• lfbno7 said on Mar 09, 2008....

  I don't think I'd waterboard Paris Hilton exactly. I think I'd get her little dog to shit on her.

• ALIENated said on Mar 09, 2008....

  
  Let me introduce you to bloc ...
  
  

  http://www.soulcast.com/bloc/

  
  He has a few million things to say about Bush and waterboarding. I think it is
  unfortunate that situations arise that demand things like waterboarding. My
  suggestion would be ... do not become a terrorist and you will not have to
  worry about it.
  
  

• Kemo said on Mar 09, 2008....

  Waterboarding is evil on the same level as mock executions....It's wrong and Bush was wrong in vetoing this legislation

• silverwhisper said on Mar 10, 2008....

  i see you've met alienated, kemo. :>
  
  naturally, vetoing this legislation is ridiculous.
  
  ed

• stopmediabias said on Mar 11, 2008....

  Bush is 100% right in vetoing this.  The CIA outlawed waterboarding.  This was just another Democrat spineless move to get attention.  They don't care about this issue.  Any of the interogation methods in question would require authorization from the President so it is only in extreme situations.  The three times we waterboarded people, they were extreme situations.

• Kemo said on Mar 11, 2008....

  Waterboarding is wrong stopmediabias....It does not matter if 3 people or a million people are waterborded....It still wrong...Bush was wrong in vetoing this legislation...and I beleve most of my readers agree with me....

• stopmediabias said on Mar 12, 2008....

  http://www.soulcast.com/post/show/118336/Bush-Veto-of-Waterboarding-Bill

  This is my post on this matter.  

  Waterboarding is a tool, that's it.  The main reason for the veto wasn't really about waterboarding.

  Even from a political standpoint President Bush was brilliant in this veto because if a Democrat gets in office they are going to have to address this issue from their own side. 

  Maybe you can offer a solution to the problem.  How do we get intelligence from a hardcore Jiadist when we only have an hour and we know he has info that will thwart attacks?

• silverwhisper said on Mar 12, 2008....

  smb, turn off 24. that isn't real life.
  
  ed

• Kemo said on Mar 12, 2008....

  Smb, I say we get are intelligence  by playing by the rules set out by the United Nations....

• stopmediabias said on Mar 12, 2008....

  Ya know that was a legitimate question.  I've heard all this talk about torture and whoever is right or wrong is to be decided but it doesn't change the actual problem.  In this day in age when we capture an Al Qaeda leader and we have one hour before the entire world knows he is captured, how do we get the information from him that will stop ongoing terror plots? 

  Let me take this a step futher and get hypothetical.  Lets say President Bush is 100% wrong about everything.  So from now on we only use the Army Manuel for interogations, will this work in the above scenerio?

  Silver-why do you egg me on?  Do you like it when I verbally smack you upside the head?

  I've actually watched 24 and find it to be a great show.  And I hate to say it but many of things on that show mirror real life as far as threats are concerned.

  And lets not mention the UN, they are useless and toothless and should be turned into a humanitarian group and sent to Canada.

• silverwhisper said on Mar 13, 2008....

  smb: i egg you on b/c you continue embarrassing yourself and i wanna see just how far you go. you've never once yet "smacked me upside the head"--trust me, we've had enough conversations that i think i'd recognize an utterly unprecedented event like that. :> and if you aren't jack bauer, how in the world can you possibly know that it's like real life?
  
  ed

• Kemo said on Mar 13, 2008....

  SMB, 24 is not real it' a tv show....It's made up for entertanment...the kind of entertanment that Fox News and the Cartoon Network provides...
   
  As far as the United Nations is concerned it's a wonderful orginization....There have been no world wars since the conception of the UN...

• silverwhisper said on Mar 13, 2008....

  what's interesting about smb's statement about the UN is that he says it's a humanitarian organization and should be sent to canada. that seems to suggest that in smb's view, humantarian organizations don't belong in the US. :D
  
  i know, i know, he didn't really mean that, but i thought it was a funny slip. :>
  
  ed

• stopmediabias said on Mar 13, 2008....

  Kemo/Silver-Go back and read your comments versus my comments.
   
  I don't know why you guys are here.  Your responses are childish.
   
  I made a couple of points and asked a question and silver comes back with a genius response of: "smb, turn off 24. that isn't real life"
   
  And Kemo says:"Smb, I say we get are intelligence  by playing by the rules set out by the United Nations...."
   
  I don't get it, why are you guys here? 

• silverwhisper said on Mar 14, 2008....

  i see you can't address the question smb and therefore, as usual, are reduced to nothing but personal attacks. sadly typical.
  
  ed

• lfbno7 said on Mar 14, 2008....

  So, what did they come up with after all this time? Don't tell me it's a secret. What did they learn from tortured prisoners that benefited us? What secrets did they torture out of them? Again, don't tell me it's top secret. That's not a good enough answer when we are debating the discontinuance of torture. Better come up with something convincing. Waterboarding ain't no fun. It ain't a ride in Disney World. Gimme some facts. Gimme a reason. Tell me that by torturing the shit out of Mohammed Ibrahim in Cuba our CIA prevented the nuclear destruction of Miami. Don't just tell me to have faith or to be paranoid. Tell me something solid.

• Kemo said on Mar 14, 2008....

  SMB…We are here too have an adult conversation ….I will leave the name calling too the Middle school kids and readers such as yourself

• stopmediabias said on Mar 15, 2008....

   ROFL!!!!!!!!!

  You guys just can't answer my question, it shows you don't have an argument and you know our President is right.  If we restrict the CIA on how they legally interogate someone you know it will hamper our abilities.  You've all back yourselves into a corner here that's why here and other places on this subject you refuse to answer the question.

  I'll be doing a post on this, thank you. 

• silverwhisper said on Mar 15, 2008....

  actually, it's you who's refusing to answer questions, smb. again: if you aren't jack bauer--or indeed, if you aren't an interrogator yourself w/ security clearance--how can you possibly know how relevant the fictional situations in 24 bear any resemblance or relevance to reality?
  
  are you actually working in the intelligence community in some fashion?
  
  your reasoning, that the president should have every possible tool available, is illogical. where do you draw the line? what tools should the president never have, smb? are there any, in your mind?
  
  this is a question you've been asked, both by myself and others, that you refuse to address meaningfully--you usually snap "of course" but refuse to enlarge upon that. so show us that we're wrong to think that: what specific things should the government never be permitted to do?
  
  ed

• stopmediabias said on Mar 15, 2008....

  They should never be specifically permitted to get a blowjob in the oval office or launch tear gas on woman and children.

  Just kidding :>

  I responded to your question on my own post.  After you finish your koolaid check it out, all though I don't think it will help you.

  http://www.soulcast.com/post/show/119005/Liberal-Soulcast-Evasions-on-Thwarting-Terrorism

   

• Kemo said on Mar 15, 2008....

  SMB, I read your post....But I did not read anything that looked like an answer...If you have forgotten the question is "What can the government  NOT DO when questioning a prisoner?"  I've answered it you have not...
   
  Oh yea I don't drink koolaid to much sugar....

• silverwhisper said on Mar 16, 2008....

  smb, you didn't answer the question. you just did your own version of "stupidest thing ever said on soulcast".
  
  you repeatedly make the ticking bomb analogy when it's been proven to be false. you still can't answer the question of where the line should be drawn, what powers should or should not be available to the president.
  
  you leave me no choice but to conclude that in your view, there's nothing that should be off-limits to the president or to interrogators.
  
  if that conclusion is incorrect, then start answering the question. b/c you keep avoiding it. i'm just curious to know whether you have the conviction of your views to say it clearly and unambiguously.
  
  ed

Comment on "Bush veto's legislation banning waterboarding"

Currently tagged	CIA waterboarding war on terror Kemo bush civil liberties (Click to add tags below)
Tag this post	(Separate tags using commas, for example: New York, dating, vegetarian)
Your comment
	Comment Anonymously