Nobel Peace Prize winner continues Rendition/torture.

boyntonstu · 10th October 2009, 05:20 AM

I would not have imagined giving a Nobel Peace Prize to a person who continues Bush's policy of Rendition (torture).

How do you feel about Obama's rendition policy?

President Obama has recently ratified continuation of the U.S. rendition policy -- removal of terrorist suspects by extra-legal means to a foreign country for interrogation. This was intended to allow prisoners to be tortured in many nations, Syria, Egypt, Latvia, Jordan, Morocco, Yemen, Kenya, Ethiopia, and Pakistan, among them in a process facilitated by Great Britain, Canada, Croatia, Georgia, Indonesia, and others. However, Obama's is not the Bush/Cheney version of rendition. The President has assured us that interrogations will be monitored to guarantee that torture does not occur.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barton..._b_269833.html

and

The typically sterile term "rendition" is now inextricably linked with torture in the public mind, as well it should be. While there may unfortunately be a legal difference, there is no moral or practical difference between the United States directly torturing an individual under American control, and the US transferring an individual to another nation where they will be tortured by a foreign government.

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-v..._b_162927.html

Now children can you say "extra-legal"?

Southwind17 · 10th October 2009, 06:00 AM

Originally Posted by boyntonstu

I would not have imagined giving a Nobel Peace Prize to a person who continues Bush's policy of Rendition (torture).

How do you feel about Obama's rendition policy?

Allow me to answer with a question: Out of interest, how many family members/friends, exactly, have you lost due to organized terrorist atrocities?

DC · 10th October 2009, 06:12 AM

Originally Posted by Southwind17

Allow me to answer with a question: Out of interest, how many family members/friends, exactly, have you lost due to organized terrorist atrocities?

and this makes torture ok?

boyntonstu · 10th October 2009, 06:58 AM

Originally Posted by southwind17

allow me to answer with a question: Out of interest, how many family members/friends, exactly, have you lost due to organized terrorist atrocities?

6,000,000

Peephole · 10th October 2009, 07:10 AM

Yup, this is why I don't support giving the Nobel Peace Prize to Obama, if he can't deliver on this promise, how does the Nobel Prize Committee know that he's serious about some of his other policies?

A.A.Alfie · 10th October 2009, 07:20 AM

It odd seems to me that he's been given the 'gong' based on what he is expected to achieve rather than what he has actually achieved to date. Wouldn't there be other people that have actually managed to envision, facilitate, manage and bring about some change rather than just represent hopes and dreams?
No disrespect intended by the way.

Peephole · 10th October 2009, 07:27 AM

Originally Posted by A.A.Alfie

It odd seems to me that he's been given the 'gong' based on what he is expected to achieve rather than what he has actually achieved to date. Wouldn't there be other people that have actually managed to envision, facilitate, manage and bring about some change rather than just represent hopes and dreams?
No disrespect intended by the way.

The five-member Norwegian Nobel Committee - four of whom spoke to The Associated Press, said awarding Obama the peace prize could be seen as an early vote of confidence intended to build global support for the policies of his young administration.

They lauded the change in global mood wrought by Obama's calls for peace and cooperation, and praised his pledges to reduce the world stock of nuclear arms, ease U.S. conflicts with Muslim nations and strengthen its role in combating climate change.

"Some people say - and I understand it - 'Isn't it premature? Too early?' Well, I'd say then that it could be too late to respond three years from now," Thorbjoern Jagland, chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, told the AP. "It is now that we have the opportunity to respond - all of us."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/1..._n_316098.html

They've done this in the past with Tutu and Gore/the IPCC. I actually agree that it's better to encourage causes than to reward people for a "mission accomplished."

WildCat · 10th October 2009, 07:28 AM

Originally Posted by boyntonstu

I would not have imagined giving a Nobel Peace Prize to a person who continues Bush's policy of Rendition (torture).

Actually Bush merely continued Clinton's rendition policy, so you can feel better about it because you can say "Obama continues ther Clinton admin's policy" and feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

Peephole · 10th October 2009, 07:35 AM

With the difference that at least part of Bush's extraordinary rendition policy was aimed at temporarily shipping people to countries to get them tortured, while Clinton extradited people to countries that have terrible human rights records.

A.A.Alfie · 10th October 2009, 07:41 AM

Originally Posted by Peephole

The five-member Norwegian Nobel Committee - four of whom spoke to The Associated Press, said awarding Obama the peace prize could be seen as an early vote of confidence intended to build global support for the policies of his young administration.

They lauded the change in global mood wrought by Obama's calls for peace and cooperation, and praised his pledges to reduce the world stock of nuclear arms, ease U.S. conflicts with Muslim nations and strengthen its role in combating climate change.

"Some people say - and I understand it - 'Isn't it premature? Too early?' Well, I'd say then that it could be too late to respond three years from now," Thorbjoern Jagland, chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, told the AP. "It is now that we have the opportunity to respond - all of us."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/1..._n_316098.html

They've done this in the past with Tutu and Gore/the IPCC. I actually agree that it's better to encourage causes than to reward people for a "mission accomplished."

I'll remember that next time I'm tendering for projects.When they ask me to outline my achievements to date, I can tell them "Nothing so far, but I have good intentions. Can I have my money now please?".

Seriously 'though, I do get what your saying and agree up to a point. But was there nobody anywhere that had actually done something?

WildCat · 10th October 2009, 07:59 AM

Originally Posted by Peephole

With the difference that at least part of Bush's extraordinary rendition policy was aimed at temporarily shipping people to countries to get them tortured, while Clinton extradited people to countries that have terrible human rights records.

Where they were often tortured and executed.

Dancing David · 10th October 2009, 10:21 AM

Originally Posted by Southwind17

Allow me to answer with a question: Out of interest, how many family members/friends, exactly, have you lost due to organized terrorist atrocities?

Not relevant the habeus corpus applies to all people, the law in COTUS says 'no person'. And that is as it should be, I am upset Obama has not declared it null and void for rendition.

Dancing David · 10th October 2009, 10:24 AM

Originally Posted by WildCat

Actually Bush merely continued Clinton's rendition policy, so you can feel better about it because you can say "Obama continues ther Clinton admin's policy" and feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

I don't like it regardless of the origins, Eisenhower? Truman? FDR? Probably farther back than that. It is wrong by COTUS and should be stopped.

boyntonstu · 10th October 2009, 10:43 AM

Originally Posted by Dancing David

I don't like it regardless of the origins, Eisenhower? Truman? FDR? Probably farther back than that. It is wrong by COTUS and should be stopped.

COITUS?

We are screwed!

A.A.Alfie · 10th October 2009, 07:07 PM

Originally Posted by boyntonstu

COITUS?

We are screwed!

LOL
Made my day!

Southwind17 · 10th October 2009, 11:58 PM

Originally Posted by DC

and this makes torture ok?

So no family/friends of yours either. So easy to take the moral high ground when you're essentially unaffected isn't it.

Originally Posted by boyntonstu

6,000,000

I think many people would find this response somewhat fickle - possibly offensive.

Dragoonster · 11th October 2009, 12:16 AM

Originally Posted by Southwind17

So no family/friends of yours either. So easy to take the moral high ground when you're essentially unaffected isn't it.

So since there are friends of victims of every crime, every criminal should get habeus corpus suspended and be sent to prisons where they're tortured?

DC · 11th October 2009, 12:39 AM

Originally Posted by Southwind17

So no family/friends of yours either. So easy to take the moral high ground when you're essentially unaffected isn't it.

I think many people would find this response somewhat fickle - possibly offensive.

so again, loosing friends and family in a terror atack gives you a right for revange and torture?

so the Afghan terrorists are OK to behead someone aslong they lost friends and family in the afghanistan war?
or does it only count for us.

Southwind17 · 11th October 2009, 01:41 AM

Originally Posted by Dragoonster

So since there are friends of victims of every crime, every criminal should get habeus corpus suspended and be sent to prisons where they're tortured?

Not quite a measured view, I'd say, probably indicative of why you think the way you do.

Originally Posted by DC

so again, loosing friends and family in a terror atack gives you a right for revange and torture?

Ditto.

Originally Posted by DC

so the Afghan terrorists are OK to behead someone aslong they lost friends and family in the afghanistan war?
or does it only count for us.

Ditto. Do you see the partiality your demonstrating here?

DC · 11th October 2009, 02:36 AM

Originally Posted by Southwind17

Not quite a measured view, I'd say, probably indicative of why you think the way you do.

Ditto.

Ditto. Do you see the partiality your demonstrating here?

he is only a terrorist in our eyes, in his view, your guys are the terrorist and he has a right to torture your guys because they invaded his country and his family was killed.

Southwind17 · 11th October 2009, 03:19 AM

Originally Posted by DC

he is only a terrorist in our eyes, in his view, your guys are the terrorist and he has a right to torture your guys because they invaded his country and his family was killed.

I think you and I must be alluding to different "terrorists". I'm alluding to terrorists that includes those who kidnap then video and broadcast the beheading of westerners, most often not military personnel. You?

BTW - your interchangeability of "our" and "your" above intrigues me.

DC · 11th October 2009, 03:23 AM

Originally Posted by Southwind17

I think you and I must be alluding to different "terrorists". I'm alluding to terrorists that includes those who kidnap then video and broadcast the beheading of westerners, most often not military personnel. You?

BTW - your interchangeability of "our" and "your" above intrigues me.

So you think its ok to sink to their level and torture others?

what is the difference between you and a terrorist?

Southwind17 · 11th October 2009, 04:20 AM

Originally Posted by DC

So you think its ok to sink to their level and torture others?

what is the difference between you and a terrorist?

"Others"?

DC · 11th October 2009, 05:17 AM

Originally Posted by Southwind17

"Others"?

other human beeings.

JihadJane · 11th October 2009, 05:32 AM

Originally Posted by WildCat

Actually Bush merely continued Clinton's rendition policy, so you can feel better about it because you can say "Obama continues ther Clinton admin's policy" and feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

Surprise, surprise! The Military-Industrial-Complex parties pursue the same vile policies. So what?

Southwind17 · 11th October 2009, 05:50 AM

Originally Posted by DC

other human beeings.

Sorry, I thought we were just talking about the category of "actual or suspected terrorists"!

DC · 11th October 2009, 05:52 AM

Originally Posted by Southwind17

Sorry, I thought we were just talking about the category of "actual or suspected terrorists"!

Guilty until proven innocent.

suspected and for you its already not a human anymore......

lets hope you are never suspected of anything by someone with your standards...

Southwind17 · 11th October 2009, 06:06 AM

Originally Posted by DC

Guilty until proven innocent.

suspected and for you its already not a human anymore......

lets hope you are never suspected of anything by someone with your standards...

Oh for an idealistic existence. There'd be no terrorists in the first place!

Let's hope you're never kidnapped by a terrorist group. Somehow I think you'll ensure you keep yourself well away from that risk, somewhere upon the moral high ground maybe.

NWO Sentryman · 11th October 2009, 06:11 AM

maybe in your tower made of ivory...

Dancing David · 11th October 2009, 06:50 AM

Originally Posted by Southwind17

So no family/friends of yours either. So easy to take the moral high ground when you're essentially unaffected isn't it.

I think many people would find this response somewhat fickle - possibly offensive.

Sorry, what , over generalization?

When the state can engage in arbitrary detention without checks then everyone has the potential to be harmed.

Dancing David · 11th October 2009, 06:51 AM

Originally Posted by Southwind17

I think you and I must be alluding to different "terrorists". I'm alluding to terrorists that includes those who kidnap then video and broadcast the beheading of westerners, most often not military personnel. You?

BTW - your interchangeability of "our" and "your" above intrigues me.

Semantic garbage, must be nice to always know you are right and just argue from your smugness.

Dancing David · 11th October 2009, 06:53 AM

Originally Posted by Southwind17

Sorry, I thought we were just talking about the category of "actual or suspected terrorists"!

Oh, sure. you made that sooooooo clear.

Like suspected , as in I suspect there is bigfoot over there.

You don't suspend habeas corpus for a suspicion.

Dancing David · 11th October 2009, 06:55 AM

Originally Posted by Southwind17

Oh for an idealistic existence. There'd be no terrorists in the first place!

Let's hope you're never kidnapped by a terrorist group. Somehow I think you'll ensure you keep yourself well away from that risk, somewhere upon the moral high ground maybe.

Noce straw attack, the issue is that you have to give checks on the behavior of humans because they are likely to act in their own self interest rather than follow the actual rules.

But please keep shifting goals posts and making straw arguments.

Southwind17 · 11th October 2009, 07:21 AM

Originally Posted by Dancing David

Sorry, what , over generalization?

I don't see any.

Originally Posted by Dancing David

When the state can engage in arbitrary detention without checks then everyone has the potential to be harmed.

It's not something I lose sleep over. Do you?!

Originally Posted by Dancing David

Semantic garbage, must be nice to always know you are right and just argue from your smugness.

Mmm ... mildly amusing if somewhat shallow retort.

Originally Posted by Dancing David

Oh, sure. you made that sooooooo clear.

I thought it went without saying, to any reasonably objective person.

Originally Posted by Dancing David

Like suspected , as in I suspect there is bigfoot over there.

This is telling, as if it needed to be!

Originally Posted by Dancing David

You don't suspend habeas corpus for a suspicion.

It depends on the circumstances.

Originally Posted by Dancing David

Noce straw attack, the issue is that you have to give checks on the behavior of humans because they are likely to act in their own self interest rather than follow the actual rules.

But please keep shifting goals posts and making straw arguments.

You have a vivid and somewhat wishful imagination. I can see why you hold the view that you do.

DC · 11th October 2009, 08:10 AM

thats just laughable.

Suspects.....

what is the percentage of suspected geting convicted and how many turn out to be innocent?

Southwind17 · 11th October 2009, 08:18 AM

Originally Posted by DC

thats just laughable.

Suspects.....

what is the percentage of suspected geting convicted and how many turn out to be innocent?

Is that one question or two separate questions?

DC · 11th October 2009, 08:24 AM

Originally Posted by Southwind17

Is that one question or two separate questions?

whatever you want

Southwind17 · 11th October 2009, 08:31 AM

Originally Posted by DC

whatever you want

You're the one asking all the questions. I think you should decide, not me. Maybe try thinking about it a little first?!

DC · 11th October 2009, 08:39 AM

Originally Posted by Southwind17

You're the one asking all the questions. I think you should decide, not me. Maybe try thinking about it a little first?!

ok i make it more simple for you, so you can keep up.

How many of the suspected terrorists turn out to be guilty? for example in Gitmo. How many suspected terrorists got sent to gitmo, and how many of those got convicted?

WildCat · 11th October 2009, 09:16 AM

Originally Posted by JihadJane

Surprise, surprise! The Military-Industrial-Complex parties pursue the same vile policies. So what?

So you think Obama is covering up 9/11 also?

10th October 2009, 05:20 AM	#1
boyntonstu Suspended Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 352	Nobel Peace Prize winner continues Rendition/torture. I would not have imagined giving a Nobel Peace Prize to a person who continues Bush's policy of Rendition (torture). How do you feel about Obama's rendition policy? President Obama has recently ratified continuation of the U.S. rendition policy -- removal of terrorist suspects by extra-legal means to a foreign country for interrogation. This was intended to allow prisoners to be tortured in many nations, Syria, Egypt, Latvia, Jordan, Morocco, Yemen, Kenya, Ethiopia, and Pakistan, among them in a process facilitated by Great Britain, Canada, Croatia, Georgia, Indonesia, and others. However, Obama's is not the Bush/Cheney version of rendition. The President has assured us that interrogations will be monitored to guarantee that torture does not occur. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barton..._b_269833.html and The typically sterile term "rendition" is now inextricably linked with torture in the public mind, as well it should be. While there may unfortunately be a legal difference, there is no moral or practical difference between the United States directly torturing an individual under American control, and the US transferring an individual to another nation where they will be tortured by a foreign government. Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-v..._b_162927.html Now children can you say "extra-legal"?

10th October 2009, 06:00 AM	#2
Southwind17 Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Location: Location Posts: 3,260	Originally Posted by boyntonstu I would not have imagined giving a Nobel Peace Prize to a person who continues Bush's policy of Rendition (torture). How do you feel about Obama's rendition policy? Allow me to answer with a question: Out of interest, how many family members/friends, exactly, have you lost due to organized terrorist atrocities?
	__________________ *How very dare you!* "England and America are two countries divided by a common language." - George Bernard Shaw (seconded by Southwind17)

10th October 2009, 06:12 AM	#3
DC Formerly The Dictator Cheney Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Helvetia Posts: 8,407	Originally Posted by Southwind17 Allow me to answer with a question: Out of interest, how many family members/friends, exactly, have you lost due to organized terrorist atrocities? and this makes torture ok?
	__________________ "Creation Science 101"

10th October 2009, 07:10 AM	#5
Peephole Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Belgium Posts: 1,328	Yup, this is why I don't support giving the Nobel Peace Prize to Obama, if he can't deliver on this promise, how does the Nobel Prize Committee know that he's serious about some of his other policies?
	__________________ 911science The Field

10th October 2009, 07:20 AM	#6
A.A.Alfie Master Poster Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Melbourne Australia Posts: 2,113	It odd seems to me that he's been given the 'gong' based on what he is expected to achieve rather than what he has actually achieved to date. Wouldn't there be other people that have actually managed to envision, facilitate, manage and bring about some change rather than just represent hopes and dreams? No disrespect intended by the way.
	__________________ “The wolfhound is right and the cannibal is wrong". Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn "science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." Albert Einstein

10th October 2009, 06:58 AM	#4
boyntonstu Suspended Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 352	Originally Posted by southwind17 allow me to answer with a question: Out of interest, how many family members/friends, exactly, have you lost due to organized terrorist atrocities? 6,000,000

10th October 2009, 07:27 AM	#7
Peephole Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Belgium Posts: 1,328	Originally Posted by A.A.Alfie It odd seems to me that he's been given the 'gong' based on what he is expected to achieve rather than what he has actually achieved to date. Wouldn't there be other people that have actually managed to envision, facilitate, manage and bring about some change rather than just represent hopes and dreams? No disrespect intended by the way. The five-member Norwegian Nobel Committee - four of whom spoke to The Associated Press, said awarding Obama the peace prize could be seen as an early vote of confidence intended to build global support for the policies of his young administration. They lauded the change in global mood wrought by Obama's calls for peace and cooperation, and praised his pledges to reduce the world stock of nuclear arms, ease U.S. conflicts with Muslim nations and strengthen its role in combating climate change. "Some people say - and I understand it - 'Isn't it premature? Too early?' Well, I'd say then that it could be too late to respond three years from now," Thorbjoern Jagland, chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, told the AP. "It is now that we have the opportunity to respond - all of us." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/1..._n_316098.html They've done this in the past with Tutu and Gore/the IPCC. I actually agree that it's better to encourage causes than to reward people for a "mission accomplished."
	__________________ 911science The Field

10th October 2009, 07:28 AM	#8
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 24,971	Originally Posted by boyntonstu I would not have imagined giving a Nobel Peace Prize to a person who continues Bush's policy of Rendition (torture). Actually Bush merely continued Clinton's rendition policy, so you can feel better about it because you can say "Obama continues ther Clinton admin's policy" and feel all warm and fuzzy inside.
	__________________ "My opinion is not uninformed there are just many things I have no clue about." -atavisms "Iran DOES have the right and good reason to attack Israel." -parky76

10th October 2009, 07:35 AM	#9
Peephole Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Belgium Posts: 1,328	With the difference that at least part of Bush's extraordinary rendition policy was aimed at temporarily shipping people to countries to get them tortured, while Clinton extradited people to countries that have terrible human rights records.
	__________________ 911science The Field Last edited by Peephole; 10th October 2009 at 07:36 AM.

10th October 2009, 07:41 AM	#10
A.A.Alfie Master Poster Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Melbourne Australia Posts: 2,113	Originally Posted by Peephole The five-member Norwegian Nobel Committee - four of whom spoke to The Associated Press, said awarding Obama the peace prize could be seen as an early vote of confidence intended to build global support for the policies of his young administration. They lauded the change in global mood wrought by Obama's calls for peace and cooperation, and praised his pledges to reduce the world stock of nuclear arms, ease U.S. conflicts with Muslim nations and strengthen its role in combating climate change. "Some people say - and I understand it - 'Isn't it premature? Too early?' Well, I'd say then that it could be too late to respond three years from now," Thorbjoern Jagland, chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, told the AP. "It is now that we have the opportunity to respond - all of us." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/1..._n_316098.html They've done this in the past with Tutu and Gore/the IPCC. I actually agree that it's better to encourage causes than to reward people for a "mission accomplished." I'll remember that next time I'm tendering for projects.When they ask me to outline my achievements to date, I can tell them "Nothing so far, but I have good intentions. Can I have my money now please?". Seriously 'though, I do get what your saying and agree up to a point. But was there nobody anywhere that had actually done something?
	__________________ “The wolfhound is right and the cannibal is wrong". Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn "science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." Albert Einstein

10th October 2009, 07:59 AM	#11
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 24,971	Originally Posted by Peephole With the difference that at least part of Bush's extraordinary rendition policy was aimed at temporarily shipping people to countries to get them tortured, while Clinton extradited people to countries that have terrible human rights records. Where they were often tortured and executed.
	__________________ "My opinion is not uninformed there are just many things I have no clue about." -atavisms "Iran DOES have the right and good reason to attack Israel." -parky76

10th October 2009, 10:21 AM	#12
Dancing David Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Central Illinois Posts: 18,357	Originally Posted by Southwind17 Allow me to answer with a question: Out of interest, how many family members/friends, exactly, have you lost due to organized terrorist atrocities? Not relevant the habeus corpus applies to all people, the law in COTUS says 'no person'. And that is as it should be, I am upset Obama has not declared it null and void for rendition.
	__________________ Resolve then, that on this very ground, with small flags waving and tinny blast on tiny trumpets, we shall meet the enemy, and not only may he be ours, he may be us.- Walt Kelly wow Mr.Philospher, you need some custard poured over your head mayhaps? -kittynh "Exhibit 1338A as to why the Politics forum is "where rational thought goes to die."-Carlitos

10th October 2009, 10:24 AM	#13
Dancing David Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Central Illinois Posts: 18,357	Originally Posted by WildCat Actually Bush merely continued Clinton's rendition policy, so you can feel better about it because you can say "Obama continues ther Clinton admin's policy" and feel all warm and fuzzy inside. I don't like it regardless of the origins, Eisenhower? Truman? FDR? Probably farther back than that. It is wrong by COTUS and should be stopped.
	__________________ Resolve then, that on this very ground, with small flags waving and tinny blast on tiny trumpets, we shall meet the enemy, and not only may he be ours, he may be us.- Walt Kelly wow Mr.Philospher, you need some custard poured over your head mayhaps? -kittynh "Exhibit 1338A as to why the Politics forum is "where rational thought goes to die."-Carlitos

10th October 2009, 10:43 AM	#14
boyntonstu Suspended Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Florida Posts: 352	Originally Posted by Dancing David I don't like it regardless of the origins, Eisenhower? Truman? FDR? Probably farther back than that. It is wrong by COTUS and should be stopped. COITUS? We are screwed!

10th October 2009, 07:07 PM	#15
A.A.Alfie Master Poster Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Melbourne Australia Posts: 2,113	Originally Posted by boyntonstu COITUS? We are screwed! LOL Made my day!
	__________________ “The wolfhound is right and the cannibal is wrong". Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn "science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." Albert Einstein

10th October 2009, 11:58 PM	#16
Southwind17 Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Location: Location Posts: 3,260	Originally Posted by DC and this makes torture ok? So no family/friends of yours either. So easy to take the moral high ground when you're essentially unaffected isn't it. Originally Posted by boyntonstu 6,000,000 I think many people would find this response somewhat fickle - possibly offensive.
	__________________ *How very dare you!* "England and America are two countries divided by a common language." - George Bernard Shaw (seconded by Southwind17)

11th October 2009, 12:16 AM	#17
Dragoonster Muse Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 941	Originally Posted by Southwind17 So no family/friends of yours either. So easy to take the moral high ground when you're essentially unaffected isn't it. So since there are friends of victims of every crime, every criminal should get habeus corpus suspended and be sent to prisons where they're tortured?
Dragoonster Muse Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 941

11th October 2009, 12:39 AM	#18
DC Formerly The Dictator Cheney Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Helvetia Posts: 8,407	Originally Posted by Southwind17 So no family/friends of yours either. So easy to take the moral high ground when you're essentially unaffected isn't it. I think many people would find this response somewhat fickle - possibly offensive. so again, loosing friends and family in a terror atack gives you a right for revange and torture? so the Afghan terrorists are OK to behead someone aslong they lost friends and family in the afghanistan war? or does it only count for us.
	__________________ "Creation Science 101"

11th October 2009, 01:41 AM	#19
Southwind17 Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Location: Location Posts: 3,260	Originally Posted by Dragoonster So since there are friends of victims of every crime, every criminal should get habeus corpus suspended and be sent to prisons where they're tortured? Not quite a measured view, I'd say, probably indicative of why you think the way you do. Originally Posted by DC so again, loosing friends and family in a terror atack gives you a right for revange and torture? Ditto. Originally Posted by DC so the Afghan terrorists are OK to behead someone aslong they lost friends and family in the afghanistan war? or does it only count for us. Ditto. Do you see the partiality your demonstrating here?
	__________________ *How very dare you!* "England and America are two countries divided by a common language." - George Bernard Shaw (seconded by Southwind17)

11th October 2009, 02:36 AM	#20
DC Formerly The Dictator Cheney Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Helvetia Posts: 8,407	Originally Posted by Southwind17 Not quite a measured view, I'd say, probably indicative of why you think the way you do. Ditto. Ditto. Do you see the partiality your demonstrating here? he is only a terrorist in our eyes, in his view, your guys are the terrorist and he has a right to torture your guys because they invaded his country and his family was killed.
	__________________ "Creation Science 101"

11th October 2009, 03:19 AM	#21
Southwind17 Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Location: Location Posts: 3,260	Originally Posted by DC he is only a terrorist in our eyes, in his view, your guys are the terrorist and he has a right to torture your guys because they invaded his country and his family was killed. I think you and I must be alluding to different "terrorists". I'm alluding to terrorists that includes those who kidnap then video and broadcast the beheading of westerners, most often not military personnel. You? BTW - your interchangeability of "our" and "your" above intrigues me.
	__________________ *How very dare you!* "England and America are two countries divided by a common language." - George Bernard Shaw (seconded by Southwind17)

11th October 2009, 03:23 AM	#22
DC Formerly The Dictator Cheney Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Helvetia Posts: 8,407	Originally Posted by Southwind17 I think you and I must be alluding to different "terrorists". I'm alluding to terrorists that includes those who kidnap then video and broadcast the beheading of westerners, most often not military personnel. You? BTW - your interchangeability of "our" and "your" above intrigues me. So you think its ok to sink to their level and torture others? what is the difference between you and a terrorist?
	__________________ "Creation Science 101"

11th October 2009, 04:20 AM	#23
Southwind17 Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Location: Location Posts: 3,260	Originally Posted by DC So you think its ok to sink to their level and torture others? what is the difference between you and a terrorist? "Others"?
	__________________ *How very dare you!* "England and America are two countries divided by a common language." - George Bernard Shaw (seconded by Southwind17)

11th October 2009, 05:17 AM	#24
DC Formerly The Dictator Cheney Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Helvetia Posts: 8,407	Originally Posted by Southwind17 "Others"? other human beeings.
	__________________ "Creation Science 101"

11th October 2009, 05:32 AM	#25
JihadJane Penultimate Satisfaction Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 12,368	Originally Posted by WildCat Actually Bush merely continued Clinton's rendition policy, so you can feel better about it because you can say "Obama continues ther Clinton admin's policy" and feel all warm and fuzzy inside. Surprise, surprise! The Military-Industrial-Complex parties pursue the same vile policies. So what?
	__________________ THE END of the recession IS NIGH

11th October 2009, 05:50 AM	#26
Southwind17 Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Location: Location Posts: 3,260	Originally Posted by DC other human beeings. Sorry, I thought we were just talking about the category of "actual or suspected terrorists"!
	__________________ *How very dare you!* "England and America are two countries divided by a common language." - George Bernard Shaw (seconded by Southwind17)

11th October 2009, 05:52 AM	#27
DC Formerly The Dictator Cheney Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Helvetia Posts: 8,407	Originally Posted by Southwind17 Sorry, I thought we were just talking about the category of "actual or suspected terrorists"! Guilty until proven innocent. suspected and for you its already not a human anymore...... lets hope you are never suspected of anything by someone with your standards...
	__________________ "Creation Science 101"

11th October 2009, 06:06 AM	#28
Southwind17 Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Location: Location Posts: 3,260	Originally Posted by DC Guilty until proven innocent. suspected and for you its already not a human anymore...... lets hope you are never suspected of anything by someone with your standards... Oh for an idealistic existence. There'd be no terrorists in the first place! Let's hope you're never kidnapped by a terrorist group. Somehow I think you'll ensure you keep yourself well away from that risk, somewhere upon the moral high ground maybe.
	__________________ *How very dare you!* "England and America are two countries divided by a common language." - George Bernard Shaw (seconded by Southwind17)

11th October 2009, 06:11 AM	#29
NWO Sentryman Proud NWO Gatekeeper Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Quantum Gate to the NWO Posts: 1,061	maybe in your tower made of ivory...
	__________________ parky76 on Conspiracy theories - Americans, Canadians, Brits, and other Westerners love to make believe they live under oppression. But when real sacrifice is called for..they fade into the distance. Travis on peruvian fat gangs - Somebody thought Fight Club was an Entrepreneurial Instruction Video.

11th October 2009, 06:50 AM	#30
Dancing David Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Central Illinois Posts: 18,357	Originally Posted by Southwind17 So no family/friends of yours either. So easy to take the moral high ground when you're essentially unaffected isn't it. I think many people would find this response somewhat fickle - possibly offensive. Sorry, what , over generalization? When the state can engage in arbitrary detention without checks then everyone has the potential to be harmed.
	__________________ Resolve then, that on this very ground, with small flags waving and tinny blast on tiny trumpets, we shall meet the enemy, and not only may he be ours, he may be us.- Walt Kelly wow Mr.Philospher, you need some custard poured over your head mayhaps? -kittynh "Exhibit 1338A as to why the Politics forum is "where rational thought goes to die."-Carlitos

11th October 2009, 06:51 AM	#31
Dancing David Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Central Illinois Posts: 18,357	Originally Posted by Southwind17 I think you and I must be alluding to different "terrorists". I'm alluding to terrorists that includes those who kidnap then video and broadcast the beheading of westerners, most often not military personnel. You? BTW - your interchangeability of "our" and "your" above intrigues me. Semantic garbage, must be nice to always know you are right and just argue from your smugness.
	__________________ Resolve then, that on this very ground, with small flags waving and tinny blast on tiny trumpets, we shall meet the enemy, and not only may he be ours, he may be us.- Walt Kelly wow Mr.Philospher, you need some custard poured over your head mayhaps? -kittynh "Exhibit 1338A as to why the Politics forum is "where rational thought goes to die."-Carlitos

11th October 2009, 06:53 AM	#32
Dancing David Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Central Illinois Posts: 18,357	Originally Posted by Southwind17 Sorry, I thought we were just talking about the category of "actual or suspected terrorists"! Oh, sure. you made that sooooooo clear. Like suspected , as in I suspect there is bigfoot over there. You don't suspend habeas corpus for a suspicion.
	__________________ Resolve then, that on this very ground, with small flags waving and tinny blast on tiny trumpets, we shall meet the enemy, and not only may he be ours, he may be us.- Walt Kelly wow Mr.Philospher, you need some custard poured over your head mayhaps? -kittynh "Exhibit 1338A as to why the Politics forum is "where rational thought goes to die."-Carlitos

11th October 2009, 06:55 AM	#33
Dancing David Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Central Illinois Posts: 18,357	Originally Posted by Southwind17 Oh for an idealistic existence. There'd be no terrorists in the first place! Let's hope you're never kidnapped by a terrorist group. Somehow I think you'll ensure you keep yourself well away from that risk, somewhere upon the moral high ground maybe. Noce straw attack, the issue is that you have to give checks on the behavior of humans because they are likely to act in their own self interest rather than follow the actual rules. But please keep shifting goals posts and making straw arguments.
	__________________ Resolve then, that on this very ground, with small flags waving and tinny blast on tiny trumpets, we shall meet the enemy, and not only may he be ours, he may be us.- Walt Kelly wow Mr.Philospher, you need some custard poured over your head mayhaps? -kittynh "Exhibit 1338A as to why the Politics forum is "where rational thought goes to die."-Carlitos

11th October 2009, 07:21 AM	#34
Southwind17 Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Location: Location Posts: 3,260	Originally Posted by Dancing David Sorry, what , over generalization? I don't see any. Originally Posted by Dancing David When the state can engage in arbitrary detention without checks then everyone has the potential to be harmed. It's not something I lose sleep over. Do you?! Originally Posted by Dancing David Semantic garbage, must be nice to always know you are right and just argue from your smugness. Mmm ... mildly amusing if somewhat shallow retort. Originally Posted by Dancing David Oh, sure. you made that sooooooo clear. I thought it went without saying, to any reasonably objective person. Originally Posted by Dancing David Like suspected , as in I suspect there is bigfoot over there. This is telling, as if it needed to be! Originally Posted by Dancing David You don't suspend habeas corpus for a suspicion. It depends on the circumstances. Originally Posted by Dancing David Noce straw attack, the issue is that you have to give checks on the behavior of humans because they are likely to act in their own self interest rather than follow the actual rules. But please keep shifting goals posts and making straw arguments. You have a vivid and somewhat wishful imagination. I can see why you hold the view that you do.
	__________________ *How very dare you!* "England and America are two countries divided by a common language." - George Bernard Shaw (seconded by Southwind17)

11th October 2009, 08:10 AM	#35
DC Formerly The Dictator Cheney Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Helvetia Posts: 8,407	thats just laughable. Suspects..... what is the percentage of suspected geting convicted and how many turn out to be innocent?
	__________________ "Creation Science 101"