Where are all the libtards

[nogods]

These dirty towel headed bastards flew airplanes into buildings. Killing and torturing thousands of INNOCENT people. It's amazing how quickly some people forget what happened that day. A wet rag on the face in nothing.

These people are absolutely ruthless. Barbaric animals too. You're not going to put them in a court room or in a prison cell and expect them to learn a lesson.

And so we should lower ourselves as a nation to their level? You are what you despise if you practice what you despise.

[NY The Vampire State]

And so we should lower ourselves as a nation to their level? You are what you despise if you practice what you despise.

No we should stand up to them. We are being bullied, forced to live in a police state and in fear. Read some history. These people are not going to quit, they are fanatical. They don't care about your laws and courts.

Like I said.. A wet rag on the face is NOTHING. What do you think those people went through on the airplanes?

[Lee Chowaniec]

As for John McCain and his floor statement, “Its use was shameful and unnecessary; and, contrary to assertions made by some of its defenders and as the Committee’s report makes clear, it produced little useful intelligence to help us track down the perpetrators of 9/11 or prevent new attacks and atrocities.” is refutable. The study was one-sided and flawed in many ways.

"Is refutable"? Wow. I do not share John McCain's political ideas. Because of what he has done, and what has been done to him, I do, however, hold his ideas on torture as sacrosanct. You say his statement is refutable.

The floor is yours, sir.

John McCain’s position is understandable as he was personally affected by torture methods. Torture has always been looked upon as inhumane. The world has changed since terrorists began their target bombing long before 9-11 and their methods of conducting warfare are looked at as inhumane by many Americans; so much so that over 60% of them take no issue with the ‘enhanced intelligence technique’ (CIA Director Brennan’s words) to gather intelligence that would prevent another attack on American soil.

McCain believes little useful information was gathered by the torture technique. His position is being refuted not only by current CIA Director Brennan but by the previous two director’s s well and many others involved in the process. Their position is that actionable intelligence was obtained – especially in the case of Sheikh Mohammed.

Diane Feinstein had an axe to grind and put out a report on a torture process that was curtailed in 2007, served no other purpose but to denigrate the Bush administration and our country before the eyes of the world. It was her last shot at getting this out there and politically damaging the other party; political posturing to the max with no regard to lives put in harm’s way or negative world opinion.

There will be no prosecutions as called for and that is a good thing. Down the road Obama’s drone bombing policy could be looked at in the same light as a process used that not only killed the targeted enemy but innocents as well.

While I respect libtards having and expressing an opinion, it is puzzling to hear them support a position that holds enhanced intelligence techniques used as inhumane but are comfortable with president Obama’s drone policy. The one incarcerates and punishes enemies of state, the other kills and/or seriously injures innocents along with the enemy.

So, the Democrats dig up a dead story, claim transparency is a must (while being opaque on several previous scandals), put out a report without any input from the intelligence agencies, openly claim the CIA is lying when they did not involve them in the report, want individuals prosecuted and the current CIA Director fired, and want legislation passed that will forever forbid ‘enhanced intelligence techniques’ to be used. And that helps us how?

Libtard Brian Williams asked General Hayden the other night how he would personally feel if it were his family members that were being tortured. I loved the response; “If they were involved in the deaths of 3,000 American innocents, no response would be needed or forthcoming.

I find it hard to believe those parents or loved ones that lost people in the bombings of ships, buildings, airplanes and in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars would not be agreeable to lighting the detainees’ balls on fire. We were not that kind of country before 9-11, we have become that way for self-preservation reasons.

In conclusion, if you libtards are of the mind that the Feinstein report is unassailable in content and that the CIA is lying, so be it.

On the other hand, some of us believe the report is refutable (and it has been refuted) and somewhere in between lies the truth. There are always two sides to a story, but not to libtards.

We also believe enhanced intelligence techniques are of merit and permissible when fighting terrorists; as well as drone strikes.

[nogods]

His position is being refuted not only by current CIA Director Brennan but by the previous two director’s s well and many others involved in the process. Their position is that actionable intelligence was obtained – especially in the case of Sheikh Mohammed.

Justifying the means by the end result is asinine. is that the best they can come up with?

The experts on the subject are certain that same information could have been obtained without torture.

Shooting a rapists as soon as he is arrested is a sure means of preventing him from ever raping again. But that is not us.

It's like people who think the only way to discipline a child is by beating them. It is their ignorance of more effective means that is the problem.

[nogods]

No we should stand up to them. We are being bullied, forced to live in a police state and in fear. Read some history. These people are not going to quit, they are fanatical. They don't care about your laws and courts.

Like I said.. A wet rag on the face is NOTHING. What do you think those people went through on the airplanes?

You can get much more juvenile than that.

[WNYresident]

Justifying the means by the end result is asinine. is that the best they can come up with?

What do you mean? Isn't that how the the democratic party pushed their agenda for ObamaCare? We'll give millions health insurance. That was the possible end result. The means in this case is much higher cost for people who had health insurance and give them less coverage for the buck.

[buffalopundit]

No we should stand up to them. We are being bullied, forced to live in a police state and in fear. Read some history. These people are not going to quit, they are fanatical. They don't care about your laws and courts.

Like I said.. A wet rag on the face is NOTHING. What do you think those people went through on the airplanes?

If you think "standing up to them" means breaking the law, and violating every conceivable principle of morality and decency, then you're wrong and you don't really want to live in our representative democracy. If you think lowering ourselves to the barbarism of our enemy is reasonable, then I don't know what to tell you.

Incidentally, it was President Reagan who signed the US onto the UN's convention against torture. When ratified in 1994, it became the law of the land.

[NY The Vampire State]

If you think lowering ourselves to the barbarism of our enemy is reasonable, then I don't know what to tell you.

See there you go with that whole "lowering ourselves to their level" again. Last I heard we never behead anyone, we didn't put them into an airplane and crash it into a building, we didn't put them next to a pressure cooked loaded with explosives and shrapnel and we didn't put them in a military base and go on a shooting spree. Life should be miserable for these people. Do you not understand that their goal is to eliminate EVERY AND ALL of the people who don't follow their fanatical way of life?

This is not just our problem, it's world wide.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/134...ull-Sharia-law

[WNYresident]

If you think "standing up to them" means breaking the law, and violating every conceivable principle of morality and decency, then you're wrong and you don't really want to live in our representative democracy. If you think lowering ourselves to the barbarism of our enemy is reasonable, then I don't know what to tell you.

Incidentally, it was President Reagan who signed the US onto the UN's convention against torture. When ratified in 1994, it became the law of the land.

Lets say there were 4 airplanes loaded with explosives in the air but a 5th airplane was stopped before it took off with hijackers on board. 1 of the 4 airplanes crashes into a building killing 1000's of people. 3 are still in the air but the crash locations are unknown. Are you trying to tell me you wouldn't question the hijackers on the 5th plane and use what ever mean you could to get the other crash locations?

[FMD]

only in America do steel skyscrapers collapse from fire.

[Save Us]

See there you go with that whole "lowering ourselves to their level" again. Last I heard we never behead anyone, we didn't put them into an airplane and crash it into a building, we didn't put them next to a pressure cooked loaded with explosives and shrapnel and we didn't put them in a military base and go on a shooting spree. Life should be miserable for these people. Do you not understand that their goal is to eliminate EVERY AND ALL of the people who don't follow their fanatical way of life?

This is not just our problem, it's world wide.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/134...ull-Sharia-law

Yes, the most intolerant religion ever conceived by man, yet expect everyone to be tolerant with them..

What Bulls**t!

No one will ever straighten that mess out.. politically, ideologically, geographically,religiously! A complete and total mess!, Unless of course you happen to be one of their sects...but that varies tremendously.
We should rue the day we ever meddled in that area of the world. Damn oil.

[nogods]

Lets say there were 4 airplanes loaded with explosives in the air but a 5th airplane was stopped before it took off with hijackers on board. 1 of the 4 airplanes crashes into a building killing 1000's of people. 3 are still in the air but the crash locations are unknown. Are you trying to tell me you wouldn't question the hijackers on the 5th plane and use what ever mean you could to get the other crash locations?

First, torture, as those who have been tortured will tell you, doesn't get viable information. So no, I would not use a means that would produce unreliable information.

Second, the hijackers were willing to die crashing into a building with an airplane. You think you are going to get relevant timely information from threatening to kill them?

What if you had access to the the captured hijacker's daughters. Would raping them in front of the hijackers until they gave you the information be within the realm of your "what ever means"?

[WNYresident]

Why do you introduce pure BS into a debate?

Would raping them in front of the hijackers until they gave you the information be within the realm of your "what ever means"?

If the lives of 1000's of USA citizens were in peril and there was a possibility that one of the captured hijackers might spill the beans I'd say go for it. Your very own words "the hijackers were willing to die crashing into a building with an airplane" so what do you have to lose? I'm not saying you need to be completely creative about it but go for it.

[Jeff]

Any US citizen that thinks rectal feeding someone is acceptable, makes me sad for this country.

[WNYresident]

Well that is screwed up. I'd like to know where do they even come up with something like that.