you think only 3 have been tortured, I think the number is much higher....sm
Posted By: () on 2009-06-21
In Reply to: How many have been tortured...(sm) - Just the big bad
That might be the reason that the former administration wanted to keep them forever imprisoned, so that they cannot talk!
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
How many have been tortured...(sm)
still remains to be discovered. Given the Red Cross report and the numerous other accounts, I would definitely say more than three. And no, torture did not "help protect us." I do believe the last memo release proved this. I think that was the memo Cheney wanted released. That was a joke. The only thing torture has done is give us a bad reputation.
Again, the point isn't what was done to us. The point is whether or not our president and VP abided by OUR laws. Obviously they didn't. The knew it was illegal from the start. Why else would they have lawyers write bogus opinions about what could and couldn't be done?
So, what of those who are known to be innocent? There are plenty of those. What would you do with them?
HOW do YOU know that they weren't tortured?
Did you speak with them and they told you so?
Some were tortured, although innocent, this surely did not make them change their mind.
I defend the innocent ones.
you keep ignoring the fact that 90% of the tortured
Abu Ghraib detainees were proved to be innocent, therefore NOT terrorists.
I do not recall that Clinton was involved in any torture, or was he?
Rights under Saddam? Any country where people are tortured, mutilated, and killed is no better
x
My guess is much higher.
I would say at least 100; 25 who can read, another 25 who can comprehend what they read; another 25 to articulate what the ones with reading comprehension can understand and try to express, and another 25 to type and proof, at least.
So much for no higher taxes of
any kind for 95% of the American people. This is just going to kill the people who are already struggling to make ends meet. Not to mention the high prices that will come if they get cap and trade passed. Why don't people in Washington get this? All they talk about are the sacrifices that we are all going to have to make and they do nothing but keep spending. Where is the sacrifice on their end, huh? We need to fix this economy and stop the constant spending by our government.
I'm so sick and tired of this. I work to make money and they are just going to take more and more of what I earn. I've always been responsible with my money and have excellent credit but how I am going to continue to make ends meet if this keeps up? It is pretty sad when responsible people are scared this will bring them down as well. I guess the rich will just have to pay for everything because there won't be a middle class left the rate things are going.
Sigh. They pay a higher percentage because they
thousands of times more wealth than each average Joe (and I DO NOT mean the plumber). We have a progressive tax system here, American as apple pie, and Obama only wants to adjust the rate back to where it was were 8 years ago....no socialist subversion in that. We all managed to survive the economic boom of the 90s, after all.
Furthermore, before pronoucing any judgements on this issue, check out the disparities in the (here comes that CAPITALIST phrase again) distibution of wealth in the US. If you do not want to research this yourself, just say so and I will post that information for the UMPTEENTH time.
Now, before you go off, Wikipedia is not the Communist Manifesto. Go to the link and scroll down a little better than halfway and read the section on the United States. If you are in the middle class, the information there will make your blood boil.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_of_wealth
it's a lot higher percentage than McCain's - nm
x
too many people = higher premiums?!
Wow, not that I want to spend all week talking about insurance, but I'm really amazed by things I'm hearing. The whole point of insurance is to lower your individual cost by adding in lots and lots of people. If you and I are the only ones who have insurance, and you have a heart attack, I'm effectively paying half your bill, right? But if we could average that bill over millions and millions of people, it'd be much easier to bear.
The ideal situation, then, would be for everybody in the country to have insurance, so we could average the costs over 300 million people. (This would also lead to a better ability to negotiate drug prices, and encourage hospitals not to spend millions on useless equipment like surgical robots that drive the costs skyward.)
Read Obama's plan, or Baucus', or Kennedy's, or Wyden's, and you'll find that people who can't afford even those new low premiums, are helped out with subsidies, NOT FINED. It's far, far cheaper to help subsidize poor people's premiums, than it is to have them show up to the ER for every cold and flu symptom, you know? Not to mention that they'll then be able to get preventative care, and not so many of them will wind up with horribly costly illnesses down the road, diabetes, heart disease, etc.
Affordable health care isn't just an easy fix, it's a moral one. And it has been tried a million times--I think Truman was actually the first president to suggest it. But you and I don't have the kind of lobbying money that big pharma has, that the doctors have, that every other player has, and they have worked for *decades* to keep Americans from getting the healthcare system they deserve.
Higher taxes are not my interest, neither is giving.
@
Anywhere in Scandinavia. Higher standard of living.
So you think you're exempt from higher taxes?
nm
yeah, of higher taxes for all -kind of change we can
nm
JTBB - If you find a higher-level forum where
intellect is respected and informed debate is possible, please post that info a time or 2. I'm looking for a spot like that myself and this sure ain't it.
Combined income or small business making 120,000 or higher
will be taxed big time instead of the 250,000. It could down lower to where anyone making 42,000 or higher will be taxed big time. He keeps changing his mind, but we will for sure see if he wins.
Posible new "boon" to the economy? Higher minimum wages??.....PSM
I was just thinking, we did a lot of discussion yesterday about welfare reform, the bloated welfare roles that we have now, and how to end it. How about passing a DECENT, HONEST, REALISTIC minimum wage act that is based on the present economy, the proposed future economay, and will make it more profitable for an American to get a fair-paying job on which he can feed his family, pay his REASONABLE mortgage, pay his bills, etc., instead of having the minimum wage so low that it is actually more profitable for many families to say on welfare, medicaide, and food stamps, along with subsidised housing AND NOT have to juggle three low-paying jobs to do it? Don't you think that if American workers felt they were more faily paid, were being compensated fairly for their efforts, and would bring home enough wages each week to live within comfortable means, that more and more folk would jump off the roles and into a job (of course, we first need the part of the stimulus package to address keeping our companies solvent and employing). Just a thought!!! 
I like number three
I like number three, blame Clinton..If in doubt..BLAME CLINTON, LOLOLOL..I was watching a video clip of Bill Maher and Tucker Carlson the other day and they were talking about Katrina, wouldnt you know it Tucker starts bad mouthing Clinton..Bill Maher said, I thought we were talking about hurricanes and, of course, Tucker kept coming back to Clinton and ragging on Clinton..Bill Maher defended Clinton and said if Clinton was in office he would have been up day and night making sure New Orleans was taken care of, instead of sleeping and on vacation..but dont ya know, if in doubt..BLAME CLINTON..
Yes please post the number. NT
/
quack number 1
I am the OP. I never said he WAS the antichrist. I think I said I am not saying he is the antichrist....... or something to that effect. Anyway, he doesnt have to be anything more than Barack Obama who is not following God to me, for me to not vote for him. I will be quacking all the way to Heaven by the way!
Yes. There are a number of other lawsuits.
the only place this can play out now could be in the Congress in impeachment proceedings. My HYPOTHETICAL question would be what would the republican party have to gain by pushing this already dead issue forward when clearly the priority is the very REAL issue of the economy? How well do you think that would play out for the pub party if they promote impeachment in the middle of it all. What would be the end result? Biden as president? A supermajority still seated? Call for another election after popular mandate has put the democratic party in the White House, the Senate and the Congress? It is a lose/lose proposition coming out of the party that claims to put country first.
So what does that make you? Number 2?
.
If you compare the number of pedophiles in the
general population to the number of pedophiles in the Catholic priest population, you are going to find a rather alarming difference in the percentages.
I am amazed at the number of people...sm
Who would vote democrat this year but are not simply because Obama is half black. I have heard this more times than I can say. I live in the south and I know there are sometimes racist people here. I am a southerner myself, born here. But I believe Obama is a better choice because we can't endure another 4 years of the same policies Bush has. Some people have even said I don't like McCain but I won't vote for a black president. Well I don't care what color he is. I want to give someone with new policies a chance. He may not be good but he may. The fact that people are being so prejudice for his skin color is just ridiculous. It is just an unbelievable amount of people who are saying this around here. I went to a halloween party and everyone was like oh my gosh we may have a black president. I am like oh well if he can do the job what does it matter? I am like well if he was white based on his policies would you vote for him? If the answer is yes then that is just being prejudice. I am not for interracial couples or any of that but when you can't even vote for a black person you have problems. 
number 1 Jesus freak here
I truly feel so bad for you guys. You look at us like we are crazy, hateful, wrong, and judgmental. You guys just dont get the big picture do you? That is such a shame.
Well, I got a fair number of other responses....sm
..from people who got the point. Sorry if it zoomed past you two!
Note to self: There are a couple of simpletons on the board. Do not use parody or metaphor when writing, or you'll lose them.
I've already got your number just the big bad aka dutchess.
xx
In the men's bathroom...right next to Hot Chick's number..nm
x
I stand corrected on the Vietnam number
but people who say this is "another Vietnam" and a quagmire is also an erroneous statement.....1,700 is a far cry from 58,000, although EVERY life lost in the fight for freedom is very valuable and not to be taken lightly and I don't think anybody does.....
And that 's not the total number either because it keeps rising. They just can't stay away.
I think it's hysterical. 
Health insurance is my number 1 issue
I agree with some of what you said about the state representatives being held accountable. I did vote for Senate candidates in the last election based on their stances on healthcare. One of them has been working tirelessly (with many others) to expand CHIP health insurance to kids to more middle-income children in the state, and he was successful! Now that the income bracket was raised, my 6-year-old has healthcare again, and I am so grateful! (Bush is threatening to veto the legislation that expanded CHIP to more families, though, so I'm praying he does not do that).
I am relatively young (26) and so many of my friends do not vote. I am always encouraging them to do just that (whether they vote Democrat or Republican), and I think if Senate recall (I think that's what you called it) was in place, more of them might vote. For now, we just have to hope they keep their campaign promises in hopes of being re-elected.
I know Congress needs to pass the bills on health insurance, and I know many of the Congressmen (on both sides of the aisle) have been bought and paid for by the insurance companies, and that is very disturbing to me. That's one of the reasons I like Obama so much - I think he is a good man who has not been "bought and paid for" by any big corporations.
I think America needs to cover all medical costs for our children and our elderly, and I hope more Republicans candidates will address that issue. We need to take better care of our most helpless citizens.
well....number one bashes humble beginnings...
what may I ask is wrong with serving your local community?
I don't have a problem with cleaning up the party if it needs cleaning.
She is pro life - GREAT. She is for marriage defined as a man and woman - GREAT.
Murkowski was crooked as a dog's hind leg and she got rid of good ol' boy politics in Alaska - GREAT.
as to lack of experience...better be careful about that one Your #1 chair has less experience than she has. That doesn't hold water.
this poster acts like it is a bad thing to bring up your own party on ethics...I saw that is what politicians SHOULD be doing IMHO. Put service to the people who elected you above your party. GOOD FOR HER!!!
actually 39% of the country is a pretty significant number....
and the deeper a hole you dig for your candidate, the higher than number will climb. He does not want the spotlight that is suddenly in his face...I cannot figure out how all of you can recite his campaign mantra but don't listen to what the man is saying now....lol
Until I developed a sufficient number of cells to even
that's exactly what I was. And so were you. It's how biology works. Oh, wait. I forgot. You only studied creationism, right?
Yeah, and a large number of those new voters are
coming out saying they will vote for McCain now.
my paper said highest number in 14 years - who was in charge then?
x
In fact, the number of labs increased after Palin became mayor nm
read
Number one, less peole SHOULD eat at McDonalds, some of the most unhealthy eating habits...sm
of this country, contributing to the obesity problem and the rising cost of healthcare. Come on, EVERYONE deserves an honest living wage where they can feed, clothe, and house their families, and that is just not happening, in the NorthEast I see it every day, most families are working two or three jobs, really good for the children and marriages, I respectfully think that is Bull (which it tastes like McDonald's and other fast food places put in their burgers). JMHO
|
