Tony Snow and Press Spar: 'Torture' For All of Them

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Do they have a special visa classification for trolls?

Edited September 15, 2006 by erekose

[Ban Hammer 13,335]

Do they have a special visa classification for trolls?

the t-1 visa?

[mmmbop1976 1]

the OP has this statement.."even torture small children in front of their parents, even sexually" he then starts his next quote "bush even claimed...." . this is intended to give the impression to people that have not viewed the video that president bush is condoning and advocating it, a typical tactic of the left. i notice that you have not taken the opportunity to say that you don't believe president bush advocates the torture of small children, even sexually. the OP stated it as a quote from the video, you gave it a thumbs up. chopf##k, this word is so old already, my opinion

You are a chopf##k because you've taken the narrator's statements as meaning that for one they are the OP's statements - Marc thought it was a worthwhile video he wanted to share here and posted the link. Does that mean he stands behind everything stated as his own word? I don't know, how about asking him instead of accusing him. How about asking me if I think the President condones sexually torturing children? You're a chopf##k because you're not concerned about the truth, just your perception of it. It is an important video and it sounded to me very point of fact. As to the allegation that White House counsel John Yoo's memo's and what those memos say, you'll have to find them and read them yourself. But aside from that, you're dicing up the statements made by the narrator into sound bites and ignoring the larger point being made - which is that the White House condoned torture. But keep reaching...I'm sure this is entertaining for all here who read this thread.

it's not about the video, it's about the OP's quotes from the video and how he arranged them in his post, to give the impression that in the video there is proof that president bush advocates the torture of small children. his statements are designed to plant a seed in the head of those that won't take the time to view the video, typical left wing tactic, take something out of context and place it in a different context. it is very plain in the OP's post that he gives the impression that president bush advocates torturing small children, even sexually, and you gave it a thumbs up, and by posting that thumbs up it implies you give thumbs up to the impression the OP is trying to give to the people about the video, and not the actual content of the video.

and i notice that you still have not denied believing that president bush advocates the torutre of children

[GaryC 7]

Gary, you're telling me that these detainees who have yet to be formally charged, tried and found guilty in a court of law are in fact all terrorists??? Do you know how many of these detainees were picked up in the first place??? Due process, due process, due process...it's a fundamental prinicipal of what our country was founded on and just because these people are foreigners doesn't mean we throw those prinicipals out the window. I'll provide you with the stats if you want to see just who these detainees are. You realize that many have been released without any charges, right? Some after being held for 5 years! Being held in Guantanamo Bay does not equate to guilt or being a terrorist. In fact, how many detainees have been tried and found guilty? Due process. Without it and we become no better than the tyrant we removed in Iraq.

If these people were caught in America then they have the rights of due process. But these terrorist were found on the battlefield. They are not Americans and were not moved to American. There is no due process for them. I really doubt that they just grab people off the streets and chuck them into prison. These people were caught red handed in a country that wasn't their own committing acts of terrorism. They have NO RIGHTS under our constitution or our justice system. They are not a part of an organized army and they are not in uniform. So they have NO RIGHTS under the Geneva Convention. They are classified as illegal combatants. In short they have NO RIGHTS AT ALL! They choose to do the things they do and it isn't our responsibility to treat them for anything other than what they are, TERRORISTS!!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

it's not about the video, it's about the OP's quotes from the video and how he arranged them in his post, to give the impression that in the video there is proof that president bush advocates the torture of small children. his statements are designed to plant a seed in the head of those that won't take the time to view the video, typical left wing tactic, take something out of context and place it in a different context. it is very plain in the OP's post that he gives the impression that president bush advocates torturing small children, even sexually, and you gave it a thumbs up, and by posting that thumbs up it implies you give thumbs up to the impression the OP is trying to give to the people about the video, and not the actual content of the video.

and i notice that you still have not denied believing that president bush advocates the torutre of children

I must be reading the wrong thread because I didn't read that in the OP post.

Gary, you're telling me that these detainees who have yet to be formally charged, tried and found guilty in a court of law are in fact all terrorists??? Do you know how many of these detainees were picked up in the first place??? Due process, due process, due process...it's a fundamental prinicipal of what our country was founded on and just because these people are foreigners doesn't mean we throw those prinicipals out the window. I'll provide you with the stats if you want to see just who these detainees are. You realize that many have been released without any charges, right? Some after being held for 5 years! Being held in Guantanamo Bay does not equate to guilt or being a terrorist. In fact, how many detainees have been tried and found guilty? Due process. Without it and we become no better than the tyrant we removed in Iraq.

If these people were caught in America then they have the rights of due process. But these terrorist were found on the battlefield. They are not Americans and were not moved to American. There is no due process for them. I really doubt that they just grab people off the streets and chuck them into prison. These people were caught red handed in a country that wasn't their own committing acts of terrorism. They have NO RIGHTS under our constitution or our justice system. They are not a part of an organized army and they are not in uniform. So they have NO RIGHTS under the Geneva Convention. They are classified as illegal combatants. In short they have NO RIGHTS AT ALL! They choose to do the things they do and it isn't our responsibility to treat them for anything other than what they are, TERRORISTS!!

Did you read the bit about due process - and the Amnesty and other references I posted about how people who 'asked the wrong' questions or simply 'were in the wrong place at the wrong time' have been detained for a siginificant period of time and released without charge.

Are you saying that everyone who is detained IS a terrorist?

[GaryC 7]

Did you read the bit about due process - and the Amnesty and other references I posted about how people who 'asked the wrong' questions or simply 'were in the wrong place at the wrong time' have been detained for a siginificant period of time and released without charge.

Are you saying that everyone who is detained IS a terrorist?

You just said it yourself. "'were in the wrong place at the wrong time' have been detained for a siginificant period of time and released without charge." The ones that are not terrorists are released. The ones at club gitmo are the hardcore "kill every American you can" types. There has to be a weeding out process and we do that.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Did you read the bit about due process - and the Amnesty and other references I posted about how people who 'asked the wrong' questions or simply 'were in the wrong place at the wrong time' have been detained for a siginificant period of time and released without charge.

Are you saying that everyone who is detained IS a terrorist?

You just said it yourself. "'were in the wrong place at the wrong time' have been detained for a siginificant period of time and released without charge." The ones that are not terrorists are released. The ones at club gitmo are the hardcore "kill every American you can" types. There has to be a weeding out process and we do that.

Sure - after being detained for over a year, subjected to 'torture and inhumane' treatment, and on release are tarred with the brush of 'terrorist suspect' for the rest of their lives. Great deal that.

Perhaps the unspoken rule here is that it is civilians in warzones 'who have no rights'.

If you were arrested without probable cause - you'd be spitting blood.

Edited September 15, 2006 by erekose

[GaryC 7]

Sure - after being detained for over a year, subjected to 'torture and inhumane' treatment, and on release are tarred with the brush of 'terrorist suspect' for the rest of their lives. Great deal that.

Perhaps the unspoken rule here is that it is civilians in warzones 'who have no rights'.

If you were arrested without probable cause - you'd be spitting blood.

You make it sound like we round up people wholesale and let them rot. They are suspected for a reason. And I just don't buy the "torture" line at all. There may be a few bad apples in the military that get carried away and that is bad, but it looks like you are painting the whole proccess with a spray gun. I understand that you don't believe in the "war on terror" line. That is your opinion and I respect that. But I do believe we are in a war on terror and we are fighting for our very futures. I have no problems with most of what Bush has done prosecuting the war and I hope he keeps up with what he is doing.

[mmmbop1976 1]

it's not about the video, it's about the OP's quotes from the video and how he arranged them in his post, to give the impression that in the video there is proof that president bush advocates the torture of small children. his statements are designed to plant a seed in the head of those that won't take the time to view the video, typical left wing tactic, take something out of context and place it in a different context. it is very plain in the OP's post that he gives the impression that president bush advocates torturing small children, even sexually, and you gave it a thumbs up, and by posting that thumbs up it implies you give thumbs up to the impression the OP is trying to give to the people about the video, and not the actual content of the video.

and i notice that you still have not denied believing that president bush advocates the torutre of children

I must be reading the wrong thread because I didn't read that in the OP post.

sorry, not the OP of this topic, an not even the OP of the thread i'm referencing, but here is the thread..

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=30738

on page 8 of this topic you will see the post about the video, on page 9 is Steven_And_Jinky's thumbs up to it. and in my opinion anyone that would try to insinuate that the president of the united states advocates torturing children is a left wing lunatic

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Sure - after being detained for over a year, subjected to 'torture and inhumane' treatment, and on release are tarred with the brush of 'terrorist suspect' for the rest of their lives. Great deal that.

Perhaps the unspoken rule here is that it is civilians in warzones 'who have no rights'.

If you were arrested without probable cause - you'd be spitting blood.

You make it sound like we round up people wholesale and let them rot. They are suspected for a reason. And I just don't buy the "torture" line at all. There may be a few bad apples in the military that get carried away and that is bad, but it looks like you are painting the whole proccess with a spray gun. I understand that you don't believe in the "war on terror" line. That is your opinion and I respect that. But I do believe we are in a war on terror and we are fighting for our very futures. I have no problems with most of what Bush has done prosecuting the war and I hope he keeps up with what he is doing.

Suspected for a reason equates to a year+ of detention without trial, torture/harsh interrogation (or whatever you want to call it), before being released without charge.

Not only that but there are question marks over what constitutes 'reasonable suspicion'. Amnesty, ICRC and similar organisations have published reports questioning the justification for certain arrests - because apparently 'wearing the wrong clothes' or 'asking the wrong question' is sufficient justification for all of the above.

Whether you like it or not - acts which constitute torture under international law have been perpetrated by the US with apparently 'high level' approval.

Justify it anyway you like - just don't try to make it something it isn't.

[Ban Hammer 13,335]

well here is some food for thought for erekose:

Spies and terrorists may be subject to civilian law or military tribunal for their acts and in practice have been subjected to torture and/or execution. The laws of war neither approve nor condemn such acts, which fall outside their scope. However, nations that have signed the UN Convention Against Torture have committed themselves not to use torture on anyone for any reason. Citizens and soldiers of nations which have not signed the Fourth Geneva Convention are also not protected by it (Article 4: "Nationals of a State which is not bound by the Convention are not protected by it".), whether they are spies or terrorists. Also, citizens and soldiers of nations which have not signed and do not abide by the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions are not protected by them.

link

In principle to be entitled to prisoner of war status the captured service member must have conducted operations according to the laws and customs of war, e.g. be part of a chain of command, wear a uniform and bear arms openly. Thus, franc-tireurs, terrorists and spies may be excluded. In practice these criteria are not always interpreted strictly. Guerrillas, for example, may not wear a uniform or carry arms openly, yet are typically granted POW status if captured. However, guerrillas or any other combatant may not be granted the status if they try to use both the civilian and the military status. Thus, the importance of uniforms — or as in the guerrilla case, a badge — to keep this important rule of warfare.

link

An unlawful combatant (also unlawful enemy combatant or unprivileged combatant/belligerent) is a person who is accorded neither the rights a soldier would normally have under the laws of war, nor the civil rights a common criminal would normally have.[citation needed]

The phrase "unlawful combatant" does not appear in the Third Geneva Convention (GCIII). However, Article 4 of GCIII does describe categories of persons who are entitled to prisoner of war status. "Prisoner of war" is generally synonymous with "detained lawful combatant."

link

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

it's not about the video, it's about the OP's quotes from the video and how he arranged them in his post, to give the impression that in the video there is proof that president bush advocates the torture of small children. his statements are designed to plant a seed in the head of those that won't take the time to view the video, typical left wing tactic, take something out of context and place it in a different context. it is very plain in the OP's post that he gives the impression that president bush advocates torturing small children, even sexually, and you gave it a thumbs up, and by posting that thumbs up it implies you give thumbs up to the impression the OP is trying to give to the people about the video, and not the actual content of the video.

and i notice that you still have not denied believing that president bush advocates the torutre of children

I must be reading the wrong thread because I didn't read that in the OP post.

sorry, not the OP of this topic, an not even the OP of the thread i'm referencing, but here is the thread..

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=30738

on page 8 of this topic you will see the post about the video, on page 9 is Steven_And_Jinky's thumbs up to it. and in my opinion anyone that would try to insinuate that the president of the united states advocates torturing children is a left wing lunatic

Well I've been called a "left wing lunatic" and I don't ascribe to that opinion.

It might be pandering to Political Correctness - but can we dispense with the labelling. It really is rather irritating, not to mention the way it is constantly being used as an insult that completely contradicts its actual meaning.

Call a pig a pig, but once again liberal is not left, socialist or communist, just as conservative, right nationalist and fascist are all separate positions.

well here is some food for thought for erekose:

Spies and terrorists may be subject to civilian law or military tribunal for their acts and in practice have been subjected to torture and/or execution. The laws of war neither approve nor condemn such acts, which fall outside their scope. However, nations that have signed the UN Convention Against Torture have committed themselves not to use torture on anyone for any reason. Citizens and soldiers of nations which have not signed the Fourth Geneva Convention are also not protected by it (Article 4: "Nationals of a State which is not bound by the Convention are not protected by it".), whether they are spies or terrorists. Also, citizens and soldiers of nations which have not signed and do not abide by the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions are not protected by them.

Perhaps we should admit that civilians in warzones have no rights. But that's not very PC is it?

[mmmbop1976 1]

Um I have a BAAAAAAAAD feeling about this?

this person, Marc and Olga believes the president of the united states condones the torture of children, even in front of their parents, even sexually.

page 8 of this thread will show you this post..

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=30738

here it is in case you don't want to go there..

Here is an interesting video in which the first part discuss how the Bush administration decided to "stop calling it torture and start calling it pressure and if someone died in custody that is even better!"

and "even torture small children in front of their parents, even sexually".

"bush even claimed having 'executive authority' to ignore ANY federal law he wished."

Time to phone Olga.

enjoy.

Edited September 15, 2006 by mmmbop1976

[Ban Hammer 13,335]

Um I have a BAAAAAAAAD feeling about this?

this person, Marc and Olga believes the president of the united states condones the torture of children, even in front of their parents, even sexually.

page 8 of this thread will show you this post..

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=30738

here it is in case you don't want to go there..

Here is an interesting video in which the first part discuss how the Bush administration decided to "stop calling it torture and start calling it pressure and if someone died in custody that is even better!"

and "even torture small children in front of their parents, even sexually".

"bush even claimed having 'executive authority' to ignore ANY federal law he wished."

Time to phone Olga.

enjoy.

i'd not call youtube a credible news source

Perhaps we should admit that civilians in warzones have no rights. But that's not very PC is it?

being pc never won any war...........

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

being pc never won any war...........

True, but it certainly helps to make it something it isn't and never was.