Lindaland
  Global Unity
  Cheney, others OK'd harsh interrogations

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   Cheney, others OK'd harsh interrogations
AcousticGod
Knowflake

Posts: 4415
From: Pleasanton, CA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 10, 2008 10:04 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for AcousticGod     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
By LARA JAKES JORDAN and PAMELA HESS, Associated Press Writer
28 minutes ago


Bush administration officials from Vice President Dick Cheney on down signed off on using harsh interrogation techniques against suspected terrorists after asking the Justice Department to endorse their legality, The Associated Press has learned.

The officials also took care to insulate President Bush from a series of meetings where CIA interrogation methods, including waterboarding, which simulates drowning, were discussed and ultimately approved.

A former senior U.S. intelligence official familiar with the meetings described them Thursday to the AP to confirm details first reported by ABC News on Wednesday. The intelligence official spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to publicly discuss the issue.

Between 2002 and 2003, the Justice Department issued several memos from its Office of Legal Counsel that justified using the interrogation tactics, including ones that critics call torture.

"If you looked at the timing of the meetings and the memos you'd see a correlation," the former intelligence official said. Those who attended the dozens of meetings agreed that "there'd need to be a legal opinion on the legality of these tactics" before using them on al-Qaida detainees, the former official said.

The meetings were held in the White House Situation Room in the years immediately following the Sept. 11 attacks. Attending the sessions were then-Bush aides Attorney General John Ashcroft, Secretary of State Colin Powell, CIA Director George Tenet and national security adviser Condoleezza Rice.

The White House, Justice and State departments and the CIA refused comment Thursday, as did a spokesman for Tenet. A message for Ashcroft was not immediately returned.

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., lambasted what he described as "yet another astonishing disclosure about the Bush administration and its use of torture."

"Who would have thought that in the United States of America in the 21st century, the top officials of the executive branch would routinely gather in the White House to approve torture?" Kennedy said in a statement. "Long after President Bush has left office, our country will continue to pay the price for his administration's renegade repudiation of the rule of law and fundamental human rights."

The American Civil Liberties Union called on Congress to investigate.

"With each new revelation, it is beginning to look like the torture operation was managed and directed out of the White House," ACLU legislative director Caroline Fredrickson said. "This is what we suspected all along."

The former intelligence official described Cheney and the top national security officials as deeply immersed in developing the CIA's interrogation program during months of discussions over which methods should be used and when.

At times, CIA officers would demonstrate some of the tactics, or at least detail how they worked, to make sure the small group of "principals" fully understood what the al-Qaida detainees would undergo. The principals eventually authorized physical abuse such as slaps and pushes, sleep deprivation, or waterboarding. This technique involves strapping a person down and pouring water over his cloth-covered face to create the sensation of drowning.

The small group then asked the Justice Department to examine whether using the interrogation methods would break domestic or international laws.

"No one at the agency wanted to operate under a notion of winks and nods and assumptions that everyone understood what was being talked about," said a second former senior intelligence official. "People wanted to be assured that everything that was conducted was understood and approved by the folks in the chain of command."

The Office of Legal Counsel issued at least two opinions on interrogation methods.

In one, dated Aug. 1, 2002, then-Assistant Attorney General Jay Bybee defined torture as covering "only extreme acts" causing pain similar in intensity to that caused by death or organ failure. A second, dated March 14, 2003, justified using harsh tactics on detainees held overseas so long as military interrogators did not specifically intend to torture their captives.

Both legal opinions since have been withdrawn.

The second former senior intelligence official said rescinding the memos caused the CIA to seek even more detailed approvals for the interrogations.

The department issued another still-secret memo in October 2001 that, in part, sought to outline novel ways the military could be used domestically to defend the country in the face of an impending attack. The Justice Department so far has refused to release it, citing attorney-client privilege, and Attorney General Michael Mukasey declined to describe it Thursday at a Senate panel where Democrats characterized it as a "torture memo."

Not all of the principals who attended were fully comfortable with the White House meetings.

The ABC News report portrayed Ashcroft as troubled by the discussions, despite agreeing that the interrogations methods were legal.

"Why are we talking about this in the White House?" the network quoted Ashcroft as saying during one meeting. "History will not judge this kindly."

___

Associated Press writer Pete Yost contributed to this report.

___

On the Net:

CIA: http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/

Copyright © 2008 The Associated Press.
By LARA JAKES JORDAN and PAMELA HESS, Associated Press Writer
28 minutes ago


Bush administration officials from Vice President Dick Cheney on down signed off on using harsh interrogation techniques against suspected terrorists after asking the Justice Department to endorse their legality, The Associated Press has learned.

The officials also took care to insulate President Bush from a series of meetings where CIA interrogation methods, including waterboarding, which simulates drowning, were discussed and ultimately approved.

A former senior U.S. intelligence official familiar with the meetings described them Thursday to the AP to confirm details first reported by ABC News on Wednesday. The intelligence official spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to publicly discuss the issue.

Between 2002 and 2003, the Justice Department issued several memos from its Office of Legal Counsel that justified using the interrogation tactics, including ones that critics call torture.

"If you looked at the timing of the meetings and the memos you'd see a correlation," the former intelligence official said. Those who attended the dozens of meetings agreed that "there'd need to be a legal opinion on the legality of these tactics" before using them on al-Qaida detainees, the former official said.

The meetings were held in the White House Situation Room in the years immediately following the Sept. 11 attacks. Attending the sessions were then-Bush aides Attorney General John Ashcroft, Secretary of State Colin Powell, CIA Director George Tenet and national security adviser Condoleezza Rice.

The White House, Justice and State departments and the CIA refused comment Thursday, as did a spokesman for Tenet. A message for Ashcroft was not immediately returned.

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., lambasted what he described as "yet another astonishing disclosure about the Bush administration and its use of torture."

"Who would have thought that in the United States of America in the 21st century, the top officials of the executive branch would routinely gather in the White House to approve torture?" Kennedy said in a statement. "Long after President Bush has left office, our country will continue to pay the price for his administration's renegade repudiation of the rule of law and fundamental human rights."

The American Civil Liberties Union called on Congress to investigate.

"With each new revelation, it is beginning to look like the torture operation was managed and directed out of the White House," ACLU legislative director Caroline Fredrickson said. "This is what we suspected all along."

The former intelligence official described Cheney and the top national security officials as deeply immersed in developing the CIA's interrogation program during months of discussions over which methods should be used and when.

At times, CIA officers would demonstrate some of the tactics, or at least detail how they worked, to make sure the small group of "principals" fully understood what the al-Qaida detainees would undergo. The principals eventually authorized physical abuse such as slaps and pushes, sleep deprivation, or waterboarding. This technique involves strapping a person down and pouring water over his cloth-covered face to create the sensation of drowning.

The small group then asked the Justice Department to examine whether using the interrogation methods would break domestic or international laws.

"No one at the agency wanted to operate under a notion of winks and nods and assumptions that everyone understood what was being talked about," said a second former senior intelligence official. "People wanted to be assured that everything that was conducted was understood and approved by the folks in the chain of command."

The Office of Legal Counsel issued at least two opinions on interrogation methods.

In one, dated Aug. 1, 2002, then-Assistant Attorney General Jay Bybee defined torture as covering "only extreme acts" causing pain similar in intensity to that caused by death or organ failure. A second, dated March 14, 2003, justified using harsh tactics on detainees held overseas so long as military interrogators did not specifically intend to torture their captives.

Both legal opinions since have been withdrawn.

The second former senior intelligence official said rescinding the memos caused the CIA to seek even more detailed approvals for the interrogations.

The department issued another still-secret memo in October 2001 that, in part, sought to outline novel ways the military could be used domestically to defend the country in the face of an impending attack. The Justice Department so far has refused to release it, citing attorney-client privilege, and Attorney General Michael Mukasey declined to describe it Thursday at a Senate panel where Democrats characterized it as a "torture memo."

Not all of the principals who attended were fully comfortable with the White House meetings.

The ABC News report portrayed Ashcroft as troubled by the discussions, despite agreeing that the interrogations methods were legal.

"Why are we talking about this in the White House?" the network quoted Ashcroft as saying during one meeting. "History will not judge this kindly."

___

Associated Press writer Pete Yost contributed to this report.

___

On the Net:

CIA: http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/

Copyright © 2008 The Associated Press.
Article

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 2787
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 10, 2008 11:43 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Water boarding is way too good for these bast@rds who deliberately kill unarmed, defenseless civilians...including women and children.

Some here think these yellow bellied cowards are really ballsy, brave and courageous...for opening up with automatic weapons on unarmed and defenseless women and children. I think there are no bigger cowards on the face of the earth.

Whatever is being done to them to get them to talk is a whole lot milder than the heat to their sorry as$es I would prescribe.

As usual, we have an antiwar press nitwit who deliberately misstates the facts about waterboarding. Waterboarding is not "simulated drowning". No one thinks they are actually drowning. They are not being held underwater until they run out of breath..and hope their interrogators are not misjudging how long they can hold their breath. Most people can hold their breath for at least a minute and a half and some for as long as 3 minutes plus. Yet, the longest holdout broke in about a minute 45 seconds. He didn't think he was drowning. He had an automatic reflex reaction, was in no danger whatsoever and told his interrogators what they needed to know. This information directly thwarted planned attacks against the US and led to the capture or killing of other terrorists in other terrorist cells.

Me, I think that terrorist bast@rd got off way too easy. All he got was a case of wet hair.

IP: Logged

Eleanore
Moderator

Posts: 112
From: Okinawa, Japan
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 11, 2008 12:59 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Eleanore     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Oh no. Not harsh interrogations against al-Qaida detainees.

Why doesn't everyone so sure that simple, easy talks with these people will work all on their own just head on over to one of al-Qaida's strongholds, with cakes and pies and tea, and invite them for a nice and pleasant chat. Please. Prove to the rest of us ignorant "war mongers" how right you are. This is your time. You have all the right answers, methods and certainly the morality. What are you doing just letting all the evil murderers "take care" of things when you have the only viable solutions? Be like turtles ... stick your own necks out and make progress. The rest of us are clearly in need of help and guidance. Lead us by example. YOU can change the world. And the rest of us sheeple will follow you once you are proven right.

IP: Logged

AcousticGod
Knowflake

Posts: 4415
From: Pleasanton, CA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 11, 2008 01:15 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for AcousticGod     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Waterboarding is not "simulated drowning". No one thinks they are actually drowning.

Anyone that educates themselves on the practice would disagree.

IP: Logged

BornUnderDioscuri
Moderator

Posts: 49
From:
Registered: Jun 2009

posted April 11, 2008 01:49 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for BornUnderDioscuri     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
While I am all for this and horrible people that wish to harm civilians should get whats coming to them, it has been shown that physical torture doesn't work very well in getting information. In fact it only works if you know for a fact that the person you are questioning, has the information you need in its entity... because if you question two suspects under torture and one knows the info and the other doesn't both are going to tell something...The one that knows the truth will give it up and one that doesn't will make it up and now ur stuck with two infos...

Im a lot more for psychological torture...breaking them down mentally should do better...it does though emulate drowning and there is studies that show it could lead to brain damage and we don't want that...we want the info...so psychological warfare has my vote. I am not 100% sure on how water boarding works but I read a few studies.

Jwhop - lol re wet hair case

IP: Logged

BornUnderDioscuri
Moderator

Posts: 49
From:
Registered: Jun 2009

posted April 11, 2008 01:54 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for BornUnderDioscuri     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
Waterboarding is a form of torture that consists of immobilizing a person on their back with the head inclined downward (the Trendelenburg position), and pouring water over the face and into the breathing passages.[1] Through forced suffocation and inhalation of water, the subject experiences the process of drowning and is made to believe that death is imminent.[2] In contrast to merely submerging the head face-forward, waterboarding almost immediately elicits the gag reflex.[3] Although waterboarding does not always cause lasting physical damage, it carries the risks of extreme pain, damage to the lungs, brain damage caused by oxygen deprivation, injuries (including broken bones) due to struggling against restraints, and even death.[4] The psychological effects on victims of waterboarding can last for years after the procedure.[5]

Im cool with the psych effects but the whole brain damage doesn't fly with me...I mean if we need them for information I don't think giving them brain damage would help. Though if it does, I am all for it...

IP: Logged

Eleanore
Moderator

Posts: 112
From: Okinawa, Japan
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 11, 2008 04:31 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Eleanore     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
"CIA officers who subjected themselves to the water boarding technique lasted an average of 14 seconds before caving in." (In practice, "14 seconds" is roughly the amount of time one can exhale slowly through the upturned nose. This keep the water out, temporarily. When your breath runs out the water starts flowing in.) There are a lot of variables to play with: the angle of the board, the volume of the water, the pressure of the plastic wrap, how much inhalation to allow, and where to keep your prisoner on the line between "waterlogged wheezing" and "deep gurgling". There's an asphyxiation hazard, but modern interrogators have doctors on hand with blood oxygen monitors to make sure their subject stays oxygenated enough to remain conscious. If the prisoner begins to asphyxiate to the point of unconsciousness the doctors have five to six minutes to resuscitate your prisoner before brain damage occurs, which is more than enough time especially with the equipment prepped.

Waterboarding - How To Do It

Not a pro-waterboarding or pro-torture site, btw.


I don't think it should be standard procedure for all prisoners, either. But it's hard to understand how people can be so worried about terrorists possibly having panic attacks from this considering the death, torture, maiming and utter destruction those same people have caused others. Kill trying to defend other people's rights or by accident, you're a monster and "deserve" what you get. But murder and otherwise cause injury to perfectly innocent people and your rights come first.


IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 2787
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 11, 2008 09:36 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
BUD, if waterboarding falls into any interrogation technique it falls into the realm of psychological pressure. That's so because the subject knows he is not drowning, that it's not the intention to drown him. What he experiences is a psychological reflex action. He also knows he can call it off whenever he's had enough, and he knows that going in.

'Waterboarding is a form of torture'....a conclusion/opinion lacking legal definition and also lacking support from dictionary definitions of torture.

"Although waterboarding does not always cause lasting physical damage".....waterboarding cannot be shown to have EVER caused any physical damage...longlasting or not.

"it carries the risks of extreme pain,".....an opinion which is not backed up with any evidence or proof. Notice, it's not fact that waterboarding causes pain....it merely carries the RISK of causing pain..by their own words.

"The psychological effects on victims of waterboarding can last for years after the procedure".....another conclusion/opinion not backed up by any facts.

I suspect these conclusions which are not fact...conclusions are not fact but are opinions...I suspect these comments came from an opponent of waterboarding...or any other means of extracting information from terrorists.

BUD, if waterboarding produced the actual physical pain and dangers opponents say it does, I'd be more likely to support it only for the most extreme terrorists and under observation of physicians. But, it already looks like every precaution is being taken already...short of not doing it at all. Further, so far as we know, waterboarding has only been done on a very few terrorists...high value terrorists who are believed to know quite a lot about their plans, their organizations and their members.

IP: Logged

AcousticGod
Knowflake

Posts: 4415
From: Pleasanton, CA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 11, 2008 10:42 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for AcousticGod     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I've never seen Jwhop produce an iota of proof to back up any claim of his regarding waterboarding.

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 2787
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 11, 2008 11:10 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I've never seen opponents of waterboarding produce one iota of proof of any of the damaging effects they say is caused by waterboarding.

As usual, these leftists just expect everyone to accept their unsupported statements as absolute truth and fact.

IP: Logged

AcousticGod
Knowflake

Posts: 4415
From: Pleasanton, CA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 11, 2008 12:35 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for AcousticGod     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I've provided links to a lot of information for you.

You, on the other hand, have not. Why is that? Did you get your information from your usual sources: unsubstantiated Conservative propaganda?

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 2787
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 11, 2008 12:47 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Information is only as good as it's source. In the case of the 2 weenie antiwar reporter twits, it's worth nothing at all.

In the case of the DOJ link you put up it takes you to the site but the "lots of information"...hopefully on this subject doesn't appear to be there.

On the other hand, you could have copied the direct web address of the "lots of information" you say is there. After looking through the opinions of the DOJ on lots of different subjects..by year going back to 2005, I didn't find the "lots of information" you said you put up.

I got my information from the library of common sense...instead of antiwar, pro terrorist weenies like you.

IP: Logged

AcousticGod
Knowflake

Posts: 4415
From: Pleasanton, CA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 11, 2008 01:22 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for AcousticGod     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/04/06/usdom13130.htm
http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/forumy/2007/10/endgame-on-torture-time-to-call-bluff.php

HENRI ALLEG: A tap, yes, tap water. So, very quickly, the water ran all over my face. I couldn’t, of course, breathe. And after a few minutes, fighting against the impression of getting drowned, you can’t resist. And you feel as if you were drowning yourself. And this is a terrible impression of coming very near death. And so, when the paratroopers, the torturers, see that you’re drowning, they would stop, let you breathe, and try again. So that impression of getting near to death, every time they helped you to come back to life by breathing, it’s a terrible, terrible impression of torture and of death, being near death. So, that was my impression. But it’s difficult to say that this—
...
And suddenly, as I have explained it—I think it was the third time—I just fainted. And I heard them after a while saying, “Oh, he’s coming back. He’s coming back.” They didn’t want me to die at once, and I knew afterwards, a long time afterwards, that many of the people who went under that waterboarding, as you call it, after having had some moments of fainting, some of them would die, drowned, “asphyxier,” as we say in French. It’s completely—it’s impossible to breathe, so they die, as if they were drowned, and this kind of “accident,” as they call, was very frequent.
...
Well, You feel that you’re going to die. Of course, you don’t want to die, and in the same time you don’t want to accept the conditions that they make around you to let you live. So, finally, at this third time, before I fainted, I was really decided to die and not to answer at any cost.
http://www.democracynow.org/2007/11/5/french_journalist_henri_alleg_describes_his

(type in "water boarding", and choose pages 225 & 226)
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0312360231/ref=sib_dp_pt#

Opinions of Admirals and Generals

etc. etc.

IP: Logged

AcousticGod
Knowflake

Posts: 4415
From: Pleasanton, CA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 11, 2008 01:25 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for AcousticGod     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
quote:
I got my information from the library of common sense

Yes, of course. It's exactly as I stated, and you refuse to name your source, because you doubt your source's credibility in having such a position.

Library of common sense...what a hoot!

IP: Logged

Mannu
Knowflake

Posts: 45
From: always here and no where
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 11, 2008 08:08 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Mannu     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
To the first post: America has violated many international rules in this war. How unethical? Are these guys cold blooded?

Why does America tolerate these baskets?
I think now I understand why Obama gets a free pass by the media

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 2787
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 11, 2008 11:24 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
acoustic, you have to be kidding me.

You expect me to accept the Human Rights Council, Amnesty International, a lawyer, or some Clinton era generals opinions...notice acoustic, I said "opinions" about waterboarding being torture.

Now acoustic, I thought you might submit the results of peer reviewed medical papers or perhaps some peer reviewed psychological papers.

I thought you might provide a medical report where an actual physician had examined a terrorist who had been waterboarded and determined he was injured...either long term or short term.

Gee acoustic, I guess I just expected too much from you.

Instead, you rely on the bare opinions of those with an ax to grind.

Not really a very good effort...in your quest to provide "lots of information". Information is only as good as it's source.

Human Rights Council is consistently far left, an enemy of the United States and Israel who considers even holding these terrorist bast@rds to be torture. An enemy of the United States going back to eras prior to the Iraq War.

Ditto for Amnesty International.

Any number of leftists attorneys can be found to deliver an opinion waterboarding is torture...along with not providing the exact temperature to terrorist liking, not serving terrorists food from their own menus and any number of other tortures.

I'll take a pass on your "lots of information". Information is not fact, in these cases their information are "conclusions" not backed up with any case studies, not backed up with any medical records and not backed up with any peer reviewed papers resulting from studies.

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 2787
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 11, 2008 11:29 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Mannu, stuff it where the sun don't shine.

Your opinion is tainted by your constant anti America rhetoric.

I'd still throw your ass out Mannu. Just so you know.

Any person with an ounce of character would have been gone from the America they despise long ago. Just know this, you and all the others like you are here on sufferance. Because unless you're a United States citizen, you have no basic right to continue to be here. Lucky you Mannu that I'm not making those decisions.

IP: Logged

Mannu
Knowflake

Posts: 45
From: always here and no where
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 11, 2008 11:44 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Mannu     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Jwhop,
Anti american rhetoric to some and peace to some. Everyone is entitled to their opinions in a democracy. Wait a minute. You have no idea what a democracy is? How could you? You are just a beneficiary of its values.

And your filthy hands can't even come close to me. So better drop that idea from your BIG head. Nuff said.

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 2787
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 12, 2008 12:21 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
The United States is not a democracy. Only the dimwits think it is.

Bet you feel pretty safe there hunched over your keyboard like a little malignant troll spewing your bilge and bile about the United States. Let me suggest you save it for your buds down at the I Hate America Club and don't take your shiit out to main street. There's a lot of barbarians in America.

What is unquestionably true is that you don't have the guts..courage, to get off your ass and seek greener pastures

IP: Logged

Mannu
Knowflake

Posts: 45
From: always here and no where
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 12, 2008 02:02 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Mannu     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
>>>The United States is not a democracy

Right, its US of KKK A

LMAO

IP: Logged

Mannu
Knowflake

Posts: 45
From: always here and no where
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 12, 2008 02:37 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Mannu     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I am so glad to find that I can make you suffer so much that you spew poison, while I am having the best sleep of my nites in years.

IP: Logged

Eleanore
Moderator

Posts: 112
From: Okinawa, Japan
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 12, 2008 07:07 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Eleanore     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Mannu, you don't actually believe America is a Democracy, though, do you?

IP: Logged

Mannu
Knowflake

Posts: 45
From: always here and no where
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 12, 2008 07:42 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Mannu     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Eleanor,

US and India and many other nations are technically considered republics.

My context of statement was Bill of Rights that you Americans are so familiar with.

Haven't you soldier's girls noticed that Jwhop, who stands for "war" is going out of his way to kill me i.e. "Peace", its equal and opposite - LOL

IP: Logged

Mannu
Knowflake

Posts: 45
From: always here and no where
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 12, 2008 07:54 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Mannu     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
The constitution by which USA is governed is not a suicide pact though.

I think the constitution may have given its heart to the people but its ass still belongs to the president, the house, the senators and the supreme court.

That is if the people are against war, they can't march and protest in front of white house and throw president from the white house. They have to go to the voting station and vote and then wait and watch what happens.

So far it seems America stands for the war by its voting patterns. Who knows what should happen tomorrow?

Are Majority fools?
We will come to know in November 2008 - LOL

IP: Logged

AcousticGod
Knowflake

Posts: 4415
From: Pleasanton, CA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted April 13, 2008 02:49 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for AcousticGod     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Haven't been to this thread in awhile.

Jwhop, yes, I absolutely believe the evidence I've provided is far superior to the evidence you haven't produced. Only you would try to argue a point you have no basis for an opinion on.

IP: Logged

All times are Eastern Standard Time

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | Linda-Goodman.com

Copyright © 2011

Powered by Infopop www.infopop.com © 2000
Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46a