Cheney - shut up or take the witness stand
puremagic
Posts: 1,907
We don't need any more memos, if you are so proud and positive that the torture of prisoners saved America, then get your ass on a witness stand and let America know what you did to save our ungrateful asses.
If you thought your program of torture was needed, then why the hell did you allow the prosecution, incarceration and dishonorable discharge of the soldiers of Abu Ghraib prison?
Weren't these soldiers 'just following orders' like the CIA interrogators? Didn't these soldiers deserve to have their military honor protected.
Why didn't you call for a pardon for these soldiers so that their military honor could be restored, like you did for that traitor 'Scooter' who sold out a CIA operative (go figure).
Why didn't you speak up for these soldiers, if your torture program was legal?
If you thought your program of torture was needed, then why the hell did you allow the prosecution, incarceration and dishonorable discharge of the soldiers of Abu Ghraib prison?
Weren't these soldiers 'just following orders' like the CIA interrogators? Didn't these soldiers deserve to have their military honor protected.
Why didn't you call for a pardon for these soldiers so that their military honor could be restored, like you did for that traitor 'Scooter' who sold out a CIA operative (go figure).
Why didn't you speak up for these soldiers, if your torture program was legal?
SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Kinda like people who slaughter chickens... if you stick you finger inside a chicken to torture it, that's a fire-able offense. Killing the chicken though is not a fire-able offense, since that's the job, even though that is worse.
*NYC 9/28/96 *NYC 9/29/96 *NJ 9/8/98 (front row "may i play drums with you")
*MSG 9/10/98 (backstage) *MSG 9/11/98 (backstage)
*Jones Beach 8/23/00 *Jones Beach 8/24/00 *Jones Beach 8/25/00
*Mansfield 8/29/00 *Mansfield 8/30/00 *Nassau 4/30/03 *Nissan VA 7/1/03
*Borgata 10/1/05 *Camden 5/27/06 *Camden 5/28/06 *DC 5/30/06
*VA Beach 6/17/08 *DC 6/22/08 *MSG 6/24/08 (backstage) *MSG 6/25/08
*EV DC 8/17/08 *EV Baltimore 6/15/09 *Philly 10/31/09
*Bristow VA 5/13/10 *MSG 5/20/10 *MSG 5/21/10
holy shit - I love your avatar!
*NYC 9/28/96 *NYC 9/29/96 *NJ 9/8/98 (front row "may i play drums with you")
*MSG 9/10/98 (backstage) *MSG 9/11/98 (backstage)
*Jones Beach 8/23/00 *Jones Beach 8/24/00 *Jones Beach 8/25/00
*Mansfield 8/29/00 *Mansfield 8/30/00 *Nassau 4/30/03 *Nissan VA 7/1/03
*Borgata 10/1/05 *Camden 5/27/06 *Camden 5/28/06 *DC 5/30/06
*VA Beach 6/17/08 *DC 6/22/08 *MSG 6/24/08 (backstage) *MSG 6/25/08
*EV DC 8/17/08 *EV Baltimore 6/15/09 *Philly 10/31/09
*Bristow VA 5/13/10 *MSG 5/20/10 *MSG 5/21/10
Like say a guy had a choice to surrender or die fighting...
But he knows if he surrenders he'll probably be tortured , so chooses to keep fighting to the death.
how many Americans would have been saved if that guy just surrendered? 1? 5? 10?
who knows.
Saving lives? maybe not.
this is insane. The US has invaded IRAQ. WE invaded IRAQ
OF course they are trying to kill our troops. its called defending your country you dumb mother fuckers.
What if Iraqi troops were now occupying the US and were running around torturing all the patriots trying to find the militia hideouts?
would you defend the torture then? They are trying to save lives. right?
right?
you are all insane.
What in the fuck.
Cheney should spend the rest of his life in prison. along with every other scumbag from that administration.
yeah. good idea.
maybe they won't decide next year that you are I are terrorists too (fingers crossed).
no evidence. no trial. no judge. no jury.
give them the power to torture but don't get on their bad side i guess.
How did killing hundred of thousands of innocent Iraqi's keep me safe?
Serious question.
Obama's not my boy. There are more positions than democrat or republican.
I agree. Innocent people die in war. that's the problem with war.
In WW1, for every 10 soldiers killed, 1 civilian died.
And on to today.,
Where for every soldier killed, 10 civilians are killed.
That's with precision guided bombs and the "great care" they take to avoid civilian casualties.
what's the current reason for invading Iraq these days? Did we bring freedom? Kill Saddam? Save them from Al-Quaeda? WMD's? I don't know because the excuse given for killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people changes every goddamn day.
And no, dropping atomic weapons on Japan had nothing to do with winning the war. The war was already over. It was a political move, the first act of the cold war.
Or the fire bombing Dresden in Germany that killed 250,000 people, mostly civilians, and some American POW's. It had nothing to do with winning the war;.
war should be the last resort...
But the US has been declining lately as a political power in the world, and as an economic power, so have been much more willing to rely on the troops to get their way, to rely on force, where its guaranteed they will have the upper hand..
I didn't plan the flying of large aircraft into buildings killings thousands of Americans. Nor am I going to. So lose a little of the drama, will you?
Isn't it fucked up how these people would kill any of us and our families yet we got people like Pinko and space boy sticking up for them. :?
They should go talk to Marianne Pearl and families of the 9/11 victims, I'm guessing they would look like fools trying to explain their case that terrorists like KSM deserve better.
little known fact: We hand out Qurans at Guantanamo that are in little ziplocks so they aren't touched by us 'infidels'. Pathetic.
He is sticking up for the principles this nation is supposed to be based on but that is beyond you because you would have to use reasoning instead of anger to understand this.
Because I"m pretty sure not every single one of them knows something about plans/attacks.
Which means some of these guys are being tortured for no good reason.
A nation of laws (that's us right?) should uphold the law even when its not convenient.
Actually, if my math is correct, 9/11 happened seven and a half years ago during the Bush administration. So, how safe did they REALLY keep us? But i'm sure you're going to respond that it was all Clinton's fault, right? Yep, and if we get hit again while Obama is pres, we can blame it on Bush for all the fuckups in his 8 year reign.
9/29/04 Boston, 6/28/08 Mansfield, 8/23/09 Chicago, 5/15/10 Hartford
5/17/10 Boston, 10/15/13 Worcester, 10/16/13 Worcester, 10/25/13 Hartford
8/5/16 Fenway, 8/7/16 Fenway
EV Solo: 6/16/11 Boston, 6/18/11 Hartford,
There's plenty of blame to go around but most of the failed Intel happened on Clinton's watch. not to mention He had several attempts to take out Bin Laden Ist world trade center bombing , the USS Cole , Tanzania. all happened on Clinton's watch which led up to 911
Look, we can go back and forth. Bottom line is no matter who is president, Democrat or Republican, there will always be groups of people out there who will try to kill us or bring our country down. Unfortunately, people will ultimately just point the blame to Washington and our leaders as opposed to the groups responsible.
9/29/04 Boston, 6/28/08 Mansfield, 8/23/09 Chicago, 5/15/10 Hartford
5/17/10 Boston, 10/15/13 Worcester, 10/16/13 Worcester, 10/25/13 Hartford
8/5/16 Fenway, 8/7/16 Fenway
EV Solo: 6/16/11 Boston, 6/18/11 Hartford,
Say an arab country had an army in the US, and was supporting some a King that ruled here. who was kind of a dick and killed a lot of dissidents, people like the tea party goers and antiwar activists.
And say,in response to that, someone from this country got a bunch of friends together and blew up some buildings in that arab country.
The guys that blew up the building are responsible for the people they killed, but it at least provides some context for the motivation behind the bombing in the first place. Those guys probably wouldn't have bothered if if the Arab country never got involved in the first place.
Take away the motivation for the attacks, chances are you eliminate the attacks themselves.
less troops. less war. not more.
I agree with you there.
9/29/04 Boston, 6/28/08 Mansfield, 8/23/09 Chicago, 5/15/10 Hartford
5/17/10 Boston, 10/15/13 Worcester, 10/16/13 Worcester, 10/25/13 Hartford
8/5/16 Fenway, 8/7/16 Fenway
EV Solo: 6/16/11 Boston, 6/18/11 Hartford,
The Geneva convention was put in place for all human beings. The minute you disregard it is the moment you become like the terrorist organisation you trying to stop. Prisioners of War have rights. Iraq is a war, Afganistan is war. Any prisoners captured have rights. You can keep them prisioner until the conflict is resolved but you cannot torture or abuse them. The US will down in history just like the Japanese in WW2 as abusers of those basic human rights. I'm sure there'll be plenty of you out there who are OK with that or just don't care but you cannot proclaim to police the world(which you do) and then make up your own rules as you go along and think the rest of the world is going to say OK cool.
Trying to justify any kind of abuse of prisioners is just utter fucking bullshit.
You'll say that the taking down of the World trade Centre/Pentagon is an act of terrorism but turn around and level the financial centre and the military headquarters of any country your invading, all the while saying that civillian calualties are inevidable. Reeks of hypocrisy.
It happens when flag-sucking morons swallow the lies they're told by their governments with the aid of a subservient, non-functioning media.
I don't support the death penalty, but seeing as Bush and Cheney do, and seeing as the death penalty still operates in Texas, then these two lying scumbags should be sent to the chair.
You think that a handful of Saudi Arabian terrorists killing 3000 Americans justifies invading Iraq and killing over 1 Million civilians? You think it justifies tearing up the constitution and pissing on the Geneva convention?
You want to know a better way to prevent terrorism? Stop participating in it and fueling it across the globe.
why didnt you post the whole comment I made instead of making me sound like I could care less about innocent civilians. I guess that's typical of a left wing loon.
Lets get something straight First off who the fuck ars you calling a flag sucking moron and Im willing to bet you wouldn't have the balls to say that to a soldier or a vet cos he or she would hand them back to you in a dogie bag. 2nd 911 is not why we invaded Iraq. Saddam violated 17 sanctions and the US along with other countries thought he had wmd's and it was post 911 People like you have been using that same number 1,000,000 for how many years now? So we all know that's not true and for you to say something like Bush and Cheney should be sent to the chair just goes to show what kind of person you are. You Want to disagree with the war and policies of the past admin that's fine you have every right. But the death Penalty ? :roll: and Alqeda dosent belong to the Geneva convention. also it says that you have to be in a uniform when fighting and you have to be fighting for a country not a perverted form of religion and please tell me how we are ripping up the constitution.Detainees at gitmo get treated 100 time better than our own prisoners do.I find it funny how no one on the board even commented on the national Geo doc on git mo. Could it be that it proved a lot of people were wrong? Probably
yes
yes
'The U.S' and 'other countries' you say? Actually, I don't think anyone genuinely thought Iraq had W.M.D's. The U.S and British governments knew perfectly well that Iraq had no W.M.D's before the invasion, as was made clear a couple of years ago with the release of the 'secret Downing Street memo':
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/u ... 387374.ece
23 July 2002
'...Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy...'
You should also take a look at some of the PNAC statements a year or two before the invasion of Iraq which state clearly that Iraq possessed no WMD's.
People like me and 'The Lancet'; one of the oldest and most respected scientific medical journals in the world. Out of all the Iraqi casualty surveys so far, only the Lancet surveys and the Iraq Family Health Survey were peer-reviewed.
LANCET REPORT CO-AUTHOR RESPONDS TO QUESTIONS
http://www.medialens.org/alerts/06/0610 ... author.php
I'm against the death penalty, as I said above. Both Bush and Cheney are in favour of the death penalty. Bush and Cheney are both criminals who are responsible for the deaths of over a million people. Therefore let the fuckers reap what they sow.
Neither do those responsible for extreme rendition and Abu Ghraib.
Righteo.
So now Nat Geographic have got the bottom line on on Gitmo, human rights and torture? Interesting.
I've not seen the documentary so I'll let someone else comment on it.
and now it's 09, so you figured you would just add another 345,000 huh?
Let me ask you this Why are we responsible for all the suicide bombers,we didnt make those dumb asses strap on a vest and tell them to go down to the market and blow up Innocent Iraqis? Did you ever think that If Saddam would have just surrendered like he was asked to things might have turned out differently ? Also Saddam feared Iran more than he did us and that's why he wanted everyone to think that he had wmd's
I said 1 million because the authors of the report stated that the the figure of 655,000 was a conservative estimate due to the fact that they weren't able to complete a full survey per capita in Iraq, and that they believed the number to be closer to 1 million.
I also said 1 million based on the following 2007 survey:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ORB_survey ... casualties
'On Friday, 14 September 2007, ORB (Opinion Research Business), an independent polling agency located in London, published estimates of the total war casualties in Iraq since the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.[1] At over 1.2 million deaths (1,220,580), this estimate is the highest number published so far. From the poll margin of error of +/-2.5% ORB calculated a range of 733,158 to 1,446,063 deaths. The ORB estimate was performed by a random survey of 1,720 adults aged 18+, out of which 1,499 responded, in fifteen of the eighteen governorates within Iraq, between August 12 and August 19, 2007.[2][3] In comparison, the 2006 Lancet survey suggested almost half this number (654,965 deaths) through the end of June 2006. The Lancet authors calculated a range of 392,979 to 942,636 deaths.
On 28 January 2008, ORB published an update based on additional work carried out in rural areas of Iraq. Some 600 additional interviews were undertaken and as a result of this the death estimate was revised to 1,033,000 with a given range of 946,000 to 1,120,000.[4]'
'
Because we destabilised the country by tearing it to pieces. The break-up of Iraq and the ensuing chaos and civil war was predicted beforehand by Middle East Analysts and was ignored by Bush et al.
Did you ever think that if the U.S and British governments hadn't deliberately lied to the populations of their respective countries, if they had allowed the weapons inspectors to finish their jobs, and that if they had abided by international law instead of side-stepping it, that over 1 million Iraqi's and 4000 American servicemen and women would still be alive?
No anger just common sense, which obviously isn't that common anymore
My principles have to with saving lives not sticking up for killers. what are yours?