|
The failed Obama administration
wrote in message
... On Jan 22, 11:40 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message ... On Jan 22, 11:04 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message ... On Jan 22, 11:01 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message ... On Jan 22, 10:49 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "BAR" wrote in message ... JoeSpareBedroom wrote: "BAR" wrote in message ... JoeSpareBedroom wrote: wrote in message ... On Jan 22, 9:45 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "Eisboch" wrote in message ... "HK" wrote in message ... Indeed, and speaking of diplomacy, I am glad to see the state department back in the hands of political and career diplomats, and no longer a tool of the pentagram, er, pentagon. The only thing I find disturbing about some of the rushed confirmations is the willingness to overlook/ignore some character flaws or misdeeds in some of the nominee's backgrounds because we are in such a critical "emergency" situation economically and politically. Didn't Obama state in his inauguration address that we will not sacrifice principles in the execution of of policies? This all sounds and feels disturbingly familiar. Eisboch Perhaps congress is looking for experience FAST. They got some. Now, if only someone would talk Obama into asking Gates to stick around..... I suppose we could dredge up more like Mike Brown, whose experience running a horse association served us so well.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Hummm, if exerience is an issue, why the hell did you elect Obama??? ================= I didn't really vote FOR Obama. I voted AGAINST two things: 1) McCain, who's too wrapped up in trying to equal his father and grandfather's achievements, probably using other people's kids as pawns to achieve that end. 2) Palin, who displayed two characteristics which I find unacceptable for high office, and I won't budge on these characteristics. Don't ask what they are. If you don't already know, we'll be wasting our time discussing them. You could have voted for a third party candidate. You know somebody who really reflects your views. And throw away what might've been a slim margin, thereby ending up with the wrong person in the White House? Not a chance. You have no principles. Neither does a political party that cares so little about America that it would permit itself to be represented by George W. Bush or Sarah Palin.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - There you go again, straying off the subject when asked to answer a question. We have answered several for you this morning, with names and sources, you have not managed to answer even one simple qestion.. Just the same old twisted justifications and non-answers... Though you would have learned by now.. later... ============ They've all been answered. But, the answers were not simple enough for you to understand.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You didn't answer what you consider "grown up news", you didn't give a list or detractors beyond "I have a list in my car" what could be more simple? =========== NPR and BBC, mentioned earlier.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - So, you only listen to left wing news, explains a lot really. ============= I'd be happy to listen to a source which you consider balanced, or even right-wing, as long as the stories are longer than 15 seconds. Please provide one or two and I will listen.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - 15 seconds? So, you really are not interested in "the other side". Are the stories on NPR and the BBC limited to 15 seconds? Just the question you ask shows you have never really sought out information other than what suits your ideology, you are uninformed by choice, holy ****, I had at least given you more than that. No wonder you can never really answer questions, if I were in your shoes I would be embarassed too. Again, it explains a lot... ============= I want in-depth stories, each of which last more than 15 seconds. If this seems strange to you, go look at the second hand on a clock for 15 seconds. Now, tell me about one or two news sources which you like, whose news stories last longer than 15 seconds. Do you have any? |
The failed Obama administration
Wizard of Woodstock wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jan 2009 10:44:08 -0500, HK wrote: Eisboch wrote: "HK" wrote in message ... Well, I expect the Obama admin will be significantly more "honest" than the Bush admin. I do not expect perfection. I do not expect Obama, Biden, Clinton, or Holder will tell bold-faced lies to the American people about what their admin is doing and why. Clinton already has. How can a person or administration be "more honest"? Either you are honest or you are not. It's not quite that black or white. Well, yes and no. Let's take the Gitmo deal that President Obama has promised to close. In a year. Maybe more than that. But he is closing it. When is up in the air. :) So that's one example of the truth of closing down Gitmo not being exactly true. How about torture. President Obama is closing down "black" stations, ending "harsh" interrogation techniques restricting interrogation to the Army Field Manual which, as I remember, has something like 20 techniques for gathering information. Unless, of course, it's absoutely necessary to use other, more creative techniques. That's another example of the truth of restricting harsh interrogation not being exactly true. So in a sense, Harry is right. The Gitmo gulag will be shut down in a year or less. Period. Not more. More likely, less. What's the holdup? Disposition of those being held. As soon as that is worked out, the prison will close. The Army Field Manual has been revised since your days in the service. It no longer is distributed on clay tablets. Further, it likely is to be revised some one in that area, since some of the changes forced during the Bush mis-administration were not exactly to the military's liking. Keep in mind it is the professional military that objected to the harsh tactics. The Israelis have an interesting set of techniques with which they torture their suspects: they set them up in dorms, let them do their own cooking, allow contact family and conjugal visits, kill them with kindness, and get a hell of a lot more information than we do. |
The failed Obama administration
On Jan 22, 11:58*am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:
wrote in message ... On Jan 22, 11:40 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message ... On Jan 22, 11:04 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message .... On Jan 22, 11:01 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message ... On Jan 22, 10:49 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "BAR" wrote in message ... JoeSpareBedroom wrote: "BAR" wrote in message ... JoeSpareBedroom wrote: wrote in message ... On Jan 22, 9:45 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "Eisboch" wrote in message ... "HK" wrote in message ... Indeed, and speaking of diplomacy, I am glad to see the state department back in the hands of political and career diplomats, and no longer a tool of the pentagram, er, pentagon. The only thing I find disturbing about some of the rushed confirmations is the willingness to overlook/ignore some character flaws or misdeeds in some of the nominee's backgrounds because we are in such a critical "emergency" situation economically and politically. Didn't Obama state in his inauguration address that we will not sacrifice principles in the execution of of policies? This all sounds and feels disturbingly familiar. Eisboch Perhaps congress is looking for experience FAST. They got some. Now, if only someone would talk Obama into asking Gates to stick around..... I suppose we could dredge up more like Mike Brown, whose experience running a horse association served us so well.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Hummm, if exerience is an issue, why the hell did you elect Obama??? ================= I didn't really vote FOR Obama. I voted AGAINST two things: 1) McCain, who's too wrapped up in trying to equal his father and grandfather's achievements, probably using other people's kids as pawns to achieve that end. 2) Palin, who displayed two characteristics which I find unacceptable for high office, and I won't budge on these characteristics. Don't ask what they are. If you don't already know, we'll be wasting our time discussing them. You could have voted for a third party candidate. You know somebody who really reflects your views. And throw away what might've been a slim margin, thereby ending up with the wrong person in the White House? Not a chance. You have no principles. Neither does a political party that cares so little about America that it would permit itself to be represented by George W. Bush or Sarah Palin.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - There you go again, straying off the subject when asked to answer a question. We have answered several for you this morning, with names and sources, you have not managed to answer even one simple qestion... Just the same old twisted justifications and non-answers... Though you would have learned by now.. later... ============ They've all been answered. But, the answers were not simple enough for you to understand.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You didn't answer what you consider "grown up news", you didn't give a list or detractors beyond "I have a list in my car" what could be more simple? =========== NPR and BBC, mentioned earlier.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - So, you only listen to left wing news, explains a lot really. ============= I'd be happy to listen to a source which you consider balanced, or even right-wing, as long as the stories are longer than 15 seconds. Please provide one or two and I will listen.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - 15 seconds? So, you really are not interested in "the other side". Are the stories on NPR and the BBC limited to 15 seconds? Just the question you ask shows you have never really sought out information other than what suits your ideology, you are uninformed by choice, holy ****, I had at least given you more than that. No wonder you can never really answer questions, if I were in your shoes I would be embarassed too. Again, it explains a lot... ============= I want in-depth stories, each of which last more than 15 seconds. If this seems strange to you, go look at the second hand on a clock for 15 seconds. Now, tell me about one or two news sources which you like, whose news stories last longer than 15 seconds. Do you have any?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Already answered, try to keep up... Gotta' go now, can't waste my time on folks who are intentionally uninformed... |
The failed Obama administration
wrote in message
... On Jan 22, 11:58 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message ... On Jan 22, 11:40 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message ... On Jan 22, 11:04 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message ... On Jan 22, 11:01 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message ... On Jan 22, 10:49 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "BAR" wrote in message ... JoeSpareBedroom wrote: "BAR" wrote in message ... JoeSpareBedroom wrote: wrote in message ... On Jan 22, 9:45 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "Eisboch" wrote in message ... "HK" wrote in message ... Indeed, and speaking of diplomacy, I am glad to see the state department back in the hands of political and career diplomats, and no longer a tool of the pentagram, er, pentagon. The only thing I find disturbing about some of the rushed confirmations is the willingness to overlook/ignore some character flaws or misdeeds in some of the nominee's backgrounds because we are in such a critical "emergency" situation economically and politically. Didn't Obama state in his inauguration address that we will not sacrifice principles in the execution of of policies? This all sounds and feels disturbingly familiar. Eisboch Perhaps congress is looking for experience FAST. They got some. Now, if only someone would talk Obama into asking Gates to stick around..... I suppose we could dredge up more like Mike Brown, whose experience running a horse association served us so well.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Hummm, if exerience is an issue, why the hell did you elect Obama??? ================= I didn't really vote FOR Obama. I voted AGAINST two things: 1) McCain, who's too wrapped up in trying to equal his father and grandfather's achievements, probably using other people's kids as pawns to achieve that end. 2) Palin, who displayed two characteristics which I find unacceptable for high office, and I won't budge on these characteristics. Don't ask what they are. If you don't already know, we'll be wasting our time discussing them. You could have voted for a third party candidate. You know somebody who really reflects your views. And throw away what might've been a slim margin, thereby ending up with the wrong person in the White House? Not a chance. You have no principles. Neither does a political party that cares so little about America that it would permit itself to be represented by George W. Bush or Sarah Palin.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - There you go again, straying off the subject when asked to answer a question. We have answered several for you this morning, with names and sources, you have not managed to answer even one simple qestion.. Just the same old twisted justifications and non-answers... Though you would have learned by now.. later... ============ They've all been answered. But, the answers were not simple enough for you to understand.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You didn't answer what you consider "grown up news", you didn't give a list or detractors beyond "I have a list in my car" what could be more simple? =========== NPR and BBC, mentioned earlier.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - So, you only listen to left wing news, explains a lot really. ============= I'd be happy to listen to a source which you consider balanced, or even right-wing, as long as the stories are longer than 15 seconds. Please provide one or two and I will listen.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - 15 seconds? So, you really are not interested in "the other side". Are the stories on NPR and the BBC limited to 15 seconds? Just the question you ask shows you have never really sought out information other than what suits your ideology, you are uninformed by choice, holy ****, I had at least given you more than that. No wonder you can never really answer questions, if I were in your shoes I would be embarassed too. Again, it explains a lot... ============= I want in-depth stories, each of which last more than 15 seconds. If this seems strange to you, go look at the second hand on a clock for 15 seconds. Now, tell me about one or two news sources which you like, whose news stories last longer than 15 seconds. Do you have any?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Already answered, try to keep up... Gotta' go now, can't waste my time on folks who are intentionally uninformed... ===================== This was your response to my request for a source which you like: "15 seconds? So, you really are not interested in "the other side". Are the stories on NPR and the BBC limited to 15 seconds? Just the question you ask shows you have never really sought out information other than what suits your ideology, you are uninformed by choice, holy ****, I had at least given you more than that. No wonder you can never really answer questions, if I were in your shoes I would be embarassed too. Again, it explains a lot..." Your response does not name any sources. Since it is not possible to understand the world based on 15 second news stories, the only possible conclusion is that you have no sources which provide detailed information. If this is not true, name your source(s). |
The failed Obama administration
On Jan 22, 12:15*pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:
wrote in message ... On Jan 22, 11:58 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message ... On Jan 22, 11:40 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message .... On Jan 22, 11:04 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message ... On Jan 22, 11:01 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message ... On Jan 22, 10:49 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "BAR" wrote in message ... JoeSpareBedroom wrote: "BAR" wrote in message ... JoeSpareBedroom wrote: wrote in message ... On Jan 22, 9:45 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "Eisboch" wrote in message ... "HK" wrote in message ... Indeed, and speaking of diplomacy, I am glad to see the state department back in the hands of political and career diplomats, and no longer a tool of the pentagram, er, pentagon. The only thing I find disturbing about some of the rushed confirmations is the willingness to overlook/ignore some character flaws or misdeeds in some of the nominee's backgrounds because we are in such a critical "emergency" situation economically and politically. Didn't Obama state in his inauguration address that we will not sacrifice principles in the execution of of policies? This all sounds and feels disturbingly familiar. Eisboch Perhaps congress is looking for experience FAST. They got some. Now, if only someone would talk Obama into asking Gates to stick around..... I suppose we could dredge up more like Mike Brown, whose experience running a horse association served us so well.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Hummm, if exerience is an issue, why the hell did you elect Obama??? ================= I didn't really vote FOR Obama. I voted AGAINST two things: 1) McCain, who's too wrapped up in trying to equal his father and grandfather's achievements, probably using other people's kids as pawns to achieve that end. 2) Palin, who displayed two characteristics which I find unacceptable for high office, and I won't budge on these characteristics. Don't ask what they are. If you don't already know, we'll be wasting our time discussing them. You could have voted for a third party candidate. You know somebody who really reflects your views. And throw away what might've been a slim margin, thereby ending up with the wrong person in the White House? Not a chance. You have no principles. Neither does a political party that cares so little about America that it would permit itself to be represented by George W. Bush or Sarah Palin.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - There you go again, straying off the subject when asked to answer a question. We have answered several for you this morning, with names and sources, you have not managed to answer even one simple qestion.. Just the same old twisted justifications and non-answers... Though you would have learned by now.. later... ============ They've all been answered. But, the answers were not simple enough for you to understand.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You didn't answer what you consider "grown up news", you didn't give a list or detractors beyond "I have a list in my car" what could be more simple? =========== NPR and BBC, mentioned earlier.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - So, you only listen to left wing news, explains a lot really. ============= I'd be happy to listen to a source which you consider balanced, or even right-wing, as long as the stories are longer than 15 seconds. Please provide one or two and I will listen.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - 15 seconds? So, you really are not interested in "the other side". Are the stories on NPR and the BBC limited to 15 seconds? Just the question you ask shows you have never really sought out information other than what suits your ideology, you are uninformed by choice, holy ****, I had at least given you more than that. No wonder you can never really answer questions, if I were in your shoes I would be embarassed too. Again, it explains a lot... ============= I want in-depth stories, each of which last more than 15 seconds. If this seems strange to you, go look at the second hand on a clock for 15 seconds. Now, tell me about one or two news sources which you like, whose news stories last longer than 15 seconds. Do you have any?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Already answered, try to keep up... Gotta' go now, can't waste my time on folks who are intentionally uninformed... ===================== This was your response to my request for a source which you like: "15 seconds? So, you really are not interested in "the other side". Are the stories on NPR and the BBC limited to 15 seconds? Just the question you ask shows you have never really sought out information other than what suits your ideology, you are uninformed by choice, holy ****, I had at least given you more than that. No wonder you can never really answer questions, if I were in your shoes I would be embarassed too. Again, it explains a lot..." Your response does not name any sources. Since it is not possible to understand the world based on 15 second news stories, the only possible conclusion is that you have no sources which provide detailed information.. If this is not true, name your source(s).- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Already noted several sources. Fox, MSNBC, CNN, NPR, BBC world news, 60 mins, Fox news Sunday, Hardball... Your silly qualifiers (15 seconds) are just excuses. You really need to expand your input if you wish to keep up... |
The failed Obama administration
wrote in message
... On Jan 22, 12:15 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message ... On Jan 22, 11:58 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message ... On Jan 22, 11:40 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message ... On Jan 22, 11:04 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message ... On Jan 22, 11:01 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message ... On Jan 22, 10:49 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "BAR" wrote in message ... JoeSpareBedroom wrote: "BAR" wrote in message ... JoeSpareBedroom wrote: wrote in message ... On Jan 22, 9:45 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "Eisboch" wrote in message ... "HK" wrote in message ... Indeed, and speaking of diplomacy, I am glad to see the state department back in the hands of political and career diplomats, and no longer a tool of the pentagram, er, pentagon. The only thing I find disturbing about some of the rushed confirmations is the willingness to overlook/ignore some character flaws or misdeeds in some of the nominee's backgrounds because we are in such a critical "emergency" situation economically and politically. Didn't Obama state in his inauguration address that we will not sacrifice principles in the execution of of policies? This all sounds and feels disturbingly familiar. Eisboch Perhaps congress is looking for experience FAST. They got some. Now, if only someone would talk Obama into asking Gates to stick around..... I suppose we could dredge up more like Mike Brown, whose experience running a horse association served us so well.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Hummm, if exerience is an issue, why the hell did you elect Obama??? ================= I didn't really vote FOR Obama. I voted AGAINST two things: 1) McCain, who's too wrapped up in trying to equal his father and grandfather's achievements, probably using other people's kids as pawns to achieve that end. 2) Palin, who displayed two characteristics which I find unacceptable for high office, and I won't budge on these characteristics. Don't ask what they are. If you don't already know, we'll be wasting our time discussing them. You could have voted for a third party candidate. You know somebody who really reflects your views. And throw away what might've been a slim margin, thereby ending up with the wrong person in the White House? Not a chance. You have no principles. Neither does a political party that cares so little about America that it would permit itself to be represented by George W. Bush or Sarah Palin.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - There you go again, straying off the subject when asked to answer a question. We have answered several for you this morning, with names and sources, you have not managed to answer even one simple qestion.. Just the same old twisted justifications and non-answers... Though you would have learned by now.. later... ============ They've all been answered. But, the answers were not simple enough for you to understand.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You didn't answer what you consider "grown up news", you didn't give a list or detractors beyond "I have a list in my car" what could be more simple? =========== NPR and BBC, mentioned earlier.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - So, you only listen to left wing news, explains a lot really. ============= I'd be happy to listen to a source which you consider balanced, or even right-wing, as long as the stories are longer than 15 seconds. Please provide one or two and I will listen.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - 15 seconds? So, you really are not interested in "the other side". Are the stories on NPR and the BBC limited to 15 seconds? Just the question you ask shows you have never really sought out information other than what suits your ideology, you are uninformed by choice, holy ****, I had at least given you more than that. No wonder you can never really answer questions, if I were in your shoes I would be embarassed too. Again, it explains a lot... ============= I want in-depth stories, each of which last more than 15 seconds. If this seems strange to you, go look at the second hand on a clock for 15 seconds. Now, tell me about one or two news sources which you like, whose news stories last longer than 15 seconds. Do you have any?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Already answered, try to keep up... Gotta' go now, can't waste my time on folks who are intentionally uninformed... ===================== This was your response to my request for a source which you like: "15 seconds? So, you really are not interested in "the other side". Are the stories on NPR and the BBC limited to 15 seconds? Just the question you ask shows you have never really sought out information other than what suits your ideology, you are uninformed by choice, holy ****, I had at least given you more than that. No wonder you can never really answer questions, if I were in your shoes I would be embarassed too. Again, it explains a lot..." Your response does not name any sources. Since it is not possible to understand the world based on 15 second news stories, the only possible conclusion is that you have no sources which provide detailed information. If this is not true, name your source(s).- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Already noted several sources. Fox, MSNBC, CNN, NPR, BBC world news, 60 mins, Fox news Sunday, Hardball... Your silly qualifiers (15 seconds) are just excuses. You really need to expand your input if you wish to keep up... ====================== You like 60 Minutes??? Aren't you people being instructed by the Garlique salesman to hate CBS? And, it appears we agree on BBC, although you pretended not to notice that when you claimed not to like my sources. |
The failed Obama administration
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"BAR" wrote in message ... JoeSpareBedroom wrote: "BAR" wrote in message ... JoeSpareBedroom wrote: wrote in message ... On Jan 22, 9:45 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "Eisboch" wrote in message ... "HK" wrote in message ... Indeed, and speaking of diplomacy, I am glad to see the state department back in the hands of political and career diplomats, and no longer a tool of the pentagram, er, pentagon. The only thing I find disturbing about some of the rushed confirmations is the willingness to overlook/ignore some character flaws or misdeeds in some of the nominee's backgrounds because we are in such a critical "emergency" situation economically and politically. Didn't Obama state in his inauguration address that we will not sacrifice principles in the execution of of policies? This all sounds and feels disturbingly familiar. Eisboch Perhaps congress is looking for experience FAST. They got some. Now, if only someone would talk Obama into asking Gates to stick around..... I suppose we could dredge up more like Mike Brown, whose experience running a horse association served us so well.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Hummm, if exerience is an issue, why the hell did you elect Obama??? ================= I didn't really vote FOR Obama. I voted AGAINST two things: 1) McCain, who's too wrapped up in trying to equal his father and grandfather's achievements, probably using other people's kids as pawns to achieve that end. 2) Palin, who displayed two characteristics which I find unacceptable for high office, and I won't budge on these characteristics. Don't ask what they are. If you don't already know, we'll be wasting our time discussing them. You could have voted for a third party candidate. You know somebody who really reflects your views. And throw away what might've been a slim margin, thereby ending up with the wrong person in the White House? Not a chance. You have no principles. Neither does a political party that cares so little about America that it would permit itself to be represented by George W. Bush or Sarah Palin. Or Bill "I never had sexual relations with that woman, Monica Lewinski" Clinton. Or Hiliary "I don't know how the billing records just appeared on the dining room table in the private residence part of the White Hosue." Clinton. Or Barack Hussein "led by the nose by Pelosi and Reid" Obama. |
The failed Obama administration
HK wrote:
Wizard of Woodstock wrote: On Thu, 22 Jan 2009 10:44:08 -0500, HK wrote: Eisboch wrote: "HK" wrote in message ... Well, I expect the Obama admin will be significantly more "honest" than the Bush admin. I do not expect perfection. I do not expect Obama, Biden, Clinton, or Holder will tell bold-faced lies to the American people about what their admin is doing and why. Clinton already has. How can a person or administration be "more honest"? Either you are honest or you are not. It's not quite that black or white. Well, yes and no. Let's take the Gitmo deal that President Obama has promised to close. In a year. Maybe more than that. But he is closing it. When is up in the air. :) So that's one example of the truth of closing down Gitmo not being exactly true. How about torture. President Obama is closing down "black" stations, ending "harsh" interrogation techniques restricting interrogation to the Army Field Manual which, as I remember, has something like 20 techniques for gathering information. Unless, of course, it's absoutely necessary to use other, more creative techniques. That's another example of the truth of restricting harsh interrogation not being exactly true. So in a sense, Harry is right. The Gitmo gulag will be shut down in a year or less. Period. Not more. More likely, less. Doubtful. What's the holdup? Disposition of those being held. As soon as that is worked out, the prison will close. Doubtful. The Army Field Manual has been revised since your days in the service. It no longer is distributed on clay tablets. Further, it likely is to be revised some one in that area, since some of the changes forced during the Bush mis-administration were not exactly to the military's liking. Just means a few more illegal combatants will end up dying on the battle field. Keep in mind it is the professional military that objected to the harsh tactics. True, but the CIA didn't. The Israelis have an interesting set of techniques with which they torture their suspects: they set them up in dorms, let them do their own cooking, allow contact family and conjugal visits, kill them with kindness, and get a hell of a lot more information than we do. Do you have proof of this? |
The failed Obama administration
BAR wrote:
HK wrote: Wizard of Woodstock wrote: On Thu, 22 Jan 2009 10:44:08 -0500, HK wrote: Eisboch wrote: "HK" wrote in message ... Well, I expect the Obama admin will be significantly more "honest" than the Bush admin. I do not expect perfection. I do not expect Obama, Biden, Clinton, or Holder will tell bold-faced lies to the American people about what their admin is doing and why. Clinton already has. How can a person or administration be "more honest"? Either you are honest or you are not. It's not quite that black or white. Well, yes and no. Let's take the Gitmo deal that President Obama has promised to close. In a year. Maybe more than that. But he is closing it. When is up in the air. :) So that's one example of the truth of closing down Gitmo not being exactly true. How about torture. President Obama is closing down "black" stations, ending "harsh" interrogation techniques restricting interrogation to the Army Field Manual which, as I remember, has something like 20 techniques for gathering information. Unless, of course, it's absoutely necessary to use other, more creative techniques. That's another example of the truth of restricting harsh interrogation not being exactly true. So in a sense, Harry is right. The Gitmo gulag will be shut down in a year or less. Period. Not more. More likely, less. Doubtful. What's the holdup? Disposition of those being held. As soon as that is worked out, the prison will close. Doubtful. The Army Field Manual has been revised since your days in the service. It no longer is distributed on clay tablets. Further, it likely is to be revised some one in that area, since some of the changes forced during the Bush mis-administration were not exactly to the military's liking. Just means a few more illegal combatants will end up dying on the battle field. Keep in mind it is the professional military that objected to the harsh tactics. True, but the CIA didn't. The Israelis have an interesting set of techniques with which they torture their suspects: they set them up in dorms, let them do their own cooking, allow contact family and conjugal visits, kill them with kindness, and get a hell of a lot more information than we do. Do you have proof of this? It's been covered in the printed and television news several times. It's not my problem if you are unaware of this. |
The failed Obama administration
On Jan 22, 12:30*pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:
wrote in message ... On Jan 22, 12:15 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message .... On Jan 22, 11:58 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message .... On Jan 22, 11:40 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message ... On Jan 22, 11:04 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message ... On Jan 22, 11:01 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message ... On Jan 22, 10:49 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "BAR" wrote in message ... JoeSpareBedroom wrote: "BAR" wrote in message ... JoeSpareBedroom wrote: wrote in message ... On Jan 22, 9:45 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "Eisboch" wrote in message ... "HK" wrote in message ... Indeed, and speaking of diplomacy, I am glad to see the state department back in the hands of political and career diplomats, and no longer a tool of the pentagram, er, pentagon. The only thing I find disturbing about some of the rushed confirmations is the willingness to overlook/ignore some character flaws or misdeeds in some of the nominee's backgrounds because we are in such a critical "emergency" situation economically and politically. Didn't Obama state in his inauguration address that we will not sacrifice principles in the execution of of policies? This all sounds and feels disturbingly familiar. Eisboch Perhaps congress is looking for experience FAST. They got some. Now, if only someone would talk Obama into asking Gates to stick around..... I suppose we could dredge up more like Mike Brown, whose experience running a horse association served us so well.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Hummm, if exerience is an issue, why the hell did you elect Obama??? ================= I didn't really vote FOR Obama. I voted AGAINST two things: 1) McCain, who's too wrapped up in trying to equal his father and grandfather's achievements, probably using other people's kids as pawns to achieve that end. 2) Palin, who displayed two characteristics which I find unacceptable for high office, and I won't budge on these characteristics. Don't ask what they are. If you don't already know, we'll be wasting our time discussing them. You could have voted for a third party candidate. You know somebody who really reflects your views. And throw away what might've been a slim margin, thereby ending up with the wrong person in the White House? Not a chance. You have no principles. Neither does a political party that cares so little about America that it would permit itself to be represented by George W. Bush or Sarah Palin.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - There you go again, straying off the subject when asked to answer a question. We have answered several for you this morning, with names and sources, you have not managed to answer even one simple qestion.. Just the same old twisted justifications and non-answers... Though you would have learned by now.. later... ============ They've all been answered. But, the answers were not simple enough for you to understand.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You didn't answer what you consider "grown up news", you didn't give a list or detractors beyond "I have a list in my car" what could be more simple? =========== NPR and BBC, mentioned earlier.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - So, you only listen to left wing news, explains a lot really. ============= I'd be happy to listen to a source which you consider balanced, or even right-wing, as long as the stories are longer than 15 seconds. Please provide one or two and I will listen.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - 15 seconds? So, you really are not interested in "the other side". Are the stories on NPR and the BBC limited to 15 seconds? Just the question you ask shows you have never really sought out information other than what suits your ideology, you are uninformed by choice, holy ****, I had at least given you more than that. No wonder you can never really answer questions, if I were in your shoes I would be embarassed too. Again, it explains a lot... ============= I want in-depth stories, each of which last more than 15 seconds. If this seems strange to you, go look at the second hand on a clock for 15 seconds. Now, tell me about one or two news sources which you like, whose news stories last longer than 15 seconds. Do you have any?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Already answered, try to keep up... Gotta' go now, can't waste my time on folks who are intentionally uninformed... ===================== This was your response to my request for a source which you like: "15 seconds? So, you really are not interested in "the other side". Are the stories on NPR and the BBC limited to 15 seconds? Just the question you ask shows you have never really sought out information other than what suits your ideology, you are uninformed by choice, holy ****, I had at least given you more than that. No wonder you can never really answer questions, if I were in your shoes I would be embarassed too. Again, it explains a lot..." Your response does not name any sources. Since it is not possible to understand the world based on 15 second news stories, the only possible conclusion is that you have no sources which provide detailed information. If this is not true, name your source(s).- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Already noted several sources. Fox, MSNBC, CNN, NPR, BBC world news, 60 mins, Fox news Sunday, Hardball... Your silly qualifiers (15 seconds) are just excuses. You really need to expand your input if you wish to keep up... ====================== You like 60 Minutes??? *Aren't you people being instructed by the Garlique salesman to hate CBS? And, it appears we agree on BBC, although you pretended not to notice that when you claimed not to like my sources.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You really need to start to read. I did not say anywhere I did not like the BBC.. I simply noted that your stated sources limit you to one point of view. As to CBS, I don't always agree, but I watch for the same reasons I watch Chris Matthews, I am interested in all viewpoints, not just the ones I agree with. That is the difference between me and folks like you and Harry... I don't consider any part of the country "fly over", I want to be informed, even if it changes my opinion.. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:18 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com