Originally Posted By gadzuux So how's that for an example? Oops - you're name was 'similar' to someone we're interested in. So we're going to swoop in, snatch this german citizen off the street, smuggle him to afghanistan, detain him for FIVE MONTHS, torture him, then suddenly he's free to go. In the meantime, 'our' government - who did this - refuses to even speak to the issue - citing "security". So `splain how this is okay.
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By wahooskipper I didn't see where it said this guy was tortured. Wrongly imprisoned, perhaps, but I don't see where he says he was tortured. Americans are wrongly imprisoned every day. It isn't right and there should be amends but that is a far cry from torture.
Originally Posted By gadzuux >> ... the practice of rendition, by which suspects have been arrested by the United States and sent for questioning to third countries. Torture is commonly used in police interrogations in those countries << Besides, Mr El Masri says he was tortured, has wounds that support his claims, and our government has not seen fit to dispute his claims - they haven't said anything at all.
Originally Posted By cape cod joe BB----------I said we've changed here-please don't name call. Analogy Israel/Palestinians----------killing will never stop until one side unitlaterally decides to stop. Please just stop BB and Beau you too! Just stop and give facts like Tom said Pretend you don't know who is saying what and address the post not the messenger.
Originally Posted By Beaumandy Gadzuux, thanks for the example, I knew about this case. But as Wahoo said, was he tortured or just wrongly imprisoned? My point is that to listen to liberals whine, you would think that hundreds or THOUSANDS of people are being rounded up and put into prisons. Instead we get one or two cases that are still up in the air.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper gadzuux, again I don't see in the article you referenced where it says he was tortured. Send to countries where torture is a police tactic? Yes. Tortured himself? I didn't see that claim.
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By Beaumandy << If I want that much rancor and bold-face hatred, I'll listen to the Saddam trial. Or maybe Rush>> Funny, but if you had it your way Saddam would not be on trial but living in a palace killing his people and working on his own nuclear program. As far as rush goes... I am willing to bet you as much money as you have that you would never have the guts or the ability to call Rush on his show and win a debate with him based on facts and logic.
Originally Posted By gadzuux Here's more, or you can just google this stuff yourself - it's not hard to find. <a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/03/06/MNGF5BL9461.DTL&hw=Khaled+El+Masri&sn=002&sc=183" target="_blank">http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/ article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/03/06/MNGF5BL9461.DTL&hw=Khaled+El+Masri&sn=002&sc=183</a> Brief excerpts from a rather lengthy but interesting an informative article. CIA handling detainee transfers Agency avoids case-by-case scrutiny because of Bush directive - Douglas Jehl, David Johnston, New York Times Sunday, March 6, 2005 Washington -- The Bush administration's secret program to transfer scores of suspected terrorists to foreign countries for interrogation has been carried out by the Central Intelligence Agency under broad authority that has allowed the agency to act without case-by-case approval from the White House or the State or Justice departments, according to current and former government officials. The unusually expansive authority for the CIA to operate independently since the Sept. 11 attacks was provided by the White House under a still- classified directive signed by President Bush within days of the attacks at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the officials said. The process, known as rendition, has been central in the government's efforts to disrupt terrorism but has been bitterly criticized by human rights groups on grounds that the practice has violated the Bush administration's public pledge to provide safeguards against torture. The official would not discuss any legal directive under which the agency operates, but said that the "CIA has existing authorities to lawfully conduct these operations." In recent weeks, several former detainees have described being subjected to coercive interrogation techniques and brutal treatment during months spent in detention under the program in other countries. The official would not discuss specific cases but did not dispute that there had been instances in which prisoners were mistreated. The official said none had died. The official said the CIA's inspector general was reviewing the rendition program as one of at least half a dozen in-house inquiries under way of possible misconduct involving the detention, interrogation and rendition of suspected terrorists.
Originally Posted By cmpaley >>As far as rush goes... I am willing to bet you as much money as you have that you would never have the guts or the ability to call Rush on his show and win a debate with him based on facts and logic.<< Don't confuse lack of desire and ability. I'd love to see Rush or Hannity go up against Ed Schulz or someone like that.
Originally Posted By DDMAN26 This war that we are a part of is a different kind of war. The enemy doesn't wear a uniform. They don't play to the standard rules of engagement. They are willing to kill anyone at anytime for there fouled up cause. The only way we can win is to fight dirty. If that includes torture than so be it.
Originally Posted By bboisvert <<I am willing to bet you as much money as you have that you would never have the guts or the ability to call Rush on his show and win a debate with him based on facts and logic.>> a: Rush would never let me on. He screens his calls so only the Ditto heads get thru or those that can be shut down easily. b: If I could get through, it would be basically the sound of me banging my head on the phone and him bl-bl-bl-bl-bl-bloviating about "liberal this" and "Clinton that". I can get that here. How about this, I'll call Rush if you can post an entire topic without using the word "liberal" or dodging the questions.
Originally Posted By DDMAN26 <<a: Rush would never let me on. He screens his calls so only the Ditto heads get thru or those that can be shut down easily.>> Which is why I don't listen anymore, his show has become boring. Our local guy here, who fills in for Rush, Mark Belling takes as many calls from liberals as he does conservative, makes for a more entertaining show.
Originally Posted By Beaumandy <<I'd love to see Rush or Hannity go up against Ed Schulz or someone like that.>> Ed Schultz had an opportunity to do just this type of debate a few months back cmpaley and he refused. O'Reilly is actually having a contest in a few weeks where people who think they can compete will get to go on his show to debate him. It's called bloviating with Bill. In 15 years, I have yet to hear anyone beat Rush in a debate. Thing about Rush is that he lets the other person talk and gives them lots of time. He also never yells. He also has the biggest ratings in talk show history for years on end. Why is that?
Originally Posted By Beaumandy The BEST guy who takes calls from liberals is Michael Medved out of Seattle. All he does is take apart liberlals who call his show... all without ever yelling or calling anyone names. There is NO liberal on the air who would dare do this as a regualar practice.
Originally Posted By cmpaley >>There is NO liberal on the air who would dare do this as a regualar practice.<< Bernie Ward does it all the time and he wipes the floor with 'em. They can't answer his questions.
Originally Posted By bboisvert <<There is NO liberal on the air who would dare do this as a regualar practice.>> Randi Rhodes takes all callers and posts all of her sources on her site. And occasionally, she gets a bit "out there" in the name of entertainment, but the facts she presents are incontravertible. Check her out, if you are able.
Originally Posted By DDMAN26 <<There is NO liberal on the air who would dare do this as a regualar practice.>> I'll admit in the .001 percent of the time I heard or seen Al Franken on a talking heads, I never once heard him raise his voice, as much as it pains me to say that.
Originally Posted By bboisvert Franken, meh.. He's not really a "caller oriented" show. He likes to have invited guests. I don't care much for his delivery.
