Comments on: Ahem

By: zorro

zorro — Tue, 08 Nov 2005 16:11:09 +0000

I guess it all depends what your definition of “is” is.

By: Semanticleo

Semanticleo — Tue, 08 Nov 2005 00:11:55 +0000

Dugger;

I’m sure it all is just a disagreement over what constitutes ‘torture’

Example; Is ‘waterboarding’ torture?

By: Dugger

Dugger — Mon, 07 Nov 2005 15:11:01 +0000

I’m getting a strong reading on the bullsh*t meter.

The source is a selectively edited CIA intelligence report. In addition, it merely states that a terrorist said one thing one time, another another. And all about a very narrow, single issue. Now, I’m not sure, but I’m betting nobody here, myself included, has actual access to the orignial classified information, the complete intelligence estimate and is in no position to judge whats what on this. The people who actually made the decisions are the only ones who saw all of the intelligence.

Dugger

By: Frank_D

Frank_D — Mon, 07 Nov 2005 14:11:45 +0000

frameone: Why don’t you buy a sense of humor? While you’re there, you could buy some vowels and consonants, instead of your usual vulgarity, profanity and obscenity.

By: Semanticleo

Semanticleo — Sun, 06 Nov 2005 17:11:30 +0000

Frame;

That was the intelligence that propelled the run up to war.

“Pull it out of your ass”

By: frameone

frameone — Sun, 06 Nov 2005 17:11:12 +0000

Apparently it was pull it out of someone else’s ass with a pair of hot pliers, or some such “technique.”

By: frameone

frameone — Sun, 06 Nov 2005 16:11:11 +0000

Oh I get it. Instead of being simply stupid, this administration was willfully and maliciously stupid. Much like Frank, here. What an ass.

By: Frank_D

Frank_D — Sun, 06 Nov 2005 15:11:48 +0000

What about torturing them for fun?

By: Semanticleo

Semanticleo — Sun, 06 Nov 2005 15:11:40 +0000

BTW;

For the “End Justifies the Means” crowd; it seems al Libi was tortured in order to extract his bogus information. Is it becoming clear to everyone that torture, besides violating what we stand for, doesn’t work?

By: Semanticleo

Semanticleo — Sun, 06 Nov 2005 15:11:33 +0000

Damn! The link

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5197853/site/newsweek/

By: Semanticleo

Semanticleo — Sun, 06 Nov 2005 14:11:07 +0000

The war on terrorism, at one time, had nearly global support after 9/11.

These guys took the total trust and unambiguous commitment of the American People, and hitched that wagon to their warped vision of the world.

Like demented alchemists, they took gold and converted it into lead as they made the rest of us complicit in misguided adventure.

How will we ever convince the already suspicious Arabic culture that we rally want them to have democracy in Iraq? How will this be the staging point for human rights we hope will spread throughout the Middle East?

Do as we say, not as we do(?) Is that the telegraphed message to those who might have been willing to peek under the covers and give the american idea of freedom a chance?

BushCo squandered the idealic environment we once had for accomplishing some headway against Al Qaeda and it’s imitators.

It is not a lost cause, yet. But it will take decades for us to recover any sense of credibility in the arab world. The sooner we start the better.

By: Semanticleo

Semanticleo — Sun, 06 Nov 2005 14:11:02 +0000

So much for ‘plausible denial’.

By: Jadegold

Jadegold — Sun, 06 Nov 2005 12:11:04 +0000

Joe Schmoe is right.

Torture and coercion will usually produce the answers you’re looking for; not the truth.

By: Joe Schmoe

Joe Schmoe — Sun, 06 Nov 2005 08:11:36 +0000

The Brits learned long ago that information obtained by torture is usually flawed. Like the guys says, a tortured prisoner give the information you ask and it is seldom the truth. Settting foreign policy from this information is reckless and stupid. But hey…..what do you expect from the Boy George president.

Look at Torquemada, the Grand Inquisitor, the witch trials in Europe and by our godly Pilgrims….people died because people lied..

But..if torture is okayed for treason, can I please torture Dick Cheney?

By: buma

buma — Sun, 06 Nov 2005 07:11:50 +0000

Why would an Al Qaeda member lie to Americans about a link between Iraq and terrorists after 9-11? >>

Maybe he was tortured during interrogation? Torture is effective at getting the answer the captive thinks you want to hear.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5197853/site/newsweek/

By: Ryland

Ryland — Sun, 06 Nov 2005 07:11:27 +0000

So I guess that means that the Bush admin are a bunch of idiots who were stupid enough to fall for a terrorist’s transparent lies, rather than a bunch of lying war-mongers who manipulated and cherry-picked intelligence reports? I can see why that would make Bush apologists feel better.

By: rhys

rhys — Sun, 06 Nov 2005 06:11:53 +0000

al-Libi? “Ibn al-Shaykh” wouldn’t happen to be Arabic for “Scooter” now would it?

Sorry, couldn’t resist.

By: frameone

frameone — Sun, 06 Nov 2005 06:11:07 +0000

I myself can’t resist asking: Why would an Al Qaeda member lie to Americans about a link between Iraq and terrorists after 9-11? What possible reason could there be for this man to intentionally mislead his questioners in this way? Is it possible, just maybe, that Al Qaeda has been playing our cowboy president like a violin for four years? Is it possible, just maybe, that this guy and his friends wanted America to invade Arab countries, wanted Bush to invade Iraq? Is it not possible that Al Qaeda set us up? I know. Wild conjecture. Conspiracy addled thinking run amok. But what if …