CIA Waterboarded Mohammed 183X in 1 Month, Zubaydah 83X in 1 month

[Hot Mega]

That's the strategy isn't? Wriggle around with semantics, obfuscations and misdirections to frustrate you into giving up.

Here's a hint though, when they resort to those tactics they've already given up but just don't know it yet.

"They"...who's "they"?
"They resort to those tactics"...what "tactics" ?
"...just don't know it yet." Don't know what yet?

I guess you couldn't read it the first time.:dunno:

Obviously the "they" is you and others in this thread who are doing the "what" (tactics) semantics, obfuscations and misdirections have given up but "just don't know it yet.":hatsoff:

 

[Philbert]

I guess you couldn't read it the first time.:dunno:

Obviously the "they" is you and others in this thread who are doing the "what" (tactics) semantics, obfuscations and misdirections have given up but "just don't know it yet.":hatsoff:

Of course I read it...I addressed the post, didn't I? Duh...
So, you are making excuses for the semantics you frequently engage in to confuse the actual issue, blaming others for confusing you or Boothbabe...and claiming diabolical intentions for your, and Boothbabe's, failure to actually back up what you claim so often with no real clarity.
Simply sad, but you gotta be you...:rofl:

I guess when asked to clarify a general unsubstantiated claim, just giving up is the way to go, huh BB?

 

[Hot Mega]

Of course I read it...I addressed the post, didn't I?

So, you are making excuses for the semantics you frequently engage in to confuse the actual issue, blaming others for confusing you or Boothbabe...and claiming diabolical intentions for your, and Boothbabe's, failure to actually back up what you claim so often with no real clarity.
Simply sad, but you gotta be you...:rofl:

I guess when asked to clarify a general unsubstantiated claim, just giving up is the way to go, huh BB?

Well I couldn't tell since you followed it with questions in cases where the answers were in plain view.

What's confusing about a thread with a "thousand" posts trying to minimize and excuse illegality??

It's pretty clear what the deal is, when the facts are against some people they obfuscate and try to point you in other directions rather than deal with the facts as they are.

There's not new or complicated about that.

 

[Philbert]

Well I couldn't tell since you followed it with questions in cases where the answers were in plain view.

What's confusing about a thread with a "thousand" posts trying to minimize and excuse illegality??

It's pretty clear what the deal is, when the facts are against some people they obfuscate and try to point you in other directions rather than deal with the facts as they are.

There's not new or complicated about that.

Exactly...a perfect description of your many posts claiming the last word on illegality and "GOPers" doing this or saying that, while any clearthinking and reasonable person knows the GOP is a party made of many different people and views, not a single entity that does this or that as a group.
Melding truth and opinion is not an honest or aboveboard attempt at discussion, but an obvious attempt at clouding and redirecting the point of discussion...but you know that, since you must be attempting to "obfuscate and try to point you in other directions rather than deal with the facts as they are".

 

[Hot Mega]

US and International laws against torture. It's been admitted that water boarding has been employed as an interrogation technique. That's against the law, we've already punished people in the past for doing it.

In the US as POTUS you can't just decide by fiat to change a law on your own then get some sycophant to right a legal opinion granting you the right to usurp the law.

That ought to be common sense.

The specious argument that no code shows "water boarding" as specifically illegal is obviously absurd.

There are many if not all forms of torture that are not specifically named as illegal but are nonetheless STILL illegal because they are prima facie torture.

And yes, enemy combatants, HVD, etc. are covered under the Geneva Convention. See below...



(again that's "the Protection of All Persons")

http://www.hrweb.org/legal/cat.html

So back to the point then Philbert.....care to respond to this? Since you asked the question (while not directed at me) and the above was the response.

 

[Jagger69]

(edit)....any clearthinking and reasonable person knows the GOP is a party made of many different people and views, not a single entity that does this or that as a group.

One of the best and truest statements you have ever made on this forum, Philby. :thumbsup: Props...:bowdown:

I'd offer only one thing for consideration....substitute "GOP" with "Democratic Party" in your post and you can make precisely the same statement. :eek:

Good thread....off the wall....

:glugglug:

 

[Facetious]

Round and round . . Hegel's dialectics at the Frankfurt school :1orglaugh :laugh:

where it goes nobody knows

 

[Philbert]

One of the best and truest statements you have ever made on this forum, Philby. :thumbsup: Props...:bowdown:

I'd offer only one thing for consideration....substitute "GOP" with "Democratic Party" in your post and you can make precisely the same statement. :eek:

Good thread....off the wall....

:glugglug:

Absolutely...does anyone think Southern Baptist Black Democrats are the same as San Francisco White ultra-liberal Democrats?
Raise your hands...I need a clear target ! I got my Dummy Smacker right here...:rofl:

 

[Philbert]

So back to the point then Philbert.....care to respond to this? Since you asked the question (while not directed at me) and the above was the response.

Damn...you read only 2 or 3 words of any post you don't write, huh?
Besides the obvious misstatement that the Geneva Convention covers all people having a hard time, the BS claim that we've already prosecuted waterboarding is a classic example of twisted truth...and it's been addressed already...more than once.

http://board.freeones.com/showpost.php?p=3240436&postcount=369
There's just one...I grow bored with your persistent refusal to stick to the actual facts.
Come up with a clear thought and I'll maybe engage...you keep posting partial truths and skewed facts, and I'll fall asleep at the keyboard.

 

[Hot Mega]

So, using your obvious logic, since a man convicted of shooting someone while committing an armed robbery can be sentenced to Death, a soldier in the US military should be convicted of the same Felony Murder offense for killing an enemy combatant while taking control of a strategic point like a building or a hill, and given the death penalty.
Pretty smart thinking there...:thumbsup:

This is your comeback?????????????????

Without a doubt the A. No.1, stupidest, most absurdly ridiculous attempt at an analogy I have ever had the displeasure of reading in my entire life.

Congratulations Philbert.

Unnnnbelievable!!

If anyone, cop, soldier or anyone else (profession be damned) commits murder in the process of a robbery they will face the same legal jeopardy..which is prosecution.

Un-fucking-real!!!!

 

[Philbert]

This is your comeback?????????????????

Without a doubt the A. No.1, stupidest, most absurdly ridiculous attempt at an analogy I have ever had the displeasure of reading in my entire life.

Congratulations Philbert.

Unnnnbelievable!!

If anyone, cop, soldier or anyone else (profession be damned) commits murder in the process of a robbery they will face the same legal jeopardy..which is prosecution.

Un-fucking-real!!!!

Are you on drugs?
Bad drugs?
That was (actually, is and was)) the dumbest and most ridiculous interpretation of a clear and obvious analogy I've run across on the site...ever.
You really have a serious comprehension problem...and I have real pity for your condition.
Stay out of discussions when you are going through an episode, you only embarrass yourself.
Seriously...

 

[Hot Mega]

Are you on drugs?
Bad drugs?
That was (actually, is and was)) the dumbest and most ridiculous interpretation of a clear and obvious analogy I've run across on the site...ever.
You really have a serious comprehension problem...and I have real pity for your condition.
Stay out of discussions when you are going through an episode, you only embarrass yourself.
Seriously...

The bad thing for you is these are your words and the speak for themselves.

So, using your obvious logic, since a man convicted of shooting someone while committing an armed robbery can be sentenced to Death, a soldier in the US military should be convicted of the same Felony Murder offense for killing an enemy combatant while taking control of a strategic point like a building or a hill, and given the death penalty.

I don't know what you thought you were trying to say but what you did suggest is there was something analogous to a armed robber killing person and a soldier engaging a target and securing a position from them. Why would anyone in their right mind consider the soldier in the same legal jeopardy when they haven't committed the same act?? And before you go there, I understand you're suggesting both people killed in order to take something but was still a stupid analogy.

The cops in the case cited were convicted and punished for water boarding and while US law is not directly linear to military law, cases against water boarding have been prosecuted by the military and as part of the Geneva Convention too.

Speaking of which, exactly what did I misstate from the Geneva Convention??

 

[georges]

Round and round . . Hegel's dialectics at the Frankfurt school :1orglaugh :laugh:

where it goes nobody knows

so true :yesyes:

 

[Facetious]

Originally Posted by Facetious :

What roles did you serve during your alleged time in the Armed Services, mega ?
Were you one of those tag along whistle blowers, accounting for every single round of 5.66 ~ reporting back to a secondary employer the GPS coordinates of potential collateral loss of life ?
(I thought that you'd like that one )
Gives a whole new meaning to watching one's back doesn't it ?

I don't believe that you spent a single day in the military, you just have false yet convincing answers for the commonly asked questions.

Originally Posted by Hot Mega :

Absolutely!! You're exactly right.

All you need to know on this bulletin board is that I served distinguishedly and honorably in several theaters of battle during my time. You're welcome

.


Had you actually served as proudly as you did, you would've defended your service much more tenaciously and convincingly. Think about it for a second or a minute if it takes that - Your rebuttal was deficient in spirit and courage and frankly, you failed to close the deal.

Furthermore, your tendency to repetitiously quarrel on the side of extreme left political leanings would certainly be out of character for anybody who claims to have served ever so proudly in the Armed Services of the United States of America, regardless of political affiliation.

Anyhow, have fun and all with your ACME "How to Win a Debate"
*featuring - bonus chapter in dialectics*

You Might have had me convinced had you measured your character instead of revealing your insecurities via your false personification of an intellect
.:spin:

 

[Facial_King]

I'm still waiting, philbert:

http://board.freeones.com/showpost.php?p=3240518&postcount=373

As long as you're going to pollute the threads I start, at least have something substantive to say when you've clearly been taken apart. Mostly, you just call people names.

 

[Philbert]

I'm still waiting, philbert:

http://board.freeones.com/showpost.php?p=3240518&postcount=373

As long as you're going to pollute the threads I start, at least have something substantive to say when you've clearly been taken apart. Mostly, you just call people names.

F-K, you pollute the entire forum.
You have yet to take anybody apart...your posts are consistently weak in logic, and sparsely populated with your own actual words...hardly surprising you would need to ride on other people's work and thoughts...you have no clear philosophy and like to mix your few facts with a lot of twisted half-truths.
I am not concerned with your need to be addressed when you demand it...keep on waiting.
You keep referring to the names I call others...you mean like "fucktard", "asshole", "dumbass", "dipshit", "idiot"...?
Quote a post where I do that....considering I have posted hundreds of thousands of words in my years here, a statement like "Mostly, you just call people names" should be child's play to instantly find a hundred examples.
I am waiting...:rofl:

 

[Facial_King]

...hardly surprising you would need to ride on other people's work and thoughts...

It's funny, because you actually asked "Please quote what exact laws were broken...", so I provided this:

http://lawreview.wustl.edu/slip-opinions/waterboarding-is-illegal/

Sorry, like you, I'm not in the position to write the laws myself.

 

[bodie54]

Had you actually served as proudly as you did, you would've defended your service much more tenaciously and convincingly. Think about it for a second or a minute if it takes that - Your rebuttal was deficient in spirit and courage and frankly, you failed to close the deal.

Could you be any more presumptious?
Who are you, particularly as a non-veteran, to dictate what constitutes an "appropriate" level of spirit and courage?
Good grief.

Furthermore, your tendency to repetitiously quarrel on the side of extreme left political leanings....

Extreme left?? :1orglaugh

....would certainly be out of character for anybody who claims to have served ever so proudly in the Armed Services of the United States of America, regardless of political affiliation.

:rofl:

Surely you're just trollling here, right?
You can't possibly be serious.

 

[Jane Burgess]

Technically the waterboarding took place on Cuban soil. Why do you think they do not have them on US soil? It is hard to feel sorry for a terrorist who does not value human life.

 

[don_equis]

let's waterboard Bush and everyone that lies to this country...it's not going to happen but it's fun to imagine how many of them politicos fall on this category.