Argue With Everyone Political Forums  

Go Back   Argue With Everyone Political Forums > News and Current Events > Politics in the News

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 12-12-2007, 12:28 PM
Oedipus Rex's Avatar
Political Mastermind
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: San Diego, Ca
Posts: 2,252
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Upton View Post
Allowing Osama to run free, while resources, that could have been used in his capture, have been diverted to Iraq, that's traitorous.


Osama isn't really 'free'. Is he in custody? No. Free? Hell no.

You guys are nearly as bad as those we're fighting in the M.E.
__________________
THAT explains it!!!



Word of warning... I don't play well with others.
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 12-12-2007, 12:36 PM
Machiavelli Incarnate
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Washington state
Posts: 3,686
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oedipus Rex View Post
Osama isn't really 'free'. Is he in custody? No. Free? Hell no.

You guys are nearly as bad as those we're fighting in the M.E.
If he is not in custody, then, by definition, he is free. Case closed

Bush has failed in his promise and obligation to capture the mastermind of 9/11.
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 12-12-2007, 12:38 PM
Oedipus Rex's Avatar
Political Mastermind
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: San Diego, Ca
Posts: 2,252
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Upton View Post
If he is not in custody, then, by definition, he is free. Case closed

Bush has failed in his promise and obligation to capture the mastermind of 9/11.



LOL. Yep, you side with the other bad guys at every chance.
__________________
THAT explains it!!!



Word of warning... I don't play well with others.
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 12-12-2007, 12:40 PM
Badmutha's Avatar
Machiavelli Incarnate
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,677
Default

Yes lets divert all resources to finding Osama--as soon as we capture him--terrorism will cease to exist and there will be peace on earth.
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 12-12-2007, 12:54 PM
Machiavelli Incarnate
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Washington state
Posts: 3,686
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oedipus Rex View Post
LOL. Yep, you side with the other bad guys at every chance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Badmutha View Post
Yes lets divert all resources to finding Osama--as soon as we capture him--terrorism will cease to exist and there will be peace on earth.
Amazing! However, I'm not surprised, as you both are defending allowing Osama bin Laden to go free.

I wonder if the families of the victims of 9/11 would agree with you.
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 12-12-2007, 12:58 PM
Oedipus Rex's Avatar
Political Mastermind
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: San Diego, Ca
Posts: 2,252
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Upton View Post
Amazing! However, I'm not surprised, as you both are defending allowing Osama bin Laden to go free.

I wonder if the families of the victims of 9/11 would agree with you.


Defending? No. I'll step out on the limb again and restate my previous position on the entire M.E. Let's nuke the whole goddamn place and be done with 'em. Is that clear enough?
__________________
THAT explains it!!!



Word of warning... I don't play well with others.
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 12-12-2007, 01:02 PM
Machiavelli Incarnate
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Washington state
Posts: 3,686
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oedipus Rex View Post
Defending? No. I'll step out on the limb again and restate my previous position on the entire M.E. Let's nuke the whole goddamn place and be done with 'em. Is that clear enough?
What about the country that can do no wrong, Israel?
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old 12-12-2007, 01:11 PM
Smitty0311's Avatar
Machiavelli Incarnate
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 4,887
Default

I love how quick the subject of a thread can be changed simply by posting the facts of the situation!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Smitty0311 View Post
THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION TOLD THE CIA NOT TO DESTROY THE TAPES! GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT LIBS!

ABC News: White House: Miers Told CIA to Save Tapes

ABC News has learned that at least one White House official knew about the CIA's planned destruction of videotapes in 2005 that documented the interrogation of two al Qaeda operatives: then-White House counsel Harriet Miers.

Three officials told ABC News Miers urged the CIA not to destroy the tapes.

Intelligence officials say the decision to destroy the tapes was made by Jose Rodriguez, former head of the CIA's covert-operations division. Even former CIA director Porter Goss did not know the tapes were destroyed. The White House said today President Bush didn't know either.

Congress is now demanding to know why the CIA destroyed those tapes, just as its interrogation methods were facing intense public scrutiny. To some prominent members of Congress there's only one explanation: a coverup.

Democratic Senate leaders compared the CIA's actions to the Watergate scandal.

Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., asked, "What would cause the CIA to take this action? The answer is obvious -- coverup." "What is at stake here goes to the heart of the rule of law and justice in America," said Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill.

This afternoon, Durbin wrote Attorney General Michael Mukasey urging him to investigate a possible "obstruction of justice."

Members of the bipartisan 9/11 Commission also expressed concern. Co-Chairman Tom Kean said the Commission had demanded all information about the interrogations and was never told about the tapes.

"They knew what they had and they didn't give it to us," Kean said.

In a message to employees Thursday, CIA Director Michael Hayden made no apologies for the tapes' destruction insisting the decision to destroy them was "in line with the law."

In 2002, the CIA videotaped the interrogations of two terror suspects, including top al Qaeda operative Abu Zubaydah. The tapes showed what the CIA calls "enhanced interrogation techniques," methods which critics call torture.

In February 2003, the CIA says it told the leaders of congressional intelligence committees about the tapes and that it planned to destroy them.
__________________
"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they've made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem." Ronald Reagan http://www.arguewitheveryone.com/war...bout-iraq.html
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old 12-12-2007, 01:11 PM
Smitty0311's Avatar
Machiavelli Incarnate
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 4,887
Default

WHY ARE THEY BITCHING NOW? THEY NOT ONLY KNEW ABOUT IT IN 2002 BUT THEY ASKED THE INTERRIGATORS IF THEY WERE DOING ENOUGH! WHY WAS WATERBOARDING NOT AN ISSUE THEN BUT AN ISSUE NOW? BUSH DERRANGEMENT SYNDROME!


washingtonpost.com - nation, world, technology and Washington area news and headlines
Hill Briefed on Waterboarding in 2002
In Meetings, Spy Panels' Chiefs Did Not Protest, Officials Say


By Joby Warrick and Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, December 9, 2007; Page A01

In September 2002, four members of Congress met in secret for a first look at a unique CIA program designed to wring vital information from reticent terrorism suspects in U.S. custody. For more than an hour, the bipartisan group, which included current House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), was given a virtual tour of the CIA's overseas detention sites and the harsh techniques interrogators had devised to try to make their prisoners talk.

Among the techniques described, said two officials present, was waterboarding, a practice that years later would be condemned as torture by Democrats and some Republicans on Capitol Hill. But on that day, no objections were raised. Instead, at least two lawmakers in the room asked the CIA to push harder, two U.S. officials said.

Congressional leaders from both parties would later seize on waterboarding as a symbol of the worst excesses of the Bush administration's counterterrorism effort. The CIA last week admitted that videotape of an interrogation of one of the waterboarded detainees was destroyed in 2005 against the advice of Justice Department and White House officials, provoking allegations that its actions were illegal and the destruction was a coverup.

Yet long before "waterboarding" entered the public discourse, the CIA gave key legislative overseers about 30 private briefings, some of which included descriptions of that technique and other harsh interrogation methods, according to interviews with multiple U.S. officials with firsthand knowledge.

With one known exception, no formal objections were raised by the lawmakers briefed about the harsh methods during the two years in which waterboarding was employed, from 2002 to 2003, said Democrats and Republicans with direct knowledge of the matter. The lawmakers who held oversight roles during the period included Pelosi and Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.) and Sens. Bob Graham (D-Fla.) and John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), as well as Rep. Porter J. Goss (R-Fla.) and Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan).

Individual lawmakers' recollections of the early briefings varied dramatically, but officials present during the meetings described the reaction as mostly quiet acquiescence, if not outright support. "Among those being briefed, there was a pretty full understanding of what the CIA was doing," said Goss, who chaired the House intelligence committee from 1997 to 2004 and then served as CIA director from 2004 to 2006. "And the reaction in the room was not just approval, but encouragement."

Congressional officials say the groups' ability to challenge the practices was hampered by strict rules of secrecy that prohibited them from being able to take notes or consult legal experts or members of their own staffs. And while various officials have described the briefings as detailed and graphic, it is unclear precisely what members were told about waterboarding and how it is conducted. Several officials familiar with the briefings also recalled that the meetings were marked by an atmosphere of deep concern about the possibility of an imminent terrorist attack.

"In fairness, the environment was different then because we were closer to Sept. 11 and people were still in a panic," said one U.S. official present during the early briefings. "But there was no objecting, no hand-wringing. The attitude was, 'We don't care what you do to those guys as long as you get the information you need to protect the American people.' "

Only after information about the practice began to leak in news accounts in 2005 -- by which time the CIA had already abandoned waterboarding -- did doubts about its legality among individual lawmakers evolve into more widespread dissent. The opposition reached a boiling point this past October, when Democratic lawmakers condemned the practice during Michael B. Mukasey's confirmation hearings for attorney general.

GOP lawmakers and Bush administration officials have previously said members of Congress were well informed and were supportive of the CIA's use of harsh interrogation techniques. But the details of who in Congress knew what, and when, about waterboarding -- a form of simulated drowning that is the most extreme and widely condemned interrogation technique -- have not previously been disclosed.

U.S. law requires the CIA to inform Congress of covert activities and allows the briefings to be limited in certain highly sensitive cases to a "Gang of Eight," including the four top congressional leaders of both parties as well as the four senior intelligence committee members. In this case, most briefings about detainee programs were limited to the "Gang of Four," the top Republican and Democrat on the two committees. A few staff members were permitted to attend some of the briefings....
__________________
"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they've made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem." Ronald Reagan http://www.arguewitheveryone.com/war...bout-iraq.html
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old 12-12-2007, 01:15 PM
Badmutha's Avatar
Machiavelli Incarnate
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,677
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Upton View Post
Amazing! However, I'm not surprised, as you both are defending allowing Osama bin Laden to go free.

I wonder if the families of the victims of 9/11 would agree with you.
lol Upton--cmon--we all know that the democrats have him hidden somewhere in hopes they can put him on the anti-war ticket.

Obama/Osama in 08
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump


» Navigation

Political Links Page

Blogs by AWE Members

Advertisers support this site - if you're interested in their product, take a look!


$5 monthly donation:

$10 monthly donation:



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0