What Interrogation Techniques are Acceptable?

Ah, then the men who seeks the annihilation of your country, your people, via whatever means necessary, is your EQUAL? You believe such an individual should be treated as you would like to be treated, even if you have not the slightest thought of killing his brothers, his sisters, his parents, his country as he does for yours? Uh uh. Love that liberal logic.

Good people believe that one does not have to become the devil to defeat the devil.

You obviously believe in water suffocating bound defenseless harmless prisoners and opening up our own brave soldiers to more torture themselves in every conflict anywhere in the world from now on... do you also believe that crushing their children's testicles for information would also be just fine as the opinion the Bush administration wanted did?

 
Werbung:
All people are equal in the eyes of the creator.

When there is a war, we always try to dehumanize the opposition, usually by inventing words to describe them as something less than human.

We did the same thing to justify keeping blacks as slaves, inventing a term that meant that they were not human with equal rights to our own.

That said, does the cab driver in the M E "seek the annihilation of our country"? People in other nations generally want the same thing we do: liberty, a decent place to live, education for their children, a chance to earn a living.

It is organizations like Al Qaeda and the Taliban who seek the annihilation not only of the western nations, but of anyone who doesn't share their rather narrow view of the world, including fellow Muslims.

There is no war between Islam and Christianity. What we are seeing is a war between civilization and savagery. When we descend to the level of he savages, then they win.

First of all, there IS no Creator. If you wish to live by a Jewish myth, feel free to do so, but do NOT justify the annihilation of my people with His 'divine' existence.

Why should we not dehumanize the opposition? Is said opposition not making his sole goal our utter destruction? You are to suggest their goals are in fact humanitarian in nature? Ah yes, 9-11 was humanitarian. The London bombings were humanitarian. The planned destruction of a nuclear reactor not too far from me here by Paki students, a feat had it succeeded, would have wiped out half of Canada's largest city, is an humanitarian gesture? Your logic is strange. There is nothing 'human' about your logic, but being a pussy is one you follow. Wars are NOT won by being a pussy.

The Blacks were never out to destroy us completely. Blacks in Africa never committed terrorist atrocities against our people. They never, ever uttered the words 'we will kill ALL of you', not even as slaves in America. The Muslims, on the other hand, HAVE uttered such statements. They have done so EVEN IN OUR OWN HOMELANDS. You are aware of imams in Western nations stating that they will 'conquer' the West? Yet, even as they utter such threats, they are PROTECTED by Western police forces, under the guise of protecting their rights to utter such words. I, as a fascist, would have had such individuals forcibly removed by armed paratroopers, with the warning if they ever return again, they forfeit their lives. Their families, and ALL sympathisers would go with him. No price is too high to pay for the protection, the defense of my people.

When in history did a slave EVER have 'human rights equal to our own'? They were slaves. These libtards are unbelievable.

The Muslims in our countries want our freedoms etc.? Really? Then why the clarion call for Sharia Law? Why are they murdering so many of their own who follow Western customs, thereby participating in such freedoms? A father in my city killed his 14 year old daughter because she refused to wear a hajib. His defense? It was an 'honour killing'. In fact, after our police took him in custody, Muslim groups were DEMANDING he be freed, for THEM to deal with via Sharia Law, which CLEARLY states what he did was correct according to Islamic custom. We would thus be forced to tolerate murder in or Western society, **** I would never allow. I would have HIM killed first, before he kills an innocent child. The rapine, murder etc. of WHITE women in Europe are at record levels. When one such WHITE blue-eyed blonde female in Sweden was gang-raped, as is the custom of Muslims in that country, by a group of Muslims, an imam claimed it was their RIGHT to do such things, as the woman 'offended' them by dressing in a manner befitting Western customs. They claimed she revealed too much of her flesh etc., and the penalty for such was death. Ah yes, this is an example of your beloved Muslims enjoying their new 'freedoms' here in the West, the freedoms that allow them to destroy us wholesale, all in the name of their religious freedom. I would ask that you take a woman to Saudi Arabia, and ask her to wear her shorts there. She would be dead within a minute, GUARANTEED. These Saudis are the same assholes that threaten Canadian military women with death for wearing khaki shorts, standard military wear in desert climates. Our government of course took the Saudis to task, as they should, then asked her to not dress in such a manner OFF BASE. The Saudis wanted her to remain covered even on our own base. We of course told the Saudis to '**** off', and rightfully so. They seem to conveniently forget that the ONLY THING that stood between us and the Iraqis was our military.

You mention they want a chance to earn a living, yet so many of those Muslims we find to be earning a good living are SENDING THEIR MONEY ABROAD, to organisations, those same organisations that harbour strong anti-West sentiments. Our own CSIS can verify this, and they have demanded our government do something about it.

Your claims about the Taliban and Al-Queda are ridiculous. They are supported by a large portion of Islam. How else do they manage to survive? Where do they obtain monetary aid? The money for their military hardware has to come from somewhere, and since neither has any economy to speak of, then where is it coming from? The sky? No, they are getting the money from Muslims all over the world. Those 'moderate' Muslims are taking over the West the smart way, by populating our countries with more of their own kind as they know the weakness of democracy, in numbers. It is why we must become fascist in order to deal with these psychotic assholes.

How do you suppose they win if we become as savage as they? Tell that to the victorious Allies, who bombed the **** out of civilian centers. If not for the destruction of cities like Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Dresden etc., the war might have been lost. The Nazis bombed the **** out of London, I know for my family was there. We returned the favour by destroying their own cities. We won by adopting that very 'savagery' you are clearly whining like a little ***** here. If we had adopted your pinko ways, we would have lost.
 

First of all, there IS no Creator. If you wish to live by a Jewish myth, feel free to do so, but do NOT justify the annihilation of my people with His 'divine' existence.

Why should we not dehumanize the opposition? Is said opposition not making his sole goal our utter destruction? You are to suggest their goals are in fact humanitarian in nature? Ah yes, 9-11 was humanitarian. The London bombings were humanitarian. The planned destruction of a nuclear reactor not too far from me here by Paki students, a feat had it succeeded, would have wiped out half of Canada's largest city, is an humanitarian gesture? Your logic is strange. There is nothing 'human' about your logic, but being a pussy is one you follow. Wars are NOT won by being a pussy.

The Blacks were never out to destroy us completely. Blacks in Africa never committed terrorist atrocities against our people. They never, ever uttered the words 'we will kill ALL of you', not even as slaves in America. The Muslims, on the other hand, HAVE uttered such statements. They have done so EVEN IN OUR OWN HOMELANDS. You are aware of imams in Western nations stating that they will 'conquer' the West? Yet, even as they utter such threats, they are PROTECTED by Western police forces, under the guise of protecting their rights to utter such words. I, as a fascist, would have had such individuals forcibly removed by armed paratroopers, with the warning if they ever return again, they forfeit their lives. Their families, and ALL sympathisers would go with him. No price is too high to pay for the protection, the defense of my people.

When in history did a slave EVER have 'human rights equal to our own'? They were slaves. These libtards are unbelievable.

The Muslims in our countries want our freedoms etc.? Really? Then why the clarion call for Sharia Law? Why are they murdering so many of their own who follow Western customs, thereby participating in such freedoms? A father in my city killed his 14 year old daughter because she refused to wear a hajib. His defense? It was an 'honour killing'. In fact, after our police took him in custody, Muslim groups were DEMANDING he be freed, for THEM to deal with via Sharia Law, which CLEARLY states what he did was correct according to Islamic custom. We would thus be forced to tolerate murder in or Western society, **** I would never allow. I would have HIM killed first, before he kills an innocent child. The rapine, murder etc. of WHITE women in Europe are at record levels. When one such WHITE blue-eyed blonde female in Sweden was gang-raped, as is the custom of Muslims in that country, by a group of Muslims, an imam claimed it was their RIGHT to do such things, as the woman 'offended' them by dressing in a manner befitting Western customs. They claimed she revealed too much of her flesh etc., and the penalty for such was death. Ah yes, this is an example of your beloved Muslims enjoying their new 'freedoms' here in the West, the freedoms that allow them to destroy us wholesale, all in the name of their religious freedom. I would ask that you take a woman to Saudi Arabia, and ask her to wear her shorts there. She would be dead within a minute, GUARANTEED. These Saudis are the same assholes that threaten Canadian military women with death for wearing khaki shorts, standard military wear in desert climates. Our government of course took the Saudis to task, as they should, then asked her to not dress in such a manner OFF BASE. The Saudis wanted her to remain covered even on our own base. We of course told the Saudis to '**** off', and rightfully so. They seem to conveniently forget that the ONLY THING that stood between us and the Iraqis was our military.

You mention they want a chance to earn a living, yet so many of those Muslims we find to be earning a good living are SENDING THEIR MONEY ABROAD, to organisations, those same organisations that harbour strong anti-West sentiments. Our own CSIS can verify this, and they have demanded our government do something about it.

Your claims about the Taliban and Al-Queda are ridiculous. They are supported by a large portion of Islam. How else do they manage to survive? Where do they obtain monetary aid? The money for their military hardware has to come from somewhere, and since neither has any economy to speak of, then where is it coming from? The sky? No, they are getting the money from Muslims all over the world. Those 'moderate' Muslims are taking over the West the smart way, by populating our countries with more of their own kind as they know the weakness of democracy, in numbers. It is why we must become fascist in order to deal with these psychotic assholes.

How do you suppose they win if we become as savage as they? Tell that to the victorious Allies, who bombed the **** out of civilian centers. If not for the destruction of cities like Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Dresden etc., the war might have been lost. The Nazis bombed the **** out of London, I know for my family was there. We returned the favour by destroying their own cities. We won by adopting that very 'savagery' you are clearly whining like a little ***** here. If we had adopted your pinko ways, we would have lost.

Look I'm a color font lover myself... makes it easy to look up my posts... but could ya possible pick a color that doesn't burn out everybody's retinas?:eek:

Oh... an your whole premise is also wrong. Torture IS bad.

proceede...
:cool:



 


Look I'm a color font lover myself... makes it easy to look up my posts... but could ya possible pick a color that doesn't burn out everybody's retinas?:eek:

Oh... an your whole premise is also wrong. Torture IS bad.

proceede...
:cool:




Ah, so you should retain the right to post in any colour you choose, but I may not. You are a liberal, aren't you? That would explain the one-sided notion of 'freedom'.

Yes, torture is GOOD. It is the salvation of any country.
 
Ah, so you should retain the right to post in any colour you choose, but I may not. You are a liberal, aren't you? That would explain the one-sided notion of 'freedom'.

Hey do whatcha want... I was trying to be helpful.. people can barely read it but do whatcha want.:)

Yes, torture is GOOD. It is the salvation of any country.

I know you believe that because you're torturing us all with these ridiculously childish posts. Any chance you might just go back in your bedroom and torture yourself?:rolleyes:
 
How do you suppose they win if we become as savage as they? Tell that to the victorious Allies, who bombed the **** out of civilian centers. If not for the destruction of cities like Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Dresden etc., the war might have been lost. The Nazis bombed the **** out of London, I know for my family was there. We returned the favour by destroying their own cities. We won by adopting that very 'savagery' you are clearly whining like a little ***** here. If we had adopted your pinko ways, we would have lost.

I can see you're into torture, but I'm not going to undergo the torture of reading your entire torturous rant, not even in red.

This last part did catch my eye, however.

Had we become as savage as the Nazis we were fighting, the world would be quite a different place today. Instead, we passed the Marshall Plan, and helped to rebuild not only our allies, but our former enemies as well. That turned out pretty well for all concerned, as you may remember from history class.

Did I see you describe yourself as a fascist somewhere in one of he rants above? If so, then of course you would have been on the side of the Axis, or wanting the allies to have become like them.

No thanks. The world we live in may not be perfect, but it is a whole lot better than it would be under the control of the fascists, or the savages, or anyone who thinks that being a humanitarian is weak.
 
Had we become as savage as the Nazis we were fighting, the world would be quite a different place today. Instead, we passed the Marshall Plan, and helped to rebuild not only our allies, but our former enemies as well. That turned out pretty well for all concerned, as you may remember from history class.
You did not address his points. I know because I made the same points earlier in the thread and they were equally avoided. You're talking about what took place after we won. He was talking about the horrors we unleashed in order to secure that victory. You totally missed the mark...

The Nazi's bombed cities in Poland, Russia, England and several other countries... If people like you were running the war, we would not have bombed German cities in order to destroy their centers of production as well as displace and dispirit their workers and civilians, because you wouldn't want us to lower ourselves to level of the savages we were fighting.
 
You did not address his points. I know because I made the same points earlier in the thread and they were equally avoided. You're talking about what took place after we won. He was talking about the horrors we unleashed in order to secure that victory. You totally missed the mark...

The Nazi's bombed cities in Poland, Russia, England and several other countries... If people like you were running the war, we would not have bombed German cities in order to destroy their centers of production as well as displace and dispirit their workers and civilians, because you wouldn't want us to lower ourselves to level of the savages we were fighting.

Of course we would have. We wouldn't have tortured prisoners we took, and might even have prosecuted enemy soldiers who did engage in torture.

Oh, wait! That is what happened.

Maybe people like me were running the war after all. People who would have become like the enemy were not, fortunately for us.
 
Of course we would have. We wouldn't have tortured prisoners we took, and might even have prosecuted enemy soldiers who did engage in torture.

Oh, wait! That is what happened.

Maybe people like me were running the war after all. People who would have become like the enemy were not, fortunately for us.

I of course agree with you totally on this.

I too don't subscribe to the notion that because some things have happen in war that were less than perfect we should then use those things to say... See there is NO LIMIT we can torture defenseless bound prisoners or crush the balls of their children, anything we want because some incident has happened in the past.

That's simply ludicrous thinking! The goals from our side and under international law that you're NOT supposed to go after civilian targets. Is there collateral civilian damage? Certainly. Did we use the Atomic Bomb on urban centers to end what would have definitely been a protracted war piling up thousands of more casualties on our side, and the other side as well? Yes.

But this has nothing to do with the treatment of prisoners. Torture only inspires the enemy to fight to the death and not surrender which ends up killing more on our side as well. The documentation of you using torture only green lights to all of your future enemies to go ahead and use that torture and worse tortures... because we're all doing it. Torture is then the excepted standard by all sides. That's neither good nor logical.

You capture someone, they have given up. You don't then bind them harmless & defenseless and brutalize and torture them, drown them, burn them, ram bamboo shoots under their fingernails... none of that.

They are to be interrogated and held in a reasonable manor. Because this wasn't always done and it was a great tragedy for soldiers on all side they came up with rules... they established fair treatment with the Geneva Convention to specifically address this problem.

It's all fine and well to think you can just do what you want because in this particular fight you're the Big Dog. But back in WW2 the Nazis were just as big... AND WE DESPERATELY WANTED OUR TROOPS COVERED BY GENEVA CONVENTION STANDARDS AND NOT TORTURED THEN.

Who knows someday we may find ourselves at war with other Big Dogs like say Russia & China together... and we'd damn sure want those protections for our soliders once again.
 
Of course we would have.
So we can do precisely what the enemy had done and carpet bomb entire cities, indiscriminately killing thousands of innocent men, women and children and that's neither an 'act of savagery' or 'becoming like the enemy'?

We wouldn't have tortured prisoners we took, and might even have prosecuted enemy soldiers who did engage in torture.
Are you talking about the specific act of Waterboarding (which we disagree is torture) or are you talking about the other 99.99% of acts that we can both agree are torture? Because I don't think we should actually torture people either.

Or are you being as intellectually dishonest as Top Gun and saying there is no difference... that waterboarding is just as bad as say... plucking out fingernails or crushing testicles with a hammer?
Maybe people like me were running the war after all. People who would have become like the enemy were not, fortunately for us.
If we waterboard so much as a single mass-murdering Al Qaeda terrorist known to be "the principal architect of the 9/11 attacks", that constitutes 'becoming like the enemy'... Please name for me an American that was waterboarded by AQ or the Taliban.
 
You did not address his points. I know because I made the same points earlier in the thread and they were equally avoided. You're talking about what took place after we won. He was talking about the horrors we unleashed in order to secure that victory. You totally missed the mark...

The Nazi's bombed cities in Poland, Russia, England and several other countries... If people like you were running the war, we would not have bombed German cities in order to destroy their centers of production as well as displace and dispirit their workers and civilians, because you wouldn't want us to lower ourselves to level of the savages we were fighting.

Ah, a smattering of intellect. Well done. That was precisely my point. It is quite hypocritical for the Allies to suggest they were 'angels' whilst they destroyed entire civilian centers. I do not disagree with what they did at all. It was necessary in order to destroy a powerful enemy whose methods had gained them a clear advantage in the war. After all, the idea of bombing the general population into submission was devised by a 'peaceful' Italian military officer. I do become annoyed though at the hypocrisy of those who praise the wonderful victory of the Allies, whilst in the same breath cursing the 'evil' Nazis and Fascists for their methodology in WWII. I argued in this thread that in order to defeat the devil, the Allies BECAME the devil.
 
Hey do whatcha want... I was trying to be helpful.. people can barely read it but do whatcha want.:)



I know you believe that because you're torturing us all with these ridiculously childish posts. Any chance you might just go back in your bedroom and torture yourself?:rolleyes:

Ah, the liberal talks. BECAUSE I am a fascist, I must therefore be 'childish'? Love that liberal logic.
 
I can see you're into torture, but I'm not going to undergo the torture of reading your entire torturous rant, not even in red.

This last part did catch my eye, however.

Had we become as savage as the Nazis we were fighting, the world would be quite a different place today. Instead, we passed the Marshall Plan, and helped to rebuild not only our allies, but our former enemies as well. That turned out pretty well for all concerned, as you may remember from history class.

Did I see you describe yourself as a fascist somewhere in one of he rants above? If so, then of course you would have been on the side of the Axis, or wanting the allies to have become like them.

No thanks. The world we live in may not be perfect, but it is a whole lot better than it would be under the control of the fascists, or the savages, or anyone who thinks that being a humanitarian is weak.

So, you equate fascism with savagery? However did you come to this conclusion? Look at the US presence in Iraq. You savages! You see my point?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GenSeneca
You did not address his points. I know because I made the same points earlier in the thread and they were equally avoided. You're talking about what took place after we won. He was talking about the horrors we unleashed in order to secure that victory. You totally missed the mark...

The Nazi's bombed cities in Poland, Russia, England and several other countries... If people like you were running the war, we would not have bombed German cities in order to destroy their centers of production as well as displace and dispirit their workers and civilians, because you wouldn't want us to lower ourselves to level of the savages we were fighting.


Ah, a smattering of intellect. Well done. That was precisely my point. It is quite hypocritical for the Allies to suggest they were 'angels' whilst they destroyed entire civilian centers. I do not disagree with what they did at all. It was necessary in order to destroy a powerful enemy whose methods had gained them a clear advantage in the war. After all, the idea of bombing the general population into submission was devised by a 'peaceful' Italian military officer. I do become annoyed though at the hypocrisy of those who praise the wonderful victory of the Allies, whilst in the same breath cursing the 'evil' Nazis and Fascists for their methodology in WWII. I argued in this thread that in order to defeat the devil, the Allies BECAME the devil.

Now this is nice. A sorta Conservative Kumbaya moment... soul mates so to speak.

This love fest should be very interesting. There's a lot to talk about. The advantages of cross burning compared to goose stepping etc.

Anyone wanting to know where the Radical Right Mr. Limbaugh types would lead... this is a case study in progression.


Don't believe it... watch... they're in America and they're in this clip talking about killing our citizens and our President!


 
Werbung:
Now this is nice. A sorta Conservative Kumbaya moment... soul mates so to speak.

This love fest should be very interesting. There's a lot to talk about. The advantages of cross burning compared to goose stepping etc.

Anyone wanting to know where the Radical Right Mr. Limbaugh types would lead... this is a case study in progression.


Don't believe it... watch... they're in America and they're in this clip talking about killing our citizens and our President!



They are skinheads, and therefore buffoons. They know nothing of Nazism/fascism. They use Nazism as a means by which they may get their sick point across. This would not be their fault. This would be the fault of liberal propaganda, which has forced into the heads of everyone the idea that Nazism is completely evil, and its tenets, symbolism etc. are to be used to commit evil. The only good a skinhead would serve is as muscle, since they obviously have not the brains. I would ask that you not compare such morons with true fascists. Hitler would have pointed at these buffoons and killed himself laughing, whilst utter 'das morons!' These idiots are like the SA goons that Hitler used, before ridding himself of them, as they served his purpose. He knew they were too stupid to become a true part of ideological Nazism. I challenge you to compare these morons with members of the Nazi SS, who were the best and brightest the Nazis had to offer. Do you remember who the SS killed? That's right, the day's equivalent of skinheads, the SA.
 
Back
Top