Bush: "We Do Not Torture"

[kumquatq3]

Just a question.  What difference, exactly does it make whether or not Thousands of unreleased torture photos (cited by rumsfeld  on the senate floor, btw)  were actually in the Defense department's hands?

 

Hmm?

 

Why in the WORLD, are you ignoring the MASSIVE multi point rebuttals to your every argument and just clinging to this ABSOLTELY irrelevant...thing?

 

Hmm?

 

To prove you wrong, I like taking out your initial arguements, and working my way down to your smaller ones.

 

And it matters, because you claimed something, you mocked me when I asked for a source, and then the source you provided disproved your own claim.

 

So it's funny and important

[Yrkoon]

Just a question.  What difference, exactly does it make whether or not Thousands of unreleased torture photos (cited by rumsfeld  on the senate floor, btw)  were actually in the Defense department's hands?

 

Hmm?

 

Why in the WORLD, are you ignoring the MASSIVE multi point rebuttals to your every argument and just clinging to this ABSOLTELY irrelevant...thing?

 

Hmm?

 

To prove you wrong, I like taking out your initial arguements, and working my way down to your smaller ones.

 

And it matters, because you claimed something, you mocked me when I asked for a source, and then the source you provided disproved your own claim.

 

So it's funny and important

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The source I provided did not dispute my claim (which, by the way, was a rebuttal to Shadowpaladin's attempt to cast doubt on the validity of some of the released torture photos...and nothing more)

 

Scroll back and learn the concept of timelines and reply quotes. Thanks.

 

Ps. Did you or did you NOT dispute the THOUSANDS claim? And did I or did I NOT link you to an artile which has Rumsfeld specifically putting the number of unreased photos in the THOUSANDS?

Edited November 15, 2005 by Yrkoon

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

The source I provided did not dispute my claim  (which, by the way, was a rebuttal to Shadowpaladin's attempt to cast doubt on the validity of some of the released torture photos)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Waste of time since those photo's I was refering to were mock up's and caused the resignation of a noted tabloid journalist (editor) to boot.

Edited November 15, 2005 by ShadowPaladin V1.0

[kumquatq3]

o, and:

 

PLEASE STOP AVODING OUR ORIGINAL ARGUEMENT:

 

You said the congress saw "THOUSANDS" of photos and are surpressing them

 

While, if you search the article (I encourage EVERYONE to search it to verify what I'm saying), only meantions "THousands" in reference to the pictures once, which is:

 

"Pentagon officials also have told lawmakers that thousands of other damning photos, not yet publicized, may exist outside the Defense Department's control."

 

"Outside of 'their' control" and "may exist" doesn't match your claim of:

 

Yrkoon: "For that matter, there are THOUSANDS of photos that our government has, and that our Senators have seen and confirme"

 

again, do you have ANY evidence to support your origianl claim?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You didn't claim "Severe" being in the torture definition was "BS"?

 

 

and whats this "Poland" I hear so much about?

Edited November 15, 2005 by kumquatq3

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

It's a waste of time until someone comes up with a definition anyway. Like you ,or was it Hades said locking someone up does cause mental harm and that is under the broad definition of torture.

 

Parading people around naked, might be humiliating, but It dosnt really qualify as what I would call torture.

[Volourn]

"{and then the source you provided disproved your own claim."

 

Don't be surprised, K. This happens all the time with Yrkoon's 'soruces'. He uses a lot of sources; but at least 25% of them usually end up opposing his claims.

 

R00fles!

[Yrkoon]

It's a waste of time until someone comes up with a definition anyway. Like you ,or was it Hades said locking someone up does cause mental harm and that is under the broad definition of torture.

 

Parading people around naked, might be humiliating, but It dosnt really qualify as what I would call torture.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Well first off, our congress is in the process of establishing (or should I say RE-establishing) a definition of torture and also barring ANY use of it regardless of circumstance. Unfortunately, there's a president who's promising to veto it and a vice president who, just last week, went to congress and tried to argue AGAINST banning torture as an option for our CIA

 

What's that tell you?

 

Second, Parading people around naked, is degrading, and some would say inhuman and abusive, which is part of the US definition of torture.

 

It's also HARDLY the scope of what we've been caught red-handed doing to detainees. So why bring it up, uless you're attempting to build a straw man?

Edited November 15, 2005 by Yrkoon

[kumquatq3]

Second, Parading people around naked, is degrading, and some would say inhuman and abusive, which is part of the US definition of torture.

 

Is it "severe" tho?

 

It might be, but have fun proving it in legal terms

 

hence why the charges were not brought, again

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Second, Parading people around naked, is degrading, and some would say inhuman and abusive, which is part of the US definition of torture.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

It's something they routinely do to their own troops too.

 

Locking someone up can be defined as torture if you so choose. Under those broad definitions it's a pointless debate.

[Yrkoon]

Second, Parading people around naked, is degrading, and some would say inhuman and abusive, which is part of the US definition of torture.

 

Is it "severe" tho?

 

It might be, but have fun proving it in legal terms

 

hence why the charges were not brought, again

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

^Doesn't have to be severe. It merely has to cause non incidental suffering

 

Hence the word *OR* after the word pain.

 

remember, kumquatq3, READING COMPREHENSION.

 

By the way, parading people around naked is hardly the scope of what we've been caught red-handed doing, so why bring it up, unless you're trying to build a straw man?

Edited November 15, 2005 by Yrkoon

[Yrkoon]

Second, Parading people around naked, is degrading, and some would say inhuman and abusive, which is part of the US definition of torture.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

It's something they routinely do to their own troops too.

 

Locking someone up can be defined as torture if you so choose. Under those broad definitions it's a pointless debate.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

It's also HARDLY the scope of what we've been caught red-handed doing to detainees. So why bring it up, unless you're attempting to build a straw man?

[kumquatq3]

^Doesn't have to be severe.  It merely has to cause non incidental suffering

 

Hence the word *OR* after the word pain.

 

remember, kumquatq3, READING COMPREHENSION.

 

 

Yes it does!!!!

 

"intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering"

 

That clearly means severe is applied to ALL three!

 

remember, Yrkoon, READING COMPREHENSION

 

unless you think causing any kind of sufferiung is torture. I purposely annoyed my sister a bunch of times, it wasn't torture tho (she says otherwise)

 

Who's your daddy?

Edited November 15, 2005 by kumquatq3

[kumquatq3]

o, and:

 

PLEASE STOP AVODING OUR ORIGINAL ARGUEMENT:

 

You said the congress saw "THOUSANDS" of photos and are surpressing them

 

While, if you search the article (I encourage EVERYONE to search it to verify what I'm saying), only meantions "THousands" in reference to the pictures once, which is:

 

"Pentagon officials also have told lawmakers that thousands of other damning photos, not yet publicized, may exist outside the Defense Department's control."

 

"Outside of 'their' control" and "may exist" doesn't match your claim of:

 

Yrkoon: "For that matter, there are THOUSANDS of photos that our government has, and that our Senators have seen and confirme"

 

again, do you have ANY evidence to support your origianl claim?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You didn't claim "Severe" being in the torture definition was "BS"?

 

 

and whats this "Poland" I hear so much about?

Edited November 15, 2005 by kumquatq3

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

It's also HARDLY the scope of what we've been caught red-handed doing to detainees. So why bring it up, unless you're attempting to build a straw man?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Who exactly are WE ?

 

It's funny you know. I was recently listening to a muslim saying they were fed up of all being branded as terrorists just because some muslims happened to be terrorists.

 

Looks like your guilty of the same crime from the other direction.

[kumquatq3]

If the US wasn't the same as Hitler or Stalin we wouldn't have destroyed and decimated an entire culture and people.  There is more blood on the foundations of the US than there ever was on Nazi Germany.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The decimation of the native americans began way before the foundation of the actual US, but then again, the US has got much blood on their hands when it comes to this issue

 

 

THE US????????

 

The way I remember it, the Euros were coming over here killing them long before we were a country!!!!

Edited November 15, 2005 by kumquatq3

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

The decimation of the native americans began way before the foundation of the actual US, but then again, the US has got much blood on their hands when it comes to this issue - I won't argue that.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Spanish started it as I recall.

[Yrkoon]

^Doesn't have to be severe.  It merely has to cause non incidental suffering

 

Hence the word *OR* after the word pain.

 

remember, kumquatq3, READING COMPREHENSION.

 

 

Yes it does!!!!

 

"intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering"

 

That clearly means severe is applied to ALL three!

 

 

 

Prove it.

Edited November 15, 2005 by Yrkoon

[Musopticon?]

To Potent:

Our lovely Christobal Colon brought the light of europan civilization to the poor natives, yes.

Edited November 15, 2005 by Musopticon?

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

To Potent:

Our lovely Christobal Colon brought the light of europan civilization to the poor natives, yes.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Along with some comunicable diseases.

[Musopticon?]

To Potent:

Our lovely Christobal Colon brought the light of europan civilization to the poor natives, yes.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Along with some comunicable diseases.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I was sorta inlcuding those little joys to the whole enlightement.

 

Poor natives weren't strong enough for our ways.

[kumquatq3]

WTF

 

That is NOT the wording of  Section 2340!

 

 

It isn't???? It IS what you posted previously:

 

The memo, on page 2, states the OFFICIAL legal definition of torture as it appears in sections 2340-2340A of title 18 of the US code. (rather than the grotesque excuse of an interpretation that the OLC gives) And the definition is:

 

(An) Act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) within his custody or physical control

 

So explain to me: Are you lying now or were you lying before?

 

I've always wanted my own bitch

 

EDIT: OOOOOOOOOOOOPS you didn't edit your post fast enought

 

He changed it to

Prove it

Edited November 15, 2005 by kumquatq3

[Yrkoon]

WTF

 

That is NOT the wording of  Section 2340!

 

 

It isn't???? It IS what you posted previously:

 

The memo, on page 2, states the OFFICIAL legal definition of torture as it appears in sections 2340-2340A of title 18 of the US code. (rather than the grotesque excuse of an interpretation that the OLC gives) And the definition is:

 

(An) Act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) within his custody or physical control

 

So explain to me: Are you lying now or were you lying before?

 

I've always wanted my own bitch

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

excuse me, but I edited my post before you posted this.

 

You are once again dishonestly dodging.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

I was sorta inlcuding those little joys to the whole enlightement.

 

Poor natives weren't strong enough for our ways.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I'll just say EEWWWWW and leave it at that.

 

Actually I've always rather enjoyed their version of spiritualism.

[kumquatq3]

WTF

 

That is NOT the wording of  Section 2340!

 

 

It isn't???? It IS what you posted previously:

 

The memo, on page 2, states the OFFICIAL legal definition of torture as it appears in sections 2340-2340A of title 18 of the US code. (rather than the grotesque excuse of an interpretation that the OLC gives) And the definition is:

 

(An) Act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering incidental to lawful sanctions) within his custody or physical control

 

So explain to me: Are you lying now or were you lying before?

 

I've always wanted my own bitch

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

excuse me, but I edited my post before you posted this.

 

You are once again dishonestly dodging.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

are you the Iraqi information minister????????

 

you know that I can hit "quote" and start typeing before you edit?

 

 

 

It OBVIOUSLY doesn't mean any intended suferring, as imprisonment is causing someone intention suffering

 

your a joke

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Yes Euros (Spanish) started it and done most of the harm....but Hades is arguing that many of those later took part in the foundation of the US and that the US continued where the Europeans stopped which is I'm afraid true.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yes. Although in some cases it wasnt completely unjustified (although equally in many it was). Top of the list is hunting the Bufalo almost to extinction since it had the biggest knock on effect. Well don't forget all that happened in reality was a name change. Those early US folks were still European with the same sort of disregard for other cultures.

 

Same thing probably would have happened in Australia if not for the more challenging wilderness. The aboriganes would kill people for trespassing (knowingly or not) on some of their more sacred sites.