Erollisi Marr - The Nameless

Go Back   Erollisi Marr - The Nameless > NON EQ Stuff (Real life, other games, etc.) > Steam Vent


Reply
 
Add/Share Add/Share Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-10-2004, 01:07 PM   #51
Lurikeen
Freaky
 
Lurikeen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 17,873
Originally Posted by LairdRagna
So the democrats are so fired up about winning back the White House but they won't exploit the issue which could give it to them? Well damn, they deserve to lose the race then. By your contention its an impeachable offense, yet they make no effort to impeach... it is the winning issue for the campaign, yet they won't exploit it.
That is pretty much my view of the situation.
__________________
"All I said was... that bit of halibut is good enough for Jehovah." Monty Python's "Life of Brian"
Lurikeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2004, 01:09 PM   #52
LairdRagna
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New York
Posts: 1,308
A skeptic might say you are rationalizing Kerry's defeat five months in advance... of course, I'm not a skeptic!
LairdRagna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2004, 01:15 PM   #53
Lurikeen
Freaky
 
Lurikeen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 17,873
A skeptic might say that. However, that is not even close to the case.

I am just very pissed off at the Democratic party right now. I think they haven't pushed key issues with the White House in order to play it safe. I think the Democratic strategists are mistaken.

This may be the last year I support the party due to their lack of initiative.
__________________
"All I said was... that bit of halibut is good enough for Jehovah." Monty Python's "Life of Brian"
Lurikeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2004, 01:17 PM   #54
Hormadrune
Sociopathic bully?
 
Hormadrune's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: PA
Posts: 11,895
Bah, don't be a fruitcake idealist. You'll support them again if it means the difference between one of them and a George W. Bush. You start going Nader on me now and I will send the Pragmatic Liberal Death Squad after you.
__________________
WoW-Ghostlands-US: Prae | sp | Prolonix | Horm | Ulfhednar | l
EQ: Hormadrune <Retired> <OFS> <CoI> <Affy> <CE>
Hormadrune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2004, 01:23 PM   #55
Trith
The lesser of two weevils
 
Trith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Shreveport, Louisiana
Posts: 3,490
Send a message via MSN to Trith
You'll support them again if it means the difference between one of them and a George W. Bush
And you wonder why we say you guys don't have a platform and why Kerry doesn't have positions on issues. Horm just summed it all up. Your running a campaign of hate and bitterness with zero substance. Expect to lose badly in November if you keep this approach up. America doesn't like whiners, and they don't like people who hate.
Trith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2004, 01:23 PM   #56
LairdRagna
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New York
Posts: 1,308
You tell em Horm, the defining quality for any candidate that the dems run is he or she isn't Bush! Damn, that will energize me to go to the polls! Pssssst, Lur is right again, the Dems don't stand for anything today. They have abandoned their members. Its time for the disaffected to switch to Nadar.
LairdRagna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2004, 01:32 PM   #57
Hormadrune
Sociopathic bully?
 
Hormadrune's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: PA
Posts: 11,895
You two aren't that stupid, and so I won't just roll my eyes and move on here. Shut those cockholes of yours and follow closely.

Kerry is the better choice based on issues- I've given my case for this before and more than once. Bush is bad for this country- I've given my case for this more times than I could possibly count. A fringe 3rd party candidate, as things stand today, could certainly be a better leader than either man, however, there is no chance he/she will take this election. That being the case, as a pragmatic liberal, I, and others like me, vote for Kerry because he is the better choice and stands the best chance of winning against an opponent like Bush. We know Bush or Kerry will win, so why waste a vote on a third party candidate unless you truly don't care which of the main party candidates win.

I literally laughed out loud when I read you two tards drooling over your keyboards and clapping your sweaty palms together sputtering "We caught you, we caught you, cookie daddy cookie!" Yet again proving how little republicans understand about the left.
__________________
WoW-Ghostlands-US: Prae | sp | Prolonix | Horm | Ulfhednar | l
EQ: Hormadrune <Retired> <OFS> <CoI> <Affy> <CE>
Hormadrune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2004, 01:37 PM   #58
LairdRagna
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New York
Posts: 1,308
Horm, do you understand what the term "tongue in cheek" means?

My friends on the right say the same thing about Bush and some would prefer to vote libertarian since they don't agree with the Patriot Act or any form of gun control, and they fault Bush for both. I have told them just what you said, a third part candidate might be preferable, but Bush is far better for our platform than Kerry will ever be.

Sheeesh, and you think Republicans have no sense of humor. Next time I'll use the little [sarcasm] [/sarcasm] tags to help you along.
LairdRagna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2004, 01:48 PM   #59
Hormadrune
Sociopathic bully?
 
Hormadrune's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: PA
Posts: 11,895
Perhaps you were being tongue in cheek. I assure you your fellow repug was not. It's sort of an anthem for the board cons- they'll teach you the words soon enough when you have your monthly baby sacrifices and blood letting ceremonies.
__________________
WoW-Ghostlands-US: Prae | sp | Prolonix | Horm | Ulfhednar | l
EQ: Hormadrune <Retired> <OFS> <CoI> <Affy> <CE>
Hormadrune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2004, 01:51 PM   #60
LairdRagna
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New York
Posts: 1,308
Did you guys have a blood-letting and baby sacrifice that you didn't invite me to? Harumph I feel so unloved! I bet Trith will take care of that for me...
LairdRagna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2004, 02:24 PM   #61
Lurikeen
Freaky
 
Lurikeen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 17,873
Originally Posted by LairdRagna
Pssssst, Lur is right again, the Dems don't stand for anything today. They have abandoned their members. Its time for the disaffected to switch to Nadar.
I think the Dems do stand for important issues, still. I just don't think they are taking the initiative in strongly pushing their issues.

Take this entire thing with Bush and the GITMO prisoners. If it were Clinton in office the Republicans would have already gotten an "independent" counsel to fry him at the stake.

What are the Democrats doing? Throwing fucking daisies at Bush as if it is going to hurt him! Come on Dems! It is time to take the gloves off and bare knuckle fight!

Another example... when Bush dropped us out of Kyoto what did the Dems do? Wag their collective stink finger at him exclaiming, "You're a bad boy!" WTF is that??

The Dems in congress right now just absolutely sicken me. I haven't seen or heard any of them really socking the Repugs in the eyes. They're pulling their punches left and right.

At any rate, the Dems do stand for something. I just don't like how they are going about it, right now.
__________________
"All I said was... that bit of halibut is good enough for Jehovah." Monty Python's "Life of Brian"
Lurikeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2004, 03:26 PM   #62
Lurikeen
Freaky
 
Lurikeen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 17,873
CIA interrogations 'too brutal'

US officials have said the CIA's methods of interrogating suspected al-Qaeda leaders are too brutal, the New York Times reports.

Unnamed counter-terrorism officials told the paper that CIA methods were so severe, the FBI had directed its agents to stay out of many of the interviews.

The techniques are said to have been authorised by the Bush administration after the 9/11 attacks on the US.

None of the detainees, held in secret locations, are thought to be in Iraq.

The paper cites one case of a detainee who was subjected to a technique known as water boarding, in which a prisoner is strapped down, forcibly pushed under water and made to believe that he might drown.

Some have been hooded, soaked with water, roughed up and deprived of food, light and medication.

At least one CIA employee was disciplined for threatening a detainee with a gun during an interrogation.

Secret rules

The paper says FBI officials have advised their director, Robert Mueller, that the techniques would be prohibited in criminal cases.

Defenders of the secret interrogation rules say the methods stop short of torture and serious injury.

Current CIA officers are said to be worried that public outrage at the treatment of detainees in Iraq might lead to a closer examination of their treatment of al-Qaeda prisoners.

"Some people involved in this have been concerned for quite a while that eventually there would be a new president, or the mood in the country would change, and they would be held accountable," one was quoted as saying.

"Now that's happening faster than anybody expected."

The whereabouts of high-level al-Qaeda detainees is a closely guarded secret, and human rights groups have been denied access to the prisoners.

Officials say some have been sent abroad.

"There was a debate after 9/11 about how to make people disappear," a former intelligence official told the paper.

The government was advised that if the CIA was considering procedures which violated the Geneva Convention or US laws prohibiting torture and degrading treatment, it would not be held responsible if it could be argued that the detainees were in the custody of another country.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/h...as/3709793.stm
__________________
"All I said was... that bit of halibut is good enough for Jehovah." Monty Python's "Life of Brian"
Lurikeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2004, 03:50 PM   #63
LairdRagna
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New York
Posts: 1,308
Yeah, I read that story too... A whole lot of unnamed sources, unconfirmed reports... Do I completely disbelieve it? No, I believe that there are people in our intelligence services that would do this. Understanding how plausable deniability works you can rest assured that there would never EVER be a line to trace between the administration and the operative doing it.

Funny, you blast Drudge for sensationalism and using unnamed sources, but here is your post which doesn't provide any smoking gun, just anecdotal "evidence" at best.

If they are being held in undisclosed locations you can rest assured they are the cream of the crop of the dregs of humanity. Water boarding... hmmm... they are only made to THINK they are drowning? If it were me I'd let them swallow a ton of water and then heimlich it out of their lungs. Rinse and repeat. Saw the entire Berg video today for the first time. Animals, rabid animals that need to be put down.
LairdRagna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2004, 03:59 PM   #64
Lurikeen
Freaky
 
Lurikeen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 17,873
Originally Posted by LairdRagna
Funny, you blast Drudge for sensationalism and using unnamed sources, but here is your post which doesn't provide any smoking gun, just anecdotal "evidence" at best.
Did I actually blast Drudge for that? Ummm... no. I clearly stated he is not a reputable news source.

I also clearly stated that his unamed source who was relaying what they thought Clinton was fealing is just gossip (I think I used the word "bullshit").

Finally, ALL news reporters use unnamed sources. So, I wouldn't inconsistently blast Drudge for simply that.


If they are being held in undisclosed locations you can rest assured they are the cream of the crop of the dregs of humanity. Water boarding... hmmm... they are only made to THINK they are drowning? If it were me I'd let them swallow a ton of water and then heimlich it out of their lungs. Rinse and repeat. Saw the entire Berg video today for the first time. Animals, rabid animals that need to be put down.
I understand your feeling. However, we are wrong to use their depravity as the basis for our own depraved actions.
__________________
"All I said was... that bit of halibut is good enough for Jehovah." Monty Python's "Life of Brian"
Lurikeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2004, 04:16 PM   #65
Sakkath
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: London, UK
Posts: 1,026
We were talking about how actions had let to a situation that was conducive to these kind of abuses occurring. I was making reference to what happened in Afghanistan, not Iraq - Officially, the Geneva convention is being applied in Iraq, though that doesn't mean that what has happened previously has not enocuraged the situation.

And Caelie, who says that these prisoners are all terrorists? Indeed the US admin itself has admitted that a majority of them are not. That aside, the way you treat prisoners is not only reflective of who you are as a people, but also influences how people will react towards you. I'm sure you'll argee that it's in all our interests to reach as peaceful a conclusion as possible, as quickly as possible.
Sakkath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2004, 08:35 PM   #66
LairdRagna
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New York
Posts: 1,308
Sakkath, be fair and acknowledge that the vast majority of prisoners were never EVER subjected to questionable treatment. Those subjected to such tactics were deemed to have important intelligence needed for the protection of US troops and to stop further attacks. The average person detained for being in the wrong place at the wrong time or brought in to answer questions arising from seized files wer detained, questioned and when information bared out were released. The accusation has never been that most prisoners were mistreated, not even close.
LairdRagna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2004, 03:14 AM   #67
Sakkath
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: London, UK
Posts: 1,026
Originally Posted by LairdRagna
Sakkath, be fair and acknowledge that the vast majority of prisoners were never EVER subjected to questionable treatment
I will certainly accept that the vast majority were not subject to the kind of abuses that have been reported in Iraqi prisons. But certainly in Afghanistan, and also in Iraq, I think a great many prisoners were subject to 'questionable treatment'. Many of them have since been released (after many months or years), but a very large number were picked up for being in the wrong place at the wrong time; shipped of to Cuba and kept in open air cages and denied contact with the outside world or access to any kind of legal process.

Frankly I don't care very much about how a terrorist is treated as long as some basic legal structure is in place. What I might well disagree with you is the definition of a terrorist - or perhaps the different types of terrorist. If we invade a foreign country, people fighting back are not terrorists in my book and they should be afforded the rights of a PoW.
Sakkath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2004, 09:05 PM   #68
AresProphet
Priest of Hiroshima
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,932
Send a message via MSN to AresProphet
Wait, what'd Zolmaz post early in the thread that was worth deleting?

Usually he doesn't even post anything worth acknowledging.
__________________
One of the wonders of the world is going down
It's going down I know
It's one of the blunders of the world that no-one cares
No-one cares enough


Attachment 181

Last edited by AresProphet; 06-11-2004 at 09:16 PM.
AresProphet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2004, 09:40 PM   #69
Brigiid
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,879
Send a message via AIM to Brigiid
Originally Posted by Laird
Next time I'll use the little [sarcasm] [/sarcasm] tags to help you along.
Completely unrelated to the topic here, so I'll be brief...

A wise liberal once told me that if you want to show sarcasm, you can insert those cute little smiley faces into your posts. Then people will know if you're joking or not!

Of course, someone else came along and said that the use of smileys can indicate gender, so you might wanna be careful with that.

So many uses, so little time. <---sarcastic smiley
__________________
Meh.
Brigiid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2004, 11:36 PM   #70
Hormadrune
Sociopathic bully?
 
Hormadrune's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: PA
Posts: 11,895
A wise liberal
Isn't that redundant?
__________________
WoW-Ghostlands-US: Prae | sp | Prolonix | Horm | Ulfhednar | l
EQ: Hormadrune <Retired> <OFS> <CoI> <Affy> <CE>
Hormadrune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2004, 03:14 PM   #71
LairdRagna
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New York
Posts: 1,308
Horm, more like mutually exclusive!

As for those at Gitmo, not a single one of them is considered any less than a high value intelligence target. Prisoners taken from Afghanistan or Iraq and deliverered to Cuba were not people randomly picked up.
LairdRagna is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:28 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.