http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/12/washington/12cnd-fisa.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

"After more than a year of heated political wrangling, the Senate handed the White House a major victory Tuesday by voting to broaden the government’s spy powers after giving legal protection to phone companies that cooperated in President Bush’s warrantless eavesdropping program."

LMAO. It's so hard being the majority.

All the hand wringing and teeth gnashing for naught. Do you lefties have any teeth left?

Anyway, Obama voted against of course, but Hillary didn't even bother showing up for one of the most important national security votes of the year. Bravo. And she slammed Obama for not voting for things in his state senate? LMAO again.

This was pretty perplexing really. what a bunch of pussies! kudos for Barak though as he once again proves that along with Paul he seems to be the only legislator in washington with any sembalance of a spine.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/12/washington/12cnd-fisa.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin



LMAO. It's so hard being the majority.

All the hand wringing and teeth gnashing for naught. Do you lefties have any teeth left?

Anyway, Obama voted against of course, but Hillary didn't even bother showing up for one of the most important national security votes of the year. Bravo. And she slammed Obama for not voting for things in his state senate? LMAO again.

Most of us do, just not the ones we elected ...LOL...its sad that I agree with the right on this :(

Which is even more reason to elect Obama president. :D

All the hand wringing and teeth gnashing for naught. Do you lefties have any teeth left?Too many of our elected leaders do not, but congratulations. I'm sure you'll be popping a cork tonight in celebration of the continued evisceration of the Constitution. Well done.

Heh, Mr. Straight Talk voted against the bill, which would ban water-boarding. It'll be interesting to hear his rationale.

Maybe once a month on the second wed. he actually finds a spine?

Heh, Mr. Straight Talk voted against the bill, which would ban water-boarding. It'll be interesting to hear his rationale.

Could it be to help him with the fearmongers vote?

Heh, Mr. Straight Talk voted against the bill, which would ban water-boarding. It'll be interesting to hear his rationale.

I would expect better of you, at least, Thor.

This is no different than the attacks you accuse Akipt of, knowing full well that a bill contains more than one or two focal points. We may all be better served by looking at what was being voted against in addition to the water-boarding ban, rather than playing the Washington spin game.

Most of us have commented at least once or twice about politicians votes on bills only to have someone from the "other side" point out the portions of the bill that make the politicians vote look like the right thing to do. It is funny to now see this kind of posting from folks. Funny in a hypocritical sort of way.


And for the record, I am disgusted at the pace with which Bush has pushed the country from democracy to facsism.

And for the record, I am disgusted at the pace with which Bush has pushed the country from democracy to facsism.


Who are you more disgusted with? Bush, The Congress/Senate or We the people?

Who are you more disgusted with? Bush, The Congress/Senate or We the people?

Bush, the Executive, who bluntly refuses to sign any legislation that does not get written the way he wants it; and,

Congress, for being more concerned with power games and re-election than with upholding the Constitution they have sworn to preserve; and,

the People, for not demanding better of their elected representatives and leader.

I would expect better of you, at least, Thor.

This is no different than the attacks you accuse Akipt of, knowing full well that a bill contains more than one or two focal points. I quite understand that, Byl, which is why I added the line regarding rationale. I expect that he will cite some other reason. But keep in mind that McCain is regularly booed when he voices his disapproval of torture by those he hopes will pull the lever in his favor . Experience over the years has shown his willingness to adapt (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=3610781) to the climate as needed (for another example, consider how McCain has treated his Vietnam experiences in 2000 and 2004 compared to the current election).

As you know, I would hope that he'd hold firm on this topic, in case he is elected.

McCain's statement on his vote -- emphasis mine.

Mr. President, I oppose passage of the Intelligence Authorization Conference Report in its current form.

During conference proceedings, conferees voted by a narrow margin to include a provision that would apply the Army Field Manual to the interrogation activities of the Central Intelligence Agency. The sponsors of that provision have stated that their goal is to ensure that detainees under American control are not subject to torture. I strongly share this goal, and believe that only by ensuring that the United States adheres to our international obligations and our deepest values can we maintain the moral credibility that is our greatest asset in the war on terror.

That is why I fought for passage of the Detainee Treatment Act (DTA), which applied the Army Field Manual on interrogation to all military detainees and barred cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment of any detainee held by any agency. In 2006, I insisted that the Military Commissions Act (MCA) preserve the undiluted protections of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions for our personnel in the field. And I have expressed repeatedly my view that the controversial technique known as “waterboarding” constitutes nothing less than illegal torture.

Throughout these debates, I have said that it was not my intent to eliminate the CIA interrogation program, but rather to ensure that the techniques it employs are humane and do not include such extreme techniques as waterboarding. I said on the Senate floor during the debate over the Military Commissions Act, “Let me state this flatly: it was never our purpose to prevent the CIA from detaining and interrogating terrorists. On the contrary, it is important to the war on terror that the CIA have the ability to do so. At the same time, the CIA’s interrogation program has to abide by the rules, including the standards of the Detainee Treatment Act.” This remains my view today.

When, in 2005, the Congress voted to apply the Field Manual to the Department of Defense, it deliberately excluded the CIA. The Field Manual, a public document written for military use, is not always directly translatable to use by intelligence officers. In view of this, the legislation allowed the CIA to retain the capacity to employ alternative interrogation techniques. I’d emphasize that the DTA permits the CIA to use different techniques than the military employs, but that it is not intended to permit the CIA to use unduly coercive techniques – indeed, the same act prohibits the use of any cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment.

Similarly, as I stated after passage of the Military Commissions Act in 2006, nothing contained in that bill would require the closure of the CIA’s detainee program; the only requirement was that any such program be in accordance with law and our treaty obligations, including Geneva Common Article 3.

The conference report would go beyond any of the recent laws that I just mentioned – laws that were extensively debated and considered – by bringing the CIA under the Army Field Manual, extinguishing thereby the ability of that agency to employ any interrogation technique beyond those publicly listed and formulated for military use. I cannot support such a step because I have not been convinced that the Congress erred by deliberately excluding the CIA. I believe that our energies are better directed at ensuring that all techniques, whether used by the military or the CIA, are in full compliance with our international obligations and in accordance with our deepest values. What we need is not to tie the CIA to the Army Field Manual, but rather to have a good faith interpretation of the statutes that guide what is permissible in the CIA program.

This necessarily brings us to the question of waterboarding. Administration officials have stated in recent days that this technique is no longer in use, but they have declined to say that it is illegal under current law. I believe that it is clearly illegal and that we should publicly recognize this fact.

In assessing the legality of waterboarding, the Administration has chosen to apply a “shocks the conscience” analysis to its interpretation of the DTA. I stated during the passage of that law that a fair reading of the prohibition on cruel, inhumane, and degrading treatment outlaws waterboarding and other extreme techniques. It is, or should be, beyond dispute that waterboarding “shocks the conscience.”

It is also incontestable that waterboarding is outlawed by the Military Commissions Act, and it was the clear intent of Congress to prohibit the practice. The MCA enumerates grave breaches of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions that constitute offenses under the War Crimes Act. Among these is an explicit prohibition on acts that inflict “serious and non-transitory mental harm,” which the MCA states “need not be prolonged.” Staging a mock execution by inducing the misperception of drowning is a clear violation of this standard. Indeed, during the negotiations, we were personally assured by Administration officials that this language, which applies to all agencies of the U.S. Government, prohibited waterboarding.

It is unfortunate that the reluctance of officials to stand by this straightforward conclusion has produced in the Congress such frustration that we are today debating whether to apply a military field manual to non-military intelligence activities. It would be far better, I believe, for the Administration to state forthrightly what is clear in current law – that anyone who engages in waterboarding, on behalf of any U.S. government agency, puts himself at risk of criminal prosecution and civil liability.

We have come a long way in the fight against violent extremists, and the road to victory will be longer still. I support a robust offensive to wage and prevail in this struggle. But as we confront those committed to our destruction, it is vital that we never forget that we are, first and foremost, Americans. The laws and values that have built our nation are a source of strength, not weakness, and we will win the war on terror not in spite of devotion to our cherished values, but because we have held fast to them.

i still cannot fathom how some people think that torturing for example a terrorist will turn them into a magic truth-telling device, incapable of uttering any lie.

I'm unaware of anyone that believes that.

how else could you 'justify' torture?

The same way I approve of dropping the atomic bombs on Japan's cities killing thousands upon thousands of citizens, waterboarding works. As least in the two or three cases it was used.

Beyond that, people say torture doesn't work, but even McCain admitted to giving up secrets as a POW. So you can't say it doesn't work.

You can argue it's not humane... and mostly you're right.

Well.. Lets not get weepy and morally outraged when its used on our men the next time they are captured.

We have now legitimized it for everyone.

Another gem in the Bush Legacy.

i can say it doesnt work, because it doesnt. how do you know waterboarding works? because the bush administration told you? loel.

They already hack their heads off, water boarding must be slightly less dramatic then ....eh?

The threat of drowning is weak compared to actual decapitation....

Heck, it's not even drowning, it's just the threat of it....

Wiggo you could also say the sky is blue, but I wouldn't believe you....

its not just the threat of it, you imbecile, its the simulation of it.

I'm all for simulated decapitation!

They already hack their heads off, water boarding must be slightly less dramatic then ....eh?

Why have any laws at all right? There will always be someone who will violate the law or rule.

Doesn't mean that it isn't a good law.

"we will win the war on terror not in spite of devotion to our cherished values, but because we have held fast to them."

From McCain's speech quoted by Thor. Holding fast to our values means respecting the humanity of those even that we consider our enemies; killing an enemy on the battle field is vastly different from torturing them in a dark secluded room. And water-boarding is torture.

Bush and those under him who engaged in this form of interrogation are guilty of war crimes IMO. But hey, he is the compassionate conservative, ya' know.

Why have any laws at all right? There will always be someone who will violate the law or rule.

Doesn't mean that it isn't a good law.

Apparently the enemy we fight in the middle east follows no law, its obvious.

Apparently the enemy we fight in the middle east follows no law, its obvious.

We may not always be fighting people from the middle east. The biggest mistake would to see things only so narrowly.

From everything I've read/seen, waterboarding is most definitely torture. It simulates drowning to the point where your body actually believes you are drowning. If there was a way to simulate decpitation without actually killing the person, it would go along the same lines.

Is there anything you guys won't make exceptions for as long as it's coming from AMERICA FUCK YEAH!? http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t257/evanluerding/emot-downswords.gif

(I think the insurgents would do well to create a video where they waterboard captured Americans. Then you can decide if you think it's right.)

From everything I've read/seen, waterboarding is most definitely torture. It simulates drowning to the point where your body actually believes you are drowning. If there was a way to simulate decpitation without actually killing the person, it would go along the same lines.



So, if I understand what you are saying, waterboarding is worse than sawing a person's head off.....?

So, if I understand what you are saying, waterboarding is worse than sawing a person's head off.....?

How does it feel to think you are going to die?

How does it feel to now feel like your going to die?

How does it feel to see the light... and then be revived?

How does it feel to rinse and repeat?

No... Jesus Christ.


WE WANT TO BE BETTER THAN IRAN, RIGHT!?

That means going ABOVE and BEYOND what they do. Yes they cut peoples heads off, WE DONT DO THAT. WE ALSO SHOULD NOT WATERBOARD OR USE TORTURE IN ANY FORM. Who cares what Iran does?

We cannot use moral justification for our invasion of other countries if our morals are found to be lacking. Most things are relative. This, I believe, is absolute. America should not torture anyone, PERIOD. I don't give a shit what some backwater countries in the Middle East are doing. You clearly believe America is the greatest nation in the world, so why the fuck are you trying to justify our practices by comparing them to a dictatorship halfway across the world?

So, if I understand what you are saying, waterboarding is worse than sawing a person's head off.....?

You don't understand what he is saying.

I wish we didn't have to incinerate/crispy a couple hundred thousand Japanese and German civilians, but we did. Wishing for something doesn't make it a reality.

I'm not trying to justify anything. I'm just trying to figure out which you think is worse.
So far from what I can gather from your statements, repeatedly bringing a person back from near drowning seems to appall you more than a person having their gourd lopped off with a rusty, dull machette.

Waterboarding is bad, and I don't deny that it's use has garnered more negatives than positives.

However, I can't believe that if you have seen the videos of the beheadings conducted by the enemy, that you think that it is somehow more humane.

Um, alright? (I'm not sure where this business about wishing comes from. If you're trying to make an argument that the ends justify the means that is fine. Unfortunately for us, we are looking forward, not backwards, in regards to issues in the Middle East. It's easy to applaud our decisions in WWII nearly 7 decades later.



Sixee: This is the disconnect between you and most of the posters here. I never said that I found one to be worse than the other. I made zero value judgement on it except that they are both BAD. You, however, managed to draw from this that I somehow thing it's okay to behead people? Honestly, sometimes whats written is all that's there.

I'm not trying to justify anything. I'm just trying to figure out which you think is worse.
So far from what I can gather from your statements, repeatedly bringing a person back from near drowning seems to appall you more than a person having their gourd lopped off with a rusty, dull machette.

Waterboarding is bad, and I don't deny that it's use has garnered more negatives than positives.

However, I can't believe that if you have seen the videos of the beheadings conducted by the enemy, that you think that it is somehow more humane.

Why do you people assume that someone automatically thinks something is more horrible then something else, just because they say its horrible?

You could always say, "Isn't it sad that both sides feel the need to torture prisoners, us with waterboarding, and them with beheadings?"

"We people" will assume that if you aren't pointing out both sides of an issue, it makes sense you are in favor of one, over the other.

You could always say, "Isn't it sad that both sides feel the need to torture prisoners, us with waterboarding, and them with beheadings?"

"We people" will assume that if you aren't pointing out both sides of an issue, it makes sense you are in favor of one, over the other.

And that is a flaw in you

So, if I understand what you are saying, waterboarding is worse than sawing a person's head off.....?

Why would it have to be worse than sawing a person's head off to be torture? What would you do to a man that waterboarded your kid? Would it be torture then?

For something to be torture in your eyes, it seems to you to have to be worse than our enemies does. That's just retarded. They are our enemies for a reason, and if we say, "well this isn't worse than they do to us," as a justification for torture, than yeah our society is doomed.

Your argument for torture is just retarded beyond belief. The fact you would keep trying to state that it's not worse than they do to our captured is just so out of touch with any reason than you are beyond help. There are shittons of things that aren't as bad as death that most certainly are torture. The fact that anyone would argue that waterboarding isn't torture is beyond belief. It may not be lethal, but it definitely is torture.

So we're all acting like the House doesn't exist now or something? That seems to be the message of this thread, along with "Sixee is mentally handicapped."

mentally handicapped, or the greatest troll in the history of the world?!

mentally handicapped, or the greatest troll in the history of the world?!I commend your application of multiple layers of irony in this little post.

domo arigato, mr roboto.

Another quick point of fact.

We prosecuted Japanese Soldiers for war crimes for waterboarding after WW2 (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/02/AR2007110201170_pf.html)


Also.. a picture from the Khmer Rouge atrocity museum

http://revart.blogs.com/minister_of_rants/images/bush_waterboarding_ts10_1.jpg

Seriously... what the fuck is happening to us? How did we get so lost?

Another quick point of fact.

We prosecuted Japanese Soldiers for war crimes for waterboarding after WW2 (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/02/AR2007110201170_pf.html)


Also.. a picture from the Khmer Rouge atrocity museum

http://revart.blogs.com/minister_of_rants/images/bush_waterboarding_ts10_1.jpg

Seriously... what the fuck is happening to us? How did we get so lost?

What happened is fear... Our government realized if they could keep us afraid, they could do anything they wanted.

What happened is fear... Our government realized if they could keep us afraid, they could do anything they wanted.

And the terrorists have won...

However, I can't believe that if you have seen the videos of the beheadings conducted by the enemy, that you think that it is somehow more humane.

What the fuck are you smoking, Sixee?

You get things so twisted, it is unbelievable. Please quote where someone said that decaptitating was more humane than waterboarding, 'cus I missed it.

What the fuck are you smoking, Sixee?

You get things so twisted, it is unbelievable. Please quote where someone said that decaptitating was more humane than waterboarding, 'cus I missed it.

Didn't you hear what he said?

You could always say, "Isn't it sad that both sides feel the need to torture prisoners, us with waterboarding, and them with beheadings?"

"We people" will assume that if you aren't pointing out both sides of an issue, it makes sense you are in favor of one, over the other.

He needs it more clearly or he won't understand.

Found this in an article about our mid east foreign policy, but thought it fit this thread perfect...

If we abandon our ideals in the name of defending them, we defeat ourselves. I have long felt that all the world - including its most troubled regions - would still follow America, if they could only find it. We must rediscover it to them, says US Ambassador Chas Freeman.

mentally handicapped, or the greatest troll in the history of the world?!

That title belongs to Ming from World of Ming, he makes a living trolling.