data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ecc4b/ecc4b27203833fe87fd54209fad637d59a4d258c" alt="https://i43.tinypic.com/1ovi11.jpg"
This guy isn't really suggesting prosecuting for torture. He's just reminding them that we've waterboarded more Americans than non.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Last edited by Spark (2009-04-23 18:44:22)
Did you finish that paragraph? Waterboard-gate?AussieReaper wrote:
Who writes "PS I was sworn to secrecy on this issue and told that I would be prosecuted if I ever divulged these national training secrets"
?
Where'd you get that kmar. It looks really suspect.
Even if it was bullshit, it was still common knowledge that water boarding and other shit like that happened at SERE. Hell the GOP brings it up in every debate about torture they can.AussieReaper wrote:
Who writes "PS I was sworn to secrecy on this issue and told that I would be prosecuted if I ever divulged these national training secrets"
?
Where'd you get that kmar. It looks really suspect.
Well with the somehow lack of knowledge on how to spell Barrack I was a little skeptical of the whole thing. Like how someone so stupid would have access to the Presidents email address, along with that of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid among others. And then write "PS".Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Did you finish that paragraph? Waterboard-gate?AussieReaper wrote:
Who writes "PS I was sworn to secrecy on this issue and told that I would be prosecuted if I ever divulged these national training secrets"
?
Where'd you get that kmar. It looks really suspect.
He was on a local radio show today. If I can find the audio I'll post it. When you hear him talk he sounds more and more legit.AussieReaper wrote:
Who writes "PS I was sworn to secrecy on this issue and told that I would be prosecuted if I ever divulged these national training secrets"
?
Where'd you get that kmar. It looks really suspect.
Difference being that when you do it to your own soldiers, they have the option of ending it and going home whenever they choose.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
3) It was pretty clearly sarcasm in the post script. His point was it is no secret that we waterboard our own soldiers in training.
"email" ..lmao Seriously? Is it really like some stretch of the imagination that this was emailed.AussieReaper wrote:
Difference being that when you do it to your own soldiers, they have the option of ending it and going home whenever they choose.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
3) It was pretty clearly sarcasm in the post script. His point was it is no secret that we waterboard our own soldiers in training.
You have to willingly go through it when it is a training exercise, and this "email" diminishes the sacrifice the actual soldiers who went through this training had to make.
O'really?Difference being that when you do it to your own soldiers, they have the option of ending it and going home whenever they choose.
I'm pretty sure that during training they give you a specific word to say to end it, whenever you wish to. But hey, maybe Sere could enlighten us. Although I don't want to press him since I'm sure it was hard enough to go through without having to deal with it again here.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
I am pretty sure crying for mommy in the middle of being waterboarded isn't going to get you anywhere, in training or in gitmo.
Yes sir. The host has hit Bush plenty too though.AussieReaper wrote:
I'm pretty sure that during training they give you a specific word to say to end it, whenever you wish to. But hey, maybe Sere could enlighten us. Although I don't want to press him since I'm sure it was hard enough to go through without having to deal with it again here.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
I am pretty sure crying for mommy in the middle of being waterboarded isn't going to get you anywhere, in training or in gitmo.
Kmar: is it a fair assumption to make that this radio station is right-wing/conservative in leaning?
Actually, the intent in SERE is to break the trainees, as well. So they understand their limits.Macbeth wrote:
Uh yeah but when we were water boarding our own it was to train and teach them when we water bordered our captured enemies it was to break them.
Indeed. In fact he said on the show that certain techniques were reserved for the toughest (of our own).FEOS wrote:
Actually, the intent in SERE is to break the trainees, as well. So they understand their limits.Macbeth wrote:
Uh yeah but when we were water boarding our own it was to train and teach them when we water bordered our captured enemies it was to break them.
Hell yea? This is absolutely one of the best things I've read all year. It however is yet another example of illustrating the ignorance of the left and its stance in defense issues. Hopefully this will get more air time than what was afforded to the larger issue of Obama waffling his decisions to release only some MEMOs and more importantly open prosecution.Kmarion wrote:
He was on a local radio show today. If I can find the audio I'll post it. When you hear him talk he sounds more and more legit.AussieReaper wrote:
Who writes "PS I was sworn to secrecy on this issue and told that I would be prosecuted if I ever divulged these national training secrets"
?
Where'd you get that kmar. It looks really suspect.
http://schnittshow.com/main.html
Anyone care to comment on the content beyond grammar and spelling?
Yes, it is a bit of a stretch to believe this would get anywhere near Obama/Pelosi et al without being dismissed by a junior staffer.Kmarion wrote:
"email" ..lmao Seriously? Is it really like some stretch of the imagination that this was emailed.
Torture is defined many ways. One of which is obviously the amount of free will someone has while under going the torture to not go through it or end the process. Do you think those at Gitmo had a choice, honestly?Kmarion wrote:
So torture is defined by the willing? If it was mandated in training there is not many options short of dismissal.
Yeah. And they do have a court system to appeal to should they be tortured. Military tribunals. Exactly the sort of thing this guy is asking for.... However the Gitmo detainees didn't have rights apparently. The right to a fair trial, the right to appeal, etcKmarion wrote:
O'really?AussieReaper wrote:
Difference being that when you do it to your own soldiers, they have the option of ending it and going home whenever they choose.
You know that for a fact? So you've been and aide to Obama or Pelosi? Junior staffer? Ha! Just like joe the pumber was dismissed? The two described above relish in personal attacks. They are ego maniacs. Rush Limbaugh ring a bell?AussieReaper wrote:
Yes, it is a bit of a stretch to believe this would get anywhere near Obama/Pelosi et al without being dismissed by a junior staffer.
They never had to surrender. They never had it so good.AussieReaper wrote:
Torture is defined many ways. One of which is obviously the amount of free will someone has while under going the torture to not go through it or end the process. Do you think those at Gitmo had a choice, honestly?
Again, you're basing the argument on a 'Probably'.AussierReaper wrote:
The point of the Gitmo torture was to break the victim. The point of the training exercises was to reach the limit and then stop. Wanna know when they knew they had reached that limit? Probably when the solider said that was enough.
Or a right to a mob execution, body drag event or perhaps the newer high-tech internet beheading?Kmarion wrote:
Yeah. And they do have a court system to appeal to should they be tortured. Military tribunals. Exactly the sort of thing this guy is asking for.... However the Gitmo detainees didn't have rights apparently. The right to a fair trial, the right to appeal, etc
Last edited by DBBrinson1 (2009-04-23 19:40:41)