As you very well know, it's impossible to prove anybody's grounds for opinion. To ask for proof for your alleged racial preferences is therefore meaningless.
However, if I misunderstand you in that you DON'T want to carpet bomb the hell out of the darkies, I'll gladly take it back. I don't have to, of course, because I am entitled to my opinion and I may freely express this opinion, but if you can show me somehow that your genocidal tendencies and thirst for non-caucasian blood ISN'T racially motivated, I'll gladly take it back
(oops, huh?)
Now, about that genocide you proposed, let's get back to that, shall we? Or are you still too busy dodging that one?
So, previously you have stated that you feel that that if a Islamitic country, Middle East or African, captures and tries an American pr British citizen for a crime according to their legal system, and if you happen to think that this law is stupid, that gives America the right to commit genocide, render an entire continent uninhabitable for millions of years, and cause massive environmental damage that may be the end for our ecosystem, by sending one hundred missiles armed with nukes to that country.
Care to comment on this?
How do you, for instance, see the issue of souvereignity resolved?
How do you feel about the millions you would sentence to death without trial?
How do you, in this light, reconcile the lack of legal basis for your proposed actions with your statement that "The lack of trial and prosecution [for those in Guantanamo] is troubling to me as well."?
How do you feel about the practical question of destroying natural resources the US most likely can't possibly do without? (I assume here that you don't care about other places in the world that might need these resources - correct me if I'm wrong.)
And last, but not least, how do you feel now about the obvious tactical error of trying to free a person by obliterating the region this person is in?
Remember, it's just an opinion I'm asking for, and you can say all you want, so why don't you be a man about it, and stop projecting my argumentation, and take the floor?
Race baiting 101.
Not even very good at it either.
more baiting inaccurate blather: "So, previously you have stated that you feel that that if a Islamitic country, Middle East or African, captures and tries an American pr British citizen for a crime according to their legal system, and if you happen to think that this law is stupid, that gives America the right to commit genocide"
I said if I was the king of England. Has nothing to do with America.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ "A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user."
Theodore Roosevelt, 1913
Posts: 2404 | Location: Redmond WA | Registered: 04 September 2006
I think all our Marines are too busy securing democracy in the Middle East to have time for Sudan.
No not really. As a whole the Marine Corps is gearing up for a significant troop reduction as more towns and cities are being turned over to local Iraqi Police backed up by Iraqi Army out in the deserts.
Also keep in mind, with approx. 1.2 million service members across all branches and roughly 10% in Iraq.. we've got plenty of options.
First, I didn't write Iraq, I wrote the Middle East, so it is probably significantly more than that.
Are you in the military Joe, if so are you in Iraq? If so, are you allowed to disclose information about the status of the situation there?
I don't see how a no-fly zone is going to have any impact on people being innocently slaughtered, but I didn't expect much more of an intelligent solution when it comes to helping others.
Maybe the US will get out of the UN, if they are so useless. I suspect the UN would accomplish much more with the US. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- On October 1, 2007, United States Africa Command achieved Initial Operating Capability (IOC). AFRICOM’s IOC marks a realignment of the U.S. Defense Department’s regional command structure. For its first year, AFRICOM will operate under U.S. European Command (EUCOM) as it progressively accepts oversight of the programs and activities that the U.S. military conducts with African nations. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
What do you mean it isn't set up yet?
Personally, I am tired of living in a country that feels the need to police the world. I feel like we are the dumb, big bully on the playground, who everyone is slightly afraid of because they know he can hit harder, but it really won't take too long before they all get together and out smart him.
Its quite sad what this administration has done to our reputation in the world. Oh well, maybe I can pass off for a Canadian when I move to Britain
"Yeehaw" is not a foreign policy!
Posts: 875 | Location: The Emerald City | Registered: 02 January 2007
No, of course not. No relation at all to the fact that you feel threatened by terrorists all over the world, between 9/11 and your knee-jerk ‘Genocide! Genocide! Nuke the terrorists!!!’ No relation whatsoever.
Next:
quote:
more baiting inaccurate blather: […]I said if I was the king of England.
I’m afraid it’s YOU who’s inaccurate here. This discussion is about something else you said, something you still obliquely refer to and support, but are afraid to openly repeat.
Next:
I prepared a list of implications springing from your call for mass murder for you to comment on, but I see you are afraid to comment because of the risk of getting banned. That’s okay though, I would be too in your situation. See? That’s what you get from yelling without prior thought.
That’s good though, everybody who reads this thread has your number; no matter how much you try pose as the victor, the floor was wiped with your hateful ignorance on this thread. Again, that’s what you get from yelling without prior thought.
You seem to have at least temporarily learned your lesson in that you now understand that you can’t openly advocate genocide without being held responsible for your words and proposed actions.
I’ll now leave it to your ass slappin’ buddies to close this thread. Have fun, guys.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: Nurdin T.,
Posts: 67 | Location: Manahachtanienk | Registered: 16 November 2007
Ah, I see. I'm sorry, for a moment there I mistook you for an actual person; thank you for setting the record straight.
No problem.. I generally find intellectually vacant people offend confuse criticism with white noise.
By the way, how is that discussion with slabmaster going?
Typical liberal fixation over issues that are irrelevant and meaningless.
**** Disclaimer: The information in this weblog is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. This weblog does not represent the thoughts, intentions, plans or strategies of my owner. It is solely my own personal opinion. Inappropriate comments will be deleted at the authors discretion.***
"I stand or fall on my own words."
Posts: 7253 | Location: PORTLAND | Registered: 07 November 2005
**** Disclaimer: The information in this weblog is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. This weblog does not represent the thoughts, intentions, plans or strategies of my owner. It is solely my own personal opinion. Inappropriate comments will be deleted at the authors discretion.***
"I stand or fall on my own words."
Posts: 7253 | Location: PORTLAND | Registered: 07 November 2005
Originally posted by Nurdin T.: I prepared a list of implications springing from your call for mass murder for you to comment on, but I see you are afraid to comment because of the risk of getting banned.
Uh....yeah.....
....that's it.
I heard a crow squauking the other day and I didn't run out and answer his noise either.
We played catch.
Log, .22 tracers and pest birds is a sight to see.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ "A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user."
Theodore Roosevelt, 1913
Posts: 2404 | Location: Redmond WA | Registered: 04 September 2006
I wonder how many times I've heard right wingers call for some sort of "final solution" in the Arab/Persian world. They'll say things like, "lets just do an air strike against their nuclear facilities..." Of course, they never consider for a second that those "nuclear facilities" are near populated cities and millions would be affected by a strike. How many died on 911? 3000? Well, if we struck nuclear sites, hundreds of thousands could die. The right keeps talking about them coming here and killing us. Again, how many countries have we recently invaded? Since 911, how many people have our bombs and guns killed in the name of fear and freedom? When did Hitler realize that he was the problem not the final solution? When will people see that the US has turned into a rabid nation of killers and torturers that need to be "contained?"
The right wing keeps talking about "THEM COMING HERE" but since 911, it us, not them, that is doing all the attacking.
What's a few brown people, right?
Oh, that's right, thats the price of war. Interesting that it's ALWAYS some other countries innocent people that need to be murdered so we don't have to be scared of being attacked.
So let's say we do attack Iran as the peons suggest. Of course, like I told the Right wingers before the iraq war, the whole region would ignite in warfare and those 73% of the Iranian people, who once liked us, would then want to kill us. So would the Saudis, the Syrians, the Pakistanis, the Afghanis... The Iranian government would then destroy our ability to get oil out of that entire region and our entire economy would tank further than it already has.
But since we don't have any actual troops to send anywhere, our ONLY option would be to drop more bombs on peoples houses which would snowball into dropping "THE BOMB." The right would go "Hurray!, that 'ill show 'em to stand up to us."
After all, if you don't have any soldiers to actually find the enemy, your only option is to drop bombs. Of course the bombs create chaos and destroy the governments and the people starve and die from sickness and violence. Tragic, of course, but, again, not the right winger's fault, you know, it's the terrorist's fault...they made us do it.
Flip Wilson comes to mind here..."The devil made me buuuuuuy that dress."
Once the governments are taken out by our bombs EVERY country there is radicalized by insane fear, intolerance and god. Aren't final solutions fun?
The right says they are not racist, I suppose absolute malicious callousness and disregard for humanity fits better. Of course this fits just fine with the right wing because that's the sort of world you find in their beloved bible where god destroys, murders, and enslaves everyone he doesn't like...That's "god's love."
Invariably, when you ask a Right Winger about Iraq and Iran and how to to solve it, the solution invariably involves the mass murder of millions (final solution mentality) upon millions of brown people over there. I mean, really, how many people do we have to murder before we kill ALL the terrorists. It really comes down to how many people live in that region. Invariably, as Hitler found, the snake soon devours itself.
Of course the right will tell themselves repeatedly that they're there to help. "Excuse us while help you by bombing the phuck out of you." That's love. The Christian God would be proud.
I wonder why the right called for the murder of Saddam for his torture and crimes against humanity and then tortured and committed crimes against humanity?
And then, after being caught doing these things, it's just fine,,,it's our right...
I wonder why the right called for the murder of Saddam for his torture and crimes against humanity and then tortured and committed crimes against humanity?
And then, after being caught doing these things, it's just fine,,,it's our right..
WOW. George Bush put people in Stump grinders? and chem warfare on democrats
I am not sure if Saddam was waterboarding and putting underwear on the heads of naked people would we have felt compelled to kill him
**** Disclaimer: The information in this weblog is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. This weblog does not represent the thoughts, intentions, plans or strategies of my owner. It is solely my own personal opinion. Inappropriate comments will be deleted at the authors discretion.***
"I stand or fall on my own words."
Posts: 7253 | Location: PORTLAND | Registered: 07 November 2005
On June 10, a spokesperson for the Buddhists privately informed the U.S. correspondents that "something important" would happen the following morning on the road outside the Cambodian embassy in Saigon. Most of the reporters disregarded the message, since the Buddhist crisis had at that point been going on for over a month, and the next day only a few journalists turned up, including David Halberstam of the New York Times and Malcolm Browne, who was the Saigon bureau chief for the Associated Press.
Thích Quảng Đức arrived as part of a procession that had begun at a nearby pagoda. Around 350 monks and nuns marched in two phalanxes, preceded by an Austin Westminster sedan, carrying banners printed in both English and Vietnamese. They denounced the Diệm government and its policy towards Buddhists, demanding that it fulfill its promises of religious equality. Another monk offered to burn himself, but Thích Quảng Đức's seniority prevailed.
The act itself occurred at the intersection of Phan Dinh Phung Boulevard and Le Van Duyet Street. Thích Quảng Đức emerged from the car along with two other monks. One placed a cushion on the road while the second opened the trunk and took out a five-gallon gasoline can. As the marchers formed a circle around him, Thích Quảng Đức calmly seated himself in the traditional Buddhist meditative lotus position on the cushion. His colleague emptied the contents of the gasoline container over Thích Quảng Đức's head. Thích Quảng Đức rotated a string of wooden prayer beads and recited the words "Nam Mô A Di Đà Phật" ("homage to Amitabha Buddha") before striking a match and dropping it on himself. Flames consumed his robes and flesh, and black oily smoke emanated from his burning body.
The last words of Thích Quảng Đức before his self-immolation were documented in a letter he had left:
quote:
Before closing my eyes and moving towards the vision of the Buddha, I respectfully plead to President Ngo Dinh Diem to take a mind of compassion towards the people of the nation and implement religious equality to maintain the strength of the homeland eternally. I call the venerables, reverends, members of the sangha and the lay Buddhists to organise in solidarity to make sacrifices to protect Buddhism.
David Halberstam wrote:
quote:
I was to see that sight again, but once was enough. Flames were coming from a human being; his body was slowly withering and shriveling up, his head blackening and charring. In the air was the smell of burning human flesh; human beings burn surprisingly quickly. Behind me I could hear the sobbing of the Vietnamese who were now gathering. I was too shocked to cry, too confused to take notes or ask questions, too bewildered to even think... As he burned he never moved a muscle, never uttered a sound, his outward composure in sharp contrast to the wailing people around him.
Police who tried to reach him could not break through the circle of Buddhist clergy. One of the policemen threw himself to the ground and prostrated himself in front of Thích Quảng Đức in reverence. The spectators were mostly stunned into silence, but some wailed and several began praying. Many of the monks and nuns, as well as some shocked passers-by, prostrated themselves before the burning monk. In English and Vietnamese, a monk repeatedly declared into a microphone, "A Buddhist priest burns himself to death. A Buddhist priest becomes a martyr."
After approximately ten minutes, Thích Quảng Đức's body toppled forward onto the street and the fire subsided. A group of monks covered the smoking corpse with yellow robes, picked it up and tried to fit it into a coffin, but the limbs could not be bent and one of the arms protruded from the wooden box as he was carried to the nearby Xa Loi Pagoda in central Saigon. Outside the pagoda, students unfurled bilingual banners which read: "A Buddhist priest burns himself for our five requests." By 13:30, around one thousand monks had congregated inside Xa Loi to hold a meeting while outside a large crowd of pro-Buddhist students had formed a human barrier around it. The meeting soon ended and all but a hundred monks slowly left the compound. Nearly one thousand monks accompanied by laypeople returned to the cremation site. The police lingered nearby. At around 18:00, 30 nuns and six monks were arrested for holding a prayer meeting on the street outside Xa Loi Pagoda. The police then encircled the pagoda, blocking public passage and giving observers the impression that an armed siege was imminent by donning riot gear.That evening, thousands of Saigonese claimed to have seen a vision of the Buddha's face in the sky as the sun had set. They claimed that in the vision the Buddha was weeping.
Posts: 247 | Location: Limbo | Registered: 17 November 2007
As long as people don't fully understand what happened at Phan Dinh Phung Boulevard on June 11 of 1963, they shouldn't be crying for blood too much. You simply don't know what you're saying.
Posts: 247 | Location: Limbo | Registered: 17 November 2007
"All the rules and procedures for formulating foreign- and security policy were annulled between 1969 and 1974. Nixon and Kissinger ignored the spirit and letter of the law in using foreign policy for their individual ambitions. They repressed reason to the detriment of political necessities."
Posts: 73 | Location: Portland OR | Registered: 27 March 2007
Originally posted by Sako: Are you claiming that all people on the right think this way?
Seems to frame a thought that is not there to me.
Well, I've noticed over the years that the right seems to have little regard for human beings, regardless of all the rhetoric. Profits take priority, with human beings being seen as their utility value for garnering those profits.
The U.S. signed the International Covenant on Political, Cultural and Social Rights only after deleting all clauses pertaining to human rights. Typical.
Even during the Spanish Civil War, the U.S. right sided with Hitler and Mussolini in overthrowing the Spanish Republic and installing Fascist Dictator Franco.
This was a repression of humanity, democracy and humane social values. When the choice has been made around the world, particularly in Latin America, when has the right ever been on the side of social justice and democracy? It wasn't the left that supported the para-military groups in So. America, it was the right busily supporting mass murder and political executions...including the assassination of the Bishop of El Salvador in his own church.
It wasn't the left that admired Hitler's rise to power, it was the right.
Do all people on the right support this sort of thing? Nope. And their support of right-wing thinkers makes them complicit in the horrors perpetrated.
Retired Monk "Ideology is a disease"
Posts: 3412 | Location: denver co | Registered: 17 April 2007
WOW. George Bush put people in Stump grinders? and chem warfare on democrats
I am not sure if Saddam was waterboarding and putting underwear on the heads of naked people would we have felt compelled to kill him
I'm not exactly sure what you were getting at but it's common knowledge that Abu Ghraib was the "notorious" prison that Saddam tortured his victims in? We just took over where Saddam left off. How fitting that we now know that King George authorized torture. The right has obviously forgotten how they pointed to Saddam's torture chambers when trying to take us into Iraq.
Behold how the media has forgotten Abu Ghraib and all the low-level peons that were put on trial. Yet, somehow, they protect the guy that authorized it all. Amazing! George said, "We don't torture" and isn't it amazing that he told us we don't torture while he signed the papers to torture.
Nothing that comes out of the Boy King's mouth is the truth. And the Right adores their beloved torturers and liars.
Good, because we didn't quite finish our discussion yet. As you may remember, I have some open issues for you to address in connection to your call for mass murder.
In case you forgot:
How do you see the issue of souvereignity resolved?
How do you feel about the billions you would sentence to death without trial, only to make your 'point'?
How do you, in this light, reconcile the lack of legal basis for your proposed actions with your statement that "The lack of trial and prosecution [for those in Guantanamo] is troubling to me as well."?
How do you feel about the practical question of destroying natural resources the US most likely can't possibly do without? (I assume here that you don't care about other places in the world that might need these resources - please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.)
And last, but not least, how do you feel now about the obvious tactical error of trying to free a person by obliterating the region this person is in?
Additional question:
How would you defend your statement that the Sudan government is 'terrorist'?
Posts: 67 | Location: Manahachtanienk | Registered: 16 November 2007
First off, my name is Nurdin. Miles is dead on this forum. You should have realized that by now.
Second, I didn't fool you. You made a statement, and I responded. Nothing in my discourse was dishonest. I merely deduced some basic implications from your call for ecocide, and asked you to respond. And since you haven't retracted, there's no reason for you not to back up your claims with additional reasoning. Good luck, kid!
You got yourself into trouble, so don't be as immature as to blame ME for it.
Posts: 67 | Location: Manahachtanienk | Registered: 16 November 2007
What you mean to say, I presume, is that you refuse to be held accountable. Apart from that being a rather infantile cop out, I would say that it really doesn't matter. This thread is up with the evidence in plain sight. You have been exposed, and there's nothing you can do to change that. Not even the cowardly deletion of your screw up.
Please don't mutilate this thread any further; thank you.
Posts: 67 | Location: Manahachtanienk | Registered: 16 November 2007
I still have some open issues for you to address in connection to your [now censored] call for mass murder:
How do you see the issue of souvereignity resolved?
How do you feel about the billions you would sentence to death without trial, only to make your 'point'?
How do you, in this light, reconcile the lack of legal basis for your proposed actions with your statement that "The lack of trial and prosecution [for those in Guantanamo] is troubling to me as well."?
How do you feel about the practical question of destroying natural resources the US most likely can't possibly do without? (I assume here that you don't care about other places in the world that might need these resources - please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.)
And last, but not least, how do you feel now about the obvious tactical error of trying to free a person by obliterating the region this person is in?
How would you defend your statement that the Sudan government is 'terrorist'?
And yes - obviously 'Nurdin T.' is a sock of the person formerly known as Miles.
Posts: 67 | Location: Manahachtanienk | Registered: 16 November 2007
**** Disclaimer: The information in this weblog is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. This weblog does not represent the thoughts, intentions, plans or strategies of my owner. It is solely my own personal opinion. Inappropriate comments will be deleted at the authors discretion.***
"I stand or fall on my own words."
Posts: 7253 | Location: PORTLAND | Registered: 07 November 2005
Miles, I still have not heard any word from you. I just want to know how you are doing. You seem to be in pain, and thus wanted to keep my door open in case you want to talk.
I know that your many friends (Nurdin, Loki, Hank and too many for me to remember) may make you feel good in the short term, but you need to have someone else to confide in. How is Andger anyway? Since being kicked out of DJ I have not heard any word from him. Are you writing anything now?
Take care...
Posts: 7939 | Location: Santa Barbara | Registered: 19 July 2005
WOW. George Bush put people in Stump grinders? and chem warfare on democrats
I am not sure if Saddam was waterboarding and putting underwear on the heads of naked people would we have felt compelled to kill him
on the subject of waterboarding.....if another nation performed waterboarding on an american citizen would it be legal or morally right for them to do so?
if not, then what makes it legal when america waterboards another nation's citizen?
quote:
Like your new obsession.
Only one sock on this board, huh? I've found that the truth will set you free. But, that is a problem for some people.
Just pointing out the obvious from what an outsider might see. "Obvservation" dontchaknow.
one sock? are you referring to nukes/genocide again? my observation has been that conservatives on this board advocate the genocide/murder of terrorists AND innocent civilians based on:
*association by means of same geographical location *association by means of religion *association by means of their legal system
------------------------------------------ debating conservatives is easy. so easy, even a caveman can do it!
"if this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck lot easier, just so long as im the dictator" -GWB Dec 18,2002
Posts: 1614 | Location: ft myers florida area | Registered: 23 September 2006
on the subject of waterboarding.....if another nation performed waterboarding on an american citizen would it be legal or morally right for them to do so?
if not, then what makes it legal when america waterboards another nation's citizen?
I could only hope that waterboading was the worst american citzens face. Beheadings, Kaning, burning, jumper cables, Foreign prison with no cable TV.
quote:
one sock?
A banned prior member "miles" is back operating under two different Sock Puppets, Loki & Nurdin. Each has a different personality. Quite fascinating.
**** Disclaimer: The information in this weblog is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. This weblog does not represent the thoughts, intentions, plans or strategies of my owner. It is solely my own personal opinion. Inappropriate comments will be deleted at the authors discretion.***
"I stand or fall on my own words."
Posts: 7253 | Location: PORTLAND | Registered: 07 November 2005
one sock? are you referring to nukes/genocide again? my observation has been that conservatives on this board advocate the genocide/murder of terrorists AND innocent civilians based on:
*association by means of same geographical location *association by means of religion *association by means of their legal system
That's exactly what Slabmaster did, first page of this thread. He edited it out now, because he doesn't want to retract (he still feels all Mulsims should be nuked), and he doesn't want to argue his 'opinion' either (that would get him banned), so he saw it fit to just falsify history. That's always a good way to get out of trouble. Ask any dictator. And certain people here apparently agree with that.
Furthermore, in the previous post you may notice an attempt at diversion by discrediting Nurdin/Loki. Supposedly, pointing out the alleged fact that I'm posting this using an alias is to discredit the words I type. Apparently, the right still holds the philosophy "attack the messenger, not the message" very dearly.
(Please note that none of the 'supporters' have managed, or even tried, to contribute to this thread in the manner of an actual discussion; none of the cheer leaders have tried to bring in any support for the idea that nuking Muslims will take care of, well, anything at all, actually. Looks like we are to conclude that the Right feels that we should just bomb the hell out of everyone, just so that it's clear who's boss. Support for this notion is neither provided nor, do they feel, required. Hardly a nuanced outlook, but there you go.)
This message has been edited. Last edited by: Nurdin T.,
Posts: 67 | Location: Manahachtanienk | Registered: 16 November 2007
Only one sock on this board, huh? I've found that the truth will set you free. But, that is a problem for some people.
What truth is that, Slab? That torture is good and killing 100,000 civilians is just fine? What "truth" do you stand for? You seem suddenly silent in your opposition to our points. Oh that's right, it's just so much fun to say "melt some sand" and then pretend that you really are looking out for those people over there.
You must really hate yourself. "Bad, Bad, Bad Christian. MUST, PUNISH. MUST, LASH OUT at someone else." I suppose Jesus likes your bombs. Of course, don't forget to torture...
Miles, I still have not heard any word from you. I just want to know how you are doing. You seem to be in pain, and thus wanted to keep my door open in case you want to talk.
I know that your many friends (Nurdin, Loki, Hank and too many for me to remember) may make you feel good in the short term, but you need to have someone else to confide in. How is Andger anyway? Since being kicked out of DJ I have not heard any word from him. Are you writing anything now?
I think the tortured souls that advocate the murder and torture of brown people in the name of Christ really are the ones that need some counseling.
It is not in reference to this thread Art. You'd have to read the blatent lie to understand. Miles knows, he's just content to keep beating a dead horse. Whatever floats yer boat.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ "A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user."
Theodore Roosevelt, 1913
Posts: 2404 | Location: Redmond WA | Registered: 04 September 2006
Originally posted by ArtJunky: You seem suddenly silent in your opposition to our points. Oh that's right, it's just so much fun to say "melt some sand" and then pretend that you really are looking out for those people over there.
You must really hate yourself. "Bad, Bad, Bad Christian. MUST, PUNISH. MUST, LASH OUT at someone else." I suppose Jesus likes your bombs. Of course, don't forget to torture...
You know Jesus loves torture.
Not sure why you think I've avoided anything, but I have been wrought with guilt over posting an incomplete statement. Loss of sleep, raging migrains, no appitite, walk around in a daze crying "why me"? etc..... I believe all innocent people should be evacuated before any of the guilty are held accountable. That would be the only fair solution. There should be a world court of opinions on what exactly guilty means and the U.N. should debate it for several years. One thought I had was that anyone that has bombed a school bus, cut off a captives head, or blown up a building using some form jihad as the reasoning, should be counceled as to why they are so angry. More counceling!
I've learned that violence is not the answer Art. Those terrorists in the middle east are just misunderstood. Thankyou for standing by me during my time of awakening.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ "A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user."
Theodore Roosevelt, 1913
Posts: 2404 | Location: Redmond WA | Registered: 04 September 2006
Slab, I think you are exactly right. We just need to hug them more.
Have you hugged your jihadist today?
I think that Al Gore has a simple three step solution to this problem. Stop Global warming-start the global cooling process. Plant trees in the deserts. Provide as many eco-psychologists as needed. Repeat as necessary...
You DO realize that you have just admitted you're out of argumentation? That your, ehr, contributions on this thread are token posts only? To have the last word, and all?
Well, okay, good luck with that, then. If you ever decide you are ready to back your, ehr, 'opinions' up with an actual argumentation, be sure to let me know, wontcha?
Thank you, God bless, and yihaa.
Nurdin.
Posts: 67 | Location: Manahachtanienk | Registered: 16 November 2007
Originally posted by Nurdin T.: You DO realize that you have just admitted you're out of argumentation? That your, ehr, contributions on this thread are token posts only? To have the last word, and all?
Well, okay, good luck with that, then. If you ever decide you are ready to back your, ehr, 'opinions' up with an actual argumentation, be sure to let me know, wontcha?
Thank you, God bless, and yihaa.
Nurdin.
I'm a new man Miles. Which one of you should I contact? The "one" you professed to be or the others?
I think you need a hug....
Ron?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ "A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user."
Theodore Roosevelt, 1913
Posts: 2404 | Location: Redmond WA | Registered: 04 September 2006
It must suck being so completely wrong on torture that you have only to pretend that the conversation has nothing to do with you. Because your president has trapped you in such an untenable position that you have only to support the worst behavior or sacrifice your so called patriotism.
On one hand, oh man, you just want to bomb the phuck out of EVERYONE. On the other hand, there's this seldom listened to voice in your head, that's telling you that torture and killing a 100,000 civilians in a made up fake of a war (occupation) goes absolutely against the teachings of your beloved Jesus.
Solution? This is where the Hebrew Scriptures come in where the "wrathful God" that wipes out whole civilizations comes in just when you need 'im.
How do you live with your own self hate? It must suck hating yourself for being so wrong. Why do you think Jesus would support torture and murder? That must be very troubling.
Be careful how you respond, Hillary and Obama are watching and waiting.
if another nation performed waterboarding on an american citizen would it be legal or morally right for them to do so?
Yes.
**** Disclaimer: The information in this weblog is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. This weblog does not represent the thoughts, intentions, plans or strategies of my owner. It is solely my own personal opinion. Inappropriate comments will be deleted at the authors discretion.***
"I stand or fall on my own words."
Posts: 7253 | Location: PORTLAND | Registered: 07 November 2005
so then you approve of torture( if you count waterboarding as a form of torture).
but knowing you logan, you probably dont think it is. so im going to prove to you that it is.
we all know waterboarding simulates drowning. it does not mean that person is drowning, but the person getting waterboard surely doesnt think so. after all, the interrigators can stop pouring water on them at any time.
now, suppose those same interrigators, instead of using a waterboarding method, just takes the guys head and dunks it underwater for a while. not long enough to drown the guy, but certainly enough where they get a lungfull of water. is this torture? in my book (and probably most) it is torture. this scenerio doesnt kill the guy and leaves no lasting marks. however, the victim certainly suffers in one form or another.
while a differnt method, waterboarding has the same effect. make the victim think he is about to die by way of drowning. both are forms of torture.
------------------------------------------ debating conservatives is easy. so easy, even a caveman can do it!
"if this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck lot easier, just so long as im the dictator" -GWB Dec 18,2002
Posts: 1614 | Location: ft myers florida area | Registered: 23 September 2006
We had an entire thread on waterboarding, and as I recall Log does NOT think it is torture, however he never proved his point, except to maintain his obstinate POV that it catergorically was not torture. Typical blah, blah, blah, right wing psycho babble. (Its the reason I don't watch Fox news)
Of course, how can you say it is not torture if you have never had it done to you, seems to me there are many people who have been subjected to waterboarding who clearly say it is torture.
Oh well, just another argument for arguments sake, I notice Log seems to enjoy that tactic.
"Yeehaw" is not a foreign policy!
Posts: 875 | Location: The Emerald City | Registered: 02 January 2007
How can you prove that something is or isn't torture? To me, listening to ABBA is torture. I suspect it's pleasure to some.
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.
Posts: 8264 | Location: Fl | Registered: 05 July 2001
so then you approve of torture( if you count waterboarding as a form of torture).
Which I think I made it clear I do not.
quote:
while a differnt method, waterboarding has the same effect. make the victim think he is about to die by way of drowning. both are forms of torture.
Not a very convincing argument on how modern day waterboading techniques rise to the current legal level of “sever” Physical or Mental harm.
As Mel points out, there is an extensive thread regarding this subject. I do always enjoy Mel editorializing that I was unable to make a convincing argument regarding the current legality of waterboarding. Despite the FACT. It IS in fact legal. (that one they always have a problem with) We have waterboarding our own most prized soldiers for over 40 years to the tone of 50-60 thousand. If in 40 years they are unable to derive a plausible scientific cause and effect relationship between waterboarding and “sever” physical and mental harm, it simplify doesn’t exist. Plus the top Legal advisor who developed the current policy regarding the use of waterboarding had himself waterboarded and concluded that when done properly, it is in fact legal. Both video, whether propraganda or not, does not show "sever" treatment.
The only icon the anti waterboarding crowd was able to drum up was an impressive 40 year counter-intelligence person Malcolm Vance. He made very passionate argument that waterboarding as in fact torture. Problem was, Malcolm’s rhethoric got a bit ahead of himself and spent the following weeks retracting and clarifying the remarks he made before Congress.
**** Disclaimer: The information in this weblog is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. This weblog does not represent the thoughts, intentions, plans or strategies of my owner. It is solely my own personal opinion. Inappropriate comments will be deleted at the authors discretion.***
"I stand or fall on my own words."
Posts: 7253 | Location: PORTLAND | Registered: 07 November 2005
I do always enjoy Mel editorializing that I was unable to make a convincing argument regarding the current legality of waterboarding.
Ding, wrong!
Not about legality. You keep spinning it as such, but it isn't.
And that about wraps 'er up for ol' Logs. If legality is not the issue, you're out of 'argumentation'. Such as it is.
Sawdust, you know very well that ABBA, which incidentally I regard as the Antichrist, is about taste. Torture isn't. There's literally nobody in the world who enjoys being waterboarded.
Rutherford,
"They may also focus on changing the subject or diluting the discussion with content-poor posts"
Posts: 247 | Location: Limbo | Registered: 17 November 2007
Besides that, I'm afraid I'm just too damn lazy to get into the actual argumentation on this with people who are not interested in any form of honest exchange anyway.
Posts: 247 | Location: Limbo | Registered: 17 November 2007
Not about legality. You keep spinning it as such, but it isn't.
Feel free to inspire me, so someone claiming to be able to wipe the floor with me regarding Waterboarding. Here is your opportunity.
Define "severe"
Prehaps if you can show me the true nature of civil exchange, I might be a better person.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: Loganthor,
**** Disclaimer: The information in this weblog is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. This weblog does not represent the thoughts, intentions, plans or strategies of my owner. It is solely my own personal opinion. Inappropriate comments will be deleted at the authors discretion.***
"I stand or fall on my own words."
Posts: 7253 | Location: PORTLAND | Registered: 07 November 2005
If in 40 years they are unable to derive a plausible scientific cause and effect relationship between waterboarding and “sever” physical and mental harm,
like i mentioned above, waterboarding doesnt leave any physical marks on its victim. but either does smothering someone to death with a pillow.
as far as mental harm, im sure a fear of water and distrust of authority would sure to appear in alot of victims of this torture.
------------------------------------------ debating conservatives is easy. so easy, even a caveman can do it!
"if this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck lot easier, just so long as im the dictator" -GWB Dec 18,2002
Posts: 1614 | Location: ft myers florida area | Registered: 23 September 2006
as far as mental harm, im sure a fear of water and distrust of authority would sure to appear in alot of victims of this torture.
That would suck to be a Navy Seal then.
quote:
For the purposes of this Convention, torture means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession
Again I ask.. Define "severe"
**** Disclaimer: The information in this weblog is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. This weblog does not represent the thoughts, intentions, plans or strategies of my owner. It is solely my own personal opinion. Inappropriate comments will be deleted at the authors discretion.***
"I stand or fall on my own words."
Posts: 7253 | Location: PORTLAND | Registered: 07 November 2005
Log, It occured to me that you did NOT convince one person that waterboarding in NOT torture.
In fact , the result of your insane babble, resulted in CaptainPatch leaving the site. (CaptainPatch is a Vietman vet, who has more credibility in his little finger on the torture issue, than you do in your entire being)
Small, scared man alert
"Yeehaw" is not a foreign policy!
Posts: 875 | Location: The Emerald City | Registered: 02 January 2007
It occured to me that you did NOT convince one person that waterboarding in NOT torture
Well it certainly wasn't for a lack of trying on my part. It seems your crowd gets extremely obstinate when facts trump emotional arguments.
Yet waterboarding is STILL legal.
quote:
In fact , the result of your insane babble, resulted in CaptainPatch leaving the site. (CaptainPatch is a Vietman vet, who has more credibility in his little finger on the torture issue, than you do in your entire being)
Red herring and said like you think I care. Captain did much better then anyone here regarding the issue. But got to emotionally invested in the argument and was unable to deal with simple, undeniable, insurmountable facts.
**** Disclaimer: The information in this weblog is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. This weblog does not represent the thoughts, intentions, plans or strategies of my owner. It is solely my own personal opinion. Inappropriate comments will be deleted at the authors discretion.***
"I stand or fall on my own words."
Posts: 7253 | Location: PORTLAND | Registered: 07 November 2005
His whole supposition is that this was/is a Christian nation and as was mentioned in the article, that Nazi Germany wasn't a Christian nation?
The article seems to push the idea that we somehow only knew to fight Hitler because we were Christians...all of us.
Of course, this ISN'T a Christian nation. I know it is popular, by the Christian majority, to claim it is but that doesn't make it so.
On the flip side, I hear it's popular for Islamic majorities living in the Arab world to claim that their countries are "Muslim." As we know, THEY ARE and THAT'S THE PROBLEM.
Now, the Christian want the US to be just like "THEM?" OK...
Originally posted by meljomur: (CaptainPatch is a Vietman vet, who has more credibility in his little finger on the torture issue, than you do in your entire being)
How so?
Did all Vietnam Vets get tortured?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ "A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user."
Theodore Roosevelt, 1913
Posts: 2404 | Location: Redmond WA | Registered: 04 September 2006
Individuals are legally responsible for their views. Messages or parts of messages may be quoted or read on the radio, or reprinted in Thom's books and other materials.
Read-Only Topic
