NationStates Jolt Archive

Run and retreat. That is all the left ever does is run and retreat. They don't stand to fight for what they believe in. Cowards.

So the mere fact we have been fighting our cause all over here and outside is 'running and retreating? I would swear but since that's what you are blatantly angling for I guess I'll leave it.

BTW, what does this place do about flamebaiting?

Believe as you wish, the fact of the matter is I know for a fact that much of your information is incorrect and I also believe that your belief structure is some messed up.

Well...since your not the boss of me, I honestly don't care what you think about me in reality. You also don't know me in person which really leaves both of us at a disadvantage. Its easy to characterize someone over the net, its another to do it in person.

So, it's not retreat, it's simply pointless in trying to have a debate or discussion with you, because when you're wrong you'll die before you'll admit it. It's just not worth my time. I've tried a few times with you. It is pointless. In my opinion you're a lost cause.

I've admit when I've been wrong before. However, in this case, I know I'm not wrong. I'm still waiting on what Senator Durbin said constitutes torture.

Then I guess that the High Moral ground called the UN has been swallowed up too since they have not prevented one war nor one genocide. They haven't done NOTHING about human rights abuses anywhere on this planet.
Aside from the obvious fallacies inherent in that statement, it's nice to see you changed your tactics of deflection from OTHER countries that use torture, to the UN this time.

Of course, actually facing the issue head on, answer the questions you've been asked, and perhaps defending your position would be even MORE refreshing...

I've admit when I've been wrong before. However, in this case, I know I'm not wrong. I'm still waiting on what Senator Durbin said constitutes torture.
Would you admit then that it's cruel and inhumane treatment?

That's a flat out lie, and I'm guessing you know it. There's a rich well documented account of UN intervention which clearly falsifies this statement. A good example would be Cyprus.

And a bad example would be....

Kosovo
Somalia
Sudan
Congo
Iraq
Rwanda

Don't get me going on this! :rolleyes:

Ummm the UN told you not to go into Iraq, but you wouldn't listen.

The UN didn't tell us to do anything. Also, do you believe in Soveriegnty or do you think the UN should run everything?

It is difficult to promote world peace when the country with the most WMD is running around kocking over all the sand castles in Iraq. IMHO the world is less safe since the invasion of Iraq. Don't blame the UN.

It is also difficult to promote peace and international security when you have nations that ignore UN resolutions, nations that are committing genocide, and nations that want to see a few nations vanish from this planet. What has the UN done to stop this? Nothing.

Then I guess that the High Moral ground called the UN has been swallowed up too since they have not prevented one war nor one genocide. They haven't done NOTHING about human rights abuses anywhere on this planet. That's a flat out lie, and I'm guessing you know it. There's a rich well documented account of UN intervention which clearly falsifies this statement. A good example would be Cyprus. And a bad example would be....

Kosovo
Somalia
Sudan
Congo
Iraq
Rwanda

Don't get me going on this! :rolleyes:

And yet, your original assertation has been proven false...care to address that?

And a bad example would be....

Kosovo
Somalia
Sudan
Congo
Iraq
Rwanda

Don't get me going on this! :rolleyes:

Well, regardless, you said the UN had never done anything. Which is clearly false. So say whatever counter examples you bring up, you're still a liar.
ha. ha. ha.

And hay guess what, in roughly half those examples, the US didn't want in either!

Would you admit then that it's cruel and inhumane treatment?

Oh I'm sorry that we are supposed to put our prisoners in a hilton. No I won't because they are illegal combatants, well most of them anyway, and they deserve no special treatment.

The UN didn't tell us to do anything. Also, do you believe in Soveriegnty or do you think the UN should run everything?



It is also difficult to promote peace and international security when you have nations that ignore UN resolutions, nations that are committing genocide, and nations that want to see a few nations vanish from this planet. What has the UN done to stop this? Nothing.
Okay Corneliu...so now, we have completely changed the subject from allegations of torture to the effectiveness or lack thereof of the UN.

You are avoiding the topic, refusing to answer questions, refusing to actually stay on track, throwing up everything you can in the way of actually giving a straight answer.

You can continue doing this, and lose all credibility, or perhaps you can deal with the issue at hand?

It is also difficult to promote peace and international security when you have nations that ignore UN resolutions,
Nations like the US.

It is also difficult to promote peace and international security when you have nations that ignore UN resolutions, nations that are committing genocide, and nations that want to see a few nations vanish from this planet. What has the UN done to stop this? Nothing.

It'd help if the US stopped fouling it every chance they get.

Well, regardless, you said the UN had never done anything. Which is clearly false. So say whatever counter examples you bring up, you're still a liar.
ha. ha. ha.

And yet Turkey and Greece are still at eachothers throats over it. They have settled disputes themselves and not via the UN. Much like Pakistan and India have done since the late 40s.

And hay guess what, in roughly half those examples, the US didn't want in either!

We did in most of them. Iraq and Kosovo comes to mind. For the rest, we'll never know if we did or not.

Nations like the US.

And what resolution did we violate? I didn't know we had a resolution on us. When did that pass?

It'd help if the US stopped fouling it every chance they get.

It'll help if the UN followed its own charter as well. The UN don't follow its own charter.

Oh I'm sorry that we are supposed to put our prisoners in a hilton. No I won't because they are illegal combatants, well most of them anyway, and they deserve no special treatment.

They still get it. Or is blasted music, solitary chained confinement and lack of legal cover par for the course in the US?

I'm reminded of the 'Colditz hotel' poster here :p

What's to condemn? Durbin is right--the sorts of things described by our own government are similar in kind to what happened in the very places Durbin named. So we're not doing them on the same scale--big fucking deal--we shouldn't be doing them at all. We're supposed to be better than that, and that's the point Durbin made, and made effectively. It's too bad that you people can't see beyond your blind loyalty to the Bush regime to realize that they've destroyed what good will we once had in the world. You better wake up.

hmmmm

difference: the nazis, stalin and pol pot MURDERED MILLIONS OF SUCH PRISONERS.

since time immemorial terror suspects have been treated roughly, if not murdered/tortured.

Is torture right? Of course not.

Are we torturing them?

Define torture first, then let's see.

One thing's certain: we are NOT CLOSE TO the regimes of Hitler, Stalin or Pol Pot in terms of big-picture/end-product treatment of detainees. THEY EAT BETTER FOOD THAN I DO, for cripes sakes! Have you read a sample Guantanamo menu? It's a freaking 3-star restaurant. We respect the no-pork diet. Sheesh!

Such horrible torture!

They still get it. Or is blasted music, solitary chained confinement and lack of legal cover par for the course in the US?

I'm reminded of the 'Colditz hotel' poster here :p

Since we punish those that do torture on prisoners, there is legal cover :rolleyes:

Would you admit then that it's cruel and inhumane treatment?
No more (and actually a good deal less) cruel and inhumane than not sleeping for days because of loud, constant shelling/gunfire, living in constant fear of death, having little food, no running water, no temperature control at all, no medical care at all, no vermin control at all... You know, life as an "insurgent" in Iraq (hell, life as a US Grunt in Iraq for that matter...)

They bought into this. Period.

It'll help if the UN followed its own charter as well. The UN don't follow its own charter.
Is it just me, or is this sounding more and more desparate...HEY GUYS, LOOK AT THE UN! STOP LOOKING AT THE US! :rolleyes:

And what resolution did we violate? I didn't know we had a resolution on us. When did that pass?
I was waiting for this. I do apologise though, you aren't in violation of any resolutions, it's more like, what resolutions did you cause to NOT be passed:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9083881&postcount=110
And you're still avoiding the issue. This isn't a UN thread. We all see this by the way...you're not fooling anyone...

The UN didn't tell us to do anything. Also, do you believe in Soveriegnty or do you think the UN should run everything?
Of course I believe in sovereignity and so does the UN. If you don't believe me, read the UN Charter. The US on the other hand, obviously doesn't give a damn about sovereignity, or else they wouldn't have invaded Iraq. There were peaceful ways of resolving this issue and the US would have none of that.

It is also difficult to promote peace and international security when you have nations that ignore UN resolutions, nations that are committing genocide, and nations that want to see a few nations vanish from this planet. What has the UN done to stop this? Nothing.
You have the US vetoing many resolutions that promote peace, the reduction of arms, the installation of basic human rights, and protection of the environment.

If the US turned a focus to peaceful measures instead of looking for wars, the UN would be much stronger and the US would be much more respected on the world stage. The US has spent $176 Billion in Iraq, teaching the world that it is right to kill innocent people to stop the killing of innocent people. If that money had been spent solely on humanitarian causes, the US could have erradicated world poverty for 7 years.

I was waiting for this. I do apologise though, you aren't in violation of any resolutions, it's more like, what resolutions did you cause to NOT be passed:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9083881&postcount=110

Conspicous that most of them are aimed at Israel. We uphold their right to self defense. I wish the rest of the world sees it as self defense too because that is precisely what it was.

And you're still avoiding the issue. This isn't a UN thread. We all see this by the way...you're not fooling anyone...

I'm not trying to fool anyone.

So you have no concept of unjust laws? Wasn't your nation created on the basis of resisting unjust laws?
Strange that.

What's an unjust law? Is it unjust to get information from someone who could save lives? I don't think so. Is it unjust for some form of tortures to be allowed? I don't think so. Is it unjust to disallow someone to drink and drive? No, that's just. Is it unjust to allow people to speed over the speedlimit? As long as they aren't driving wrecklessly(weaving in and out of traffic) I don't see why we need a speed limit, yet we still do. Should cigarettes be sold only to people over 18? I think they should. I have concepts of just and unjust law. It's just your opinion differs from mine, and i don't think the form of torture they are sanctioned(sp, jeez, forgot how to spell) to use is unjust. Yes it was formed on that ;), as stated earlier, i don't see sanctioned torture unjust.


Originally Posted by Mirchaz
as i said, it's hard to give just a yes or no answer. You see it as a human rights violation as compared to what's happene under Saddam, what's happened in Rwanda and all the other historic things that have been mentioned (and are currently going on). But me, i don't think they are the same.


Are you talking to yourself or me? Because the bolded part of your quote is the exact opposite of what I personally believe or what I have stated here.

You can't compare them and have one form of torture turn out rosier than the other. It's torture. Period. Maybe it makes you 'gentler' than other torturers...but certainly NO BETTER.
the bolded part i said was you. You say you don't believe that the same human rights violation under Saddam is the human rights violations of the US, YET, you state your setence in purple, to you they are the same.

and with that, it's beer-30 and happy hour is calling my name. May reply to more posts tonight, but most likely will be Monday. Hasta.

the bolded part i said was you. You say you don't believe that the same human rights violation under Saddam is the human rights violations of the US, YET, you state your setence in purple, to you they are the same.


I'm sorry...unless you make this clearer, I can't respond. I think you've read my position incorrectly, but I'm not really sure, since can't make out what you are saying here.

Is it just me, or is this sounding more and more desparate...HEY GUYS, LOOK AT THE UN! STOP LOOKING AT THE US! :rolleyes:
One of his favourite tactics for sure. :eek:

Of course I believe in sovereignity and so does the UN. If you don't believe me, read the UN Charter. The US on the other hand, obviously doesn't give a damn about sovereignity, or else they wouldn't have invaded Iraq. There were peaceful ways of resolving this issue and the US would have none of that.

Peace wasn't working with Iraq. Your not fooling anyone with that line :rolleyes: As for peace, why hasn't there been a peace settlement in regards to the Arab/Israeli conflict? The Israelis want peace! Oh wait, the palestinians don't. Anyway, things have calmed down there so maybe they'll work it out.

You have the US vetoing many resolutions that promote peace, the reduction of arms, the installation of basic human rights, and protection of the environment.

And most of those were aimed at Israel. Nice try and please come again.

If the US turned a focus to peaceful measures instead of looking for wars, the UN would be much stronger and the US would be much more respected on the world stage.

If the UN cared, then why don't nations follow through? Apparently none of the Non-align movement cares. The Arab League doesn't care either. The only ones that seem to care are the US and Britain.

The US has spent $176 Billion in Iraq, teaching the world that it is right to kill innocent people to stop the killing of innocent people.

As opposed to say, the number killed by Saddam Hussein? As opposed to say, the number killed by the insurgents? How many civilians have the terrorists killed? More than we have I can tell you that.

If that money had been spent solely on humanitarian causes, the US could have erradicated world poverty for 7 years.

This has got to be the most ignorant statement I think I heard you say in all my time here CanuckHeaven.

Conspicous that most of them are aimed at Israel. We uphold their right to self defense. I wish the rest of the world sees it as self defense too because that is precisely what it was.



I'm not trying to fool anyone.
I knew I shouldn't have fed the trolls:)

Let's get back on track, shall we? Drop the UN, or get another thread. Deal with the issues in THIS one.

I knew I shouldn't have fed the trolls:)

Let's get back on track, shall we? Drop the UN, or get another thread. Deal with the issues in THIS one.

WHat he said on the senate floor doesn't constitute the word torture.

One of his favourite tactics for sure. :eek:
I'm going to stop responding to him, since he refuses to actually answer any of the direct questions he's been asked, choosing instead to grasp at straws and find some other argument...

I'd do the same if I were you...no point in expending energy for no reason.

The only logical reason for their actions is a pure hatred for the US. They say they don't support the war, but support the troops? My BS detector explodes everytime they say that. These people are pathologically enraged at the President, and everything that this country does and/or stands for. These people really are mentally deficient. How could you hate someone so much that your hatred takes over your life. My God!

Yes, there's no such thing as just, you know, wanting fair treatment for all humanity. Nope. Not at all. Everyone has a political agenda, and if they want people to be treated well, they hate the United States and everything about it. Yep. Sure.

Do you /really/ believe that? That people, /any/ people, don't deserve to be humanely treated? I don't care /what/ they've done, inhumane treatment - whether you call it torture or cruel and degrading punishment, or parsnips for all I care - is /wrong/. If something is wrong, there is /no/ justification for it. No, okay, I'll take that back in light of the world we live in. If something is wrong, it should not be done except in the case of dire need. That means that yes, torture /can/ be acceptable... if a nuclear device is known to be located in your city, and you capture the man who planted it, then yes, do whatever you need to. But this? No.

Okay, class, repeat after me: 'THese people are PRISONERS OF WAR.' They are also "Unlawful Combatants". This means they have NO RIGHTS. Under wartime conditions, the UN declaration has no force of law. as Unlawful combatants, these gents are not protected by teh Geneva Conventions.

Then the UN, the Geneva Conventions, and the US Government are wrong. Repeat after me: "These people are human beings, and deserve to be treated as such." No? If you can't agree to that, then we have fundamentally different points of view, and I can't continue discussing this with you, because it will get nowhere. We're just not close enough in mindset to ever convince each other.

WHat he said on the senate floor doesn't constitute the word torture.
So your argument NOW is...

...the torture being used is

...NOT torture.

Very trite.

Just forget it Sinhue. It's over, has been since about page 5...

So your argument NOW is...

...the torture being used is

...NOT torture.

Very trite.

It isn't. Show me where the torture took place

Just forget it Sinhue. It's over, has been since about page 5...
Yeah, but now with the merge, it's even harder to track the arguments:)

It drives me nuts when someone comes in arguing *x*, then when you question *x* they say *g*.

Well, time to go home...have a good weekend all!

This has got to be the most ignorant statement I think I heard you say in all my time here CanuckHeaven.
Why do you consider this an ignorant statement?

The War in Iraq Costs the United States (http://costofwar.com/index-world-hunger.html)

$177,283,706,512

Instead, we could have fully funded global anti-hunger efforts for 7 years.

Why do you consider this an ignorant statement?

The War in Iraq Costs the United States (http://costofwar.com/index-world-hunger.html)

$177,283,706,512

Instead, we could have fully funded global anti-hunger efforts for 7 years.

You do know there are other nations right? We pay our share of it. Do you also know that foods aren't going to the people because people claim its poisoned? *cringes*

It isn't. Show me where the torture took place
No point I guess...I've read your other posts about what YOU think is torture and what is not. Apparently it is a very subjective definition...and any evidence that has already been shown you was dismissed as 'not torture'.

Pointless really. You can say, "It isn't this" but it doesn't make the action any more moral by changing its name.

Statements with which I think we can all agree:

1. Many countries violate people's basic human rights.
2. Violating people's basic human rights is a bad thing.
3. Two (or more) wrongs don't make a right.

Agreed? Yes?

If we all agree on those statements, then why is anyone still using the "all these countries are worse" argument as a justification? Yes, many countries have done worse things than we have - no one's arguing with that. However, that doesn't somehow make the actions of the US completely okay. No one defends a rapist by saying, "Hey, it could be worse! He could have raped AND killed her! Lots of rapists do that! He should be proud of not being as bad as those rapist/murderers! Hooray for rapists!"

And, I mean, honestly, when you're standing up for the US by saying "we're still not as bad as the Nazis" (as one poster did), don't you think your standards have eroded a bit? Once upon a time the US was supposed to be a "city on a hill," an example to the world, and now we're bragging, "Hey, look at us! We haven't killed 6 million civilians for fun yet! Isn't that special? Woooo!" We can do better. We should do better.

hmmmm

difference: the nazis, stalin and pol pot MURDERED MILLIONS OF SUCH PRISONERS.

since time immemorial terror suspects have been treated roughly, if not murdered/tortured.

Is torture right? Of course not.

Are we torturing them?

Define torture first, then let's see.

One thing's certain: we are NOT CLOSE TO the regimes of Hitler, Stalin or Pol Pot in terms of big-picture/end-product treatment of detainees. THEY EAT BETTER FOOD THAN I DO, for cripes sakes! Have you read a sample Guantanamo menu? It's a freaking 3-star restaurant. We respect the no-pork diet. Sheesh!

Such horrible torture!Read my original post--similar in kind, not in severity---then shut the fuck up. Remember--we're supposed to be so much better than the regimes he mentioned that the comparison would be ludicrous, and yet it isn't, not in the eyes of much of the world. We're supposed to be so far above that kind of shit that the mere mention of the kinds of actions we are performing would be considered ridiculous, and yet we're performing them regularly. What does that tell you about our current moral position? It tells me that we're fucked and there's not much we can do about it. We've given al Qaeda and every other terrorist group who's recruiting better propaganda than they ever could have come up with on their own, and asshats like you not only defend it, you applaud it. No wonder we're in such a world of shit right now--people like you are running the show.

Statements with which I think we can all agree:

1. Many countries violate people's basic human rights.
2. Violating people's basic human rights is a bad thing.
3. Two (or more) wrongs don't make a right.

Agreed? Yes?
Don't assume. Many people here will not agree with either 2 or 3.

No point I guess...I've read your other posts about what YOU think is torture and what is not.

I haven't even stated what I consider torture or not. So why don't you show me in this memo what constitutes torture? Oh wait, Durbin hasn't shown us the memo yet.

Apparently it is a very subjective definition...and any evidence that has already been shown you was dismissed as 'not torture'.

Since it wasn't torture, I need to see what else was in that memo that made him compare our troops to those of the Russian Gulags and Nazi Germany.

Pointless really. You can say, "It isn't this" but it doesn't make the action any more moral by changing its name.

Care to show me what constitutes the torture he's talking about?

No one defends a rapist by saying, "Hey, it could be worse! He could have raped AND killed her! Lots of rapists do that! He should be proud of not being as bad as those rapist/murderers! Hooray for rapists!"


BEAUTIFUL!!! :D

Statements with which I think we can all agree:

1. Many countries violate people's basic human rights.
2. Violating people's basic human rights is a bad thing.
3. Two (or more) wrongs don't make a right.

Agreed? Yes?

On point 1: Agreed
On point 2: Agreed
On Point 3: Agreed

If we all agree on those statements, then why is anyone still using the "all these countries are worse" argument as a justification?

Because people point the finger at one and say its bad forgetting that worse has occured. Its not justifying it but putting things into perspective.

Yes, many countries have done worse things than we have - no one's arguing with that. However, that doesn't somehow make the actions of the US completely okay.

Correct! It doesn't.

No one defends a rapist by saying, "Hey, it could be worse! He could have raped AND killed her! Lots of rapists do that! He should be proud of not being as bad as those rapist/murderers! Hooray for rapists!"

True.

And, I mean, honestly, when you're standing up for the US by saying "we're still not as bad as the Nazis" (as one poster did), don't you think your standards have eroded a bit? Once upon a time the US was supposed to be a "city on a hill," an example to the world, and now we're bragging, "Hey, look at us! We haven't killed 6 million civilians for fun yet! Isn't that special? Woooo!" We can do better. We should do better.

Agreed 100%

I haven't even stated what I consider torture or not.
Liar.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9085885&postcount=131

On point 1: Agreed
On point 2: Agreed
On Point 3: Agreed



Because people point the finger at one and say its bad forgetting that worse has occured. Its not justifying it but putting things into perspective.



Correct! It doesn't.



True.



Agreed 100%
I assume the irony is completely lost on you that you have just, with one post, contradicted everything you have previously said.

I assume the irony is completely lost on you that you have just, with one post, contradicted everything you have previously said.

1. Show me where I was justifying torture? I have never justified it
2. Show me where I said that most nations didn't abuse human rights? I listed several that did.
3. Show me where I said that 2 wrongs made a right? I didn't say that either.

As for the rest of my post? How did I contradict myself?

I assume the irony is completely lost on you that you have just, with one post, contradicted everything you have previously said.

To be fair, I think Corneliu tends to the 'It's not torture' rather than the 'They do worse' side of things.

BEAUTIFUL!!! :D

I'm glad you approved. :)

Because people point the finger at one and say its bad forgetting that worse has occured. Its not justifying it but putting things into perspective.

I haven't really seen much evidence that anyone's forgotten that worse things have occurred. At no point that I heard did the senator or anyone on this forum say, "What is happening at Gitmo is as bad as or worse than anything the Nazis/Pol Pot/Stalin/etc. did." What people are saying is more like, "What is happening at Gitmo is the sort of crap one would expect from people like Pol Pot/Stalin/etc., not from a country that claims to be vastly morally superior."

Why do you consider this an ignorant statement?

The War in Iraq Costs the United States (http://costofwar.com/index-world-hunger.html)

$177,283,706,512

Instead, we could have fully funded global anti-hunger efforts for 7 years.

Well, no actually you could not. In the first place, it isn't your money.
In the second, you would demand it be handed over to the United Nations for distribution, which in turn means that it would be pilfered, and appropriated by every leftist cause kofi and company could imagine, himself first. Then a small portion several years down the road may make it's way to a couple of preferred dictators for distribution in a manner consistant with their individual pocket sizes.
I have no doubt your individual intentions are honorable, however, once the politicians get involved the only thing you have left is, good intentions.

I assume the irony is completely lost on you that you have just, with one post, contradicted everything you have previously said.
I do find that extremely ironic and yet sad. Perhaps he doesn't realize what he has typed?

"The VFW's commander in chief, John Furgess, said, "The senator was totally out of line for even thinking such thoughts..."

*shiver*

Welcome to Amerika.

1. Show me where I was justifying torture? I have never justified it
Actually yes you did justify torture and of a very severe nature I might add:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9086178&postcount=174

3. Show me where I said that 2 wrongs made a right? I didn't say that either.
Here ya go:

Actually you can compare them. People are quick to point the fingers at the US for human rights abuses but then say we're making stuff up when we point there's out. They have done far far worse than we have done but yet, no one covers them but when an American does something its front page news for 2 weeks. Hypocracy only goes so far.

When a country takes the high moral ground, they should be prepared to not violate it by doing the same shit to other people? And no, you cannot defend those actions. If anything, the people should be screaming at the politicians to cease and desist in these practices.

Well it appears that you contradicted yourself twice, and two out of three ain't bad. Good job!! :eek:

I'm sorry...unless you make this clearer, I can't respond. I think you've read my position incorrectly, but I'm not really sure, since can't make out what you are saying here.

what i said what that you think the human rights violations are just like the ones that happen elsewhere in the world. and Then you go on to say that no matter the form of torture, it's torture, whether it was done under Saddam or the US, it's still the same (that was the thing in purple). Follow now?

what i said what that you think the human rights violations are just like the ones that happen elsewhere in the world. and Then you go on to say that no matter the form of torture, it's torture, whether it was done under Saddam or the US, it's still the same (that was the thing in purple). Follow now?
No. You HAVE read my position incorrectly. Here it is, again, for you to look at:

1) Torture is wrong.
2) Someone else's 'worse' torture does not justify someone else's 'nicer' torture.

That does not mean I do not see that some tortures are more horrific than others. It simply means, people are using the US as a benchmark for what they can get away with. When countries like the US use torture, even 'nice' torture, it is then seen as justification for others to use torture. Kind of like, "Hey, even the Americans do it...so no one's perfect, we might as well keep it up! They can't say too much about it, considering that they use it too!"

Clearer now?

I do find that extremely ironic and yet sad. Perhaps he doesn't realize what he has typed?
I think it is because of his definition of what is, and what is not, torture.

"The VFW's commander in chief, John Furgess, said, "The senator was totally out of line for even thinking such thoughts..."

*shiver*

Welcome to Amerika.Has anyone run a check to see if the VFW commander in chief's mouth is connected in any way to a brain...any brain at all?

Has anyone run a check to see if the VFW commander in chief's mouth is connected in any way to a brain...any brain at all?

That former VFW CIC is correct in what he said regarding Durbin.