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.

Sunday, February 14, 2010

Sen. Feinstein asks about chance of attempted terrorist attack

This is a video is of those right wing fear mongers the liberals on our blog are always accusing us of being.

114 comments:

Sarkazein said...

Yeah, but if we just ignore it, we win. Especially if they are successful, we just act like it never happened. Because if we let them know we noticed it, they win. So everybody SHHHHHH. First one to notice the enemy loses.

Honest Debate said...

An attempted attack is a certainty. The 9/11 commission was right, they were at war with us long before we were at war with them. They will remain at war with us whether we fear them, ignore them, apologize to them, imprison them, profile them, love them or hate them.

Liberal POV said...

HD

What's so hard for you people to understand?

Yes, we keep pressure on KNOWN Al Qaeda, we follow our own laws, we don't act foolishly to their benefit, We respect human rights, we don't empower the government to torture people,
We don't assist them is hyping fear their main weapon and strategy. We forge alliances with Muslim people around the world.
The current Republican voices Chenney, Palin, Guy , Sark are all Know Nothing ignorance the will asure an much wider war and disaster.

Honest Debate said...

...or we kill the bad guys before they kill us.

Liberal POV said...

HD

Think!! No fear, No becoming them, Keep our libery, Keep out civilized world, Respect Non Al Qaeda lives, Don't empower Al Qaeda.

Honest Debate said...

Kudos to Obama for doing the opposite of what Lib wants.

Honest Debate said...

"The idea of there being a massive attack in the United States like 9/11 is unlikely, in my opinion," Biden said in an interview on CNN's "Larry King Live."

We can all rest easy now.

Liberal POV said...

HD

Kudos to Obama for doing the opposite of what Lib wants.

Is that what you think I posted?

Why would you want to play into Al Qeada's over all strategy of fear?

You are many times more likely to be harmed by a drunk driver, You and most Americans have the danger out of prospective. It's not that it can't happen but it's just not that big a danger over all.

Playing up the danger works against us and for them.
The more you give time on this blog to fear the more you help Al Qaeda's strategy.

Honest Debate said...

"Playing up the danger works against us and for them.
The more you give time on this blog to fear the more you help Al Qaeda's strategy." -LiberalPOV

Tell that to the gentlemen testifying.

Reader said...

HD, I think you are terrifying the life out of Lib...please continue. Until he faces the truth, oh well.

guy faulkes said...

POV is an interesting entity. He is a dead end in the highway system of life. Something that does not believe in self preservation cannot survive. Unfortunately, he wants to take the rest of us with him.

Liberal POV said...

Fear Mongers

This year Americans are for more likely to die from, drunk drivers, Tornados, Hurricanes then from terrorist attacks in American.

Do you really believe Guy or Cheney's extremism will make a safer world?

The Republican Party is lead by Know Nothing extremist.

guy faulkes said...

POV, how many times are you going to [post the same irrelevant, inconsequential dribble(Or as it is translated: La La La La La La)?

Why do you keep referring only to Republicans when Moderate Democrats and Independents also disagree with you?

You must be very lonely out there in Never Never Land. Fortunately you have to Kool Aid to numb your mind.

Liberal POV said...

Guy

Not even you believe you believe your nonsense and extremism would make a safer world.

Johnny Rico said...

Liberal Socialist Lemming said"

"we don't empower the government to torture people"

When did we ever torture anyone? Who was tortured? Are you talking about the Muslims torturing Daniel Pearl as they lopped his head off with a dull knife?


"The current Republican voices Chenney, Palin, Guy , Sark are all Know Nothing ignorance the will asure an much wider war and disaster."

Is the same "no nothing ignorance" that seated a Republican in Mass. for the first time in 50 years (The woman killing Ted Kennedy's seat nonetheless!). Is it that ignorance you are describing?

LOL!!!!!

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

Johnny Rico said...

Liberal Socialist Sheep said:

"Respect Non Al Qaeda lives, Don't empower Al Qaeda"

Ah hah!!! Here we have it - the political correctness that has cost 4 thousand American lives. You respect the lives of Al Queda over the lives of your own soldiers. Amazing. More precision strikes are the order of the day I suppose? Or community building, or consensus building, or cultural awareness. When has any of these "concepts" ever won a war? Show me just one.

You see, and I don't really think you will ever see as you are blinded by your own ignorance and refusal to accept historical facts, killing non-Al Queda is the way to winning this war. We killed the non Bushido Warriors in Japan in WWII. We killed the non Nazis in Germany in WWII. We killed the families of Johnny Reb in the Civil War. What was the end result of all these wars? Victory, pure and simple.

A precision strike and feel good fighting (born of liberals such as yourself) will never win a war. This is exactly what Hussein Obama is doing. He, with your concurrence, is continuing to expend American soldiers when they don't have to be expended.

A steady supply of bombs knocking out all major and minor infrastructure followed by a million man invading army would have it said and done with in short order. Hard to be a terrorist when you can't find enough to eat.

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

PS And burying Al Queda fighters with hogs is an excellant idea as Black Jack himself proved nearly a century ago. War is hell, war is hell.


Grady

Johnny Rico said...

Liberal Lemming POV said:

"Why would you want to play into Al Qeada's over all strategy of fear?"

And whom does this fear spread to? It spreads to liberals such as yourself. Conservatives understand how to deal with Muslim extremists (Has the Ft. Hood shooter been named a terrorist yest by Hussein Obama), but they are bound by political correctness born by idiots such as yourself.

This same type of fear is what causes things like the King, NC martial law incident (hoping I wouldn't bring that one up weren't you). Liberals such as yourself use terrorism and the fear it projects upon yourselves to strip away rights from the rest of us who are not scared!!!!

Amazing!! Bomb Iraq and Afghanistan into the stone age and then have the FBI go after domestic terrorists such as Liberal POV and Tricycle Lard. A charge of treason, following by a federal charge of capital punishment would do wonders for the attitude of this country.

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

LOL!!!

Barbara

Johnny Rico said...

Liberal Socialist Sheep said:

"The Republican Party is lead by Know Nothing extremist."

Is that why Brown beat the pants off the liberal female in Mass?


LOL!!!!!!

Johnny Rico said...

Liberal Socialist Sheep POV:

What gives (gave) you more pleasure. Spitting on returning soldiers from Vietnam or enjoying the 4 thousand American soldier's deaths during our most current conflict? (the conflict supported by Democrats as well as Republicans).


LOL

Your ole pal again

Johnny Rico

Liberal POV said...

HD Reader

There you have it the voice of reason and peace for Johnny and Guy.

This is what your Republicn Party has become a party of insanity.

Keep in mind Johnny 20 million died in World II and over 600 thousand Americans died in the Civil War?

These people have NO Navy, No Airforce, Little Money, No Country, few places to hide as a group why are you so frightened?

guy faulkes said...

POV, you keep referring to Republicans. Are you ever going to address the fact moderate Democrats and the vast majority of Independents do not agree with you?

Again, is it getting lonely in La La land?

Liberal POV said...

Guy

The fools I'm hearing are You, Dick Cheney, Palin and Rush.

The Republicans will never win outside of the old south with that insanity.

Honest Debate said...

Lib,

Obama stumbled big time with Abdumutallab. The KSM trial is a logistical nightmare. Add to that he promised to close Gitmo and has real problems dealing with the prisoners. In other words, capturing more high value Al Qaeda leaders is a very real and ongoing problem. We need to take a few alive to interrogate them or opportunities for peace are missed.

The result: Obama has made a calculated decision to kill them instead.

Read this.

Liberal POV said...

HD

This is the part you don't get If the target is dead that story is over no torture, no human rights abuse, no leadership for a little while. The next known leader becomes the target. Little propaganda for growing Al Qaeda as you and Conservative want.

This is a war of minds not just weapons. We have the weapons but we need the populations of the Middle East on our side.
Pissing off the Muslim world means more Americans die and a larger bloodier war as we have seen with the Rumfelt, Cheney blunders.

Liberal POV said...

HD

We become the ones despensing fear to those KNOWN connected Al Qaeda not the general populations. If they are taken into US Custody they're to be treated with the same respect and humaniity we would want for our children.

Johnny Rico said...

Liberal Socialist Sheep POV said:

"This is what your Republicn Party has become a party of insanity."

Really, then why did Scott Brown win in Mass? Care to explain that one? LOL!!!

The amoeboid lemming goes on to say:

"These people have NO Navy, No Airforce, Little Money, No Country, few places to hide as a group why are you so frightened?"

We aren't. Because of exactley what you said, we are wondering how idiots like you are able to prolong the war through political correctness. Precision strikes have never won a war, even against those without an army, navy, technology, common sense or toilet paper, and we will lose this war unless we bring it to the people of Afghanistan and Iraq. War is hell my friend, hell.

Again my question to you. What gives you more pleasure, the deaths of 4 thousand American soldiers or spitting on returning Vietnam Vetrans?

LOL!!!

So easy.

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

Betsy G.

Johnny Rico said...

Liberal socialist sheep lemming said:

"The Republicans will never win outside of the old south with that insanity"

Then how did they happen to win by a majority in Mass? LOL!!! Duh, duh, do da daa duhhhhh. LOL!!!

Since you live in the old south, and seem to hate it so much, then do us all a favor and leave. We were doing just fine in Watauga County before outsiders like you moved in and started changing things.

LOL

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

Craig

Johnny Rico said...

Liberal Socialist Sheep POV said:

"Pissing off the Muslim world means more Americans die and a larger bloodier war as we have seen with the Rumfelt, Cheney blunders"

And not pissing them off gives us Clinton type blunders such as 9/11, USS Cole, Mogadishu, Bosnian genocide, Darfur genocide, and many, many others.

Why is it you never seem to mention that the blunder of not taking action is what got us into this mess. When the draft dodging, dope smoking, dull eyed slug did exactly what you propose -NOTHING- it led us down the pass of becoming victims.

You can be a victim if you want, but leave me out of that one. We need to bomb and kill the enemies wherever they are, and if it means bringing the war to the Muslim people, then that should be done also. Show me one limited war that the US has ever won. Just one.

LOL!!!!

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

Raul

Johnny Rico said...

Liberal Socialist Lemming POV said:

"If they are taken into US Custody they're to be treated with the same respect and humaniity we would want for our children"

Your even more stupid than I gave you credit for. You are now comparing hardened terrorists with our children. Put the terrorists in time out - that will certainly work.

What about Daniel Pearl. Why was it that we had Abu Grab shoved down our throats (I didn't see one thing wrong with Abu Grab) every night on the news, yet they refuse to show anything relating to Daniel Pearl who had his head lopped off by the enemy? The news media claimed the Daniel Pearl beheading was too strong to be shown on television, yet they went right ahead and showed the "deplorable" acts against enemy soldiers by our US soldiers?

Can you liberals say the word HYPOCRISY? HYPOCRISY?

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

PS If you want them treated as you would treat your children (I was hoping against hope you hadn't figured out how to procreate), then how about "hosting" some terrorists in your home sometime?

LOL

Donna H.

Liberal POV said...

Republicans

See Johnny's post and see your future.

Professor Johnny Rico said...

Care to tell why you disagree with any of my posts?

guy faulkes said...

See Johnny's post and see your future. - POV

It looks bright indeed and not just for Republicans, but conservatives of all persuasions.

POV, you have not explained the outcome of the Massachusetts senate race.

The Democrat Senator from Indiana, Evan Bayh, has decided not to run for re-election. Care to explain that one? How about him running against Obama in 2012 as he was fairly conservative and disagreed publicly with the Obama policies?

Honest Debate said...

Lib,

I want top make sure I understand you correctly. You object to capturing terrorist on humanitarian grounds yet it's cool to target them for assassination. Is that right?

Alright then, what about Mullah Baradar? The number two Taliban leader has been captured. He is being harshly interrogated as we speak. Good or bad?

Liberal POV said...

HD

Let me be clear Civilian Casualties by mostly Christian foriegn powerful ocuplying military will not be in our interest. All posible steps need to be taken to avoid innocent non Al Qaeda residents from being killed.
Known Al Qaeda killed on the battle field I have no problem with. I'm not talking about field executions.

Once an Al Qaeda suspect is in our custody all human right , Geneva Convention, Red Cross and Red Cresent rules apply.

HD
"what about Mullah Baradar? The number two Taliban leader has been captured. He is being harshly interrogated as we speak. Good or bad?"

If true bad. It will only work against us later.

I believe Major Matthew Alexander has won over the military to smarter interrogations.

What is your proof something different is happening?

oatz said...

Islamic Republic News Agency reported:

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said in a press conference in Tehran that US President Barack Obama has a limited time to materialize his campaign promise of change…

He criticized US President Barack Obama for his failure to shut down Guantanamo Bay detention camp over the past year since taking office despite his campaign promise to do so.

guy faulkes said...

Alwxander, who ever hw is is insignificant. He joins the ranks os Michael Moore and Al Gore as discredited leftist talking heads to which no one except the Kool Aide drinking liberals pay any attention. Check the polls, POV.

I am still waiting for POV to explain about Brown and Bayh.

Reader said...

Is this the Alexander you are commenting about Lib?

http://thisainthell.us/blog/?p=14664

Liberal POV said...

Reader

That's the one.

Do you still want to support unAmerican activitiies like human rights abuse and torture?

Honest Debate said...

Reader,

I don't think Lib read your link.

Liberal POV said...

HD

Sure I read it. You have a right wing blog trying to do a hachet job on Sliver Star and or Bronze star Lt Col.

This man is an officer in the US military and this blog carefully make statements to discredit Major Alexander while not laying out any facts different than those stated.

One Statement to discredit the officer was his assocation with the ACLU a freedom defence organization.

HD, Do you support the US Military being involved with torture and Human rights abuse?
What did you here in the blog that I didn't?
Was the officer accused of being a liberal?

Johnny Rico said...

Liberal Socialist Sheep POV said:

"All posible steps need to be taken to avoid innocent non Al Qaeda residents from being killed."

Yet another political correctness factor in why we will never win another war when liberal socialists (you) have a say. You seem more outraged at Muslim civilian deaths as opposed to American civilian deaths. Why is that. Is it because, as Faulks has already said, you are a traitor?

The US should reduce Iraq and Afghanistan's infrastructure to nothing. Doing this will bring the war to the people (the only true way to win a war) which will in turn cause them to rail against the ones who started this (Al Queda). This same strategy has worked time and again throughout history and will work today.

Too bad liberal political correctness has caused 4 thousand Americans to die in two wars we will never win. So which do you like better, spitting on returning Vietnam Vetrans, watching American citizens die at the hands of terrorists, or 4 thousand American soldiers dying needlessly?

LOL!!!

Your ole pal
Johnny Rico

PS Have you ever answered even one question on this site?

LOL!!!

Donna H.

Johnny Rico said...

Liberal Socialist Sheep POV:

I am still wanting to know when we ever tortured anyone? Who was tortured? Are you talking about the Muslims torturing Daniel Pearl as they lopped his head off with a dull knife?


This ought to be ineteresting

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

guy faulkes said...

The following are excerpts from two posts on the reality check thread. As POV is using his same La La approach on this thread, I hope you will forgive my bringing attention to them again. I felt it necessary.

POV, it is interesting that, at various times, you have accused Blogger, HD, Sark, Reader, Bushrod Gentry, Johnny Rico, Simon Gentry, MikeD. Oatz, the Wolf, and me of the same thing (not having facts to back up our statements). The only common denominator between us is you. We have all disagreed amicably with each other, as we have with Bridle and RV. You and BB are the only entities that use your ridiculous tactics of obstructive, repetitive, meaningless posts. You are both pathetic. It is not that our facts do not "cover" our posts, it is that you are religiously unable to admit that they do.

You chose not to accept the truth. Another of your La La La La La statements is the claim that others put words in your mouth when you are caught in one of your idiotic statements. At various times you have also made this claim in reply to all of us.

Do these facts being exposed embarrass you or do you not have the capacity to understand how pitiful you are? La La land is about the only place you can survive.

Reader said...

All they have to ask themelves is, "why didn't I see that"? I won't say a word...I promise. I would like to say now, thank you for seeing it though. That's it. We all want to be right, but that doesn't happen in this life. It might in our second life, but not this one.

guy faulkes said...

POV, was William Calley an officer in the United States military? Did you admire him because of this? If being a member of the military makes Alexander admirable, then logically you would also admire Calley. I would say you would also admire Benedict Arnold because he was a member of the military, but then you probably do as he was another traitor such as yourself. Same result, different reason.

If you are as old as you say you are and if you are a veteran, you know who Calley was and of what he was convicted.

I have serious doubts as to the truth of the claims you have made about your age and occupation. You write as if you were an early 20's entitlement baby.

Liberal POV said...

Guy

Now you want to tell me I'm wrong about my age and experiences.

Do you believe if you get to make up my age and experience you will be able to respond with real facts and data?

Yes, I know who Lt Calley was and I also know Hugh Thompson Jr. was.


I don't believe Lt Calley got a medal for his actions.

Why would you and other republicans support human rights abuse, torture and forfeit your humanity?

History will not be kind to people like you.

Your values are no only unAmerican but uncivilized and similar to what the German people justified during World War II.

Why are you even arguing to a return to such inhumanites?


http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mylai/myl_hero.html

Honest Debate said...

"I have serious doubts as to the truth of the claims you have made about your age and occupation. You write as if you were an early 20's entitlement baby." -Guy Faulkes

I agree.

guy faulkes said...

Calley did not get a medal for his war crimes. Alexander, whoever he really is may not deserve one either. The point is your claim that Alexander deserves to be used as a competent source was based on his being a member of the military,as per your own words. I used Calley to prove you were incorrect in this assumption.

Stick to the point , POV. Focus. Focus. Keep trying. However, I bet we see another "putting words in my mouth" whine approaching.

"Why would you and other republicans support human rights abuse, torture and forfeit your humanity?" We do not except in your insane mind.

I notice you did not deny your admiration for Benedict Arnold.

POV, you have lied so many times that I do not understand why you think we should believe anything you say, even statements about your age or life experience.

Liberal POV said...

Guy

"Why would you and other republicans support human rights abuse, torture and forfeit your humanity?"

Answer: We do not except in your insane mind.


What are we debating?

This means you agree those in US Custody should not be tortured and should be treated as we would want Americans treated? This also means the suspects are entitled to a trial or hearing on guilt or innocents.

Does this mean you no longer support the statement below?
"I personally think killing them with some kind of swine byproduct and burying them with a hog might be effective. It worked for Black Jack Pershing. Saturation bombing of terrorist strongholds would also be effective. It would not be long until these strongholds would not be allowed by the local populace."

February 14, 2010 4:41 PM

Does this mean you really don't want to enflame the entire Muslim World all 1.100 billion, The World Almanac (1997)?

guy faulkes said...

Does this mean you really don't want to enflame the entire Muslim World all 1.100 billion, The World Almanac (1997)? - POV

I want to support the majority of Muslims that wish to be rid of the fanatics that practice lesser jihad. My earlier statement would accomplish that goal. You, on the other hand want to support the terrorists, even at the cost of United States citizens lives.

This means you agree those in US Custody should not be tortured and should be treated as we would want Americans treated? This also means the suspects are entitled to a trial or hearing on guilt or innocents. - POV

No one has been tortured. Why have you not answered Rico's challenge to detail any such torture. Water boarding is not torture. Enemy combatants have no rights under the United States civil legal system. They can be tried for war crimes under a military court.

Thank you for proving your belief system is not sane.

Are you ever going to address the issues of Bayh's withdrawal, Brown's victory, and Michael Moore's insignificance and nerd persona while at the same time you attack Rush?

Liberal POV said...

Guy

"Water boarding is not torture"

These courts disagree:

A Punishable Offense

In the war crimes tribunals that followed Japan's defeat in World War II, the issue of waterboarding was sometimes raised. In 1947, the U.S. charged a Japanese officer, Yukio Asano, with war crimes for waterboarding a U.S. civilian. Asano was sentenced to 15 years of hard labor.

"All of these trials elicited compelling descriptions of water torture from its victims, and resulted in severe punishment for its perpetrators," writes Evan Wallach in the Columbia Journal of Transnational Law.

On Jan. 21, 1968, The Washington Post ran a front-page photo of a U.S. soldier supervising the waterboarding of a captured North Vietnamese soldier. The caption said the technique induced "a flooding sense of suffocation and drowning, meant to make him talk." The picture led to an Army investigation and, two months later, the court martial of the soldier.

Cases of waterboarding have occurred on U.S. soil, as well. In 1983, Texas Sheriff James Parker was charged, along with three of his deputies, for handcuffing prisoners to chairs, placing towels over their faces, and pouring water on the cloth until they gave what the officers considered to be confessions. The sheriff and his deputies were all convicted and sentenced to four years in prison.

Waterboarding may be widespread, but it has not been used everywhere. There's no evidence that either the Nazis or the Soviets used the technique, Rejali says. These regimes, he says, weren't concerned about public opinion, and so they often used harsher methods that left permanent scars or killed their victims. If anything, Rejali says, waterboarding has been an interrogation technique preferred by the world's democracies.

Stephen Rickard, Washington director of the Open Society Institute, says that throughout the centuries, the justifications for using waterboarding have been remarkably consistent.

"Almost every time this comes along, people say, 'This is a new enemy, a new kind of war, and it requires new techniques,'" he says. "And there are always assurances that it is carefully regulated."

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

Liberal POV said...

Guy

"Water boarding is not torture"

http://blogs.georgetown.edu/?ID=28978

"First, Judge Wallach clarifies the nature of what is called waterboarding:
That term is used to describe several interrogation techniques. The victim may be immersed in water, have water forced into the nose and mouth, or have water poured onto material placed over the face so that the liquid is inhaled or swallowed. The media usually characterize the practice as "simulated drowning." That's incorrect. To be effective, waterboarding is usually real drowning that simulates death. That is,
the victim experiences the sensations of drowning: struggle, panic, breath-holding, swallowing, vomiting, taking water into the lungs and, eventually, the same feeling of not being able to breathe that one experiences after being punched in the gut. The main difference is that the drowning process is halted. According to those who have studied waterboarding's effects, it can cause severe psychological trauma, such as panic attacks, for years."

Liberal POV said...

Guy

""Water boarding is not torture"

"Second, Wallach makes it clear that the United States has traditionally punshied those who have engaged in waterboarding:
The U.S. government -- whether acting alone before domestic courts, commissions and courts-martial or as part of the world community -- has not only condemned the use of water torture but has severely punished those who applied it.
After World War II, we convicted several Japanese soldiers for waterboarding American and Allied prisoners of war. At the trial of his captors, then-Lt. Chase J. Nielsen, one of the 1942 Army Air Forces officers who flew in the Doolittle Raid and was captured by the Japanese, testified: "I was given several types of torture. . . . I was given what they call the water cure." He was asked what he felt when the Japanese soldiers poured the water. "Well, I felt more or less like I was drowning," he replied, "just gasping between life and death."
Nielsen's experience was not unique. Nor was the prosecution of his captors. After Japan surrendered, the United States organized and participated in the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, generally called the Tokyo War Crimes Trials. Leading members of Japan's military and government elite were charged, among their many other crimes, with torturing Allied military personnel and civilians. The principal proof upon which their torture convictions were based was conduct that we would now call waterboarding."

Liberal POV said...

Guy

""Water boarding is not torture"

http://blogs.georgetown.edu/?ID=28978


"After noting several other prosecutions, Judge Wallach continues:
More recently, waterboarding cases have appeared in U.S. district courts. One was a civil action brought by several Filipinos seeking damages against the estate of former Philippine president Ferdinand Marcos. The plaintiffs claimed they had been subjected to torture, including water torture. The court awarded $766 million in damages, noting in its findings that "the plaintiffs experienced human rights violations including, but not limited to . . . the water cure, where a cloth was placed over the detainee's mouth and nose, and water producing a drowning sensation."
In 1983, federal prosecutors charged a Texas sheriff and three of his deputies with violating prisoners' civil rights by forcing confessions. The complaint alleged that the officers conspired to "subject prisoners to a suffocating water torture ordeal in order to coerce confessions. This generally included the placement of a towel over the nose and mouth of the prisoner and the pouring of water in the towel until the prisoner began to move, jerk, or otherwise indicate that he was suffocating and/or drowning."

The four defendants were convicted, and the sheriff was sentenced to 10 years in prison."

Liberal POV said...

Guy

Guy

"Water boarding is not torture"

http://blogs.georgetown.edu/?ID=28978


Wallach concludes:
We know that U.S. military tribunals and U.S. judges have examined certain types of water-based interrogation and found that they constituted torture. That's a lesson worth learning. The study of law is, after all, largely the study of history. The law of war is no different. This history should be of value to those who seek to understand what the law is -- as well as what it ought to be.

Liberal POV said...

Guy

"Water boarding is not torture"

http://www.amnestyusa.org/document.php?id=ENGAMR510112008&lang=e

This attempt to justify these admitted acts of waterboarding flies in the face of the USA's treaty obligations. The UN Convention against Torture, ratified by the USA in 1994, states that "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".

Liberal POV said...

Guy

"Water boarding is not torture"

http://lawreview.wustl.edu/slip-opinions/waterboarding-is-illegal/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8uMOnLarOo

Honest Debate said...

Lib,

Your posts are irrelevant. We didn't do any of that. We water boarded three prisoners and we did it under very controlled circumstances. There was no immersion in water or drowning or anything of the sort. This is not 1947 Japan.

guy faulkes said...

POV, as a traitor and supporter of terrorism, you do not even think we should say"Naughty, Naughty" to captured enemy combatants. Your views are irrelevant. I do not believe anyone really cares about anything you say anymore. However, you do a good job in stimulating conversation by giving us something at which to laugh (or pity).

Liberal POV said...

HD

The question " Is Water Boarding Torture?" Not how many which you have wrong.

It makes no difference what you personally believe the world courts including American courts have defined water boarding as torture.

"To be effective, waterboarding is usually real drowning that simulates death. That is,
the victim experiences the sensations of drowning: struggle, panic, breath-holding, swallowing, vomiting, taking water into the lungs and, eventually, the same feeling of not being able to breathe that one experiences after being punched in the gut. The main difference is that the drowning process is halted. According to those who have studied waterboarding's effects, it can cause severe psychological trauma, such as panic attacks, for years."

"This attempt to justify these admitted acts of waterboarding flies in the face of the USA's treaty obligations. The UN Convention against Torture, ratified by the USA in 1994, states that "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".


It makes no difference what you , Guy, Johnny or Dick Cheney think it does not change history or the law. Water Boarding is morally wrong and has been illegal for centuries.

Honest Debate said...

"To be effective, waterboarding is usually real drowning that simulates death. That is,
the victim experiences the sensations of drowning: struggle, panic, breath-holding, swallowing, vomiting, taking water into the lungs and, eventually, the same feeling of not being able to breathe that one experiences after being punched in the gut." -LiberalPOV

I feel a tingle going up my leg.

Liberal POV said...

HD

"I feel a tingle going up my leg."


Why would you make lite of such a serious issue as a war crime?

Are you really that morally bankrupt?

Have you no humanity?

This is harm leadership like Dick Cheney and Hate media can do. We probably all has such inhumanity within us but the likes of Rush, Hannity and the current Republican leadership bring out the worst of humanity.
The above post is proof of the lost humanity.

The problem with you, Guy and Republicans in general is you cannot process information different from what you think you know.
You can not learn from a mistake because you never admit to a mistake.

Honest Debate said...

"We probably all has such inhumanity within us but the likes of Rush, Hannity and the current Republican leadership bring out the worst of humanity." - LiberalPOV

There you go ladies and gentlemen. Lib likes the "we" word but "we" means "I". I, for one, don't have an inhumane bone in my body. I don't struggle at all suppressing my inner rage, I have none.

Liberal POV said...

HD

"I, for one, don't have an inhumane bone in my body. I don't struggle at all suppressing my inner rage, I have none."

What's that you have been endorsing the last few years?

Do you now agree the Cheney, Rumsfelt treatment of detainees was wrong and counter productive?

Do you agree with no exceptions torture is morally wrong and illeagal?

Do you admit waterboarding is leagally torture?

Honest Debate said...

A peaceful world.

They're heroes.

Yes.

No.

Liberal POV said...

HD

Do you admit waterboarding is leagally torture?

Answer "NO"

That does not change the FACT that it is.

Your opinions don't become facts because you post them.

"To be effective, waterboarding is usually real drowning that simulates death. That is,
the victim experiences the sensations of drowning: struggle, panic, breath-holding, swallowing, vomiting, taking water into the lungs and, eventually, the same feeling of not being able to breathe that one experiences after being punched in the gut. The main difference is that the drowning process is halted. According to those who have studied waterboarding's effects, it can cause severe psychological trauma, such as panic attacks, for years."

"This attempt to justify these admitted acts of waterboarding flies in the face of the USA's treaty obligations. The UN Convention against Torture, ratified by the USA in 1994, states that "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".


It makes no difference what you , Guy, Johnny or Dick Cheney think it does not change history or the law. Water Boarding is morally wrong and has been illegal for centuries.

guy faulkes said...

POV, how many times can you ask the same lame questions? Why do you do it when you know what the answers are going to be?

The problem with you, Guy and Republicans in general is you cannot process information different from what you think you know.
You can not learn from a mistake because you never admit to a mistake. - POV

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. You know you are wrong but cannot get La La La La La out of your head. You are the prime example of a person that has been brainwashed into the cult of liberalism.

You keep talking about Republicans. You ignore the moderate Democrats and Independents. You run from discussing the Brown victory. You have no way to explain how the seat formerly held by the poster child of liberalism, Ted Kennedy went to a Republican in a blue state. It was not just the Republicans that elected him. You ignore the question concerning the number of Democrats that are not going to run for re-election such as Bayh. They know that they have lost the support of the moderate Democrats and Independents. You ignore the fact that even Boxer is in trouble in California, again because of moderate Democrats and Independents.

Finally you never admit your hypocrisy in demonizing Rush and other conservatives while saying nothing about Michael Moore. Moore is the poster child of irrelevance, except for, maybe, you.

Sarkazein said...

I would bet the Taliban leader recently captured by a joint effort of the US and Pakistan, wishes he were in US only custody right now. He is staying under Pakistan jurisdiction for interrogation reasons. And Obama knows about it. Water-boarding would be his "break-time".

Obama is HOPING for the Taliban leader to give up Osama so he can read a speech about how he caught Osama that will contain more I's and ME's than any reading in the history of the spoken word.

Liberal POV said...

Guy, HD and Reader

I see my questions about your support of human rights abuse and waterboarding make you uncomfortable. That's a sign you know your position is WRONG and indefensible.

Liberal POV said...

Guy

"Finally you never admit your hypocrisy in demonizing Rush and other conservatives while saying nothing about Michael Moore. Moore is the poster child of irrelevance, except for, maybe, you."

Could you post an issue Michael Moore has presented to the world that is without merit?

Liberal POV said...

Guy

""Water boarding is not torture"

That does not change the FACT that it is.

Your opinions don't become facts because you post them.

"To be effective, waterboarding is usually real drowning that simulates death. That is,
the victim experiences the sensations of drowning: struggle, panic, breath-holding, swallowing, vomiting, taking water into the lungs and, eventually, the same feeling of not being able to breathe that one experiences after being punched in the gut. The main difference is that the drowning process is halted. According to those who have studied waterboarding's effects, it can cause severe psychological trauma, such as panic attacks, for years."

"This attempt to justify these admitted acts of waterboarding flies in the face of the USA's treaty obligations. The UN Convention against Torture, ratified by the USA in 1994, states that "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".


It makes no difference what you , Guy, Johnny or Dick Cheney think it does not change history or the law. Water Boarding is morally wrong and has been illegal for centuries.

Sarkazein said...

POV asked-"Could you post an issue Michael Moore has presented to the world that is without merit?"


A new day, POV awakens. All memory of past days wiped clean from his tabula after 8 hours of slumbering (memory deleting).

guy faulkes said...

Irrelevant,misleading, and fraudulent productions by Moore include Fahrenheit 9/11, Bowling for Columbine, and Sicko.

This does not answer the original question of whether Rush or Moore looks and acts more like the stereotype of the person that emerges from his apartment in his mother's basement dressed in a Star Trek uniform and crying "Live lone and prosper".

As you indicated in your charge about others, you refuse to admit you are wrong about water boarding. Instead you sit there with your fingers in your ears going La La La La La. The UN Convention against Torture does not cover water boarding as water boarding is not torture. Also, the proper course for the U.S. is to withdraw from the U.N. and throw the U.N. out of the U.S.

You continue to ignore the subject of moderate Democrats and Independents proving to be conservative although you make continuous rants against Republicans. Do you have anything to say or do you admit it by virtue of your avoiding the issue? What is your explanation of the Bayh and the Brown victory?

Liberal POV said...

Guy


Wrong again!

" The UN Convention against Torture does not cover water boarding as water boarding is not torture."


"The UN Convention against Torture, ratified by the USA in 1994, states that "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".


US Courts recognize warterboarding as torture.

YOU'RE WRONG!!

Sarkazein said...

POV- US Courts recognize murder as a form of birth control...just like scientists, they're not always right.

Liberal POV said...

Sark

I see you're still wading in the shallow end of the think tank.

Honest Debate said...

Lib,

Please tell me you don't have children.

Sarkazein said...

They were lucky, they were born pre-Roe v. Wade.

Liberal POV said...

HD

I see you know the human rights abuse is wrong but to be a good Republican you must support Cheney and all the myths and lies.

Sarkazein said...

Guy- Don't forget "Roger and Me". A movie about a forty year old guy that looks like Larry Mondello, that mistakenly thinks he is important enough to see a CEO at his whim.

Honest Debate said...

Lib,

Do you feel a little dizzy? You sound dizzy.

guy faulkes said...

I guess POV capitulates as to the fact that moderate Democrats and Independents are conservative. He just cannot bring himself to admit it so he keeps addressing Republicans.

POV, water boarding is not an exceptional circumstance nor is it defined as torture except as case law in particular cases. It is a recognized form of interrogation for enemy combatants in other cases and by Congressional approval (even though Pelosi tried to deny it).

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/17/ashcroft.waterboarding/

Liberal POV said...

Guy

" It is a recognized form of interrogation for enemy combatants in other cases and by Congressional approval (even though Pelosi tried to deny it)."

Even if this were true this would change nothing.
Waterboarding is still illegal and immoral.
Why would you support such inhumanity.

What kind of monsters have you people become?

Did you ever serve in the military?

How about you HD?

Do we have a bunch of chicken hawks wanting to create presidents to bite our military in the ass?

These are what the conservative call family values?

How are you any different than those we fight against?

guy faulkes said...

POV, lets address your post one comment at a time.

Waterboarding is still illegal and immoral. No, it is not.

Why would you support such inhumanity. It is not inhuman. Aggressive interrogation saves the lives of our militarily personnel and the lives of civilians in all countries.

What kind of monsters have you people become? We are not monsters. we leave that distinction to you. We are patriots instead of traitors and supporters of the terrorists that would murder us for not having the same religion as they do, such as you.

Did you ever serve in the military? No. My vision prevented me from being accepted both time I tried to enlist. Did you? You claimed to be a vet, but again, I have my doubts to the truthfulness of the claim. Other posts you have made about the Vietnam era lead me to think you only read about the time period.

How about you HD?

Do we have a bunch of chicken hawks wanting to create presidents to bite our military in the ass? It is interesting that you personally attack those that do not agree with you by using military service as a criteria. Do you think those that did not serve in the military have no right to an opinion? As for creating presidents that would "bite our military in the ass", as you put it, you are the person that does not want the interrogation of of your enemy combatant terrorist heroes and puts our troops at risk. You do not want us to win the war on terror. All you want to do is to capitulate and sign Kumbala as the terrorists kill us.

These are what the conservative call family values? Actually, I think you would call them patriotic or military values.

How are you any different than those we fight against? I am not a terrorist, a supporter of terrorists, or a traitor such as you.

Now, are you going to address the Bayh, Brown, and Moore questions?

Liberal POV said...

Guy

So we do have chicken hawks like Cheney, Guy, Rush, O"Reilly, HD wanting to undo anti torture treaties decades old.

I just linked you proof or waterboarding being illegal and where people went to prison for waterboarding.

guy faulkes said...

POV, still running. Nothing about Bayh, Brown, Moore. Same old talking points about water boarding.
Personal attacks on those that disagree with him. Thank God he is a liberal. I would be ashamed for him to claim to be conservative.

Sarkazein said...

Guy-

POV has stated at one time he served in the Kentucky or Tenn National Guard during the VN era, but never went to VN. You descide.
However, he has declared openly that Obama is a "Chicken Hawk" per his definition. FDR was a "Chicken Hawk", and that Bill Clinton was a "Chicken Hawk" all according to POV.
It is goofy to think that anyone not having served in the military is not allowed an opinion on National Defense or past/current wars.

Liberal POV said...

Chicken Hawks

The difference is you want to set precedents that American men and women in uniform would have no protection of current treaties or world opinion to protect them from torture and abuse in future engagements.

You are the cheerleaders of the invasion of Iraq and the cheerleaders of policy blunder by Bush , Cheney and Rumsfelt that cost the lives of both American and Iraqis men and women.
You're the old fools that want to send young men and women to die.
The definition chicken hawk is the word hawk meaning men wanting war that never servered.
Your understanding of war comes from Rambo movies and TV.
You don't know what you think you know.

Sarkazein said...

POV wrote-"The definition chicken hawk is the word hawk meaning men wanting war that never servered."

Obama threatened the invasion of Pakistan prior to becoming President, increased military attacks on the tribal areas of Pakistan, surged the war on the Taliban.

FDR promised Churchill he would help him against Germany, sent war material to GB while thumbing his nose at Hitler, forced an oil embargo on Japan, was developing an AF to attack Japan in it's invasion of China... acts of war.

Clinton called for regime change in Iraq, fired missiles into Iraq, changed the mission in Somalia,
fired missiles into the aspirin factory, told the Serbs how they could handle their illegal alien problem and used military force to get them to comply.

This is why your continued allegations of others as chicken hawks who don't agree with you, includes people you agree with, thus making your claim... BOGUS.

Honest Debate said...

Lib,

I figured it out, you're talking in circles. That's why you're dizzy.

Liberal POV said...

Sark and other Chicken Hawks

Clinton, FDR and Obama were not flat earthers and worked to forge Alliances in wars of necessities.

FDR and Clinton won the war they engaged .

I believe I'm correct that we only lost one soldier in Bosnia.

You chicken Hawks have little grasp of world history , the US Constitution, Law, Military strategy, logic, geography, world religion or world climate.

We seen the mess people like you can make with government see Bush and Cheney years.

Honest Debate said...

7,500 military deaths during Clinton's time in office. 4,417 in the first term.

guy faulkes said...

POV, is the most thoroughly brainwashed cult member of which I have ever even heard. Like most liberals, he is a master of speaking out of both sides of his mouth. His blog name should really be Janus or, as some have suggested, Dizzy from his practice of turning in circles.

POV, We are waiting for your comments on Bayh, Brown, and Moore.

YoHoo! Is anybody home?

Liberal POV said...

Honest Debate???

You just can't keep it honest can you.

How many were combat related to the War in Bosnia?

How many were combat related unde Clinton? Answer 76

How many were Combat related unde Bush? Answer 3512 before 2008 is added likely 4500.
Total military deaths under Bush II after 2008 is added likely close to 12,000

http://www.logictimes.com/A-Forgotten-War.htm

Honest Debate said...

I love how you tell me I'm not honest and then say "likely" and add the 4500 you pulled out of your butt.

My numbers are correct. I said "military deaths" not "combat deaths". They are both just as dead.

guy faulkes said...

POV, is your theme song "A Do Run Run"? How about "Run Run Running Away"; "Runaway", or "Born o Run"?

Once again, please give us your opinion of Brown's victor, Bayh's refusal to run for re-election, and does Moore or Rush appear to come closer to having the appearance and actions of stereotypical, socially inept nerd?

So, POV, are you proposing that Clinton capitulated to our enemy by refusing to use the military? You may be correct.

Liberal POV said...

Honest Debate???

Combat death under Clinton for 8 years was 76

Combat Death under Bush II for 7 years was 3512

The average military deaths per year under Bush was 1535 compared to 938 under Clinton.

When Combat death for 2008 are added to the Bush era the number is very to exceed the 4000 mark.

The War in Iraq was totally unnecessary and did nothing to stop Al Qaeda.

Sarkazein said...

POV wrote-"FDR and Clinton won the war they engaged "


YET, neither one ever fought in a war themselves, making your defense of the indefensibly goofy comment about "chicken hawks" even goofier than the original comment.

Liberal POV said...

Sark

FDR, Clinton and Obama were thinkers and were all students of the world. FDR swam in the deep end of the think tank as does Clinton and Obama.

Clinton, FDR and Obama were not flat earthers and worked to forge Alliances in wars of necessities.

You flat earther at some point in life decided you knew everything and needed no additional input.

You have Fox and Rush to confirm your misinformation.

Your heros are the people that endorse the worst of humanity Cheney, Rumsfelt, Palin, Rush, Glen Beck, and lots and lots of proven hypocrites. Sandford, Foley, Newt, Raph Reed and V Foxx

Honest Debate said...

My numbers are correct and you don't dispute them, you just give other numbers some of which you made up.

I don't know what your point is and I don't care. I should not have engaged you anyway.

You sir, are a doofus.

Sarkazein said...

POV, why don't you just write that your "chicken hawk" comments did not hold up in debate, and you will attempt more puffery later?

Liberal POV said...

HD

Your numbers maybe correct but still dishonest.

Combat death under Clinton for 8 years was 76

Combat Death under Bush II for 7 years was 3512

The average military deaths per year under Bush was 1535 compared to 938 under Clinton.

When Combat death for 2008 are added to the Bush era the number is very likely to exceed the 4000 mark.

Sarkazein said...

POV-
Osama declared war on the US in 1997+-. As Clinton played in the sand box with Monica and others, instead of answering the call to duty, and continued to kick the can down the road, he exposed thousands to future deaths... both military and civilian. He is/was a coward... a chicken.(period)

guy faulkes said...

POV, as you run from the questions that have been put to you, here is one more to give emphasis to your momentum.

What do you think of Clinton's cowardly policy of withdrawing from Somalia, thereby creating the problems existent in that country today? I would suspect you approve, being the traitor that you are.

One does not have many combat deaths when the Commander in Chief is a coward that is afraid to defend his country's interests.

HD, you owe an apology to doofuses everywhere for categorizing POV as one of their number.

Sark, your comment only gives POV something else from which to run.

Honest Debate said...

"Your numbers maybe correct but still dishonest." -LiberalPOV

So the truth is not honest? You're talking in circles again. Get some air.

Liberal POV said...

HD


You tell me:

Your original Post:

"7,500 military deaths during Clinton's time in office. 4,417 in the first term."


The Truth in context:

Combat death under Clinton for 8 years was 76

Combat Death under Bush II for 7 years was 3512

The average military deaths per year under Bush was 1535 compared to 938 under Clinton.

Honest Debate said...

Did you get some air? Get some air.

Sarkazein said...

POV-
Osama declared war on the US in 1997+-. As Clinton played in the sand box with Monica and others, instead of answering the call to duty, and continued to kick the can down the road, he exposed thousands to future deaths... both military and civilian. He is/was a coward... a chicken.(period)

Liberal POV said...

Sark

You've had your Monica fetish under control for a while, I see it's back.

Sark you're a dirty old man.

Sarkazein said...

So weak

guy faulkes said...

I see POV is still being a track star. He is now going faster as he has more questions to dodge.

POV, you do remember Somalia?

Johnny Rico said...

Liberal Socialist Sheep POV:

I am still wanting to know when we ever tortured anyone? Who was tortured? Are you talking about the Muslims torturing Daniel Pearl as they lopped his head off with a dull knife?


This ought to be ineteresting

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

February 16, 2010 5:38

Liberal POV said...

Johnny

Are You also a Chicken Hawk?

Why would you want to remove want to remove torture treatie protection from US Military personel serving in combat zones as well as world public oppinion?

guy faulewks said...

POV, if it was not for your information retention disorder, you might remember Rico said she had served in the military. Are you now changing your definition of chicken hawk to those that have done so? By the way, which do you consider worse, being a chicken hawk or being a traitor?, such as you?