blogs.discovermagazine.com— Perhaps you've heard all the uproar about President Obama's speech today. A group of folks is very concerned about a speech of his today, because he's talking to children...
Sep 8, 2009View in Crawl 4
Wait a second, I thought that the Republican ethos was all about personal responsibility. Now the president is talking about what he's done, to provide an example of self-reliance and personal responsibility as it relates to education, and now he's an ego-centrist.It doesn't matter what he does, you will always come up with something to fault him for. That's the problem with hate, you will concoct reasons to loathe someone, even when they espouse the very ideals you pretend to represent.Hypocrite.
My friend - you are obviously high or drunk, and it is you who is, irrefutably, the nitwit here. Please, list for us these 20 attacks. I know of four - the first & second World Trade Center attacks, the USS Cole bombing, and the bombing of the embassy in Kenya. That leaves 16 for you to account for.While you're at it - give us evidence, real evidence, of even one single attack that was prevented after 9/11 - one that might actually have happened and we were able to disrupt it because of something learned from torture or waterboarding or whatever you want to call it. No, vague Republican premonitions of something bad about to happen do not count. Raising the terror alert level does not count either. I want facts - hard facts - and evidence of an attack that realistically would have been carried out but that some sort of intelligence information gleaned through "enhanced interrogation". If not, STFU and go bury your head back in your bible. Pray a little and I'm sure everything will be ok for you. Pray really hard and maybe god will even open your eyes and turn your brain on for you. "Waterboarding is not fun - it is not supposed to be - but it is not torture" Please, define "torture" for us then. They are inducing an unpleasant feeling in the victim, in an attempt to break him or her and get him or her to talk. Yes, there is no permanent damage. Neither is there from many other forms of torture that are acknowledged by everyone as torture - electric shock, mock executions, mild beatings, humiliation, etc. Again, I will ask as I've asked before, if waterboarding is not torture, if its not illegal, then why don't we, for instance, use it against gang members who may be planning acts of violence in the US? Wouldn't it be doing the exact same thing to the gang members that you claim is ok to do against terrorists? Many gang leaders are not U.S. Citizens, and are not legally in our country. So why don't we do this to them? Answer? Because it is torture, it is cruel and unusual punishment, and it is against the law. IIRC, Shek Mohammed was tortured via waterboarding, and the government admitted to torturing two others in this manner.
@LastVisibleDog - you failed to address the core issue, which is exactly what attacks have been prevented through waterboarding or other 'enhanced interrogation' techniques?To your statement and list of terrorist incidents - while you claim there have been no terrorist attacks since 2001, your list includes many occurances that are similar to things that have happened since 2001.For instance:5/12/2003 - In Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, suicide attack against a housing complex for westerners kills 8 Americans and 34 in total12/6/2004 - In Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, terrorists storm the U.S. consulate, killing 5 consulate employees.8/19/2005 - a rocket attack apparently aimed at US navy ships in the port of Aqaba misses11/9/2005 - Amman, Jordan: suicide bombers hit 3 American hotels, Radisson, Grand Hyatt, and Days Inn, in Amman, Jordan, killing 57. Al-Qaeda claimed responsibility.1/12/2007: Athens, Greece: The U.S. embassy is fired on by an anti-tank missile causing damage but no injuries. 9/16/2008: a car bomb and a rocket strike the U.S. embassy in Yemen as staff arrived to work, killing 16 people, including 4 civilians. At least 25 suspected al-Qaeda militants are arrested for the attack. These are a few of them. There are numerous others. Not to mention numerous suicide attacks and attacks blamed on Al Quada and other terrorist groups against our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq. Your statement "0 terrorist attacks on the US and US assets since 9/12/2001" is completely innaccurate. So it seems to me that you are the one with predefined conclusions, inventing mythical facts and disregarding real facts in order to support the conclusions you've already reached. But lets forget whose inventing what. Since you seem to be unable to provide evidence of any plausible attack that was prevented through the use of waterboarding and other 'enhanced interrogation techniques', maybe you can at least explain to me why these techniques failed to prevent the above attacks if the techniquesin question are the wonderful magic bullets you claim that they are?
when i used to see people on the side walk protesting bush "IMPEACH! HE IS A WAR CRIMINAL!" i thought that was wrong.now i see almost the same thing aimed at Obama,it's still wrong.look i didn't vote for Obama,and i never will,but there is a certain level of respect inherent to the office.at least there is supposed to be.this extremism must stop."A house divided cannot stand."
After watching Reagan's talk to the kids on Digg yesterday, I understand people not wanting the president to address their children.... but after watching Obama's talk, it did end up being quite innocent...
What I like about Obama is that he said he was against NAFTA then got caught sending out memos to Canadian officials not to worry about it. I like how he voted for the Patriot Act, FISA immunity bill, the Real ID Act, and continued funding for the war. I also appreciate Mr. Obama's plan to create a civilian national security force that's "just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded" as the U.S. military.I just can't stop praising him. He said he was going to get us out of Iraq on day one during the campaign, then he changed it to 16 months, then to 19 months, then to 23 months. I can't get enough of it.
Imagine my surprise to wake up and see you took the low road out. I will justconsider myself the winner of the debate. As you decided to choose tomatch the information on the link I sent to fox news. It's ok though.I have talked to people like you before. Your messiah is at 51% approval ratingand falling. Your guys last rebuttal to the facts thrown at you. Is to bring up fox news.Keep blaming fox news and Republicans. It might work for you one day. While the restof the public wakes up. You and your clique can hunker down in the corner and praise Obama.Also you give me a link to wikipedia. That has known to be wrong because users have change the information and you complain about the information I sent you. That's rich.Grow up.Good Luck.
socialpsyenceSep 9, 2009
Wait a second, I thought that the Republican ethos was all about personal responsibility. Now the president is talking about what he's done, to provide an example of self-reliance and personal responsibility as it relates to education, and now he's an ego-centrist.It doesn't matter what he does, you will always come up with something to fault him for. That's the problem with hate, you will concoct reasons to loathe someone, even when they espouse the very ideals you pretend to represent.Hypocrite.
notachickenhawkSep 10, 2009
My friend - you are obviously high or drunk, and it is you who is, irrefutably, the nitwit here. Please, list for us these 20 attacks. I know of four - the first & second World Trade Center attacks, the USS Cole bombing, and the bombing of the embassy in Kenya. That leaves 16 for you to account for.While you're at it - give us evidence, real evidence, of even one single attack that was prevented after 9/11 - one that might actually have happened and we were able to disrupt it because of something learned from torture or waterboarding or whatever you want to call it. No, vague Republican premonitions of something bad about to happen do not count. Raising the terror alert level does not count either. I want facts - hard facts - and evidence of an attack that realistically would have been carried out but that some sort of intelligence information gleaned through "enhanced interrogation". If not, STFU and go bury your head back in your bible. Pray a little and I'm sure everything will be ok for you. Pray really hard and maybe god will even open your eyes and turn your brain on for you. "Waterboarding is not fun - it is not supposed to be - but it is not torture" Please, define "torture" for us then. They are inducing an unpleasant feeling in the victim, in an attempt to break him or her and get him or her to talk. Yes, there is no permanent damage. Neither is there from many other forms of torture that are acknowledged by everyone as torture - electric shock, mock executions, mild beatings, humiliation, etc. Again, I will ask as I've asked before, if waterboarding is not torture, if its not illegal, then why don't we, for instance, use it against gang members who may be planning acts of violence in the US? Wouldn't it be doing the exact same thing to the gang members that you claim is ok to do against terrorists? Many gang leaders are not U.S. Citizens, and are not legally in our country. So why don't we do this to them? Answer? Because it is torture, it is cruel and unusual punishment, and it is against the law. IIRC, Shek Mohammed was tortured via waterboarding, and the government admitted to torturing two others in this manner.
notachickenhawkSep 11, 2009
@LastVisibleDog - you failed to address the core issue, which is exactly what attacks have been prevented through waterboarding or other 'enhanced interrogation' techniques?To your statement and list of terrorist incidents - while you claim there have been no terrorist attacks since 2001, your list includes many occurances that are similar to things that have happened since 2001.For instance:5/12/2003 - In Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, suicide attack against a housing complex for westerners kills 8 Americans and 34 in total12/6/2004 - In Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, terrorists storm the U.S. consulate, killing 5 consulate employees.8/19/2005 - a rocket attack apparently aimed at US navy ships in the port of Aqaba misses11/9/2005 - Amman, Jordan: suicide bombers hit 3 American hotels, Radisson, Grand Hyatt, and Days Inn, in Amman, Jordan, killing 57. Al-Qaeda claimed responsibility.1/12/2007: Athens, Greece: The U.S. embassy is fired on by an anti-tank missile causing damage but no injuries. 9/16/2008: a car bomb and a rocket strike the U.S. embassy in Yemen as staff arrived to work, killing 16 people, including 4 civilians. At least 25 suspected al-Qaeda militants are arrested for the attack. These are a few of them. There are numerous others. Not to mention numerous suicide attacks and attacks blamed on Al Quada and other terrorist groups against our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq. Your statement "0 terrorist attacks on the US and US assets since 9/12/2001" is completely innaccurate. So it seems to me that you are the one with predefined conclusions, inventing mythical facts and disregarding real facts in order to support the conclusions you've already reached. But lets forget whose inventing what. Since you seem to be unable to provide evidence of any plausible attack that was prevented through the use of waterboarding and other 'enhanced interrogation techniques', maybe you can at least explain to me why these techniques failed to prevent the above attacks if the techniquesin question are the wonderful magic bullets you claim that they are?
h8red42Sep 11, 2009
when i used to see people on the side walk protesting bush "IMPEACH! HE IS A WAR CRIMINAL!" i thought that was wrong.now i see almost the same thing aimed at Obama,it's still wrong.look i didn't vote for Obama,and i never will,but there is a certain level of respect inherent to the office.at least there is supposed to be.this extremism must stop."A house divided cannot stand."
Closed AccountSep 15, 2009
After watching Reagan's talk to the kids on Digg yesterday, I understand people not wanting the president to address their children.... but after watching Obama's talk, it did end up being quite innocent...
silverstandardSep 18, 2009
What I like about Obama is that he said he was against NAFTA then got caught sending out memos to Canadian officials not to worry about it. I like how he voted for the Patriot Act, FISA immunity bill, the Real ID Act, and continued funding for the war. I also appreciate Mr. Obama's plan to create a civilian national security force that's "just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded" as the U.S. military.I just can't stop praising him. He said he was going to get us out of Iraq on day one during the campaign, then he changed it to 16 months, then to 19 months, then to 23 months. I can't get enough of it.
stonebearSep 18, 2009
Whenever I find people hating on the baby boom, I like to bring up George Carlin.
trythison4sighsSep 25, 2009
Stop using logic. It doesn't work on digg!
trythison4sighsSep 25, 2009
You, sir, are racist, sir.
Closed AccountSep 28, 2009
Imagine my surprise to wake up and see you took the low road out. I will justconsider myself the winner of the debate. As you decided to choose tomatch the information on the link I sent to fox news. It's ok though.I have talked to people like you before. Your messiah is at 51% approval ratingand falling. Your guys last rebuttal to the facts thrown at you. Is to bring up fox news.Keep blaming fox news and Republicans. It might work for you one day. While the restof the public wakes up. You and your clique can hunker down in the corner and praise Obama.Also you give me a link to wikipedia. That has known to be wrong because users have change the information and you complain about the information I sent you. That's rich.Grow up.Good Luck.