kapkomet

QUOTE (DukeNukeEm @ Apr 24, 2009 -> 02:59 PM) kap, you can just not post in the filibuster and treat it as a white sox message board. Sure. Done.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 24, 2009 -> 03:07 PM) Like I said a few pages ago...when a report on violence by left wing extremists (animal rights groups, anti-globalization groups, environmental groups) was made by the DHS, no one batted an eyelash. When a report about right wing extremists came out from the DHS, Hannity, Limbaugh, Savage, Beck, Bachmann, etc. all suddenly thought "This could be aimed at me!" I wonder why... Because when GWB issued it, they identified clearly defined groups. This report had a lot of the same things but were blanket statements with little identification of specific groups. But I'm sure I'm a liar or misinformed because 100 liberal blogs told you so.

QUOTE (Texsox @ Apr 24, 2009 -> 12:46 PM) ahem *cough* WSI already does. Yea, and I see why. This is supposed to be a White Sox message board.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Apr 24, 2009 -> 11:27 AM) That's the current source of the heat, and it's both threads, and that's my thought as well. I would have split off and started a new thread a couple days ago but I'm at work, and that takes too long. Perhaps if someone started a thread on it, then everyone would gravitate towards it? Forget it. I'll just stop posting about it. That will solve the problem because I'm the only one that keeps going.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Apr 24, 2009 -> 11:24 AM) Maybe if you all lived in one place. The shipping is too expensive. Cheapskate.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 24, 2009 -> 11:22 AM) I think the solution is for you to ship Giordano's to the rest of us. That'll brighten the mood in here so rapidly... ^^^^^^^^^

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 24, 2009 -> 11:22 AM) But I'm listening to the people who repeatedly have said so, one of whom you keep trying to cite for 1/3 of the things his memo said. To me, that's an important distinction. And they keep not talking about the whole story... isn't that important to know?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 24, 2009 -> 11:20 AM) We go through this same exercise every time we hit a vehemently discussed issue that comes up in a number of ways. I have very few problems with how things currently sit. If it's getting on your nerves, the options are very simple; use the ignore button or take a few days off from the Filibuster. There's a reason I disappeared from PHT last night mid-game. I guess my issue is that most of the time, no one is going to change their minds and it just goes on and on and on. Myself included, duh.

QUOTE (CanOfCorn @ Apr 24, 2009 -> 11:16 AM) That Texas Triangle would be a great place for high-speed rail. Dallas - Austin - San Antonio - Houston. I've done that drive and I-35, I-45 and I-10...not so good. And there's quite a bit of open land to get it done.

You really want the truth? Get rid of the filibuster, and political conversation altogether.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Apr 24, 2009 -> 10:54 AM) Maybe the train runs on I-35 for that part of the trip. Crappiest traffic in Texas! I-35 sucks. Bad.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 24, 2009 -> 10:56 AM) They by no means did any of this as a last resort, and in the same documents you want to cite they say that they didn't have enough time to finish and everything obtained under torture was in the process of being obtained by other means. Both the memo from the DNI last week and the Op-ed piece in the NYT say the exact same thing, and it is 100% in disagreement with what you're saying. You are choosing to take 1 paragraph out of context because it fits your case. And there's more that hasn't been released. You all want to believe so bad "so Bush gets what's coming to them" that nothing else matters. You WANT it to be bad so it makes your case look better that Bush was an asshole. I keep seeing "right vs. wrong" and I just don't by it, or you all simply don't care about more Americans dying. Me saying that is as much of a strawman arguement as they could have gotten the information in different ways. You don't know, and I don't know. But you want to side on the hate Bush crowd.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Apr 24, 2009 -> 10:59 AM) The Bush admin will get what was coming to them. And that says it all... you care more about that then anything else.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Apr 24, 2009 -> 10:45 AM) Because there's only 2 options, waterboarding or having a cup of coffee with them. Read your own papers that you want to prosecute people over... they tried many things and only did waterboarding as a last resort, and only to 3 people. And it did get results, but just not in your precious documents that were blacked about on that part. My "friends" illustration is just as ludicrous as your "waterboarding is war crimes" is, it's the opposite extreme.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Apr 24, 2009 -> 10:43 AM) Right. We're asking them to be our friends. *face palm* Let's just sit down and have a cup of coffee, make them comfortable, and hope they talk... that's pretty much being their friend.

QUOTE (southsideirish71 @ Apr 24, 2009 -> 10:42 AM) The entire end game of these leaks is how they can get the bush administration once and for all. They want to march them up, put them on trial or better yet send them off to the hague. UN torture envoy: US must prosecute Bush lawyer UN May prosecute Bush Administration, regardless of US action. Exactly.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Apr 24, 2009 -> 10:35 AM) Coming from the same crowd that is ok with warrantless phone tapping. Whatever it takes to protect us! What's next? Opening our mail? Installing video cameras in our homes? We need more Benjamin Franklin's... What's next? Allowing someone who has already been a part of the murder of 3,000 people and was plotting for thousands more to be our friend?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 24, 2009 -> 10:17 AM) Could we have gotten that information without torturing, er, sorry, "enhanced interrogating" them? Was the "harsh treatment" really necessary to get the information? No one knows. They all want to think they know. Do you want to take the chance on thousands of lives? Again, we are talking about less then 5 people... and to make the leap that this is "war crimes" is pretty callous.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Apr 24, 2009 -> 10:13 AM) Why did we execute Japanese who were waterboarding our soldiers? And which one is it? If waterboarding is so safe why is it used? Sounds ineffective the way you put it. No one said it was "safe". But it is effective in certain circumstances. But you all want it to be something so bad you can't see through the rest. You all have such a hard on to get even with Bush officials that you simply cannot fathom that we might have gotten information that saved lives. You don't want that to be true, because then your arguments don't mean as much.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Apr 24, 2009 -> 10:08 AM) Like Sullivan said...go volunteer to be sleep deprived for several weeks, thrown into a wall repeatedly and water boarded over 100 times and tell me you weren't tortured. Why is it that a bunch of our own troops are waterboarded for training so they can know what to expect if they get caught? OMG! NOW we are "torturing" our own! WAR CRIMES! And I don't need to be "tortured" because I haven't committed my life to killing thousands of others.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Apr 24, 2009 -> 10:05 AM) Torture is not a war crime? You learn something new everyday. It is not torture. But you want it to be. Bad.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Apr 24, 2009 -> 10:03 AM) War crimes are war crimes Kap. They are not war crimes. But you sure as hell want them to be. Bad.

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Apr 24, 2009 -> 09:20 AM) What is considered waterboarding?.......Tying someone down and pouring water them......or the actual pouring of water on the person? Because I keep hearing the number 183. These guys were not tied to a board 183 times. Whatever sounds the worst, is what the definition will be right now.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 24, 2009 -> 09:11 AM) The one thing I will agree with is that it puts the lives of troops in danger, which for me at least, isn't political. ^^^^^^ And, you don't go around releasing stuff like this - there are some things you just leave alone - our tactics on a war is one of them. IT IS POLITICALLY MOTIVATED to release this stuff now. ACLU lawsuits or not, it's politically motivated. This stuff could be held up for years, if the administration so chose for national security purposes. But, you know: "war on terror" = "overseas contingency operation" "terrorist act" = "manmade natural disaster" "interrogation techniques" = "torture" And you want to tell me that this isn't political? Which of the three don't fit with the other two?

QUOTE (lostfan @ Apr 24, 2009 -> 08:30 AM) (The outrage on "Torture") is incredibly overrated IMO and I wish more people would focus on that, if they did, these arguments probably wouldn't be so heated. Fixed that for you.