Torturing SOB's
 

On Wed, 10 Dec 2014 13:52:05 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 12/10/14 1:14 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

That's the problem with people like BOA. He selectively ignores some
things if it doesn't serve his argument.


The trouble with "people like Luddite" is they can't help dragging
partisan politics into a subject titled "Torturing SOB's."

There is plenty of debate going on about the release of this report and
it's not limited to the right-leaning media outlets. Even MSNBC has
raised some questions regarding the motivations of Feinstien and her
committee. The committee never bothered interviewing any of the people
who were actually involved in the interrogation program as research for
the report. It started as a conclusion which then had to be justified
with selectively chosen accusations and facts. You are correct. Many
of the same people were chastising the CIA for not doing enough shortly
after 9/11.

Finger pointing and evading responsibility. That's all.

You just evade the point of my post, which is that U.S. Government
engaged in widespread torture.
Maybe you don't believe it happened. Or maybe you think it's okay.
But you want to get into political ****-slinging.
I don't. Sorry about that.
You can argue politics with Scotty. Go right ahead.



We used to be able to claim the high moral ground because even in
warfare, we supposedly did not engage in war-making on civilians to the
extent our "enemies" did. World War II put that claim to death, of
course, with our massive bombings of mostly civilian parts of cities in
Germany and Japan, and the horrors we perpetrated on Vietnamese civilians.

Yeah, we should have left Hitler and Tojo just have their way.

What a f'ing joke, Toad.
--

"The modern definition of 'ingrained racist' is someone who's winning an argument
with a couple liberals."

(Thanks, Luddite!)

Torturing SOB's
 

On Wednesday, December 10, 2014 12:32:19 PM UTC-5, Keyser Söze wrote:

Christians are still doing "bad things," moron.

Yeah, knocking on your door occasionally, trying to hand you a pamplet.

Torturing SOB's
 

Keyser Söze wrote:
On 12/10/14 1:14 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

That's the problem with people like BOA. He selectively ignores some
things if it doesn't serve his argument.


The trouble with "people like Luddite" is they can't help dragging
partisan politics into a subject titled "Torturing SOB's."

There is plenty of debate going on about the release of this report and
it's not limited to the right-leaning media outlets. Even MSNBC has
raised some questions regarding the motivations of Feinstien and her
committee. The committee never bothered interviewing any of the people
who were actually involved in the interrogation program as research for
the report. It started as a conclusion which then had to be justified
with selectively chosen accusations and facts. You are correct. Many
of the same people were chastising the CIA for not doing enough shortly
after 9/11.

Finger pointing and evading responsibility. That's all.

You just evade the point of my post, which is that U.S. Government
engaged in widespread torture.
Maybe you don't believe it happened. Or maybe you think it's okay.
But you want to get into political ****-slinging.
I don't. Sorry about that.
You can argue politics with Scotty. Go right ahead.



We used to be able to claim the high moral ground because even in
warfare, we supposedly did not engage in war-making on civilians to the
extent our "enemies" did. World War II put that claim to death, of
course, with our massive bombings of mostly civilian parts of cities in
Germany and Japan, and the horrors we perpetrated on Vietnamese civilians.



In war there are no innocents. Who was building the war machines?

Torturing SOB's
 

In article ,
says...


Nice try BOA but this subject is about as political as any subject can be.


Only if you want to make it "political". I don't.
I see it as a question of values. I am anti-torture.
So is John McCain.

You are the one who started the thread, crying big crocodile tears about
"your country" and "torture".

Suck it up.

What's to suck up?
As I said in my initial post, which was totally apolitical,
"Of course some here would allow the government to torture.
And they are morons too."
I've remained apolitical throughout the thread.
So if you support government torture, or deny they have tortured,
well, put on your moron shoes.

Torturing SOB's
 

On 12/10/2014 1:52 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 12/10/14 1:14 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

That's the problem with people like BOA. He selectively ignores some
things if it doesn't serve his argument.


The trouble with "people like Luddite" is they can't help dragging
partisan politics into a subject titled "Torturing SOB's."

There is plenty of debate going on about the release of this report and
it's not limited to the right-leaning media outlets. Even MSNBC has
raised some questions regarding the motivations of Feinstien and her
committee. The committee never bothered interviewing any of the people
who were actually involved in the interrogation program as research for
the report. It started as a conclusion which then had to be justified
with selectively chosen accusations and facts. You are correct. Many
of the same people were chastising the CIA for not doing enough shortly
after 9/11.

Finger pointing and evading responsibility. That's all.

You just evade the point of my post, which is that U.S. Government
engaged in widespread torture.
Maybe you don't believe it happened. Or maybe you think it's okay.
But you want to get into political ****-slinging.
I don't. Sorry about that.
You can argue politics with Scotty. Go right ahead.



We used to be able to claim the high moral ground because even in
warfare, we supposedly did not engage in war-making on civilians to the
extent our "enemies" did. World War II put that claim to death, of
course, with our massive bombings of mostly civilian parts of cities in
Germany and Japan, and the horrors we perpetrated on Vietnamese civilians.




I was recently reading about some of the lead up events to WWII, mainly
because some of the current global issues especially with regard to
Russia and Putin are somewhat similar. Japan was pushed into a corner
big time with sanctions, etc.

Roosevelt faced stiff domestic opposition to entering the war. He tried
to goad Germany into attacking a US convoy transporting aid to Great
Britain to create a justification for a war declaration. The Germans
didn't fall for the trap.

Instead, sanctions imposed on Japan were stiffened, leading to the
so-called "surprise" attack on Pearl Harbor. Most historians are now of
the opinion that it wasn't a surprise. It was anticipated.

Torturing SOB's
 

On 12/10/14 2:10 PM, Toad Gig wrote:
On Wed, 10 Dec 2014 13:52:05 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 12/10/14 1:14 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

That's the problem with people like BOA. He selectively ignores some
things if it doesn't serve his argument.


The trouble with "people like Luddite" is they can't help dragging
partisan politics into a subject titled "Torturing SOB's."

There is plenty of debate going on about the release of this report and
it's not limited to the right-leaning media outlets. Even MSNBC has
raised some questions regarding the motivations of Feinstien and her
committee. The committee never bothered interviewing any of the people
who were actually involved in the interrogation program as research for
the report. It started as a conclusion which then had to be justified
with selectively chosen accusations and facts. You are correct. Many
of the same people were chastising the CIA for not doing enough shortly
after 9/11.

Finger pointing and evading responsibility. That's all.

You just evade the point of my post, which is that U.S. Government
engaged in widespread torture.
Maybe you don't believe it happened. Or maybe you think it's okay.
But you want to get into political ****-slinging.
I don't. Sorry about that.
You can argue politics with Scotty. Go right ahead.



We used to be able to claim the high moral ground because even in
warfare, we supposedly did not engage in war-making on civilians to the
extent our "enemies" did. World War II put that claim to death, of
course, with our massive bombings of mostly civilian parts of cities in
Germany and Japan, and the horrors we perpetrated on Vietnamese civilians.

Yeah, we should have left Hitler and Tojo just have their way.

What a f'ing joke, Toad.


As usual, you just don't get the point. The point is, if your enemy
engages in war against non-combatant civilians and you do, too, then
you've lost your claim to the high moral ground.

That the Japanese and the Germans killed millions of innocent people
didn't make it "ok" for us to firebomb civilian areas. Operation
Meetinghouse, for example, supposedly killed more than 100,000 civilian
Japanese, and many believe the death toll was much higher.



--
I feel no need to explain my politics to stupid right-wingers.
After all, I am *not* the Jackass Whisperer.

Torturing SOB's
 

On 12/10/14 2:13 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 12/10/14 1:14 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

That's the problem with people like BOA. He selectively ignores some
things if it doesn't serve his argument.


The trouble with "people like Luddite" is they can't help dragging
partisan politics into a subject titled "Torturing SOB's."

There is plenty of debate going on about the release of this report and
it's not limited to the right-leaning media outlets. Even MSNBC has
raised some questions regarding the motivations of Feinstien and her
committee. The committee never bothered interviewing any of the people
who were actually involved in the interrogation program as research for
the report. It started as a conclusion which then had to be justified
with selectively chosen accusations and facts. You are correct. Many
of the same people were chastising the CIA for not doing enough shortly
after 9/11.

Finger pointing and evading responsibility. That's all.

You just evade the point of my post, which is that U.S. Government
engaged in widespread torture.
Maybe you don't believe it happened. Or maybe you think it's okay.
But you want to get into political ****-slinging.
I don't. Sorry about that.
You can argue politics with Scotty. Go right ahead.



We used to be able to claim the high moral ground because even in
warfare, we supposedly did not engage in war-making on civilians to the
extent our "enemies" did. World War II put that claim to death, of
course, with our massive bombings of mostly civilian parts of cities in
Germany and Japan, and the horrors we perpetrated on Vietnamese civilians.



In war there are no innocents. Who was building the war machines?


Now you sound like the Jihadists...and in a way, of course, you are
correct. The point, of course, is that our hands are bloody, too.

--
I feel no need to explain my politics to stupid right-wingers.
After all, I am *not* the Jackass Whisperer.

Torturing SOB's
 

On 12/10/14 2:26 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 12/10/2014 1:52 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 12/10/14 1:14 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

That's the problem with people like BOA. He selectively ignores some
things if it doesn't serve his argument.


The trouble with "people like Luddite" is they can't help dragging
partisan politics into a subject titled "Torturing SOB's."

There is plenty of debate going on about the release of this report and
it's not limited to the right-leaning media outlets. Even MSNBC has
raised some questions regarding the motivations of Feinstien and her
committee. The committee never bothered interviewing any of the people
who were actually involved in the interrogation program as research for
the report. It started as a conclusion which then had to be justified
with selectively chosen accusations and facts. You are correct. Many
of the same people were chastising the CIA for not doing enough shortly
after 9/11.

Finger pointing and evading responsibility. That's all.

You just evade the point of my post, which is that U.S. Government
engaged in widespread torture.
Maybe you don't believe it happened. Or maybe you think it's okay.
But you want to get into political ****-slinging.
I don't. Sorry about that.
You can argue politics with Scotty. Go right ahead.



We used to be able to claim the high moral ground because even in
warfare, we supposedly did not engage in war-making on civilians to the
extent our "enemies" did. World War II put that claim to death, of
course, with our massive bombings of mostly civilian parts of cities in
Germany and Japan, and the horrors we perpetrated on Vietnamese
civilians.




I was recently reading about some of the lead up events to WWII, mainly
because some of the current global issues especially with regard to
Russia and Putin are somewhat similar. Japan was pushed into a corner
big time with sanctions, etc.

Roosevelt faced stiff domestic opposition to entering the war. He tried
to goad Germany into attacking a US convoy transporting aid to Great
Britain to create a justification for a war declaration. The Germans
didn't fall for the trap.

Instead, sanctions imposed on Japan were stiffened, leading to the
so-called "surprise" attack on Pearl Harbor. Most historians are now of
the opinion that it wasn't a surprise. It was anticipated.



I don't think the attack was unexpected, but the timing of it was.

--
I feel no need to explain my politics to stupid right-wingers.
After all, I am *not* the Jackass Whisperer.

Torturing SOB's
 

On Wed, 10 Dec 2014 14:36:54 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 12/10/14 2:10 PM, Toad Gig wrote:
On Wed, 10 Dec 2014 13:52:05 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 12/10/14 1:14 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

That's the problem with people like BOA. He selectively ignores some
things if it doesn't serve his argument.


The trouble with "people like Luddite" is they can't help dragging
partisan politics into a subject titled "Torturing SOB's."

There is plenty of debate going on about the release of this report and
it's not limited to the right-leaning media outlets. Even MSNBC has
raised some questions regarding the motivations of Feinstien and her
committee. The committee never bothered interviewing any of the people
who were actually involved in the interrogation program as research for
the report. It started as a conclusion which then had to be justified
with selectively chosen accusations and facts. You are correct. Many
of the same people were chastising the CIA for not doing enough shortly
after 9/11.

Finger pointing and evading responsibility. That's all.

You just evade the point of my post, which is that U.S. Government
engaged in widespread torture.
Maybe you don't believe it happened. Or maybe you think it's okay.
But you want to get into political ****-slinging.
I don't. Sorry about that.
You can argue politics with Scotty. Go right ahead.



We used to be able to claim the high moral ground because even in
warfare, we supposedly did not engage in war-making on civilians to the
extent our "enemies" did. World War II put that claim to death, of
course, with our massive bombings of mostly civilian parts of cities in
Germany and Japan, and the horrors we perpetrated on Vietnamese civilians.

Yeah, we should have left Hitler and Tojo just have their way.

What a f'ing joke, Toad.


As usual, you just don't get the point. The point is, if your enemy
engages in war against non-combatant civilians and you do, too, then
you've lost your claim to the high moral ground.

That the Japanese and the Germans killed millions of innocent people
didn't make it "ok" for us to firebomb civilian areas. Operation
Meetinghouse, for example, supposedly killed more than 100,000 civilian
Japanese, and many believe the death toll was much higher.

The only time you give a **** about 'high moral ground' is when it's
occupation may harm this country.

F'ing joke, Toad. Face it.
--

"The modern definition of 'ingrained racist' is someone who's winning an argument
with a couple liberals."

(Thanks, Luddite!)

Torturing SOB's
 

On Wed, 10 Dec 2014 14:39:25 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 12/10/14 2:13 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 12/10/14 1:14 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

That's the problem with people like BOA. He selectively ignores some
things if it doesn't serve his argument.


The trouble with "people like Luddite" is they can't help dragging
partisan politics into a subject titled "Torturing SOB's."

There is plenty of debate going on about the release of this report and
it's not limited to the right-leaning media outlets. Even MSNBC has
raised some questions regarding the motivations of Feinstien and her
committee. The committee never bothered interviewing any of the people
who were actually involved in the interrogation program as research for
the report. It started as a conclusion which then had to be justified
with selectively chosen accusations and facts. You are correct. Many
of the same people were chastising the CIA for not doing enough shortly
after 9/11.

Finger pointing and evading responsibility. That's all.

You just evade the point of my post, which is that U.S. Government
engaged in widespread torture.
Maybe you don't believe it happened. Or maybe you think it's okay.
But you want to get into political ****-slinging.
I don't. Sorry about that.
You can argue politics with Scotty. Go right ahead.



We used to be able to claim the high moral ground because even in
warfare, we supposedly did not engage in war-making on civilians to the
extent our "enemies" did. World War II put that claim to death, of
course, with our massive bombings of mostly civilian parts of cities in
Germany and Japan, and the horrors we perpetrated on Vietnamese civilians.



In war there are no innocents. Who was building the war machines?


Now you sound like the Jihadists...and in a way, of course, you are
correct. The point, of course, is that our hands are bloody, too.

Which makes the beheadings, etc, OK, right?

Toad, you've become the hit of the party. WAFJ!
--

"The modern definition of 'ingrained racist' is someone who's winning an argument
with a couple liberals."

(Thanks, Luddite!)