|
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
The reactionary left has descended upon waterboarding as its new case
study in why conservatives are diabolical and without conscience. The sad reality is that conservatives are reacting in the rather conventional manner of going on the defensive. Conservatives need to fight back more vigorously against this community now willing to name even Harry Truman as a war criminal alongside President Bush, Condoleeza Rice, Vice President Cheney, and so many more good citizens. The reactionaries of the Left are celebrating their own unique sense of jingoism that has come to dominate their political community since Vietnam. In this distinct and pathological view of the world, there is only one reality -- America's imperialism. The global human community has ceased to exist for this reactionary community. 'America does not f***ing torture,' in the over heated words of Shepard Smith. For the torture reactionaries, the question can only be if America tortures. The global concept of torture has completely been subordinated to a view that no one tortures in the world except as a genuine and comprehensible response to American imperialism. It is an America in need of God's damning to paraphrase one of its unrepentant spiritual leaders. A more productive and comprehensive study of the question of torture would include: Is it torture to slowly behead someone with a knife as Musab Al Zarqawi did with American ANSWER leader's son Nicholas Berg? Berg's father Michael robotically answered this question by telling the world that George W. Bush killed his son-- completely consistent with ANSWER's reactionary brainwashing. Is it torture for Saddam Hussein and his sons to watch victims in Iraqi prisons witness the raping of spouses or have an electric drill run into someone's ankle bone? Is it torture to discharge an AK-47 into a woman's skull in front of crowds at a Kabul soccer stadium? The prolonged silence and ambivalence of the reactionary left toward such atrocities has created a rhetorical vacuum. The reason the term "neo-conservative" was invented by the reactionary left was to close the door on an ugly divorce within their community between human rights and global politics. The Left largely no longer believes in individual human rights for people outside the United States -- with the possible exception of individuals inside the Gaza strip. The reason Pat Buchannan can sit alongside Keith Olberman on an MSNBC television set is that the paleo-con and the reactionary leftist share an ambivalence for the rights of individuals oppressed by non-American and non-Israeli points of power. For both political stances, the retraction of American power will lead to a world of useful silence wherein we will simply not know or concern ourselves with inhumanity as it may be practiced in the world. It is after all 'their culture.' The mind numbing multiculturalism is the intellectual sedative that has put the struggle for individual human rights to slumber on the Left. Noticeably missing from the discussion of whether water boarding crosses the line from interrogation to torture is analysis of how the decision was made. The Bush administration conducted a legal debate within their ranks and the broader public sphere. That is the most important principal revealed by the CIA memos and the most important contrast principal of Obama's politics in choosing to release only one side of that debate. The reactionary community that fuels the Obama administration does not believe in free and fair debate. They believe that strategic exclusions of information constitute appropriate means for building political power. On the other hand, within the Bush administration, the CIA, the American media, and the public, there was a constant debate about whether water boarding was appropriate. There were no debates in Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Sudan, or dozens of other countries where torture actually does take place. In sharp contrast, the torture enjoyed by families such as the Hussein family of Iraq, was a matter of pure impulsive indulgence and spectacle. There was little or no notion of protecting a public sphere in Iraq. The heads of Iraqi victims were regularly posted outside the homes of victim's families after these spectacles were complete. The adamant refusal of the Olbermans, Stewarts, Riches and other reactionaries to entertain a serious conversation on global torture is one which is veiled in their jingoistic display of the flag. This is America! We don't torture! The sad state of affairs was amplified in the recent 100 day press conference. At this event, President Obama appealed to the idea that the British refused to torture during World War II. The appeal to a foreign government as more moral than America fits easily within Obama's worldview. Obama and his team must have missed this gem from the British press published in 2006 by the Guardian: "Sherman Carroll, of the Medical Foundation for the Care of Victims of Torture, said British authorities should also apologise and pay compensation to survivors. "The suggestion that Britain did not use torture during world war two and in the immediate aftermath, because it was regarded as 'ineffective', is a mythology that has been successfully propagated for decades," he said. "The fact that it took place should be acknowledged. .. . . Others interrogated at the same prison, at Bad Nenndorf, near Hanover, included Nazis, prominent German industrialists of the Hitler era, and former members of the SS. At least two men suspected of being communists were starved to death, at least one was beaten to death, others suffered serious illness or injuries, and many lost toes to frostbite. The appalling treatment of the 372 men and 44 women who were interrogated at Bad Nenndorf between 1945 and 1947 are detailed in a report by a Scotland Yard detective, Inspector Tom Hayward." Obama's misstatement is symptomatic of the community from which he draws his arguments -- reactionary and shallow. The British actually used brutal tactics against Nazis and other rivals in World War II -- including thumbscrews and shinscrews -- and continue to use techniques that most US officials would blanche at in fighting terrorists such as the IRA during the 1980s. Obama's slick answer is typical wishful thinking from the reactionary left which only allows itself to consider American and Israeli roles in torturing the innocent. It is intrinsic to the close mindedness that has descended on the Left regarding human rights as a global struggle. The circularity of the reactionary Left's worldview is one that not only condones torture but encourages it. It is a circularity that helped America look away from the torture of the Khmer Rouge after Vietnam. It helped Clinton look away from Africa after Mogadishu when Hutus took up machetes against their brothers and sisters in Rwanda. It is a view that helps genocide expert and Obama administration aide, Samantha Power see a "monster" in Hillary Clinton when she threatened Obama's path to power, but now she sees an acceptable sovereign seated in Khartoum. The Obama administration would do well to look at the recent example of Democratic congressional members arrested at the Sudanese embassy and less to the shrill jingoism of Code Pink, ANSWER, and Michael Moore. The insular jingoistic view of torture held by the reactionary left is killing us all. http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/..._of_the_r.html |
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
wrote:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/...toric_of_the_r... This guy is out of his ****ing gourd. Why did you bother posting his tripe? |
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
On May 3, 9:30*pm, Spartakus wrote:
wrote: http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/...toric_of_the_r... This guy is out of his ****ing gourd. *Why did you bother posting his tripe? Not only do YOU not even have a "guard", you don't have conscience - the definition of a Liberal Fascist Neo-Commie. |
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
wrote in message
... ... ...Liberal Fascist... Heh. Wearing your ignorance like a badge. Jim |
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
On May 3, 10:04*pm, wrote:
The reactionary left has descended upon waterboarding as its new case study in why conservatives are diabolical and without conscience. *The sad reality is that conservatives are reacting in the rather conventional manner of going on the defensive. *Conservatives need to fight back more vigorously against this community now willing to name even Harry Truman as a war criminal alongside President Bush, Condoleeza Rice, Vice President Cheney, and so many more good citizens. (crap snipped) The fact is you repugs used and supported torture. The same torture we put Japanese in jail for. Hypocrites. |
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
On May 3, 10:55*pm, wrote:
On May 3, 9:30*pm, Spartakus wrote: wrote: http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/...toric_of_the_r.... This guy is out of his ****ing gourd. *Why did you bother posting his tripe? Not only do YOU not even have a "guard", you don't have conscience - the definition of a Liberal Fascist Neo-Commie. I think it is absolutely disgusting that a few enlisted service members were given dishonorable discharges and spent time in military prisons all because of the decisions made by other un-named individuals. |
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
wrote:
wrote: wrote: http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/...toric_of_the_r.... This guy is out of his ****ing gourd. *Why did you bother posting his tripe? Not only do YOU not even have a "guard", you don't have conscience - the definition of a Liberal Fascist Neo-Commie. If you don't understand the situation regarding torture, you are refusing to learn. |
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
On May 3, 7:30*pm, Spartakus wrote:
wrote: http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/...toric_of_the_r... This guy is out of his ****ing gourd. *Why did you bother posting his tripe? You have that right. Obamasux is delusional at best, and probably clinically insane from suppressing and/or dancing around the basic rules of logic and evidence. That his position is rapidly losing support does not seem to keep his reality check from bouncing. |
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
Sigh, how pathetic.
As usual, trying to justify torture by what some barbarians do in other countries. First, it's well-established that torture took place. It is also well- established that the US military ruled dozens of deaths in Bagram as homicides. There is no disputing these easily-accessed facts from their direct sources. It is also well-established that the US prosecuted and punished Japanese military leaders and soldiers for torture for waterboarding our soldiers during World War II. It's also well-established that waterboarding is, as a matter of law, torture, despite some pathetic attempts to re-define the law which hold no legal weight or authority and violate prior treaty obligations such as the Geneva Convention. Moreover, and perhaps most damning, torture is worthless for gaining intelligence. Even the Nazis stopped doing it because it generates so much false intelligence. It's simply a fact that torture is primarily useful for extracting false confessions (which were gotten by the thousands as many "witches" confessed to their "witchcraft" during the Inquisition.) The tortured person simply tells the interrogator what he thinks they want to hear based on the line of questioning, to make it stop. In fact, torture was used extensively to "prove" that Iraq had WMDs that they didn't have. The faulty intelligence gathered this was was at best misleading and at worst deliberate propaganda to sell an war for political reasons. At any rate, only a creep would defend US behavior at Abu Grahib or Bagram. Only an un-American with no clue what our values are. |
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
On May 3, 7:04*pm, wrote:
There were no debates in Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Sudan, or dozens of other countries where torture actually does take place. *In sharp contrast, the torture enjoyed by families such as the Hussein family of Iraq, was a matter of pure impulsive indulgence and spectacle. There was little or no notion of protecting a public sphere in Iraq. The heads of Iraqi victims were regularly posted outside the homes of victim's families after these spectacles were complete. There was no debate here either. The perps hid behind secrecy and did their level best to prevent we, the people, from ever learning about the torture (in at least one comprehensively documented case, totally innocent person tortured to death by the US.) Lying creeps Cheney and Bush, Rumsfeldt, et. al. painted the embarassing actions at Abu Grahib as the actions of a few "bad apples", and let them go to prison for following their Administration's orders. What can you say about these dishonorable men except they are liars and criminals? As far as "they did it!" as a defense for committing a crime, that's just childish. To follow Obamasux's idiotic logic, if radical religious nuts cut off the head of an American, then we ought to start capturing civilians and killing them too. I'm sure the next step is "Well, the Nazis did it, so we can too." Bleh. What a childish morally deficient idiot this Obamasux is. |
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
On May 4, 12:59*pm, Spartakus wrote:
wrote: wrote: wrote: http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/...toric_of_the_r... This guy is out of his ****ing gourd. *Why did you bother posting his tripe? Not only do YOU not even have a "guard", you don't have conscience - the definition of a Liberal Fascist Neo-Commie. - If you don't understand the situation regarding torture, - you are refusing to learn. Spartakus, Would "You" Torture A Terrorist To Save The Lives Of Your Family and Loved Ones ? http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r...5b1437406d3851 http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r...04cbafa70bfbdb |
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
On May 5, 1:00*am, "~ RHF" wrote:
Would "You" Torture A Terrorist To Save The Lives Of Your Family and Loved Ones ? Would you cut off your left arm to save the lives of your family and loved ones? Do you still have your left arm? If so then do you have any family and loved ones? One stupid hypothetical deserves another. Are your blinders of your own making? |
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
On May 5, 11:09*am, wrote:
On Tue, 5 May 2009 05:17:28 -0700 (PDT), Gary Forbis wrote: On May 5, 1:00*am, "~ RHF" wrote: Would "You" Torture A Terrorist To Save The Lives Of Your Family and Loved Ones ? Would you cut off your left arm to save the lives of your family and loved ones? *Do you still have your left arm? If so then do you have any family and loved ones? One stupid hypothetical deserves another. Are your blinders *of your own making? Would you blow up a nuclear bomb in NYC to save your family? You beat me to it. look what happened as soon as the democrats got in and stopped torture. according to rightards everything that has happened to america in the last 2 years was the fault of the democrats, snicker, only a nut cases believe that, but, if that is the case the democrats won the war with islam Says Leading Geopolitical Analyst click on the link for the video. http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker...s set=&ccode= West Has Already Won War with Islam, Says Leading Geopolitical Analyst Posted Apr 30, 2009 07:30am EDT by Aaron Task in Newsmakers Related: ^DJI, ^GSPC, SPY, DIA, EEM, TUR With the Taliban on the march in Pakistan, Osama bin Laden still unaccounted for, attacks against U.S. troops in Iraq rising again and Afghanistan a quagmire, it would seem the war against jihadist Islam is only accelerating in intensity. But what if it's already all over but the shouting? "It is debatable whether the U.S. has actually won the U.S.-jihadist war - but it has certainly achieved its strategic goals," - preventing another 9/11 and avoiding jihadist uprising in the Arab world, George Friedman, founder of STRATFOR, writes in his latest book The Next 100 Years. "The U.S. has succeeded, not so much in winning the war as in preventing the Islamists from winning and, from a geopolitical perspective, that is good enough." Friedman expands up this theory in the accompany video, where we discuss the following: What he calls the "fundamental weakness" of the Muslim world. The likely endgame in Afghanistan, where he says the U.S. "cannot win." The potential for a jihadist uprising in Turkey, which Friedman sees as one of the great regional powers of the 21st Century. The likelihood of Pakistan falling into Taliban control, if it hasn't already. The "real" meaning of Iran's rhetorical threats. Whether Bin Laden is better captured and put on trial, dead, or alive and isolated. And whether Al Qaeda is still able to carry out major terrorist attacks today. |
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
|
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
Gary Forbis wrote:
On May 5, 1:00 am, "~ RHF" wrote: Would "You" Torture A Terrorist To Save The Lives Of Your Family and Loved Ones ? Would you cut off your left arm to save the lives of your family and loved ones? Sounds reasonable to me. There is a guy who cut his own hand off to save himself. Would he have done it so he could save his family? You need to ask him, he has experience cutting off limbs. I wouldn't hesitate. Would you get in a box and go careening down hills at 10 times your natural speed to get food to feed your children? Think about it when you climb into your car to go to work. |
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
On May 5, 12:53*pm, wrote:
On Tue, 5 May 2009 10:45:12 -0700 (PDT), wrote: West Has Already Won War with Islam, Says Leading Geopolitical Analyst Posted Apr 30, 2009 07:30am EDT by Aaron Task in Newsmakers Related: ^DJI, ^GSPC, SPY, DIA, EEM, TUR With the Taliban on the march in Pakistan, Osama bin Laden still unaccounted for, attacks against U.S. troops in Iraq rising again and Afghanistan a quagmire, it would seem the war against jihadist Islam is only accelerating in intensity. But what if it's already all over but the shouting? "It is debatable whether the U.S. has actually won the U.S.-jihadist war - but it has certainly achieved its strategic goals," - preventing another 9/11 and avoiding jihadist uprising in the Arab world, George Friedman, founder of STRATFOR, writes in his latest book The Next 100 Years. "The U.S. has succeeded, not so much in winning the war as in preventing the Islamists from winning and, from a geopolitical perspective, that is good enough." Friedman expands up this theory in the accompany video, where we discuss the following: * * * * What he calls the "fundamental weakness" of the Muslim world. * * * * The likely endgame in Afghanistan, where he says the U.S. "cannot win." * * * * The potential for a jihadist uprising in Turkey, which Friedman sees as one of the great regional powers of the 21st Century. * * * * The likelihood of Pakistan falling into Taliban control, if it hasn't already. * * * * The "real" meaning of Iran's rhetorical threats. * * * * Whether Bin Laden is better captured and put on trial, dead, or alive and isolated. And whether Al Qaeda is still able to carry out major terrorist attacks today. Bush Iraq war and it's shifted focus away from Afghanistan totally destabilized South Asia and the Middle east. It's directly responsible for the mess sin Pakistan where we need to fear radical muslims getting control of a nuclear arsenal. It's expanded Iranian influence in the region, and radicalized vast swathes of Islam. And this after we had virtual total world support after 9-11. His hubris will cost us for generations. all of that is correct. |
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
|
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
On May 5, 5:17*am, Gary Forbis wrote:
On May 5, 1:00*am, "~ RHF" wrote: Would "You" Torture A Terrorist To Save The Lives Of Your Family and Loved Ones ? Would you cut off your left arm to save the lives of your family and loved ones? *Do you still have your left arm? If so then do you have any family and loved ones? One stupid hypothetical deserves another. Are your blinders *of your own making? GF - If You would Give You Life for Your Family and Loved Ones : What Is An Arm ? ~ RHF |
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
On May 5, 9:09*am, wrote:
On Tue, 5 May 2009 05:17:28 -0700 (PDT), Gary Forbis wrote: On May 5, 1:00*am, "~ RHF" wrote: Would "You" Torture A Terrorist To Save The Lives Of Your Family and Loved Ones ? Would you cut off your left arm to save the lives of your family and loved ones? *Do you still have your left arm? If so then do you have any family and loved ones? One stupid hypothetical deserves another. Are your blinders *of your own making? - Would you blow up a nuclear bomb in NYC to save your family? - - You beat me to it. RG - Just How Does Commiting a Terrorist Act and Killing Tens of Thousands or Millions of Innocent Human Beings =Equate To= "You" Torture A (One) Terrorist To Save The Lives Of Your Family and Loved Ones ? |
(OT) : Jihad Is Alive And Well In Islam -and- Only Fools ThinkOtherwise
On May 5, 10:45*am, wrote:
On May 5, 11:09*am, wrote: On Tue, 5 May 2009 05:17:28 -0700 (PDT), Gary Forbis wrote: On May 5, 1:00*am, "~ RHF" wrote: Would "You" Torture A Terrorist To Save The Lives Of Your Family and Loved Ones ? Would you cut off your left arm to save the lives of your family and loved ones? *Do you still have your left arm? If so then do you have any family and loved ones? One stupid hypothetical deserves another. Are your blinders *of your own making? Would you blow up a nuclear bomb in NYC to save your family? You beat me to it. *look what happened as soon as the democrats got in and stopped torture. according to rightards everything that has happened to america in the last 2 years was the fault of the democrats, snicker, only a nut cases believe that, but, if that is the case the democrats won the war with islam Says Leading Geopolitical Analyst *click on the link for the video. http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker...-with-Radical-... West Has Already Won War with Islam, Says Leading Geopolitical Analyst Posted Apr 30, 2009 07:30am EDT by Aaron Task in Newsmakers Related: ^DJI, ^GSPC, SPY, DIA, EEM, TUR With the Taliban on the march in Pakistan, Osama bin Laden still unaccounted for, attacks against U.S. troops in Iraq rising again and Afghanistan a quagmire, it would seem the war against jihadist Islam is only accelerating in intensity. But what if it's already all over but the shouting? "It is debatable whether the U.S. has actually won the U.S.-jihadist war - but it has certainly achieved its strategic goals," - preventing another 9/11 and Preventing another 9/11 Attack on US Soil is at best a short-term Strategic Goal that is measured one day at a time until the next Mega Attack and these Terrorist Attacks may occur Decades Apart because for the Islam-O-Fascist Terrorist the Propaganda Value of these Attacks lasts for Years and Decades; and they believe that their Jihad is for their Lifetimes and Generations to come. The reality is that the Islamists the Jihad Against 'The West' and Christianity is a Hundred Year War that is renewed each Century. Only a Fool Thinks that the Jihadists have given-up. The Jihadist would very much like it for The West to think that it has given-up and have The West to Let It Guard Down. - avoiding jihadist uprising in the Arab world, Jihadism is still very much alive in the Arab World and is a significant Faction of Islam in all areas of the Globe where Islam is a Major Religion. Only a Fool Thinks that the Jihad is Dead in the Arab World and across the Globe. For the Jihadist each Islamic Country is a potential Afghanistan and only a decade away from becoming a Religious State Committed to Jihad for all Eternity. Generally for Muslims living within Predomitly Islamic Countries the numbers roll-out to be : * 3%~5% say that they would Do Jihad Against "The West" : Become Fighters and Wage War. * 25%~33% say that they Believe Jihad Against "The West" is a Just Act under Islam; and Justified. * 17%~22% say that they would Support Jihad Against "The West" with Money; Aid, Shelter, Food and Supplies. Clearly Jihad is Alive And Well In Islam -and- Only Fools Think Otherwise. ~ RHF {ibid} George Friedman, founder of STRATFOR, writes in his latest book The Next 100 Years. "The U.S. has succeeded, not so much in winning the war as in preventing the Islamists from winning and, from a geopolitical perspective, that is good enough." Friedman expands up this theory in the accompany video, where we discuss the following: * * * * * * What he calls the "fundamental weakness" of the Muslim world. * * * * * * The likely endgame in Afghanistan, where he says the U.S. "cannot win." * * * * * * The potential for a jihadist uprising in Turkey, which Friedman sees as one of the great regional powers of the 21st Century. * * * * * * The likelihood of Pakistan falling into Taliban control, if it hasn't already. * * * * * * The "real" meaning of Iran's rhetorical threats. * * * * * * Whether Bin Laden is better captured and put on trial, dead, or alive and isolated. And whether Al Qaeda is still able to carry out major terrorist attacks today. |
(OT) : Jihad Is Alive And Well In Islam -and- Only Fools ThinkOtherwise
On May 5, 5:28*pm, "~ RHF" wrote:
On May 5, 10:45*am, wrote: On May 5, 11:09*am, wrote: On Tue, 5 May 2009 05:17:28 -0700 (PDT), Gary Forbis wrote: On May 5, 1:00*am, "~ RHF" wrote: Would "You" Torture A Terrorist To Save The Lives Of Your Family and Loved Ones ? Would you cut off your left arm to save the lives of your family and loved ones? *Do you still have your left arm? If so then do you have any family and loved ones? One stupid hypothetical deserves another. Are your blinders *of your own making? Would you blow up a nuclear bomb in NYC to save your family? You beat me to it. *look what happened as soon as the democrats got in and stopped torture. according to rightards everything that has happened to america in the last 2 years was the fault of the democrats, snicker, only a nut cases believe that, but, if that is the case the democrats won the war with islam Says Leading Geopolitical Analyst *click on the link for the video. http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker...-with-Radical-... West Has Already Won War with Islam, Says Leading Geopolitical Analyst Posted Apr 30, 2009 07:30am EDT by Aaron Task in Newsmakers Related: ^DJI, ^GSPC, SPY, DIA, EEM, TUR With the Taliban on the march in Pakistan, Osama bin Laden still unaccounted for, attacks against U.S. troops in Iraq rising again and Afghanistan a quagmire, it would seem the war against jihadist Islam is only accelerating in intensity. But what if it's already all over but the shouting? "It is debatable whether the U.S. has actually won the U.S.-jihadist war - but it has certainly achieved its strategic goals," - preventing another 9/11 and Preventing another 9/11 Attack on US Soil is at best a short-term Strategic Goal that is measured one day at a time until the next Mega Attack and these Terrorist Attacks may occur Decades Apart because for the Islam-O-Fascist Terrorist the Propaganda Value of these Attacks lasts for Years and Decades; and they believe that their Jihad is for their Lifetimes and Generations to come. The reality is that the Islamists the Jihad Against 'The West' and Christianity is a Hundred Year War that is renewed each Century. Only a Fool Thinks that the Jihadists have given-up. The Jihadist would very much like it for The West to think that it has given-up and have The West to Let It Guard Down. - avoiding jihadist uprising in the Arab world, Jihadism is still very much alive in the Arab World and is a significant Faction of Islam in all areas of the Globe where Islam is a Major Religion. Only a Fool Thinks that the Jihad is Dead in the Arab World and across the Globe. For the Jihadist each Islamic Country is a potential Afghanistan and only a decade away from becoming a Religious State Committed to Jihad for all Eternity. Generally for Muslims living within Predomitly Islamic Countries the numbers roll-out to be : * 3%~5% say that they would Do Jihad Against "The West" : Become Fighters and Wage War. * 25%~33% say that they Believe Jihad Against "The West" is a Just Act under Islam; and Justified. * 17%~22% say that they would Support Jihad Against "The West" with Money; Aid, Shelter, Food and Supplies. Clearly Jihad is Alive And Well In Islam -and- Only Fools Think Otherwise. ~ RHF {ibid} George Friedman, founder of STRATFOR, writes in his latest book The Next 100 Years. "The U.S. has succeeded, not so much in winning the war as in preventing the Islamists from winning and, from a geopolitical perspective, that is good enough." Friedman expands up this theory in the accompany video, where we discuss the following: * * * * * * What he calls the "fundamental weakness" of the Muslim world. * * * * * * The likely endgame in Afghanistan, where he says the U.S. "cannot win." * * * * * * The potential for a jihadist uprising in Turkey, which Friedman sees as one of the great regional powers of the 21st Century. * * * * * * The likelihood of Pakistan falling into Taliban control, if it hasn't already. * * * * * * The "real" meaning of Iran's rhetorical threats. * * * * * * Whether Bin Laden is better captured and put on trial, dead, or alive and isolated. And whether Al Qaeda is still able to carry out major terrorist attacks today. their largest recruiting tool is about to face charges because ronald reagan understood what torture does to a country that is its recipient, and the country that is the perp. man, conservatives are the most god awful stupidest people on the planet. its a treaty we entered into under the republican party. federal treaties become the law of the land. By giving its advice and consent to ratification of this Convention, the Senate of the United States will demonstrate unequivocally our desire to bring an end to the abhorrent practice of torture. RONALD REAGAN http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...88/ai_6742034/ U.S. signs UN convention against torture US Department of State Bulletin , August, 1988 1 Following are the President's message to the Senate and the text of the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment signed on behalf of the United States by Deputy Secretary of State John C. Whitehead on April 18, 1988, at the United Nations. The United States became the 63d nation to sign the convention, which was adopted by the UN General Assembly in December 1984 and entered into force on June 26, 198 7, after it was ratified by 20 nations. MESSAGE TO THE SENATE, MAY 20, 1988.sup.1 With a view to receiving the advice and consent of the Senate to ratification, subject to certain reservations, understandings, and declarations, I transmit herewith the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. The Convention was adopted by unanimous agreement of the United Nations General Assembly on December 10, 1984, and entered into force on June 26, 1987. The United States signed it on April 18, 1988. 1 also transmit, for the information of the Senate, the report of the Department of State on the Convention. The United States participated actively and effectively in the negotiation of the Convention . It marks a significant step in the development during this century of international measures against torture and other inhuman treatment or punishment. Ratification of the Convention by the United States will clearly express United States opposition to torture, an abhorrent practice unfortunately still prevalent in the world today. The core provisions of the Convention establish a regime for international cooperation in the criminal prosecution of torturers relying on so-called "universal jurisdiction." Each State Party is required either to prosecute torturers who are found in its territory or to extradite them to other countries for prosecution. In view of the large number of States concerned, it was not possible to negotiate a treaty that was acceptable to the United States in all respects. Accordingly, certain reservations, understandings, and declarations have been drafted, which are discussed in the report of the Department of State. With the inclusion of these reservations, understandings, and declarations, I believe there are no constitutional or other legal obstacles to United States ratification, The recommended legislation necessary to implement the Convention will be submitted to the Congress separately. Should the Senate give its advice and consent to ratification of the Convention, I intend at the time of deposit of United States ratification to make a declaration pursuant to Article 28 that the United States does not recognize the competence of the Committee against Torture under Article 20 to make confidential investigations of charges that torture is being systematically practiced in the United States. In addition, I intend not to make declarations, pursuant to Articles 21 and 22 of the Convention, recognizing the competence of the Committee against Torture to receive and consider communications from States and individuals alleging that the United States is violating the Convention. I believe that a final United States decision as to whether to accept such competence of the Committee should be withheld until we have had an opportunity to assess the Committee's work. It would be possible for the United States in the future to accept the competence of the Committee pursuant to Articles 20, 21, and 22, should experience with the Committee prove satisfactory and should the United States consider this step desirable. By giving its advice and consent to ratification of this Convention, the Senate of the United States will demonstrate unequivocally our desire to bring an end to the abhorrent practice of torture. RONALD REAGAN TEXT OF CONVENTION2 Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment The States Parties to this Convention, Considering that, in accordance with the principles proclaimed in the Charter of the United Nations, recognition of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family in the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world, Recognizing that those rights derive from the inherent dignity of the human person, Considering the obligation of States under the Charter, in particular Article 55, to promote universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms, Having regard to Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, both of which provide that no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Having regard also to the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Being Subjected to Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, adopted by the General Assembly on 9 December 1975. Desiring to make more effective the struggle against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment throughout the world. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 |
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
On May 5, 4:07*pm, wrote:
On Tue, 5 May 2009 14:54:25 -0700 (PDT), "~ RHF" - - wrote: - - RG - Just How Does Committing a Terrorist Act - - and Killing Tens of Thousands or Millions of - - Innocent Human Beings =Equate To= "You" - - Torture A (One) Terrorist To Save The Lives - - Of Your Family and Loved Ones ? - Torture is terrorism. After the 9/11 Attacks Terrorism has taken on a new dimension that goes way beyond an Individual inflecting Pain-and-Suffering on an Individual. Terrorism is now expanded to the Mass Murder of Thousands / Milllions; that was only previously thought possible in War or a Natural Disaster. - If you want to create hypothetically that allow - it for you, have at it. - All it shows is *a vivid imagination and a lack of morals. So Liberal & Democrats Believe that it is OK "Moral" to let your Family and Friends and Loved Ones Die : When you could have 'possibly' prevented it from happening to them. RG - The Logic and Justification is always : The Pain and Suffering {One Life} of a Terrorist for the Lives of Thousands, Tens of Thousands or Millions of Innocent Human Beings. The 'basic' Question Remains Would "You" Torture A (One) Terrorist To Save The Lives Of Your Family and Loved Ones ? The 'base' Human "Gut" Answer is either a simple : Yes -or- No ~ RHF |
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
On May 5, 6:07*pm, wrote:
On Tue, 5 May 2009 14:54:25 -0700 (PDT), "~ RHF" wrote: RG - Just How Does Commiting a Terrorist Act and Killing Tens of Thousands or Millions of Innocent Human Beings =Equate To= "You" Torture A (One) Terrorist To Save The Lives Of Your Family and Loved Ones ? Torture is terrorism. If you want to create hypothetically that allow it for you, have at it. All it shows is *a vivid imagination and a lack of morals. the idiot gets that crap from 24, he is incapable of understanding what he is parroting. he has no thoughts of his own, let alone any morals. |
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
~ RHF wrote:
So Liberal & Democrats Believe that it is OK "Moral" to let your Family and Friends and Loved Ones Die : When you could have 'possibly' prevented it from happening to them. What profits a man who gains the world but loses his soul? |
(OT) : Jihad Is Alive And Well In Islam -and- Only Fools ThinkOtherwise
- wrote:
- Desiring to make more effective the struggle - against torture and other cruel, inhuman or - degrading treatment or punishment throughout - the world. VIDE - So 'You' are clearly against Torture and therefore naturally you are also against : The Death Penalty & Abortion & Partial Birth Abortion & Life In Prison . . . nah would be to consistent and morally logical ~ RHF |
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
|
(OT) : Jihad Is Alive And Well In Islam -and- Only Fools Think Otherwise
wrote in message ... On May 5, 7:39 pm, "~ RHF" wrote: - wrote: - Desiring to make more effective the struggle - against torture and other cruel, inhuman or - degrading treatment or punishment throughout - the world. VIDE - So 'You' are clearly against Torture and therefore naturally you are also against : The Death Penalty & Abortion & Partial Birth Abortion & Life In Prison . . . nah would be to consistent and morally logical ~ RHF . . i am not for right wing demagoguery. I, personally, am against torture, the death penalty, abortion for any purpose other than saving the life of the mother. I am for life imprisonment. I feel that is a just punishment for murder, rape, etc. |
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
Beam Me Up Scotty wrote:
wrote: On Tue, 5 May 2009 14:54:25 -0700 (PDT), "~ RHF" wrote: RG - Just How Does Commiting a Terrorist Act and Killing Tens of Thousands or Millions of Innocent Human Beings =Equate To= "You" Torture A (One) Terrorist To Save The Lives Of Your Family and Loved Ones ? Torture is terrorism. If you want to create hypothetically that allow it for you, have at it. All it shows is a vivid imagination and a lack of morals. (D)Harry Truman - Terrorist - ?????????????????? Nagasaki???????????????????? |
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
On May 5, 5:54*pm, "~ RHF" wrote:
On May 5, 9:09*am, wrote: On Tue, 5 May 2009 05:17:28 -0700 (PDT), Gary Forbis wrote: On May 5, 1:00*am, "~ RHF" wrote: Would "You" Torture A Terrorist To Save The Lives Of Your Family and Loved Ones ? Would you cut off your left arm to save the lives of your family and loved ones? *Do you still have your left arm? If so then do you have any family and loved ones? One stupid hypothetical deserves another. Are your blinders *of your own making? - Would you blow up a nuclear bomb in NYC to save your family? - - You beat me to it. RG - Just How Does Commiting a Terrorist Act and Killing Tens of Thousands or Millions of Innocent Human Beings =Equate To= "You" Torture A (One) Terrorist To Save The Lives Of Your Family and Loved Ones ? *. OH YEAH TORTURED LIBERAL LOGIC ! *. The Answer is either a simple : Yes -or- No *. The answer is that torture doesn't work. The answer is that you, personally, want to watch. You get your rocks off by hearing about torture. You are a coward. But so what, you want to watch other people being tortured. Not that torture ever reveals anything, how many witches got burned do you think? How many satanists? The fact is that all the persons involved in torture are criminally culpable. The fact that they won't be brought to trial shows what prosecutorial discretion is. |
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
~ RHF wrote:
On May 5, 9:09 am, wrote: On Tue, 5 May 2009 05:17:28 -0700 (PDT), Gary Forbis wrote: On May 5, 1:00 am, "~ RHF" wrote: Would "You" Torture A Terrorist To Save The Lives Of Your Family and Loved Ones ? Would you cut off your left arm to save the lives of your family and loved ones? Do you still have your left arm? If so then do you have any family and loved ones? One stupid hypothetical deserves another. Are your blinders of your own making? - Would you blow up a nuclear bomb in NYC to save your family? - - You beat me to it. RG - Just How Does Commiting a Terrorist Act and Killing Tens of Thousands or Millions of Innocent Human Beings =Equate To= "You" Torture A (One) Terrorist To Save The Lives Of Your Family and Loved Ones ? . OH YEAH TORTURED LIBERAL LOGIC ! . The Answer is either a simple : Yes -or- No . Conservative logic - Torture works. http://catherinemacivor.com/2009/04/...does-not-work/ |
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
"John Barnard" wrote:
Conservative logic - Torture works. http://catherinemacivor.com/2009/04/...does-not-work/ Such primitive torture techniques described above and elsewhere belong to the medieval ages. The perfect torture is such that doesn't leave any physical evidence in forms of scares, burn-marks, destroyed lungs from water-boarding or crippled legs from beating the feet. The perfect torture doesn't leave any physical evidence, but rather a big scare on the soul of the victim. He/she is turned into a human wreck without any obvious reason a doctor/therapist can relate to. There are many obvious way make a subject psychically destroyed. Rape is a well know technique that leaves the victim in state of a shock and trembling. Their whole believe system becomes shattered. Their sense of honour gets crushed. Image how a Muslim would feel being raped in the ass by a pig! I dare not think about the modern techniques of psychological brain-wash and torture the FSB (former KGB), NSAX [1] or even the Chinese are using today. They probably use it remotely by some devilish laser-rays or neuron-rays. Has anybody really wondered what all these low-orbiting satellites are doing up there. I'm sure they are there not just for surveillance. These satellites are from 50km up and should have no problem reading right over your shoulder and administer head-pain in anyone they care to torture. My point is that these smarter agencies can administer torture from anywhere and to any person living in a daily situation. The subject may not even be aware of the torture being administered. One of the objectives of such torture would be to get the subject to feel psychotic, mentally drained for live-force and in the ultimate end commit suicide. You see. No evidence of torture. The coroner would have a slam-dunk case, but the ultimate goal of the torturer would be obtained w/o compromising itself. Are these techniques just science-fiction or are they being used today? I guess yes. But how does one prove it. Duh, we can't; these techniques are a very well kept secret of these agencies [1] A supposedely super-secret US spy-agency that even the US president isn't aware. These guys are answering to no one and get their funding from some secret channel. The Iran-Contras case should be peanuts in comparison. --gv |
(OT) : Jihad Is Alive And Well In Islam -and- Only Fools ThinkOtherwise
On May 5, 10:16*pm, "Brenda Ann" wrote:
wrote in message ... On May 5, 7:39 pm, "~ RHF" wrote: - wrote: - Desiring to make more effective the struggle - against torture and other cruel, inhuman or - degrading treatment or punishment throughout - the world. VIDE - So 'You' are clearly against Torture and therefore naturally you are also against : The Death Penalty & Abortion & Partial Birth Abortion & Life In Prison . . . nah would be to consistent and morally logical ~ RHF . . *i am not for right wing demagoguery. I, personally, am against torture, the death penalty, abortion for any purpose other than saving the life of the mother. *I am for life imprisonment. I feel that is a just punishment for murder, rape, etc. |
(OT) : Jihad Is Alive And Well In Islam -and- Only Fools ThinkOtherwise
On May 5, 6:02*pm, wrote:
On May 5, 7:39*pm, "~ RHF" wrote: - wrote: - Desiring to make more effective the struggle - against torture and other cruel, inhuman or - degrading treatment or punishment throughout - the world. VIDE - So 'You' are clearly against Torture and therefore naturally you are also against : The Death Penalty & Abortion & Partial Birth Abortion & Life In Prison . . . nah would be to consistent and morally logical ~ RHF *. *. - *i am not for right wing demagoguery. So that does not exclude 'demagoguery' as a whole; and since you specified 'ring-wing' : One could conclude that you were FOR Left-Wing {Liberal} Demagoguery. vide - but i think just about everyone here knew that already ~ RHF |
(OT) : Jihad Is Alive And Well In Islam -and- Only Fools ThinkOtherwise
On May 5, 10:16*pm, "Brenda Ann" wrote:
wrote in message ... On May 5, 7:39 pm, "~ RHF" wrote: - wrote: - Desiring to make more effective the struggle - against torture and other cruel, inhuman or - degrading treatment or punishment throughout - the world. VIDE - So 'You' are clearly against Torture and therefore naturally you are also against : The Death Penalty & Abortion & Partial Birth Abortion & Life In Prison . . . nah would be to consistent and morally logical ~ RHF . . *i am not for right wing demagoguery. - I, personally, am against - torture, - the death penalty, - abortion for any purpose other than saving the life of the mother. - -*I am for life imprisonment. - I feel that is a just punishment for murder, rape, etc. BAD It is good to see that you know what you are 'For' and 'Against' and can answer with a simple 'Yes' or 'No' ~ RHF |
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
On May 5, 9:41*pm, Beam Me Up Scotty Then-Destroy-Everything@Talk-n-
Dog..com wrote: wrote: On Tue, 5 May 2009 14:54:25 -0700 (PDT), "~ RHF" wrote: RG - Just How Does Commiting a Terrorist Act and Killing Tens of Thousands or Millions of Innocent Human Beings =Equate To= "You" Torture A (One) Terrorist To Save The Lives Of Your Family and Loved Ones ? - - Torture is terrorism. - - If you want to create hypothetically that allow - - it for you, have at it. - - All it shows is *a vivid imagination and a lack - - of morals. - (D)Harry Truman *- Terrorist - ?????????????????? The Democrats Can't Get Any Greater Act of TERROR than "The Buck Stops Here" Harry Truman [P-D] : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Truman Ordering the Dropping of Nuclear Bombs on Japan. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_...a_and_Nagasaki |
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
On May 6, 5:56*am, Kevin Cunningham wrote:
On May 5, 5:54*pm, "~ RHF" wrote: On May 5, 9:09*am, wrote: On Tue, 5 May 2009 05:17:28 -0700 (PDT), Gary Forbis wrote: On May 5, 1:00*am, "~ RHF" wrote: Would "You" Torture A Terrorist To Save The Lives Of Your Family and Loved Ones ? Would you cut off your left arm to save the lives of your family and loved ones? *Do you still have your left arm? If so then do you have any family and loved ones? One stupid hypothetical deserves another. Are your blinders *of your own making? - Would you blow up a nuclear bomb in NYC to save your family? - - You beat me to it. RG - Just How Does Commiting a Terrorist Act and Killing Tens of Thousands or Millions of Innocent Human Beings =Equate To= "You" Torture A (One) Terrorist To Save The Lives Of Your Family and Loved Ones ? *. OH YEAH TORTURED LIBERAL LOGIC ! *. The Answer is either a simple : Yes -or- No *. The answer is that torture doesn't work. Another Liberal Lie and Democrat Distortion : Since what is now being called Torture did help prevent a 9/11 type Attack on LA. -*The answer is that you, personally, want to watch. * KC - If you had ever saw a Family Member, a Friend or Loved One In-Pain and Suffering : You Would Not Want To Watch [.] - You get your rocks off by hearing about torture. KC - Typical Liberal-Fascist Thinking Torture = Sex. -*You are a coward. KC - 'coward' - - - = = = RHF's Canned Reply 'Rant' = = = - - - [: To Liberal-Fascist Name Calling :] ROTFL - You Know When You Are Winning An Argument : When a Super-Smart 'Enlightened" Liberal Starts Name Calling*. * They Lose Their Ability To Think And Get Emotional - rotfl ~ RHF http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r...8979fbe8546cfa |
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
~ RHF wrote:
On May 5, 5:23 pm, dave wrote: - - ~ RHF wrote: - - So Liberal & Democrats Believe that it is OK - - "Moral" to let your Family and Friends and - - Loved Ones Die : When you could have 'possibly' - - prevented it from happening to them. - What profits a man who gains the world but loses his soul? Dave - What profits a man who Save His Family and Friends {Retains His World} -but- Tortures and/or Kills a Terrorist He has a World with his Family and Friends in it; and the Understanding and Forgiveness of God{Allah} - Amen ~ RHF . . You don't get it. You are willing to throw the country away to save your own; that is not patriotism. The USA does not torture. That is a core value. Treat them with humanity, and let them have no reason to complain of our copying the brutal example of the British Army in their treatment of our unfortunate brethren who have fallen into their hands, he wrote. In all respects the prisoners were to be treated no worse than American soldiers; and in some respects, better. Through this approach, Washington sought to shame his British adversaries, and to demonstrate the moral superiority of the American cause. In the worst of times when foreign troops literally occupied American soil, torturing and murdering American patriots and few believed that the cause of the revolution could ultimately win against the might of the British Empire, the first Commander in Chief of the U.S.A. set the precedent that this society is to lead even our enemies by benignant sympathy of [our] example. To win the war against the occupying army of Redcoats, the American revolutionaries needed right on their side." http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2007/12/...e-on-my-watch/ |
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
~ RHF wrote:
On May 6, 5:56 am, Kevin Cunningham wrote: On May 5, 5:54 pm, "~ RHF" wrote: On May 5, 9:09 am, wrote: On Tue, 5 May 2009 05:17:28 -0700 (PDT), Gary Forbis wrote: On May 5, 1:00 am, "~ RHF" wrote: Would "You" Torture A Terrorist To Save The Lives Of Your Family and Loved Ones ? Would you cut off your left arm to save the lives of your family and loved ones? Do you still have your left arm? If so then do you have any family and loved ones? One stupid hypothetical deserves another. Are your blinders of your own making? - Would you blow up a nuclear bomb in NYC to save your family? - - You beat me to it. RG - Just How Does Commiting a Terrorist Act and Killing Tens of Thousands or Millions of Innocent Human Beings =Equate To= "You" Torture A (One) Terrorist To Save The Lives Of Your Family and Loved Ones ? . OH YEAH TORTURED LIBERAL LOGIC ! . The Answer is either a simple : Yes -or- No . The answer is that torture doesn't work. Another Liberal Lie and Democrat Distortion : Since what is now being called Torture did help prevent a 9/11 type Attack on LA. That's not true. The alleged Library Tower plot was thwarted months before Condi first gave the word to start torturing. This from official Bush Administration timelines. If you weren't so gung-ho to defend the undefensible you might bother to learn the truth. |
The Tortured Rhetoric of the Reactionary Left
On May 7, 4:15*am, "Who i$ John Galt" "Men of the Mind"@Talk-n-
Dog..com wrote: John Barnard wrote: ~ RHF wrote: On May 5, 9:09 am, wrote: On Tue, 5 May 2009 05:17:28 -0700 (PDT), Gary Forbis wrote: On May 5, 1:00 am, "~ RHF" wrote: Would "You" Torture A Terrorist To Save The Lives Of Your Family and Loved Ones ? Would you cut off your left arm to save the lives of your family and loved ones? *Do you still have your left arm? If so then do you have any family and loved ones? One stupid hypothetical deserves another. Are your blinders *of your own making? - Would you blow up a nuclear bomb in NYC to save your family? - - You beat me to it. RG - Just How Does Commiting a Terrorist Act and Killing Tens of Thousands or Millions of Innocent Human Beings =Equate To= "You" Torture A (One) Terrorist To Save The Lives Of Your Family and Loved Ones ? *. OH YEAH TORTURED LIBERAL LOGIC ! *. The Answer is either a simple : Yes -or- No *. Conservative logic - Torture works. Liberal Logic - outing CIA agents is OK unless it's Valerye Plame. It is? What CIA agents were outed for political purposes that Liberals did not decry? Liberal Logic - Clinton Assassinating Usama Bin laden is OK but Bush Waterboarding Bin Laden is a crime against humanity. Some of this is just verbiage. Would you use the word "assassinating" in relationship to what a swat team does to a hostage holding bank robber? The distinction between appropriate and inappropriate use of force is quite important. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:59 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com