bpwallace49 Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 -sigh- Are you guys reaslly taking the word of Cheney . . . a guy that has never succeed in ANY post he held in government, and STILL gets a massive compensation paid to him by Halliburton (y'know . . the firm that got all those no-bid contracts to rebuild Iraq at the AMERICAN TAXPAYERS EXPENSE) Arent you two (Az and Perch) AGAINST wasteful govt spending? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted April 20, 2009 Author Share Posted April 20, 2009 -sigh- Are you guys reaslly taking the word of Cheney . . . a guy that has never succeed in ANY post he held in government, and STILL gets a massive compensation paid to him by Halliburton (y'know . . the firm that got all those no-bid contracts to rebuild Iraq at the AMERICAN TAXPAYERS EXPENSE) Arent you two (Az and Perch) AGAINST wasteful govt spending? I'm pretty much against 90% of all government spending that isn't military related. I don't really care for Cheney, but I seriously doubt he'd come out and say what he said on the record unless the documentation was there to back him up. It is to easy to disprove otherwise. You obviously haven't been her long, and don't know the first thing about construction. If you did you would know that no-bid contracts are usually the cheapest way to do construction in a hurry, particularly when what you are building or rebuilding is not clearly defined, as it can be done on a cost plus basis, that way the number isn't inflated with the CYA factor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 -sigh- Are you guys reaslly taking the word of Cheney . . . a guy that has never succeed in ANY post he held in government, and STILL gets a massive compensation paid to him by Halliburton (y'know . . the firm that got all those no-bid contracts to rebuild Iraq at the AMERICAN TAXPAYERS EXPENSE) Arent you two (Az and Perch) AGAINST wasteful govt spending? huh? what the hell are you rambling about? in any case, I don't think cheney's asking anyone to take his word...he's asking for the relevant papers to be de-classified. as for me, I'm just interested to see how it plays out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 “And I've now formally asked the CIA to take steps to declassify those memos so we can lay them out there and the American people have a chance to see what we obtained and what we learned and how good the intelligence was, as well as to see this debate over the legal opinions.” That'd be a first. But how would Cheney actually recognize good int since he's never seen any before? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Since you were obviously there and know the exact reason as to why they did this so much, why don't you fill us in on how much of a waste of time and ineffective it was. Because if we did get information out of him, that would be released as well right? Sure whatever you say. Throw out a plausible hypothesis about torturing someone 183 times that doesn't involve it either being inneffective or being an abuse. I'll listen to reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retrograde assault Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 I have no problem with brutal interrogation if need be. The rest of the world doesn't either if they're truthful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Sacrebleu Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 CHENEY: “One of the things that I find a little bit disturbing about this recent disclosure is they put out the legal memos, the memos that the CIA got from the Office of Legal Counsel, but they didn't put out the memos that showed the success of the effort. And there are reports that show specifically what we gained as a result of this activity. They have not been declassified.” “I formally asked that they be declassified now. I haven't announced this up until now, I haven't talked about it, but I know specifically of reports that I read, that I saw that lay out what we learned through the interrogation process and what the consequences were for the country.” “And I've now formally asked the CIA to take steps to declassify those memos so we can lay them out there and the American people have a chance to see what we obtained and what we learned and how good the intelligence was, as well as to see this debate over the legal opinions.” Thanks for the quote Az. So, Some of you are arguing that Obama disclosing some of the specifics of the torture (which EVERYONE IN THE WHOLE FRIGGIN WORLD knows we do) is tipping off the enemy. Shouldn't you be outraged that Cheney is proposing revealing the actual intel we got from this torture? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Cid Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Thanks for the quote Az.So, Some of you are arguing that Obama disclosing some of the specifics of the torture (which EVERYONE IN THE WHOLE FRIGGIN WORLD knows we do) is tipping off the enemy. Shouldn't you be outraged that Cheney is proposing revealing the actual intel we got from this torture? Since when has Cheney done anything that wasn't self-centered and/or self-aggrandizing? He doesn't care two poopys about this country, never has, never will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 when something like this hits the news, the idea is for us to feel happy or be glad like there is justice in the world and to desensitize us from torture/waterboarding.... the more we see instances where we like it....the more the edge gets taken off of it each time you hear about it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Shouldn't you be outraged that Cheney is proposing revealing the actual intel we got from this torture? Good point. Waiting to hear some responses to this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cre8tiff Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Cheney is in full defense mode. He knows the harsh light of scrutiny is just beginning to shine on the doings of the previous administration. The result of which may not end well for him in the court of history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Irish Doggy Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Did Cheney also ask the CIA to declassify the intelligence that was obtained when someone just said anything to not be waterboarded again and again? Hey, like Cheney said, we're just looking for the truth right? The argument for torture proceeds from a guilty until proven innocent premise. Unfortunately, you can't prove that you are innocent until you've been stripped naked, beaten, half drowned, electrocuted and God knows what else. How about we make suspected terrorists also prove they aren't witches by seeing if they float? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 The irony of Cheney indignantly protesting the apparent release of classified info for political reasons is not lost on me. Seriously. Anyone who gives a crap what Cheney says, as if it isn't always exactly whatever is the best for him personally at that exact moment and devoid of any underlying principle or ethics, is a total sheep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Soon, Obama will realize it matters not how you "treat" these people....they would still break in your house and slit your children's throats while they slept if given the chance no matter what. Obama is acting like an immature child. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Soon, Obama will realize it matters not how you "treat" these people....they would still break in your house and slit your children's throats while they slept if given the chance no matter what. Obama is acting like an immature child. So what you're arguing is that because it doesn't matter what we do, we should be as brutal as possible. Do you have a history of inflicting pain on animals? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 So what you're arguing is that because it doesn't matter what we do, we should be as brutal as possible. Do you have a history of inflicting pain on animals? Of course not...but when the time comes to get info, I have no problem cutting one of these people's throats to show the others what I'm capable of if they don't cooperate. For me, it'd be like sacrificing Vick to show anyone else what will happen to them if they ever do that to dogs again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Let me clarify. If someone flies against the face of all that is basic humanity (aka don't fly planed into building to kill innocent people), do you people really think singing cumbaya to them is going to make them stop. How many times must you get your ass kicked until you start thinking about reality? Are you just going to repeatedly get punched in the mouth every year to keep your high morals intact? Ridiculous. When the terrorists start nuking your cities, you're going to ask why the Government didn't do everything necessary to garner the info it needed to stop them. Or, I guess, you'd better get used to the sweet smell of burnt uranium on your lawn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Can we at least put all the high moral hippies that want to sing cumbaya in one half of the United States and the realistic people that want to do anything they can to stop these crazies in the other half? You guys will die with your morals intact. Congratulations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted April 21, 2009 Author Share Posted April 21, 2009 Thanks for the quote Az.So, Some of you are arguing that Obama disclosing some of the specifics of the torture (which EVERYONE IN THE WHOLE FRIGGIN WORLD knows we do) is tipping off the enemy. Shouldn't you be outraged that Cheney is proposing revealing the actual intel we got from this torture? As long as it does not affect an ongoing operation, then I see no problem releasing the information, and can see where it might actually justify what was done in the court of public opinion. Most of the objections to releasing the "torture" info is that while people thought we were "torturing" enemy combatants, they had no concrete proof. The proof just incite the enemy and by releasing the information, it brings it to the forefront again. Now if we were to release additional information about terrorist operations that were thwarted because of the "torture" these people received, I think that it could help us. There are only two reasons not to release this information, that would be if it is part of an ongoing operations (which isn't likely as the last time this "torture" was used was 6 years ago), or for political reasons. Which is it? I think this all has to do with politics. I think Obama has his eye on the Secretary General's seat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Perch, they'll never release when it was successful and stopped attacks by gaining information. This is purely a childish move for the Bush haters. Plain and simple. I'd hoped Obama would be better than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 (edited) Thanks for the quote Az.So, Some of you are arguing that Obama disclosing some of the specifics of the torture (which EVERYONE IN THE WHOLE FRIGGIN WORLD knows we do) is tipping off the enemy. Shouldn't you be outraged that Cheney is proposing revealing the actual intel we got from this torture? umm, if you'll notice, I wasn't outraged at the release of the legal memos, so I'm not sure why you think I ought to be outraged that cheney is calling for the release of more memos that tell the whole story. isn't what intel we got out of the two individuals mentioned as being waterboarded relevant to this discussion? bush administration critics repeatedly assert that these techniques don't work, they don't get good intel, buying them a steak dinner yields such better results, yada yada. well, is that true or isn't it? do we deserve to know or don't we? you want to call cheney a hypocrite for arguing against the release of the legal memos for national security reasons, but arguing for a release of ALL the relevant memos once those are already public? go ahead, knock yourself out, I won't argue, and I'll even agree there probably IS some hypocrisy on his part. though there is every bit as much hypocrisy in anyone who says the public's right to know overrides any security concerns with the legal memos, but NOT the memos spelling out the results. if this discussion is going to take place in the public arena, because sunlight is the best disinfectant, the people deserve to know, and so on, the info cheney is referring to should probably be made available, should it not? Edited April 21, 2009 by Azazello1313 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Of course not...but when the time comes to get info, I have no problem cutting one of these people's throats to show the others what I'm capable of if they don't cooperate. For me, it'd be like sacrificing Vick to show anyone else what will happen to them if they ever do that to dogs again. a thought process like this is the beginning of the problem.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Can we at least put all the high moral hippies that want to sing cumbaya in one half of the United States and the realistic people that want to do anything they can to stop these crazies in the other half? You guys will die with your morals intact. Congratulations. nobody is invading the US.....or have ever invaded the US.... they have committed unforgivable crimes, but I will prove why I am different than them rather than sink to their level.... I will die, defending my country, not ruining another.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 a thought process like this is the beginning of the problem.. You know what the end of the problem is? Death to all of them. You can't reform them. Or do you think you can talk them out of it? You're not dealing with rationale human beings. Hell, the pit bulls had more social skills than Vick ever will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 (edited) You know what the end of the problem is? Death to all of them. You can't reform them. Or do you think you can talk them out of it? You're not dealing with rationale human beings. Hell, the pit bulls had more social skills than Vick ever will. you're thinking out of fear rather than rationale, the Bush Administration propaganda machine salutes you! edit: say Bush Administration Propaganda Machine 4x fast....it is impossible... Edited April 21, 2009 by Avernus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts