You are kidding, right? Are you referring to the waterboarding in the prisons?
Posted By: duh? on 2009-04-27
In Reply to: Would You Let Someone Waterboard You For $50,000? - ctmt
The difference is that those who are getting waterboarded in prisons do not know if they are going to be rescued or not. I also think that the 'procedure' takes longer than just 40 seconds.
Every second they have the feeling to get finally drowned. And I assume that some are really drowned when they do not give the expected answers.
And besides the interrogators are asking for 'answers' many do not have, or give answers just to get rescued.
It is different if a physician and a psychiatrist are standing by ensuring your rescue.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Most of these are federal prisons and
military bases that do have prisons for military personnel plus the barracks.
Don't get so upset. I think most of that link is just to fire up people's imagination. What do you think they would do with the prisoners in these federal prisons???? Turn them loose? Don't think so. It's scare tactics.
Islamic influence in prisons is not a new
This has been going on for quite some time. Unfortunately, what is taught in prison isn't "mainstream" Islam, but a corruption of it that really amounts to nothing more than criminal enterprise cloaked in the guise of religious activity. As such, the hands of prison officials are basically tied when it comes to trying to stop it because they would be interfering with a prisoner's "religious freedoms".
Yes, there are also innocent people in prisons on death row.
Therefore I am against the death penalty.
Saddam's rape rooms are replaced by US prisons.....
In addition, how many people DIE of starvation every single day in Africa (mostly children)? We don't even have to invade a country to save them.
Below is a report on Abu Ghraib prison. Some Iraquis might not agree with how much more moral the Americans are:
"[B]etween October and December 2003, at the Abu Ghraib Confinement Facility (BCCF), numerous incidents of sadistic, blatant, and wanton criminal abuses were inflicted on several detainees. This systemic and illegal abuse of detainees was intentionally perpetrated by several members of the military police guard force. … The allegations of abuse were substantiated by detailed witness statements (ANNEX 26) and the discovery of extremely graphic photographic evidence. … I find that the intentional abuse of detainees by military police personnel included the following acts:
a. Punching, slapping, and kicking detainees; jumping on their naked feet;
b. Videotaping and photographing naked male and female detainees;
c. Forcibly arranging detainees in various sexually explicit positions for photographing;
d. Forcing detainees to remove their clothing and keeping them naked for several days at a time;
e. Forcing naked male detainees to wear women's underwear;
f. Forcing groups of male detainees to masturbate themselves while being photographed and videotaped;
g. Arranging naked male detainees in a pile and then jumping on them;
h. Positioning a naked detainee on a MRE Box, with a sandbag on his head, and attaching wires to his fingers, toes, and penis to simulate electric torture; …
j. Placing a dog chain or strap around a naked detainee's neck and having a female soldier pose for a picture;
k. A male MP guard having sex with a female detainee;
l. Using military working dogs (without muzzles) to intimidate and frighten detainees, and in at least one case biting and severely injuring a detainee …
These findings are amply supported by written confessions provided by several of the suspects, written statements provided by detainees, and witness statements. …
In addition, several detainees also described the following acts of abuse, which under the circumstances, I find credible based on the clarity of their statements and supporting evidence provided by other witnesses (ANNEX 26):
a. Breaking chemical lights and pouring the phosphoric liquid on detainees;
b. Threatening detainees with a charged 9mm pistol;
c. Pouring cold water on naked detainees;
d. Beating detainees with a broom handle and a chair;
e. Threatening male detainees with rape; …
g. Sodomizing a detainee with a chemical light and perhaps a broom stick."
—Executive summary of Taguba report, finalized Feb. 29, 2004, briefed to superiors on March 3, 2004, and submitted in final form on March 9, 2004
A little waterboarding anyone?
Right wing radio jock tries to prove waterboarding isn't torture.
http://www.blueoregon.com/2009/05/trying-to-prove-waterboarding-isnt-torture-rightwing-radio-jock-tries-it-and.html
Waterboarding
I quote from your post...
'Waterboarding with medical personnel alongside to make sure no permanent harm is brought to these thugs...'
From Wikipedia...
Waterboarding is a form of torture that consists of immobilizing the victim on his or her back with the head inclined downwards, and then pouring water over the face and into the breathing passages. By forced suffocation and inhalation of water, the subject experiences drowning and is caused to believe they are about to die.[1] It is considered a form of torture by legal experts,[2][3] politicians, war veterans,[4][5] medical experts in the treatment of torture victims,[6][7] intelligence officials,[8] military judges,[9] and human rights organizations.[10][11] As early as the Spanish Inquisition it was used for interrogation purposes, to punish and intimidate, and to force confessions.[12]
what about Abu Ghaib and waterboarding......nm
nm
If waterboarding isn't torture...(sm)
then why did we execute Japanese war criminals for waterboarding American POWs after WWII? Maybe it's just considered torture when done to Americans? You can't have it both ways.
Waterboarding! Have you seen the movie, TAKEN?
Obama's little girls were taken or any other government offical's kids were taken, there would be no hesitation and would definitely use waterboarding.
Oh wait! Obama would rather reason? Ha, ha.
What? like sleep deprivation and waterboarding?
nm
Waterboarding makes Jesus Cry
xx
Abu Ghraib and waterboarding are 2 completely
nm
Waterboarding is only a small part...(sm)
of what they have done.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0521-01.htm
torture,-if waterboarding can save thousands of
nm
This thread started with waterboarding, torture or not?
Everybody is FREE to post one's opinion.
I NEVER STARTED being rude, maybe I REACTED rude.
The one who starts is the guilty one, even with insulting language. I dislike it immensely when people run out of ideas to defend their stance, the personal attacks, taken out of the blue, set in, like
'take your meds' or 'take your Xanax', or 'chill out.'
This puts them immediately into the loser position.
Or they become all of a sudden 'Grammar Nazis', because they run out of choices to prove their points, whereas these are mostly just TYPOS.
Or do you follow the Christian rule:
'If somebody slaps you on your right cheek, offer him also your left cheek.'
I NEVER understood this weird suggestion.
Not what I was referring to...
Anyway, I'm beginning to be sorry I mentioned this. The whole point was that a poster said TWICE that it was easy enough for her to check ISPs to find out who was using multiple monikers in order to find out what was posting as whom, etc. I was just questioning that comment, that's all.
As far as the hacking on the protestwarrior.com website, that is a separate issue from what I was referring to. Someone revealed some folks' personal information on the forum. I wasn't blaming the owners of the website for that.....
Time for me to give this a rest.
LOL! I was referring to
Bush's invasion of Iraq to *spread freedom* (#2 reason after the failed WMD excuse). I'd consider it kind of a *gander invasion* (as in what's good for...). Could you imagine an America where, regardless of wealth, everyone received medical care, nobody starved, everyone had adequate housing? An America that didn't throw its poor to the wolves (or the *waves* of a hurricane, as pointed out below in the areas that Bush included in his Louisiana plan)? An American government that allowed personal freedoms, didn't force one set of religious beliefs down your throat via politics, didn't try to control your personal life/death issues, didn't condemn you to unequal rights and eternal damnation because you love the *wrong* person?
I wouldn't object to living in that kind of America. 
Actually, I was referring to
money/evil as it regards George W. Bush, et al.
The UAE has a very unstable history of *loyalty* to the United States, and I believe allowing this deal to go through is very risky business and completely contrary to the man who said *If you're not with us, you're against us,* who, to me, is now completely against us and in favor of big money. The 9/11 Commission is totally against this deal. But anything to defend Dubya, right?
Let me guess...you *accidentally* posted on the liberal board again, right?
I was actually not referring to you.
You are not the message-syntax-style-similar person.
I was not referring to these 2
individuals exclusively. I said there are those who are able to see a problem from all sides. These are the people who will lead us to peace if we can ever achieve it. As far as liars et al, PULEEZE, take a look at our current Congress, take a look at many of our **ministries.** Take a look at our leaders of industry. Take a look at our professional sports and news people and newspapers.
My point was that one can actually have a viewpoint that is diametrically opposed to yours and still love America, love democracy and disapprove of this administration AND say so out loud. I admire people who can put their personal feelings aside and see incendiary events objectively. I am not able to do that but there are those that can. My post was not a defense of anyone in particular.
I was referring to myself...
the things I have gotten mostly on the C board but some here. I did not say you said any of those things. I just know they have been said to me. I am not championing anyone. I wanted to let Teddy know that she has a place here as does everyone (except if you denigrate W) and some pretty nasty things have been said on both sides. I did not want her to leave because she was, it appeared, standing alone yesterday. The more people are here the better it is.
I don't think that anyone probably deserves some of the rhetoric that appears here and I am amazed at the viciousness sometimes...both sides...but we are representative of a larger picture and that is a good thing.
My apologies, I was not referring to you in any way. I was telling Teddy that I knew how she must feel. It's tough to go it alone sometimes or be the only one on your side (or so it seems). I have been there where I am the only left voice and besides being difficult, it gets really confusing about answering what to who about what. That is all.
This is what I was referring to...
I should probably refrain from any dialogue and perhaps just correct posts that are obviously erroneous (like the one about poverty in the U.S.). Correcting factual errors on their posts would probably be a full time job. Besides I enjoy the research and learn lots!!
Don't know what you are referring to. nm
nm
I am referring to....
The missionary story told in the "Wow. This is impressive. I agree." post, the point being that there are a multitude of Christian viewpoints, especially when it comes to interpreting the Bible (or any other holy book, for that matter) and reconciling more secular political beliefs.
To whom are you referring?
First, I would like to know exactly to whom you are referring. Second, I would like to know who gave you the power to tell people to go elsewhere? If you are offended by a post or posts, you certainly are free to go elsewhere yourself, but I do not believe you have the right to tell others what to do!
Perhaps she's referring to
A fictional character, John McClane of Die Hard fame. We know she's out of touch with reality.
But why are you referring to....sm
republicans as being rabid tonight? I imagine that term could be used both ways for both parties, but why are you so vehement tonight about only Republicans? Did something happen?
(at least in the posts that I have read...might have missed some, as I don't go back when I've missed a day or so of posts....)
You're usually very level headed, although as you said above on a different post, it sounds like you go right and left on different issues.
And I keep meaning to ask you how your gourd painting is coming along, now that Halloween and fall are upon us. I hope you're having fun with that, as I saw you post on a different board a while back about your hobby....
I was referring to the very same NWO...
...that is the goal of the PNAC that everyone was afraid Bush would cause.
That's what I was referring too....
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,450445,00.html
The Atheist organizations ran "Why believe in a god" ads in D.C.
I mean if we as Christians can't run ads in secular areas, why should atheists?
By the way, Atheism is becoming a lot like it's own religion nowadays....
That's right - I was referring to him
and should have credited Bubba's name to the quote. Everyone should remember though, Mr. O is not the first black President we've had, according to many Bubba was.
First of all, I was referring to the GOP going . . . .
down the toilet, NOT Fox News. Secondly, the only reason Fox has the highest ratings on non-cable networks is because all the intellligent people are gleaning their information from the more intelligent cable networks. I reckon those people in the boonies can't get those fancy cable stations, and so they are forced to pick between the big 3, and besides, Lamebaugh, Beck, et al, are more to their likin', since birds of a feather (or smaller brains) stick together. So, you all can keep harping on Fox's ratings -- I don't give a rat's behind because I am not impressed (and I am not brainwashed), and I actually have a mind of my own. I think it is disgraceful that they are even allowed to call themselves a news network -- more like hate-inciting network.
If you are referring to me....
I haven't posted anything since January. So I think you may have me confused with someone else. I really just lurk and laugh. Thanks though! 
I think I see now what you're referring to about my post.
I don't find one thing funny about it. I'm outraged about it because blaming anyone BUT the priests is giving a green flag for that behavior to continue.
And I totally agree with you that it's gone on too long, with the church's apparent blessing. They know what these priests are doing, and they just transfer them to another parish so they can continue with a new set of children.
As far as the "headline" comment about my post, see what you mean about it coming up as a "headline" when you log onto this site. I didn't realize it was going to come up that way.
Please rest assured that I'm outraged by all this. Our children in this country are molested and killed every day in what seems to be an epidemic, and nobody is doing anything about it.
OK. But, I wasn't referring to this. That's all I'm trying to say. nm
x
Wasn't referring to you....nm
fdfdf
The 'jokes' I was referring to
were in your previous post. I guess I'm breaking your mold because, while I've never heard AL Franken, I'd break his nose too because what he said in the quote you just provided is hateful. I do not defend one side and slam the other.
Sounds like you are referring to a
certain group of people. Correct me if I have misunderstood. Who are you talking about? The vast majority of conservatives who believe the Bible is divinely inspired support the Constitution and don't want it meddled with. Your observation truly has me confused. 
I know...I was referring to my typo (nm)
xx
I still have no idea to whom you are referring!
Why don't you give specific examples, so I can understand what you are talking about? I am not psychic and truly don't know who you are targeting here. Everyone on the board has the ability to post under whatever name they choose. For example, Sam admitted to posting under the name Indy Observer yesterday. No one knew it was her until she revealed it in one of her posts. Do you have special powers that allow you to know who is posting under various names?
I was referring to the war in Iraq being
a waste. The man who was behind our 09/11 massacre is still at large. We should have put more time, resources in money going after him. Not going after Iraq, but then they had all that great oil. Again, Afghanistan is one thing, Iraq another. Bush and his admin. mislead and lied to everybody saying that Iraq had anything to do with 09/11. So, now we have pumped billions of dollars into an Iraq war when it should have put into getting the man/people would attacked us. So yes, the fact that it is Afghanistan does make the difference IMO.
I shudder to think of all the things the Republicans have done in the 6 years that they had majority that we don't even know about yet. It does not excuse this current fiasco though and as I stated earlier, no I do not overlook what hand the Dems had it in either.
Who are you referring to by "they" ?
I am also a Christian and don't condone any of it either and I think most people probably do not. "they" fear Muslims because all they know of Muslims is the small portion of them who are terrorists. They don't realize it is a peaceful religion. All of these things that were done in the name of religion over centuries were done by radicals one way or the other looking for an excuse. No one's God, not the God we Christians believe in, not the God Muslims believe in, condones killing and hatred. That is something we humans have done all by ourselves.
Which lies are you referring to
Would you please be specific. I understand you are not defending either candidate, but you came on and pretty much said that whatever we wrote were lies, so I would like to know which "lies" are you referring to. I'm sure you're probably referring to the people who wrote about their concerns and posted articles that were against Obama.
I came on this board to read people's "opinions", why someone liked or disliked a candidate and for what reason. Also a lot of excellent links and articles were posted. Some written by lawyers, journalists, etc. People with degrees and who have been studying the economy, foreign affairs, laws, and presidential races for 20 years or more. Are those people lying? They've done their research, and for many of us we posted links to those sources for people to read themselves and make their own determinations as to whether they belive it or not.
What I saw constantly was if it went against Obama people said it was a lie. We posted articles and were told the source is not credible. Then when we posted some from CNN or MSNBC nothing was said. So people gave no reason as to why they were not credible except for the simple fact that it did not praise Obama. They chose to ignore the truth instead.
So as for people "making things up". It all depended on if you were for or against Obama. I never heard one Obama supporter question any of the stuff Obama was saying or doing or his shady background and questionable associations. But the McCain supporters did question him. We did say time and time again we weren't really happy with the republicans choice, but the other was worse.
P.S. - The stuff we post... we do back up with a credible source.
So please tell me which lies you are referring to so we can answer you with credible sources.
This is referring to an off shore rig..... sm
when it talks about taking 20 years to bring one to production. People need to understand that this is from the seismographic investigations until the first drop of crude comes from below the ocean floor.
I am talking about land rigs, and I believe I stated this in my post. I live in an oil and gas rich region of our country and have a very good friend who is a consultant for one of the major drilling companies in the region. When I asked him how long it takes to bring a rig to production, his answer was that it used to take upwards of 6 weeks to 2 months but that they now have the technology to bring one in within 14 days from rig up to rig down. The higher ups in the business push for a figure closer to 10 days. I have watched the oil drilling activity in my area, and I mean physically watched it and not just reading about it in the newspaper, for the last 3 years and have literally counted the days from rig up to rig down several times and it generally does come in at around 10 to 14 days.
I also looked at the front page for your source. Did you? It has Obama written all over it, so any "facts" that are posted there are going to be slanted in his favor to advance his legislation and party. Even the first sentence is an outdated statement. Gas prices have plummetted in the past couple of weeks. It is currently down to below $2 in several towns in my area. My mother's royalty check this month was only 25% of what it had been in previous months.
So, I believe I know my facts pretty well and I don't need Obama's website decrying what Bush did or did not do to substantiate them.
Noooooooooo! I was referring to
when Bush declares martial law.
I wasn't talking about Obama.
If anyone is the antichrist, it's Bush, in my opinion. 
which post are you referring to
specifically? Which one of my posts were lies?
Not referring to you but to Keisha
@@
What lies are you referring to?
The ones coming out of the conspiracy theorists and witch hunts?
Referring to your quote above, would
sentiments if a conservative was being sworn into office on 1/20/09? Is this how you felt on 11/3/08?
**From where I stand (the left...ok, far left),....I would say that most Americans realize the power that comes with being united and would not be willing to give that up, regardless of which side of the aisle you're on.**
If you are referring to Obama.....sm
who refuses to release his IQ...it may well be in the triple digits, but so is President Bush.
I could care less what you think of Bush, so don't go there. He's made mistakes, most can agree on, so I won't debate any of those with you.
But high IQ does not equate to wisdom, and only time will tell if Obama, in his administration, will have any....wisdom that is.
He obviously hasn't had much wisdom wth respect to his past life, so hopefully his future will be different. I doubt it though.
I am referring to several of her posts, not just this one.
xx
I am very aware of what she was referring to.
I am asking for facts/incidences that directly relate to the type of "personality" that proves this poster's observations on Mrs. Obama's character. What exactly has she done to draw this meaness from someone?
|
