But I'm going to venture a guess you don't question when Obummer says his plan will "Create or save X jobs" assume X being what ever figure he's pulling out of his arse this week.

And now to quote a famous Marine Colonel:

"I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said "thank you," and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest that you pick up a weapon and stand a post."

The question was "is it torture?", well sure it is, but so what? Torture is also the trip down in freefall from the 98th floor of the WTC. And the person who caused that deserves no light treatment, and if he lets go of some juicy intel along the way, so much the better.

Only if they were fed the information prior to being questioned which is a rather poor technique for an interrogator to use don't you think?

Britian, Austrailia , Canada, just some of the armed forces that were deployed to iraq and afghanistan.

Reading here is often torture but it is also entertaining. I love when such nonsense is showed up by people with smarts and real courage. Below applies to this laughable thread. It's like shining light on roaches.

So we're back to the red herrings (with a nice touch of ad hominem, surely a sign of a weak argument).

No real marine has ever provided me with a "blanket of freedom" by unacceptable or unsavory means much less some cheesy movie characature. Even my father (who was a marine in Korea) never made such a claim nor do I, after years in more than one military ever attempt to make such a claim.

And this applies to the hundreds of others who have been tortured either at Abu Ghraib, Bahgram, in the many "torture for hire" rendition sites or even Guantanamo (where the techniques of the long banned Ulster Depth Interrogation method have been used daily) in what way?

Life must seem so simple down in 'Bamy

Stereotype much?

Sorry, I didn't realize you were from 'up there' which explains a lot. I was assuming you were an AMERICAN lefty.

And, for the record, I live in a city that I will bet is populated by more engineers, scientists and degreed people of all stripes than the one you live in.

Number one, you have no idea what has, or has not, happened at Gitmo

I'm just going to file that under "what you don't know, or have the first clue about, won't disturb you."

A cheesy character perhaps, but there are many who very much agree with that movie soliloquy.

No real marine has ever provided me with a "blanket of freedom" by unacceptable or unsavory means

Oops... another "bad" on your part. With a population almost triple Huntsville and the largest concentration of engineers, scientists and other PhD/degreed people in the country, 4 universities (the PhD granting kind, not the cheesy 1-2 yr diploma in hairdressing granting kind) that is highly unlikely (even if every breathing man, woman and child in Huntsville had a degree).

Sorry dude but, you are quite wrong on that one. The subtle clues given unconsciously by the interrogators, the very questions themselves and the continued questioning after an answer has been given will give an "interviewee" more than enough direction to be able to tell you what you want to hear.

Actually no Canadian soldier has set foot in Iraq. Our PM at the time seen right through Bush's BS and refused to participate.

Afghanistan yes, but not Iraq.

Just an observation, you never served in the US military? Because for someone who says they served in "more than one military" you strike me as incredibly naive. To say that no Marine, or soldier for that matter, has ever crossed the boundaries even a little in war time, is just a little too Pollyanna for some one who claims an extensive military background.

Just an observation, you never served in the US military?

Because for someone who says they served in "more than one military" you strike me as incredibly naive. To say that no Marine, or soldier for that matter, has ever crossed the boundaries even a little in war time, is just a little too Pollyanna for some one who claims an extensive military background.

Frankly, I am not going to do a statistical comparison.

But dude, think about it, it's Ottowa......I mean........Ottowa.......Canada.......just sayin'.

Sorry dude but, you are quite wrong on that one. The subtle clues given unconsciously by the interrogators, the very questions themselves and the continued questioning after an answer has been given will give an "interviewee" more than enough direction to be able to tell you what you want to hear.

"No real marine has ever provided me with a "blanket of freedom" by unacceptable or unsavory means..."

Actually, I have, for several years, Army to be exact and in the Canadian Army, also for several years and a tour as a UN peacekeeper on the Golan (where the IDF likes to shoot and bomb peacekeepers with uncanny regularity).

I understand that you live in country where something like the CHRC is considered a good thing, so your stance on this is understandable. I also know how Dhimmified Canada is becoming, so not wanting to 'offend' an islamic terrorist is the natural outcome of that.

Frankly, I have my doubts as to your bona fides as a US soldier, but you certainly seem perfect for the CF.

D1ck Cheney has never served his country as anything but dead weight...neither did Rumsfeld or Wolfowitz. They are millstones around the neck of your Republic.

I tend to view Rumsfeld's service as Sec. of Def. as a negative.

"You go to war with the Army you have" was cold comfort for the unequipped soldiers who had to scrounge body armor from garbage heaps in an illegal, ill-planned and unnecessary conflict. Rumsfeld's attachment to Cheney and Wolfowitz as part of the Neo-Conservative club that has been working in Washington since the Ford administration is a blight on the nation.

Don't get me wrong. I think America is a wonderful country...I just don't want to see it subverted by a cabal of corporatist thugs who want to line their pockets...and in the last 50 years particularly since the Reagan and Bush administrations, certain groups such as Bechtel and Halliburton in particular (but also older groups like United Fruit in Guatemala and many other interests in Central and South America and the Middle East and South East Asia) have been making hay while the sun shines at the expense of the common good of the American people. I think everyone ought to be a little more concerned at that and how it leads to the image of the nation abroad.

I do hold that military service, in particular in the intelligence gathering community, offers a better perspective as to the value of intelligence gathered under torture and its ethical merits. I am seeing overwhelming agreement amongst the veterans and the upper echelons of those communities stating that intel gathered under torture is of little to no value. Cherry picked exceptions disproving the rule are worthless and about as useful as random chance. The ethics are equally overwhelming on the side of not using them.

Why would we then descend to it's use? Only if policy had been determined to do so for the very purpose of inflaming the enemy into further and worse aggression to maintain the conflict. Why? To maintain the white hat vs. black hat. scenario coveted by the neo-conservatives allowing them free reign to carry out the PNAC with impunity.

As you know, Bush also served.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
February 5, 2004

RELEASE OF PRESIDENT BUSH’S MILITARY RECORDS PROVE HE IS GUILTY OF MILITARY CRIMES

The American Gulf War Veterans Association can no longer remain silent on the subject of George W. Bush’s military records. FOX NEWS reporter Sean Hannity stated Wednesday evening that this was a question that had been resolved. Guest Howard Wolfson responded by saying that the President should release his records. If the media had been doing their homework they would know that the records have already been released. It is because of the actual content that these military records are not being disclosed.

Joyce Riley, spokesperson of The American Gulf War Veterans Association revealed on air in a two hour “white paper” report yesterday, Feb. 4, 2004, on The Power Hour radio show, (www.thepowerhour.com) that George W. Bush’s military records indicate that he was not present for his entire six year required service to the military. Even more shocking and significant is that he did, in fact, deny a direct order, during time of war, and was suspended from flying. The debate may rage on the major networks about whether or not he was AWOL, however the documentation exists and is available at http://users.cis.net/coldfeet/document.htm

Riley, who has also been a testifying expert in medical malpractice trials for fifteen years states: “There is no question he is guilty of major military crimes and should be held accountable. The military records confirm these accusations. No matter how many of his “buddies” they “pull out of a hat” to say he was present, the records speak for themselves. Thousands of veterans, from Atomic Veterans, Vietnam War, Project Shad, and Gulf War I have been denied compensation because the V.A. and Department of Defense state that their “records” don’t prove exposure to chemicals, biological agents, experimental vaccines and depleted uranium. ( www.gulfwarvets.com/ao.html ), Project Shad and Gulf War victims now suffer and cannot prove their records exist. (www.projectshad.org.) Mr. Bush’s records do prove without a doubt that he denied a direct order during time of war, and this, by definition is Treason.

The AGWVA will provide FOX NEWS, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC and BBC with copies of these documents by contacting this organization. The millions of prior service personnel who served proudly will be outraged when they read what the present Commander in Chief is guilty of —and is not being held accountable for. Innocent troops that are simply protecting their health and their families from the anthrax vaccine are being court martialed. How can the President stand before them when he is guilty of so much worse? Full reports on the military records of George W. Bush will be available at: www.gulfwarvets.com and www.thepowerhour.com.

Umm yeah, ok. Beyond your father you must not have known many Marines. But whatever gets you though the night I guess.

Frankly, I have my doubts as to your bona fides as a US soldier, but you certainly seem perfect for the CF.

I would suppose that if you had Micky Mouse doing the interrogation that would be the case bu,t if you had anybody who was trained in interrogation and questioning then that would definitely not. If you read this manual then you will see that there is a lot of thought that goes into an interrogation session such as time, place, conditions, direct questions, unbalancing questions, control questions, purpose, and followup questions so idiotic incidents like those you speak of don't crop up.

All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

HOWEVER, unlike the US which is routinely behind others in its commitment to the UN, Canada is always bearing more than its fair share of commitment to peacekeeping forces on a per-capita basis.

"Dhimmified..." hilarious. That will be the day. Canada will no more be enacting Sharia Law than it will any other religious law. Bad enough that enough Christian fun-damn-mental-cases are in positions of power to make us fear Christo-fascism in America or Canada, Canadians by and large are well known for steering to the middle. There is no chance of appeasement towards fundamental or extremist Islamism in this country.

Considering you are writing this on the 65th anniversary of D-Day, you should have a bit more shame and respect for members of both forces. Your disrespect for the members of the Canadian Forces is despicable and not worthy of comment. You should be ashamed of yourself.

So what you seem to be suggesting is that the average marine is a sadistic, immoral thug with license to commit whatever depravity they deem fit and no truck with professionalism.

Such an honor you do the Corps with your words.

No doubt you do. Those who are unable to rise to the bar (of professional soldiering) often attempt to deny those soldiers for whom professionalism, honor, duty and committment actualy mean something. No doubt that is why you wish to drag the memories of the Marines who have served the country down to your level.

I'll ask you this same question:

It truly is amazing how the law, held so dear to conservatives as the glue which binds society, provides a moral barrier and preserves tradition, becomes a mere plaything to be thrown aside when it becomes inconvenient.

For the foregoing reasons, we conclude that torture as defined in and proscribed by Sections 2340-2340A, covers only extreme acts. Severe pain is generally of the kind difficult for the victim to endure. Where the pain is physical, it must be of an intensity akin to that which accompanies serious physical injury such as death or organ failure. Severe mental pain requires suffering not just at the moment of infliction but it also requires lasting psychological harm, such as seen in mental disorders like posttraumatic stress disorder. Additionally, such severe mental pain can arise only from the predicate acts listed in Section 2340. Because the acts inflicting torture are extreme, there is significant range of acts that though they might constitute cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment fail to rise to the level of torture.

Further, we conclude that under the circumstances of the current war against al Qaeda and its allies, application, of Section 2340A to interrogations undertaken pursuant to the President’s Commander-in-Chief powers may be unconstitutional. Finally, even if an interrogation method might violate Section 2340A, necessity or self-defense could provide justifications that would eliminate any criminal liability.

Let me apologize to current and former members of the CF, you do have some excellent troopers- in fact last I heard the General in charge of NORAD was a Canadian officer. What I should have said was he seemed perfect for the CF's Logistics Branch- that better?

11B2v. you?

At the time of the interrogations we speak of Bush has issued a directive upon the advice of the OLC. That advice was as follows:

I would prefer you justify your contention that people trained in interrogation and, interviewing extremely high value detainees utilizing high level techniques with doctors, translaters and recording personnel present all with decades of experience in this line of work are more than likiely to be amateurish enough that they are transmitting intelligence rather than following a carefully constructed line of questioning.