- 2,477
- 11
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2008
Originally Posted by LilStarZ07
Originally Posted by AddictedToFreshKicks
Sean Hannity...
Sean Hannity would be Waterboarded for Charity (Post #4 embedded vid, won't let it in post 1)
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by essential1,
- Start date
lilstarz07
Banned
- 3,227
- 10
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2008
olbermann is more of a douche than hannity is any day of the week ... how is your #1 story about sean hannity? if hes so minuscule why are you talking abouthim? dude acted like this was some breaking O M G news lead story music and all, then gets all serious and issues a challenge to a news anchor ... ... ... imsure there wasnt anything else more newsworthy for olbermann to report on ... thats why i cant take most liberal media seriously ... i dont even like hannitybut at least he doesnt focus 100% of his show to bashing liberals, at least he gets to some type of news ... olbermann parades these people on his show whojust bash bash bash bash bush and hanity and oreilly and blah blah blah ... WE GET IT, move the *@!$ on ...
and last but not least ... WE WATERBOARDED THE MAN WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR PLANNING THE 9/11 ATTACKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! #!% IS WRONG WITHTHAT??????????????????????????? KILL YOURSELF IF YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT
and last but not least ... WE WATERBOARDED THE MAN WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR PLANNING THE 9/11 ATTACKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! #!% IS WRONG WITHTHAT??????????????????????????? KILL YOURSELF IF YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT
- 4,857
- 14
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2008
Originally Posted by LilStarZ07
Originally Posted by AddictedToFreshKicks
Sean Hannity...
- 2,409
- 10
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2007
I would give my hard earned money to see this as well.
- 36,268
- 11,071
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
Well if you want to add fuel to the fire of American Hatred go ahead. If you want to go back on a treaty we signed with many other nations goahead. If you think committing a wrong for another wrong is right go ahead. We don't get at the man who is responsible for 9/11 it makes us look no betterthan them. When we are threatened we have to sell ourselves out, all our ideals, all our moral judgment and all justification for any other country to act likeus. Activities of torture do not make us safer. They make more people on the other side hate us, when we act with a holier than thou do as I say not as I doattitude. So in effect we recruit more terrorists to do a part 2 on the United States. If it is so terrible for Middle Easterners to kill and torture ourcitizens it is wrong to do if we do it.SO KILL YOURSELF IF THINKING WE SHOULD ENDANGER OURSELVES WHEN WE COULD PUT THE MAN IN JAIL FOR LIFE OR GIVE HIM THEELECTRIC CHAIR UNDER OUR OWN LAWS.
Also Olbermann started the show with 10 minutes about a lie about Bush stopping a terror attack with extraordinary interrogation when they couldn't evenkeep the dates straight. And Hannity is #1 story because he is treating this like a joke, like torture doesn't have consequences to the U.S.
We never learned 1 thing from torture that could help us.
It just made us as if not more vicious as the enemy. But since we are the U.S. it is right? NO IT IS NOT RIGHT TO TORTURE ANYONE REGARDLESS.
THIS IS WHERE I WILL GET EXTREMELY LIBERAL (You're welcome Daytona) CONSERVATIVES HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE HELL A SOUND FOREIGN POLICY LOOKS LIKE.
- 8,065
- 118
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2005
Geneva Convention?
- 2,409
- 10
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2007
Also, another reason that Olbermann feels the need to go after Fox News reports is because they get so much wrong. I don't even think they care if whatthey say is actually a fact, they just say what they want their audience to believe.
Case in point, when Bill O was challenged by (I can't remember who) about Nixon shaking Mao's hand not getting the same backlash as Obama shakingChavez's hand, Bill interrupted and denied that Nixon ever shook his hand. To prove that this was false, Olbermann pulled up the video of said event,proving that not only did he shake his hand, but he bowed to him as well.
I'm glad that SOMEONE is watching the things people on Fox say any challenging them because so much of what they say is completely false.
Case in point, when Bill O was challenged by (I can't remember who) about Nixon shaking Mao's hand not getting the same backlash as Obama shakingChavez's hand, Bill interrupted and denied that Nixon ever shook his hand. To prove that this was false, Olbermann pulled up the video of said event,proving that not only did he shake his hand, but he bowed to him as well.
I'm glad that SOMEONE is watching the things people on Fox say any challenging them because so much of what they say is completely false.
- 6,823
- 10
- Joined
- May 25, 2003
It's not torture....
I could show some Liberals torture if they want to see torture....
I could show some Liberals torture if they want to see torture....
Originally Posted by PhilBalla09
Originally Posted by LilStarZ07
Originally Posted by AddictedToFreshKicks
Sean Hannity...
- 36,268
- 11,071
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
it was Alan Colmes (poor guy never gets a break on Fox even when he is right)
Shep Smith is the only thing that resembles objectivity on Fox.
- 36,268
- 11,071
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
TBone if Waterboarding isn't torture you should try it honestly.Originally Posted by TBONE95860
It's not torture....
I could show some Liberals torture if they want to see torture....
Originally Posted by PhilBalla09
Originally Posted by LilStarZ07
Originally Posted by AddictedToFreshKicks
Sean Hannity...
God forbid, but if another country did that to anyone on NT who has fam in the military or anyone in the military, you would scream bloody murder. HYPOCRITE.
Dude and you don't know the half of what tortures Liberals... I listen to O'Really, Hannity, that ignoramous Beck, and Rush from time to time.. Itshould be torture because these guys are killing the conservatives and republicans. Where as Olbermann, Maddow doesn't have that effect on the left orDemocrats.. A dying breed it sucks when it happens...
- 2,409
- 10
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2007
- 2,409
- 10
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2007
- 17,246
- 73
- Joined
- May 19, 2004
It's not torture....
I could show some Liberals torture if they want to see torture....
- 1,241
- 10
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2008
On point.
sirius lee handsome
Banned
- 9,918
- 12
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2009
I sometimes feel bad when dudes pile on you here on NT, but seriously, I don't think you have any clue about the things you say most of thetime. This just adds to the list of stupid things you've written.
I didn't see the Hitchens vid posted up initially, but I just saw that someone beat me to it. It's exactly the example I wanted to post here to showsome of you dunces that it is indeed torture and unusual punishment. I tried to embed a different video showing something similar, but it's not embeddingfor some reason. Here's the link to the video if anyone wants to view it: LINK
lilstarz07
Banned
- 3,227
- 10
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2008
man maybe im off my rocker ... but if you are faced with the man that was responsible for 9/11 and you are seriously fighting for his civil rights, you aredead to me ... i have no words for you, i dont care about you, you should off yourself ... and lets not forget that this waterboarding stopped a terroristattack in LA from occurring ... dont worry essential, when the proper documents get released (hopefully obama doesnt suppress them) and proves that we stoppedterror, ill remember you said the waterboarding did nothing and pm you ...
i mean are people that delusional? and just for the record, hannity and oreilly are arguing for waterboarding ONLY BY PRESIDENTIAL ORDERS ... they arent sayingwe should practice this widespread or every day ... it should be reserved for special occasions, like when we have the man who planned the 9/11 attacks in ourjail cell and we need information ...
people in here talking about a convention ... mother +$%$!$ was it conventional when a terrorist chopped an americans head off? sheik mohammed was in no waypart of any type of agreement on how we should treat prisoners, $$*+ THAT ... when a dude orchestrates a terror plot that results in thousands of deaths, $$*+HIM ... you think those extremists hate us more now cuz we waterboarded a dude? get real, it doesnt matter if we wined and dined that dude there would still beextremists chomping at the bit to fly planes in our !$* ...
and last but not least, i pray every night before i go to bed and one of the things i pray on is that we dont get hit again ... my mother works in dc ... oneof my best friends lost their aunt in NY on 9/11 ... the reason why i care about this @!#% is because being soft with these dudes can potentially bite us inthe !$* ... i dont want to sit here and have to watch tv and wonder if someone in my family just died ... or even worse, not be able to see my unborn childrengrow up because obama thought he could "reason" with dictators who dont give a $$*+ about us ... you got chavez mocking the US in public and peopledefending dude ... i just dont get it ... $$*+
i mean are people that delusional? and just for the record, hannity and oreilly are arguing for waterboarding ONLY BY PRESIDENTIAL ORDERS ... they arent sayingwe should practice this widespread or every day ... it should be reserved for special occasions, like when we have the man who planned the 9/11 attacks in ourjail cell and we need information ...
people in here talking about a convention ... mother +$%$!$ was it conventional when a terrorist chopped an americans head off? sheik mohammed was in no waypart of any type of agreement on how we should treat prisoners, $$*+ THAT ... when a dude orchestrates a terror plot that results in thousands of deaths, $$*+HIM ... you think those extremists hate us more now cuz we waterboarded a dude? get real, it doesnt matter if we wined and dined that dude there would still beextremists chomping at the bit to fly planes in our !$* ...
and last but not least, i pray every night before i go to bed and one of the things i pray on is that we dont get hit again ... my mother works in dc ... oneof my best friends lost their aunt in NY on 9/11 ... the reason why i care about this @!#% is because being soft with these dudes can potentially bite us inthe !$* ... i dont want to sit here and have to watch tv and wonder if someone in my family just died ... or even worse, not be able to see my unborn childrengrow up because obama thought he could "reason" with dictators who dont give a $$*+ about us ... you got chavez mocking the US in public and peopledefending dude ... i just dont get it ... $$*+
- 36,268
- 11,071
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
Give me 5 minutes I'll find the exact document you are talking about.
- 2,409
- 10
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2007
The fact remains that it isn't ok to do things like this, ever. No matter what the circumstances are. He has rights no matter if he is aterrorist, Nazi, Communist, Arab or anything. We only feel that is ok because we are the ones doing it. You can't go against the Geneva Conventions andviolate peoples human rights just because it is a "special occasion." It doesn't work like that.
Of course they have done horrible things to our people, but does that justify our behavior? You want to act the same way they do? They may not hate us morebecause we waterboarded one man, but they do hate us more because we destoryed and occupied/occupy a country that posed no danger to us, or the countriesaround it whatsoever. They also hate us more when we round up innocent people and throw them in illegal jails where they are tortured and the released. Thisbreeds extremism.
I'm FROM New York City. I WATCHED this happen. Only I didn't say, "Lets kill ALL of them!" I asked, "Why would they do this to us?"and the reasons they have are completely valid. They don't warrent a large scale attack like 9/11, but they do have valid grievences. When you imprisoninnocent people illegally or kill innocent civilians you do MUCH more damage than being soft on them ever could.
- 36,268
- 11,071
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
Robert Mueller, Bush FBI Director In 2008: Torture Didn't Foil Any Plots
Now that Bush administration officials have launched a major campaign to persuade us that torture "worked," perhaps it's worth recalling thatGeorge W. Bush's own FBI director said in an interview last year that he wasn't aware of a single planned terror attack on America that had been foiledby information obtained through torture.
Robert Mueller, who was appointed by Bush in 2001 and remains FBI director under Obama, delivered that assessment at the endof this December 2008 article in Vanity Fair on torture:
I ask Mueller: So far as he is aware, have any attacks on America been disrupted thanks to intelligence obtained through whatthe administration still calls "enhanced techniques"?
"I'm really reluctant to answer that," Mueller says. He pauses, looks at an aide, and then says quietly,declining to elaborate: "I don't believe that has been the case."
That stands in direct contrast to %+%+ Cheney's recent claim that torture has been "enormously valuable" in terms of "preventing anothermass-casualty attack against the United States."
You'd think that this sort of thing would throw a bit of a wrench into the Bushies' campaign. But as Charles Kaiser notes, these types of statementshaven't really broken through the media din.
On that score, it's worth asking why the White House and its allies aren't pushing back a bit harder on the Bushies' claims. Yes, this is a debatethat the White House would like to avoid. But Cheney and other Bush administration officials have launched a major campaign here that shows no signs whatsoeverof abating.
Whatever downsides Cheney's constant public appearances hold for the GOP, the Bushies seem to be having some success shifting the debate onto the narrowquestion of whether torture "worked." Shouldn't we be seeing more push-back from the White House or its outside allies?
Now that Bush administration officials have launched a major campaign to persuade us that torture "worked," perhaps it's worth recalling thatGeorge W. Bush's own FBI director said in an interview last year that he wasn't aware of a single planned terror attack on America that had been foiledby information obtained through torture.
Robert Mueller, who was appointed by Bush in 2001 and remains FBI director under Obama, delivered that assessment at the endof this December 2008 article in Vanity Fair on torture:
I ask Mueller: So far as he is aware, have any attacks on America been disrupted thanks to intelligence obtained through whatthe administration still calls "enhanced techniques"?
"I'm really reluctant to answer that," Mueller says. He pauses, looks at an aide, and then says quietly,declining to elaborate: "I don't believe that has been the case."
That stands in direct contrast to %+%+ Cheney's recent claim that torture has been "enormously valuable" in terms of "preventing anothermass-casualty attack against the United States."
You'd think that this sort of thing would throw a bit of a wrench into the Bushies' campaign. But as Charles Kaiser notes, these types of statementshaven't really broken through the media din.
On that score, it's worth asking why the White House and its allies aren't pushing back a bit harder on the Bushies' claims. Yes, this is a debatethat the White House would like to avoid. But Cheney and other Bush administration officials have launched a major campaign here that shows no signs whatsoeverof abating.
Whatever downsides Cheney's constant public appearances hold for the GOP, the Bushies seem to be having some success shifting the debate onto the narrowquestion of whether torture "worked." Shouldn't we be seeing more push-back from the White House or its outside allies?
- 36,268
- 11,071
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
The "torture prevented a west coast 9/11" lie
by Jed Lewison
Thu Apr 23, 2009 at 02:02:03 PM PDT
First of all, the background: No, Karl Rove, Marc Thiessen, and Fox News are not telling the truth when they claim that U.S. torture techniques prevented a'west coast 9/11.'
Rove et all. claim that after CIA water boarding, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed gave authorities information used to foil a plot tohijack an airplane with a shoe bomb and fly it into the tallest building in Los Angeles, the Library Tower (now known as the U.S. Bank Building).
In other words, Rove and his crew say torture saved America from another 9/11.
As Timothy Noah and Daily Kos TV have documented, however, the Rove timetable just doesn't add up. While KSM was arrestedin March 2003, the plot was stopped in February 2002 -- more than a year earlier. Rove's tale could not possibly betrue.
But like any pathological liar, Rove is pushing a lie containing threads of truth.
Rove (and his associate, former Bush speechwriter Marc A. Thiessen) cite a May 30, 2005 memo from DOJ's OLC to the CIA astheir key source.
You have informed us that the interrogation of KSM -- once enhanced techniques were employed -- led to the discovery of a KSMplot, the "Second Wave," "to use East Asian operatives to crash a hijacked airliner into" a building in Los Angeles.
Keep in mind that this is a memo from DOJ to CIA, so "you have informed us" refers to something the CIA told DOJ.
Notice that while the sentence says KSM's torture "led to the discovery of a KSM plot" (the L.A. attack) itdoesn't say that the torture led to the prevention of that attack. Why not? Because the attack had already been prevented in 2002.
In other words, torturing KSM may have allowed the CIA to figure out what had been prevented, but it didn'tactually prevent anything.
Timothy Noah discusses this possibility:
Conceivably the Bush administration, or at least parts of the Bush administration, didn't realize until Sheikh Mohammed confessed under torture that it hadalready broken up a plot to blow up the Library Tower about which it knew nothing. Stranger things have happened. But the plot was already a dead letter. Iffoiling the Library Tower plot was the reason to water-board Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, then that water-boarding was more than cruel and unjust. It was a waste ofwater.
Noah's conjecture seems to be exactly what happened, because in February, 2006, President Bush recounted the foiling of the west coast plot (emphasisadded):
Their plot was derailed in early 2002 when a Southeast Asian nation arrested a key al Qaeda operative. Subsequent debriefings and other intelligence operationsmade clear the intended target, and how al Qaeda hoped to execute it.
So in President Bush's own words, intelligence officials did not know what they had prevented until after they prevented it. (And even that assumes thatKSM was telling them the truth.)
Even though they managed to thwart the attack without using torture, they resorted to torture to discover what they had thwarted -- and only the most sadisticadvocates would consider that a reasonable justification for torture.
by Jed Lewison
Thu Apr 23, 2009 at 02:02:03 PM PDT
First of all, the background: No, Karl Rove, Marc Thiessen, and Fox News are not telling the truth when they claim that U.S. torture techniques prevented a'west coast 9/11.'
Rove et all. claim that after CIA water boarding, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed gave authorities information used to foil a plot tohijack an airplane with a shoe bomb and fly it into the tallest building in Los Angeles, the Library Tower (now known as the U.S. Bank Building).
In other words, Rove and his crew say torture saved America from another 9/11.
As Timothy Noah and Daily Kos TV have documented, however, the Rove timetable just doesn't add up. While KSM was arrestedin March 2003, the plot was stopped in February 2002 -- more than a year earlier. Rove's tale could not possibly betrue.
But like any pathological liar, Rove is pushing a lie containing threads of truth.
Rove (and his associate, former Bush speechwriter Marc A. Thiessen) cite a May 30, 2005 memo from DOJ's OLC to the CIA astheir key source.
You have informed us that the interrogation of KSM -- once enhanced techniques were employed -- led to the discovery of a KSMplot, the "Second Wave," "to use East Asian operatives to crash a hijacked airliner into" a building in Los Angeles.
Keep in mind that this is a memo from DOJ to CIA, so "you have informed us" refers to something the CIA told DOJ.
Notice that while the sentence says KSM's torture "led to the discovery of a KSM plot" (the L.A. attack) itdoesn't say that the torture led to the prevention of that attack. Why not? Because the attack had already been prevented in 2002.
In other words, torturing KSM may have allowed the CIA to figure out what had been prevented, but it didn'tactually prevent anything.
Timothy Noah discusses this possibility:
Conceivably the Bush administration, or at least parts of the Bush administration, didn't realize until Sheikh Mohammed confessed under torture that it hadalready broken up a plot to blow up the Library Tower about which it knew nothing. Stranger things have happened. But the plot was already a dead letter. Iffoiling the Library Tower plot was the reason to water-board Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, then that water-boarding was more than cruel and unjust. It was a waste ofwater.
Noah's conjecture seems to be exactly what happened, because in February, 2006, President Bush recounted the foiling of the west coast plot (emphasisadded):
Their plot was derailed in early 2002 when a Southeast Asian nation arrested a key al Qaeda operative. Subsequent debriefings and other intelligence operationsmade clear the intended target, and how al Qaeda hoped to execute it.
So in President Bush's own words, intelligence officials did not know what they had prevented until after they prevented it. (And even that assumes thatKSM was telling them the truth.)
Even though they managed to thwart the attack without using torture, they resorted to torture to discover what they had thwarted -- and only the most sadisticadvocates would consider that a reasonable justification for torture.
- 36,268
- 11,071
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
So they thwarted the L.A. terror attack in 2002 from the water boarding of KSM.. But KSM was detained in 2003.
They solved the problem in Feb 02... But Bush says they didn't start "enhanced interrogation" (torturing) until Aug 02... So how did tortureprevent this?
TORTURE HAS DONE NOTHING YOU IDIOT
They solved the problem in Feb 02... But Bush says they didn't start "enhanced interrogation" (torturing) until Aug 02... So how did tortureprevent this?
TORTURE HAS DONE NOTHING YOU IDIOT
lilstarz07
Banned
- 3,227
- 10
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2008
i tell you to wait for the document that specifically says the results of the waterboarding that obama has OPENLY suppressed, and you go and get an articlethat REEKS of the left ... good one though lol ... i swear every time i argue with yall left dudes its all the same "look at this article i found"... dont know your !*@ form your elbow ...
and as for this ...
and as for this ...
- 2,409
- 10
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2007
^^^
Good info.
Good info.
- 36,268
- 11,071
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
- 36,268
- 11,071
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
Actually he didn't supress the Memo. The thing about the memo is THAT the Bush chronological dates don't match..
AS IN.....................
So they thwarted the L.A. terror attack in 2002 from the water boarding of KSM.. But KSM was detained in 2003.
They solved the problem in Feb 02... But Bush says they didn't start "enhanced interrogation" (torturing) until Aug 02... So how did tortureprevent this?
By the way we gave Abu Zubida NORMAL INTERROGATION and we found out that KSM was the matermind of 9/11 and helped us catch Jose Pedea who is known as the"Dirty Bomber".. This was before we started waterboarding him 82 times... We didn't waterboard people once we did it many times to people. KSMgot waterboarded over 100 times.