War Criminals: In Our Names! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

SugarMyChurro -> War Criminals: In Our Names! (4/10/2008 11:24:42 PM)

Sources: Top Bush Advisors Approved 'Enhanced Interrogation'
http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=4583256

At the time, the Principals Committee included Vice President Cheney, former National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Secretary of State Colin Powell, as well as CIA Director George Tenet and Attorney General John Ashcroft.

-----

So yeah, the idea that McCain now supports the ideas of this administration flies utterly in the face of his supposed experiences as a POW. If he was POW under the circumstances he has previously described how can he now support this illegal bullshit? And do please note the name of Condoleezza Rice who has been floated as a possible McCain running mate. Well, aren't these war crimes? These people belong before the Hague for war crimes and McCain supports their views anyway. That seems very odd to me. Are we just going to elect another war criminal?

Is everyone in the U.S. totally fucking insane? We're all just a pack of drooling warmongers out for blood? Is that right?

Also looking ahead: it seems to me that we have them all ensnared increasingly tightly in a flat out conspiracy to commit war crimes. Shrub Jr is also implicated in the role of "knew or should have known" as all of these people acted in his name and consulted with him daily.



farglebargle -> RE: War Criminals: In Our Names! (4/11/2008 4:36:48 AM)

quote:

So yeah, the idea that McCain now supports the ideas of this administration flies utterly in the face of his supposed experiences as a POW


That's how you can tell that he's just another piece-of-shit scumbag politician.

If you'll SELL-OUT your principles about TORTURING PRISONERS when you've *reportedly* been tortured while a prisoner, what *WILL* you take a moral stand against?

For all the "Obama's got crazy religious cohorts" crap, never forget that McCain sucked James Dobson's cock enthusiastically enough last year....

THE FAKE ELECTION **SHOW** ISN'T EVEN ENTERTAINING!




MmeGigs -> RE: War Criminals: In Our Names! (4/11/2008 4:40:32 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro

If he was POW under the circumstances he has previously described how can he now support this illegal bullshit?



I suspect that if he didn't support it now, he wouldn't be the Republican nominee. 


quote:

ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro
Is everyone in the U.S. totally fucking insane? We're all just a pack of drooling warmongers out for blood? Is that right?


I don't think that's right.  I think that a lot of folks in the US are scared - of terrorists, economic insecurity, homosexuals, global warming, lefties, righties, what have you.  Many want to believe that there are easy answers and they vote for people who claim to have them. 



caitlyn -> RE: War Criminals: In Our Names! (4/11/2008 6:19:14 AM)

This is all noise.

Senator McCain on torture, from the debate.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNf6ubjdYmc

Now, many people want to say that Senator McCain's vote agaist the so called "Waterboarding Bill" as a flip-flop, but if you listen to his reasons, they are consistant with what he says in the link above, that these activities are already illegal and not part of techniques authorized in the Army Field Manual.

There is no flip-flop. There is no need for a bill, making something illegal, that is already illegal.

I'm still not going to vote for him ... but there it is. [;)]



Owner59 -> RE: War Criminals: In Our Names! (4/11/2008 7:33:41 AM)

 Sorry caitlyn.He did flip-flop.There`s no other way to describe what he did.Your link only makes that clearer.He voted against his own bill.wtf?

The reasons,..... are transparent.They are the same reasons he "changed" his mind about whether Jerry Falwell was an "agent of intolerance".

Is there any doubt that Falwell was, and Pat Robertson,Haggee,Parsley and the rest are  agents of intolerance?

Nothing has changed to make them tolerant or civil, so McCain is a flip-flopper and can`t be given credit for being a maverick or a centrist.

As someone who once admired him,I`m very disappointed.He went from a regular conservative(the loyal opposition) to a neo-conservative,just to be president.

He`s got nothing left.



SugarMyChurro -> RE: War Criminals: In Our Names! (4/11/2008 9:25:15 AM)

Yeah, I'm going to go with Owner59 here, except that I never particularly admired him anyway.

I'll only vote for McCain in order to destroy this country more quickly.



SugarMyChurro -> RE: War Criminals: In Our Names! (4/11/2008 11:16:24 AM)

And...checkmate!

The signature of Mr. Junior on a memo authorizing the new torture guidelines:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB127/02.02.07.pdf



cyberdude611 -> RE: War Criminals: In Our Names! (4/11/2008 12:53:02 PM)

As far as the International Criminal Court...that has problems...the United States (as well as Israel and most of the mid-east) are not members. The US Senate in fact voted unanimously NO to the Rome treaty several years ago on fears the ICC would try to overrule the US Supreme Court in future cases. So there is a jurisdiction problem here.
Another problem is the US has immunity. And the reason why is because the United States threatened to withdrawl troops from Kosovo and pull military support out of NATO. The Europeans didnt want that to happen so they agreed to make the US immune from the court.

This is the letter that the United States sent to the ICC back in 2001:
"This is to inform you, in connection with the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court adopted on July 17, 1998, that the United States does not intend to become a party to the treaty. Accordingly, the United States has no legal obligations arising from its signature on December 31, 2000. The United States requests that its intention not to become a party, as expressed in this letter, be reflected in the depositary's status lists relating to this treaty."
 
Other big nations such as Russia and China also refuse to be part of the court. So it's backed by Europe, Africa, and 3rd world country. So it doesnt have much power.



SugarMyChurro -> RE: War Criminals: In Our Names! (4/11/2008 12:54:45 PM)

I realize all of that. It doesn't change anything.

War criminals are war criminals.



Floggings4You -> RE: War Criminals: In Our Names! (4/11/2008 1:24:07 PM)

I'm still reeling from the last two Presidential elections; I'm certainly not ready for another one.  To lose faith in our justice system, and then four years later, in the American people, was just too much.








MissSepphora1 -> RE: War Criminals: In Our Names! (4/11/2008 1:28:21 PM)

Just out of curiosity, do you consider the muslims cutting off the heads of American journalists in front of cameras war criminals also?

quote:

ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro

I realize all of that. It doesn't change anything.

War criminals are war criminals.



cyberdude611 -> RE: War Criminals: In Our Names! (4/11/2008 1:38:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MissSepphora1

Just out of curiosity, do you consider the muslims cutting off the heads of American journalists in front of cameras war criminals also?

quote:

ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro

I realize all of that. It doesn't change anything.

War criminals are war criminals.



Of course not....those people are "freedom fighters." And they only act that way because of American policy. We should all convert to Islam and support Taliban governments. That way no one will be angry and we can finally have world peace.



mnottertail -> RE: War Criminals: In Our Names! (4/11/2008 1:40:02 PM)

Rather a moot point, in this day and age.  I suppose it is equally as illegal as gunning down a car full of innocents off camera.

What we had, and what we no longer have the moral fortitude to continue, was the fact that as a matter of worldly stated policy, we don't fucking torture prisoners of any sort, for any reason, and we will not demonstrate a largesse to nations that do, in fact we used to have the noblesse oblige to say, we aint going to put your cities to the torch, nor rape your women, so get up off your haunches, and let the United States (and insert country here) be as brothers, and it is now very difficult matter to show any lese magiste (let alone pretend an affront) at those who do so.

Ron  



MissSepphora1 -> RE: War Criminals: In Our Names! (4/11/2008 1:48:09 PM)

And as soon as all of us are muslim, we'll all be killed for being sexually deviant!  Woohoo!

quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611

quote:

ORIGINAL: MissSepphora1

Just out of curiosity, do you consider the muslims cutting off the heads of American journalists in front of cameras war criminals also?

quote:

ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro

I realize all of that. It doesn't change anything.

War criminals are war criminals.



Of course not....those people are "freedom fighters." And they only act that way because of American policy. We should all convert to Islam and support Taliban governments. That way no one will be angry and we can finally have world peace.



SugarMyChurro -> RE: War Criminals: In Our Names! (4/11/2008 2:07:57 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MissSepphora1
Just out of curiosity, do you consider the muslims cutting off the heads of American journalists in front of cameras war criminals also?


No, I guess I see that as more simply murder. The problem is that we are the invading force in Iraq and they don't want us there. To them any westerner may be up for grabs in making their political points.

We are also torturing people.

As has been said, we have lost any possible moral high ground in this invasion. We already took out Hussein, it's time to leave.

Question: What would you do if we had people invading the U.S.? Might you kill them indiscriminately?



MissSepphora1 -> RE: War Criminals: In Our Names! (4/11/2008 2:12:00 PM)

So it's okay to murder indiscriminantly, but it's not okay to torture someone to get information that might save millions of lives?

Where in the hell is the logic in this?

quote:

ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro

quote:

ORIGINAL: MissSepphora1
Just out of curiosity, do you consider the muslims cutting off the heads of American journalists in front of cameras war criminals also?


No, I guess I see that as more simply murder. The problem is that we are the invading force in Iraq and they don't want us there. To them any westerner may be up for grabs in making their political points.

We are also torturing people.

As has been said, we have lost any possible moral high ground in this invasion. We already took out Hussein, it's time to leave.

Question: What would you do if we had people invading the U.S.? Might you kill them indiscriminately?




SugarMyChurro -> RE: War Criminals: In Our Names! (4/11/2008 2:16:39 PM)

I don't think anyone argues that people aren't allowed to protect their homes and their country from invasion.

There's the logic.



MissSepphora1 -> RE: War Criminals: In Our Names! (4/11/2008 2:20:11 PM)

So, in torturing these terrorists, is that protecting our country from invasion?

And if you don't think we're being invaded, I have a long laundry list of terrorist acts that have been perpetrated on American soil, including embassies and ships.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro

I don't think anyone argues that people aren't allowed to protect their homes and their country from invasion.

There's the logic.



mnottertail -> RE: War Criminals: In Our Names! (4/11/2008 2:25:51 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MissSepphora1

So it's okay to murder indiscriminantly, but it's not okay to torture someone to get information that might save millions of lives?

Where in the hell is the logic in this?



Nope, as stated, nobody will disagree with it, it is useful politic.

Please be so kind as to enumerate the indiscriminant murder (and who it was performed by) and the discriminate torture (and who it was performed by) and how that logicic is appliant here, vis a vis; eye-for-eye or any other generally understood principle.  

Ron



SugarMyChurro -> RE: War Criminals: In Our Names! (4/11/2008 2:26:39 PM)

Yeah, I really don't buy into all that crap. We reap what we sow in the world.

I don't believe Al Queda exists. It's a made up bogeyman.

If we didn't have a global imperialist agenda to force our brand of capitalism onto everyone maybe they'd leave us alone at home.



Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125