Posted on 10/01/2006 7:58:27 AM PDT by dennisw
"IF" does not cut it... not even close!
I have met President Bush. I have looked eye to eye into the man. I have faith in GOD, and I have faith in our President. I do not have faith in the media, except for Rush and Brit Hume. It was Hume that stated the facts that I gave you, and it came from CIA reports, interviews with agents in the field, and President Bush himself.
LLS
I suspect David is "belly up to the bar" in that place ~ all too often.
Assuming you are taking a shower in the bidet.
The fact that you're mentioning the two in the same sentence and according them the same credibility tells me all I need to know.
I am dumbstruck with what the dems are doing to themselves. i work with a lot of apolitical people but lately those whom i work with cannot understand why the dems oppose wiretaps and interegation. They are risking putting themselves into the electoral abyss. It doesnt seem the average joe doesnt get to upset that alquida might get a little wet in order to get vital info
How can these idiots be so disconnected - and right. . . the more 'false' info they get. . .the better!
The rationale here is no different than their twisted logic that has them concluding that America on the 'offense' of WOT has created more terrorists. . .
(Imagine. . .If only we would make it easier; so they would have to use less manpower. . - and of course, we have a Dimwit Party that is willing to do just that). . ).
Nacny Pelosi denying the insult of their Party being 'soft' on terrorism; when just prior; she offered her spiritual resolve re WOT. . .'we should treat our enemies. . .as we would have then treat us'. . .
ANY Dems that should read ANY of the above. . . PLEASE take note. . .re your VOTE
How can these idiots be so disconnected - and right. . . the more 'false' info they get. . .the better!
The rationale here is no different than their twisted logic that has them concluding that America on the 'offense' of WOT has created more terrorists. . .
(Imagine. . .If only we would make it easier; so they would have to use less manpower. . - and of course, we have a Dimwit Party that is willing to do just that). . ).
Nacny Pelosi denying the insult of their Party being 'soft' on terrorism; when just prior; she offered her spiritual resolve re WOT. . .'we should treat our enemies. . .as we would have then treat us'. . .
ANY Dems that should read ANY of the above. . . PLEASE take note. . .re your VOTE
No prisoner of American forces ever has to undergo waterboarding, or any other interrogation technique. All they have to do is give us the information we request. If they do this, no discomfort will come to them.
It was in your first post where I learned all that I needed to know about you. It's your right to believe how you wish and to expound on it here, but the First Amendment works both ways... and it works much better if civilty is used in its practice.
LLS
If the intel being gathered by these techniques is of dubious value, then we certainly should reconsider our methods. But I have no moral misgivings whatsoever about extracting information from the vermin we capture. These are the same creatures that plant roadside bombs, behead people, drag burnt corpses through the streets, and fly airplanes into office buildings. It's hard to find much sympathy for their feigned umbrage at our moral "lapses."
There was something "uncivil" about that?
They waterboarded at least some of their intelligence radion ops before sending us to VN in their survival training simulated POW camp.
Having experienced this as a pilot during Survival, Escape, Resistance, and Evasion (SERE) training, I agree that this is NOT torture.
That is torture to the islamists.
My remark was a premise of a syllogism: IF we can believe that intel gathered by use of this technique has prevented 8 al-Qaida attacks in this country, then the intel is not dubious. One thing arguing against blind acceptance of that premise is that George Bush is capable of falsifying data that will aid his case. While that was not the central point of my premise, intellectual rigor demands that it be recognized.
Argue on the merits of your beliefs, not upon my proclamation of faith.
First, your faith inspires no such obligation in me. Secondly, I am not "arguing" anything. I am merely presenting my personal observations, consistent with logical thought. And thirdly, I suspect that this disagreement arose from a misperception. When I suggested that George Bush was capable of misrepresentation, I did not intend to insult your god. In my religion, George Bush is simply a human being, as fallible as the rest of us mere mortals.
The fact that he has achieved a credibility on par with the Almighty in your opinion says more about you than it does about him. And it certainly doesn't lend any logical weight to your case.
liberals will always consider it torture when it is done to one of their own; communist revolutionaries, jihadists, non-uniformed combatants fighting americans, insurgents, AND dirty, un-washed, home-grown socialists...(their bodies may be clean but their minds are nothing but active petri dishes)
I would rather be waterboarded than face a west coast libs idea of a good time: a high colonic. (Just don't ask me weight or age questions.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.