Our freedom is on it's last legs.

[crowmanyclouds]

Oh yeah I forgot;
WE don’t torture, torture is illegal and WE never do anything illegal.
If you claim you have been tortured, you are mistaken, you were not tortured, it’s all in your head.

Evil liberals are just fucking with your head, it wasn’t torture.

Torture is such a negative word, we should find another one to describe what we’re not doing to you, that’s it we just need another word, a nice happy word…

[Sevastopol]

You’re not getting it. Torture is this seasons WMD.

It was only Democrats that cared there were no WMD. GOPians were overjoyed. Similarly, your outrage at the US’s torture policy translates into ecstasy for GOPers.

It’s the broad goal of this administration writ small. To erase the liberal mindset from North America and emblazon their constituency’s values as the true America. You aren’t alone though. Even a brilliant man like Jimmy Carter doesn’t get it:

This isn’t the real America

…Also endangered are our historic commitments to providing citizens with truthful information, treating dissenting voices and beliefs with respect, state and local autonomy and fiscal responsibility.

At the same time, our political leaders have declared independence from the restraints of international organizations and have disavowed long-standing global agreements - including agreements on nuclear arms, control of biological weapons and the international system of justice.
…
Regardless of the costs, there are determined efforts by top US leaders to exert American imperial dominance throughout the world.
…
Of even greater concern is that the US has repudiated the Geneva accords and espoused the use of torture in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay, and secretly through proxy regimes elsewhere with the so-called extraordinary rendition program. It is embarrassing to see the president and vice president insisting that the CIA should be free to perpetrate “cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment” on people in US custody.

No Jimmy, this is the real America.

[elucidator]

@Scylla

Fuck you. I never said one was ok, and fuck you again for suggesting otherwise…

You’d never go back to chickens.

…It’s not ok to torture, and it’s not ok to fabricate accusations of torture and state them as fact. To make such accusations without positive knowledge is slanderous irresponsible and slimy…

He fabricated them? Out of whole cloth, did he? How very odd. Those certainly look like cites to me. Yes, very clearly, those are cites. Did he “fabricate” those as well? Makes your task that much easier, all you need do is prove that the cites themselves don’t exist. Good luck with that.

…It’s also true that if somebody just makes up a story and says US forces torture dozens to death without knowing it to be true, it also makes enemies for us when other people here and beleive it…

Just so. He should hie hence to Iraq, and bring his full powers of subpoena and investigation to bear. Ferret out the truth, with videotaped confessions and affidavits written in blood.

But what is the need? We have you, our very own LaMont Cranston, who peers into the hearts of men and ascertains their content. You know treason when you see it, you know the malice that lurks behind their words.

… I agree. That’s why I can’t understand why you would defend somebody making up false accusations that damage us and create enemies.

Or, do you want us to have more enemies?..

Scylla’s Fork “Are you a lying traitor or merely a traitor?” Choose A or A.

…Do you support false and irresponsible accusations of torture, or do you think they should be responsibly verified before they are made?

“Responsibly verified” means different things to different people. Have you “responsibly verified” your accusations of treason to the same level of excruciating exactitude that you demand of others? Or are you content to fling it as it pleases you?

[Hamlet]

@Scylla

Bullshit. For your information I went off on the administration on page 1

This one? or This one?
Boy howdy, did you really lay into the administration on page one! :rolleyes:

You’ll call Finn a liar and a traitor, two accusations that are reprehensible when he provides cites that support his position and wave your hands at the torture and murder of prisoners by the United States in Abu Ghraib and Afghanistan. Maybe it’s not just a case of fucked up priorities, maybe you’re just plain fucked up.

@Scylla

and there failings do not excuse the falsification of extreme accusations by others, nor does it invalidate such slander from being a viable and vital topic particularly when it’s becoming increasingly ubiquitous.

Prove that they are falsifications. Maybe, just maybe, you’d have an ounce of credibility left. You’d still be fucked up, but maybe you could save a modicum of your quickly deteriorating credibility left.

@Scylla

In fact, some of you would probably say that the dangers of doing that are a lesson we learned from the administration, which makes it doubly inexcusable.

Torture and murder v. arguing from citations and information. Yep, great point you make there.

[vibrotronica]

@Scylla

It’s not particular enlightening to say “you lost my respect” or “Fuck you,” unless you explain your position.

I will explain mine. You tell me (if you’re capable and willing) what’s wrong with it.

Finnagain has said that US forces have tortured and killed dozens. I asked him to prove his statement or be considered a traitor. He said “deal.”

::snip a whole bunch of bullshit nobody wants to read a second time::

It’s traitorous. It’s stupidity. It disgusts me.

A strong accusation such as he made requires strong evidence. He has none.

Do you Vibtrotonica think it’s ok to fabricate lies to slander our soldiers?

Do you understand why I take strong issue with it?

I can read, asshole. Your brave defense of tourture is inspiring. Your intellectually rigorous accusations of treason are duly noted. Do you think it’s OK to accuse your fellow American of treaon when there are people sitting in the White House–whose right to torture people and detain them indefinitely without the right of due process or the protections of the Genevea Conventions you have spilled so many electrons to defend–who have performed actions–like outing a covert CIA agent–that can arguably be called treason? I’m sure you’d call it treason if I did it! Do you, Scylla think it’s OK for our troops to tourture detainees? Do you, Scylla, think it’s OK to expose CIA agents for partisan gain? Do you, Scylla think it’s OK to attack someone’s FAMILY because they told the truth and exposed your lies? Do you think it’s OK to pursue agressive, unprovoked war on the basis of lies? Do you understand why I take such strong issue with it?

I abolutely will not tolerate anyone else from either side of the asile accusing anyone of treason or calling anyone a traitor while these criminals sit in the White House. And you, Scylla sully your good name when you defend them. Look at yourself. Look at what you’re saying in their their name. “Sure, he was beaten to death, but that doesn’t prove anything!” Take a step back and think for a minute about what you’re saying! Sure, you can defend the administration with lawyerly technicalities, but the handwriting is on the wall. They have betrayed the the most fundamental values that this country is based on, and that’s just fine with you. You should be ashamed of yourself. Where is your moral sense?

I am not a traitor. You are not a traitor. There are no traitors here in this thread.

@Scylla

“Fuck me?” Oh no, my dearest. Fuck you.

And I’m male, bitch.

[kaylasdad99]

Notes to self:

Try not to use the word “proof,” in SDMB discussions, when making a request for information.

Try to avoid characterizing the information you provide as “proof”.

When you are decrying multiple instances of a reprehensible action, try to avoid assigning a label that can be converted to a specific number when you are asked to substantiate that multiple instances of the action occurred.

[SteveG1]

@Sevastopol

You’re not getting it. Torture is this seasons WMD.

It was only Democrats that cared there were no WMD. GOPians were overjoyed. Similarly, your outrage at the US’s torture policy translates into ecstasy for GOPers.

It’s the broad goal of this administration writ small. To erase the liberal mindset from North America and emblazon their constituency’s values as the true America. You aren’t alone though. Even a brilliant man like Jimmy Carter doesn’t get it:

This isn’t the real America

No Jimmy, this is the real America.

Jimmy Carter hates America. Damn pinko commie rat bastard librul. :rolleyes:

[New_Iskander]

@vibrotronica

And I’m male, bitch.

So?

[Evil_Captor]

@Squink

Even more worrisome:Oh goody, now they’re going to sell my name and information to fucking spammers, or worse, credit card companys, religious groups and organized crime. Hell, maybe they’ll blackmail me with it when I write a letter to the editor that they don’t like.

Nah. They’re going to give your data to ChoicePoint or something like it, which will run the demographic data through an engine that will decide if you’re a likely Dem voter, and if you are, will find some pretext for preventing you from voting. Like they did in Florida in 2000 and tried to in 2004.

[kaylasdad99]

@New Iskander

So?

So instead of

@Scylla

“Fuck me?” Oh no, my dearest. Fuck you.

it might be more appropriate for him to have posted

“Fuck me?” Oh no, buddy. Fuck you.

IOW, just a nit.

[Gala_Matrix_Fire]

Today’s Washington Post has a letter from Marc Rotenberg, executive director, and Marcia Hofman, staff counsel, of EPIC, the Electronic Privacy Information Center, in response to Barton Gellman’s original article about these National Security Letters. If you’ll remember, that’s what this thread used to be about.

here is the link to the Wash Post article, and here’s a snippet:

When the FBI determines that domestic intelligence investigations were conducted contrary to law and in violation of the individual rights of U.S. citizens, the law requires that these cases be reported to the Intelligence Oversight Board. Administrative errors do not require reporting to the board.

EPIC obtained documentation of a dozen such referrals. Subsequent reporting uncovered 113 violations since last year. And the numbering system associated with these reports suggests that several hundred such cases may have occurred since passage of the Patriot Act in 2001.

[SteveG1]

This is what has been stirring the pot lately. It is an attempt to shift blame, wave the flag, paint everyone but Bush as the villain, and shift blame for HIS decisions.

@Bush Veterans Day Speech

“The stakes in the global war on terror are too high, and the national interest is too important, for politicians to throw out false charges. These baseless attacks send the wrong signal to our troops and to an enemy that is questioning America’s will. As our troops fight a ruthless enemy determined to destroy our way of life, they deserve to know that their elected leaders who voted to send them to war continue to stand behind them.”

Here is a response.

@The response

The ‘demoralizing our boys and comforting the enemy’ line is a last ditch, McCarthy-lite gambit that doesn’t work in this country. Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon used it to fill their credibility gaps, without success. It was cheap and cowardly then and it still is now.

Furthermore, it’s not crystal clear who exactly the “ruthless enemy determined to destroy our way of life” is. Is it the Sunnis blowing up the Shiites in Iraq? Or the Shiites blowing up the Sunnis? Or is it the Shiites and the Sunnis when they are blowing up Americans? Or Jordanians blowing up Jordanians? Or is it the prisoners in secret CIA prison camps?

Who exactly are these people getting the wrong message and encouragement from the speeches of Harry Reid, John McCain and Chuck Hagel? (Here’s Hagel on the administration’s new counter-offensive: “The Bush Administration must understand that each American has a right to question our policies in Iraq and should not be demonized for disagreeing with them.”)

The administration is especially perturbed that some critics still believe the case it made for war lacked integrity and still want a proper investigation into the policy uses of pre-war intelligence.

Then on the the final sentence which sums it all up perfectly

@The response

That is manipulating intelligence and misleading the American people. Saying otherwise, twisting what major reports have said and questioning the patriotism and honor of critics is a sure way to stay holed up in Credibility Gulch.

@From The American Prospect

The speech was humiliating to Bush and the United States of America on so many levels that I don’t even know where to begin. OK, actually, I do. I’ll begin with the outright lie.

My critics, Bush whimpered, “are fully aware that a bipartisan Senate investigation found no evidence of political pressure to change the intelligence community’s judgments related to Iraq’s weapons programs.”

No such thing ever happened. That bipartisan investigation — the so-called “Phase II” probe into administration manipulation of pre-war intelligence — is ongoing right now. It’s taken this long to start because, as Laura Rozen reported in our October print issue, Senate intelligence committee chairman Pat Roberts dragged his feet; and, as Murray Waas reported in The National Journal online, once Roberts did haltingly begin the probe, Dick Cheney and his staff refused to turn over crucial documentation. The delays and stonewalls, of course, are exactly what led the Democrats to call the closed session of the Senate. The probe is finally proceeding — but it sure hasn’t “found” anything.

There is no other way to interpret Bush’s sentence: It is a direct, unmediated, Nixonian lie. What kind of pathetic man would utter such a lie on Veterans’ Day, when over 2,000 U.S. soldiers have died?

From 50 years ago, during World War 2, when we were facing TWO far more powerful enemies - world class powers, Japan and Germany, at their peak strength:

@Robert Taft

As a matter of general principle, I believe there can be no doubt that criticism in time of war is essential to the maintenance of any kind of democratic government … too many people desire to suppress criticism simply because they think that it will give some comfort to the enemy to know that there is such criticism. If that comfort makes the enemy feel better for a few moments, they are welcome to it as far as I am concerned, because the maintenance of the right of criticism in the long run will do the country maintaining it a great deal more good than it will do the enemy, and will prevent mistakes which might otherwise occur.

These words were spoken by a Republican, just a few days after the Pearl Harbor attack in 1941.

[New_Iskander]

@kaylasdad99

…might be more appropriate for him to have posted,

“Fuck me?” Oh no, buddy. Fuck you.

What about the “pillow talk”?

[Scylla]

Elucidator

He fabricated them? Out of whole cloth, did he? How very odd. Those certainly look like cites to me. Yes, very clearly, those are cites. Did he “fabricate” those as well? Makes your task that much easier, all you need do is prove that the cites themselves don’t exist. Good luck with that.

Having a cite is not enough. The cite must support the conclusion. Saying his cites prove US forces have tortured dozens to death is as accurate as saying they support alien abduction.

It seems to me, that you should understand this, having spent so much of the past several years railing against those who jump to conclusions with insufficient evidence.

I suppose if it’s a conclusion you would like, the standard drops to nonexistance.

Hamlet

You’ll call Finn a liar and a traitor, two accusations that are reprehensible when he provides cites that support his position and wave your hands at the torture and murder of prisoners by the United States in Abu Ghraib and Afghanistan

Fine. You cut and paste the part that proves our forces tortured two dozen or more to death, and I’ll apologize.

You can’t?

No shit. It doesn’t exist because it’s a slanderous and unfounded accusation.

But go ahead. Prove me wrong.

Prove that they are falsifications. Maybe, just maybe, you’d have an ounce of credibility left.

For the fourth time… and you should really understand this: It is not my part to prove a negative. In fact, it can’t be done. Logically, rhetorically, however you want to put it, the person making the positive statement needs to demonstrate it. The person opposing it does not need to disprove it.

For example, If I say “Aliens are visiting the earth in spaceships,” it is not reasonable for me to take the stance that you need to prove that it’s not true. It would fall on me to prove my statement before I could expect it to be accepted by rational people. Carl Sagan writes about this:

http://spl.haxial.net/religion/misc/carl-sagan.html

I’d suggest you read it.

So, I will not be providing a cite, that proves something didn’t happen. The person saying it does not only needs a cite (any old cite won’t do,) they need a cite that demonstrates their conclusion.
Vibrotonica

Do you think it’s OK to accuse your fellow American of treaon when there are people sitting in the White House–whose right to torture people and detain them indefinitely without the right of due process or the protections of the Genevea Conventions you have spilled so many electrons to defend–who have performed actions–like outing a covert CIA agent–that can arguably be called treason?

Do you think it’s ok to question with what appellation I choose to describe lying slanderous weasels while thousands of children are starving to death in Africa?

I abolutely will not tolerate anyone else from either side of the asile accusing anyone of treason or calling anyone a traitor while these criminals sit in the White House

And I won’t tolerate you questioning anybody else’s right to free speech while children are starving to death!

And I’m male, bitch

That’s too bad. You were kind of turning me on.

[SteveG1]

@New Iskander

What about the “pillow talk”?

ROFL. Good thing I didn’t have a mouth full of soda

[vibrotronica]

@Scylla

Do you think it’s ok to question with what appellation I choose to describe lying slanderous weasels while thousands of children are starving to death in Africa?

And I won’t tolerate you questioning anybody else’s right to free speech while children are starving to death!

That’s too bad. You were kind of turning me on.

So, just to be absolutely straight on this, you stand by your characterization of certain posters in this thread as “traitors.” You believe they are guilty of treason, am I correct?Say it in plain English for all the world to see. Call a traitor. Call elucidator a traitor. Call FinnAgain a traitor. Call jfranchi a traitor. Point out all of the traitors on this board. Do it. Put your shamlessness out there for all the world to see. Remove any doubt about your motives and character. Tell us how we don’t love our country. Tell us how we hate America. Call us all traitors. But only do it if you REALLY mean it, not merely to score rhetorical points. I’m calling you out. Do you really believe, in your heart of hearts, that we are traitors because we don’t agree with you and we don’t agree with this war and the way it’s being conducted. If you have other instances of our treason, cite them. Show us the treason, Scylla.

[Hamlet]

@Scylla

Fine. You cut and paste the part that proves our forces tortured two dozen or more to death, and I’ll apologize.

It’s so cute to see you floundering around in your own stupidity. You can play your “proof” game, critique the cites, and whatever else gets your little Pubbie dick hard, it doesn’t change the fact you’re being a complete and utter asshole. The fact that the ACLU, which reviewed the volumunous documents (and are still fighting the Pentagon to get more) characterized 21 deaths as homicides will not convince you, but you’re willing to call a fellow poster a traitor without proving it in the slightest. The fact that the records indicate “at least eight resulted from abusive techniques by military or intelligence officers, such as strangulation or “blunt force injuries,” as noted in the autopsy reports” will not convince you, but you’re willing to paint the entire “left” with a broad insulting brush. The fact that, in one case, the report said, a detainee died after being smothered during interrogation by military intelligence officers in November 2003 won’t convince you. The fact that in another case cited by the report, a prisoner died of asphyxiation and blunt force injuries after he was left standing, shackled to the top of a door frame, with a gag in his mouth won’t convince you. Hell, even the fact that, to date, there have been more than 400 investigations of detainee abuse, and more than 230 military personnel have received a court-martial, nonjudicial punishment or other administrative action won’t convince you something is wrong.

Despite all that supporting evidence, you have the audicity to call Finn a traitor. It’s disgusting, sad, pathetic, and oh so very much like you.

@Scylla

For the fourth time… and you should really understand this: It is not my part to prove a negative. In fact, it can’t be done. Logically, rhetorically, however you want to put it, the person making the positive statement needs to demonstrate it. The person opposing it does not need to disprove it.

You called Finn a traitor and demonized anyone who disagrees with you. Prove your allegations. Rebut the findings of the ACLU. Show you have at least some good faith interest in the truth, rather than the simple Nuh, Uh, you’ve offered so far.

And all that is besides the point I was making. You get so riled up, so willing to go on the offensive attacking the left, over a poster who reports ACLU findings, and the atrocities at Abu Ghraib get one throw away sentence. You’ve taken a page from the latest Bush playbook to go on the attack while ignoring the huge problems with this administration. “HEY LOOK.” shouts Scylla, “They’re exaggerrating what happened, those traitorous scumbags!!!” Meanwhile all but ignoring the torture and murder of prisoners and the indefinite detention, without due process of others. I don’t know how many different times or ways to say it, but that is seriously fucked up.

[elucidator]

As well, I am under the impression that friend Finn is from England (that which used to be Great Britain…). His loyalties can be therefore fairly surmised to be bad teeth, warm beer, and an inbred, geneticly compromised nobility. Now, if he were to put forth the notion that Princess Di was a brainless skank, that might very well be treason.

[Scylla]

@vibrotronica

So, just to be absolutely straight on this, you stand by your characterization of certain posters in this thread as “traitors.” You believe they are guilty of treason, am I correct?Say it in plain English for all the world to see. Call a traitor. Call elucidator a traitor. Call FinnAgain a traitor. Call jfranchi a traitor. Point out all of the traitors on this board. Do it. Put your shamlessness out there for all the world to see. Remove any doubt about your motives and character. Tell us how we don’t love our country. Tell us how we hate America. Call us all traitors. But only do it if you REALLY mean it, not merely to score rhetorical points. I’m calling you out. Do you really believe, in your heart of hearts, that we are traitors because we don’t agree with you and we don’t agree with this war and the way it’s being conducted. If you have other instances of our treason, cite them. Show us the treason, Scylla.

Now you’re really turning me on. Are you sure you’re not a girl?

[Scylla]

@Hamlet

You can play your “proof” game, critique the cites, and whatever else gets your little Pubbie dick hard, it doesn’t change the fact you’re being a complete and utter asshole.

It’s not particularly a surprise at this stage that you’re not interested in things like proof.

The fact that the ACLU, which reviewed the volumunous documents (and are still fighting the Pentagon to get more) characterized 21 deaths as homicides will not convince you,

That’s not a fact. They were characterized as homicides in the autopsy reports by the army, not by the ACLU. How you get from the documented fact that a homicide occured to “These people died as a result of torture by US Forces” is an explanatory gap.

Simply assuming it is stupid, irresponsible, treacherous, slander.

Fill the gap and you have something worth listening to.

but you’re willing to call a fellow poster a traitor without proving it in the slightest.

Not only is it proven, the poster agreed to the condition beforehand. To paraphrase, I said “prove this and I will never say another word in support of the war, fail to do so and I will consider you a traitor for spouting slanderous unproven allegations.” He said “Deal.”

The fact that the records indicate “at least eight resulted from abusive techniques by military or intelligence officers, such as strangulation or “blunt force injuries,” as noted in the autopsy reports” will not convince you,

We looked at those reports, you and I. Unlike you, I actually tried to find the parts where it says that in the reports. I could not. Oddly, those reports don’t seem to be available.

Like I said before, please look. Find the part where it says "at least eight resulted from abusive techniques by military or intelligence officers, such as strangulation or “blunt force injuries.”

Cite that for me in a report, please.

but you’re willing to paint the entire “left” with a broad insulting brush.

Absolutely.

The fact that, in one case, the report said, a detainee died after being smothered during interrogation by military intelligence officers in November 2003 won’t convince you.

Here’s the problem. This was said before. I responded to it. You ignored the response, and now you’re repeating it.

What I said was:

"I’m glad you brought that up. I saw that, and I looked for it. It’s listed on this page:

http://action.aclu.org/torturefoia/released/102405/

According to that it’s documents 3220-27 and 3305. Those documents though are not available to look at on that page for some reason.

So, I clicked on the link that says “More Torture Documents Released Under FOIA” at the top of the page.

From that page I clicked on “documents the government did not want you to see.”

That page brought me back to the first page where the document wasn’t available.

So, since I can’t actually look at the document and see the context, I can’t really comment on it.

Take a look and see if you can find it. I did see that one, and did look"
“The fact that in another case cited by the report, a prisoner died of asphyxiation and blunt force injuries after he was left standing, shackled to the top of a door frame, with a gag in his mouth won’t convince you.”

Show me that autopsy report.

Hell, even the fact that, to date, there have been more than 400 investigations of detainee abuse, and more than 230 military personnel have received a court-martial, nonjudicial punishment or other administrative action won’t convince you something is wrong.

That’s not true. It’s simply not the subject were debating. What we’re debating is whether the statement that our forces have tortured dozens to death can be factually supported and reasonably made.

It appears that it can’t. You seem to be trying to change the subject to something else.

Despite all that supporting evidence, you have the audicity to call Finn a traitor. It’s disgusting, sad, pathetic, and oh so very much like you.

That’s not supporting evidence for torturing dozens to death. It’s evidence of other things.

You called Finn a traitor and demonized anyone who disagrees with you. Prove your allegations.

You’re really having a problem with this concept. For the fifth time, the person making the statement needs to prove it. It is not for me to disprove, merely to accept proof.

Rebut the findings of the ACLU. Show you have at least some good faith interest in the truth, rather than the simple Nuh, Uh, you’ve offered so far.

There’s nothing to rebut. The autopsy reports that are available on that website do not support the conclusions. It’s that simple.

And all that is besides the point I was making. You get so riled up, so willing to go on the offensive attacking the left, over a poster who reports ACLU findings, and the atrocities at Abu Ghraib get one throw away sentence. You’ve taken a page from the latest Bush playbook to go on the attack while ignoring the huge problems with this administration. “HEY LOOK.” shouts Scylla, “They’re exaggerrating what happened, those traitorous scumbags!!!” Meanwhile all but ignoring the torture and murder of prisoners and the indefinite detention, without due process of others. I don’t know how many different times or ways to say it, but that is seriously fucked up.

I don’t understand how you can admit they are lies and exagerations and at the same time expect me to take them seriously.