the Congressional approval of water boarding?"

#1 Prove it happened?

#2 If you can prove it happened it make no difference it was still a mob action and morally wrong and illegal and should be condemned by all.

#3 Torture and Human rights abuse was counter productive and is still costing American lives.

Liberal POV said...

Guy ( The Flat Earther )

"What the fact that even some of the people you used to quote admit the Earth has been cooling for several years and that it was warmer in the middle ages than it is now?"

What do yo need should be found at these sites.


http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

http://climate.nasa.gov/

Liberal POV said...

Guy ( The very Shallow Thinker )


"What about the treatment of Daniel Pearl?"

Should this become the world's standard of treating the opposing sides prisoners?

Liberal POV said...

Guy

"What about Brown, Bayh, and Moore?"

I'm not sure, unlike you I try not to comment on things I know little about.

I don't know the question your asking about Moore.

I don't think Brown's election means much.

I don't know what Bayh's decision means

guy faulkes said...

POV, you are still running. So you do not have an opinion about why Brown won in one of the most liberal states in the union, why Bayh and other liberals are not running for reelection, you have no opinion on Moore's persona versus Rush's persona? You can not tell the difference between water boarding and beheading?

Your posts have indicated a lack of intelligence, but I never thought to hear you use this condition as an excuse.

Liberal POV said...

Guy

"You can not tell the difference between water boarding and beheading? "

Both are war crimes if done after capture. ( Bombs and shells often behead men, women and children that would have been censored on western media ) one ends in death and the other in near death in most cases but in some actual death.

Honest Debate said...

"You nor any of your conservative friends know how to define a victory so don't play that game." -LiberalPOV

Two things: 1)We've already defined it until we're blue in the face, and 2)victory is no game.

"(The Flat Earther)"

You are not allowed to use that term anymore. You lost that argument and tacitly asked forgiveness by not commenting on the "Global Warming" thread. It was granted (at least by me). If you must, take your links there but I'm warning you, I will shred your argument into little bitty pieces. If I were you I'd set down the kool-aid and slowly back away.

Johnny Rico said...

Liberal Socialist Sheep said:

"I have no idea how to stop religious conflicts rooted over one thousand years ago reawaked by both Al Qaeda and The Iraq War."

A better sentence from the idiot of a socialist would read something like: " I have no idea about anything other than myself as I am a selfish liberal who knows what is best for everyone even though I plan not to follow my own rules because I am a HYPOCRITE".


LOL!! Stings doesn't it? So Daniel Pearl wasn't tortured? I would love for you to tell his friends and family that you dumb idiot of a dolt of an amoeboid liberal socialist sheep. What would you tell them exactly? Maybe "Your son was not tortured as the dull knife SLLLOOOWWWWLLLLYYYY began to cut through his throat".

You know not what you say, and, like all liberal socialist sheep, deserve to be tried as traitors.

It is a wonder you even have the sense to spoon food into your well worn pie hole you idiot.

LOL!!!

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

bridle said...

HD - P. 227 – "We found evidence that Yoo knew he was exaggerating the legal authority for this argument and consciously chose to conceal that fact."
Page 232 - "….we found that the Bybee and Yoo memos contained seriously flawed arguments and that they did not constitute thorough, objective, or candid legal advice. "
p.232 – "We also found evidence that the OLC attorneys were aware of the result desired by the client and drafted memoranda to support that result, at the expense of their duty of thoroughness, objectivity, and candor. …According to Rizzo, there was never any doubt that waterboarding would be approved by Yoo, and the client clearly regarded OLC as willing to find a way to achieve the desired result."
p. 234 – "Several of the memoranda’s arguments were supported by authority whose significance was exaggerated or misrepresented. ….We found instances in which adverse authority was not discussed and its effect on OLC’s position was not assessed accurately…."
P -235 - "…the Bybee and Yoo memos adopted inconsistent positions to advance a permissive view of the torture statute."
p. 236. Some of the arguments in the memoranda were illogical or convolouted…..
p. 240 –" Based on the results of our investigation, we concluded that the classified Bybee memo did not constitute thorough, objective, and candid legal advice."
p.257 – "We found, based on a preponderance of the evidence that Yoo knowingly failed to provide a thorough, objective and candid interpretation of the law. "
p. 258 –" We found that Yoo knowingly provided incomplete and one-sided advice in his analysis……"
p. 266 – Conclusion – "Yoo committed intentional professional misconduct….Bybee committed professional misconduct."

bridle said...

Sark - I was taught and still believe that two wrongs don't make a right.
Where did you learn that it's ok to do bad things if other people do bad things? In church maybe?

Honest Debate said...

Bridle,

Are you claiming you did read the report? Or were the 10 paragraphs the same ones your left wing hit piece cherry picked? 10 paragraphs out of 289 pages, nice context! Why wouldn't you use a single word from Margolis' reasoning? Does any of it matter? In the end THEY WERE CLEARED. Obama made sure of it, he had to.

Did you know that at least nine DOJ lawyers have defended terrorist in court and that Holder is refusing to name them? There are many reasons to question your cherry picked quotes but it doesn't matter. THEY WERE CLEARED. You really don't want to go where you're going. I mean, do you really want to read the conclusions reached in Hillary's travel gate scandal? Or Whitewater? They were cleared, it's all that matters.

Sarkazein said...

Bridle preached-"Sark - I was taught and still believe that two wrongs don't make a right.
Where did you learn that it's ok to do bad things if other people do bad things? In church maybe?"

That may work for you in Sunday School, but in the world of fighting Communists, terrorists, gang bangers, and Algore Global Warming hoaxers, ALL is fare.

bridle said...

HD - Is there any way I can win your 'debates'? I published a link to the whole report, and you accused me of not having read it. Then I published direct quotes with page references and you say that is not adequate. Of course I cherry picked! Was I supposed to type out the whole report? Of course I chose references that support my argument. My argument is that the original report found them guilty of professional misconduct. The conclusion plainly states that both were guilty of professional misconduct.
As to the Margolis memo overriding the findings of the report, he does not justify or condone the Bybee,Yoo memos.On the first page He makes it clear that "This decision should not be viewed as an endorsement of the legal work underlying the memos." He states " Although the ...errors were more than minor..." (p65) "It is a close question... I would be remiss in not stating that these memoranda represent an unfortunate chapter in the history of the office of legal council." None of the following statements in his conclusion are anything but critical of the work. In fact his final judgment is that they were guilty of poor judgment that approaches but does not fall firmly into intentional misconduct.
The sum of all is that a report prepared and endorsed by 19 attorneys found them guilty of professional misconduct, and this report was overridden by a single bureaucrat who found that the level of misconduct did not quite reach beyond poor judgment.
I wonder why?

Honest Debate said...

Bridle,

I can't resist, I just want to show you how you are lowering the bar.

Hillary claimed she was not involved with the travel office firings and was cleared yet the report said: "Mrs. Clinton’s input into the process was significant, if not the significant factor influencing the pace of events in the Travel Office firings and the ultimate decision to fire the employees." Moreover, Ray determined Hillary Clinton had given "factually false" testimony when questioned by the GAO, the Independent Counsel, and Congress about the travel office firings..."

I could do the same thing with the FBI files scandal and Craig Livingstone to indict Hillary but she was cleared.

Whitewater? That report is downright scary. All Clinton's partners and everyone they dealt with was corrupt...except for them. 15 convictions, over 40 crimes and a suicide. They were cleared.

By your criteria we should damn them anyway. Right?

Sarkazein said...

I don't need to read the entire report to know it is a review of others actions after the fact. Making most of it opinion after the action.
My point about misconduct goes back to pre-9/11 when it was misconduct for the military intel to share with the FBI. Now it is not misconduct. However, thanks to Jamie Gorlick(sp) thousands died. She was paralyzed with fear of misconduct. War is war, one has to think and act outside the box. Making it where individuals are afraid to go against the norm in an abnormal situation is a recipe for defeat.

Honest Debate said...

Bridle,

First, just flat out tell me, did you read the entire report or not? You. I don't believe you did. If you tell me you did I will but you aren't saying that. I don't think we can have a relevant discussion of the details unless we both read the entire report. I readily admit I haven't and you're pretending you did. Blame it on me if you want because I don't intend to read it, it doesn't matter. I didn't question any of your quotes anyway just your lack of curiosity and logic.

The Bush administration started the investigation 7 years ago and Obama cleared them. Doesn't that tell you something?

"...this report was overridden by a single bureaucrat who found that the level of misconduct did not quite reach beyond poor judgment.
I wonder why?"

Single bureaucrat? Do you think Margolis acted in a vacuum? This would not have happened without Obama's involvement. I can only guess at the reasons. I've already been there February 21, 2010 8:21 AM.

Liberal POV said...

Bridle

You have done an outstanding job of showing the human rights abuse and torture was planned in the white house and these sorry people let low ranking soldiers go to prison for caring out Cheney and Rumsfelt take the gloves off ( torture ) policy.
Be careful as these are sore losers and will start to delete your comments.

Honest Debate wants neither honesty or a real debate.

bridle said...

HD- I am guilty of skimming the report. I did not focus on all the justifications and legal background. I went to the section where conclusions were reported. So what?

bridle said...

LPOV - Thanks for your comment. It appears you are right and the moderator (despite the moniker) is only interested in repeating the party-line talking points.

guy faulkes said...

No Bridle, you at best gave us a half truth when you were indicating you had read the report. Then you said you ahd merely skimmed it. You never answered if you picked those quotes yourself or regurgitated them from another source. That makes the quotes their opinions, not yours. This makes what you originally indicating at best a half truth. If one believes this was deliberate, then it was a lie. If you ahd wanted to quote a condensation or report on the report, then you should have done so while making it clear that was your intent.

All you have done is lessened the veracity of your arguments.

Finally, I could care less what the report indicates in either support or opposition of this interrogation technique. Water Boarding is not torture and should be used on foreign enemy combatant terrorists to keep us safe. According to the polls, most people agree with me.

Liberal POV said...

Guy

"According to the polls, most people agree with me."

Most mobs will vote for a lynching is that the America you want?

Honest Debate said...

"So what?" -Bridle

I thought I explained all of that pretty well February 21, 2010 2:46 PM and 3:08 PM.

These men simply had to be cleared. Obama had no choice at all. It does not matter what the Bush DOJ lawyers "conclusions" were.

Liberal POV said...

Guy

" Water Boarding is not torture and should be used on foreign enemy combatant terrorists to keep us safe."

Once again you must be reminded your opinions don't become facts because you post it.

United States Courts of law have defined waterboarding as torture as have world courts. That's a fact. This is also defined in world treaties.
That's the whole reason the attorneys were found guilty of professional misconduct by the committee charged with investigating their actions.

Honest Debate said...

"Once again you must be reminded your opinions don't become facts because you post it." LiberalPOV

I can't believe you wrote that and followed it the way you did.

bridle said...

Guy - WTF are you talking about?
HD - I found an analysis that provides a possible explanation for why Margolis decided to overturn a report that resulted from 5 years investigation and was signed by 19 DOJ attorneys here
I still think it's because President Obama is trying to hard to be a moderate centrist. Or else Cheney and his gang of torturers have some dirt on Margolis.

Honest Debate said...

Guy,

Bridle may not have gotten it but I did and you were on the money. Ditto on another thread towards LiberalPOV. You clearly understand the meaning of "honest debate". Most of us do but you've taken the opportunity to put it into words in these two instances. Nice job and thanks.

Honest Debate said...

Bridle,

I really do think you are over analyzing this. Doesn't the idea of criminalizing advice send a chill down your spine?

Think of flight 93. After the Twin Towers were hit and before it was known where flight 93 was headed the decision was made to take it down. That's one hell of a decision. Is it murder by government of civilians or saving catastrophe? You've got two minutes to decide. Luckily, the heroes on board intervened and changed history. Obama has to be ready. What should he do if he was presented the same situation? He needs advice. Candid advice. How could he get it if the advisers knew they could be jailed?

Liberal POV said...

HD, Guy , Johnny

Why would a true conservative want to give any government the right to torture?
Who has oversight in your world?
Who decides who gets tortured?
Who decides how much or how long?
Whose responsible when he victim dies?

Sound like a lot of shallow thinking to me or complete lack of any thinking.

Please explain what you want in a free society?

Honest Debate said...

"United States Courts of law have defined waterboarding as torture as have world courts. That's a fact. This is also defined in world treaties.
That's the whole reason the attorneys were found guilty of professional misconduct by the committee charged with investigating their actions." -LiberalPOV

No, US courts have not. If some rogue cop somewhere broke the law then hang him. Ditto treaties. The three that we waterboarded did not die as you claim sometimes happens. Anything that was done in other wars is not germane to the three we waterboarded under extremely controlled circumstances. It was nothing like 1947 Japan.

The attorneys were cleared, that means found not guilty.

Liberal POV said...

HD

How much proof would you like that waterboarding is illegal and immoral?

You don't get to rewrite history or law.

United States court cases where waterboarding was ruled torture and people sent to prison punished.

http://www.truthout.org/042709J

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15886834

http://www.progresspolitics.com/2009/04/a-victims-discription-of-waterboarding-us-convicted-japanese-soldiers-in-wwii-for-waterboarding/

guy faulkes said...

POV, your first two links have nothing to do with the interrogation of foreign enemy combatant terrorists that do not have the same rights as a citizen of the United States. Your third link is by a propaganda site. Even it makes the point that it was not a United States court that found against water boarding, but an international court that took place shortly after the Second World War. Your source also makes alligations about the military use of water boarding in the Vietnam War. Your claim that it was a U.S. Civilian Court is not true, even using your sources.

Liberal POV said...

Guy

"POV, your first two links have nothing to do with the interrogation of foreign enemy combatant terrorists that do not have the same rights as a citizen of the United States."

Human Rights apply to all humans not just Americans!

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." Sound Familiar?


This says nothing about Americans having special rights.

Why would a conservative want to give government the power to torture?

Liberal POV said...

Guy

"POV, your first two links have nothing to do with the interrogation of foreign enemy combatant terrorists that do not have the same rights as a citizen of the United States."

It makes no difference who is being tortured waterboarding is considered torture by these United States Courts of Law. That is fact and history.

Waterboarding is torture and illegal and immoral.

guy faulkes said...

POV, even you should know there is a difference in the rights of en enemy combatants and citizens of this country. You should also know there is a difference in how military courts and civilian courts operate. Unfortunately, there is a huge difference it what you should know and what you do know.

Did you get a high school diploma, by any chance?

Liberal POV said...

Guy

"POV, even you should know there is a difference in the rights of en enemy combatants and citizens of this country."

Who get to make that decision, someone like you that don't know the difference between an argument condemning human rights abuse and being labeled a terrorist ? Someone as foolish as you could have that power? What rank could get you past such foolish military or government officals?

guy faulkes said...

POV, the rule of law is made by the legislature. They already made the decision. I guess you did not get a high school diploma or if you did it did not cover a civics class.

Liberal POV said...

Guy

"POV, the rule of law is made by the legislature. "

No, we have three branches of government the courts rule on a laws legality.

Precedent prevent torture from ever being legal.

Why would you want the government to have the right to torture???

guy faulkes said...

POV, you certainly have never had a civics class. There are three branches of Government. you probably learned this from a neighborhood kid. Get him to teach you the duties of each. The legislative branch makes laws, spends money, and raises taxes.The executive branch serves as Commander in Chief, enforces the laws made by the legislative branch, and appoints heads of agencies and ambassadors. The judicial branch interprets the laws passed by the legislative branch.

The Obama administration investigated the case. There was not enough cause to send it to the judicial branch. The advisers were cleared. The system worked.

I cannot believe you post on a political blog, when you have no idea how the government is supposed to operate.

Liberal POV said...

Guy

"The Obama administration investigated the case. There was not enough cause to send it to the judicial branch."

The case was there but the Obama Admin or someone choose not to spend political capital on it.
You haven't been paying attention.

see bridle's post

bridle said...
HD - P. 227 – "We found evidence that Yoo knew he was exaggerating the legal authority for this argument and consciously chose to conceal that fact."
Page 232 - "….we found that the Bybee and Yoo memos contained seriously flawed arguments and that they did not constitute thorough, objective, or candid legal advice. "
p.232 – "We also found evidence that the OLC attorneys were aware of the result desired by the client and drafted memoranda to support that result, at the expense of their duty of thoroughness, objectivity, and candor. …According to Rizzo, there was never any doubt that waterboarding would be approved by Yoo, and the client clearly regarded OLC as willing to find a way to achieve the desired result."
p. 234 – "Several of the memoranda’s arguments were supported by authority whose significance was exaggerated or misrepresented. ….We found instances in which adverse authority was not discussed and its effect on OLC’s position was not assessed accurately…."
P -235 - "…the Bybee and Yoo memos adopted inconsistent positions to advance a permissive view of the torture statute."
p. 236. Some of the arguments in the memoranda were illogical or convolouted…..
p. 240 –" Based on the results of our investigation, we concluded that the classified Bybee memo did not constitute thorough, objective, and candid legal advice."
p.257 – "We found, based on a preponderance of the evidence that Yoo knowingly failed to provide a thorough, objective and candid interpretation of the law. "
p. 258 –" We found that Yoo knowingly provided incomplete and one-sided advice in his analysis……"
p. 266 – Conclusion – "Yoo committed intentional professional misconduct….Bybee committed professional misconduct."

February 21, 2010 1:25 PM

Liberal POV said...

Guy

"The judicial branch interprets the laws passed by the legislative branch."

Would this be a case where the courts decide if the laws passed are legal?

http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/SCOTUS/story?id=5037600

Liberal POV said...

Conservatives

Why would you want the government to have the right to torture???

Johnny Rico said...

Liberal Socialist Sheep POV,

Yet again we ask the question " who was tortured?" Enhanced interrogation is not torture, it is a tactic that saves American lives. I have always wondered why the lefties who claim to hate torture so much never complain when Al Queda does it to our own citizens. Daniel Pearl had his head cut off of Al Jazirra TV with a dull knife. Why do we never get to see that? We sure had Abu Grab on TV every night for months. Still waiting to hear you tell Pearl's family that he wasn't tortured. LOL!!!

Stings don't it?

Your ole pal again

Johnny Rico

guy faulkes said...

Yes, POV, the Supreme Court ultimately decides if a law is constitutional after it has been through the gambit of lower courts. In order to do this, a case must be brought before the court system.

Therein is the point. While the Obama administration wrongly (as usual) decided to ensure those that gave advice concerning water boarding, they did not feel they had a case to take before the courts. If they did feel they had a case, and did not do so because of political reasons, they either felt that the Court would decide against them or they knew that doing so would add to the political doom of the progressives as public opinion does not agree with them.

Liberal POV said...

Guy, Johnny

I think person such as your self that feel it's okay to committ such human rights abuse along with these attorneys and Dick Cheney should have to experience what those like HD call a nasal rinse.

This nasal rinse is actual drowning with lungs filling with water the only difference is the person controling the water will usually stop before you die. Why don't you try having a brother in law who doesn't like you, bind your hands and feet and summit yourself to real waterboarding then you may know what your talking about.

Answer the question. Why would you want the government to have such power?

Liberal POV said...

Guy

Why do the conservatives such as yourself want a police state?

guy faulkes said...

POV, it is interesting that you would permit torture for me. This practice is not water boarding but would be torture.

Well at least you finally have proven without a doubt that you are a hypocrite that would torture those he disagrees with while at the same time defending his terrorist heroes.

Nothing I have ever said promotes a police state.

The police have nothing to do with the foreign enemy combatant terrorists you so admire. They are under the jurisdiction of the military. This is another major mistake of the ridiculous Obama administration.

Proverbs 18 : 2 does indeed describe you perfectly.

Liberal POV said...

Guy

So when its you under the water it becomes torture?

Great logic Guy

Liberal POV said...

Guy

Many South American and Middle East Governments have the kind of police states you want.

Liberal POV said...

Guy

"Nothing I have ever said promotes a police state. "

When you want the government to have the power to at will pick up a suspect and waterboard that suspect without trial that is what a police state does.

guy faulkes said...

Capturing a foreign enemy combatant terrorist is not picking someone up at will, LIBERALP18:2. Also you said you wished to drown me. Water boarding does not do this, hence the difference. Thank you for the acknowledgment of my logic. It is rare you have this much insight.

Liberal POV said...

Guy

Waterboarding is the actual drowning of a person which stops short of death most of the time. Often the victim will lose consusiness.

I suggest you read and learn what you support.

http://www.progresspolitics.com/2009/04/a-victims-discription-of-waterboarding-us-convicted-japanese-soldiers-in-wwii-for-waterboarding/

"Navarro: When Yuki could not get anything out of me, he wanted the interpreter to place me down below. And I was told by Yuki to take off all my clothes, so what I did was to take off my clothes as ordered. I was ordered to lay on a bench and Yuki tied my feet, hands and neck to that bench, lying with my face upward. After I was tied to the bench, Yuki placed some cloth on my face. And then with water from the faucet, they poured on me until I became unconscious. He repeated that four or five times."

"Waterboarding actually refers to two different interrogation techniques. One involves pumping water directly into the stomach. "This creates intense pain. It feels like your organs are on fire," says Darius Rejali, a professor at Reed College in Oregon and author of a new book, Torture and Democracy.

The other technique — the one more widely used today — involves choking the victim by filling their throat with a steady stream of water — a sort of "slow-motion drowning" that was perfected by Dutch traders in the 17th century. They used it against their British rivals in the East Indies."

guy faulkes said...

LiberalP18:2, one of your own links defined water boarding as a cloth being placed over the mouth and water being poured on the cloth. No water is poured down the throat. Are you lying now or did you lie then?

By the way, you hung around BB to long. I thought better of you than your expressing the wish to commit murder. It goes to show how hypocritical your are in your desire to protect foreign enemy combatant terrorists but kill those that disagree with you. This has ended any claim you might have had to being taken seriously.

Liberal POV said...

Guy

" I thought better of you than your expressing the wish to commit murder."

I see waterboarding has moved from enhanced interrogation procedure when committed on other human being to possible murder when you could become the victim.

It's interesting how your prospective changes.

I did suggest that one of your brother in laws show you what waterboarding really is. I assume he really doesn't like you very much.

guy faulkes said...

liberalproverbs18:2

I see waterboarding has moved from enhanced interrogation procedure when committed on other human being to possible murder when you could become the victim.

It certainly did. You were the entity that accomplished that using your own words. No wonder you seldom do anything but repeat talking points. I cannot control the huge extent to which you stick your foot in your mouth.

Apparently, neither can you.

Hammer Rico said...

Liberal Socialist Sheep POV,

You seem to need another dose of reality. You see, you lie so often and so much that you begin to believe your very own lies.

The US has unfortunately not tortured anyone in Iraq or Afghanistan.

What about Al Queda torturing American civilians and soldiers. Does this even register on the collective memory of idiot liberal socialists such as yourself. For you not to remember marks you forever and always a traitor of the highest order. If you don't like it here in the country that has given you such an easy life then get your sorry ass the hell out of here. Pack your possessions, do us all a favor, and go to, ummm, France and see how you like conversing with the frogs.

Folks like you are what has killed over 4 thousand of our soldiers. do you feel guilty about it in the least?


LOL

Betsy G.

Johnny Rico