Gotta love him!

[Lisabob]

The reason that you "never hear any complaining about that" Brent is because it is nearly universally agreed that such behavior is barbaric and (even) our own government does not engage in it. At least, not that I have heard. You get an outcry over these other issues because our own gov't is engaging in behavior - in all of our names as Americans - that many of us find to be reprehensible. Thus it is our duty as citizens to object to these practices, if we believe that our gov't is, yet shouldn't be, engaging in them. That's what the whole idea of representative democracy suggests - people ought to have a voice in what their gov't does and have every right to express their opinion, especially when they don't like what their gov't is doing.

[DanKroh]

"Bush says we don't torture."

 

And I guess that makes it true? At least in the mind of Mr. Bush, it does, huh? Even when photographs from Abu Ghraib and first hand accounts from the soldiers involved in these "aggressive interrogation techniques" contradict him.

 

Sometimes I wonder if there is anything Mr. Bush could ever do that would drive away that small minority of blindly faithful.

 

Has anyone else been reading the accounts of the young servicewoman Alyssa Peterson, who it appears may have committed suicide after objecting to those same interrogation techniques?

 

No, the enemy doesn't follow the rules of the Geneva Convention. But just because someone else rolls around in garbage doesn't mean we should do it to; all that does is cover us all with the filth of inhumanity.

[Trevorum]

Loyalty to your elected leaders is fine but, good lord man, open your eyes!

[SR540Beaver]

"Bush says we don't torture."

 

He also said Iraq had WMD's. I hope no one has been holding their breath waiting for them to show up.

 

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

 

[BadenP]

Finally the truth has made it to the light and now Republicans and Democrats can unite under the fact that torture is morally wrong and for our country to be engaged in it is morally wrong. Well W has finally reunited our country under a common cause, now it is time for the people to be heard, VOTE.

[Merlyn_LeRoy]

That old saying should be:

"Fool me once, shame on shame on you. Fool me you can't get fooled again."

http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/bushvideos/v/bushfoolme.htm

 

In this particular case, I think Bush knew the saying well enough, he's just psychologically unable to say "shame on me."

[SSScout]

 

Romans 12:19 - 21

[packsaddle]

Everyone who is outraged at torture should stop reading what I am about to write. It is very graphic. Instead take a look at this link:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15519404/

 

 

 

 

 

OK, For the rest of you, I have a question but first I need to set the stage. I recently attended a class reunion (that's another story, LOL) but one of my old buddies arrived with his personal photo album from Gulf I. He was Special Forces and went into Kuwait before the general invasion. His mission was to work with the Kuwaiti resistance and prepare them to work with the coalition forces. He saw a lot in Kuwait, and all the way through Iraq...you know, burned bodies still in trucks, burned carcasses with comrades' heads in their laps after being blown up and burned, the usual stuff.

 

Some of what he did was to work with the Kuwaitis to capture an Iraqi soldier here and there to 'interrogate' them for info prior to the invasion. He had photos of the captured as they were captured, after his interrogation, and then after the Kuwaitis finished.

The captured Iraqis weren't always turned over to the Kuwaitis, rather that fate was used as a threat to extract the info. But they did turn some over to the Kuwaitis partly to serve as examples. Those individuals were 'interrogated' with great prejudice and in the end, as he put it, they were stomped to death. He had photos of those results as well.

 

So my question is about animal behavior. The stomped bodies were just left to decompose. He had photos of the various stages of that as well. As I went through these photos I noticed that stray cats had eaten parts of many of the corpses. They seem to prefer the fingers, noses, ears, cheeks, and lips.

So why do they have this preference? My buddy thought it was because those parts are chewier. I'm not so certain. Any ideas?

Edited Part: I also noticed this in other conflicts so it seems to be a general behavior by cats. I suppose if I died tonight and no one discovered me, and the cats ran out of cat food, I'd become cat food. Think I'll tease them a little now....maybe let the python loose on the floor, that just sends them into orbit! Great fun.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

[BrentAllen]

Well, SRBeaver, I lost the pool. I bet it would only take 2 hours before some liberal would start crying "Bush lied about WMD's!" It actually took 5 - must be due to the distractions of the election, eh? I was right in that if I heard that just one more time, I was gonna puke. And for the millionth time, exactly what did all those Democrats vote for in the resolution authorizing war? Were they voting for their favorite Girl Scout cookie?? To quote Trevorum, "good lord man, open your eyes!"

 

Why do we need Acts like the one mentioned in the article? Maybe because we have "naive" bleeding-heart liberal attorneys who will reveal classified secrets and violate security regulations to help our enemies. Want an example?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A15444-2005Feb10.html

 

It's amazing how her attitute changed as her sentencing approached. She went from "I know I committed no crime" to realizing what an idiot she was:

"Stewart has expressed her regrets. Her goal was to improve the prison conditions of her client, she says, but she was naive not to realize that what might have been considered legitimate before Sept. 11 would now be interpreted as criminal. "At the time I didn't see this," she wrote. "I see and understand it now." She says she should have fought the constitutionality of the prison regulations in court. She now says she wants Judge Koeltl to see.

Stewart: My flaws, my weaknesses, my tendency to let my heart run ahead of my head.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6275682

 

I'd say that is the definition of liberalism - "My flaws, my weaknesses, my tendency to let my heart run ahead of my head."

 

Sorry, but these types simply cannot be trusted with protecting our national security.

 

packsaddle - linking Olberman? Is he still on the air?? Be sure to send him an email - he will be glad to know he actually has a viewer! As for Kerry, I think I hear the fat lady singing on his presidential aspirations - thankfully.

[packsaddle]

Actually, I've never seen Olbermann on the air. I mostly read.

So.....how about my question? Any ideas?

[SR540Beaver]

Brent,

 

It looks like you lose two pools in one day. I'm not a liberal. I'm also not a GWB style "conservative" either, but I am an honest conservative and I don't like the way the name has been coopted by the current crowd of so called conservatives. We do engage in torture. Do you have any idea what we have in common with the Khmer Rouge, the Soviets and the Nazis? Waterboarding. Why is it torture when they do it and interrogation when we do it? Because Bush and Cheney say it isn't? Open YOUR eyes.

 

And yes, I brought up the WMD's because it was the primary reason given to justify a war of choice. I don't care what any other nation said or who may have voted to give the President autority to flex his muscle. The sole responsibility for the war rests with the one guy who gave the order. The buck stops there. He was wrong then and he is wrong now to authorize torture.

[BrentAllen]

packsaddle,

Sorry - forgot about your question. I have two cats, let me go ask them if they know. I'll be right back.......(think elevator music).......................

Ok, I'm back. Sorry, but Belle and Binks couldn't come up with a logical answer. They prefer chicken and other poultry based meals, so I didn't expect them to be much help.

 

SRBeaver,

Interesting position. If I understand you correctly, any president, current or future, cannot trust any of the intelligence agencies to advise him. He must conduct his own intelligence gathering and actually go see the evidence himself before making a decision to act against a threat. For example, to satisfy you, Bush would need to secretly sneak into North Korea and penetrate their nuclear program to verify they actually have nuclear weapons. The buck stops with him, right? Maybe you can come up with one of those invisible cloaks Harry Potter has, and donate it to the White House. Might make things a little easier for all the future presidents.

 

Y'all are so convinced we are conducting torture - please give me the details. I want to hear what we are doing, the methods, the techniques. Not Abu Grab, I mean now, today, tonight. What exactly are we doing?

[Gonzo1]

 

You guys know by now that I'm a veteran. I gotta tell you, I'm opposed to real torture. You know, bamboo shoots under the finger nails, brutalizing people, uh, chopping off their heads, and dragging them through the streets, oh, wait a minute, the enemy has done those things to our guys. We feed and clothe our prisoners, allow them to practice their religion, etc. Sure, the worst of the worst may not get the red carpet treatment.

 

I am however for extracting information that will save Americans lives. I think it should be OK to tinker with the clock, make some one think it's a different time of day. Play loud Barry Manilow music, rock music, light or sound deprivation, etc. Even scare tactics with dogs. I'm opposed to turning the dogs loose on the enemy. Even the waterboard should be allowed.

 

Having said that, let me tell you that I had to attend (and survive) the Navy's POW simulation school, Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape. I didn't get water boarded, but I know guys who did. I got crammed into a little box, got roughed up, and I lived to tell about it.

 

The enemy being held at Guantanamo is now complaining because they are getting FAT! And, we're supposed to give them LAWYERS???!!! Give me a break.

 

Here's how to connect the dots: Al Gore, Bill Clinton, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy and just about every other major DEMORCRAT elected official in Washington said that Saddam was a threat to the United States. Saddam gassed his own people (for which he is now on trial) and paid a death gratuity to surviving family members of the 9/11 hijackers. Saddam allowed and supported Al-Qaida terorroists to train in Iraq. If I heard correctly on ABC radio news, maybe I saw it in the paper, it has been confirmed that Iraq had a well developed nuclear program. Hmm, maybe he was a threat, you know, gas and nukes.

 

Isn't better to conduct the war over there, instead of over here?

 

By the way, Saddam was just CONVICTED of genocide. He'll probably hang.

 

Vote and the choice is yours, don't vote, and the choice is mine.

 

Republicans vote on Tuesday, democrats should vote on Wednesday.

Do like they do in Chicago, vote early and often. As mayor Daly of Chicago said "Da dead got just as much right to vote as da next guy"

[packsaddle]

Heh, heh, Brent, you have wuss cats! Put their dish away and then lie very still on the floor for a few days......I'm pretty sure mine are ready to pounce minutes after I go. I don't even let them in the same room if I'm sleeping. Good reason to keep the snake around, really freaks the cats.

 

Gonzo1, stop voting long enough to answer this question: do you think that we should be denied habeas corpus?

[BrentAllen]

pack,

I told my cats what you said about them. Their response - "Hah! We eat liberals for breakfast!" Actually, they aren't wusses (sp?), they are Bombays! http://www.hexpride.com/bombay.htm

The kids have a dwarf white rabbit for a pet as well. The cats have had their eyes on him for awhile. Given the situation you mentioned, I think they would go after poor Mr. Snowy first, and only turn to me after his bones had been licked clean.