Cheney Requests Documents, Gets Slapped Down

[Bubba X]

by, of all people, Hillary Clinton. :lol:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090422/ts_nm/us_usa_clinton_cheney_3

...Asked about Cheney's request this week to declassify documents showing the "success" of some widely condemned, harsh interrogation techniques launched by ex-President George W. Bush after the September 11 attacks, Clinton had a caustic reply.

"It won't surprise you that I don't consider him (Cheney) a particularly reliable source," Clinton told the House of Representatives foreign affairs committee....

Now, according to whacked-out right wing conspiracy theorists, this must, MUST, be yet another example of the Main Stream Media/Obama Cabal manipulating the poor, unsuspecting public.

Yeah sure. The question she responded to was asked by a California Republican, Dana Rohrbacher who, I suppose, could be in on the conspiracy.

Anything's possible.

[delayjf]

Bill Clinton is irrelevant here, he was not involved nor does he have any first hand knowledge about the memo's Cheney is referring to. Perhaps they shouold get together and iron out their differences, perhaps they could go hunting. :D

[Tom]

Nice spin, but that is not what happened.
It was HILLARY who got slapped down.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/04/22/hillary_clinton_questions_dick_cheneys_credibility .html

Typical stupid non-answer by the Queen Bitch.
Then the real slap-down
Then she STILL refuses to give a straight answer, and is rescue by the DEMOCRAT chairman, trying to get he out of it. Typical dem investigation.

They are CHICKEN-SHIT because they KNOW Cheney has the real evidence and do not want to have to address it. The truth to a dem is like garlic to Dracula.

Nice try at spin, though.

[Bubba X]

Bill Clinton is irrelevant here, he was not involved nor does he have any first hand knowledge about the memo's Cheney is referring to. Perhaps they shouold get together and iron out their differences, perhaps they could go hunting. :DThen again, perhaps you don't realize it was Secretary of State Hillary Clinton who made an ass of Cheney. Not Bill. Though I'd assume he got a laugh out of it as well.

[Tom]

She made an ass out herself by not answering the question.

[Bubba X]

Nice spin, but that is not what happened.
It was HILLARY who got slapped down.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/04/22/hillary_clinton_questions_dick_cheneys_credibility .html

Typical stupid non-answer by the Queen Bitch.
Then the real slap-down
Then she STILL refuses to give a straight answer, and is rescue by the DEMOCRAT chairman, trying to get he out of it. Typical dem investigation.

They are CHICKEN-SHIT because they KNOW Cheney has the real evidence and do not want to have to address it. The truth to a dem is like garlic to Dracula.

Nice try at spin, though.
Yes, that is exactly what happened. And Cheney? Come on, he's just seliing books now, just like every other rat with a book coming out. You don't see that?

[Tom]

I see someone ( YOU) who cannot deal with any facts at all.
What Hillary thinks about him or what he is doing now is 100% irrelevant.
AL that counts here is those memos.....try to focus more - you look very foolish when you totally miss every point every day.
lsbets must have knocked you down harder than we thought. You have been a joke since he put you in your place. :lol::lol::lol:

If anyone got slapped down here, it is YOU.


When you decide to talk about facts, try again.

[delayjf]

Bubba, my bad, your right I'll bet he did get a laugh out of it.

[Bubba X]

I see someone ( YOU) who cannot deal with any facts at all.
What Hillary thinks about him or what he is doing now is 100% irrelevant.
AL that counts here is those memos.....try to focus more - you look very foolish when you totally miss every point every day.
lsbets must have knocked you down harder than we thought. You have been a joke since he put you in your place. :lol::lol::lol:

If anyone got slapped down here, it is YOU.


When you decide to talk about facts, try again.
Let's see:
Cheney = Former Vice President = As relevant as Al Gore.
Clinton = Current Sec of State = Responsible forCurrent Foreign Relations

And you think I cannot focus? I know you are old but come on, it's not that hard.

Getthememoegetthememosgetthememosgetthememos?

[Lefty]

bubba, get your head on straight. Look at the big picture: If they are going to release top secret memos that say that harsh interrogation was torture and they are saying it didn't work; just to be fair shouldn't they release the memos that tell what information was gained? Wouldn't you like to see all sides instead of just one? They have made the country less safe by releasing these memos, but now that the genie is out of the bottle, shouldn't we see all sides?

[PaceAdvantage]

The disrespect shown the former Vice-President of the United States by the current sitting Sec. of State is highly disturbing to say the least. For her to say what she said in public shocks me, although I know it shouldn't...after all, I'm the admin here and I read every post in off topic. She's obviously fully invested in the far-left wing...

Still, her comments were best kept private, away from the glare of TV cameras and whatnot. Shameful if you ask me...

[Bubba X]

bubba, get your head on straight. Look at the big picture: If they are going to release top secret memos that say that harsh interrogation was torture and they are saying it didn't work; just to be fair shouldn't they release the memos that tell what information was gained? Wouldn't you like to see all sides instead of just one? They have made the country less safe by releasing these memos, but now that the genie is out of the bottle, shouldn't we see all sides?Lefty, PA:
Yeah, I agree that if some docs come out, they should all come out. Frankly, the whole thing is ridiculous and stupid. Nothing good will come from it. You have Obama and crew playing this as if they are still campaigning and you also have Cheney becomiing more visible now than he was while in office. Obama's "let's get to the truth" is just politics and Cheney's recent comments are no different. It is ugly and hopefully Obama will shut down Holder at some point and Cheney will hit the mute button.

[Floyd]

bubba, get your head on straight. Look at the big picture: If they are going to release top secret memos that say that harsh interrogation was torture and they are saying it didn't work; just to be fair shouldn't they release the memos that tell what information was gained? Wouldn't you like to see all sides instead of just one? They have made the country less safe by releasing these memos, but now that the genie is out of the bottle, shouldn't we see all sides?

I agree, we should see all sides. Transparency is essential in a democracy. The evidence indicates that torture wasn't used to obtain information, but rather to generate false confessions to use as propaganda:

Officer 'Unpopular' for Opposing Interrogations. (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103421778)

...during the Cold War — the U.S. trained its people in what might happen to them if they were taken hostage, say as POWs in Korea by the Chinese?
Precisely so. Even before the Korean War, during the Soviet show trials that occurred shortly after World War II, we as the U.S. government observed very odd and inexplicable behavior — people claiming to be CIA agents who weren't on the CIA payroll. More intelligence came in to describe these … interrogation methods that were being used to compel people to produce what can be described as propaganda — a mixture of truth with a heavy overlay of falsehoods.

And these harsh interrogation methods had been used by the Soviets and the Chinese to get people to say things that weren't true?

That's true. And it's not just harsh physically, but I think the element that was more persuasive was their ability to induce what is known as debility, depression and dread through emotional and psychological techniques that profoundly altered somebody's ability to answer questions truthfully even if they wanted to. It truly undermined their ability to recall, so therefore it would call into question its efficacy in an intelligence-based interrogation.

Report: Abusive tactics used to seek Iraq-al Qaida link (http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/66622.html)

The Bush administration applied relentless pressure on interrogators to use harsh methods on detainees in part to find evidence of cooperation between al Qaida and the late Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein's regime, according to a former senior U.S. intelligence official and a former Army psychiatrist.

[Tom]

And yet we averted the attack on LA and numerous other plots, as well as capturing many high level Al Qeda operatives.

Your link would tend to disprove that tired argument that "torture" will yield incorrect evidence. In this case, where there was no link to Iraq, 83 WB events were not able to get a false report of one. And the fact that he not only survived it 83 times, but has no harmful effects from it tends to disqualify WB as a real torture.

[Floyd]

And yet we averted the attack on LA and numerous other plots, as well as capturing many high level Al Qeda operatives.

You keep saying this, Tom, when you know it isn't true.

[Tom]

I know that it is true. You are in denial.

Take your pick of links:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&hs=kil&ei=og3ySdGXE4r0MuDVpbEP&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=1&ct=result&cd=1&q=la+terror+attack+prevented+by+waterboarding&spell=1

[Floyd]

I know that it is true. You are in denial.

Take your pick of links:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&hs=kil&ei=og3ySdGXE4r0MuDVpbEP&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=1&ct=result&cd=1&q=la+terror+attack+prevented+by+waterboarding&spell=1

Let's see, your search leads to a bunch of articles which say "Cheney hints..." "officials at the CIA state..." We have no corroboration from any other source.
We do have this quote:
"The scientific community has never established that coercive interrogation methods are an effective means of obtaining reliable intelligence information," former military interrogation instructor and retired Air Force Col. Steven M. Kleinman wrote in the Intelligence Science Board report. "In essence, there seems to be an unsubstantiated assumption that 'compliance' carries the same connotation as 'meaningful cooperation.'"

And you know what? Even if torture was the most effective and reliable method of obtaining information, which it isn't, and even if torturing may have saved lives, which has not been proven, it would still be morally wrong and illegal. I know, I know. Less coercive interrogation techniques don't give you that little tingly feeling in your naughty-bits, but that's why we have laws, to keep people like you from carrying out in the real world the acts you and the other right-wing extremists like to advocate on this forum.

[Burls]

I throw this onto the fire.
Leaving to the side issues of whether or not waterboarding is an affront to human dignity, both of the torturer and of the tortured, let's focus on the informational aspects of the practice.
It is known that, in general, torture techniques such as waterboarding, are not a reliable means of extracting information from prisoners.
But, not being reliable doesn't mean that they never work.
Pushing a pin through the DRF is, in general, not a reliable means of handicapping.
But, it does sometimes work.
On those occasions when waterboarding does reveal accurate information, there is always the question of whether or not that information could have been revealed by non-torturous means.
The kind of situation where this seems least likely would be one like the LA terror plot, where specific information is required in a very short period of time.
Could waterboarding be justified on informational grounds in this very limited range of cases?
That, I think, is a controversial question.
What say you?

[Floyd]

I throw this onto the fire.
Leaving to the side issues of whether or not waterboarding is an affront to human dignity, both of the torturer and of the tortured, let's focus on the informational aspects of the practice.
It is known that, in general, torture techniques such as waterboarding, are not a reliable means of extracting information from prisoners.
But, not being reliable doesn't mean that they never work.
Pushing a pin through the DRF is, in general, not a reliable means of handicapping.
But, it does sometimes work.
On those occasions when waterboarding does reveal accurate information, there is always the question of whether or not that information could have been revealed by non-torturous means.
The kind of situation where this seems least likely would be one like the LA terror plot, where specific information is required in a very short period of time.
Could waterboarding be justified on informational grounds in this very limited range of cases?
That, I think, is a controversial question.
What say you?

I believe that torture is always morally wrong.
And that LA plot everyone keeps mentioning? It wasn't worth torturing over. (http://www.slate.com/id/2216601/)

[mostpost]

I believe that torture is always morally wrong.
And that LA plot everyone keeps mentioning? It wasn't worth torturing over. (http://www.slate.com/id/2216601/)

Floyd, I was just about to post that link. Let me point out the link "fact sheet" within the story. This takes you here: http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070523.html
This is a White House link where it is stated, under the title "Al Qaeda Leaders Intend To Strike Our Country Again" that in 2002 the Bush administration had disrupted a KSM plot to fly an airplane into the tallest building west of the Mississippi River. Remember that year. 2002!!!

According to Wikipedia (and many other sources) Khalid Shaikh Mohammed was captured in Rawalpindi, Pakistan on March 1, 2003. Which means we waterboarded him 183 times to get information on a plot we already knew about and had already eliminated.

But, perhaps I'm wrong. Maybe Bush/Cheney contacted Sherman and Dr. Peabody and borrowed the "Way Back Machine" thus saving us from tragedy :rolleyes: .

Floyd, Good job of once again finding links to prove your point. Tom, not so much.

[mostpost]

Nice spin, but that is not what happened.
It was HILLARY who got slapped down.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/04/22/hillary_clinton_questions_dick_cheneys_credibility .html

Typical stupid non-answer by the Queen Bitch.
Then the real slap-down
Then she STILL refuses to give a straight answer, and is rescue by the DEMOCRAT chairman, trying to get he out of it. Typical dem investigation.

They are CHICKEN-SHIT because they KNOW Cheney has the real evidence and do not want to have to address it. The truth to a dem is like garlic to Dracula.

Nice try at spin, though.

If you watch C-Span, you know that Congresscritters have a limited time to ask questions and speechify. Republcans, Democrats it doesn't matter. When your time is up your time is up. It has nothing to do mith Party or who the witness is.

[Floyd]

But, perhaps I'm wrong. Maybe Bush/Cheney contacted Sherman and Dr. Peabody and borrowed the "Way Back Machine" thus saving us from tragedy....
I hate to be pedantic. No, wait. I love to be pedantic. Anyway, I have it on good authority that Mr. Peabody never finished his PhD.
His boy ate his dissertation.

[HUSKER55]

If the US is mean to our enemies when they try and kill us then what do you call what they do to American prisoners?

Where is your outrage?

Do you guys flood them with your emails and opinions or are we the privileged few?

We interrogate to avoid taking lives.

I am curious. Did any of our "techniques " kill any of the prisoners?

Can our enemy say the same? I have talked to several guys who returned and they say that our enemy does kill prisoners and civilians who may or may not be anything but a worker.

I am to infer that when those civilians contactors who were beheaded, you think they were CIA?

[mostpost]

I hate to be pedantic. No, wait. I love to be pedantic. Anyway, I have it on good authority that Mr. Peabody never finished his PhD.
His boy ate his dissertation.

I meant MR. Peabody :blush: :blush: :blush: :blush:

[Floyd]

If the US is mean to our enemies when they try and kill us then what do you call what they do to American prisoners?

Where is your outrage?

Do you guys flood them with your emails and opinions or are we the privileged few?

We interrogate to avoid taking lives.

I am curious. Did any of our "techniques " kill any of the prisoners?

Can our enemy say the same? I have talked to several guys who returned and they say that our enemy does kill prisoners and civilians who may or may not be anything but a worker.

I am to infer that when those civilians contactors who were beheaded, you think they were CIA?

Did any of our "techniques" kill any of the prisoners? We don't know. (http://www.propublica.org/article/dozens-of-prisoners-held-by-cia-still-missing-fates-unknown-422)

It's interesting that the discussion has gone from "We didn't really torture." to "But they torture, too!"
The United States has tortured prisoners. That is a fact.
The mistake is that we let our adversaries set our policy for us.

[cj's dad]

You know, this torture issue is like the "innocent" drive by victim that is in a known drug buy zone at 2:30 am and is "accidentally" shot. What the hell are decent people doing in a known drug area?

Interred prisoners at Gitmo have no rights, they are there for a reason. Cut off their nuts if necessary if needed to get info which would save innocent American lives.

If you could use any means necessary to protect your parents, children etc... from an unnecessary death at the hands of terrorists, would you authorize torture? If you say no, you are lying and if you would allow members of your family to be killed you are an idiot.; if yes then you have no grounds for criticizing those who torture.

Torture away boys and girls, and do it right- make it hurt- make them talk- they will and if they don't, who cares?

9/11 = 3000+ = paybacks are a bitch !!

[HUSKER55]

Here is something else we don't know.

Hillary and Pelosi and the rest of the dems had no idea what was going on while Bush was in office?

What? They walked around in a daze?

(maybe they did)

I'm betting Chenney documents he requested will prove they did.

[delayjf]

Floyd, I was just about to post that link. Let me point out the link "fact sheet" within the story. This takes you here: http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archi...5/20070523.html
This is a White House link where it is stated, under the title "Al Qaeda Leaders Intend To Strike Our Country Again" that in 2002 the Bush administration had disrupted a KSM plot to fly an airplane into the tallest building west of the Mississippi River. Remember that year. 2002!!!

No doubt the dates raise a lot of questions. But remember, the reports Cheney wants released are classified - the 2002 attack is not. So you have to wonder - was there another attack? Especially since the CIA is standing by their story.

So Floyd, had we water boarded the information about 9/11 out of KSM in time to prevent the attack and save 3000 innocent lives - would it have been worth it?

[Burls]

I think it is true that certain nations have engaged in torture of prisoners and will continue to do so regardless of what the US does.
Does this fact -let's assume it is one - make it morally acceptable for the US to engage in the torture of prisoners?
One avenue of response would be to claim that, unseemly as it is, such torture saves the lives of innocent Americans; thus, it is morally justifiable.
This response brings us back to the question of whether or not such torture techniques are reliable ways of gaining information. If they are not, then this avenue of response fails.
So far, Floyd and mostpost have provided evidence that indicates that such torture techniques are not reliable ways of gaining information.
At this point in the debate, it's hardly plausible to just insist that such torture techniques do save lives, because, presumably, they are reliable ways of gaining information.
That's the issue at hand here.
Is there any evidence that can be presented to rebut the evidence presented by Floyd and mostpost?
There might be.
If anyone is aware of such evidence, let's hear it.

[PaceAdvantage]

Does this fact -let's assume it is one - make it morally acceptable for the US to engage in the torture of prisoners?It is 100% morally UNACCEPTABLE for the US to engage in the torture of prisoners. Luckily, to the best of my knowledge, this hasn't happened.

Waterboarding <> Torture

[Lefty]

Geo Tenet himself said valuable info was gathered through these techniques you call torture. That's why Cheney wantsthe docs made available that prove the techniques did lead to saving lives. If you libsare right, then why won't they release the docs? How come the dims lie about not knowing what was going on, when they were briefed in 2002 and did not dissent. Wants again, dims try to have it both ways.

[rastajenk]

And to paraphrase our worthy admin, Pace Advanti, I think it was, how can you believe the CIA some of the time and not believe them at other times? Who gets to pick and choose when the CIA, of all outfits, is credible? When it fits an agenda? Is that the best barometer of the truth?

[Rookies]

An Opinion on torture written by a Lefty in a conservative newspaper.

RICK SALUTIN
From Friday's Globe and Mail

April 24, 2009 at 12:00 AM EDT

There is something precious and virginal about the torture debate in the United States. As if that nation never knew torture before the shock of 9/11, and had to play catch-up, stumbling understandably as it felt its way.

The notion that torture is foreign to U.S. policy would leave people in Latin America laughing bitterly. For 63 years - first in Panama, then in Georgia - the School of the Americas (now renamed) has trained Latin American security forces using manuals frequently found to violate human rights.

Last week in Trinidad, Barack Obama was lectured on this kind of history and given renowned author Eduardo Galeano's book, Open Veins of Latin America, which covers much of the sad tale and has been continuously in print in English and Spanish for nearly 40 years. I'd be surprised if he doesn't already have his own copy.

The rest here:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090423.wcosalutin24/BNStory/specialComment/America/

[Tom]

Pelosi knew in advance about WB and said nothing,. Now she is lying.

[Tom]

You use an opinion piece as some kind of fact?

Originally Posted by Floyd
I believe that torture is always morally wrong.
And that LA plot everyone keeps mentioning? It wasn't worth torturing over. (http://www.slate.com/id/2216601/)

[Floyd]

You know, this torture issue is like the "innocent" drive by victim that is in a known drug buy zone at 2:30 am and is "accidentally" shot. What the hell are decent people doing in a known drug area?

Interred prisoners at Gitmo have no rights, they are there for a reason. Cut off their nuts if necessary if needed to get info which would save innocent American lives.

If you could use any means necessary to protect your parents, children etc... from an unnecessary death at the hands of terrorists, would you authorize torture? If you say no, you are lying and if you would allow members of your family to be killed you are an idiot.; if yes then you have no grounds for criticizing those who torture.

Torture away boys and girls, and do it right- make it hurt- make them talk- they will and if they don't, who cares?

9/11 = 3000+ = paybacks are a bitch !!

This is the type of "blame the victim" thinking that caused this mess.
This is why we have laws, so your twisted revenge fantasies and irrational "ends justify the means" logic wouldn't drag us down to the level of our enemies. This kind of thinking is also why we need to prosecute those animals who tortured people in our name.

[Tom]

By your logic, you certainly must support arresting and charging Obama with murder then. At least twice since he took office, innocent Pakistan were murdered by drones under his command. Surely that animal must pay for his crimes, no?

No one died from WB, but this monster is leaving blood all over the place.

[Floyd]

It is 100% morally UNACCEPTABLE for the US to engage in the torture of prisoners. Luckily, to the best of my knowledge, this hasn't happened.

Waterboarding <> Torture

Maybe (http://www.nybooks.com/icrc-report.pdf) you need to do a little more research on the subject. Or is this continued ignorance on your part willful?
Dick Cheney isn't even denying that we tortured any more, he says it was "justified."
This country we believe in? This "shining beacon on the hill?" Our actions in this have been no better than those we vilify. If that's what you want for America I'm glad your extreme right-wing views are in the minority.

[Floyd]

You use an opinion piece as some kind of fact?



Oh, c'mon Tom. That's pathetic. Have a little more coffee, I'm sure you can do better.

[Floyd]

By your logic, you certainly must support arresting and charging Obama with murder then. At least twice since he took office, innocent Pakistan were murdered by drones under his command. Surely that animal must pay for his crimes, no?

No one died from WB, but this monster is leaving blood all over the place.

What? Huh?
You still drunk from last night?

[Bubba X]

Maybe (http://www.nybooks.com/icrc-report.pdf) you need to do a little more research on the subject. Or is this continued ignorance on your part willful?
Dick Cheney isn't even denying that we tortured any more, he says it was "justified."
This country we believe in? This "shining beacon on the hill?" Our actions in this have been no better than those we vilify. If that's what you want for America I'm glad your extreme right-wing views are in the minority.

"A thousand points of pain."

[Floyd]

In 2002, Military Agency Warned Against 'Torture' (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/24/AR2009042403171.html)
"The military agency that provided advice on harsh interrogation techniques for use against terrorism suspects referred to the application of extreme duress as "torture" in a July 2002 document sent to the Pentagon's chief lawyer and warned that it would produce "unreliable information."

Hmmm. Even the Pentagon called it 'torture.'

[Tom]

What? Huh?
You still drunk from last night?

Ah, afraid to tackle the hard ones, huh?
Didn't think you had anything of substance. I was right. :lol:
But hey, Bubba is impressed! :rolleyes:

[boxcar]

These two are quite the tag team. Couldn't ask for a better comedy act.

Boxcar

[Floyd]

Ah, afraid to tackle the hard ones, huh?
Didn't think you had anything of substance. I was right.
But hey, Bubba is impressed!
Did you have anything substantive, (like, you know, links supporting your position or something,) to add to the discussion, Tom?

[Floyd]

These two are quite the tag team. Couldn't ask for a better comedy act.

Boxcar
Morning, Boxcar! Tell us some more stories about "Rambo Jesus" killing all those infidels and torturing people and throwing them off the boat and stuff!

[Tom]

You really are afraid to deal with reality, aren't you.


Here's one.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=100131283

Now, maybe you could address this unwarranted murder and knock off your totally classless nonsense like your reply to Boxcar above. You really show nothing but low class ignorance when you sink to that level. Are your really that low rent to have to resort to mocking GOD for a cheap laugh? Is that all you have? Pathetic.

[Floyd]

You really are afraid to deal with reality, aren't you.


Here's one.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=100131283

Now, maybe you could address this unwarranted murder and knock off your totally classless nonsense like your reply to Boxcar above. You really show nothing but low class ignorance when you sink to that level. Are your really that low rent to have to resort to mocking GOD for a cheap laugh? Is that all you have? Pathetic.
There's nothing there about torture, Tom, which is the subject of this thread. Maybe you'd like to start a new one?
I wasn't mocking God, I was asking Boxcar for more of his stories about this "Rambo Jesus" he believes in.

[boxcar]

There's nothing there about torture, Tom, which is the subject of this thread. Maybe you'd like to start a new one?
I wasn't mocking God, I was asking Boxcar for more of his stories about this "Rambo Jesus" he believes in.

Oh...so you want more "stories", do you? The best I can do is offer up a few passages from the Good Book:

Rev 14:9-12
9 And another angel, a third one, followed them, saying with a loud voice, "If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives a mark on his forehead or upon his hand, 10 he also will drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is mixed in full strength in the cup of His anger; and he will be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. 11 "And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever; and they have no rest day and night, those who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name." 12 Here is the perseverance of the saints who keep the commandments of God and their faith in Jesus.
NASB

The "Lamb" in the above passage is referring to Christ since he's the Lamb of God who sacrificed himself for the sins of his people. This Lamb will also judge the entire world at the end of the age.

2 Tim 4:1-2
4:1 I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead , and by His appearing and His kingdom: 2 preach the word;
NASB

Matt 25:31-34, 41-42
31 "But when the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the angels with Him, then He will sit on His glorious throne. 32 "And all the nations will be gathered before Him; and He will separate them from one another, as the shepherd separates the sheep from the goats ; 33 and He will put the sheep on His right, and the goats on the left. 34 "Then the King will say to those on His right, 'Come, you who are blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world...41 "Then He will also say to those on His left, 'Depart from Me, accursed ones, into the eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels;
NASB

Misunderstanding the true nature and character of Jesus Christ and exactly who he his and why his Father sent him to this dark and forlorn planet the first time will carry a very large price tag -- one that no one will be able to afford when the end comes. It's a very dangerous thing to mock that which you do not understand; for a day of reckoning is coming when all mockers of the King of Kings and Lord of Lords and the Judge of the Living and the Dead will answer to him.

Boxcar

[Floyd]

Oh...so you want more "stories", do you? The best I can do is offer up a few passages from the Good Book:
Matt 25:31-34, 41-42
31 "But when the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the angels with Him, then He will sit on His glorious throne. 32 "And all the nations will be gathered before Him; and He will separate them from one another, as the shepherd separates the sheep from the goats ; 33 and He will put the sheep on His right, and the goats on the left. 34 "Then the King will say to those on His right, 'Come, you who are blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world...41 "Then He will also say to those on His left, 'Depart from Me, accursed ones, into the eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels;
NASB

Misunderstanding the true nature and character of Jesus Christ and exactly who he his and why his Father sent him to this dark and forlorn planet the first time will carry a very large price tag -- one that no one will be able to afford when the end comes. It's a very dangerous thing to mock that which you do not understand; for a day of reckoning is coming when all mockers of the King of Kings and Lord of Lords and the Judge of the Living and the Dead will answer to him.

Boxcar

You missed a bunch of that Matthew quote, didn't you?
Here:
34"Then the King will say to those on His right, 'Come, you who are blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.
35'For I was hungry, and you gave Me something to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me something to drink; I was a stranger, and you invited Me in;
36 I was naked, and you clothed Me; I was sick, and you visited Me; I was in prison, and you came to Me.'
37"Then the righteous will answer Him, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry, and feed You, or thirsty, and give You something to drink?
38'And when did we see You a stranger, and invite You in, or naked, and clothe You?
39'When did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?'
40"The King will answer and say to them, 'Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of these brothers of Mine, even the least of them, you did it to Me.'

Did you get that last bit?
'Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of these brothers of Mine, even the least of them, you did it to Me.'

So I gotta ask you again, Boxcar. Who would Jesus torture?

[Burls]

Pelosi knew in advance about WB and said nothing,. Now she is lying.Tom, you're bad-mouthing Nancy!
Say it isn't so!

[Tom]

There's nothing there about torture, Tom, which is the subject of this thread. Maybe you'd like to start a new one?
I wasn't mocking God, I was asking Boxcar for more of his stories about this "Rambo Jesus" he believes in.

Nice try. But the topic changed.

Post 40:
Originally Posted by Tom

By your logic, you certainly must support arresting and charging Obama with murder then. At least twice since he took office, innocent Pakistan were murdered by drones under his command. Surely that animal must pay for his crimes, no?

No one died from WB, but this monster is leaving blood all over the place.

What? Huh?
You still drunk from last night?

Post 43
Originally Posted by Floyd

What? Huh?
You still drunk from last night?

Ah, afraid to tackle the hard ones, huh?
Didn't think you had anything of substance. I was right.
But hey, Bubba is impressed!

Post 45:
Originally Posted by Tom

Ah, afraid to tackle the hard ones, huh?
Didn't think you had anything of substance. I was right.
But hey, Bubba is impressed!

Post 48

Did you have anything substantive, (like, you know, links supporting your position or something,) to add to the discussion, Tom?

There's nothing there about torture, Tom, which is the subject of this thread. Maybe you'd like to start a new one?
I wasn't mocking God, I was asking Boxcar for more of his stories about this "Rambo Jesus" he believes in.


You asked for a link right after acknowledging my question to you about your boy being a murderer, which you cannot answer honestly and still hold your same opinion on torture. Then you try to spin by going off topic about God with Boxcar.

Face it Floyd, you have nothing - caught in your own lies, you have not the wit or the balls to reply. You are a troll, nothing more. You have been outed.

[Tom]

http://digitalartpress.wordpress.com/2008/06/26/obama-terrorist-have-constitutional-rights/


Hey Floyd, listen to this and tell where in the Constitution he gets the right to murder innocent people with drones? got a link to any of the warrants he obtained? All bush did was listen to phone calls. Barry murders people.

Maybe one to the authority to do this granted by Congress, like Bush had for Iraq? BTW, bush had congressional sign off on torture, too.

Maybe you could show us where the Pakistani government - a sovereign nation - gave him permission to vilolate their air space and murder people there?

Anything of substance will do, Floyd.....

[Floyd]

Nice try. But the topic changed.

You asked for a link right after acknowledging my question to you about your boy being a murderer, which you cannot answer honestly and still hold your same opinion on torture. Then you try to spin by going off topic about God with Boxcar.

Face it Floyd, you have nothing - caught in your own lies, you have not the wit or the balls to reply. You are a troll, nothing more. You have been outed.

Tom, what's your point? That you want to talk about something else? Is that why you wanted to change the topic? Like I said, why don't you start a new thread to talk about what you want to talk about.
We were talking about torture.
Boxcar believes in a Jesus that would encourage torture, so I asked him about that, he responded with chapter and cherry-picked verse. You have been reduced to distraction by false equivalence, bluster and name-calling because you have nothing germane to add to the discussion. Why do you even try? Really, start another thread about Obama's alleged war crimes and post there. The adults here will continue to talk about the recently disclosed crimes against humanity of the previous administration.

[boxcar]

You missed a bunch of that Matthew quote, didn't you?
Here:
34"Then the King will say to those on His right, 'Come, you who are blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.
35'For I was hungry, and you gave Me something to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me something to drink; I was a stranger, and you invited Me in;
36 I was naked, and you clothed Me; I was sick, and you visited Me; I was in prison, and you came to Me.'
37"Then the righteous will answer Him, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry, and feed You, or thirsty, and give You something to drink?
38'And when did we see You a stranger, and invite You in, or naked, and clothe You?
39'When did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?'
40"The King will answer and say to them, 'Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of these brothers of Mine, even the least of them, you did it to Me.'

Did you get that last bit?
'Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of these brothers of Mine, even the least of them, you did it to Me.'

So I gotta ask you again, Boxcar. Who would Jesus torture?

Well...if you want to call it "torture", those on his left in verse 41, which you left out. I purposely omitted the above verses for brevity's sake, plus it really didn't change the sense of the passage.

The central point to all three passages is that this Jesus, who you have compared to a "Rambo", will judge all when he returns and will send all unbelievers into eternal perdition where the "smoke of their torment will go up forever and ever". Some would construe this kind of language as constituting "torture".

Boxcar

[Floyd]

Well...if you want to call it "torture", those on his left in verse 41, which you left out. I purposely omitted the above verses for brevity's sake, plus it really didn't change the sense of the passage.

The central point to all three passages is that this Jesus, who you have compared to a "Rambo", will judge all when he returns and will send all unbelievers into eternal perdition where the "smoke of their torment will go up forever and ever". Some would construe this kind of language as constituting "torture".

Boxcar

Thanks for demonstrating how far you'll stretch to defend the indefensible.

[Tom]

Thanks for demonstrating how far you'll stretch to defend the indefensible.

You defend murdering innocent people from the sky?
The topic blend - I asked how you could justify murder and not torture, then you insult GOD. You are a coward, dude. :lol::lol::lol:

[Floyd]

You defend murdering innocent people from the sky?
The topic blend - I asked how you could justify murder and not torture, then you insult GOD. You are a coward, dude.

False equivalence, and a willful misrepresentation of what I posted.

Not only have you shown yourself to be morally and ideologically bankrupt, but intellectually bankrupt as well.
If you don't have anything to say, why do you bother saying anything? Really, Tom. Stick with the inane one-liners.

[Tom]

I don't blame you, you can't defend your position.
I have been very clear in my questions and provided links as you requested

Given that you support A, I concluded that you must also support B.
Examples were provided.


Nonsense was your reply. WHY is it a false equivalence?

I'm done with you.....your suit is emptier than Obama's.
Just another internet mouth. But most of us have know that for a while.

[Floyd]

I don't blame you, you can't defend your position.
I have been very clear in my questions and provided links as you requested

Given that you support A, I concluded that you must also support B.
Examples were provided.


Nonsense was your reply. WHY is it a false equivalence?

I'm done with you.....your suit is emptier than Obama's.
Just another internet mouth. But most of us have know that for a while.

Tom, monkey logic won't work with grown-up humans. I have defended my position, you have tried to change the topic.
I could say that, given your stated support for white supremacists, you support an American racial genocide.
"Given that you support A, I concluded that you must also support B."
That's monkey logic. We humans are a little more intellectually facile. You're obviously out of your depth here. You have failed to prove any of your points regarding the topic at hand, which, as you seem to have forgotten, is torture. You have resorted to distraction, distortion and name calling because you cannot rationally justify your stand on torture. I can sense your frustration. I understand that you feel defeated and want to lash out, but, really, you aren't doing yourself any favors here. You might just want to let this one go, because we can all see how much you're struggling.

[boxcar]

Thanks for demonstrating how far you'll stretch to defend the indefensible.

I would never "stretch" anything beyond what the Word of God does. Don't shoot me; I'm only the messenger, not the author of the message.

Boxcar

[Floyd]

I would never "stretch" anything beyond what the Word of God does. Don't shoot me; I'm only the messenger, not the author of the message.

Boxcar

Our very own Torquemada, spreading God's love through torture.

[fast4522]

These consummate dyed in the wool left wing people are just shape shifters, in my mind it is ok to prevent a second attack like 911 by any means necessary. At the time it occurred there was little doubt it was necessary and the left wing did little to block it. When your dealing with roaches that hide in other peoples coaches you get out the Raid, I am sorry but TFB. Its not a matter of white supremacy as some would suggest or are even so rank to mention such rubbish. Today its air supremacy, and if you let this administration have its way past the next two years and elect more Barney's & Nancy,s our aircraft carriers will be in the same sad state of disrepair (50% not functional) like they were prior to Bush taking office.

[Floyd]

These consummate dyed in the wool left wing people are just shape shifters, in my mind it is ok to prevent a second attack like 911 by any means necessary. At the time it occurred there was little doubt it was necessary and the left wing did little to block it. When your dealing with roaches that hide in other peoples coaches you get out the Raid, I am sorry but TFB. Its not a matter of white supremacy as some would suggest or are even so rank to mention such rubbish. Today its air supremacy, and if you let this administration have its way past the next two years and elect more Barney's & Nancy,s our aircraft carriers will be in the same sad state of disrepair (50% not functional) like they were prior to Bush taking office.

So am I to conclude from this scattered rant that you have no use for such tired and outdated constructs as "laws," "treaties," "conventions," or, indeed "morality?"

[fast4522]

Floyd,
If its you or me, its a better bet than I will go to work the next day and you will not, its a even better bet than a horse race. Mind you if approved by the President or VP any rubbish you suggest can not be held against anyone down the chain of command other than hearings that can't go anyplace other than garbage TV.

[Floyd]

Floyd,
If its you or me, its a better bet than I will go to work the next day and you will not, its a even better bet than a horse race. Mind you if approved by the President or VP any rubbish you suggest can not be held against anyone down the chain of command other than hearings that can't go anyplace other than garbage TV.
Your first sentence makes no objective sense.
Hmm.
Nope. Still nothing. I'll ignore it.

Your second statement is the well known Nuremburg Defense.
That hasn't worked so well in the past.

[fast4522]

In short it means if you do something against this country, or even suggest to do so, you might well expect to perish before anyone takes you serious, and everyone around you maybe. We do not live in a perfect world, or have to pretend we are not as extreme as the next, but just get the job done. History will reflect a Presidents marks plus or minus in the light of the day that it was. And while using the very near memory of 911 and what followed it to change the agenda to a socialist one, it will probably do little for this administrations mark in history.

[boxcar]

Our very own Torquemada, spreading God's love through torture.


Now...you see...you ain't bein' fair 'n' balanced. Remember the sheep who were separated to His right. No "torture" for them -- just eternal bliss and happiness.
No wonder people like you are ga ga over CNN, MSNBC, NY Slimes, etc., etc. You always like to have the lies slanted your way,while believing they are the truth.

Boxcar

[Tom]

Let's see, Floyd says I am morally bankrupt.
Wow. I guess that's pretty bad when you consider his demonstrated morality.
Just today, he accused me drinking, called our military animals, mocked God, lied in a few posts, and refused to denounce outright murder.

Sure am glad I am bankrupt of his brand of morality! :lol:

You have to admit, most of the lefties here will fight forever for their convictions, and whether I agree with them or not, I have to respect them for holding their ground. Then there's Floyd......he must be French. :lol:

[Floyd]

In short it means if you do something against this country, or even suggest to do so, you might well expect to perish before anyone takes you serious, and everyone around you maybe. We do not live in a perfect world, or have to pretend we are not as extreme as the next, but just get the job done. History will reflect a Presidents marks plus or minus in the light of the day that it was. And while using the very near memory of 911 and what followed it to change the agenda to a socialist one, it will probably do little for this administrations mark in history.
Uhmmm, lessee if I can parse this. If I do something against this country, like, maybe torture, perhaps? I might well expect to perish.
I can live with that. It seems maybe we're in agreement here.
Thanks for clearing that up.

[Floyd]

Now...you see...you ain't bein' fair 'n' balanced. Remember the sheep who were separated to His right. No "torture" for them -- just eternal bliss and happiness.
No wonder people like you are ga ga over CNN, MSNBC, NY Slimes, etc., etc. You always like to have the lies slanted your way,while believing they are the truth.

Boxcar

Got ya. Sheep go to heaven, goats go to hell.
Well all right.

[Floyd]

Let's see, Floyd says I am morally bankrupt.
Wow. I guess that's pretty bad when you consider his demonstrated morality.
Just today, he accused me drinking, called our military animals, mocked God, lied in a few posts, and refused to denounce outright murder.

Sure am glad I am bankrupt of his brand of morality! :lol:

You have to admit, most of the lefties here will fight forever for their convictions, and whether I agree with them or not, I have to respect them for holding their ground. Then there's Floyd......he must be French.

Wait, I thought you said you were done with me. Why are you still here? Listen, just go fling your poo in the other room, there are adults here who would like to discuss torture and its ramifications in a representative democracy. If you can't step up and defend your position, just shush. Really. You're only embarrassing yourself.

[boxcar]

Got ya. Sheep go to heaven, goats go to hell.
Well all right.

Now...that's more like it. Fair and balanced and truthful. :jump:

Boxcar

[Floyd]

The Banality of Bush White House Evil (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/26/opinion/26rich.html?_r=1)
"Five years after the Abu Ghraib revelations, we must acknowledge that our government methodically authorized torture and lied about it. But we also must contemplate the possibility that it did so not just out of a sincere, if criminally misguided, desire to “protect” us but also to promote an unnecessary and catastrophic war. Instead of saving us from “another 9/11,” torture was a tool in the campaign to falsify and exploit 9/11 so that fearful Americans would be bamboozled into a mission that had nothing to do with Al Qaeda. The lying about Iraq remains the original sin from which flows much of the Bush White House’s illegality."

[fast4522]

Anything approved by the President or the VP people can talk of illegality, but the truth is nothing other than hearings and a waste of taxpayer money will be the result, if the President approves a missile that targets anyplace outside the USA its ok because it was not used in the US. Any sitting United States President can mark you as a enemy of the state, and they can do anything they want with you, its done every day.

[Tom]

Floyd found an opinion. Woo Hoo.
Here's another one - terror free for 8 years.
Thank you Mr Bush and Mr Cheney.

[Marshall Bennett]

I'm waiting for Obama to bring all of the terrorist to the white House to talk . :)

[Tom]

Maybe he plans to infect them all with SWINE flu.:lol:

[PaceAdvantage]

Our actions in this have been no better than those we vilify. If that's what you want for America I'm glad your extreme right-wing views are in the minority.I don't recall us ever cutting off the heads of any Al-Jazeera journalists...do you?

You really consider me extreme right-wing? Really? Wow...you really need to get out more.

What extreme right-wing views have I espoused here on off-topic? What is considered extreme right-wing these days anyway?

I'm guessing anything to the right of Obama/Pelosi/Ayers is considered extreme right-wing...correct?

You think this shit is going to fly forever?

[PaceAdvantage]

What? Huh?
You still drunk from last night?Not scoring any points here...

[PaceAdvantage]

Did you have anything substantive, (like, you know, links supporting your position or something,) to add to the discussion, Tom?You mean like this stellar contribution:

You still drunk from last night?