CIA 'running secret terror jails' (in LOS too)

[Guest]

Correctomundo. Myself, I have zero sympathy for terrorists. If some of the ones held turn out not to be terrorists, they'll be released. Shit happens, but I believe very effort is made to keep the mistakes to a minimum and that the mistakes that do occur are fewer than in the past.

 

France is finding out the hard way that there's no way to please a disgruntled Muslim, You just have to get rid of him, and I couldn't care less how, deportation or miscellaneous.

[..]

Ahhh, BK you hypocrite. I KNOW that you would be screaming bloody murder if a Thai copper tried to knick you for B2K cuz you "dropped a fag end".

 

It is exactly the same thing. Rules are rules. Enforce them all for all or enforce none. You cannot have it both ways.

 

Regards,

SD

[Guest]

 

What a load of shite. since I don't want to be knicked for a cigarette butt, all terrorists should be given a fair palying field. ucj that! call me what you will, I support the secret prisons 100 fucking per cent, unlike certain apologists for terrorists, if not outright terrorist lovers.

[Guest]

And since you have so much respect for rules and law and order, I have no choice but to assume you have nevere ever circumvented the prostitution laws of Thailand. Or the driving laws. Or fudged your taxes. Or worked without a work permit. I'm sure you're just a friggin' Boy Scout.

[..]

Awfully defensive there eh big guy?

 

<EDIT: Whether I am a Boy Scout or John Dillinger is not an issue. We are discussing fair treatment under the law, a thing that makes us better than the likes of Saddam or the Taliban. We are discussing the breaking of an internationally negotiated treaty. I guess that we can be Nazis as long as we are not as bad as Mengele. Is that it huh? Let's see what Republican Jesus has to say about it:

 

 

Ahh, I see. Games with words. Ask John McCain if that is torture or not. END EDIT>

 

All I can say is that your side has been in charge since 2000. In that time, worldwide terrorism has gotten exponentionally worse since then by ANY metric. Need I post proof? I did not think so -- you cannot argue that fact.

 

Bye the way, love your tag line -- give war a chance They are signing up 45+ years olds now for active duty. Why do you not go fight that war you so dearly love? Yeah, I thought so. Don't bother with the usual excuses (I would but I am needed here..., I already served my time..., I have a bad <insert body part here>..., Well, we are just not a military family..., etc., etc., etc.). You are as bad as the rest of them...let someone else's kid go do your dirty work but you'll be damned if you will do it yourself. You must love terrorists!!!! It IS the only explanation. Just like 99% of the GOP elected officials who cheerleading this crap. Tells ya sumthin', doesn't it...

 

Buh bye,

SD

[Guest lazyphil]

the apolgists are pandering to the muslims here, christmas is offensive to muslims in some places, districts of birmingham i think, so its called winterville or some such nonsense ....what are they doing here if they despise our culture :: can expats in arabia demand ramadam to be called the sand festival?...thought not!

[Guest]

Believe what you want. If the prisons are there, I support them.

[chuckwoww]

There's an interesting situation in Denmark. Somebody seems to want to push the tolerance thing to some kind of conclusion.

 

Danish editor tests right to violate Muslim taboos

By James Brandon | Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor

COPENHAGEN ? When Flemming Rose heard last month that Danish cartoonists were too afraid of Muslim militants to illustrate a new children's biography of Islam's Prophet Muhammad, he decided to put his nation's famous tolerance to the test.

 

The cultural editor of Denmark's largest newspaper, Jyllands-Posten, then recruited cartoonists to depict Islam's Prophet Muhammad and published them in the paper.

 

 

http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1110/p01s01-woeu.html

[..]

Phil, I agree that this is wrong and if people are not happy in a country (e.g., quotes from French rioters that "The French hate us and we hate them") then they should get the fuck out. But these are entirely different subjects. You are referring to changing a law to pander to a minority. I am referring to enforcing an internationally negotiated law in an equal manner.

 

Cheers,

SD

[Bangkoktraveler]

[color:"red"] We are talking about a few hundred people (at most) out of 5 or 6 billion world population. Detention without trial and unconventional questioning techniques for so few, selected as suspects by knowledgable and responsible agencies, does not worry me at all. [/color]

 

 

 

Laws have been written that provides common rights to all people. When some of the rights are taken away for a few, what prevents other rights from being taken away?

 

To say it is okay to torture some people also implies it is okay to torture other people. Has torturing people made the world a safer place? I do not think so. If a policeman should take you into a room and a plastic bag is put over your head for the purpose of getting information, would you say that is okay? Another thread discusses that very same topic.

 

This type of thinking I find very disturbing.